Sharma GauravDr GAURAV SHARMA (Labour—Hamilton West): It's my pleasure to rise a second time in the House today after having recently spoken on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Legislation Bill. This time I'm speaking on the Drug and Substance Checking Legislation Bill (No 2). I just want to acknowledge David Seymour; I used to live in his electorate—rather I spent the majority of my life living in Epsom going to school and medical school there and I never thought I would actually agree with him. So never say never I guess.As a member of the Health Committee as well as a medical professional I'm proudly supporting this bill. I'm supporting this bill because last summer the Labour Party - led Government legalised drug-checking services to operate at festivals over the summer and it's already having an impact. As we've heard from other members—the deputy chair of the Health Committee Dr Tracey McLellan—research from Victoria University has shown that 68 percent of people surveyed festival-goers who used the drug-testing services changed their behaviour as a result of that. This behaviour change meant that some disposed of their drugs that had been tested some reduced the amount of drugs they took and 87 percent that's a lot said that as a result of talking to the testing team they understood more about the harmful behaviour involved in taking the drugs.The problem we've got at the moment though is the Act will expire in December and experts are telling us that it should be made permanent. The Act has also given welcome reassurance to those operating the services in New Zealand as well as festival organisers who host them that they will not be criminalised for their efforts to keep young New Zealanders safe. Under section 12 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 it is an offence at the moment to knowingly allow premises to be used for the commission of an offence against the Act. Before section 12 was amended by the drug checking Act recently on an interim basis event organisers and other hosts who allowed drug-checking services to take place were at risk of prosecution under section 12 because the promotion of drug-checking services could have constituted evidence of knowledge that drugs were being consumed or possessed on the premises. The drug-checking amendment on section 12 provided that it's not an offence to host a drug-checking service any more.But if a permanent regulatory system is not introduced drug checking will revert to a legal grey area and drug-checking service providers and their hosts will again be at risk of prosecution. It is likely that drug-checking services will be provided at fewer events once again. As a health professional I would say it adds another layer to it because once you test the drugs you know what people are taking and you are able to provide the best medical care to people. In my own career I have seen people come to me but not knowing what the drug is means it takes that much longer to provide that care. So for us it's always been about a health perspective not the criminal aspect of it and we want to make sure that people have that access available to them especially our young kids.So I will say to the Opposition: know your stuff" before you criticise Victoria University Simeon Brown. And as such I would recommend this to the next stage."