 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Further implications
The differences in the positions of the New South Wales and Victorian governments on the legalisation of marijuana are not as great as their public statements might at first make it appear.
The New South Wales government has committed itself to funding extensive medical trials before it will begin the process of seeking to have particular marijuana-derived products legalised for medicinal use. However, before the trials have begun, the New South Wales government has also indicated that it will establish guidelines to ensure that those currently using marijuana products to treat terminal illnesses will be able to possess up to 15 grams of cannabis without being liable to prosecution. Though the government is not proposing immediate legalisation or even decriminalisation of marijuana, it is taking action to ensure that current users of the drug to treat serious conditions will not be penalised.
In Victoria, the Labor Party, while still in Opposition, committed itself to what it termed the legalisation of medical marijuana. This undertaking has been repeated since the party won government. However, what exactly the Labor Government means by this pledge is not completely clear. The Victorian Government plans to have the ramifications of legalisation investigated by the Victorians Law Reform Commission. Exactly what form of marijuana is to be investigated by the Commission has not been fully explained. It is fairly plain, however, that the Victorian is not seeking to decriminalise the use of crude marijuana either now or in the future. The Victorian Labor government's policy on the issue states, 'Labor will not legalise the smoking of marijuana for medical purposes.' In this the Victorian policy is more conservative than the New South Wales' one, which allows the terminally to possess, and presumably smoke, up to 15 grams of cannabis.
What the Victorian government has indicated it wishes to legalise is the use of cannabis oil. It has stated, 'Cannabis oil can have a powerful effect treating very sick children and adults by reducing symptoms, with life-changing results. It can relieve conditions such as cancer, HIV/AIDS, MS, glaucoma and Parkinson's Disease.' The government seems to have no intention of making this treatment broadly available. It has stated, '[I]t can be used to treat people in exceptional circumstances.'
The full implications of the Victorian Government's position are not yet clear. Its policy is focussed on changing the law, rather than on gaining medical authorisation for marijuana as a treatment; however, the two cannot occur separately. Marijuana products can only be fully legalised for medical use if approved by the federal Therapeutic Goods Administration. Such approval is unlikely to be given in the absence of further clinical trials.
Perhaps what the Victorian government is actually proposing is decriminalisation rather than legalisation. As The Sydney Morning Herald stated just before the Victorian election, 'Daniel Andrews proposes to first seek advice from the Victorian Law Reform Commission on ways of decriminalising medical cannabis for use in sick people in "exceptional circumstances" (a caveat that already hints at years of bureaucratic nitpicking ahead). If and when the commission makes its recommendations, and the Andrews government passes legislation (it hopes to table legislation by the end of 2015), numerous questions will remain. Will they allow patients to grow their own, as occurs in some countries? Who will manufacture the drugs for commercial distribution? What will they cost? What will they be allowed to be prescribed for?'