Bills

Statutes Amendment (Drug Offences) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 5 September 2018.)

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (16:07): I rise to speak in support of this bill, which delivers another key election promise of the Marshall Liberal team and sends a clear message that the use, sale, manufacture or cultivation of illicit substances will not be tolerated by this government. Indeed, since my election to this place in 2006, which seems a long time ago now, I have always personally taken a strong stance on drug use and associated criminal activity, taking particular issue with our lax and outdated cannabis laws, relentlessly calling on the previous Labor government to deter and prevent its abuse through tightening legislation. In fact, I recall the very first bill I introduced as a new member in 2006 sought to combat the prevalence of cannabis use in our society. I am therefore extremely pleased the new Liberal government is introducing measures, without delay, with the same intent.

We simply can no longer ignore the fact that, over the last few decades, since the inception of the Controlled Substances Act 1984, cannabis has been found to be an incredibly harmful and addictive drug, and our laws in South Australia should reflect this. This bill introduces a number of provisions to ensure our laws pertaining to illicit substances are in line with community expectation, dealing appropriately and more effectively with the evolving nature of drug crime in our society.

Under the proposed amendments, the penalty for cannabis possession will be increased to $2,000, which follows a recommendation from Deputy Coroner Anthony Schapel's inquest into the tragic murder of teenager Lewis McPherson in 2012, who was fatally shot in the chest by an inebriated and drugged Liam Humbles. I am sure members are familiar with the fact that the maximum penalty for cannabis possession in our state has remained at just $500 since the Controlled Substances Act came into effect some 33 years ago; $500 was a substantial amount of money 33 years ago, but of course is much less today.

Members would also be aware that, in practice, expiation fines generally imposed for the possession of cannabis under 25 grams is presently only $150, which is comparable to that of a jaywalking fine and far less than the average speeding fine. I understand from the Attorney's comments in the other place that this is, thankfully, likely to increase in the regulations in an effort to maintain consistency with other changes to penalties contained in this bill.

In addition, a new type of offence is created referred to as 'serious drug offending' which will apply to those who have committed two or more crimes under part 5 of the act within 10 years. These repeat offenders will be subject to higher penalties for subsequently committing certain offences. The bill will also add 13 new aggravated offences, targeting offenders linked to organised crime, and will compel courts to consider whether a child was present at any stage concerning an offence against section 33.

There have been significant concerns that serial drug offenders have been abusing the current system by electing to participate in a drug diversion program to avoid prosecution for repeat offenders, given the regime places no restriction on the number of times they can elect to undertake an accredited course. I understand there is evidence to suggest the courses are relatively effective for those who are serious about the rehabilitation, but compliance generally wanes when they are undertaken on multiple occasions, as one might expect.

The statistics concerning drug diversions are quite startling, with a 10-year review revealing that one-quarter of the 13,627 participants were diverted more than once—one-quarter diverted more than once; 15 per cent were diverted twice; 5 per cent were diverted three times; and 4 per cent were diverted four or more times. Astoundingly, one individual alone was diverted no less than 32 times. When you consider the amount of taxpayers' money that would have been wasted on those who are evidently rorting the system, it would be irresponsible for our government not to take action.

In response, this bill introduces a limit on the number of times an offender can undertake drug diversion programs to twice within four years. This move will be welcomed by South Australia Police, which has indicated that an extraordinary amount of its energy and resources are directed toward dealing with people who fail or refuse to attend their counselling sessions. I am sure members would agree that our officers’ time and attention can be better directed elsewhere; they certainly should not be preoccupied by those who are obviously not earnestly seeking to rehabilitate.

It is no secret that cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance in our state, with the 2016 National Drug Household Survey indicating almost one out of 10 South Australians had used the drug in the year prior. This is particularly concerning, given some research indicates a majority of habitual users will go on to use other illicit substances. Studies conducted all over the world have consistently found cannabis alone to be linked to psychosis, depression, anxiety, increased suicide, compromised cardiovascular, respiratory and immune systems, premature ageing, cognitive dysfunction, motor skills deficiency and learning, executive functioning and memory impairment.

Our youth, of course, are most susceptible to developing an addiction to this substance, with research in the US suggesting the younger a person is when they are introduced to cannabis, the higher their risk is of developing a dependency on the drug. Reflective of the drug culture in our general community, it is the most commonly used illicit substance amongst secondary students, with 10 per cent admitting to having used the drug previously. As science has confirmed, the adolescent brain is particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of marijuana use. Measures need to be put in place now to ensure our future generations are better protected and dissuaded from its use.

As mentioned earlier, I have been known to be passionate about addressing problems associated with illicit substances and specifically, although not only, cannabis, a drug that has been grossly underestimated in its ability to inflict serious harm on those who use it in the community in general, and certainly those who abuse it. Almost 20 years ago, statistics indicated the national economic and social costs resulting from the abuse of marijuana alone was estimated to be $21 billion per annum. That is almost 20 years ago. I would imagine this figure would have increased considerably since then, but even if it remained static against all odds (and I am sure that is not the case, but even if it had) it is nonetheless an astronomical burden for our communities to bear.

I have long believed we have had a duty to toughen our laws with regard to the possession, cultivation, manufacturing and trafficking of illicit substances, and I am very pleased the Marshall Liberal team is determined to prevent the accessibility of dangerous substances through ensuring the threat of punishment for drug crimes deter their production and sale. Its sweeping review of the act and subsequent reforms are undoubtedly in the best interests of South Australia and I strongly support the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.