Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Thank you Madam Chair. The principal Act here in clause 3—we've heard submissions from certainly my colleagues talking about how the purpose of the principal Act is to describe a medicinal cannabis scheme and as the title says medicinal cannabis extending into products. I think one of the greatest disappointments that we hear across the sector and maybe the main reason why we are unable to support this bill is the lack of detail. The media called it legislative laziness—that's what they called it. It's a bare landscape.We have to imagine that across the House we have collaborated on other sensitive issues—and be clear this is a sensitive issue. We have collaborated on poverty. We are collaborating on the climate. We've each been able to see and scrutinise what might be in those bills. Here—nothing; another sensitive topic and nothing. No framework nothing. We're going to leave it to unnamed officials for some period of time to define a framework that is very very important. Everybody is disappointed with the absence of any sort of skeleton framework. Industry are disappointed. Their concern is that they have assets that are now sitting cold; not knowing what's coming next they can't anticipate they can't plan. We have the medicinal cannabis community wondering Where am I going to get it from? Is there a dispensing mechanism? Who's going to be able to get it for me? Will I be able to collect it myself? What if I'm too sick? What if I can't get there?" Are there any provisions there for a carer or a carer card as we described in some of our previous pieces of work to help people who might be too ill to be able to access medicinal cannabis products themselves—nothing.We could have had some key areas—manufacturing maybe licensing would have been kind of good dispensing would have been kind of good as well. Nothing. No guidance to the sector. No guidance to really anyone who's involved in this domain and to the parliamentary colleagues across the Chamber for a topic like this that really does need parliamentary oversight.Let's remember we put it to the committee—that was how we fell apart. We put it to the committee and the chair won't disagree with me that all we asked for were these sorts of details to come back to the House. It was all we asked for. We even sent away the clerks to say "How do we do that?" and they came back and said "Oh it's called an affirmative instrument." Yep that's what we're looking for: some detail from the scheme. We have some knowledge that we could put together with others across the House and we could work out some framework that could have some degree of public scrutiny that could stand here tonight. The answer came back: no.And so what that "no" means is: it's blank. As this bill progresses through it will not change from being blank and for a topic that's this important that really is not acceptable. And furthermore that is probably one of the main reasons why the National Party will not be supporting its progress further. We need more detail. We could have lived with even a framework—a skeleton framework probably—but no nothing. So it's with great disappointment that we have to sort of understand that there's nothing there. The work wasn't done. I think the media's reference to it as legislative laziness is correct and the Minister may want to put some sort of items in the discussion here that we could understand.It's pleasing that the Supplementary Order Paper that he has actually starts talking about manufacturing actually starts talking about cultivation but they're just words. That's not enough. Tell us a bit more. Where can you grow it? We've had those discussions. We met with industry. We've been informed by what industry had told us. We can help with that. We know what industry is thinking around what might work for locations and we may still be able to help with that but in a framework that everyone around the House can agree to—that the public that the House that the medicinal cannabis community can see and scrutinise.That's the sort of work we wanted to do. That's what we were putting on the table with the select committee and the Government came back saying "No. We haven't done the work so we have nothing to scrutinise. The answer is no. It will be a blank board and unnamed officials over an undefined period of time will tell New Zealanders what a medicinal cannabis scheme looks like will tell industry what it looks like."Now I have no doubt there'll be some advisory committees that are already terminally late. So while we're talking terminal the proposed medicinal advisory committee was due to have started well before now and hasn't. So it is with some disappointment—extreme disappointment in fact—that we have no details further on this scheme. We were willing to collaborate but the Government said no."