As
IR-01-25-46261
30 January 2026
Lee
[FYI request #33308 email]
Dear Lee
Thank you for your Official Information Act 1982 (OIA) request received 16 December
2025, in which you asked for information about the roadside oral fluid testing regime. On
18 December 2025, Police invited you to refine the scope of your request to allow a
suitable response. On 21 December 2025, you refined the scope of your request. I have
responded to each part of your request below.
1.
What qualification and authority you, Superintendent Steve Greally have to
perform “Roadside drug testing anywhere, anytime, where the law enables police
to test a driver at any point, without having cause to suspect they have consumed
drugs” under the:
•
“The Land Transport (Drug Driving) Amendment Act 2025 now enables
Police to also test for recent use of qualifying drugs using a mobile drug
screening device. This gives us the ability to stop a driver at the roadside.
It is a test for presence (of an impairing drug that has been recently used)
and not impairment”
•
On behalf:
•
NZ Transport Agency where the Land Transport Act 1998
that states “Repealed”:
(i)
s201Authority to consider delegating or contracting out of
functions and powers [Repealed]
(i ) s202Authority may arrange for services to be provided by
outside agencies
[Repealed]; and
•
Policing Act 2008
(i)
s24 Authorised officers—Part 4—A Police employee
warranted as a Police transport enforcement officer:
(1)The Commissioner may, by warrant, authorise a Police
employee for particular policing roles set out in Schedule 1.
(i ) S 30 Command and control
No Police employee may, when exercising any power or carrying
out any function or duty, act under the direction, command, or
control of—
(a)
a Minister of the Crown
Police National Headquarters 180 Molesworth Street. PO Box 3017, Wellington 6140, New Zealand.
Telephone: 04 474 9499. Fax: 04 498 7400. www.police.govt.nz
The authority for Police to conduct roadside drug testing is provided under the Land
Transport Act 1998, as amended by the Land Transport (Drug Driving) Amendment Acts
2022 and 2025. The Land Transport Act under s71A states who must undergo a saliva
(oral fluid) screening test and states that this applies to any driver or person attempting to
drive a motor vehicle on a road, a person who has committed an offence against the Act
involving a motor vehicle, or where an accident has occurred involving a motor vehicle as
per the Land Transport Act 71A.
These amendments specifically enable Police officers to carry out roadside drug
screening tests (for recent use of specified qualifying drugs) of anyone driving (or
attempting to drive) a motor vehicle and does not require good cause to suspect. This is
in alignment with how we undertake breath screening tests.
Police officers act under the powers conferred by the Land Transport Act and the Policing
Act 2008. Under section 30 of the Policing Act, Police employees exercise these powers
independently and not under the direction of a Minister. The operational implementation
of roadside drug testing is a policing function, not a delegated responsibility from NZ
Transport Agency. The repealed sections you reference (s201 and s202) relate to
NZTA’s ability to contract out services, which is separate from Police powers under the
Land Transport Act.
In summary:
• The Land Transport (Drug Driving) Amendment Act 2025 authorises Police to be
able to require a driver to undertake a roadside drug screening test anywhere,
anytime.
• Police officers exercise these powers under the Policing Act 2008, which governs
their authority and independence.
• This is not a delegated function from NZTA; it is a statutory policing power.
The purpose of this approach is to deter and detect drivers who have recently consumed
impairing drugs, reducing the risk of serious crashes and fatalities on our roads.
2. The evidential basis you are reliant on for concluding the choice to use the
Australian made Securetec DrugWipe 3S device?
The choice to use the Securetec DrugWipe 3S device was based on independent
verification and compliance with Australian and New Zealand standards for saliva (oral
fluid) testing.
The device is widely used international y, including by most Australian police jurisdictions,
and has a proven track record in law enforcement. This evidence gave Police confidence
that the device is reliable, fit for purpose, and supports the goal of improving road safety.
3. That the Securetec DrugWipe 3S device is fit for purpose given that documented
international performance has shown there are issues?
