Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Narcotic Drugs Amendment (Medicinal Cannabis) Bill 2021 and I rise to support this bill. This bill aims to cut red tape and reduce the regulatory burden for those who grow, produce, manufacture and conduct research regarding medicinal cannabis. It implements in part recommendations made by Professor John McMillan in the final report on Australia's medicinal cannabis regulatory framework under the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967, which was tabled way back on 5 September 2019.

If this bill passes—and I am hopeful it will—these businesses will face less duplication and require a single, ongoing medicinal cannabis licence. Permits required for day-to-day operations will ensure continued, proportionate and appropriate oversight of the industry. This change will assist businesses by streamlining and simplifying regulatory arrangements. Most importantly, it may indirectly help to reduce some of the costs which remain a barrier to access for some patients—in fact, many patients. These are people who need access to medicinal cannabis products to help manage chronic pain conditions such as multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and nausea induced by chemotherapy, and those who are, sadly, in palliative care settings.

What we know at the moment is that for many people the only things that are affordable are highly addictive opioids. They are on the PBS, with horrific side effects for many and, as I said, highly addictive. Cost is an important issue for some of my constituents who have written to me and who I have met with, because they cannot always afford medicinal cannabis products. One lovely gentleman that I sat down with advises me that these products help him to live with the symptoms of multiple sclerosis, which he was diagnosed with around a decade ago. When he has medicinal cannabis he is still able to work, but he can only take around one-third of what he needs and what is prescribed to him. That costs around $200 a week, around $800 a month or $10,000 a year as a participant in the NDIS. He can only afford a third of it and so he's not getting the true benefit simply because of cost. That is why this must be on the PBS.

I have also heard from constituents who are loving grandparents advocating for their granddaughter to have her medicinal cannabis, CBD, subsidised by the PBS so the family can afford treatment for her seizures. The little girl's name is Evelyn, the same as my daughter, and she is only four years old. She should be able to enjoy preschool without being disrupted by an upsetting seizure almost every day. Her grandparents tell me that these seizures have occurred at a remarkably lesser rate since Evelyn was prescribed medicinal cannabis oil. They have reduced to once every few months with this treatment. This is extraordinary. But purchasing the oil costs her parents around $180 every 10 days, or approximately $6½ thousand every year. This represents a huge cost burden for this family—and for any family in that situation. This is compounded by the need to care for Evelyn at home, at times, for health reasons.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee considered putting medicinal cannabis on the PBS back in August last year, particularly products for use in such things as the treatment of paediatric epilepsy. The PBAC deferred its decision, to seek further clarity on the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and financial implications. While we all respect that the PBS sits well outside of this place and the responsibilities of the minister, we know that so many Australians are prohibited from having really life-changing health outcomes without this being on the PBS. I know that so many people are very hopeful that this can be on the PBS soon.

Sadly, my constituents are not alone in their hope or, indeed, their experiences. There was the recent Senate Community Affairs References Committee inquiry, which reported last March on the current barriers to patient access to medicinal cannabis in Australia. The committee's recommendations included education and public awareness to reduce stigma associated with the use of medicinal cannabis; better resources for patients; training for health professionals; compassionate pricing models or subsidies charged through the PBS; and other changes.

I am therefore pleased to see that the government is taking a step towards better supporting an innovative Australian medical cannabis industry by amending and streamlining the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967. I reiterate my support for this bill and I also encourage further work to implement last year's Senate committee recommendations in order to further improve safe and appropriate access and regulated patient access to medicinal cannabis in Australia.

See this speech in context