Kim O’KEEFFE (Shepparton) (16:22): Today I rise to make a contribution on the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Amendment (Pill Testing) Bill 2024. We do know that there is a significant issue with drug substance abuse and also the criminal activity of drug crime. Music festivals are a place where young people are out to have a good time and we know that they are also an environment where the opportunity to be exposed to drugs is increased, but we know that this issue goes much more broadly. Labor had a firm stance against pill testing, and as recently as February 2023 the government said that they would not be introducing a pill-testing trial and that pill testing can give people a sense that it is safe to take drugs. Yet here they are now with a completely different position with this bill before the house.
Police Association Victoria Secretary Wayne Gatt said pill testing would fly in the face of long-accepted policing principles, personal responsibility and the law:
Our view remains that pill testing is not the panacea to the issue …
Mr Gatt said in a statement. The state’s powerful police union has also criticised the move and said the government needs to clearly outline how it expects police to enforce drug taking at music festivals. Police also have unanswered questions. The government has not provided sufficient information with this bill, and there are significant areas of concern and critical flaws in the drafting of this legislation.
The government has not provided significant information through the bill briefing and to the public to fully understand and evaluate the drug-checking service model. We had many questions on this side of the house at the bill briefing and we have not received those answers, so how are we expected to support a bill without the information that we require? There is no mandatory obligation to enact an early drug warning system if a tainted or dangerous drug is detected by the drug-checking service, thereby withholding health information from the community. This is contradictory to the Minister for Health’s second-reading speech, which states the drug checking trial will provide Victorians from all parts of the community with the health information they need to reduce drug harms and save lives. The government were unable to provide details around what analysis would be used in mobile sites, the limitations of testing, the sensitivity and specifically the testing protocols, turnaround times for testing, whether mobile or fixed-testing sites would be NATA accredited details surrounding the cost of testing or the number of tests to be completed each day.
There is concern that the analysis intended to be used for mobile testing will not be able to detect nitazenes, the emerging class of drugs of most concern to the alcohol and other drugs sector. Despite messaging around pill testing, mobile analysis will not be able to test the potency of a drug, so the result cannot be used to dose-test substances. The legislation does not mandate referral of novel, impure or other dangerous drugs to the centralised drug testing service for confirmation nor further initiate an alert when extremely dangerous drugs are detected. There is no fit and proper test for special drug-checking workers, even though they will be handling drugs for testing. New section 20AA(5) states that general drug-checking workers are not authorised to provide a drug-checking service other than the service of providing harm reduction information. The definition of harm reduction information is extremely limited to information about drugs detected in the sample, information regarding possible consequences of using the substance and information and advice about access to health services, welfare services and similar assistance. The legislation therefore does not allow for the general drug-checking worker to discuss the limitations of testing – for example, that a drug could be in the drug sample but below detectable limits – nor allow for disclosure of vital information around the waiving of civil liabilities, as outlined in the legislation. This is a highly concerning drafting error which could impact on the ability of drug-testing clients to receive information that would affect their ability to make an informed decision around consumption of the tested substance.
A Melbourne mother whose son survived a drug overdose at the Hardmission Festival this year said she had mixed feelings about the pill-testing trial. She said her son was hospitalised and placed into an induced coma and intensive care for two days. She said no-one can determine how each individual will respond to taking drugs and if it is safe to do so. There are also additional risks when, often, alcohol is mixed into the equation, as we know. In January two women were hospitalised after suspected drug use at the Juicy festival, where heat was found to have also played a role in the impact. Not everyone is affected in the same way. What if there are other medications being taken? What measures are in place? There are many unanswered questions and alarming flaws in this bill. This will now be the sixth proposal for pill testing to be introduced to the Victorian Parliament since 2016, and they still do not have it right. New section 22CD, which provides exemptions for clients from supply and possession offences, does not limit police officers’ authority to exercise discretion in not charging a person in the vicinity of a drug-checking place in order to use the service.
There is no such thing as safe drug use and pill testing, and this bill fails to address the real dangers of relying on pill testing when tackling drug consumption. This is because onsite testing has significant limitations. It cannot measure drug potency, predict individual reactions or account for dangerous interactions with alcohol and other substances. Education does remain paramount in addressing drug-related harm, with the biggest risks being overdosing and mixing drugs and alcohol, as well as overheating. The government should be focusing on evidence-based strategies to reduce drug-related harm by investing more funding and support in drug addiction and drug and alcohol rehabilitation, in education for reducing drug harm and in mental health support. The Allan Labor government has failed to implement other effective harm reduction strategies. There is currently no drug early warning system available. Opioid replacement programs have been wound back, as the government has failed to recruit doctors to prescribe the methadone opioid replacement therapy.
The form of pill testing that the Allan Labor government is proposing and seeking to legalise is not a safe or reliable way to manage drug taking. It is a trial that fails to address the real dangers of drug consumption. You only have to look at this government’s failed handling of its self-injecting clinic in North Richmond, right next door to a primary school. It has constantly been plagued with issues. But it is the most vulnerable regional Victorians in need of drug and alcohol rehabilitation who continue to be snubbed by the Allan Labor government. In the minister’s overview of the bill he says that it is the government’s aim to improve public health outcomes in Victoria related to harm caused by illicit substance use, yet the government could not answer basic questions that remain outstanding. Communities are calling out for support and for drug rehabilitation facilities, and we know the need for these types of facilities will continue to grow. Drug and alcohol addiction is devastating the lives of people, and the Allan Labor government is failing to deliver enough support, despite Labor’s mental health tax raising $1 billion annually. A recent survey undertaken by the Victorian Alcohol and Drug Association revealed a staggering 93 per cent surge in the number of Victorians waiting for treatment since September 2020. Alarmingly, more than 4600 people were waiting for treatment on any given day between June and July this year.
It is appalling that my community, like many other regional communities, does not have adequate drug and alcohol rehabilitation facilities. The government is ignoring our calls for support. People in the community who are ready to seek treatment for drug and alcohol addiction are told that there are lengthy waiting periods and they will also have to go elsewhere to seek treatment, isolating them from their loved ones and support. Victoria’s most vulnerable residents are being left behind. Communities are feeling the impact of drug and alcohol addiction and mental health issues – ask families who are living every single day with a family member with addiction who are not getting the support that they desperately need. When addiction takes hold it can ruin lives, and there is not enough support to treat addiction.
I wish to also raise a community organisation called the Cottage in my community, which offers a secure residential program for men and women. It is a not-for-profit organisation. The community has funded and come together to support this centre. But, as we know, there are so many more people that need help, and this facility is only a drop in the ocean for my community. But I praise their efforts, and I praise the contribution they make. I also spoke recently to some of the participants, some of the people at the Cottage, who are suffering drug addiction, and it is interesting when they talk about the social interactions and the opportunities that they had to come into contact with drugs.
I do feel we do need to do so much more. It is irresponsible of the government to present this bill in the current form, which clearly has many issues, and for the government to not answer critical questions of concern. It should be no surprise that we oppose this bill.