Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on the Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill. I just want to make a few comments in relation to the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 178 in the name of my colleague Dr Shane Reti. I just want to acknowledge the work that he's done and actually the detail that this Supplementary Order Paper goes into on this important topic. I just want to also focus on these eligibility and suitability criteria for an individual to hold a licence and just make a few points in relation to why these are so important and why these should be put in place in the primary legislation.I think firstly we as Parliament are the ones who create the law. We are the ones who have the responsibility to ensure that we get this legislation right. We as Parliament are the ones who should be dictating to any regulated medicinal cannabis market as to who should and who shouldn't be eligible to hold a licence to produce to sell and to be able to distribute medicinal cannabis products. I think it's important that we take stock of the fact that we are dealing with substances here which are currently in the Misuse of Drugs Act. These are drugs which need to be regulated in a way which we as Parliament should be making sure is done in a fit and proper way. So putting these in the primary legislation is actually a critical way in terms of making sure that Parliament's intent is actually held.I'd like to point out that the bill which is actually on the Table without the Supplementary Order Papers essentially lacks all the detail in regard to who should be eligible and who should be suitable and leaves that not only to be delayed but completely unknown to us as parliamentarians and as members of Parliament who are responsible for setting in place the legislation.So the eligibility criteria I think in clause 5 of new schedule 6 are very sound. The individual must be 18 years or older—that's in line with a range of other legislation around age—and they have not been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty an offence punishable by imprisonment for two or more years or an offence outside New Zealand. I think I heard the member Chlöe Swarbrick talking earlier about how this potentially will get in the way of some people who may have been convicted of certain drug offences in the past. But the point being made here is that we want people who have a good record who are in the business of creating these medicinal products.We want people who have a clean record and we want them to have been law-abiding citizens. That is something which is expected of so many other people in so many other functions under a range of other pieces of legislation. Law-abiding citizens are required by law to be in place and licensed in a range of functions under legislation. So the question we as Parliament have to ask is: why is this any different? Why should we here be going for a lower standard of people who have eligibility to deal to create to manufacture and distribute medicinal cannabis products than for any other medicine or drug products in our legislation? I'd like the Minister to address that question as to why we would potentially be opening ourselves up to a lower standard of person who has eligibility.I think the intent that this SOP is trying to put forward is that we are creating a medicinal cannabis regime. It's about medicines. It's about people who will be in the business of creating medicines manufacturing medicines researching medicines selling medicines. This is not a sort of quasi - legalised cannabis or marijuana smoking pot scheme. The intent is to create medicines for New Zealanders to assist them and help them. So why should we as Parliament be accepting people who may have a chequered record who may have committed drug-related offences who may have been involved with dishonesty? Why should we as Parliament accept those people to be given the ability to also engage in this scheme when New Zealanders who go to their doctors and seek a prescription for medicine should know that the whole process—[Time expired]