KEY POINTS:
A compromise on the highly contentious proposal of a transtasman regulatory agency for medicines and therapeutic products is very close to gaining enough parliamentary support to pass.
The compromise, drawn up by New Zealand First about three weeks ago, has been put before several political parties and Parliament's independent MPs by Labour and is gaining some favour.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters yesterday appeared confident about the behind the scenes talks, and went as far as saying that he would introduce an amendment to the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill.
"We spent a lot of time fixing it up to the satisfaction of New Zealand's alternative medicines industry," Mr Peters said.
The compromise would still establish an agency but give makers of New Zealand-based complementary products the option of being regulated by it instead of forcing coverage on them.
If the makers of complementary products wanted to expand into the Australian market they would have to come under the transtasman agency.
Labour has struggled to get support for enabling legislation for the transtasman agency since 2003, when it signed a treaty with the Australian Government.
That treaty contained a clause which allows either the New Zealand or Australian governments to depart from it in "exceptional circumstances".
This mechanism appears to allow New Zealand to say in its legislation that domestic-produced complementaries would not be covered by the new transtasman agency.
While MPs are not yet voicing explicit support for the compromise, it is clear it is very similar to what many of them are seeking.
United Future leader Peter Dunne yesterday said his party would only support the bill proceeding if it met certain requirements.
He said pharmaceutical medicines should be included under the transtasman regime, but that "natural health products and complementary medicines and the rest" should be excluded, with a provision to voluntarily opt in.
Mr Dunne said there had been some informal discussion behind the scenes about the compromise, but he had not yet seen the precise wording of it.
