Anderton Jim: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
Anderton Jim: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21486] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I just want to make a short intervention because it is good to put the facts in the way of anybody’s ignorance or prejudice. Mr Williamson says he comes to Parliament fresh to the issue. That actually that he does not know anything about it. To get up and say that as though there is an important point he is making is completely erroneous. The affirmative resolution procedure—[ 
Interruption 
] If Mr Williamson wants to deal with the drug issue we will deal with it. This issue is not a party political issue. It is a serious issue that affects the lives and the future of a whole pile of young New Zealanders and here we have Mr Williamson making a few cheap political points. 
 I point out—[ 
Interruption 
] Yes he is still shouting them out. I point out that the affirmative resolution procedure is not a draconian procedure. It is a perfectly reasonable system for Parliament to use. Actually it was one of National’s own members Wyatt Creech who started the process in the first place and I support it. I have discussed the matter with the Clerk of the House to make sure that this process is perfectly reasonable to use. Here is the process and how draconian is this? The Cabinet of New Zealand has to consider an issue that it wants to go to the issuing of Order in Council. The Cabinet is not an outfit of cowboys who have just turned up on the night. Cabinet Ministers were elected to Parliament and then they were elected to Cabinet. Cabinet considers whether the procedure goes to the issuing of an Order in Council. Mr Williamson describes that as some kind of whim of the Minister but it is not. It is the collective decision of Cabinet. The procedure goes to the issuing of an Order in Council and the Governor-General signs it on the advice of Ministers. 
Then what happens? Does the Order in Council automatically become law? No it does not. It goes to the select committee. Did Mr Williamson know that? 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Yes. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Oh he did know that. But he says it is just a whim of the Minister and the select committee does not have anything to do with it. Well it has. The matter goes to the select committee for 28 days and the select committee has to make a recommendation to Parliament—not to Mr Anderton or to any other Minister but to Parliament. Who makes the decision on the recommendation from the Order in Council? Parliament does. So to Mr Williamson Parliament is some kind of whim of the Minister. It may be under a National Government but it is not under this one. 
Parliament decides this matter and the process is determined by the fact that we have to be timely democratic and relevant. How relevant is timeliness for Parliament? Last night we heard that 12 months should be all right to consider some of this stuff—that is what we heard last night. I think there may be a bit of a change in attitude on that but 12 months was mentioned and sometimes 2 or 3 years. It took us about as long as that to reclassify methamphetamine. Is that dangerous enough for someone? It took about 3 years to do that. Is that adequate? No it is not. Should there be a better process than that which makes Parliament relevant? There surely should be. Is there now? Yes. Does most of the Parliament support it? Yes. Does Mr Williamson support it? No. That does not make any difference I do not think. I think that the rest of Parliament is right and Mr Williamson is wrong. Before Mr Williamson comes down to this House and gives us the benefit of his fresh ideas he should inform himself about the process.