The architect of Canberra's drug decriminalisation laws has defended how the bill was brought forward and slammed claims of drug tourism as "laughable".
Labor backbencher Michael Pettersson said he was excited ahead of the ACT's new drug decriminalisation laws, which are set to come into effect this Saturday, saying it was a long time coming after he started work on the bill three years ago.
There have been concerns the new laws could result in people travelling to Canberra from Sydney to use drugs, including from the territory's chief police officer.
But Mr Pettersson said he did not agree people would travel to Canberra to use drugs, when new penalties come into effect from this Saturday.
"Canberra is a great place to visit. Canberra will remain a great place to visit, it's got nothing to do with these drug laws," he said.
"The idea that people from Sydney are going to be travelling down the highway for a weekend to use drugs in the ACT is laughable.
"The idea that someone would go out of their way to come to Canberra to use drugs, theoretically, if they use drugs under certain quantities for a $100 fine, when in Sydney, for the same offence, they will be getting a $400 fine is laughable."
'I continued with that momentum'
Mr Pettersson introduced the bill to the Legislative Assembly in early-2021 after releasing a draft in December 2020.
The introduction of the bill has faced criticism in recent months after a recording of Health Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith emerged where she said Labor took the policy of drug decriminalisation to the election "quietly".
She said because it was done through a private members' bill "it could be done much more quickly".
Mr Pettersson has said there were no specific discussions about his bill before the 2020 election but he wanted to seize on momentum and released the proposal only weeks after the poll.
He said he took the bill to the Labor caucus, which backed the idea but there were no guarantees it would pass.
"I do have to be somewhat careful because I don't want to just spill caucus deliberation but I think it's important to be very clear I took a proposal to my caucus colleagues that I could go out there and try and advance this idea," he said.
"There were no guarantees that cabinet would support that. Cabinet is not beholden to me as a non-executive backbencher. I knew that, ultimately, the fate of that bill would rest with a cabinet decision after a committee inquiry."
Ms Stephen-Smith said a Labor backbencher would not introduce a bill without support of the party's caucus but there was no expectation it would move as quickly as it did.
"But I don't think there was specifically any expectation when we went to the 2020 election that things would move so quickly," she said.
Mr Pettersson predicated his bill on an inquiry into youth mental health that was held in the last Assembly term.
The 2020 inquiry recommended the government "consider further criminal justice diversion for young drug users by investigating the appropriateness of a simple drug offence notice for some drugs". The committee was a Liberal majority.
Mr Pettersson said following this inquiry he decided to put forward a motion calling for the government to investigate a simple offence notice for drugs which was supported by all members.
The backbencher has argued this gave him a mandate to pursue the bill, alongside Labor's election policy.
Labor's 2020 policy position statement on health said: "a re-elected Labor government will also investigate the feasibility of a simple offence notice for some drugs of dependence to ascertain the legal, social and health impacts".
"After the election campaign, I continued with that momentum and said 'I think this is still a good idea here is a private members' bill'," Mr Pettersson said.
"I was very much of the belief that a private members' bill would keep this ticking along ... my colleagues were very happy for me to lead the charge when presenting a private members' bill."
Opposition Leader Elizabeth Lee was on the committee who made the recommendation. While she would not go into committee deliberations she said the committee attempted to be as collaborative as possible.
She has also argued the Liberals only supported the idea of an investigation not the actual implementation of the policy.
"If you go back to the actual recommendation, it says explore a simple offence notice for young people. Now I don't think anyone can object to that," Ms Lee said.
"Working on a committee you want to try and be as collaborative as possible, you want to try as much as possible to leave politics outside because you want to make sure, if at all possible, you have one report with all of the recommendations."
'Why don't we take the next step'
Mr Pettersson's original bill was to amend the simple cannabis offence notice, which existed before the drug was legalised. That notice had the same $100 penalty for possessing cannabis.
However, the bill was changed following the committee process and a series of amendments were proposed by the government, the Greens also attempted to put forward separate amendments. A person caught with drugs in an allowable limit will face either a $100 fine or have to attend a one-hour drug treatment program.
This was not Mr Pettersson's first foray into drug laws was in the last Assembly term when he successfully put forward a bill to legalise the possession and cultivation of small amounts of cannabis.
Mr Pettersson said he first became interested in drug policy as a teenager through watching Youtube videos on the subject. He said he was surprised at the lack of discourse on drug policy when he was elected to the Assembly as a 25-year-old.
"Canberrans are very progressive. We've seen that recently in the Voice results and so I was surprised that there wasn't an interest from any parties in the Assembly to move things forward," he said.
He said he did not draw inspiration from other places where drug decriminalisation had been implemented, such as Portugal and Oregon in the United States.
"A lot of these debates often are grounded in comparisons with other jurisdictions. I've seen those debates and I don't pay a whole bunch of attention to them because we're not Portugal. We don't have the same culture, we don't have the same infrastructure and we don't have any same shared history," Mr Pettersson said.
"For the ACT, I think the best way to go about reducing the harms that drugs cause in our community right now is to look to things the city already has in place.
"I actually looked at the ACT and thought we have the simple cannabis offence notice game, it worked relatively well ... why don't we take the next step and apply it to more substances."
