Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair. Look I'd like to take another call following on from the contributions on this side including the contribution by the Hon Michael Woodhouse in relation to clause 6 which is the issue which we've been traversing which I think Michael Woodhouse has put very clearly: that if this is not such a major change as the Minister is trying to put to the committee then this should be withdrawn. I too rise in support of the Hon Paula Bennett's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 291 to delete clause 6.I would like to point the Minister's attention to a couple of documents. Firstly to the departmental disclosure document under the heading Part Four … Strict liability or reversal of the usual burden of proof for offences" it clearly states that subsection (5) ensures the police can decide not to prosecute if either a health-centred or therapeutic approach is to be preferred for the person or the offence is inconsequential. It does not talk about the public interest here in this disclosure document. It is talking about "for the person" and so the issue here that we continue to bring to the Minister's attention is the confusion that this is going to be leading to for our police. While he is including another few words around the public interest we want to highlight the fact that the police here will be having to make these decisions based upon the health-centred or therapeutic approach for the individual person.I would like to also highlight the New Zealand Police Association's submission—and it's paragraph 16 if the member Darroch Ball is interested—which says "With respect to those who do need drug rehabilitation and other forms of health care officers know such facilities are scarce and not consistently available throughout New Zealand. Officers also know police cells are no substitute for health care." So I bring those points to the Minister because what this highlights is the fact that officers are going to be put between a rock and a hard place and we're not just talking about cannabis here we're not just talking about class C substances; we're talking about all classified substances in New Zealand. That includes meth it includes cocaine it includes ecstasy it includes heroin—the whole list of drugs. Police will be put between a rock and a hard place where they will have to make a call on whether there is a health-centred or therapeutic approach available—where their evidence says that that is something which can be patchy—or whether to prosecute.So I ask the Minister to please explain to us whether the police will be making this decision in the public interest or on an individual case for the person because that is something which I think this House needs a very clear answer to. But the SOP which he has put down actually only further confuses the situation which we have before this committee. This is a serious issue. As Michael Woodhouse has said if this is simply just codifying police discretion well we already have it. This section is not required in this piece of legislation because the police have to make these decisions every single day. But if this is giving the police an additional test for all substances—and we heard this is for all substances—then that is something which is far more serious and is something which I believe this House should be taking far more consideration of and also that the Government does have a responsibility to ensure that there is far better treatment available and far more health-centred or therapeutic approaches available consistently across the country so that the police are able to make that decision and to use that discretion as they will be required to under this piece of legislation.So I ask the Minister to take a call and address those issues. He may talk about some of the investments which are being made. He may talk about the amount of money which was announced during the Government's announcement towards the end of last year but that was only I think $12 million or $16 million. That's not going to provide the substantive support required across the country. The point I would make is that that change should be happening before we in this Parliament are changing the law to decriminalise all these substances."