Today on Newshub Nation ` Chloe Swarbrick and Michael Woodhouse on the newly proposed rules for medicinal cannabis. Then, the voice of experience ` Europe's pre-eminent medicinal cannabis expert Dr Michael Barnes. And Backstory ` how well do we know our leaders? We head to the Waikato with Taupo MP Louise Upston and uncover a few surprises. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2019 Kia ora, good morning. I'm Simon Shepherd, and welcome to Newshub Nation. The government will knock up to $8000 off the price of electric and hybrid vehicles in an effort to clean up the nation's fleet. To meet climate targets, 80% of New Zealand's new cars will need to be electric within a decade. Electric vehicles currently make up only 0.3% of our fleet. Retiring Gisborne mayor Meng Foon has been appointed to race relations commissioner for a five-year term. Foon is fluent in Te Reo Maori, Cantonese and English and will be responsible for leading the Human Rights Commission's race relations work. The government was under pressure to appoint someone to the role following Dame Susan Devoy's departure more than a year ago. And Defence Minister Ron Mark has announced a review of the 81,000ha of defence force land. $2.1 billion will be spent on upgrading infrastructure across 58 sites out to 2030. Well, Green MP Chloe Swarbrick's name has become synonymous with drug reform, so following years of campaigning for safe, public access to medicinal cannabis, what does she think of the government's new plan? Well, Chloe Swarbrick joins me now. Thanks for your time this morning. Thank you. Good to know, about my name. Yeah, well, that's the association that maybe you've got. You've campaigned a long time for drug reform, so have you been happy with what's been proposed this week? Yeah, so, this was something which was part of the government's 100-day plan to introduce medicinal cannabis regime. I was part of actively negotiating with Dr David Clark, the minister of health, the regime which is now` well, the legislation which has led to the regime. Yeah. And one of the really key components that the Greens negotiated is that we would have this regime, the concrete principles in place, by the end of this year so there's certainty for patients. Great. Are you happy with it? We are largely happy with it, yeah, absolutely. I mean, two of the key things for patients are the issues of access and affordability. And what's really fascinating about cannabis and medicinal cannabis as a product for those who are in pain or in suffering presently is that hasn't come on to the market or become an issue as a result of this real top-down, medicalised approach, whereby it's come in a pill bottle and then been supplied to patients. Instead, it has been largely an issue driven by patients and their whanau looking for an alternative to a cocktail of opiates that come with a raft of awful side-effects. OK. You seem quite passionate about this. Why? Why is that? I didn't come into Parliament to advocate for drug law reform. Right. So, I received the medicinal cannabis member's bill from Julie Anne Genter when we negotiated to form a government and she became a minister. A minister can't progress a member's bill, so we were looking around our caucus. We are on record at the time as saying that we were unhappy with the proposals in the government's legislation for medicinal cannabis. We wanted it to go further, particularly because we were listening to the voices of patients. But what we always recognised is that in the potential for the regime to be developed to allow for licencing of domestic products, there is massive opportunity for New Zealanders to produce affordable, accessible products in medicinal cannabis. So, if we back the truck up a little bit, in your private member's bill that you took on, it proposed people being able to cultivate and grow their own after prescription from their GP. So would you still support that? Because that's not allowed in this current regime. Yeah, so, personal cultivation is one of those major differences between what was proposed in the government's legislation and in ours. Notably, we have worked with the government to detail three major changes to the government's legislation, but we can get to that later. So... This is not one of them, though, is it? No, it's not. And this, we found that my member's bill was voted down. There was not a majority in parliament in support of that, so now we're actually dealing with the issue of personal cultivation in the referendum. And that, I think, is actually a really important distinction, because in the referendum, we are going to be talking about the broader issue of cannabis and whether we want to see it treated as a criminal issue, instead of what I think it should be, which is a health issue, which is the path that New Zealand is now currently on. There are greater oversights in what's being proposed in this medicinal cannabis regime, and I think that it strikes the balance between efficacy and safety of products, and accessibility and affordability for patients. OK, let's talk about that, then. There are two manufacturing standards being considered in this framework. One would place it as a medicinal standard. But that would make it slower to get to market and more expensive. So which one do you favour? That one or a lesser one? Yeah, so there are two proposals ` there's GMP, which is governed by the Medicines Act, and there's GPP, which is governed by the Misuse of Drugs Act. And what's actually proposed is that we have a dual track there. So, the GMP line would allow us to export products, which obviously offers a massive opportunity for domestic producers to get into what is a billion-dollar industry. But in terms of getting products to market ` that are certain in their potency and that there is consistency of supply for patients and their whanau ` I do think that we also need to make sure that there are those products that meet those GPP ` Good Production Practices. So you're favouring a two-track approach to this. But what about the quality assurance for that lesser manufacturing process? How can you be assured that you're actually getting something which is being advertised as a medicine, and the quality that it needs? Well, it's not going to be advertised at all, which is one of the things which is in the legislation for medicinal cannabis. OK, put forward as a medicine, then. That's a different issue ` but put forward as a medicine. So, it is still meeting a really high threshold of quality with those GPP standards. And what we will know is that there is going to be certainty of the balance of THC and CBD in those products. I think there's perhaps a little bit of misinformation around CBD and THC. As the evidence is developing, it's becoming common knowledge amongst practitioners that you actually, in certain circumstances when prescribing this product to people, do need that THC, which is commonly associated with psychoactive properties. But that actually also helps with pain relief. So if you get that balance right between CBD and THC, then you do get the best possible medicine available for people. Let's talk about THC, then. I mean, because there is evidence that THC does affect young people's brains, OK? And there is no prescription in these regimes for the amount of THC that can be in these products. So is that a dangerous path to tread? There is, actually. Well, it doesn't say the potency. It does say that. It says that there's a 2% limit of THC when you are looking at prescription through the Medsafe model. So that is for different types of products that are going to be produced. And this is the whole point of going out to public consultation, because these medicines, you know, as I said at the beginning ` whether you have a drug that is accessed through a pharmaceutical prescription, or you have a drug that is accessed through the black market under prohibition ` these drugs are going to be used, and they're potentially going to be misused. The best way to reduce harm and ensure the well-being of communities and of patients is to make sure that we have sensible, evidence-based legal regulation. OK. So, you just talked about the black market then. So if we're going to be developing a market which is medicine-grade, it's going to take a long time, and it's going to be expensive for that to actually mature. So for those people who need it in the short-term and they don't have an exemption under the law, what's going to happen to them? They're still going to be prosecuted, aren't they? Well, notably, the Greens advocated for a criminal defence for all people who are using for medicinal purposes, and that is a large proportion of New Zealanders. Per our Ministry of Health stats, 11% of New Zealanders are using cannabis. But that doesn't exist under this regime, does it? It does exist for those with terminal illnesses, yes. That's right. But there's other people who have chronic pain who want to be able to use this; they won't be able to afford it; they'll go to the black market, and they're going to get prosecuted. Is that correct? Not necessarily, because there's also a raft of other changes that are occurring within this space, particularly around the Misuse of Drugs Act amendment that's currently just being reported back from the Health Select Committee. But importantly, with regard to the development of the market, you've hit the nail on the head. It is going to take a long time, or a substantial amount of time, to develop a mature market, which is why it's important that we have this dual track for both GMP ` really high-standard, medicinal, pharmaceutical-grade products ` and GPP, because people are currently already accessing medicinal cannabis products. Under the current proposal, specialists are going to have to sign off the bulk of these prescriptions, because these medicines aren't on the market yet. Is that too prescriptive? Or too restrictive? I think what we know ` and I know this speaking to a number of GPs out there ` is that there is a little bit of hesitancy, because, again, the way that medicinal cannabis has evolved and developed as an issue hasn't been this top-down approach that has come through med schools or been advocated necessarily by pharmaceutical guilds otherwise. So you're saying they're uneasy with it? I'm saying that it's new, and newness proposes novelty, and it proposes challenge, and it proposes risk, and what that means is that