The roads of Aotearoa are about to undergo perhaps the largest change of our lives so far, at least for Gen Z stoners. For at least a generation or two, we have all known the score. Driving after a few too many drinks could have you calling home from a breath test, and that is the best-case scenario. 

Very soon, a cone or a Toke on a spliff,  could see you fined, lose your license or (pending a blood test) more than a little fucked by our legal system and this may not be a bad thing. The coming introduction of roadside saliva testing, which detects the presence of drugs and not just alcohol consumption, will change the way we police stoned drivers. 

The devil might be in the details here. In a brief and informal poll of Nexus, it was nearly unanimous that we knew people who had been too high to drive or we had been in that situation ourselves, and most would welcome some sort of crackdown (sorry for the pun) on driving high. The problem is that I have been told by some of the people around Nexus that drugs have a weird and alarming side-effect that for all the harm they can do, people are reporting that from time to time being stoned can actually be fun. 

Those same people that want drugs off our streets and tell me that we can trust they won’t drive high… are fucking paranoid that the saliva test will just show a cop they were high the day before when they Uber’d a  Maccas family share box for one and binge watched Emily in Paris 

Drug driving is no doubt one of the most selfish, short-sighted, and dangerous things you could do. So many kiwis have lost family to an intoxicated driver, or lived the rest of their lives with the guilt of severely injuring or killing others on the road. 

Some may say it is their body and their choice, which is ironically pro-choice and strangely aligns with the ACT party’s libertarian views on drugs.  The problem is that seldom, when cars and roads are involved, is it just your body and your choices that seemingly impact the world around you. 

On the other hand the proposed legislation goes far beyond Satan’s spinach; ketamine, MDMA, meth, codeine, cocaine, to name a few, seem likely to be present in test results. Rolling with the road, pinging off your face on gear seems like one way ticket to a lamppost or worse, as does ketamine – where users are known to be unable to walk let alone drive – but detection of historic use (with a Ket’ high tending to last 30-60 minutes, and coke about the same) worry folks that put the party in party drugs.   

Nexus interviewed Associate Professor Lisa Tompson for the academic perspective. We also spoke to the CEO of the Drug Detection Agency (TDDA), and a benzodiazepine addict, to cover everything from drug-induced anxiety to the safest way to drive the conversation about safety ahead.


My Question: 
Will These Roadside Saliva Tests Reduce The Frequency Of Drug Driving In Aotearoa, And How Will They Affect All Members Of Our Community?


Interviews

Nexus felt the technical details of the saliva tests, which the Police didn’t want to spill, were the most relevant to answering many of the paranoid stoner’s questions. The CEO of TDDA, Glenn Dobson, who was also a police officer for 15 years, cleared up some of these queries  from the perspective of, “a privately owned workplace drug & alcohol testing company”. Although the supplier for the police saliva tests is not yet publicly available, TDDA currently provide their pre-employment saliva tests and so seem a possible contender to make a lot of money from seeing how high you might be behind the wheel. 

I already heavily researched the political discourse and proposed legislation, and definitely had not simply read an article by the NZ Drug foundation, to know that the saliva tests will involve two stages, an initial test followed by a lab test. Why? I don’t know so I asked Glenn, “…the initial test is generally a screen, this means that it is an indication only, so the result can’t be called a positive result if drugs are detected. In the industry we call this a ‘non-negative’ result. To get a confirmed drug test result we would then collect a secondary oral fluid sample (in a device similar to a test tube) and send it to a lab to confirm what drugs are present and at what quantity.” 

See below for further answers, many abridged.


Glenn Dobson The Drug Detection Agency CEO

What did your work in the Police look like and how does it affect your current role? 

In my 15 years with the Police I remained in uniform, which meant I was exposed to the day-to-day negatives effects of drug use out in the community. 

How is this technology tested on individuals who have consumed substances?

Oral fluid testing is generally carried out in 2 main steps. First a verified oral fluid screening device is introduced to the donor’s mouth cavity so an oral fluid sample can be collected and screened by the device. The screening device normally has an end similar to a cotton swab that collects/absorbs the oral fluid sample. The device will then allow the oral fluid sample to flow to the testing strips in the device that have been created to screen for certain drugs. The device then works similar to the RAT tests we were all used to during COVID, with a number of lines for each drug indicating if a drug is present or not. To confirm a non-negative screening result a second oral fluid sample may be collected and sent to a lab for confirmation testing. 

Why is this technology needed and how can it help road safety and our community? 

We know that drugs negatively affect a person’s fine motor skills and cognitive ability… This is particularly important for road safety where we know that drugs are present in a large number of fatal crashes. 

Rumours of ‘work arounds’ for cannabis detection have started circulating, are TDDA aware of these and are there techniques to override saliva tests or is this simply folklore? 

Whether it is oral fluid testing or urine testing or hair testing, there is no one singular perfect drug testing technique. In saying that, there are also processes in the testing protocol to significantly minimise any risk of testing integrity issues

How long after consumption will each of these substances be detected in the roadside saliva test? 

