Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Hansard source

Senator, we actually have been through all this, and that is the intent of the legislation. As I have said to you a number of times, that is the intent of the legislation. It has a broad definition deliberately. The reason it has a broad definition is so that we can stay ahead of an ever-changing drug market. You can keep asking the question and, Senator, I will keep on giving you the answer. That is fine. I am quite content with that. That is the rationale of the government. I have stated that to you a number of times. And that is the reason that we have taken the approach that we have.

I do not believe that it is unreasonable that someone who wants to put something into the Australian market should demonstrate its efficacy or its use. We do that for a number of products. We say that, if a food wants to make a therapeutic claim under our Food Standards Australia New Zealand legislation—and you have acknowledged that—it should demonstrate that. I have acknowledged that a new substance may be caught in the process. I have also said on a number of occasions that the purpose of this is to capture substances that are most likely to be imported for use as alternatives to illicit drug use. So, if you are telling me the substance you have just described might be imported as an alternative to illicit drug use—