O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I am very pleased to take a call on the Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill now in its third reading. I just want to actually acknowledge the member who has just taken her seat the Hon Ruth Dyson for her contribution. I think it actually represents along with the Minister's words the collegiality that has occurred around this bill.I think it is right—perhaps I am slightly prejudiced as the chair of the Health Committee—to say we worked incredibly well together but it was a robust discussion on a number of issues particularly around the rights of the individual because as has been highlighted briefly tonight and certainly in other contributions this is forcing an individual into a situation that they are probably not keen on for a variety of reasons. It is where society in this particular instance believes it is in that person's best interest and so there is a paternalistic quality there and when that is enacted—infrequently hopefully in this liberal society—it has to be done very cautiously and with a number of safeguards. I will revisit that briefly later on in my contribution.I want to acknowledge once again Minister Dunne for bringing this bill to the House sponsoring it and seeing it through. I think there is a lesson today that as he has made some adjustment around cannabis access we are also reflecting at the other end of the spectrum on the dangers of drugs be they legitimate or not. So I thank the Minister for bringing it to the House and I thank once again all the members of the committee for their hard work.This is an update of a bill from 1966. It has been a long time but also a long time in terms of medical practice so this is bringing it up to best practice but there is the challenge still that although we can pass legislation we can also set down new guidelines of what is expected for compulsory treatment. There is a requirement on us as a House and certainly as a Government to make sure that resources are available to look after people because one of the elements here is that—and you will see as you read through the bill that the word detention" is used quite a bit—a New Zealander could be put into detention in order to compulsorily assure they get the services required.I think it is really important to emphasise that detention is not so much about locking someone up and it is not about bolts on doors as much as it is a treatment pathway that ensures that they get the services they need. Detention in these sorts of circumstances can be as much as the encouragement of those providing the treatment to have the person stay. So it is a small point but a relevant one and I just hope that the public listening and certainly the House appreciate that we are not talking about locking people up into rooms for the sake of it; we are trying to detain them in the broader sense of the word to ensure that they get the treatment needed.So the second point within that as I have stressed in previous times is we are talking about people with incredibly high needs. We are not talking about your I think stereotypical alcoholic or perhaps some with a high-level drug addiction of course. We are talking about someone who has serious serious addiction issues: perhaps that unfortunate soul whom you have seen on the street who is—let us say going back to the alcohol thing—drinking from dawn to dusk. They cannot help themselves are forever falling down tripping up. They are in fact as much a harm to themselves as to others and because of that high level of need intervention is required. More often than not that will come from an individual in the family. Why I mention that is this bill protects not only that person but the person who has sought that help. They are provided with the information necessary to understand the treatment journey that is about to begin.The seriousness often comes first and foremost from what they call the neuro adaptation to the disease. Any of those in this House alongside me who have worked in this field will know that if you are at this level of addiction you just cannot separate yourself from it. Your whole body and mind has become completely dependent on the substance and the craving—probably well beyond what hopefully any of us have experienced personally. Importantly too these orders for compulsory treatment cannot be brought about until other avenues have been brought forward. Again the person whom we are trying to help is denied treatment so many times that now we have to intervene.I have noted in other contributions that there is layer upon layer—the guy sounds like a Sara Lee pastry ad—of support here including judicial review where required and various delegations through the Ministry of Health. So I think it has been well-thought-through and well balanced.I really just want to end my contribution by in some ways addressing those whom we seek to help. I think there is a much greater appreciation in medicine today and in the general public of the nature of disease around addiction and it is certainly our intention I think as a select committee to do our best to help these people as our fellow Kiwis so that we can restore them to some normality and that they can be full participants in society beside us and alongside us. So I commend this bill to the House."