Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4856] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill. In many respects Metiria Turei may be applauded for representing her constituency but I do have many concerns about this bill. There are many tens of thousands of medical practitioners nurses and caregivers around the world who are extremely concerned about alleviating pain and the best ways to do that. It is important to point out that successive parliaments have spent considerable time on cannabis use and medicinal cannabis use. For instance in 2002-03 the Health Committee and the Hon Steve Chadwick was chairman at the time had an extensive inquiry into public health strategies related to cannabis use and their most appropriate legal status. More recently the Health Committee has responded to a petition of Chris Fowlie who requested that Parliament give urgent consideration to changing the law to allow individuals to obtain possess and use cannabis for the treatment of serious medical conditions when this has been endorsed by their registered medical practitioner. 
I think it is important to reiterate the conclusions of the select committee which were that we do not support changing the law to allow individuals to use the natural cannabis plant to treat specific and serious conditions when traditional methods have failed. We note that there is pharmaceutically based THC derivative medicine available by application to a general practitioner. Concern was expressed that this cost up to $15 a day and that should be looked at. There were also two further recommendations: that the Government instruct the Ministry of Health to update the prescribing guidelines for pharmaceutically based THC derivative medicines to include Sativex as a medicine under the Medicines Act 1981 and to continue to make pharmaceutically based THC derivative medicines available to treat serious medical conditions when traditional methods have failed. 
But I am concerned at the explanatory note in Metiria Turei’s bill. I believe it is not solid or evidence-based. She says that scientific research is now verifying anecdotal evidence that cannabis is a safe and effective medicine. That is not good enough. I absolutely agree with the Hon Jonathan Coleman’s comments about new schedule 4 in clause 13 of the bill. When we turn to schedule 4 we read that asthma and pain perhaps of any sort would be included in the regime within this bill. Undoubtedly smoking cannabis is certainly absolutely inappropriate for someone with asthma. I had a prominent Wellington physician tonight point out how conditions like nail-patella syndrome are absolutely rare and there are many other options to treat it with. When one looks at new section 9B “Medicinal Cannabis Identification Cards” in clause 10 and the requirement in 9B(1)(b) to have “the written support of his or her medical practitioner or medical specialist;” one must recall just recently the striking off of the medical register of Dr Rhys Cullen who abused his privilege. There is room for abuse in this bill by inappropriate prescriptions and I agree that the provision in section 12 “Supply of cannabis seeds” by the police will also be particularly cumbersome. 
When one goes through the literature one sees in  
The 
Lancet 
 in July 2004 in the  
European Journal of Cancer 
 more recently and in the  
Journal of Pain  
in 2008 some of the most prestigious writers on this subject in the world. I quote from a randomised placebo-controlled crossover trial of cannabis cigarettes in neuropathic pain. The conclusion of those doing the trial was that no sound scientific studies supported the medicinal use of cannabis. They pointed out that over 111 compounds were identifiable in smoked cannabis including several potentially harmful hydrocarbons. However they saw the sense of carrying out similar trials in the future using vapourised deliverable therapeutic doses. It is very important that we keep searching for evidence-based ways to alleviate pain but I do not believe that this bill is a suitable instrument with which to do it.