Page 4471 - Week 14 - Thursday, 1 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Ms Follett: You are just being silly.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, I will leave it to members to decide whether that amounts to a misleading of this house.
Ms Follett: Madam Speaker, I take a point of order. There is no more serious motion than a want of confidence in a Minister. I urge you to ensure that this Minister is heard in silence in his own defence. It is totally unacceptable to have Mrs Carnell and her colleagues rabbiting on in their usual fashion.
MADAM SPEAKER: I did ask for silence during this debate. I will try to maintain it.
MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, I continue reading from the legal advice that I have tabled today and which has been the basis for my statements, both inside the house and outside the house, in which I have tried to simplify that advice and to put it into lay terms. I quote:
The section is inconsistent with other provisions of the Act, to such an extent that third parties may be the subject of prosecution even if the person who uses the drug in the circumstances envisaged by section 171B is protected by that section. This includes the supply (which has an extended definition under the Act) to a person protected by a certificate.
The section provides no checks or balances on a doctor's discretion to certify or recommend the use of cannabis - the term medical research is not restricted by the operation of any other section of the Act.
There is no real restriction on what physical or mental conditions a doctor might certify as being appropriate to be treated by cannabis beyond that it not be for drug dependence.
Madam Speaker, I am charged with misleading the house for describing this as an open slather approach to cannabis. Madam Speaker, that is the legal advice; that is the advice that I had before you.
I leave it for members to make the judgment as to whether statements like what I now read amount to what I have described as open slather:
The section provides for no checks or balances on a doctor's discretion to certify or recommend the use of cannabis - the term medical research is not restricted by the operation of any other section of the Act.
There is no real restriction on what physical or mental conditions a doctor might certify as being appropriate to be treated by cannabis beyond that it not be for drug dependence.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .