Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I would also like to acknowledge the chair of the Health Committee because she did a tremendous job and does a tremendous job. Actually she's a very effective Labour member of this House and I am surprised she isn't further up the totem pole. In frankly a shallow puddle of talent over there I would have thought she was much much higher ranked but she certainly did a very good job in sometimes trying circumstances because the National caucus started in good faith in support of the goals of this bill.There are three goals: the de-scheduling of cannabidiol the terminal exemption—the temporary terminal exemption—from prosecution for those who are terminally ill and the licensing framework. The National Party actually supports all three of those goals and it's a measure of the intellectual poverty inherent in this bill that despite being able to support those goals it can't support this bill.As the Leader of the Opposition said we're also open to the idea of a conversation in this country about the decriminalising of cannabis more generally. Now we need to tread very carefully through that—Hon Shane Jones: Piker—piker.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: —because depending on the way in which the conversation is articulated we'll have I think a very different outcome. So we do need to be cautious.But the sad thing is we've actually started and ended that conversation in a way through the passage of this legislation. We have conflated the decriminalising of illicit substances with the licensing regime for medicinal cannabis and that is to the shame of a lazy Government and a lazy Minister. Let's go through this. Firstly—Hon Shane Jones: No plan B—no plan B.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: —the temporary exemption from prosecution—DEPUTY SPEAKER: I just remind the member there is a Speakers' ruling that interjection should be rare reasonable and witty and none of those to date have met any one of those three tests. Sorry to interrupt the member.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: The memory of H V Ross Robertson has just come back into the House.Hon Tim Macindoe: And a bit of contagion" was required.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: That's quite right—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Actually it was Braybrooke.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: —especially the "witty" bit.The temporary exemption from prosecution when this bill is passed is anything but temporary. The policy statement—the explanatory note—said that this exemption would only be in place until such time as an effective licensing regime and high-quality medicinal cannabis products were on the market. So it follows that there should be a sunset clause on that provision—no. The select committee discussed it. The committee of the whole House discussed it. The Minister rejected it. The Government rejected it. Why? Well it's open to speculation about whether the de facto decriminalising of illicit substances through the passage of this legislation is an accident or intended and—without bringing the gallery in—I noticed the applause when the Leader of the Opposition suggested that was exactly what was happening when we pass this bill. What I describe as an island of immunity—Greg O'Connor: I thought it was his valedictory.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: —in an archipelago of offending will cause no end of trouble for Mr O'Connor's former colleagues in New Zealand Police who came along and told us that they aren't chasing and hunting down and arresting and jailing terminally ill people who have a joint for their pain. But they are interested in the supply chain so look out for that.The Minister and the Government still haven't answered the question of what happens to somebody who's terminally ill who smokes a joint outside a school or a shopping mall or a movie theatre. What are they going to do? Give them a pass under the Misuse of Drugs Act but prosecute them under the Smoke-free Environment's Act? I doubt it—I sincerely doubt it.In fact the member based in Invercargill Dr Liz Craig did the Minister's work in committee by pointing out that the Government alternative to a sunset clause was a review: a review in two years report back in three—on what? On what amendments to these provisions would be required? Not whether the provisions have gone past their sell-by date and should be repealed in which case we've got to come back to this House and do just that because there is no sunset clause. No it only talks about whatever amendments are necessary. The inference from that is that this is anything but a temporary exemption. So anybody who is terminally ill can smoke illicit substances till doomsday—well till their doomsday to put some gallows humour on to it.Now the licensing regime—the famous 59 words. We got a few more when we came out of the committee of the whole House but a paucity of information about what that should be. The Minister's response was twofold: "Look at section 37 of the Misuse of Drugs Act." and "Trust us."So here are some questions that at this very eleventh hour we still don't know the answers to. What will happen to somebody who wants to put a manufacturing process close to a school in the middle of a residential area? Will the manufacturing entity be an outside process or an indoor process? What is the fitness to hold the licence—no idea. Will it involve—this is crucial—loose leaf? Will that complete oxymoron of a medicine that is rolled up and smoked be allowed under the medicinal cannabis regime? Not the temporary exemption; not the terminal exemption.Louisa Wall: You're obsessed about it.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: And the Minister—oh "obsessed"? The member says that I'm obsessed by this question. Well I'm sorry; it's a pretty fundamental question. Are we decriminalising loose-leaf cannabis use or not? Because I don't know; I'm no doctor. Dr Reti can address this; Dr Craig could. But it seems to me that the smoking of what previously was an illicit substance for a chronic condition and bear in mind we're not talking about terminally ill once this licensing regime is in place; we're talking about anybody who the GP or the doctor—the prescribing person—deems will benefit from this product and the ingestion process is relevant. But no—not a dicky-bird on whether or not smoked loose leaf will be part of the licensing regime.What manufacturing standards will be required for the people who hold the license? No idea—none whatsoever. Well the answer to the question is guess what? We're going to set up another committee a ministerial oversight group. So this was a high priority for the Government. It was in the 100-day plan. We've had a year to think about it and all of the detail is being delegated not only to officials but to another oversight group—add that to the 200-plus we've already got.I have some significant concerns about the relationship between this change and our land transport rules and the effect that this will have on road safety because while the principal change is a licensing framework there is no doubt that the effect is the same whether it's illicit or prescribed drugged driving is a massive risk on our road. If we have to look at the jurisdictions I'm advised that in those jurisdictions where cannabis was decriminalised deaths from drugged driving went up considerably and in some jurisdictions are greater than alcohol harm on their roads and that is going to come to a highway near us. Why? Because we haven't even engaged transport officials on that crucial question. We haven't engaged New Zealand Police per se about a test and whether there's a high enough correlation between the presence of THC and evidence of impairment. It's been a problem in illicit use. It's not going to get any easier just because it's prescribed.Of course we did have the nonsense of our—and indeed today the combined select committees of health and Māori affairs have reported back to this House on its progress in achieving the goal of being smoke-free by 2025. Well we can throw that goal completely out the window. Challenging though it was; it's gone now.Louisa Wall: Why?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Because tobacco is deemed more harmful than cannabis. I feel like I'm in a parallel universe. It really is. The Government are about to outlaw smoking in cars with children but it will be OK to take prescription cannabis. Where are we? What a complete schmozzle. I also want to add my thanks to those submitters to those members of the medicinal cannabis industry who are ready willing and able to create a safe high-quality manufacturing process with exactly the sort of rules and boundaries—they want these rules and boundaries—that the Government is not prepared to say should be part of the regime. I wish them all the very best in developing that and I hope they're not going to do it in the sort of policy vacuum that exists as we pass this bill. It is bad law and it should not proceed."