Chapter 5
Committee comments and recommendations
5.1
As outlined throughout this report, the committee heard much evidence in
support of the intent of the Bill as well as evidence highlighting potential
issues requiring attention.
5.2
With regard to the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes and research
into medicinal cannabis products, there remain significant gaps in our
scientific understanding. The committee was informed that there are numerous
conditions for which cannabinoid therapy is under investigation, including
treatments for tumours and cancer, seizures in patients with severe forms of
epilepsy, endocrine-metabolic modification in diabetes, post-traumatic stress
syndrome, Alzheimer's disease, and inflammatory bowel disease. As discussed in
chapter 2, academics from the University of Sydney explained that cannabinoid
science is a rapidly developing field and has 'remarkable potential to
influence human disease and wellbeing'.
5.3
The committee is encouraged by and supportive of the research activity
in this space. While medical experts and researchers voiced differences of
opinion over the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis during the course of the
inquiry, further research will demonstrate in what circumstances medicinal
cannabis is a safe and effective remedy, and where it is ineffective or
inappropriate.
5.4
This medical perspective was put into context by the personal accounts
of witnesses such as Mrs Lucy Haslam and Mrs Joelle Neville. The committee
again thanks those submitters and witnesses willing to share their personal
experiences with the committee: this evidence gave the committee an insight
into the dire and sometimes tragic circumstances in which patients and families
find themselves where conventional therapeutic options have failed or are
intolerable. The committee acknowledges the relief from symptoms many patients
experience as a result of medicinal cannabis and the difficulties they face in
obtaining a remedy they have found to be of benefit.
5.5
The committee is particularly persuaded by the personal accounts it
heard and is unanimously in support of patient access to products derived from
cannabis. However, for the safety of patients and the protection of medical
professionals the committee believes it is important that medicinal cannabis is
used to treat identified medical conditions where it has been proven to be safe
and effective.
Recommendation 1
5.6
The committee supports, in principle, the access to products derived
from cannabis for use in relation to particular medical conditions where the
use of those products has been proven to be safe and effective.
Recommendation 2
5.7
The committee recommends that the Bill is amended, if necessary, to
establish mechanisms by which scientific evidence about medicinal cannabis
products can be assessed to determine their suitability for use in the
treatment of particular medical conditions.
5.8
Some submitters and witnesses raised concerns about the interaction
between the Bill and Australia's existing regulatory framework as well as its obligations
under international law. For example, the Department of Health (the department)
and Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) raised concerns about the
interaction of the Bill with the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, the Narcotics
Drug Act 1967, customs regulations in respect of prohibited imports and
exports and the Crimes (Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances) Act 1990 (see chapter 4). Both the department and the TGA were concerned
about the Bill's interactions with this Commonwealth legislation and the
potentially confusing and contradictory regulatory regime which could result.
5.9
While the committee is supportive of patients' access to medicinal
cannabis in appropriate circumstances, the committee does not believe it is
appropriate to burden regulators, industry or medical professionals with
unnecessary red tape. The committee shares the concerns of the department and the
TGA: any duplication, contradiction or uncertainty arising from the Bill's
implementation must be resolved. The committee therefore recommends that the
Bill is amended to address the issues raised by the department and the TGA
about its interaction with the existing Commonwealth regulatory system for
medicinal products, including but not limited to the Therapeutic Goods Act
1989, the Narcotics Drug Act 1967 and relevant customs legislation.
Recommendation 3
5.10
The committee recommends that the Bill is amended to address issues
raised about its interaction with the existing Commonwealth regulatory framework
for medicinal products, including the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, the Narcotics
Drug Act 1967 and relevant customs legislation.
5.11
The committee also notes the significant concerns raised not only in
relation to the Bill's interaction with existing Commonwealth legislation but
also with Australia's international obligations. As discussed in chapters 2 and
4, Australia is party to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (the Single
Convention), the Convention on Psychotropic Substances and the United
Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances. In particular, the department highlighted inconsistencies
between the Bill and Australia's international obligations, and the risk that
passage of the Bill in its current form may result in Australia breaching these
obligations.
5.12
To address these concerns, the committee recommends that the Bill is
amended to ensure that medicinal cannabis products can be made available in
Australia in way that is consistent with Australia's international obligations,
including under Articles 23 and 28 of the Single Convention.
Recommendation 4
5.13
The committee recommends that the Bill is amended to ensure that
medicinal cannabis products can be made available in Australia consistent with
Australia's international obligations, including under Articles 23 and 28 of
the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961).
5.14
The operation of the regulatory regime proposed by the Bill and its
intersection with state and territory laws and approaches to cannabis (both
medicinal and illicit) was the subject of some discussion during the course of
the inquiry. The committee notes that some submitters were supportive of a
Commonwealth medicinal cannabis scheme providing clarity and consistency, while
others indicated that imposition of a Commonwealth regulator would complicate
regulation and enforcement by the states and territories as well as confuse
patients accessing the scheme.
5.15
This confusion and any contradiction or conflict between the operation
of the proposed Commonwealth regulator and the states and territories should be
addressed to ensure the effective implementation of a scheme to access
medicinal cannabis in Australia. The committee urges the Commonwealth
government to consult with the states and territories about the inter-relationship
of relevant laws to ensure a consistent approach and to facilitate compliance not
only with any medicinal cannabis access scheme but also with Australia's
international obligations.
Recommendation 5
5.16
The committee recommends that the Commonwealth government consult with
its state and territory counterparts about the interrelationship of relevant
laws to ensure a consistent approach to accessing medicinal cannabis and to
facilitate compliance with any such access scheme and Australia's international
obligations.
5.17
If the concerns raised in this chapter and detailed elsewhere in this
report are addressed, the committee recommends that the Bill, as amended, is
passed.
Recommendation 6
5.18
Subject to the preceding recommendations, the committee recommends that
the Bill be passed.
Senator the Hon
Ian Macdonald
Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page