Sabin Mike: Psychoactive Substances Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSabin Mike: Psychoactive Substances Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11576. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MIKE SABIN (National—Northland):I want to just reflect a little bit on the history of the synthetic drug scene and the background that really has been consequential in this bill the Psychoactive Substances Bill. That is that back in the late 1990s and early 2000s when Matt Bowden and Logan Williams pioneered benzylpiperazine (BZP) or party pills as they were commonly phrased. What was discovered through that was that the ability to manufacture a synthetic drug—something that people could get high on and that could mimic the effects of the illicit drugs—found a popular market particularly within the youth of New Zealand at a time that was quite critical because that was the same time that methamphetamine was growing. It sort of said to New Zealanders: “If you want to get high let’s go out and take pills.”Around 2008 BZP was banned but long before that Logan Williams and Matt Bowden had signalled their ability to simply change a chemical make-up to derive analogues of BZP to achieve the same purpose. In fact they almost saw it as sport in my view. That is exactly what they did do so by the time BZP was banned there was already a large volume of similar drugs out there and making their way into the market. That has really precipitated the cat and mouse situation that has brought about this bill. So the temporary class drug notices that were put in place to actually try to capture the drugs as they moved and were obviously classed as harmful to some extent were able to put a stop to it but only for the amount of time that the drug chemists could then remanufacture something else and that is exactly what they did. Some 33 temporary class drug notices were issued. But what we can say both here in New Zealand and overseas is that as long as there is the demand the chemistry will always beat the legislation.So what does this bill do? Well at the heart of this bill it actually places the onus back on those who are producing the drugs to say that if they are producing a substance that a human being is going to consume then it needs to be safe for consumption—Dr Paul Hutchison: Minimal risk.MIKE SABIN: —or minimal risk low risk or whatever. To me “safe” is what it is all about. Ultimately what we do know is that drugs such as K2 or some of the other synthetic cannabises and drugs of scene are far from low risk and are far from safe. The onus now goes back on to the manufacturers of the drugs. They must prove that they are of low risk for human consumption.Some would say and I have heard it certainly from Labour and the Greens that this means we are creating a regulated drug market. Actually I do not think that is what we are doing. There is nothing in this bill that says taking drugs is a legitimate thing. It issimply a way to get ahead of the ability to constantly chemically re-engineer the drugs to beat the legislation. This is not about legitimising the idea that drug taking is a good thing. The only safe drug-use is actually no drug use and that conversation should not be lost in this bill.When we talk about low harm—that is where the crux of this will come down to—we have to ask what would constitute low harm. I am pretty sure that any medical physician would say that smoking something would not be of low harm. Certainly no doctor says to go and smoke your aspirin or smoke this or smoke that as part of a medical practice. So I cannot see anything that can be smoked as being of low harm. I cannot see anything that would cause depression or anything that would trigger any sort of mental illness as being of low harm. I could not see anything as being of low harm that had any addictive impact—that would cause withdrawal craving and bingeing. So that then says that anything basically that stimulates dopamine to a degree that would create a high would be harmful because it would create withdrawal cravings and bingeing which is the nature of the addictive cycle which means that people typically turn to something more significant.In the Committee of the whole House I will talk to Supplementary Order Paper 260 in the name of the member Mojo Mathers but suffice to say what is being tested at the moment what is the guinea pig at the moment is human beings. This bill is about taking control out of drug-peddlers’ hands the people who prey on vulnerable young people. I have no hesitation in commending it.