Page 214 - Week 01 - Thursday, 18 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (11.33), in reply: As has been said by Mrs Carnell, this Bill goes to the disposal of cannabis. I am advised that we have a quite large amount of cannabis in storage at this point. I know that it would not be safe under the Liberals; they would sell it.
Mr De Domenico: Privatise.
MR BERRY: You can get an idea on how they figure things out. They would sell the stuff. That is right; they would privatise the drugs that are in storage. I am pleased to see that they have shown their colours. They are quite proud of their great traditions of privatisation, even in relation to the drug industry.
Madam Speaker, the Bill therefore amends the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989 to provide for the magistrate or the Government Analyst to order the pre-trial destruction of cannabis in excess of that required for evidentiary purposes. As has been said, the amendments are based on the relevant provisions of the New South Wales Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. Under the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989, a drug of dependence or a substance prohibited under the Act and seized by the Australian Federal Police is delivered to an analyst at the Government Analytical Laboratory of the Department of Health. The substance is then identified, certified for evidentiary purposes and retained by the Government Analyst pending an order for destruction or until all subsequent court action has been finalised. The Government Analyst has responsibility for the storage and security of such substances.
Section 194 of the current Act provides for the destruction of excess quantities of a seized substance in relation to which proceedings have been instituted. The intention is to avoid the prolonged storage of a bulk amount of the substance until the completion of those legal proceedings. The Director of Public Prosecutions considers that certain provisions of section 194 of the Act are unworkable and, because of this, no applications to the court for a court order for the pre-trial destruction of any drugs or substances have been made. As I have said, the present storage facilities are filled with a large amount of cannabis in relation to which proceedings are incomplete.
The cannabis stored is an accumulation of seizures since the introduction of the original Act in 1989. May I say to this Assembly and to the people of Canberra that under Labor it will not be sold, but the Liberals have made clear their intentions. There is also concern - - -
Mr De Domenico: We are still on the high moral ground, Mr Berry.
MR BERRY: Some are. There is also concern that the ACT does not cater for special situations when a large plantation of cannabis is seized. Regardless of the size of the seizure, the police are required to harvest and deliver the entire crop to the Government Analyst for identification, certification and storage. So that puts a great deal of pressure on the storage facilities that one has to provide. The Bill amends the Act to permit preliminary on-site destruction. It provides for the Government Analyst to order the on-site destruction of the excess amount of cannabis in special circumstances where no charges have been laid and when he
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .