Faafoi Kris: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 09 April 2013. Volume:689;Page:9152. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I guess what I am going to say is best summed up as that it did not have to be this way. The Law Commission put forward its report on this issue in April 2011 and here we are in the year 2013 in April and this legislation the Psychoactive Substances Bill is being put through this House. Although we are supportive of the referral motion that the Associate Minister of Health is seeking—to bring the select committee period for submissions from around 4 to 6 months which is the usual term down to 2 months—we are very concerned that that really takes away the time for public scrutiny around this bill. There will be plenty of public scrutiny as has been said in earlier contributions. Members from right around this House were talking about the numbers of stories that they had in their own communities around concern around the use of party pills and legal highs so we expect there to be a significant amount of scrutiny and comment from the public. To have that window of opportunity for people to make their submissions reduced from around 4 to 6 months which is the usual amount of time down to 2 months is a concern for us as we would like to have the submissions listened to in a meaningful manner.As the Hon Annette King said you have got to have some sympathy for the Hon Peter Dunne who is in charge of this bill because he has been pushing for this bill for some time. As I said the Law Commission report came out in April 2011 and I am sure that behind the scenes he would have been pushing the Government very hard for this legislation to get in and be passed by the time the temporary legislation runs out and becomes invalid in August of this year. So now we have found ourselves in a situation where the Minister has to come to this House and ask for us to truncate the select committee period in order for his law—a very good law we are saying—to come into effect so that there is no window of opportunity for the likes of Kronic K2 Dream and the other substances all sorts of substances to go back on the shelves.Again I will just reiterate that it would not have had to be this way if the Government had acted faster to get this legislation to the House. It was introduced in February 2013—this year—despite the Government making recommendations in 2012 I believe around September that legislation would be made available to this House. So it has taken a considerable amount of time and I am sure a considerable amount of lobbying has gone on behind the scenes by Peter Dunne to get this legislation to the House. But ithas taken another 6 to 8 months for it to be introduced and Mr Dunne now has to come to this House and ask us to truncate the select committee period. Well we do not think that is good enough in terms of the management of legislation by the Government in this House.As the honourable member said in his opening address to this referral motion he does not believe that there will be a lot of issues raised during the select committee process but one of the issues that he did refer to was one that I mentioned in the first reading around the classification of kava which is a serious issue. Although I mentioned it members on the other side of the House said that it might not necessarily be included in this bill. There is nothing in this bill to say that kava may not be included so I believe that that is one of the issues. And Sam Lotu-Iiga will be interested in this because he is never shy of an ‘ava ceremony. So if you read the bill—Hon Maurice Williamson: It covers synthetic. It covers synthetic only.KRIS FAAFOI: If you read the bill at clause 9 “Meaning of psychoactive substance” it does not say anywhere in that part of the bill that it is just synthetic substances. So that is something that I think needs to be addressed at the select committee. I am sure there will be a lot of interest in the Pacific community around making sure that they put their legitimate questions and their opinions to the select committee. But because that select committee submission period is going to be truncated from the usual 4 to 6 months to 2 months that is going to make it a little bit more difficult for those communities to put their argument across.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Rubbish. Scaremongering.KRIS FAAFOI: It is not scaremongering. It is actually the truth because those communities will now have a smaller window of opportunity to make—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Read the bill if you can.KRIS FAAFOI: I have read the bill. I have read the bill. You go to clause 9 and you tell me where it says that this covers only synthetic materials. It does not so that is one of the valid questions that I think the Pacific community can put to the select committee to make sure that their rituals around the ‘ava and kava ceremonies can be protected for their own cultural identity.Paul Hutchison said in the first reading debate that this Government wants to get the law through in a fairly rapid way which as Annette King said was crocodile tears from the Government because it has not moved in a very rapid way with this legislation at all. On this side of the House we do want to make sure that we get this legislation through in a rapid way but nothing that this Government has done in terms of the passage of this legislation has seen it moving in any faster way at all. The Minister said it was cat and mouse in terms of the particulars around the technology and the fast-moving nature of this industry but this Government has moved more like turtles in terms of the way in which it has introduced this legislation to the House. Again we do have some sympathy for Peter Dunne because I am sure he would have wanted to make this legislation get through this House much much faster.We will support the referral motion to reduce the submission time to 2 months. It is not without concern. It does mean that the window of opportunity for submitters is much smaller and that the public will not get a much more fulsome opportunity to debate this issue.