Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14662] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the Misuse of Drugs (Classification of BZP) Amendment Bill. I certainly take very seriously the points that have been made that alcohol and tobacco morbidity and mortality are the most significant effects of drug usage in New Zealand. There is no doubt about that but I think it is also salutary to remember that it was not until 1963 that Sir Richard Doll clearly discovered the connection between the use of tobacco and lung cancer. 
One of the remarkable things about party pills is that they are extremely new on the scene in New Zealand. In fact I can refer to a very interesting article by Carroll du Chateau in the  
New Zealand Herald  
in May last year where she puts out a fact file that says that party pills often advertised as herbal highs have been available since late 2000. That is very very recent in the history of personkind given that alcohol and tobacco have been used for many many centuries. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: That’s a bit PC. What’s this “personkind” business? 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: “Humankind” if you like I say to Mr Mallard. Carroll du Chateau also says that although legal party pills are chemically designed to mimic the effects of ecstasy and P which we all know have extremely serious effects. She goes on to say that users become more sociable and wakeful and that adverse effects include insomnia seizures nausea vomiting and headaches. She also says that experts argue that criminalisation may drive pills underground which is indeed a very serious argument. 
The article brings up the trial that Professor Richard Beasley conducted in Wellington over a few years. I must say that the professor is someone who is highly regarded for conducting international clinical trials. It was pretty unusual for him to decide to abandon the trial because of the bad reactions from those who were taking the benzylpiperazine. He basically said: “We were concerned about the nature and severity of the adverse events range of side effects from anxiety to panic attacks headaches and migraines through to vomiting.” Consequently the first-ever clinical trial of benzylpiperazine was abandoned. That gives us some context to the fact that this is a very contemporary phenomenon and that the first-ever clinical trial was abandoned because of the concerns. One might say that the clinical trialist has an incentive to carry on because he is paid to carry on and complete such a trial. He gave up because of the concerns he had regarding it. 
Obviously there has been huge—as Hone Harawira would put it—pump preaching cant and moralising around the country on this issue. It is very important that we try to keep things as evidence-based as possible. There is no doubt that right throughout New Zealand we have had emergency service specialists comment on how concerned they are about the new phenomenon of admitting people—from age 7 to 93 in one instance at the Waikato Hospital emergency department—who have taken benzylpiperazine and its derivatives. The difficulty in getting an evidence base behind their effects is that so often they are mixed with other compounds—whether it be tobacco alcohol other party pills or more serious ones such as Ecstasy it is very hard to tell. But we do know that there are some pretty serious side effects even if as yet deaths have not been recorded. 
The other great concern is whether benzylpiperazine is one of the many gateway drugs. Again the evidence is actually not very clear although here at Victoria University a study believes that party pills users are 10 times more likely to be users of LSD Ecstasy and Ritalin. The report author Kate Bryson concluded that “party pills aren’t fulfilling their purpose of reducing illegal drug use—for drug users they’re just another item on the menu.” This conclusion is shared by a further study from Auckland City Hospital. 
One of the things we have relied on in New Zealand has been the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs. Its mandate is to ensure that drug classification decisions are evidence-based appropriate for our domestic situation and consistent with international obligations. It has quite a wide spectrum of duties to fulfil. I vividly remember its report from 2004 when I was on the Health Committee; I think both Katherine Rich and I were on it. At the time the recommendations were very clear that firstly at that stage of events it was not appropriate to reclassify benzylpiperazine. In fact the recommendation said that there was no current need for rescheduling the Misuse of Drugs Act. Secondly it said that the Minister for Food Safety should be requested to consider the appropriateness of permitting the chemical benzylpiperazine to be sold as a dietary supplement because at that stage it was. It seems pretty bizarre to think that was the fact and that indeed young New Zealand children could buy it next to the jelly beans in outlets throughout the country. The report of the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs went on to recommend that the Ministry of Health conduct further research into potential harms and that the Minister direct the ministry to examine options for new categories of classification levels of control and regulations such as an 18-plus age limit without prohibiting access to these substances completely. 
That was in 2004. Since then a further report in 2006 was carried out by the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs and another in May 2007 that were quite conclusive. There is no doubt that there have been divergent opinions and it was not a unanimous view by that committee but it did recommend that benzylpiperazine be reclassified into class C that the classifications class C1 drug covers all known analogues and that benzylpiperazine be removed from schedule 4 in order that it no longer be a restricted substance. They also said that work should continue to further develop the regulatory framework and enforcement capacity that would support the restricted substances provisions of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act. I would like to add that if one looks at schedule 1 and schedule 2 of this new amendment one can see that it includes not only benzylpiperazine but many of its derivatives such as—as stated in schedule 1—“(3) The isomers of the substances mentioned in clause 2” “(4) The esters and ethers of the substances mentioned in clause 2” and “(5) The salts of the substances mentioned in clause 2”. Back in 2003 somewhat radical legislation was brought into this Parliament by the rapid scheduling mechanisms because we know that those dealing in drugs the gangs involved and the big money people behind them are extremely keen to re-alter the chemical composition of the drugs so that they do not fit in with the legislative descriptions. That is very important if one is going to schedule them and make sure that they are well covered. 
I would finally like to say that I intend to bring up an amendment that would require monitoring of this legislation if it is passed and a report to the relevant parliamentary select committee in 2½ years’ time on the effects of having rescheduled these substances because I believe that if there are adverse effects then Parliament should be made formally aware of them.