GPs are going to have to learn a little bit more about what medicinal cannabis means. And the evidence base is developing, because it has been ` cannabis and medicinal cannabis ` have been subject to 'reefer madness' and the war on drugs for 40-plus years, and it's going to take some time to unpick that. But I've also spoken to GPs who are incredibly keen to actually get the best outcomes for their patients. Which is what they sign up to in the first place. Absolutely. Let's just move on to something ` last thing ` you're on this cannabis referendum roadshow. I mean, you had your first one in Invercargill this week. Do you see medicinal cannabis as sort of a stepping stone to introducing recreational use? They're two different issues completely. So, the issue of cannabis as a whole is about how we actually deal with the problem that cannabis exists in this country, and it is being used regardless of prohibition. So we actually want to look at reducing harm, because we know that people are presently accessing it. Medicinal cannabis is for people who are currently in pain and suffering and are being turned into criminals for accessing the only medicine that works for them. Do you think that that blurred line that people see can ever be pulled apart? Do you think people will see the two different arguments? I think that the very proposal that's currently on the table from the Ministry of Health and the Expert Advisory Panel, which is now out to the general public to give their submissions in by the 7th of August, is demonstrative of that. We're looking here at producing a product that meets health standards, that meets medical standards and that has medical oversight. Green MP Chloe Swarbrick, thank you for your time. Kia ora. Right, if you've got something to say about what you see on our show, let us know. We are on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram ` NewshubNationNZ. Our Twitter panel this week is Jason Walls and John Hart. They're using the hashtag #NationNZ. And you can email us at nation@mediaworks.co.nz. The address is on your screen right now. But still to come ` we dissect the week's political news with our panel. Plus ` the National Party view on medicinal cannabis, followed by Europe's leading expert, Professor Michael Barnes. Welcome back. The National Party proposed its own medicinal cannabis scheme last year. Its health spokesperson, Michael Woodhouse, says it shouldn't have been ignored. So I began by asking him what his problem is with the government's proposed regime. Well, I think this is a terrible process. The government introduced a bill in December 2017 that said it was going to have a regulatory framework for a medicinal cannabis scheme ` no details whatsoever. They passed the bill, rejecting the very good suggestions that Dr Shane Reti made in select committee. And then months later, they come up with a discussion document and give stakeholders four weeks to respond; that's the very definition of bad policy. Well, you could have worked more constructively with them when it all happened last year, though, couldn't you? We tried. We've worked very hard in the select committee, of which I was a member, to say, 'Look, this is the only time Parliament gets to scrutinise this bill. Let's have a bit more flesh on the bones.' They didn't want to do that. All right, so we've got the flesh on the bones now. What are your concerns about it? Or is it just OK? Well, there are some aspects of the discussion document that we agree with and actually reflects a lot of what Dr Reti had done last year. But we think there are some omissions ` and some quite concerning ones. Like what? Well, there's no guidelines around proximity of cultivation to, for example, residential areas or schools. There is the opportunity, actually, to grow cannabis outside, which means security is going to be quite significant, but the discussion document doesn't say very much about that. Why do you have concerns about proximity of growing a crop around a school? Near a school? Well, this is, until now, and still in the future in the illicit sense, an unlawful product that is grown` that has a psychoactive property. I don't think parents and teachers would want to have 200 square metres or more of cannabis growing within` But this is going to be a licenced, regulated industry producing a medicine. It's totally different to a gang-grown crop, isn't it? Well, for example, morphine is a medicine too. But heroin, the poppy product that is grown wild, is actually very dangerous if it's not well-controlled. The same will be the case for marijuana leaf. Now, marijuana leaf is not dangerous as a plant if it's just growing in the ground. Well, I think there are some dangers in respect of the likelihood that there could be people wanting to go and raid the crop. So you're talking about criminal activity? Potentially. I mean, it's currently a criminal activity to grow it now. The proximity to those sorts of places I think should have been in the discussion document; it's not. So it may well be consulted on over the next month. But that's just a transitional phase, isn't it, until you actually have an industry going, and then the safety concerns will be addressed. Well, there'll always be a cultivation process. I think the right time to talk about safety and security is right now. Obviously, there's an oblique reference in the discussion document to making sure the properties are secure, but it doesn't rule out growing them in the open air. And I do worry about the fact that it could be growing close to residential areas. You're also concerned about the way that this is going to be administered, i.e. vaping? Yeah. So, look, currently, the only medicines that are inhaled are ones either for respiratory conditions or that are overseen by a medical practitioner ` say, an anaesthetist, for example. This has dangers with both the safety of it but also dose control. But it's not smoking, though; it's vaping, and that's a controlled dosage, isn't it? Well, not necessarily, because there's no controls over the number of times that the product is vaped, and that goes to the question` Remember, this is still a psychoactive substance. It's going to give people a high unless that particular constituent is taken out of the product. It's hard to see how that can happen in vaping. The irony of all of this, of course, is that the government's not prepared to include vaping of nicotine in its Smokefree Environment legislation, but it seems to allow it for marijuana. It's putting it up for discussion, anyway, the possibility of vaping. Well, we wouldn't support vaping in the framework. Right, OK. Your government invested in the clean, green image of New Zealand. Surely this is a way of promoting that and getting a big industry going for New Zealand. It's lucrative. Absolutely. And in that sense, we're not opposed to a medicinal cannabis regime. But remember that this should be a pharmaceutical product. It should be manufactured to pharmaceutical standards and have the same sort of controls, including medical practitioner oversight, as those other medicines. So as long as those controls are in place, we don't object to the framework. We certainly object to the process, and we have some concerns about some aspects of it. OK. So, you're talking about the quality to which it's manufactured. One of the proposals is to manufacture some of these products to a slightly lesser standard, but that's to try and get the industry up and running. Isn't that a good thing? Yeah, well, firstly, this is a pharmaceutical product ` that's how it's being promoted ` and therefore, it should apply the pharmaceutical standards. For us, that's GMP ` Good Manufacturing Practice. But the other aspect to this ` and the Minister has spoken about this ` is that he foresees an export market for high-quality medicinal cannabis. That being the case, we should be manufacturing to the standard those countries expect, and that for us is GMP. One of the problems of having the high level of standards is that the drugs are going to be expensive ` initially anyway ` and that means that people who are poor won't be able to afford them, so they're still going to have to buy them on the black market, aren't they, if they want them. Well, there's still the risk that those who can't afford the medicines if they're not subsidised will continue to go to the black market now. But of course, we've got, currently, a bill before the House that instructs police not to prosecute for possession. We've got a potential referendum next year. So it may well be that we put in place this medicinal cannabis framework and people won't use it. Does National support the prosecution of people who use medicinal cannabis on the black market if they can't take a legal drug? So, firstly, there's a terminal exemption that was part of the legislation that was passed here, and we certainly didn't worry too much about that, because that was pretty much what police were doing. But I don't think it's appropriate to have a blanket 'police should not prosecute' clause in the legislation, and that's what's currently being proposed. We don't support that. OK, just quickly, a couple of things ` would you subsidise medicinal cannabis? Well, that'd be a matter for Pharmac, and the interesting thing about these medicines is that we're worried about them being safe and in the right hands. Pharmac will be interested about whether they are actually effective in doing the sorts of things that people say they are ` that's pain relief, moderating neurological symptoms and so on ` and that they have to be better and more cost-effective than the other medicines on the market. So that's for Pharmac. Is there anything that you would change? Certainly, we would strengthen the licensing regime around the 'fit and proper person' test. We certainly wouldn't rule out anybody with no drug convictions as a worker inside these cultivation or manufacturing processes, but we think the proposal is too loose as it is now, and it needs to be tightened up. Thank you very much for your time. Thanks, Simon. Well, countries around the world are also dealing with medicinal cannabis; Britain legalised it last year. But the uptake has been slow. Neurologist Professor Mike Barnes wrote the report that convinced UK lawmakers it was a good idea. He's coming here soon to get GPs ready for the 'green rush', so Europe correspondent Lloyd Burr asked him about who in the UK is actually having it prescribed. Well, actually, the surprising answer is very few people are taking it at all. It's available legally through a doctor's prescription, but there's not one single patient on the National Health Service ` the public provision ` who's been prescribed medical cannabis since the law changed on the 1st of November. There's been about 22 ` I think the answer is now ` private prescriptions written, which is unfortunately very expensive because of the supply chain problem. So, we're very slow in picking up this opportunity. So, is it a supply chain issue, or is it just the fact that there's not a demand ` people don't want to take it? I think there's a huge demand. In the UK, our best estimate is about a million people take cannabis for medical purposes every day, and if you add to that those who aren't taking it because they don't want to break the law, you'll probably get one-and-a-half to two million people who would benefit from medical cannabis. So, the big block is the doctors being unwilling to prescribe. We have a very conservative medical profession ` that's worldwide, but particularly in the UK ` and they've just been very slow to take up this opportunity. So, what has it done to the black market for cannabis in the UK? Well, at the moment, it probably has no dent at all in the black market, with 22 prescriptions. And at the moment, sadly, you can still obtain cannabis on the black market much, much cheaper than you can for a legal prescription. Now, of course, there's problems with the black market in knowing what you're getting, what contaminants it has in it. It's nowhere near the same quality ` of course it's not. But, sadly, at the moment, because it's so much cheaper, the black market is still flourishing. So, why is there this discrepancy there between stuff that is regulated and produced and is actually safe to consume, and then you've got stuff that is illegal ` it's on the black market ` and yet it's so much cheaper? It is a crazy situation. The demand is definitely there, and what we need to do more than anything else is to educate our doctors. At the moment, of course, doctors haven't been trained in cannabis medicine ` they don't know what to give; they don't know what dose to give; they don't know what format to give it in ` and no one wants their doctor to prescribe something they don't really know what they're doing. So, the priority by far is to educate our doctors and get rid of the stigma of cannabis, because it's been an illegal product. It's had that thought in people's minds that it's associated with anti-establishment views, hippies ` all those images we have of cannabis over the last 50 or 60 years. We've got to break down that stigma that's associated with it and tell our doctors a) that it's really safe and b) that it does actually help a huge number of people with chronic conditions. So what you're saying is it's going to take a long time, I guess, to bed in, not just in medical training and GPs and things like that, but in society as a whole. Yeah, I think society as a whole is actually very accepting of this. There's a couple of surveys recently that showed over 80% of the population were in favour of medical cannabis, and indeed ` strangely ` 80% of doctors in the UK are in favour of medical cannabis. It's this gap between what they know, what they want to do and what they can do because they feel empowered to do it, and that` we've got to break down that empowerment gap, if you like ` that knowledge gap. That's the key to it. So, as you're aware, we're going through the same process in New Zealand of making medicinal cannabis legal. Are you concerned that we're going to repeat some of the same mistakes that the UK made? Sadly, where cannabis has been introduced medically in every jurisdiction, it's taken two, three, four years for the medical profession to catch up with the legal changes. That happened in Canada; it happened in Germany; it's happened in the United States, where it's legal now. So, I hope that each jurisdiction that comes on the stream, that gap between the law changing and the medical opinion changing will be less and less. So I hope it will be quicker in New Zealand. I think we're still coming back to the same point ` it's got to be the education of the doctors, the reassurance of the doctors and the knowledge of the doctors that will break down those barriers and get them prescribing more quickly. One of the proposals that's in New Zealand is that medicinal cannabis is going to need the sign-off of specialists. What is your opinion on having specialist sign-off on medicinal cannabis? Well, we have the same issue in the UK. It can only be signed off by a doctor on what's called the Specialist Register ` so basically a hospital consultant. I think that's an error. I think the UK government got a lot right when we changed the cannabis laws ` they're quite liberal in this country; we can prescribe any type of cannabis for any condition ` but I think the one mistake they made was not allowing general practitioners to prescribe. After all, very few doctors know anything about cannabis, so why restrict it to specialists who know nothing about cannabis, as opposed to GPs who know