Page 2590 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
their list become changes to our list. In other words, we simply use NHMRC schedules as our own. The second way is by far the best approach and is much simpler, provided there is a provision in the legislation for the Minister to make exceptions if he sees that as necessary.
Madam Speaker, I urge the Government to introduce scheduling by reference as soon as possible. We have already missed out on most of the hay fever season, and this has cost Canberrans many thousands of dollars and added substantially to the Medicare bill. Obviously, the Government does not have its legislation priorities in order. I assume that, as I have finally been given the opportunity to debate this motion after it has been on the notice paper for two months, the Government finally has legislation in this area ready. I challenge them to introduce it now. It must be done as a priority.
MR LAMONT (11.15): First of all, I am somewhat miffed at the suggestion by Mrs Carnell that this matter was first placed on the notice paper some two-and-a-half months ago and the Government has now allowed it to be debated. The Administration and Procedures Committee is made up of the Speaker; Mr De Domenico, the Opposition Whip; me, the Government Whip; and Mr Moore. It is the Administration and Procedures Committee, not the Government, that determines the order of private members business. So, I hope that Mrs Carnell stands suitably chastened for the way in which she has insulted this chamber and in particular the Administration and Procedures Committee.
Madam Speaker, unfortunately, Mrs Carnell's proposal - that the Government introduce, as a matter of urgency, legislation to facilitate drugs and poisons scheduling by reference to the recommendations of the NHMRC - does not take into account the existing situation in the ACT with regard to its drugs and poisons legislation. If Mrs Carnell cares to sit there for five minutes she will, hopefully, come out somewhat more educated than she was when she walked into the chamber this morning. As the Deputy Chief Minister explained, there are three pieces of such legislation in the ACT requiring amendment to give effect to the NHMRC standards. That was explained by the Deputy Chief Minister when this matter was previously discussed here in this Assembly, and I am sure that when the Deputy Chief Minister speaks on this matter later he will cover that ground once again.
There are three pieces of relevant legislation in the ACT. These are the Poisons Act, the Poisons and Drugs Act and the Drugs of Dependence Act. In order to adopt by reference the NHMRC standard for the uniform scheduling of drugs and poisons, other changes to each piece of legislation are concurrently required to avoid duplication and to streamline controls over drugs and poisons. When it became clear 18 months ago that this was indeed not a simple proposition, the Government took immediate action and amended the schedules to both the Poisons and Drugs Act and the Drugs of Dependence Act to incorporate all the current recommendations of the NHMRC. I might add that at that time, Madam Speaker, which was in March 1991, the ACT was the most up-to-date State with regard to the implementation of the scheduling recommendations of the NHMRC.
Madam Speaker, during the review of the legislation it became apparent that reform of the controls over dangerous poisons was overdue; so the Government has taken this timely opportunity to improve certain controls over dangerous poisons by transferring these controls from the Poisons Act to the Poisons and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .