HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-10-15 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES (OFFENCES) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 25 September 2013.)

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (16:52): I indicate that I am the lead speaker for the opposition on this important piece of legislation and that the opposition is supporting the legislation without amendment. The bill was introduced in this place as a result of the increasing number of synthetic drugs that are being put onto the market and circulated through various other means. These drugs mimic illicit drugs such as amphetamines and marijuana—the cannabinoids.

It is interesting to see that under the Controlled Substances (Controlled Drugs, Precursors and Plants) Regulations 2000 there are about 300 controlled drugs other than drugs of dependence, there are about 70 drugs of dependence, and there are about 100 controlled precursors. I will not go through them. It is like having a trip back to organic chemistry at university, reading the names of these chemicals.

What is important is that these chemicals are very complex in most cases, and it only takes a subtle change in the number of carbon atoms or hydroxyl ions being added to them or being taken away, or the number of bonds in them which changes their configuration and which then puts them outside the legislation.

Clever chemists out there have been doing this for quite a while, and it does go back quite a long time, back to the 1920s when some of these first synthetic drugs were about the place, but now there are hundreds and hundreds of them out there. The sad thing, though, for the community is that these drugs are becoming more and more potent and being passed off as everything from bath salts to herbal highs to legal trips, and they are not. They are very, very dangerous drugs.

At the moment in the current regulations for drugs is a list of schedules. I remember as a veterinarian that we had the S8 drugs, the controlled drugs, that we had to use and ketamine was one of those in that range. This has been used as a drug for obtaining highs by people who wanted to get around the other illicit drugs.

As a vet student back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I remember being warned about injecting animals with ketamine—and it is used in everything from cats to horses—that if we got it on our fingers to be very careful to wash our hands because it could not only have an immediate effect on your mental and physical state but also you could have severe flashbacks with it. It is a very dangerous drug. Even today, veterinarians are having to lock up a lot of medication in safes in their practices to make sure that they are kept out of the reach of people who would like to use them for purposes besides what they are intended for.

It is a huge range of drugs out there and this is why it is going to be important that under this piece of legislation the minister, in this case the Attorney-General, has the power to declare a substance to be an interim controlled drug and that can be declared in the Gazette. That interim notice will operate for a period of not more than 12 months. It is not necessary to have an organic chemical make-up of that drug; it can be identified by its trade name or in any other manner that is found to be suitable. Once a substance has been declared an interim controlled drug, the substance is treated in the same way as a controlled drug.

You only have to read the literature to see the entrepreneurial way some people describe it and the ingenious way that chemists and people, who in some cases have very little training other than going onto the internet, are able to manipulate chemical structures of compounds to produce these new psychoactive drugs. The possession and consumption offences contained in section 33 of the Controlled Substances Act will not apply to the interim controlled drugs because people will have bought these drugs as legal products at the time and so I understand that that is a reasonable thing to do.

However, I think we need to make sure we are out there educating people that the drugs they have are not just bath salts, not just a herbal high, that they are very dangerous drugs. In many cases we have no idea of the extent of the long-term damage that is being done by these drugs. It is not just the tachycardias, the psychoses that happen in some cases; there is a lot more residual effect that we are not aware of. It is the same with ketamine as I was saying before. One of the reasons we were warned about it was because you can have flashbacks, nightmares and psychoactive episodes for months afterwards even from just having ingested some accidentally.

As to the new offences that are created in this bill, the offences apply regardless of whether the substance has been proven to be dangerous. I can understand that. Here is one case where the precautionary principle really is a worthwhile principle. In other areas I question its effectiveness or its need, but in this case the first new offence is the intentional manufacturing of a controlled drug alternative, which will be under the new section 33LD.

Under the new proposed section a person who manufactures a substance, intending that the substance will have pharmacological effects similar to those of a controlled drug or the illegal alternative to a controlled drug, will be guilty of an offence with a maximum penalty of $15,000 fine or imprisonment for four years. That is a significant penalty. Catching these people is the thing we need to make sure we do because the damage will have been done by the time people have ingested these new psychoactive substances.

There is a change to the term 'manufacture' in relation to controlled drugs. It means undertaking any process by which the drug is extracted, produced or refined or taking part in the process of manufacturing of the substance and for the purpose of the act, a person takes part in the process of manufacture of a controlled drug if the person directs, takes or participates in any step. It is those who are out there providing the money, providing the premises and providing the wherewithal for people to produce these drugs who we need to catch as well. The steps in the process of the manufacture of a controlled drug include:

(a) acquiring equipment, substances or materials;

(b) storing equipment, substances or materials;

(c) carrying, transporting, loading or unloading equipment, substances or materials;

(d) guarding or concealing equipment, substances or materials;

(e) providing or arranging finance (including finance for the acquisition of equipment, substances or materials);

(f) providing or allowing the use of premises or jointly occupying premises [for the production of these drugs].

I remember that, not long ago, there was a motel suite on Anzac Highway at Glenelg that was raided. I forget what the actual term is, but they were cooking up, I think, methyl amphetamines in there. The risk associated not only with just the end product but also the process is one we should not overlook as well because there have been cases where these drug labs have exploded and caused loss of life and certainly loss of property.

The bill also contains another new offence; that is, promoting a controlled drug alternative. The proposed section is 33LE. This is something that has surprised me. I have learnt a bit more about the way people market these drugs since I have been looking at this piece of legislation. Terms like 'bath salts', 'legal highs', 'herbal highs' and others are being used to pass off these substances as innocuous substances that are just a bit of fun.

They will often label them 'not for human consumption' as well, to try to say, 'You should not be consuming this; it clearly says that on the label,' but what is the intent? The intent is to get people to purchase and consume them with who knows what effects. So, promoting a controlled drug alternative is picked up in this bill and is something that I think everybody in this place will be supporting most strongly.

The new section 33LF creates the new offence of manufacturing, packaging, selling or supplying a substance promoted as a controlled drug alternative. This offence requires persistent conduct so, obviously, the police will be out there investigating. They will be making sure that the people who are involved in this industry are being monitored and watched. To that end, under section 33LF:

If a police officer reasonably suspects that a person intends to manufacture, package, sell or supply a substance that is being, or is to be, promoted in a manner prohibited under section 33LE, the officer may give the person a notice...warning the person that if he or she manufactures, packages, sells or supplies the substance he or she will be guilty of an offence.

I understand from briefings that the warnings can then go on to the next step where a premises can be closed or parts of a premises can be cordoned off so that the people involved in the selling of these substances are very clear about the need to desist, to ensure that public safety is being put first.

These are not recreational drugs, they are not 'legal highs', they are not like taking a painkiller to relieve your pain: these are very, very dangerous substances. I am sad that we have to introduce this legislation, but the reality of the world nowadays is that there are people out there who are making billions of dollars, as I understand it, across the nation by selling illegal drugs.

The only questions I had for the people giving me the briefing—and I thank them for that—were about the courts and appeals and things, and they have been answered satisfactorily. Whichever court is involved in the particular offence will be the one that has the jurisdiction and then the appeal, apparently, goes to the next higher court from there. I am not a lawyer and I am quite happy to leave that side of things to the lawyers.

It is disappointing that we need to have this legislation in place. As I say, these chemicals, these compounds, are not recreational drugs although, when you look at the interim ban notice that was put out by the Minister for Business Services and Consumers back in June this year, you would think that these are almost lolly-like names: White Revolver, Ash Inferno, Kyote, K2, Kronic, Black Widow, Buddha Express Black Label, Iblaze Tropic Thunder, I blaze, Galaxy Ultra Nova, Skunk, Circus Deluxe, Vortex Inferno, Herbal Incense, King Karma, Montana Madness, Sharman, Iceblaze and Slappa. These names hide a deadly consequence for those who take them.

As I have said before, and I would like to emphasise, not only the short-term effects, which are quite evident, but the long-term effects of taking these new psychoactive substances are not known and are not documented. The last thing people should be doing is experimenting with their own life, never mind allowing people to sell these drugs, which will potentially kill people or maim them in some way, mentally or physically.

The opposition supports this legislation. We hope that the police are able to do everything in their power to come down hard on people who are peddling drugs, no matter what sort they are, in South Australia and in the nation because there is nothing more insidious and harmful than the drugs that are being peddled throughout our communities at the moment. With that contribution, I support the bill.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (17:06): I will just make a brief contribution on this bill. Clearly, our side of the house is supporting this legislation; it is necessary. I suspect that what will need to happen over future years is that the parliament, in dealing with any sorts of issues like this, will need to be a lot quicker and a lot smarter a lot more regularly well after most of us are gone.

From a personal point of view, I am not sure that the penalties are harsh enough. I would be in favour of locking them up for about 20 years and leaving them there to rot because they get out and they start again. I say that because I have done numerous prison visits, and to see people who have been incarcerated for drug-related offences knowing that they will get out again in due course and do the same thing again annoys me intensely.

Anything which will assist in controlling drugs or which will give police the ability to control them and pull them into gear is to be commended and supported. That is something that I am sure both sides of the house feel strongly about. I cannot speak for others, of course, but I would probably have difficulty in finding anybody in the parliament who would not agree.

