Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Medicinal Cannabis Legislation Amendment (Securing Patient Access) Bill 2017 and to indicate our support for the bill. It is a bill that seeks to simply reflect the will of this Senate from June this year, when the Senate disallowed the government's amendment to the Therapeutic Goods Regulations 1990 so that medicinal cannabis could be imported for use for patients under the Department of Health's Special Access Scheme category A, as well as category B. Three days after the disallowance motion was passed the government sent a sharply worded letter to importers, threatening them that, despite the Senate's disallowance motion, it would be a breach of permit and licence conditions if they were to supply any imported medicinal cannabis product to a patient under Special Access Scheme category A. I feel that was a bit of a heavy-handed approach by the government. It was an approach that failed to recognise the will of this Senate, but that can now be corrected through the passage of this bill.

The bill makes two legislative changes to improve access to medicinal cannabis for terminally ill patients under category A of the Special Access Scheme. Category A allows terminally ill patients access to unregistered therapeutic goods with a doctor's prescription, but without preapproval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. It is, therefore, quicker than other pathways. Because of the threat made by the government to import permits, it amends the Customs Act 1901 to clarify that 'a licence, permission, consent or approval' to import medicinal cannabis applies to category A, as well as other pathways.

The second change is to ensure that terminally ill patients can access domestic medicinal cannabis products under category A when they become available. It amends the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 to add category A as one of the purposes for which the secretary of Health can grant a licence to manufacture medicinal cannabis in Australia. These amendments are for category A of the Special Access Scheme. Category A applies, as previous speakers have indicated, only to terminally ill patients.

As I've said for many years, when debating medicinal cannabis, this is a matter of compassion. That's what it's about; it's about compassion. It's about politicians, doctors and bureaucrats demonstrating some compassion towards a group of people who suffer from an incurable condition, with no idea what tomorrow will bring, or even if there will be a tomorrow. This is about a group of people who experience unimaginable pain on a daily basis, a group of people who have found that traditional medicines do not assist in suppressing their conditions. Whether it's a case of seizures in a young girl, like that of April, who I know, or a case of a mother's lung function, like that of Natalie, who I also know, this is about a minister hearing their pleas, listening to the community and doing the right thing.

If the vote goes the same way as the disallowance in June then this bill will pass the Senate. But it is then up to Minister Hunt to bring the matter to the House of Representatives, recognise that he made a mistake and that the amendment was too heavy handed, and accept the will of the Senate. The minister could even achieve half a what this bill seeks to achieve without even taking the bill to the House of Representatives. If the minister directed his department to change import permit conditions to allow imports for category A patients then the spirit of the disallowance would be enacted. This is about helping people who have been assessed by their doctor as terminally ill. We're not looking at a free-for-all here.

The Special Access Scheme is administered by the Department of Health, like all of our health regulations. It is a very rigorous process for a patient and their GP. It comprises three categories: A, B, and C. Under the government's policy, access is only available for Australians under category B. Category B is an application pathway, while category A is a notification pathway. The critical difference is that under category A the doctor only has to notify the Therapeutic Goods Administration that they are accessing medicinal cannabis products for patients who are seriously ill with a terminal illness, but under category B the doctor must first apply to the TGA and receive an approval letter before medicinal cannabis products can be accessed.

What we're debating today is recognising the mounting global evidence that medicinal cannabis is a safe, effective product for many, many people. We're debating the rights of doctors to work with their patients, to work with the TGA and to work with suppliers so that we can improve access to medicinal cannabis for the many thousands of Australians who need it. This bill today is just one small part of the huge web of legislative changes needed to improve access to medicinal cannabis.

With brave community advocates and many parliamentary colleagues, I've been fighting for a long time for improved access to safe, reliable, legal and affordable medicinal cannabis. There is no doubt that cannabis has brought relief to and a dramatic reduction in pain and suffering for so many Australians. In my home state of Tasmania I have personally met with many individuals who have seen their lives and the lives of their loved ones turned around through this treatment.

Sadly, though, there are just as many heartbreaking stories of those who continue to suffer because they are unable to gain access to this treatment. There are many others who are still branded as criminals under Australian law for accessing and using this treatment, despite the incredible and proven health outcomes to them and their loved ones. For too long Australians have been forced to navigate underground criminal networks in order to secure a medication that we know works, because it works for them; they demonstrate it.

There is no doubt in my mind that change is desperately overdue. I would like to formally acknowledge all the brave Tasmanians who have had the courage to go public with their own stories, despite potential personal risks, in order to mount the case for reform. Some of these people are elderly; they look after their children. Some of them are very young. They are very nervous about the prospects of what dealing with an illegal substance may mean for them, but they cut through that, because it means to them that they can provide the help for their loved ones in suffering.

Last year, I spoke in this place about Natalie, about Lyn and Jeremy, about Nicole and Alice, and about Jessie and April, in the debate on the Narcotic Drugs Amendment Bill 2016. Tragically, Natalie Daley, a young mum with three children, lost her battle with cancer mid-year last year. Natalie was from my home town of Ulverstone. She was a pioneering advocate for medicinal cannabis, and her resilience was an inspiration to so many people. Despite the risks, Natalie went public with her very, very personal experience of the incredible change that medicinal cannabis made to her life after she was diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer.

