Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to table my responses to questions taken on notice on Monday to Senator Hanson and also to Senator Siewert. I seek leave to incorporate those responses.

The answers read as follows—

1 Response to Question without notice from Senator Hanson — Monday 10 October:

The Australian Government's decision has been to regulate medicinal cannabis products as therapeutic goods. There are constitutional limits to the extent that the Commonwealth can regulate therapeutic goods. All therapeutic goods are subject to both Commonwealth and state/territory legislation.

In the case of medicinal cannabis products, some states, such as Queensland and Victoria, have decided to introduce or enact new legislation to facilitate access to these products. Other states have determined that there is no need to change their legislation.

This is a matter for state governments to decide. In Queensland, access to medicinal cannabis products was absolutely prohibited until December 2015, regardless of any decisions at the Commonwealth level. In December 2015, the Queensland government made changes to their regulations to enable, for the first time, access to medicinal cannabis products.

The Commonwealth has no power to directly intercede and overrule the state governments and so is working with them to ensure, as much as possible, a harmonised approach.

The recent decision by the Therapeutic Goods Administration to schedule medicinal cannabis products to schedule 8 of the Poisons Standard under certain circumstances is intended to facilitate state/territory laws around medicinal cannabis products. However, this decision has no legal effect unless adopted by the states and territories. Our understanding is that the states either intend to adopt the decision or to do something equivalent.

The Bill that the Queensland government is debating is about providing a pathway for access to medicinal cannabis products, which are whole plant extracts. This is different to 'synthetic cannabis' that is sometimes sold on the black market for recreational use and there is no evidence that these whole plant extracts are in any way detrimental to patient welfare.

The legislation passed unanimously by the Parliament in February this year is aimed at facilitating the cultivation of cannabis for manufacture into medicinal cannabis products that are standardised, safe and of appropriate quality, specifically to protect patients from the risks associated with black market cannabis, which has unknown quantities of cannabinoids and the potential for contamination with bacteria, funguses, heavy metals and other material that represent a risk to the health of the patient.

In the case of medicinal cannabis products, some states (Victoria and Queensland) have decided that special medicinal cannabis legislation would make access easier for patients. However, in all states, access to medicinal cannabis products will be subject to state and territory drugs and poison legislation, just as every other medicine used in Australia is.

Although the Poisons Standard provides a classification of drugs and poisons into Schedules it is a recommendation to states and territories. Scheduling of drugs and poisons, and hence access, is implemented through relevant state and territory legislation. Examples of controlled drugs where there are separate state/territory controls on access include:

In relation to medicinal cannabis please note this is an unapproved drug whereas the examples just given relate to drugs that have gone through a full approval process with TGA.

Response to Question without notice from Senator Siewert — Monday 10 October:

Funding for the Partners in Recovery (PIR) and Day to Day Living (D2DL) programs is transitioning to the NDIS between 1 July 2016 and 30 June 2019.

To ensure service continuity and NDIS rollout, PIR and D2DL have been extended for a transition phase of three years, with an initial funding extension of 12 months to 30 June 2017.

Partners in Recovery and Day to Day Living clients are being progressively transitioned to NDIS in line with regional timeframes detailed in Bilateral Agreements with the relevant state and territory governments (noting that a bilateral agreement with Western Australia is still under negotiation).

PIR and D2DL services continue to be available to existing clients, including where a region has not commenced rollout, where a client is ineligible for NDIS (for example if they do not meet age requirements), or if they have not yet applied for NDIS in a region that has commenced rollout.

When NDIS rollout commences in a region, PIR and D2DL Organisations will be required to assist NDIS-eligible clients to apply, and will be provided with an in-kind allocation in their budget which reflects the level of NDIS service delivery required to support NDIS rollout.

The Council of Australian Government has made a commitment that existing program clients will not be disadvantaged through the transition to the NDIS. Existing program clients found not eligible for the NDIS will receive support under Continuity of Support (CoS) arrangements.