Police are confident the Securetec DrugWipe 3S device is fit for purpose based on
independent verification and compliance with Australian and New Zealand Standard for
saliva (oral fluid) testing. The device was tested for accuracy, including false positives
and negatives, and met all required performance criteria. While international experience
has highlighted chal enges with oral fluid testing generally, these were considered during
procurement, and the device selected has a proven track record worldwide, and is used
extensively in most jurisdictions in Australia.
4. Provide independent forensic laboratory testing used that ensures the accuracy
of the roadside equipment for Securetec DrugWipe 3S device are reliable before
an infringement is issued;
•
Its ongoing testing for accuracy;
•
The timeframes for servicing that are the critical components in
procurement evaluation;
Before any infringement offence notice is issued, the testing process involves two steps
to ensure accuracy. First, a roadside drug screening test using the DrugWipe 3S device
to detect recent use of specified drugs. If this initial test is positive, a saliva (oral fluid)
sample is col ected and sent to the forensic laboratory for confirmatory testing. Only when
the laboratory confirms the presence of drugs at or above the legal threshold is an
infringement notice issued.
Ongoing accuracy is maintained through:
• The laboratory testing meeting the requirements set out in the Australian and
New Zealand Standard.
• The manufacturer has a strict process to ensure quality assurance of each batch
before they are distributed.
These measures were key considerations in the procurement evaluation to ensure
reliability and integrity of the testing process.
5. What chemicals, substances, antibodies, and immunoassay formulations those
are proprietary in New Zealand's use with the Securetec DrugWipe 3S tongue-
swipe test that wil be used by Police for the roadside drug screening?
The list of ingredients used by Securetec AG is confidential and is proprietary information
and therefore cannot be provided, as Police do not hold this information. As such, this
part of your request has been refused pursuant to section 18(g)(i) of the OIA in that the
information requested is not held by Police and I have no grounds for believing that the
information is held by any other agency subject to the OIA.
However, Police can confirm that the driver wil only be in contact with the device pad/s
which do not contain any harmful ingredients.
6. Your research and validation that the Securetec DrugWipe 3S tongue-swipe test
wil not cause an adverse reaction, harm or contradictions or breach the natural
persons rights under:
•
The Bil of Rights Act protects rights, such as the right to refuse medical
treatment, may only be relevant to natural persons (real people) under
sections 8 to 11 that set out rights that are essential to an individual’s
personal wel being. Do you recognize these rights protect a person’s
autonomy, human dignity and bodily integrity;
Police endeavour to exercise their powers in a manner that is consistent with the rights
and freedoms guaranteed under NZBORA. Roadside drug screening is not a medical
procedure; it is a law enforcement activity authorised under the Land Transport Act 1998
and its amendments. The process involves a simple drug screening test, which is self-
administered, non-invasive and does not introduce any chemicals or substances into the
body.
7. State the validation studies and chemical data that you, Superintendent Steve
Greally and all NZ service providers are reliant on;
The evaluation report of Securetec DrugWipe 3 S by abf diagnostics GmbH who
evaluated the device for specificity and sensitivity in compliance around the nominated
thresholds (cut-off concentration levels).
An independent testing from Independent Forensic Consulting, a company specialising in
pharmacology and forensic toxicology, assessed all drug testing devices during the
procurement evaluation process.
8. How are natural persons (real people) autonomy, human dignity and bodily
integrity going to be protected as within their right going to be upheld by Roading
Police / NZ police / Police as good policy development should consider how best
to uphold fundamental human right pursuant (not limited) to:
•
New Zealand Bil of Rights Act 1990—Section 10: right not to be
subjected to medical or scientific experimentation without consent; and
Section 11: right to refuse to undergo medical treatment;
•
Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights (under the
Health and Disability Commissioners Act 1994)—Right 7: you must give
informed consent to health or disability services, except in limited
emergency/compulsory-treatment situation;
•
Crimes Act 1961—Non consensual penetration of your body, which
includes but not limited to the mouth without consent using medical
procedures (for example, injections, internal examinations, or other
procedures involving your body) done without proper consent;
This question is not a request for official information held by Police. It seeks assurances
and statements of position about how rights wil be upheld, which would require Police to
create new information rather than provide existing documents or data.
Accordingly, as the information requested is not held, and Police has no reason to believe
it is held by another agency, this part of your request is therefore refused pursuant to
section 18(g)(i) of the Official Information Act 1982.
9. Where you state “Police do not need good cause to suspect a driver has
consumed drugs for oral fluid testing”, this is in conflict with Judith Col ins'
attorney-general's NZBORA report stating “requiring officers to have reason to
suspect drug consumption before testing would make the regime less likely to be
inconsistent with NZ BORA s 22”; it appears that NZ Police are violating NZ
BORA 1990, implementing this road side testing that violates fundamental rights
and the violation cannot be justified: https://bil s.parliament.nz/download/Pap...
•
How have you, Superintendent Steve Greally secured that peoples’ rights
are not breached under legislation, not limited to;
i. New Zealand Bil of Rights (NZ BORA) Act 1990;
ii. Human Rights Act 1993 (disability discrimination, indirect racial
discrimination);
iii. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Article 20:
Personal mobility) are not ignored;
that allow for lawful cases to be brought against Roading Police/ NZ
police / Police?
As phrased, this question is not a request for official information held by Police. It seeks
explanations and statements of position about legislative consistency and the protection
of rights, which would require Police to create new information rather than provide
existing documents or data.
Accordingly, as the information requested is not held, and Police has no reason to believe
it is held by another agency, this part of your request is therefore refused pursuant to
section 18(g)(i) of the Official Information Act 1982.
10. What qualification and training do Road Policing / NZ Police / Police have
concerning the new equipment that is to be used?
•
evidence on its reliability of accuracy;
•
The training and qualification officers are required to be competent in
handling peoples bodily samples as per legislation, not limited to the
Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 (CIBSA) and not
limited to sections 10,13, 36, 60?
Police officers using roadside drug testing equipment receive specific training to ensure
they are competent in administering and col ecting saliva (oral fluid) for drug testing, and
handling saliva samples in accordance with legislative requirements. This training covers
the correct use of the Securetec DrugWipe 3S device, the approved saliva collection kit,
and the procedures for packaging and sending samples to the laboratory for confirmatory
testing.
The Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 that you refer to does not apply to
drug driving testing of saliva, as this process is authorised under the Land Transport Act
1998 and its amendments. The drug testing process is a non-invasive, driver-
administered test that does not involve medical treatment or forced col ection. Officers
are trained to follow procedures that respect individual rights and ensure samples are
handled securely and appropriately.
11. What assurance can you provide that when asked to provide a salvia test for the
Securetec DrugWipe 3S device; people who decline on grounds specific to their
circumstances such as:
•
Medical grounds / pre-existing medical conditions are respected?
•
The right to decline consent for chemicals, substances, antibodies, and
immunoassay formulations to be in their body that could have an adverse
reaction under NZ BORA is respected?
•
What assurance can you provide that the officer’s details and insurance
liability is to be supplied at the time of the event for court appearance?
As phrased, this question is not a request for official information held by Police. It seeks
assurances and statements of position about how individual circumstances and rights wil
be treated, which would require Police to create new information rather than provide
existing documents or data.
Accordingly, this part of your request is refused under section 18(e) of the OIA on the
basis that the information requested is not held.
12. What happens with the car if that “natural person” has been forbidden to drive?
When a driver is forbidden to drive for 12 hours following roadside drug screening, it is
the driver’s responsibility to ensure the vehicle is managed safely. This may include
arranging for a legally licensed person to drive the vehicle, engaging a tow operator, or
leaving the vehicle parked at the roadside if no other options are available. Police do not
assume responsibility for the vehicle in these circumstances.
13. How can you, Superintendent Steve Greally be sure these test kits can’t be
interfered with as identified with the breath test devices between July 2024 and
September 2025 that were falsely / erroneously recorded by 120 police Officers
with the motivation linked to meeting performance targets (as per the findings in
the falsification of breath tests)?
As phrased, this question is not a request for official information held by Police. It seeks
assurances and statements of position about the integrity of roadside drug testing
devices and how Police can be confident they cannot be interfered with. Responding
would require Police to create new information rather than provide existing documents or
data.
Accordingly, this part of your request is refused under section 18(e) of the Official
Information Act 1982 on the basis that the information requested is not held.
14. What action plans are in place to implement roadside Roading Police / NZ Police
/ Police carry out:
•
lawful authority requirements
•
proper calibration & procedure
•
non-arbitrary stopping
•
accurate information about consequences
•
ability to elect confirmatory testing
•
chain of custody integrity
•
The right of refusal under medical grounds
Police have clear legislative authority under the Land Transport Act and its amendments
to stop and test any driver for recent use of drugs. Roadside drug testing is implemented
under the same lawful principles as alcohol testing, meaning any driver can be tested at
any time, and no exemptions apply.
Al devices used for roadside screening have been independently verified to meet the
Australian/New Zealand Standard for saliva (oral fluid) testing. Officers are trained in
correct collection procedures to ensure accuracy and compliance.
Stops are conducted lawful y and non-arbitrarily. Drivers are informed at the roadside
about the testing process, what happens if they test positive, and the consequences,
including infringement notices, demerit points, and temporary driving prohibitions.
If a driver tests positive at the roadside, a saliva sample is collected for laboratory testing.
This sample is sent to an approved laboratory for confirmation before any infringement is
issued. Drivers also have the right to request an elective sample for independent analysis
at their own cost.
Refusal to undergo a roadside drug test is not permitted under the law. However, if an
infringement is issued for a prescribed medicine, the driver can apply for a medical
defence after the fact by providing evidence of a valid prescription and compliance with
medical advice.
15. Please state the method:
•
How is the salvia and data for laboratory analysis collected: Tongue
scrape, cheek scrape, salvia spit etc?
At the roadside, the Oral Fluid Screening Test uses the Securetec DrugWipe 3S device.
The driver wipes the device pads down the front part of their tongue to absorb saliva (oral
fluid), then the pads are clicked back into the device, which releases the saliva onto the
test strips for screening.
If the initial screening test is positive, a saliva sample for laboratory analysis is collected
using the approved Pathtech Oral Fluid Col ection Kit. The driver wipes each side of the
collection pad on their tongue and then places it under their tongue to absorb saliva. The
collection pad is then placed in the buffer transport tube and sent to the laboratory for
confirmatory testing.
16. The storage of these taken samples is held by PHF Science, what is PHF
Science?
New Zealand Institute for Public Health and Forensic Science (PHF Science) is the
forensic laboratory contracted by Police to conduct confirmatory analysis of saliva
samples collected during roadside drug testing. The laboratory performs scientific testing
to determine whether drugs are present at or above the legal threshold before any
infringement is issued.
17. Where wil the data analysis be kept?
The data analysis for roadside drug testing wil be stored and managed by PHF Science,
the approved laboratory responsible for confirmatory testing and reporting.
18. Why are all samples held for 6 months?
If the saliva (oral fluid) sample col ected for analysis has a positive result in the laboratory
(one or more listed qualifying drugs are detected at or above their respective thresholds),
it is disposed of by PHF Science no sooner than 6 months after it was received as secure
biohazard waste. These are requirements outlined in the Land Transport (Oral Fluid
Samples) Regulations 2025.
If the saliva sample did not produce a positive result in the laboratory (did not detect
drugs at or above its respective threshold), the saliva sample is disposed of by PHF
Science as secure biohazard waste as soon as possible after it is analysed as per the
Land Transport (Oral Fluid Samples) Regulations 2025.
As noted above, NZ Police following the storage requirements as set out in the Land
Transport (Oral Fluid Samples) Regulations 2025. For more information, please refer to
the regulations.
19. How are the samples destroyed after 6 months?
After the six-month retention period, samples are disposed of by PHF Science as secure
biohazard waste as per the Land Transport (Oral Fluid Samples) Regulations 2025.
20. What is “elective saliva sample for private analysis” verses “elective saliva
samples where a driver has not requested its release for private analysis”?
A driver who has screened positive for drugs at the roadside and had a saliva (oral fluid)
sample collected for laboratory analysis, is able to elect for a second saliva sample to be
taken at the roadside. This is called an elective sample.
An elective sample provides the driver with an opportunity to organise their own private
analysis (from an independent laboratory), as a potential pathway to dispute an
infringement notice for the detection of a qualifying drug.
An independent or private analysis would need to be arranged by the driver and would be
at the driver’s cost.
PHF Science will store the elective sample, to ensure its stability, until the driver requests
it be released for analysis by a private analysis of their choosing.
If the driver does not request the elective sample is released for private analysis, PHF
Science wil dispose of the sample as secure biohazard waste.
More information about the elective sample can be found on Police’s websit
e here.
21. How the samples stored immediately are the sample is taken? Verse the
contradiction where positive or negative are disposed of by Police at the end of
the shift?
Al drug screening test devices used at the roadside (whether positive or negative) are
disposed of by Police as secure biohazard waste at the end of the shift.
Police must handle, retain, transfer, or dispose of a saliva (oral fluid) sample obtained in
accordance with the applicable procedures prescribed in the Land Transport (Oral Fluid
Samples) Regulations 2025.
Al saliva samples collected for laboratory analysis are packaged, label ed, and
transported under strict chain-of-custody procedures. Immediately after the saliva sample
is collected, it is securely held within the dedicated roadside drug driving kit, before being
securely stored in a Police station. Al saliva samples are transported to PHF Science as
soon as practicable after col ection.
22. Where are they stored until the end of the shift?
As above. The sample(s) may be required to be held at a police station for storage until
collected by the courier (or hand delivered) and sent to PHF Science in accordance with
Police Instructions and Local Orders. Police Instructions require the samples to be
delivered to PHF Science as soon as practicable after collection.
23. Who wil have access to these samples / results at any given time?
The laboratory wil analyse the results and provide the results to the officer via an
analysis certificate. The results are also received by the frontline file management team
and entered in the Police National Intelligence Application (NIA).
24. Do the samples identify the subject they were taken from?
The roadside drug screening device itself does not store or record any personal
information about the driver. However, when a saliva (oral fluid) sample is col ected for
laboratory analysis, it is packaged, labelled, and transported under strict chain-of-custody
procedures to ensure it can be accurately linked to the driver who provided it. A driver will
receive a copy of the laboratory form completed and sent with the sample.
25. If the screening devices are not held or stored by Police once used, where are
they held until destroyed?
Used screening devices are disposed of at the roadside in a biohazard waste bag and
kept with the dedicated roadside drug testing kit before being placed in a secure
biohazard waste bin at a Police station.
26. As no one is above the “Rule of Law” wil the Roading Police / NZ Police / Police
as well Ministers also be regularly tested for drug use? If not, why not?
Roadside drug driving testing applies to anyone driving on New Zealand roads,
regardless of their role or position. Police officers, Ministers, and members of the public
can all be tested at any time if they are driving. The legislation is designed to ensure road
safety and does not exempt any individual from being subject to roadside drug screening.
If you are not satisfied with the way I have responded to your request, you have the right
under section 28(3) of the OIA to ask the Ombudsman to review my decisions.
Information on how to do this is available online at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz.
Yours sincerely
Superintendent Steve Greally
Director: Road Policing
New Zealand Police
