Barry MaggieHon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I rise with true conviction to speak to the Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill at its first reading. I support this bill. I congratulate the member Simeon Brown on the enormous amount of work that he has put into this. I acknowledge the previous speaker Louisa Wall for going back over the history and the background of this and for one moment I thought you were going to vote for this bill because you seemed so persuaded by it.Anyway there does seem to me to be a real need to take a multifaceted approach and this approach that this bill does actually does allow for the people who are pushing this stuff and who are supplying it—to bring the penalties for them into a consistent level with the other drugs and the other suppliers. Although it is a small bill—a mere page—I think it is a very important part of this war against drugs and that's what it is. Going soft on the people that supply it sending them messages that psychoactive substances aren't as bad as other substances—whatever. The inconsistencies are cleared up by this bill and I think as a class C drug under section 6(2)(c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act it is absolutely appropriate to do it.So why is it that this inconsistency has occurred? Some of the other members who have taking calls today have pointed out the history and the way that we have gradually discovered the extreme toxicity of these drugs once readily available at the corner dairy. I know of people who were caught up in them parents of young children who were unable to persuade or use their parental authority on their kids because they was so readily available there was no harm to them. The reality is they are highly toxic and that toxicity is not visible.I commend the courage of the people who have lost family members in this terrible situation. I think it takes huge courage to come forward and I commend you all for not only your personal loss but because you have done so much to help other people and to bring this to our awareness and to make it a point of discussion. Dependency and addiction are things that transcend all boundaries and when a drug has people in its grasp they need to have what part two of what Simeon Brown has been doing has offered and that is this holistic approach.So not only do we have a piece of legislation or an amendment to it that will beef up the penalties show how serious we are as a Government as a country and as a Parliament about this but also not only doing the supply thing but also the demand to help the people who are addicted to make it possible for those people to get ready help and access to that help—so that holistic approach. The petition that requests that the House pass the amendment bill to increase the penalty further requests a select committee inquiry into addiction to psychoactive substances and I would hope that the Health Committee and the Government would look favourably upon that. I think it is a really important part of dealing with people particularly young and vulnerable people those that are clearly predated on—as we saw in the Jones case—by drug dealers who are highly motivated perhaps by their own addictions or perhaps by their dark-heartedness that they just want to make money at the expense of other people's misery. But the easy access must stop. We must in this House do all that we can to stop the ease of access to get rid of these drugs to marginalise the people that promote them.So when I hear other parties who will not support it particularly the Greens—what a mealy-mouthed ridiculous assertion was made by the member who stood for that party saying this bill is embarrassingly impotent. It is not so much the member that uttered those words; what a soft and ludicrous option the Greens are taking here. I think that Labour also really needs to look at itself carefully. The idea that this won't make a difference says the police Minister Stuart Nash. Well if there's anyone who ought to know better it would be the Minister of Police. They are playing politics. The idea that if it goes to a select committee it can't be improved is ridiculous—of course it can. So if there are any positive ideas or any initiatives coming from that party and the Greens then why don't they come up with them and use them in the select committee process? That's what happens in this place. If you don't think every aspect of the law or the legislation that's proposed works then move in to change it. Don't vote against it. Cite mental health and that we have to do everything before we can do anything—what an absolute crock of an argument and I'm deeply disappointed in Labour and the Greens for their gutless approach to this. We need to increase the penalty and as a member of the Justice Committee I'm happy to be getting it. Thank you.