nothing about cannabis? Why not get the whole of the medical community up to speed? And cannabis is a symptom-controller. If you take cancer ` it can help anxiety; it can help pain; it can help muscle spasm; it can help appetite. There's a load of things it helps with cancer, for example, and GPs are very well-placed to prescribe, if you like, for the whole patient. So I think it should be allowed to be prescribed by any medical practitioner with the right knowledge. It sounds like, despite the law change, it's still impossible to get your hands on it. Even if you go to your GP, your GP will have to refer you to someone else. It sounds like that's just` it's an impossible, kind of, system they've implemented here. It is. It is a very difficult system. So, you can get it privately. There's 22 people who have been prescribed it. But the expense of that` First of all, it's sad, because, of course, the expense has excluded most of the population. 95%-plus of the population can't afford it. Because there's so few prescriptions being written, it's very expensive. You have to import it ` there's only import cannabis in this country ` and you have to do one patient at a time for one month's supply, and if you add up the time that takes and the import license fees and everything else, you're looking at something like �800-�900 sterling per month per patient, and most people can't afford that. So we've got a lot wrong in this country, and I hope education comes first in New Zealand, and I hope it opens up to all the doctors who want to get trained. So, I guess, then, what is your message, not only to the New Zealand government and those making the laws, but to Kiwi GPs? I think embrace it. It's not a cure-all for everything. It's not a wonder drug. It is another very good and very safe ` that's the point to emphasise ` it's very safe. There are very few risks to cannabis. It does benefit a lot of conditions that are troubling to a lot of people ` like pain; like children with epilepsy, for example; like anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, Crohn's disease. There's a lot of things for which there is a reasonably good evidence base. Now, we do need more research and we need more evidence, but in my view, there's enough evidence base for people to understand this and prescribe this and help a lot of people in New Zealand. Has it been overregulated here in terms of red tape? It has to some extent. I think the red tape will fall away once the medical profession are prescribing, because then we'll have volume prescription, the supply chain will be improved, and those bureaucratic hurdles at the moment will slowly disappear. You're going to New Zealand soon. You're being brought over to New Zealand by a company that makes medicinal cannabis. Can you tell us a bit about that trip? That's organised by Helius Therapeutics. I'm going next week, and I'm going to do a one-day what they call master class in Auckland, followed by Wellington, followed by Christchurch, and that's open to any doctor. And I also think the New Zealand regulators are going to come on each day and tell the medical community assembled there what the regulations are likely to be, although I gather it's still out for consultation. So that's very helpful, and it's good to see the regulators being involved in that sort of training. And that's what we got wrong in the UK is the law changed ` and changed very well and very quickly ` but they left the medical profession behind. So it'll be nice to see in New Zealand that the medical profession is brought along with the same pace as the law change. All right, up next, our panel ` Peter Dunne, Russell Brown and Dr Lance Norman. And then, Backstory ` how well do we know our leaders? We head home with a mystery MP and uncover a few surprises. Welcome back. I'm joined now by our panel ` former United Future leader Peter Dunne; journalist Russell Brown; and Dr Lance Norman, who's head of Equity and Maori Health at ProCare. Gentlemen, thank you for your time this morning. Lance, first to you. The idea behind this legislation or this regime is to make medical cannabis accessible and affordable. Does it look like that's going to happen? Oh, I think it needs to happen. I always relate these sort of conversations to when vaccinations first came out. There would have been some evidence, and there would have been a lot of medical people saying it's not a good idea, but history told us that was a very good thing. It's a similar conversation we're having around vaping, where there's evidence there, and I think this is a good thing and it needs to happen sooner than later. OK. One of the issues that, say, Dr Michael Barnes` Professor Michael Barnes was warning about then was the fact that GPs don't want to be part of it in the UK. Are we gonna have that problem here? I think we will have this problem, but the key is ` it was touched on ` the education of GPs, and putting information to the public domain that's actually factually based that people can make decisions on, remembering there's a 'do no harm' rule that doctors have. 