Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]
| Madam Speaker, before I move that the bill be read a second time I will, for the sake of honourable members, outline what I intend to do. The bill will be read the second time. I presume that somebody from the opposition will seek to adjourn debate. Immediately thereafter I will move the urgency motion so we can debate that straight after the bill is on the floor of the House, otherwise we would be debating an urgency motion for a bill that is not on the record. To that end, I move that the bill be now read a second time. Our nation is in the throes of systemic and widespread methamphetamine and amphetamine manufacture, supply and addiction. Dependency on these highly addictive, dangerous drugs grips people from all walks of life and affects their parents, their children, their extended families, their friends and it affects their own physical and mental health. Prolonged use of these drugs can lead to exposure to our criminal justice system or acute mental health problems, often both. As a result, methamphetamine is scheduled in the highest category of prohibited dangerous drugs in every Australian jurisdiction. Since the middle of 2013 seizures of methamphetamine, amphetamine and other amphetamine-type substances by the Northern Territory Police have risen by approximately 170% for powdered forms of substances and over 480% for liquid forms of the substances. Despite significant efforts by the Northern Territory Police and other law enforcement agencies in this area, methamphetamine and other amphetamine type substances continue to flood our streets and continue to plague our community. It is estimated that over 80% of methamphetamine and other amphetamine type substances seized in the Northern Territory are brought in from interstate. The supply methods most commonly used by criminal networks for the transportation of methamphetamine and other dangerous drugs include private vehicle traffic between jurisdictions, trucking companies and commercial traffic, freight and drug mules on commercial flights. As law enforcement agencies at a national, state and Territory level increase their presence and detection capabilities, criminal networks are also increasing their ability to develop new and innovative methods to transport illicit drugs in an attempt to avoid detection. Recent seizures in the Northern Territory and police intelligence from around Australia has highlighted major drug suppliers are attempting to evade detection by packaging drugs and secreting them in fuel tanks, vacuum sealed devices, and by otherwise masking the smell of the drugs through various and increasingly elaborate means. The Police Administration Act contains wide-ranging powers for the police to search for and seize dangerous drugs as well as their precursors. However, the use of powders is dependent on police reasonably suspecting an offence has been, or is likely to be, committed and is, therefore, reactionary and reliant upon either a tip-off from interstate law enforcement agencies or the use of other forms of criminal intelligence. Legislative amendments over the last several years have not included new innovative proactive tools which allow police to specifically target the importation of methamphetamines and other dangerous drugs into the Northern Territory and, as a result, criminals have found ways to circumvent the powers that police have. Section 95(2) of the Liquor Act contains broad at-random stop, search and seizure powers relating to alcohol; however, such powers do not extend to the searching of dangerous drugs. The Traffic Act, at section 29A(a)(b), contains powers for a police officer to stop a vehicle without reasonable suspicion that the driver has committed an offence, for the purposes of conducting a breath test or saliva test for dangerous drugs in the case of drivers of prescribed vehicles. This power only extends to alcohol and drug testing, and does not include any search and seize powers. Random or without reasonable suspicion stop, search and seizure powers have been incorporated into drug legislation in other jurisdictions. Section 52B of the Controlled Substances Act 1984, South Australia, contains additional powers that can be utilised by police officers in declaring drug transit routes. The South Australian act allows a police officer, at the rank of inspector or above, to declare an area to be a drug transit route. Such a declaration can last for up to 14 days and it allows officers to exercise additional powers of search and seizure on the drug transit route during the period of declaration. The additional powers relate to the random stopping of vehicles and the use of drug detector dogs and electronic drug detection devices on the vehicles and occupants. In their submission to the Ice Select Committee, the Northern Territory Police note the risks posed by methamphetamine and other amphetamine-type substances can be mitigated through a coordinated whole-of-government approach that focuses on the reduction of harm, demand and supply. That submission, and the submissions of the number of other stakeholders to the committee, is on the Legislative Assembly website and I encourage people to read them. The Northern Territory submission noted the establishment of the Commonwealth and Territory multiagency task force comprised of the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Crime Commission, Customs and Border Protection and state or Territory police, which will provide support to any Territory-specific strategy through the provision of additional support which focuses on the identification and targeting of suppliers, and their supply routes, at a national and international level. The submission recommended that the legislative amendments to assist in the disruption and dismantling of drug supply routes be introduced as a matter of urgency. It is noted that supply reduction strategies form one of the main components of the harm minimisations principles that underpin the national drug strategy. This bill allows for the drug detection areas to be authorised by a senior police officer, and allows Northern Territory police officers to exercise prescribed powers over vehicles and occupants within the authorised area. The key features of the bill are as follows. Clause 6 inserts the provisions regarding the authorisation of drug detection areas and the powers conferred on police within the declared areas. The clause contains the following matters: · A new section 19V contains the specific matters relating to an authorisation. These matters include:
o the officer must be at the rank of Commander or above o the authorisation must comply with guidelines issued by the Police Commissioner. o the authorisation is subject to any conditions specified and can be in effect for a period not exceeding 14 days. The authorisation can be varied or revoked at any time. · The new section 19W places restrictions on the size and location of the drug detection area and notes that the area must be at least 30 km from the Darwin general post office. The total size of the area must not exceed 3 km2. If the area contains any roads the authorised part of the roadway must not exceed 3 km in length. · New section 19X notes that the authorisation allows a police officer to exercise the powers in new section 19Y without warrant and without reasonable suspicion an offence against the act has been committed, for the detection of an offence against the Misuse of Drugs Act. This section also states that the commissioner must establish written procedures for the use of powers conferred by this part, and notes that no more than three authorisations can be in force at any given time. · The new section 19Y contains powers that the police may exercise in drug detection areas. The powers are:
o to detain the vehicle and carry out general drug detection in or out of the vehicle and any person or property in or out of the vehicle. General drug detection is defined as the use of a detection dog or electronic drug detection system; o for a police officer to physically enter the vehicle and search the vehicle or a person who is in the vehicle or who they reasonably believe has recently left the vehicle; o to seize any items or things the officer reasonably believes are connected with an offence against the Act; and o to give directions to a person to open any part of the vehicle. · The new section 19Z allows police to create a drug detection point within an area and requires facilities to be provided and for appropriate warnings to be given for drivers. · New section 19ZA requires the Commissioner of Police to report to the minister, namely the Attorney-General, within three months of the end of the financial year regarding the use of the powers under this new part. The report must contain prescribed information, for example, the number of authorisations, the areas that were authorised, the periods for which the authorisation had effect, and the number of occasions a dangerous drug or precursor was seized. The minister must table a copy of the report in the Legislative Assembly within seven sitting days of receipt of the report. Clause 11 of the bill inserts two regulations into the Misuse of Drugs Regulations. The definition of ‘general drug detection’ in the new section 19U notes that general drug detection includes using an electronic drug detection system in relation to a person or property in a manner prescribed by the regulation. Regulation 14 notes how the electronic drug detection devices must be used on people and Regulation 15 notes how they are to be used on property. The provisions are similar to those contained in the South Australian Controlled Substances Regulations. Clause 15 amends the Police Administration Act and complements section 116F of that act. Currently Section 116F of the Police Administration Act contains a provision relating to reasonable grounds for search without warrant on indication of a drug detection dog. The Police Administration Act does not contain similar provisions relating to an electronic drug detection system and this oversight is being rectified. The bill also contains amendments to section 40 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. Section 40(c) contains evidentiary matters that need to be satisfied to prove a person was in possession of a dangerous drug. The current wording of section 40(c) requires prosecuting authorities to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the person knew or suspected that the drugs or precursors found in or on a workplace to which the person was an occupier or was concerned in the management or control of were in their possession. In the absence of admissions or surveillance evidence in this matter, it is difficult to prove and it is being successfully utilised to an offender’s advantage where they are intercepted either entering or preparing to enter the Northern Territory or Indigenous communities with drugs in their luggage or in their vehicles. The Northern Territory police have noted that the use of the defence is being actively promoted and while the intent of the provision was to capture genuine non-intent to possess situation it is presently being utilised to usurp the effect and intent of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The amendment of clause 8 of the bill ensures that the evidentiary provision in the Misuse of Drugs Act cannot be used as a blanket defence when the possession is alleged. It does so by incorporating a reverse onus provision where an accused person must prove the lack of knowledge of possession where it is proven a drug or precursor was located in or at a place to which that person was the occupier or was concerned in management or control. The amendment is consistent with other evidentiary clauses in drug legislation throughout Australia, for example, section 5 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 of Victoria and section 7 of the Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 of New South Wales. Clause 8 also amends section 40 to allow for a certificate signed by the Commissioner of Police to act as prima facie evidence for two matters; namely the rank of the senior police officer and the fact that an area on a specified day was an authorised drug detection area. The amendment allows evidence that is not in dispute to be admitted by way of certificate without need to call witnesses. If the matters are in dispute, of course evidence will need to be called to prove the matters. Dangerous drugs, and methamphetamine in particular, are a scourge in our community, and this government is committed to ensuring that law enforcement has the necessary tools to disrupt in a significant and real way the drugs supply in the Northern Territory. Drug manufacture and supply is a business, a very profitable business that preys on human misery and we, as a government and as a community, must meet the challenge of dismantling these enterprises. The additional powers contained in this bill are game-changers in the fight against the drug supply inside and into the Northern Territory. The government’s message is this, if you do not transport dangerous drugs, you will have nothing to worry about. You will be stopped for a short period of time in the authorised area and then you can continue your journey. If you do transport drugs, you can run the gauntlet but you can be stopped at random by police within an authorised area. Police can search you and your vehicle, and there is a high probability you will be caught. I commend this bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement. Debate adjourned. |