Stewart Barbara: Medicines Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Stewart Barbara: Medicines Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 20 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8806. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to support the Medicines Amendment Bill. Like the previous speaker Kevin Hague I would like to thank the officials for their hard work. There were some parts of the bill that did need a lot of clarity for members and the officials worked hard to ensure that we had that clarity. I would also like to thank the chair of the Health Committee Dr Hutchison for his patience and I thank fellow members of the committee. 
This bill has taken a long time to get back to the House. Why? We are totally unsure. We have had no reasons for the delay in this bill. New Zealand First supports this bill the Medicines Amendment Bill in view of the global advances that are happening in medicines and the changing role of medical practitioners. We in New Zealand First have always believed that decisions regarding health have to be timely and this bill is one way with the burgeoning disease burden that is now approaching New Zealand that we can ensure that timely decisions are actually made. 
By altering the definitions of “medicines” and “medical devices” and further defining where various health professionals fit in on the prescribing framework this bill will help to achieve the goal of timely decisions. What is the slogan we hear in this House quite often? Is it “Better sooner faster care” or is it “Better sooner more convenient care”? We hear it daily and we would like to believe it. 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Why does Maryan Street oppose it? 
BARBARA STEWART 
: We are not opposing it; we are supporting it. We believe that this bill will actually enable New Zealanders to have a greater flexibility to get the most out of our health system. 
When one goes to an optometrist or a pharmacist or a nurse practitioner and some ailment is diagnosed identified and prescribed for it makes sense to have that prescription written out at that time rather than going to the general practitioner at some later time and having to arrange the appointment. We all know that attending work is one of New Zealanders’ greatest considerations and the greatest percentage of New Zealanders try to take the minimum of sick leave. 
One of the purposes of this bill as the Hon Maurice Williamson said is to modernise definitions to align with international norms. This tells us a lot. Where New Zealand was once considered one of the world’s leaders in health information and health technology advances we are now playing catch-up with our legislation but it is an important step if we are ever going to get ahead. We do live in a time now when technology is accelerating advancements in health and medicine. As such it is no surprise to find that the definitions of “medicines” “medical devices” and “therapeutic purpose” need adjusting from what is currently set out in the Medicines Act 1981. Realigning these meanings with the products that we find ourselves buying time and time again is timely. Over-the-counter products for self-medication have advanced in recent years. The number of advances in over-the-counter products like contact lens solution eye drops headache remedies self-testing pregnancy kits and nasal sprays cannot be considered by anyone to fall under the category of medicine and they should not be classified as such—and no doubt there is a whole list of other things that should be mentioned. 
In fact technology has advanced significantly and it is inevitable that “technology” in the regulations would need to be amended. We want these advances to continue as we are the recipients and we need to see the definitions of medical devices and medicines aligned with international norms. We live in an international world and we basically cannot afford to shut ourselves away in our corner of the world and ignore what is happening elsewhere. 
Whom we see for a routine check-up or a repeat prescription has also changed quite markedly. Pharmacists optometrists dentists and nurse practitioners are often the first port of call for minor ailments or for ongoing condition maintenance. Where would we be without the trusted community pharmacies that can provide a wide range of advice and remedies for a wide range of ailments from coughs and colds first aid for a wide range of sports injuries and everything else in between—warts nits lice everything? We have all been there and used those services and sometimes bought those products ourselves. It is an excellent service that the pharmacists provide instead of people actually going to the doctor. Pharmacists always provide a very valuable professional service to a very high level. It is instantly available and people appreciate that. So we in New Zealand First were very pleased to see their prescribing regime actually changed recently and we wish them well and hope that it continues. 
Of course we have to recognise too the increase in the amount of training that is actually given to pharmacy staff by various organisations. This has really given the pharmacy staff and the customers the benefit of the wider experience of those working in the pharmacy industry making everyone’s understanding of minor health ailments so much better and allowing them to more ably select the self-medicating products that we rely on. With these subtle changes to the health model that we currently have the legislation needed to catch up to accurately represent our experience within the health system. 
While working on this bill in the Health Committee it became apparent that submitters generally supported the new regime and the new definitions. I am confident that the work done on the bill has resolved the queries of the various groups that discussed their submissions regarding the prescribing framework. It did take some work for all of us to understand the differences between an “authorised prescriber” a “designated prescriber” and a “delegated prescriber”—all of those terms that the Hon Maurice Williamson waxed lyrical about this morning. So we believe that we can support this part of the bill with confidence. 
Delegated prescribers are very important and a valuable step away from “health by postcode”—a problem that we really do not want to have. It is a good option beyond the current prescribing practices that people currently have. When this role is totally established it will help ensure that all New Zealanders have more convenient and efficient access to medicine. We believe these changes will also help bridge the gap between the rural and the urban experience. 
New Zealand First supports the passing of this bill as it allows for greater flexibility where medicine and health changes are happening at an incredible rate. We believe it is in the interests of our health outcomes to keep up with the changes. Safety however is a priority for New Zealand First. We will watch as the regulatory authority is created and carefully monitor what problems are arising in this particular faction. Given we are seeking to increase the flexibility of our health system we will support the bill right through all stages. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.