Government to fund construction of large wooden badger


Remember how Peter Dunne sold us the Psychoactive Substances Act?

Here‘s what he told the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs when he took the world stage in Vienna, Austria six months ago.

While we have placed more than 30 synthetic cannabis-like substances under temporary bans, but we are aware that there are potentially hundreds more that could replace them.

Last month, the New Zealand Government introduced new legislation into our Parliament that will end the game of catch-up once and for all.

We are going to reverse the onus of proof so the manufacturers of these products have to prove they are safe before they can bring them on to the market.

He said the same thing last year. It’s what he’s said all along, time and again. In his capacity as a Cabinet minister. On behalf of the New Zealand government.

As promised, we are reversing the onus of proof. If they cannot prove that a product is safe, then it is not going anywhere near the marketplace

Like some codswallop with your porkies? Lies. That’s how we got sold the PSA. But what we got was not as advertised. Quite the reverse.

1. Pass safety tests.
2. Approve for sale.

That was Plan A.

This is Plan B.

1. Approve for sale.
2. Build a large wooden badger.

Here‘s what Dunne said back in May, in his final bout of banning.

This is another blow to the industry and one of many we have delivered – but I fully acknowledge it is more of the cat-and-mouse game until we can deliver the killer punch in August when the Psychoactive Substances Bill will become law.

Deliver the killer punch?! He makes the Psychoactive Substances Act sound like the Jonestown Massacre! Could be something in the analogy.

8 thoughts on “Government to fund construction of large wooden badger”

  1. You sound like an irate prohibitionist!
    You complain that the bill is too Libertarian… not restrictive enough!
    Do you think Cigarettes should be banned… and alcohol…. they are not ‘Safe’?
    What about Bicycles… or Sky diving????
    What is this mystical thing ‘Safety’…. this negation of individual responsibility… you expect the Law to provide?

  2. You sound like an irate prohibitionist!

    You sound like someone who craves Nanny State regulation!

    Do you think it is a proper role of government to “approve” recreational drugs?

    Do you realise that the recreational drugs the government has “approved” are untested research chemicals about whose long-term health consequences we know nothing?

    The government has well and truly scuppered the Libertarianz Transitional Drug Policy. 🙁

  3. the decision would be left to the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs. … If their past performance is anything to go by, their judgements would err on the conservative side.

    Wow, did I ever get that wrong. 🙁

  4. Anti-conservative should not be considered the same thing as libertarian.

    Abortion legislation, civil union/gay marriage legislation, prostitution regulations, euthanasia regulations, drug regulations… all wrong… all promoted by libertarians.

  5. Care to elaborate?

    I thought I just did. I’ve tried to explain this before but found it too hard.

    Do you see my principled stand on the PSA as libertarian or anti-conservative?

    Libertarian maybe. Unless you are seeking legislative approval of drug use?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *