Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I will address two issues, and I thank the minister for his comments. The first is the criminalisation of possession, and I think this is quite a crucial point. We have seen in the past, especially when it comes to kids in my home state of Queensland, that First Nations kids in particular are often overpoliced in their communities and possession charges are often used as an excuse to go after them, harass them or discriminate against them. The Greens are very proud of the fact we've managed to get rid of criminalisation for possession or at least ensure that a kid with one or two vapes isn't harassed by the police over basic possession. That's crucial because prohibition at that scale has never worked. The government cannot even keep drugs out of prisons, so I'm not sure what we would gain out of increasing the criminalisation or overpolicing often of vulnerable communities and in particular of marginalised children.

I think this is a huge significant gain because it means that, right now, for the lives of kids, if they are using vapes, it is a health issue. Surely it's not an issue that should involve the police or the criminal justice system. Pushing kids into a situation where they have to hide the fact that they vape, lest they worry about being criminalised, surely makes it less likely that they might get health support in the future. Kids should be treated completely differently in that situation; I support that.

The second thing around the shift to the pharmacy model is, again, all prohibition has done in the past, even with alcohol and in other countries around the world, is create a black market. It has pushed people to seek out criminals—some of the worst people in the world—and the illegal drug trade to seek out drugs that they are always going to seek out. The state has never been able to successfully stamp out any illicit drug. Never. In this situation it's a good thing that we at least ensure people don't have to think about either paying huge gap to go and see a GP that they already struggle to get to see, to get access to a vape because, with that level a barrier, it will mean more people end up trying to access them illegally.

It is a genuinely positive thing that the minister said that when they do go to purchase a vape that they will have to have a conversation with their pharmacist but they don't have to cross another financial barrier and another logistical barrier to get something that, let's be frank, a lot of people are already going to try and get. So I think this has been a genuinely good process of negotiation between the government and the Greens and parts of the crossbench that has led to a fine balancing out in this parliament of differing views about how we regulate drugs in our society through acknowledging the evidence. If anyone can point to me to a moment in history, in any country around the world, where prohibition to that level has worked to stamp out the usage of illicit drugs, I will be happy to look at it.

What prohibition has often resulted in is the over-policing of marginalised communities, in particular in my home state of Queensland, massive increases in incarceration rates for First Nations children in particular, who, let's be clear, are kids. What on earth is interacting with a police officer who has a go at them for having a couple of vapes going to achieve other than further marginalising them and further pushing them into a criminal justice system they should not have to interact with?

I think there are a lot of positives in this shift and I wanted to get up and defend them.

See this speech in context