Another Natalie, who is still fighting, is Natalie Vassallo from Burnie. I have known Natalie for some time. Earlier this year, at a forum in Burnie, we had a lengthy chat about her current situation, and she penned a powerful, logical email to me detailing her experience with medicinal cannabis and the Tasmanian health system and about her strong will to keep fighting to live so she could see her boys grow up. Natalie has spent time educating her GP on whole-plant medicinal cannabis therapy. Natalie said to me that she's one of the lucky ones: she is lucky enough to have a reasonable GP who is willing to listen but also to do his own research. But, under the Tasmanian government's scheme for accessing medicinal cannabis, only a specialist can make prescriptions, and Natalie, unfortunately, rarely gets to see her lung specialist. Her first appointment is scheduled for November this year. But she doesn't know if he'll have the time, or the interest, to help her apply for the state government's prescribed access scheme. Natalie says that her lung function improvements under medicinal cannabis have been nothing but remarkable. When she wrote the email to me in August, she was off all pain medications after using cannabis oil over the past two years, and she says that cannabis oil is the reason she's still here for her three boys, one of whom is still in school, while an older boy is her carer. The main issue is of course supply. The lack of pathways to access cannabis oil is a story told countless times to me and to all of us in this place, and it is the absolute core of this debate here today. Thank you, Natalie, for sharing your story, and thank you to your GP for listening but also for having the willingness to learn. And thank you to your boys for their support of each other but also of you. Every change that we can make in this place and in the Tasmanian parliament to empower our GPs and improve access is a step in the right direction.

I also want to commend Andrew Irving from Tasmania for his enduring leadership of Medicinal Cannabis and Hemp Tasmania. Andrew had been a full-time carer to his wife, Marilyn, until she, sadly, passed away earlier this year. Marilyn had a neurodegenerative condition and used medicinal cannabis. When she passed away, Andrew's resolve was to educate our community on medicinal cannabis and advocate for patients' rights, and he wanted to continue that legacy. Andrew publishes a regular newsletter called The Leaf, for Medicinal Cannabis and Hemp Tasmania members, and last year successfully crowdfunded for thousands of dollars and provided many hours of his own labour and other people's to create two educational trailers for the state. The trailers are packed full of information that can educate people and dispel the myths surrounding medicinal cannabis.

The trailers have been a huge success. They have been such a success, in fact, that Andrew is now building a third one, ready to go to the mainland. I was at the launch in Ulverstone last year for the trailer that was dedicated to Natalie Daley, and I know that Senator Brown, who is here in the chamber, was also at the launch in Hobart. That demonstrates Labor's commitment, right across the state, from the north to the south.

Also in Tasmania, we have had absolutely tremendous advocacy from our Tasmanian Labor politicians. That advocacy has been led by our former Premier Lara Giddings. While both the Labor and Liberal parties are supportive of improving access to medicinal cannabis, just like here in Canberra, the Liberal Party is overly cautious in its approach. It is leaving people to suffer, leaving people in fear of prosecution and creating uncertainty at a time when all we need to do is make access simpler. Under the Tasmanian Liberal government, specialists can apply to the health department to prescribe the drug, but the government can't say how long it will take to access medicinal cannabis. Labor's position is that doctors should be able to prescribe it, to make the drug more accessible. It has taken the Liberal government 3½ years to come up with a system that is simply too slow and doesn't facilitate safe and prompt access.

I've just told this place about Natalie's delays in accessing her specialist. I said her appointment is in November, but she doesn't actually have a date yet. All she has is: 'It's November.' As I said, she's concerned that the specialist won't have the time to help her apply through the state government's scheme. An ABC story from 5 October reported that in the first month of operation the Tasmanian government's Controlled Access Scheme received only three applications from medical specialists, with none having been approved at the time of writing. The health department has no timeline on a decision regarding pending applications.

While the Tasmanian Liberal government is off being overly cautious, GPs are confused with how the scheme works. Dr Bastian Seidel from the college of GPs said in the 5 October story that it is difficult for GPs to refer to the appropriate organisation or hospital specialist. He went on to say that states each have their own scheme and that patients who might benefit from medicinal cannabis can't get it, while GPs who want to prescribe it are not able to. Meanwhile, hundreds of Tasmanians are using medicinal cannabis every day. As I said earlier, they are risking prosecution. They don't have an easy, or good, supply chain—the quality quite often is questionable. They're suffering. I really hope that the government will hear the pleas not only in the stories I've shared today but in the stories I'm sure they've heard, as well as from the many others who are constant in their strong advocacy for improved access. What we need is support for this sensible legislation and movement to improving access for Australians who need it.

I thank Senator Di Natale for introducing this bill and for his longstanding commitment to working across the parliament—with me and other members of the Labor Party and with members of the coalition—to improve access to medicinal cannabis for people in Australia. In the last parliament, medicinal cannabis access was a great story of people coming together from across the political spectrum to do the right thing for those people in our community who are suffering, for those people who are helped in some way by medicinal cannabis. I remind the Senate that passage of this bill won't allow free access for all. To access products under category A a patient must be terminally ill. The heavy handed, cruel approach by the Minister for Health is undermining patient safety, it's undermining collaboration between the federal and state governments and it's miring GPs and patients in hours and hours of unnecessary red tape. Minister, please respect the will of the Senate, acknowledge the skills and expertise of our medical fraternity and move urgently to improve access for people who need our help.