Lees-Galloway Iain: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 09 April 2013. Volume:689;Page:9134. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): Let me say at the outset that Labour wholeheartedly supports this legislation the Psychoactive Substances Bill and we look forward to the select committee process and hearing what people have to say about the bill.There are two aspects of it that I think are particularly worthy of praise. First—and this is the thing that many parents around New Zealand will be very pleased to see—it does provide a mechanism to get some of these substances that have been untested that are unproven off the shelf until such time as they are proven to be safe. I know that there will be people particularly parents around the country rejoicing at the knowledge that this legislation is finally being passed and that that will be the effect. The second aspect though that I think is particularly praiseworthy is the fact that for the first time in this Parliament we are expecting to pass legislation that proposes a mechanism by which some drugs can become legal and make it to market in a regulated—I hope a very tightly regulated—market. That I believe is a very positive step in our drug laws—Mike Sabin: Don’t worry. We will never be doing that with cannabis. Don’t panic.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Sorry. Say that again Mike Sabin.Mike Sabin: I said we won’t be doing that with cannabis so don’t worry.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I think this is a very positive step and we may want to look more widely at how it could be applied to other substances. But I know that that is not the purpose of this legislation. That is not the debate we are having today.We need to focus today on the issue at hand and that is the issue of novel particularly synthetic psychoactive substances that are not covered by other pieces of legislation. Things like alcohol tobacco and those conventional drugs that are covered by the Misuse of Drugs Act and natural remedies—those sorts of things—are not going to be covered by this bill. This is particularly aimed at things like synthetic cannabis and party pills which we know have unfortunately caused a lot of damage to young people because there has been no mechanism by which those substances can be proven safe before they go to the market.I would like to point out some aspects of the Psychoactive Substances Bill that I think are particularly excellent. The first is that the possession of a substance that is not an approved substance will not attract a criminal conviction. There is no danger of a person being imprisoned. In fact it will be nothing more than an infringement that attracts a fine of up to $500. I think that again is a positive step and one that we might want to reflect on in the future for how that type of arrangement might apply to other substances. Obviously this allows for the substances to be sold only to people who are aged 18 and over and that will need to be tightly tightly enforced.Finally it is an offence to employ someone under 18 to sell psychoactive substances. Again this is an issue that we have seen time and time again in the tobacco debate: youngsters very young people—employed in small retail outfits to be fair—have been in the position where they have been selling a substance that is restricted and to be sold only to people who are aged 18 and over. There is anecdotal evidence of those very young people being bullied—really—into selling tobacco to people who are aged under 18. It would be the same situation with psychoactive substances. I am very pleased to see that provision included in this legislation.As the Associate Minister of Health the Hon Peter Dunne said around 18 months ago he introduced the time-limited bans on certain psychoactive substances. Again we in the Opposition supported that. As the Minister said he has issued notices regarding 37 of those substances. However many more are still available and if anything after the introduction of those temporary bans the pace at which new substances came on to the market to replace those that had the temporary ban applied to them increased. It was never going to be the lasting solution. The Minister freely conceded that. It is fantastic that we have finally got to the stage 2 years after the Law Commission tabled its reportControlling and Regulating Drugs where we are debating the lasting legislation that will deal with that situation.There are a range of aspects of the bill about which we in the Opposition are looking forward to hearing what submitters have to say and are looking forward to discussing at the select committee. Issues such as plain packaging of psychoactive substances whether or not the display of psychoactive substances at the point of sale ought to be banned and whether or not there should be in-store advertising of psychoactive substances are left in this bill to regulation. They are not dealt with in the primary legislation. Therefore it is over to a Minister to decree by Order in Council whether or not we have such measures. I know that there are some people out there who think that is not robust enough and that those aspects should be included in the primary legislation. I for one am keen to hear the debate for and against that. I want to hear what the officials think is the best approach but I do believe that those aspects need to be considered closely.There is a transitional period accounted for in this legislation. That would mean that for some substances that are currently available to which temporary bans have not been applied it would be potentially possible to carry on selling those substances after this legislation is passed. I do not believe that everybody in our communities thinks that is adequate. Many many people will be expecting that by passing this legislation we will be removing all of those substances from the shelf until they are proven safe. We need to look closely at that transitional period.This legislation requires people to acquire a licence to import and a licence to manufacture psychoactive substances. It does not require retailers to acquire a licence to sell psychoactive substances. We have a situation in New Zealand at the moment where we have a substance tobacco that retailers do not require a licence for in order to sell. We have another substance alcohol that retailers do require a licence to sell. Where do psychoactive substances fit in that spectrum? Ought we be leaning more towards a licensing regime? Or ought we as this legislation allows for not have such a licensing regime for retailers? That is another question that needs to be explored thoroughly at the select committee.Although this legislation does adhere very closely to chapter 5 and the recommendations held in chapter 5 of the Law Commission’s report one of the recommendations in that chapter was for price controls to be considered as a method of harm reduction regarding psychoactive substances. The Law Commission stated that just as it found with alcohol it believed that price controls would be a method that wecould use to reduce the harm. However this legislation makes no reference at all to price controls whether they be through a minimum pricing regime or through the use of excise taxes. Again it is another issue that needs to be explored at the select committee.In the short time I have left I do just wish to state that although this legislation is a positive move it is by no means the fulsome consideration of the Misuse of Drugs Act that is required. The Law Commission said that the Misuse of Drugs Act is outdated it is not fit for purpose and it needs to be thoroughly reviewed and replaced. This is far from a replacement for the Misuse of Drugs Act. Other issues canvassed in the Law Commission report such as the classification system for conventional drugs—one that actually considers the real harms associated with different drugs—regulation regarding personal use and possession of drugs as well as the possession of utensils for drug use; regulation affecting offences and penalties; and exemptions from prohibition are all factors that the Law Commission made sound recommendations on and are all ignored by this legislation. It is time for a comprehensive review and a comprehensive replacement of the Misuse of Drugs Act. But on the issue of psychoactive substances getting them off our shelves until they are proven safe this legislation is good and the Labour Party is pleased to support it.