• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS LEGAL HIGH LEGISLATION: Products to be Regulated

AyahuascaSeeker13

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
783
Dunne: legal highs regime costs and penalties announced
Wednesday, 10 October 2012, 1:43 pm
Press Release: New Zealand Government

Hon Peter Dunne
Associate Minister of Health

10 October 2012

Dunne: legal highs regime costs and penalties announced

Legal high manufacturers will face estimated $180,000 application fees plus $1 million to $2 million in testing costs for each product they want to sell, and up to eight years in prison for selling banned substances, Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne said today in announcing details of the permanent psychoactive substances regime.

“I make no apologies for setting the bar high on public safety and putting in place a regime with the process costs squarely on the legal highs industry, and not the taxpayer,” Mr Dunne said of the regime which should be in place by the middle of next year.

“I have said all along that this regime will be fundamentally based on reversing the onus of proof so those who profit from these products will have to prove they are as safe as is possible for psychoactive substances.

“We will no longer play the cat-and-mouse game of constantly chasing down substances after they are on the market.

Penalties under the new regime will include up to eight years in prison for importing, manufacturing, supplying or possession with intent to supply analogues of controlled drugs that come under the Misuse of Drugs Act, and up to two years for import, manufacture, supply or possession with intent to supply unapproved substances.

Other key features of the new regime that have been approved by Cabinet include:

• Personal possession of an unapproved product will incur a $300 fine.
• There will be a minimum purchase age of 18.
• No advertising except at point of sale.
• Restrictions on outlets, including barring dairies from selling such products, and labelling and packaging requirements.

Mr Dunne said the $300 personal possession fine is deliberately not being legislated as a criminal offence.

“What we are trying to do is actually protect young people, not criminalise them and thereby jeopardise their job and travel prospects. The approach we are taking is similar to that used with alcohol infringements,” he said.

Labelling and packaging requirements will require all products to have a label listing their active ingredients, the phone number for the National Poisons Centre and contact details for the product’s New Zealand manufacturer or supplier.

‘To date, there has been no ingredient information, so no one who buys these products has the first clue what is in them, which is as ridiculous as it is dangerous and irresponsible,” Mr Dunne said.

“We have had considerable success with the Temporary Class Drug Notices that we instituted in August last year. They have taken 28 substances and more than 50 synthetic cannabis products off the market, but that was always a temporary measure until we could get this regime in place,” Mr Dunne said.

He said he will introduce the required legislation later this year and it is expected to be in place by the middle of next year. In the meantime, all existing temporary notices will be rolled over so they remain in effect until the permanent regime is in place.

The Cabinet paper and Regulatory Impact Statement can be found at www.health.govt.nz/about-ministry/l...new-regulatory-regime-psychoactive-substances

Psychoactive Substances Regime Questions and Answers

What are low risk psychoactive substances?
This refers to new psychoactive substances for which the risks are low enough that they meet the approval criteria set by the regulatory. We say 'low-risk' to avoid implying that they will be entirely safe, as there will always be some risk. This is because different people have different reactions to pharmacologically active substances.

Why is the Government bringing in a psychoactive substances regime?
We are doing this because the current situation is untenable. Current legislation is ineffective in dealing with the rapid growth in synthetic psychoactive substances which can be tweaked to be one step ahead of controls. Products are being sold without any controls over their ingredients, without testing requirements, or controls over where they can be sold. The government must prove a risk of harm before controlling a substance. The new regime will require a supplier or manufacturer to apply to a regulator for a safety assessment before any product can be sold.

Are we legalising drugs?
No. The regime will provide stronger controls over psychoactive substances. At the moment, these products are unregulated, with no control over ingredients, place of sale, or who they can be sold to. Because they are synthetic substances, there are a huge number of potential ingredients, which makes it unfeasible to deal with them individually.

It will be illegal to sell any product which has not been through an assessment. There will be strict restrictions on where products can be sold, the purchase age, and marketing restrictions.

What will the implications of the new regime be for cannabis?
The legal status of cannabis will not change. This is because the regime will only cover new psychoactive substances that are not already classified under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.

Why don’t you just ban everything?
Legislation should not be used to restrict behaviour that cannot be proved to be harmful. Products that meet the approval criteria will be approved. However, our position will still be that not using these products is the safest option.

Is this a stealthy way of banning everything and never approving any product?
No. Clear testing requirements are being established to determine the risks of psychoactive products. Products that meet the approval criteria will be approved.

How will risk/safety be determined?
Consistent toxicological and behavioural testing will be required for every product seeking approval. A new regulator will be established to consider the data from this testing for each product. Products that meet the approval criteria will be approved.

What do you mean by the regulator?
A regulator will need to be established for psychoactive substances. This regulator will oversee the approval of products, monitor for compliance with post market restrictions, and reassess products in light of any new evidence of harm that might arise.

How many drugs will get approved?
We don’t know this yet. Products that meet the approval criteria will be approved. This will require toxicological and behavioural testing.

Who will do the risk assessments?
The new regulator will consider toxicological and clinical data for each product.

Does this mean the Government is endorsing drugs?
No. At the moment these products are available without any information regarding their risks to health. We are changing the system to require industry to prove they do not pose a greater than a low risk of health before they may be sold.

