Science Busts Meth Myth

Sheralee from Te Atatu Peninsula

It seems tens of thousands of homes have been needlessly tested, cleaned, demolished and left empty for no good reason.

A report has shown third-hand exposure to houses where methamphetamine had been consumed posed no risk to humans.

The prime minister's chief science advisor Peter Gluckman, who led the study, said: "we can't find one case” of someone being harmed from passive use.

He said New Zealand had engaged in a "moral panic" around cleaning and remediation, which could have been avoided if science had been involved earlier in the policy-making process.

In response to the study, Housing Minister Phil Twyford has announced new standards and less stringent standards would be set for houses within the next year.

Several hundred state homes sitting needlessly empty would be put back into use within weeks, and Housing New Zealand would save up to $30 million a year on testing, he said.

Consumer Affairs Minister Kris Faafoi would carry out a review into how the standards were set.

Former Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett welcomed the report, adding that she had long pushed back against Housing NZ's approach.

Bennett was minister over 2014-16 when hundreds of state housing tenants were evicted over meth residue. Some of those people were charged thousands of dollars in costs.

She acknowledged “there was a level of hysteria around meth contamination”, but she did not believe the previous National-led Government had contributed to a sense of ‘moral panic’ around methamphetamine.

Landlords who have forked out thousands are feeling duped, but the meth testing industry has slammed the report, calling the office of the prime minister's chief science advisor "reckless".

MethSolutions chief executive Miles Stratford said the Government's economic, political and social policy stood to benefit from the report.

"Media tells us New Zealand has a shortage of state houses for people in need but changing the level of what they determine to be 'safe' meth residue is not the answer, no matter how many more state houses it may free up for occupation," Stratford said.

[Upon reading this it suggests just state housing, but also applies to private houses as well]