Turner Judy: Motions — Misuse of Drugs (Changes to Controlled Drugs) Order 2005 and the Misuse of Drugs (Presumption of Supply - Amphetamine) Order 2005—Approval 
Turner Judy: Motions — Misuse of Drugs (Changes to Controlled Drugs) Order 2005 and the Misuse of Drugs (Presumption of Supply - Amphetamine) Order 2005—Approval 
[Volume:627;Page:22270] 
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future in support of the Misuse of Drugs (Changes to Controlled Drugs) Order 2005 and the Misuse of Drugs (Presumption of Supply - Amphetamine) Order 2005. 
I was driving home the other night from a late meeting as most of us are doing now in the time leading up to the election—and my human rights were violated. I turned the corner and there they were with lights flashing ready to pull me over and breath test me! I celebrate the fact that the police were prepared to have a team out there to breath test me and everybody else on the road that night because what that offered me was protection. It meant they would be checking that the other people using the road that night were safe to be driving and that my safety was important. I did not for 1 minute object to being pulled over and delayed for the short time it took to be breathalysed. In that case the innocent until proven guilty rule was not being applied but I am grateful for the efforts of the police in that regard. 
United Future is very keen to help move this issue along. We understand and appreciate that on these matters Parliament needs to be able to reflect on the evidence-based but urgent needs that cross our path in respect of the supply of illicit drugs in this country. Certainly the therapeutic benefits of the drugs we are talking about are quite minimal. They do have some uses and we accept that but generally they are mostly used in this country for illicit purposes. 
The Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs is able to approach the Minister and suggest that new substances be added to schedules or that the classification of a substance be upgraded by Order in Council. United Future in our recent amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act made sure that the movement by Order in Council can only be used to strengthen the provisions around the substance—that is if there were ever a decision to liberalise the classification of a drug that could not be taken by Order in Council but would require full scrutiny by Parliament and full input by the public through the submission process. We are very pleased to have put that amendment forward. We are very happy to be able to respond quickly to crises but we think the opposite effect of an Order in Council—whereby it could be used in an unhelpful way to downgrade the classification of a substance without full parliamentary scrutiny—is an unwise and reckless provision and we are glad to have been part of the change. 
I want to counter something that was said previously. One of the members talked about the fact that Ecstasy we were told was less of a risk than alcohol. I think we need to read very carefully what was said because it is not actually quite true. What was said was that the public health risk of Ecstasy was notably lower than that of alcohol—and that is quite a different matter. We accept that we still have a way to go in terms of the binge-drinking culture of New Zealanders in order to address our approach to the substance of alcohol. Binge drinking is wrong unhealthy and dangerous. 
I was interested in talking recently to a publican who objected to the amount of host responsibility the law puts on him and who felt there should be a lot more responsibility put on individuals to manage the amount they drank. My response to him was: “You sell poison; you take responsibility.” I really do think we need to look very carefully at our attitudes towards alcohol. I accept the Green member’s position on that—that we do sometimes give alcohol a lighter treatment—and I agree that that is wrong. United Future would support efforts that are sensible in that regard. There are also some rather silly suggestions about how that might be achieved and we need to be sensible about it. 
Why should we reclassify amphetamine? Well the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs told us that they found there has been increasingly prevalent amphetamine use and importation into New Zealand clear evidence of the high risk of harm associated with amphetamine use limited therapeutic applications for the drug evidence of drug substitution between amphetamine and other amphetamine-type stimulants and a need for decisive police powers to tackle street-level amphetamine offending. 
It is interesting that they also gathered evidence to say that there are clear links now between New Zealand’s illicit amphetamine market and organised crime. As I mentioned earlier there is also a growing concern about the link between substance abuse and road safety beyond just our current monitoring of alcohol consumption. I believe that in New Zealand when people are found driving recklessly and breaking the road rules in some way we need to collect a lot more data to determine whether other substances are present in their systems if alcohol is not. We need to understand a lot more accurately the impact of what is going on with road safety issues and the link between those and drug abuse. 
United Future does not really need to say more at this stage; we are supportive of this legislation. However I would like to signal one thing in relation to the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs on which we rely so heavily for information on these matters. I am very supportive of a lot more transparency in that process. I think it is good that we expect to see the reasons behind the advice it is giving. We need to see where it gets its information from and who it consulted with. 
United Future would be supportive of seeing an increased level of transparency in some of the advisory committee’s recent advice on things like party pills which we have some personal disquiet about. I know that New Zealand First also shares our disquiet. It may be that all we are dealing with is just the cocktail effect of party pills with alcohol but some of us just want to be really really sure that these issues the committee gives us clear rulings and advice on are revisited from time to time and that in an ongoing way it is considering evidence from overseas as other jurisdictions deal with this very very serious problem. 
Motion agreed to.