Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Drug Paraphernalia DRUG PARAPHERNALIA The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON Legislative Council DRUG PARAPHERNALIA The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (14:51): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister representing the Attorney-General questions on drug-using paraphernalia. Leave granted. The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON Legislative Council The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON: As honourable members may recall, in February 2011 I asked questions of the Attorney-General about the operation of section 9B in the Summary Offences Act 1953, introduced by my Summary Offences (Drug Paraphernalia) Amendment Bill 2007. Specifically, I sought from the Attorney-General an assurance that he would review the judicial interpretation of the law, which I believe was undermined by the judgement in Police v Mr Koutsoumidis, the owner of Off Ya Tree in Hindley Street. The effect of this decision has allowed paraphernalia that is clearly intended for consuming illicit drugs—such as smokeless pipes and their variation, known as 'bud bombs'—to be legally sold in spite of the bill passed by this parliament. Another question I asked of the Attorney-General was whether he had seen the pipes and so-called water pourers that had been held not to be within the scope of section 9B and hence remain on sale at Off Ya Tree. Having received no response to my question, I was surprised to read in a media article the comments on this issue made by the Attorney-General, and I quote: I am concerned to ensure that the legislation works as effectively as possible to prevent the sale of drug implements...I am interested in discussing this issue with Ms Bressington and the police and taking advice from the Crown Solicitor to see if the law needs to be tightened. While this stood in stark contrast to an earlier statement he made, I nonetheless welcomed the news that the Attorney-General was now taking this issue seriously, and I scheduled a meeting with him late last week. At this meeting I provided the Attorney-General with the drug-using paraphernalia that had either been provided to me by concerned parents or that my office had purchased. This paraphernalia included a smokeless cannabis pipe, a glass open bowl pipe and a bong masquerading as a water pourer. When I placed the water pourer on his table, his comment was, 'Well, I know what this is'. Having sighted the items, it was clear to the Attorney-General that parliament's intention had been undermined by the Koutsoumidis judgement if these items were legally for sale. In fact, he seemed quite concerned that these items were actually still being sold. So, for the sake of the record and progressing this parliament's response, my questions for the Attorney-General are: 1.	Having been provided with pipes and a bong that are still legally for sale, does the Attorney-General now agree with me that parliament's intention when passing the Summary Offences (Drug Paraphernalia) Amendment Bill 2007 has been undermined? 2.	If so, will the Attorney-General take action to close the loophole that was created by the Police v Koutsoumidis case and, if so, when will this occur? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (14:54): I thank the honourable member for her important questions, and I will refer them to the Attorney-General in another place and bring back a response.