Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I am yet to get an answer on how they establish that it is not used for that intended purpose and it does not have a psychoactive effect. We are talking about a product—in this case one that contains caffeine, which we know has a psychoactive effect—that is imported by particular outlets, that is used as an alternative to other caffeinated beverages and that satisfies the definition under the legislation of being a psychoactive substance. You said that it may be caught; it sounds as if it is not a particularly effective piece of legislation if substances like this 'may be caught'. You have also said that the onus is on the importer. What I am asking is: how does the importer satisfy the authorities that this is not a substance that is being imported with a view to mimicking the effect of other psychoactive substances? How does that occur? What is the test that is applied?