Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee 
[Volume:658;Page:7199] 
Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill 
Instruction to Committee 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 I move  
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill that it have the power to consider and if it thinks fit adopt the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 66.  
I am moving this instruction because the amendments contained in the Supplementary Order Paper concern drug-driving so are not relevant to the subject matter of the bill which aims to enhance the powers of the police and road-controlling authorities to deal with illegal street racing. 
The Supplementary Order Paper implements a commitment I made on 24 June this year when Parliament passed the Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4). That bill created a new offence of driving while impaired by controlled drugs or prescription medicines in the bloodstream. It also gave the police new powers to enforce that offence. I am pleased to recall that there was a broad display of bipartisanship on that bill. 
Just before the bill was passed I was approached by anti - drug-driving campaigners concerned about the exclusion from the bill of the 34 tranquillisers and anti-anxiety medications known as benzodiazepines. The exclusion means that a person who fails the compulsory impairment test and gives a blood sample that contains one or more of those drugs cannot be charged with the new impaired-driving offence. It was too late by then to amend the bill but I agreed that I would have officials look at the issue as a matter of urgency. I promised that if their advice supported the inclusion of benzodiazepines I would seek to have the legislation amended before it came into force later this year. 
The Ministry of Transport has reported to me that the reasons for excluding benzodiazepines from that bill were weak. Recently published research shows that benzodiazepines can cause impairment in the ability to drive. There is also evidence to show that the impairment is linked to dosage and tolerance as experienced by longer-term users. Apparently when the bill was being prepared there were concerns that innocent people who had been prescribed these drugs would be processed by the police. It was feared that this would bring the legislation into disrepute. I am advised that those fears were overstated and there are several safeguards to prevent such a situation. Only impaired drivers would be stopped and tested and there is also a legal defence for those who have been prescribed the drug and use it in accordance with medical advice. 
The Supplementary Order Paper also makes a couple of drafting changes to the legislation to simplify and clarify it. The legislation adopts the term “controlled drug” from the Misuse of Drugs Act but gives it a significantly different meaning. That creates scope for confusion. Further the interpretation contains separate definitions for “controlled drug” and “prescription medicines”. These separate definitions are unnecessary so the two separate items would be replaced by a single term “qualifying drug” with a definition that includes prescription medicine controlled drugs and members of the benzodiazepine family. 
Implementing these changes through the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill will enable the amendments to be put in place before the drug-driving legislation comes into force on 1 November. This will simplify the implementation of the new regime. I look forward to receiving support for it from all other parties in the House. 
Motion agreed to.