Kanongata'a-Suisuiki AnahilaANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): Kia orana. Firstly I'd like to congratulate the member on his first member's bill the Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill. I also want to pay respect to the memories of those who have lost their lives through drug use and acknowledge the hurt of their family and friends. However Labour does not support this bill. From the onset while we take the subject of illicit drug supply and abuse very seriously New Zealand does not need another measure—which I will extrapolate later on—in terms of penalty.Can I remind the House of the purpose of this bill. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 to increase the penalty for selling or supplying psychoactive substances from two years to eight years. The purpose of the primary act which is the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 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.I want to acknowledge the last speaker Dr Shane Reti. He spoke about the response being a complete package—that this bill addresses a complete package—but I didn't hear that in terms of most of what he said.I also want to remind the House that this amendment bill seeks to amend section 70 of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013. If I could just bring it back in terms of what section 70 is just to remind members of the House and those listening actually what that section is. So in section 70 Offences relating to psychoactive substance that is not approved product" subsection (1) states "A person commits an offence if the person without reasonable excuse—(a) sells or supplies a psychoactive substance …" It then goes on to "(b) offers to sell or supply …" and then it goes on to "(c) possesses a psychoactive substance that is not an approved product with the intent to sell or supply …" Then it continues on to subsection (2) and talks about the penalties in terms of subsection (3). Section 70(3) states "A person who commits an offence against subsection (1) is liable on conviction—(a) in the case of an individual to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 2 years: [and] (b) in the case of a body corporate to a fine not exceeding $500000."So at the moment what we've heard is there is no convincing evidence that increasing penalties will reduce drug-related harm. As the Minister has alerted us to 62 percent of prisoners in New Zealand have either a mental health disorder or a substance use disorder. Extending sentences is not an acceptable response to the drug use issue. What we do know—we've heard it today—is that synthetic drugs can be highly addictive for those who use them and greatly difficult in stopping. For the fourth year running the Global Drug Survey identified that the risk of seeking emergency medical treatment was higher following the use of synthetic cannabinoid products than any other drug. It is therefore important for this Government to take a preventative first approach to crime which will tackle the root of crimes to reduce offending and make communities safer. For the variety of costs involved this measure will significantly benefit communities.What I'm trying to say is that my interpretation of this bill is focused on the drug user. What this Government intends to do in terms of the review and what the Minister alluded to is we're investing $6 billion—was it $6 billion?—in terms of the review of—I've lost my place. What I'm saying is that the Government is taking an approach on a complete package in terms of this review. This bill only addresses the offender and I think it's unfair that we forward this bill in terms of just looking at the penalty."