Watts Simon; Little AndrewSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Madam Chair and thank you to the Minister for providing a bit of an overview in terms of this bill. I was actually a member of the select committee that went through this and I do want to acknowledge the many parties that did provide a submission as part of that select committee process; in particular St John Ambulance of which I am a volunteer member. I guess my experience related to this bill—and I've got a couple of questions for the Minister around in particular new section 35DDF inserted by clause 10 which I've just slightly touched on there around the provision of appropriate harm reduction advice.The other aspect I'm interested in is in new section 35DDI which is the data provision or information and data that is provided to the Director-General of Health in regard to dangerous drugs. What I'd like the Minister to provide a little bit of context around is in regard to those dangerous drugs. What are some examples in terms of that where he would foresee that information that would be provided through to the director-general—and for what purpose would that information be used in order to I guess provide some public benefit? In regard to the harm reduction elements I'm interested to get into the practicalities around how hard or how overt that advice is going to be and particularly also the provision of advice to individuals or minors. So there I'm referring to individuals that are under the age of 16 or potentially are when they're seeking the advice under the influence of alcohol so their competency in order to be able to understand information particularly advice their ability to comprehend the implications of taking that drug or not and the follow-through around that—how that is assessed by the person providing that harm reduction advice. Because I think that is a pretty significant point in terms of whether the individual may or may not take the drug.My experience having worked at SIX60 concert in a capacity as a St John volunteer ambulance officer for the last two concerts in Auckland—I've dealt with multiple patients; one was critical. We actually had to physically ventilate the patient one that was having a seizure in the mosh pit as the result of drugs and trying to extract them in darkness with torches and trying to manage that is significant. The reality is no testing would have avoided the situation in that regard and I think the information for those individuals of the risks around drug taking—for most they may say Look there's no risks." but I personally have seen the consequences of drug taking and the implications that it does have for individuals and their families. So I'd appreciate some feedback from the Minister on that.Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): I'm thankful to that member for the insight he's shared with the experience that he has had at those concerts. I might say too when I was the custodian of a student union building and was on duty at some of the big concerts I saw some pretty horrific consequences of overconsumption of alcohol that were distressing including a person who after a night on the tequila had walked over the balcony completely out of it landed on his back and put a bone through his hand and all the rest of it and I had to attend to him. But the point that he makes that actually even drug-checking services might make it inevitable that there will be people who can't be prevented from consuming dangerously; I'm not sure that is necessarily the case. The availability of drug-checking services in a sense in an environment where there is no judgment made and it's accessible I think can go a long way to changing behaviours as I think the Victoria University research on last summer's activity around drug-checking services showed. Two-thirds of those who used-drug checking services changed their behaviour either declined to consume at all or reduced their level of consumption or took away material that was about harm reduction.So to answer the two specific questions the member asked—what L data would go to the director-general under new section 35DDI—I was checking to see whether the bill went up to section 35DDT because that might deal with some of the problems we had but no it didn't. But new section 35DDI—the purpose of providing that data to the director-general is again a public health approach: let's build up a profile of the data that's been gathered the sort of drugs that are being consumed the risks that are being taken because that can then inform some broader public policy public health initiatives to address dangerous or harmful drug consumption. In terms of the second question how I view that advice I think the bill makes it very clear in new section 35DDF(2) "The advice must be about the following harms and how they may be reduced". And then if the test is a positive test there's a certain amount of advice that has to be given and if the test is not positive nevertheless advice has to be given on harm reduction and the risks and dangers associated with the consumption of that particular substance or any substance of that sort of nature. So I think that is covered off and I'm thankful to the committee who actually put that provision in. I think it's a useful provision to have and it further sustains the objective of the exercise which is harm reduction and actually being able to inform particularly young people for whom this is often an experimental kind of time an experimental activity just to let them know that there are hazards and dangers associated with drugs. Even if the drugs are what they say they are there can still be hazards that go with it and every effort should be made to keep people informed about that. So I thank the member for those questions. I'm confident that they are covered off in what is in the bill. And again it is about keeping people safe."