Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. It is my pleasure to speak on this the second reading of the Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Bill. I am not a member of the Health Committee but I want to acknowledge the work of the Health Committee because I think the substance of this piece of legislation is incredibly important and I think a number of the issues that the select committee has had to deal with have been really well addressed in the select committee report so I wanted to acknowledge that.In preparing for my contribution this afternoon I found a document produced by the Ministry of Health. It is called the New Zealand Drug Harm Index 2016. What that particular report does is look at the social cost of drug-related harm and intervention cost in the 2014-15 period. It is estimated that the cost to New Zealand is $1.8 billion and that is in terms of personal harm community harm and the cost of interventions. I know that they have talked about the limited number of people who have been impacted by this serious addiction issue but for those who are addicted the social cost per year per dependent user was estimated at $33800. The cost to families and friends through the pain and suffering that they also have to endure was estimated at $438 million. The other telling information that was communicated in this New Zealand Drug Harm Index 2016 was that the acquisition crime—so this is what users do to support their habits—was estimated at $140 million. The context of this piece of legislation is incredibly important and so I want to acknowledge that. I also want to acknowledge that there is a group in Aotearoa New Zealand called Matua Raki and it is the national centre for addiction and workforce development in New Zealand. When I looked at what it had to say about this piece of legislation it said it has been crying out for reform for over 30 years. In fact there have been three official reviews and a Law Commission report which have led to the creation of this piece of legislation. From its perspective you know there are a number of deaths that have been preventable. Obviously in terms of the harm to family and community that has been preventable Matua Raki sees this as a way forward. It sees that the people who are most affected by this piece of legislation will be able to be protected from the personal harm that they endure that the legislation will provide for a better facilitation of an assessment of their conditions that we will be able to stabilise the health and well-being of people that we will be able to protect and enhance their mana and dignity and that we will be able to facilitate an opportunity to also engage in voluntary treatment. So Matua Raki sees this as a stepping stone and it sees that people who are severely affected by addictions will by being supported through a compulsory system eventually be able to make decisions themselves about what is in their best interests. So the full criteria that it outlined were: that people have to have a severe substance addiction that their capacity to make informed decisions about treatment for addiction is severely impaired and that compulsory treatment really is the only course of action to provide some resolution. Also there is a big emphasis on providing appropriate treatment for the person who has a severe addiction. It also talked about the definition of severe addiction—what people actually have or the kind of psychological place they are in. So the compulsive use of a substance is characterised by a neuro-adaptation to the substance; a constant craving for a particular substance; unsuccessful efforts to control the use of that substance; and continued use despite harmful consequences not only for the person who has the addiction but also for their families. These really are people who are not in a position to make decisions in their best interests. I was really interested in the number of submissions received by the select committee. There were 39 written submissions and 15 gave oral submissions. One of the issues that was highlighted—it is on page 2 of the select committee report—was the clarification of an appropriate facility. I note two particular submissions. The first was by Judge Recordon—I hope I am pronouncing his or her name right—that noted there have been instances where 14- and 15-year-olds were detained in police cells for four to five nights. Also the Human Rights Commission highlighted that under the proposed legislation it was possible for somebody to stay in a police cell for up to 27 days if they did not have a facility for this person to be held in. What has been very good in terms of the select committee process is that the select committee has been very clear that that type of situation or scenario will not occur under this new legislation. There will be approved providers who will be able to provide for the person in the interim if they are not able to be housed in a treatment facility. On reading through the select committee report I think as Associate Minister Dunne has outlined that has been a very good recommendation by the select committee that this House will support. I note that this piece of legislation with the amendments has the unanimous support of the House. This is another one of those constructive processes that I have seen this House go through and again demonstrated by the Health Committee. I am also heartened I guess to see that there is also the right for a person to get a second opinion. Even though they may fit the criteria for compulsory assessment and treatment the legislation allows for the person to get a second opinion and also for the patient to get advice from a lawyer. So from my perspective there are a whole lot of safeguards within this legislation that not only support the person through a particular addictive episode but ensure that there are safeguards and that there are people who have their best interests at heart throughout the process—they are not the clinicians but they are people providing oversight. I am reassured and I think the House should be reassured that nobody is going to be captured by this legislation who does not need the support of the State and does not need treatment options. It is really the only way we are going to address the addiction issues that they have displayed. I want to congratulate the Health Committee again and I commend the bill to the House. Thank you.