Will there be controls to stop children buying these drugs from dairies?
Yes, it is intended that there will be restrictions on where substances can be sold and a minimum purchase age which will be set in due course.

What happens when the legislation comes into force? Will everything be pulled from the shelves?

A transition period will follow enactment of the new regime. During the transition period, a sponsor will only be able to sell:
• products with an application pending approval by the regulator; and
• that have been legally on the market for at least six months prior to enactment of the new regime; and
• provided that there are no health concerns about the products concerned.

Will this just backfire and create a bigger black market?
No. We expect that having low risk psychoactive products legally available will make it less likely that consumers will resort to a black market.

ENDS
 
the regime will only cover new psychoactive substances that are not already classified under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.

I don't get this part, if you're going to go through special toxicological and behavioral testing for all these new 'RC' drugs which are generally chemical analogues of already controlled drugs, why wouldn't you test the illegal stuff as well so you can compare how much 'safer' or 'riskier' these new drugs are compared to the old drugs.
 
All it takes is one "white powder" and one "leafy cannabis-like substance" to be approved and branded and I will have two new containers to store and transport my preferred drug of choice in. ;)

The financial cost seems high but any one of the big players who first developed and then profited from a vast number of these newer chemicals will easily afford to set up shop in NZ and absolutely clean up. Anyone for Zorbing while tripping balls?

zorbing.jpg
 
^ I'm in! Hahaha sounds like a "ball" (not funny sorry).

Yes, a few names spring to mind of those which will clean up, however I'm not giving them free advertising :)
 
Will this just backfire and create a bigger black market?
No. We expect that having low risk psychoactive products legally available will make it less likely that consumers will resort to a black market.

Am I the only one who genuinely sees this as a positive first step? Of course I see it ridiculous that we might be able to purchase chemicals that from personal experience are far more unhealthy to the mind and body than many established drugs but if one or two of the psychoactive drugs do become legal, and society is reassured that the streets won't dissolve into drug fueled anarchy, then surely it will be easier to convince the government to loosen control over better drugs such as mdma or cannabis.
 
I don't get this part, if you're going to go through special toxicological and behavioral testing for all these new 'RC' drugs which are generally chemical analogues of already controlled drugs, why wouldn't you test the illegal stuff as well so you can compare how much 'safer' or 'riskier' these new drugs are compared to the old drugs.

My guess is because the legal high/RC market is still a niche' small market to the much bigger black market. If they tested old drugs such as MDMA and found it to be relatively safe, their plan could backfire dramatically as it would appeal to a lot more people. Having said that I wish they would test the older drugs.

Am I the only one who genuinely sees this as a positive first step? Of course I see it ridiculous that we might be able to purchase chemicals that from personal experience are far more unhealthy to the mind and body than many established drugs but if one or two of the psychoactive drugs do become legal, and society is reassured that the streets won't dissolve into drug fueled anarchy, then surely it will be easier to convince the government to loosen control over better drugs such as mdma or cannabis.

I 100% agree.

Penalties under the new regime will include up to eight years in prison for importing, manufacturing, supplying or possession with intent to supply analogues of controlled drugs that come under the Misuse of Drugs Act, and up to two years for import, manufacture, supply or possession with intent to supply unapproved substances.
I thought most legal high's (pretty much all) fall under this catergory? If so then I'm a bit more sketch on the new legislation but apart from that I definitely see this as a real positive.
And to think just two days I was being grilled for thinking our country was making slow but gradual progress in drug laws 8)
 
Thread title should say New Zealand, I got excited when I first read this haha. I wonder how MXE and Methylone will go in their testing.
 
"Anyone for Zorbing while tripping balls?" FUCK YES!!! For years I've wanted to take mdma and run around and play in Canola fields while there blossoming (bright yellow and bushy) but zorbing on acid is now much higher on my to-do list than that. Thanks for the new entry on my bucket list :)
 
Am I the only one who genuinely sees this as a positive first step? Of course I see it ridiculous that we might be able to purchase chemicals that from personal experience are far more unhealthy to the mind and body than many established drugs but if one or two of the psychoactive drugs do become legal, and society is reassured that the streets won't dissolve into drug fueled anarchy, then surely it will be easier to convince the government to loosen control over better drugs such as mdma or cannabis.

It sets my teeth on edge, but for once I have to agree with Busty :p if they're serious about doing the right thing here, which they seem to be, this could be an enormous and positive first step. At first I was worried that this was just 'a ban by any other name,' but they addressed that concern fairly rationally, now it just remains to be seen whether they intend to come through.

What will be interesting is what happens if anything 'does' become approved. I mean they said that this legislation only applies to new drugs, but what happens when, say, a random THC analogue is legalized, then people rightly point out that marijuana itself, despite for all intents and purposes being identical to the newly legal drug, never went through the same stringent testing procedures and was just banned as a matter of course. It would almost force them to re-examine their standing drug laws.

This is definitely a situation to watch.
 
This is a great first step. I'm not sure how many, if any worthwhile RC's will be marketable under this scheme; but this is the first example I can think of of a country admitting it cant police all its drug issues, and opting to control rather than prohibit.

If they allow the use of some worthwhile RC's with fairly established safety profiles (ie. MXE) and don't experience the 'fallout' expected by most conservative governments then this could serve as a great example for legalisation/decriminalisation.
 
Top