Minister doubts by-law

Press, 24 April 1986, Page 5

Minister doubts by-law

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

in Wellington Doubts that the Christchurch City Council has the power to make a bylaw to prohibit solvent abuse in a public place have been expressed by the Minister of Police and Social Welfare, Mrs Hercus. She was commenting on the suggestion by Dr Morgan Fahey on a way of coping with the problem of Christchurch. Mrs Hercus, member of Parliament for Lyttelton, said her preliminary advice was that it was most unlikely that the council had the power to make such a by-law. "I also doubt that Dr Fahey has had definite

legal advice on this matter, in which case his proposal has hardly been thought out very well,” she said. “It is not much use hitting the headlines with proposals that probably are not feasible.” Legislation existed which enabled the police to take positive action when dealing with people using solvents. The Children and Young Persons Amendment Act, 1982, dealt with what the police could do with unaccompanied young children and young people under 17 who were abusing solvents, Mrs Hercus said. Defining them to be “in an environment detrimental to their physical

wellbeing,” the police could take these young people (using force if necessary) to a person who was willing and able to take care of them, or to the Director-General of Social Welfare who could refer them to a social worker. If the circumstances were appropriate, solvent abusers could be dealt with under section 37A of the Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Act, 1966, which was now inserted in he Summary Offences Act, 1981, she said. This legislation applied to people found intoxicated in a public place, and might be used to obtain treatment for people considered to be addicts.

The definition of "intoxication” was wide enough to cover not only alcohol but also the effect of inhalation of solvents, Mrs Hercus said. The Commissioner of Police, Mr Ken Thompson, said that parents of such addicts should be encouraged to seek an order for detention and treatment under section 9 of the legislation if the addict would not make a voluntary application for an order under section 8. If either of these choices were impractical, the police should make the application, he said. Mrs Hercus said the police were reminded regularly by the commisioner of the legislation

available to deal with solvent abuse, and how they should handle apparent solvent intoxication. Mr Thompson said the police should, for prefer* ence, take intoxicated solvent abusers to their permanent or temporary home if there was someone to take care of them or, if that were not possible, to a detoxification centre. If a detoxification centre was not practical, the person might be detained in a police station until sobriety had been regained, or for up to 12 hours, he said. Follow-up action by his youth aid section was initiated for all young people who came to notice in this way.