'Do no harm' also extends to understanding new forms of healthcare that can be adopted in this country. OK. Peter, you've been around drug reform for a while. How do you see this process? Has the government actually got it right? I think the truth lies somewhere between the government's position and the National Party's position. I think this has been unnecessarily drawn out for what was a 100-days project. Initially, we were told the regime would be up and running by now. It's now six months away, with the regime to be in place and fully operational, allegedly, by the middle of next year. It's going to be impossible for manufacturers to produce products by the middle of next year, because they won't actually know they've got a licence to proceed finally until after the final regs are passed in December. So I think the process has been unnecessarily slow. I think the consequence of that has been a build-up of a lot of false hope. I think Professor Barnes was absolutely right. These transitions do take time. You've got the education of the medical profession. You've got the whole structuring of the industry. Then you've got the level of education of the public about what these medicines will be able to achieve for them for particular conditions, and I think there's still quite a long way to go down that path. In terms of education of the public, Russell, I mean, Dr Barnes was talking about stigma, not only in the medical profession but also in the community as well. Do you agree with him that that is something that we have to overcome for this to be an effective...? I actually think there's more stigma within the medical profession than with the public. I think the public are fairly open to this, and certainly there is` I've been looking at the pre-conclusion results of the MCANZ survey, which sort of shows you the` basically the core patient community. They're quite an educated community. They know what CBD is. Some of them are already having success in sourcing high-CBD strains. So this is going on as we speak. Right. So it's going on as we speak, right? So let's talk about the black market, OK? There's no provision in this regime for people who are needing medicinal cannabis but are not terminally ill ` don't suffer` don't have one of those exemptions. So, Russell, what's going to happen to those people? They're still going to be prosecuted, aren't they? Yeah, they will be, but when you look at the reality of what's happening in the courts, the police and the courts are losing interest in prosecuting people for this. There are people with 20 plants who are getting discharges. So, that's not gonna stop, and it really wasn't what this scheme set out` This was an attempt to bring cannabis into the existing system, and that's a complex business. I think they've done a reasonably good job of it, apart from the specialist-only prescription. I think that needs to change. But let's not kid ourselves that the rest of` the black-turning-to-grey market is going to continue. OK. Let's talk about the provision there that you just mentioned. Lance, should GPs only be prescribing this, or does it need a specialist referral? I think because most people go to GPs, it's helpful that` the more people that can prescribe under a regulative environment, I think the better. So, GPs should be in a position to be able to prescribe with the right tools and the right clinical assessments behind that. OK. What about the way that this is going to be manufactured? There's a two-prong approach being suggested. Peter, should it just be medicinal-grade, or should there be two ways that we can manufacture it? Look, I understand what the government's trying to do here. I think it's essentially problematic, because the two-track will become not an equal track but a sort of a one up, one down. When you move to GMP ` and most of the companies who are involved in the production side will want to focus on GMP for the export opportunities, as well as the domestic opportunities ` when you move to that, then GPP becomes a sort of a secondary consideration. GMP-manufactured products will need to meet certain standards in terms of testing and everything else. GPP won't, and yet they'll still be classed as a prescription medicine. I think that's really problematic, and I think Medsafe will have some huge issues trying to handle that. I think GPP is an attempt to address cost, which they haven't really done elsewhere. It's cost and access, though, because we're talking about trying to get a market to mature and have these products, and they can be really expensive in the beginning, so there's people who are not going to be able to afford it. So shouldn't there be a way of lesser-costing products getting on to the market? That raises another issue. If we are adding these products ` whether they be GPP or GMP, it doesn't actually matter ` to the suite of medicines that are available to New Zealanders, we're not saying, 'Here's something that's being treated differently.' It's part of the suite of medicines. It needs to be addressed that way in terms of the funding, which brings Pharmac into the equation, which brings all of the uncertainties around that process ` what it is they're actually going to be regulating and funding. I don't think these issues have been well-thought through or thoroughly thought through enough at this stage to give