Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21515] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 The National Party certainly does support the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) as introduced because it deals with the very concerning area of controlled drugs and the huge need in New Zealand to use every possible method to stop their very worrisome proliferation. I want to remind the House of how that proliferation has occurred. We learn from the Institute of Environmental Science and Research that New Zealand’s first methamphetamine or P clandestine laboratory was discovered in 1996. Since then the number of laboratories has dramatically increased particularly in the last few years. Police found nine laboratories in 2000. In 2001 they found 41 in 2002 147 and in 2003 146 of them were closed. I think that gives us an idea of how dramatically the problem has increased in New Zealand for about 10 years but has particularly escalated over the last 5 years. 
 I wanted to point that out because in the 1997-98 era the Rt Hon Wyatt Creech thought that it was important—at that early stage before the escalation had really occurred—to bring in the affirmative resolution process in order to have a mechanism available to combat the proliferation that he quite rightly saw would occur. The Labour Government sat around for several years before finally bringing in its amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act in about 2001-02. It certainly took quite some time to do that. So although Jim Anderton said that something should have been done in the 1990s the evidence is that as recently as 2000 only nine clandestine P laboratories had been closed by the police in New Zealand. But that number has escalated logarithmically over the last few years. 
Undoubtedly the reason we are supporting this bill is the inclusion of the main provisions in Parts 1 and 2: the presumption of supply matters to be amended by Order in Council the presumption of supply quantity for methamphetamine the adding of a Ministry of Justice official to the membership of the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs the creation of new offences of importing and exporting precursor substances the creation of powers of search and seizure without warrant for ephedrine and pseudoephedrine and the measure allowing for the controlled delivery of precursor substances. The National Party is hugely aware of the illicit use of drugs and of their importation by highly sophisticated gangs which are ready to change their methods and formulae in relation to those very dangerous controlled drugs. If a drug appears on the schedules the gangs will come up with another one and therefore it is necessary to use every method we can possibly find to combat the sophisticated nature of illicit drug manufacture and the lengths to which New Zealand and international gangs go in order to bring drugs into this country. That is a hugely serious and worrying concern for us. 
But it is also hugely concerning that the Hon Jim Anderton brought in the amendment that has now become Part 3 of this bill which also covers the affirmative resolution procedure that the Regulations Review Committee has pointed out must be used wisely by the New Zealand Parliament. I reiterate what that committee stated about it: “The amendment of primary legislation by an Order in Council is commonly referred to as the ‘Henry VIII’ clause and is regarded as undesirable because it allows the executive the power to override Parliament. Such powers should be granted by Parliament rarely and with strict controls.” I also point out what the committee further stated: “In our view the classification of restricted substances is a matter of significant policy that should be dealt with by primary legislation.” It is for that reason that the National Party is not supporting Part 3 as brought in somewhat belatedly by the Hon Jim Anderton. The proper consideration it deserves has not been given to it. 
There is no doubt that the National Party recognises the problem of party pills and the use of some substances such as “BZP” or benzylpiperazine as being one of great concern. But we have made a commitment to bring in well-thought-out well-considered legislation within the first 12 months of the new Government that will very likely come into office within the next few months ahead. I think it is also absolutely important to reiterate that the affirmative resolution process should be used with great care as the Regulations Review Committee has recommended. That recommendation has been ignored by the Labour Party and by Jim Anderton and his so-called coalition party the Progressive Party. I think that is very very serious. I also think it is important to point out what the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs concluded about benzylpiperazine. It stated that there was insufficient information available on which to base a recommendation to classify those substances in the schedules of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. 
I again absolutely emphasise the fact that the New Zealand National Party does regard those substances as being a very serious issue. Many of us have children and teenagers who talk continually about the proliferation of party pills herbal pills and related substances and there is no doubt that those substances are becoming logarithmically more available. It is because of the highly explicit nature of how they are being advertised now and of how they appear to be being used by many young people in New Zealand that Jim Anderton has woken up suddenly and said that we must do something about it—and what is being done about it has been brought into Parliament very much against the wise advice of the Regulations Review Committee. 
It is also important to point out that the expert advisory committee did express concern about the increased supply of party pills through a whole variety of mechanisms—over the Internet through countercultural retailers and more recently through liquor outlets service stations and dairies. We want to make sure that well-considered legislation is brought to Parliament regarding that. Time and time again we see the Labour Government bring in hurried legislation under urgency just like today that will undoubtedly have to be re-amended at a later time. That is why we believe it is so important to have well-considered legislation. I was deeply concerned to hear the Hon Jim Anderton make light of the affirmative resolution procedure and say it is not a serious procedure. It is a very serious procedure. Indeed it goes to the heart of our democracy and it is a great worry when we have the Labour Party and the coalition party the Progressive Party making light of that procedure. 
The National Party does support the bill but is very concerned about Part 3.