Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green): Madam Chair thank you. I just wanted to question a few of the arguments that were put forward by the member in charge of this bill which is of course Simeon Brown. I want to acknowledge him for his luck in having his member's bill drawn and obviously progressed to the committee of the whole House stage. So this clause that we're debating at the moment is in regard to the title of this piece of proposed legislation which is of course the Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill. I wanted to speak to the points that the member raised with regard to the purpose. So the purpose in Part 1 Subpart 1 of the original Act which this member's bill seeks to amend—that purpose is and I quote The purpose of this Act is to regulate the availability of psychoactive substances in New Zealand to protect the health of and minimise harm to individuals who use psychoactive substances." The clauses that were quoted by the member previously were of course within the principles framework that being section 4 of the original Act.The reason that I cite this is because as has been mentioned by a number of members prior to myself the very purpose of the original Act which this member's bill seeks to amend is to regulate—is to create a regulated drug market. My question to the member as pertaining to the title of this legislation is: is the member aware of how wide-ranging the changes that are being proposed with regard to increasing penalties will be in that is the member aware that there may be a better approach for example in amending the Misuse of Drugs Act such as to contain the two particular chemicals that have been implicated in all of the deaths with regard to the use of synthetics?So my question to the member is around how wide-ranging this increase in penalties will be—i.e. how many substances or potential substances or variables of substances or chemical cocktails will be captured but also whether the member is aware that it is those two substances those two chemical compounds of synthetic cannabinoids that have been implicated in those 50 deaths around the country?I also want to point to the fact that this Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill title refers solely to increasing penalty for supply and distribution. But is the member aware that in section 70 which this piece of legislation seeks to amend in clause 4 there would in fact be captured per section 70(1)(c) of the original Psychoactive Substances Act those who possess a psychoactive substance that is not an approved product with the intent to sell or supply the psychoactive substance to any person? On that point I would like to ask the member in charge of this piece of legislation whether he is aware who that would capture and what threshold is required—as in what qualifies for the intent to sell or supply?To that point perhaps a better name or title for this member's bill is the "Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution or Intent to Supply or Sell) Amendment Bill. I would ask the member to answer all of those questions as addressed."