Cunliffe David: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Psychoactive Substances Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 09 April 2013. Volume:689;Page:9153. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): I rise to take a very short call in this debate to record my support for the position that the Opposition has set forward which is to conditionally support this bill the Psychoactive Substances Bill proceeding to a select committee process of not less than 2 months. It is worth recording that the Government’s preference was a very shoddy 1-month process and that under discussion with the Opposition—Hon Peter Dunne: No that’s not true. That’s not correct. That’s not correct.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: Oh that was a mistake? Oh now it is a mistake like so much else that has been happening lately like the appointments of senior and very sensitive Public Service positions like the protection of personal private information and a whole lot of other mistakes.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order!Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: I will come back to the bill. Labour supports in principle the shifting of the burden of proof. This is an issue that my colleague Iain Lees-Galloway our associate health spokesperson has spent some time on over the years. He has led a debate within our caucus that shows the value in ensuring that those who would wish to put on the market potentially psychoactive substances are required to meet the full cost and the full standards of medical integrity of providing for those tests. I also wish to just briefly record as a member of Parliament with a large Pacific Island community in my electorate the sensitivity around the issue of kava taking. It is a traditional substance it is part of traditional routines and we will want assurance from—Hon Peter Dunne: Wrong bill. The natural products bill covers it.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: —well we will wait for the Minister to go on record when he is in the chair and we look forward to that—the Government that traditional cultural practices will not be inappropriately affected by this legislation. I will look forward to hearing Pacific members opposite taking up that banner in support of those constituencies. It seems to be the Labour members so far who have been championing that issue on behalf of our Pacific communities.So summing up—and I do not wish to detain the House—Labour conditionally supports the passage of this bill through to the select committee process. We hope that the public will have as much opportunity as possible to make submissions. The Health Committee will carefully consider those. It is strange that the Government which has had this bill in development for such a very long time has brought it to the House with such a rushed timetable—only 2 months it has now been clarified shall we say. That is against the normal practice of a full 6-month select committee hearing timetable. That is not ideal. It is part of a trend that New Zealanders are seeing where this Government is playing fast and loose with the legislative process. New Zealanders are becoming increasingly concerned and increasingly disappointed in a Government that is not protecting their rights—not protecting their rights to have their say on legislation not protecting their rights to the privacy of their personal information and not protecting their rights to keep them from the prying eyes of the State. New Zealanders are asking what it is going to look like to live in John Key’s New Zealand in a couple of years’ time if these trends continue. It is something that all New Zealanders would wish to guard against.So although we have no problem with the principle of this bill which is the reversing of the burden of proof here to ensure that the proposed manufacturers and retailers of potentially psychoactive drugs are meeting the costs and the due diligence of proving their safety we are seriously concerned about the shortage of time for submissions and we have been very active in pushing back on the Government for any further shortening. Thank you.Motion agreed to.