Every person metabolises different drugs at different rates (including alcohol). Factors that can affect the rates of metabolisation and therefore the detection timeframe include (but are not limited to): age; gender; weight; type of drug; passage of ingestions; how much food has been consumed; if other drugs have been consumed etc. As a general rule, and depending on the drug, the detection timeframe for oral fluid testing can be almost immediately consuming the drug up to between 12 to 24 hours post consumption. 

Which substances or classes of drugs are the hardest to detect in a saliva test (e.g. opiates, psychedelics etc.)?  

Cannabis can be one of the more difficult drugs to detect in an oral fluid test as the THC component is quite “sticky” and binds to surfaces (like the lining of the mouth etc). This means it can be more challenging to then move the THC in the oral fluid onto the screening device. 

We would be lying if we said we knew what crime science was before researching for this piece, except perhaps Ruby and her criminal inclination, but we have since learned it is an evidence-based approach to crime that aims to understand the causes behind crime and posit practical solutions. We spoke with UoW associate professor Lisa Tompson who has worked in the field of crime science for 15 years, to better understand the academic approach to current changes.


Senior Lecturer Lisa Tompson

Can we expect the introduction of roadside drug testing to decrease rates of crashes with a high driver behind the wheel? 

It depends on where and when the roadside drug testing is deployed. If it is deployed at times and places that people who are likely to drive under the influence of drugs pass through (or people they know who tell them about it) then it could encourage general (i.e. population level generic) deterrence. If specific people that are likely to drive under the influence of drugs at another time – or their close associates – are stopped it could encourage specific deterrence (as the name implies, much more specifically related to an individual). If poorly deployed and no one at risk learns of the roadside drug testing, it is unlikely to change any perceptions or behaviour. 

What are the factors which lead to drug driving? 

I don’t know but I imagine they are varied and include a) it is easy to do so, b) it is low risk, c) it is high reward, d) it is easy to excuse. 

A drug user informed us, “All the time in dealer chats people are posting where the Police stops are, they are selling radios and scanners, and it’s not just for stops, it’s for raids and everything”, are Police and crime scientists aware of this? 

Yes, this is a longstanding tactic, no surprises there. 

If the above is true, could we then expect organised criminals and wealthy drug users to be relatively immune to these roadside tests? 

Yes, perhaps. 

Which demographics are likely to be overrepresented by offences and convictions from these saliva tests? 

This is an interesting one. When we try to calculate if Police actions are disproportionately falling on one social group (perhaps unfairly) more than other social groups we need a good denominator (also known as a benchmark). The best denominator is the population-at-risk of scrutiny (which can sometime, but not always equal the offending population).  

For drug driving that would be the population that is drug driving at a given moment in a given location. Not an easy thing to collect data on! If Police deploy the roadside testing in the same way as the breathalyser tests they do then the driving population is the one that is most likely to come under scrutiny (because they test everyone passing through a particular point). If they deploy it at night-time, it would be the night-time driving population which can be subtly/dramatically different than the daytime one, depending on the time of night. If they deploy in certain suburbs then the driving population that frequently passes through that suburb. So, fraught with measurement issues….


Drug User:

Are pharmaceutical users worried about the new roadside saliva testing? 

I don’t know much about this [to be] honest, I don’t think it’s going to change much though! Users are still going to use if they are testing for it or not. It’s not going to stop me, and I don’t think it will stop others. But it’s fair and those that do it know the risks.

Do you expect work arounds to be used or strategies from organised crime groups and individual drug users in response to the saliva tests? 

As far as workarounds are concerned there may be a way but it’s already the same as it was before! All the time in dealer chats people are posting where the police stops are, they are selling radios and scanners, and it’s not just for stops, it’s for raids and everything. This was already happening before they implemented this and will keep on carrying on after they have. I would say users are worried but not enough to stop them. 


Conclusion

In answer to my question, it seems drug users are unlikely to stop driving high thanks to saliva tests, “I don’t think it will stop others”, however Glenn shared that, “NZ only needs to look over at Australia (who have been running roadside drug testing programs for a number of years now) to see the high positive rate for roadside drug testing over there”, so we can assume many offences will be noted (fines distributed) and that drug driving convictions are incredibly likely, in my opinion extremely certain, to dramatically increase, leading to large debts, criminal records, and potential prison sentences for drug drivers. Whether this will make our roads safer is a rather nuanced questions hinged on; will drug users continue using in prison? Will they relapse after release? As these answers likely predict a return, or not, to drug driving. The cycle of poverty and addiction are particularly relevant as were an addict to be given a criminal record (and thus restricted with regards to employment) and/or placed in debt (which only needs a positive saliva test not a criminal conviction) will they stop using? A life without a clear path to success – in the case of stunted career potential – or money owed, become a matter of will this help an addict quit or will that itch for another high be as engrossing as it ever was, leading potentially to more crime to pay the debt and/or buy a gram? 

As “it can be more challenging to then move the THC in the oral fluid onto the screening device”, perhaps stoners don’t need to be as anxious as their last cone suggested but users of heavier drugs (who are, in my opinion, more likely to be pulled aside for a subsequent blood test) could either achieve sobriety or fall deeper into their habits depending on their access to substances in prison, depth of addiction, support systems around them, and will to quit. 

Regardless, more drug users than ever before in the history of Aotearoa will be taken off our roads.