SENATE

Thursday, 13 October 2016 SENATE 69
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:
Stimulants such as Ritalin and dexamphetamine, and
Opioid dependence treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine.
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.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
Attorney-General
Senator MOORE (Queensland) (15:08): I move:
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Attorney-General (Senator Brandis) to questions without notice
asked by Opposition senators today relating to the Solicitor-General.
I am sure the government senators are really surprised at that statement. I would like to thank the Attorney for the
answers he did give us today, because I learnt much from those answers. I was very pleased to find out that there
is actually a book that talks about the role of the Solicitor-General, and that will be on my reading list
automatically, I think. There was also a reference to collected speeches from Mark Dreyfus, which are already on
my reading list in terms of the process. I do take a lot of interest in the various speeches made by Mark Dreyfus
and, indeed, prefaces to books—
Senator Brandis: Madam Deputy President, a point of order. I have the greatest respect for Senator Moore's
respect for the Senate, but she does appear to be mocking Mr Dreyfus now, and I wonder whether that constitutes
a reflection.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It does not.
Senator MOORE: I reject that point of order, and I will continue with my deep respect for at least one person
involved in this debate, which is the shadow Attorney-General. I was also particularly interested in having some
CHAMBER