We have to get a lot tougher on it, and what we have to do is to make sure that the police can get a lot tougher. Since I have been in this place, we have passed heaps of bills supposedly on law and order, yet we are not seeing a lot of this transpire into action because the police are not able to do things, whether they are not allowed or whatever.

I was pleased to see the Victoria Police knock down a few fortresses in Victoria last week. I can remember former premier Rann, of blessed memory, and Kevin Foley, of even more blessed memory, talking about what they were going to do, and it never happened—and we are still waiting for it to happen!

Mrs Redmond: Nothing has changed.

Mr PENGILLY: Nothing changes. In that respect, I will give the government a bit of a whack around the ears because they simply have not done enough. I was pleased to see what they did do in Victoria last week. Anyway, enough of that. It is an important move. It should have a speedy progress through the house, I would suspect. Heaven knows what will happen in another place but, with a bit of luck, it will get there fairly quickly. I doubt that they will have a select committee on this one. With those few words, I have pleasure in supporting the bill.

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (17:08): It is with enthusiasm that I rise to support the bill. I was very pleased when the Attorney brought this bill into the house. I will not detain the chamber for long, but I do want to get on the record my support. The ways in which the criminal class has responded to law enforcement and also to the potential stigma amongst people who are concerned about their safety but still wish to take risks with drugs is that, when they hear about things such as people dying after overdosing on dodgy cooked ecstasy or methamphetamine overdoses, the response in many ways has been to go down this path, which is to have synthetic drugs, herbal remedies, almost the vegan kosher biodynamic yoghurt-style version of drugs. But they are just as damaging and just as dangerous and they can cause just as many problems.

The public profile of these drugs that we have seen in the last few months, particularly with high profile cases of very tragic circumstances surrounding the death of those who have taken some of these substances, has highlighted the need for this sort of legislation. I think this will enable the Attorney-General to be responsive in a fashion to deal with new substances as they arise, and I think that that is a positive thing. It will give the police the opportunity to arrest some of these people who manufacture, promote and sell what are, in fact, deeply dangerous and harmful substances that should not be legally available for sale, and it will curtail this trade. I look forward to its speedy passage through the house.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (17:10): First of all, I thank the contributors to the debate, the members for Morphett, Finniss and Morialta. I have to say that this is one of those occasions when all of us in here are in furious agreement about something. Those are great moments because, even though I know the member for Finniss has his doubts about what is going to happen elsewhere, I have a hunch that we probably have the numbers, folks, because if you people over there and the government over here are all pointing in the same direction, even the vagaries of another place are unlikely to overtake that. Maybe we can even extend that support to them bringing the thing on quickly, voting yes, and then moving back to some of the other things they do so that we can start giving it to the police.

I genuinely appreciate the support from the opposition. It is really good to see the opposition and the government speaking with one voice about this terrible scourge that is out there in the community; it is very positive. Something the member for Morialta said stuck in my mind. I was with my children driving down Jetty Road at Glenelg not that long ago, and one of my children said, 'Oh, that's some place,' and I cannot remember the name—and I probably should not name it anyway because I do not want to give it any advertising, but you know who I am talking about, member for Morphett.

I just looked at it and said, 'That's not a particularly useful place for you kids to be going to,' and they said, 'Oh, no, it's fine. These are legal drugs.' I said, 'Uh-uh, I don't know where your information is coming from. These are untested chemicals and people have no idea what the consequences are, and there is stuff in there that's more dangerous than stuff your doctor will prescribe to you.' A debate then opened up in the car about whether or not they were drugs. 'No, they are not actually drugs, they are just herbs.' I said, 'Uh-uh, no, they might look like tea leaves but they have something sprinkled on them that is very different from what you would find sprinkled on most tea leaves.'

The member for Morialta commented on the idea of these being vegan, or healthy, or organic, or something; unfortunately, that is out there a bit, and there is this misapprehension, particularly among younger people who perhaps have not been educated about this, that these things are harmless bits of chemicals that you can ingest, that it is just a bit of fun and that no harm will come to you because you are buying it from this funny-looking shop with funny-looking weed diagrams on the windows.

We all know that that is not right, so I am very keen to have this bill enacted and proclaimed quickly so that the police can start getting out there and we can actually get some public attention on the fact the police are shutting these operations down because it is definitely not in the public interest that this be allowed to continue. I sincerely thank everybody who has spoken, and I also again thank the opposition for supporting this important measure.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (17:14): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

I have had a brief word with the member for Morialta, and I do not think at the present time we are in a position where other members are able to progress matters, although we will be dealing with that in the course of the next day or so.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT