Page 4567 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 6 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it is very sad that this debate is on at all today. It is sad because it shows a Minister who is willing to play politics with medicine, and playing politics with medicine is totally unacceptable. In fact, this Minister appears to be a liar. He appears to be a liar. It is okay to say that, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: No. Order! I did ask for "appears to be a fool" to be withdrawn and, from my memory, Mr Connolly did withdraw.
MRS CARNELL: Oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: I beg your pardon. When Mr Connolly used it again and Mr Humphries pointed out that there was offence being taken, I asked for it to be withdrawn and Mr Connolly withdrew it. I have had enough of people mocking this parliament.
MRS CARNELL: I withdraw, Madam Speaker. It is unfortunate that in this debate it is impossible, without talking about faces and other things, to talk about the things that Mr Connolly has been saying over the last week, things that are simply incorrect. Mr Connolly has claimed that the amendment passed last week would legalise cannabis. Mr Refshauge's legal opinion says that Mr Moore's amendment did not, as the Government Solicitor agreed, decriminalise the supply of cannabis. It did not. End of deal! Mr Connolly was wrong again. Mr Connolly was wrong about it, yet he said it and he said it again. He talked about an open slather approach to cannabis use in Canberra, and Mr Berry did also - open slather, when it has not decriminalised the use of it, when it is prescribed by a medical practitioner for medical research.
Quite seriously, those sorts of statements are simply irresponsible. There is no other way to look at them. He said, or indicated, or Carmen Lawrence indicated, that there may be a breach of international treaties. We have already heard Mr Moore quote verbatim from the relevant report - "Legislative options for cannabis in Australia". That was never the case. It was never the case for even one second, yet Mr Connolly was very happy to spread those sorts of unacceptable untruths. He did it not just once, but continued to do it. He continued to say that it was open slather. He continued to say that it was - - -
Mr Lamont: It must have hurt.
MRS CARNELL: Yes, Mr Lamont, it was absolutely remarkable to us that anybody in this house would go down that track and put politics in front of people with cancer, and that is what he did. He was quite happy to do it. He did not do it once; he kept doing it. He did it time and time again. He said, to quote him, that "it allowed doctors to prescribe cannabis for anything from the common cold up". Absolute rubbish!
Mr Connolly: It would, and Refshauge agrees.
MRS CARNELL: He does not agree. The fact is that it had to be part of medical research. Mr Connolly then went on to half quote Brendan Nelson. Brendan Nelson said quite categorically that any doctor who was involved in shonky research, research that was not up to scratch, would be deregistered, would be subject to medical discipline.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .