Soper Lesley: Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Soper Lesley: Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14651] 
LESLEY SOPER (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to support the passage of the Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill. This bill had lengthy and intensive consideration in the Health Committee. There were 52 submitters on the bill many of them passionately in support of the reclassification of benzylpiperazine (BZP) and some equally passionately opposed to that. We heard from submitters as wide ranging as the Salvation Army the pill manufacturers and many individuals with many stories. 
We heard wide-ranging opinions about the need or otherwise for reclassification of BZP. We heard stories of the harm that ithas already done and we heard of its side effects. We heard that banning BZP would merely force young people on to harder drugs. We heard that BZP had beneficial effects but we did not hear any substantiation of that. In fact the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs informed us that there are no approved therapeutic uses for BZP. We heard that many young people had already given up on BZP because of the unpleasant side effects and the implication seemed to be that therefore we did not need to reclassify it. We heard stories of BZP acting as a gateway drug to harder drugs. We heard of BZP’s ready availability—of the many shops that sell it. And we heard the argument that if we did not ban alcohol and tobacco we should not be banning BZP. So we heard a very wide-ranging set of submissions on this amendment bill. 
At the end of the submissions and after very hard thinking and consideration the Health Committee has recommended the bill should proceed without amendment. The bill amends the Misuse of Drugs Act by removing BZP from its current scheduling as a restricted substance and adding it to the schedule 3 Part 1 class C classification of that Act. The effect of that classification will be to make the sale and use of BZP and of related substances commonly included in currently legal party pills illegal from the passing of this bill. Once this bill is enacted the penalties for the supply of BZP and related substances will be up to 8 years’ imprisonment consistent with those applying to other class C1 drugs such as cannabis. With such a tough penalty we obviously gave a great deal of consideration to that hard-thought-out recommendation. 
However an amnesty period for possession and use is proposed in the bill for 6 months after the legislation comes into effect whereby possession of less than 5 grams or 100 tablets of BZP for personal use unless otherwise proven to be for supply will not be a criminal offence. When that amnesty expires the normal penalties for possession and use of a class C1 drug of up to 3 months’ imprisonment or a $500 fine or both will apply. 
The purpose of the principal Act is to prevent the misuse of drugs by imposing legislative controls over harmful substances. It provides a mechanism for the classification of drugs. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
LESLEY SOPER 
: When we broke for dinner I was pointing out that the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and the amendment bill that we are discussing tonight have a primary purpose: to prevent the misuse of drugs through legislative controls over harmful substances. The legislation provides a mechanism for the classification of drugs according to their degree of harmfulness and sets out legitimate access to these drugs including licensing prescribing storage and import and export controls. It also establishes when the New Zealand Police and New Zealand Customs Service can take action to control the supply of illicit drugs. Under a 2005 amendment to the Act it was already an offence to supply BZP to anyone under the age of 18 to give away BZP-containing products and to advertise BZP. Unfortunately there was ample evidence that under-18-year-olds were obtaining BZP and related substances quite easily and legally through the legal access of older friends and family members who were doing the purchasing at a range of legal outlets. 
The Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs is a statutory body established under the principal Act and is responsible for advising the Minister of Health on drug classification issues. It is made up of experts from the fields of pharmacology toxicology psychology drug and alcohol treatment community medicine pharmaceuticals public health police the Ministry of Justice and a representative of consumers of drug treatment services. The committee is expected to work with evidence-based research. The expert committee had looked at the classification of BZP and related substances more than once. In 2006 with new research available it made a further assessment and concluded that BZP and related substances posed a moderate risk of harm. It recommended the removal of its status as a restricted substance from the Act and its classification as a class C1 controlled drug. The Associate Minister of Health the Hon Jim Anderton quite rightly publicly released the committee’s advice in December 2006 and began a consultation process on the classification of BZP. In May 2007 the expert committee met again with even more up-to-date evidence and again advised a majority view that BZP and related substances posed a moderate risk of harm. 
I need to point out several things here. To those who say we are legislating too late I say that our expert advisers needed to have the full evidence-based backing for their advice. To those who say the research was not robust enough and not peer reviewed I say that by the time of the reconfirmed advice in May 2007 it was both robust and peer reviewed and that the Health Committee explored those issues quite fully. To those who say that stricter regulation and enforcement would have been enough I say that once BZP and related substances were assessed by our expert advisers on the evidence as posing a moderate risk of harm then they ceased to be able to just stay as restricted and regulated substances under schedule 4 of the Act. To those who say that no one has yet died I say it is better to take a precautionary and protective approach to public health now based on evidence and expert advice than to wait for one or more deaths to occur. To those who say that we are not legislating in the same way for alcohol and tobacco as for BZP I would remind them that alcohol and tobacco have their own legislative frameworks. In this case we were dealing with the Misuse of Drugs Act and with these particular substances. To those who say that we are criminalising party-pill users by this amendment I say that I believe the 6-month amnesty is a reasonable answer. 
For all those reasons I am comfortable to support the passage of this amendment bill and to commend it to the House. Thank you.