certainty. OK. What about the people who can cultivate and grow this? Now, people are already doing this, Russell. Can they use the` what they're growing already to create a legal crop when this regime comes into place? No, they'll have to` Even the big companies that currently have research licences, and that's actually a little disappointing. There are plants of the standard being grown right now, and the products are being made, but they're being made on research licences, and apart from a few to maintain the cultivar, they'll all have to be destroyed in December. Right. Which is a little bit of a shame. There could have been a stroke of the pen there that` Yeah, but how do we know that those plants that have been grown are going to be of sufficient quality for this regime, though? Because they're basically identical to the ones that will be licensed under the regime. Yeah, but you'd have to go round and test them all, wouldn't you? Mm... Well, that's part of the problem, because, as Russell says, you've got licences out there at the moment for companies to grow crop for research purposes. In fact, that's been a provision for many, many years. It's not just` Long before this legislation. But once the final regs are in place, the companies then require a fresh round of licensing to get to the stage where they can actually enter the market as producers, and the idea that they can do that between December and July of next year is fanciful. Although Hikurangi claim they're gonna have plants` they're gonna have products on the shelves in March. They've still gotta get licences. They've still gotta go through the regulatory process. You know, I know how regulators work. There's one more question that I want to ask. Lance, what do you think is the safest method, do you think, that would be to provide a dosage of medicinal cannabis? So, Pharmac is the key to this conversation. So, every product we have needs to be fully regulated and fully tested through Pharmac, and it needs to be verified, and there needs to be clinical trials, and there needs to be education to say this is how the product is being able to be sold or dispensed. Is it through pharmaceutical organisations only? Is it through prescription by GPs? And then having a good, robust conversation on what's safe for our community. All right. Quickly... If you're talking about Michael Woodhouse's qualms about vaporising, that's absolute nonsense. Vaping actually lets people moderate their dose. There are many, many good reasons to allow that. OK. I thought that was a nonsense objection and not in good faith. All right. Well, I'm going to leave it there. There's lots more debate to come on this. Thank you very much for your time at the moment. Up next, Backstory ` how well do we know our leaders? We go behind the scenes in the Waikato with our petrolhead MP. Plus ` John-Michael Swannix investigates farming done well. Welcome back. She was once a sole parent, is a self-confessed petrolhead and is the proud owner of rescued battery hens. You might be surprised to know we've just described the National Member of Parliament for Taupo, Louise Upston. A politician who prefers to let her political achievements speak for themselves, she agreed to open up and tell us her backstory. (POP MUSIC) So, these are my ladies. As in, L-A-Y. And they are rescue chickens. We rescued them about 18 months ago. She's Lizzie. That one's... That one's probably Di. All royal names. We were having dinner one night at the table outside. Yeah? And it jumped up on to the, kinda, bench seat beside us. Yeah. And it was just like, 'Ooh, that's a bit keen.' Then it jumped up on the table, took a piece of meat out of one of the boys'` off his table` off his plate, and then took off. And we're like, 'No, that's too much.' The chickens are moving. They are not doing that any more. Yes, so, this is my dad and his wife, Kirsty. My eldest sister, Belinda. My next sister, Rebecca. And these are my three. Hamish, yeah, he had his 21st in January this year ` my big boy. And my son Mac, and that's Jessica. I've got three amazing kids, I'm very, very lucky. And they're incredibly supportive of what I do for my career. I know it means that I'm away from them quite a bit. Um, but, yeah, they're fantastic kids. We had a great upbringing. Um, you know, my parents were very, kind of, focused on education. So didn't really matter what you did, but you got a qualification. I wanted to be a member of Parliament when I was in primary School. And so, kinda, I've always wanted to get there, and my goal was to be an MP by the time I was 40. And I remember having a conversation with someone quite close to me at the time, when I was trying to make the decision about proceeding with this pregnancy or not, cos I had a number of medical issues and that going on, and this person said to me, 'Actually, if you choose to have this baby, 'you can kiss goodbye to your dream of ever being a member of Parliament.' I just sort of thought, 'Bugger you,' you know? No one tells me what I can and can't do, and it actually made me way more determined. You know, I was 26 when I found out I was pregnant. So, you know, not a teenager. But still a very, kinda, scary concept. I remember, I had to` My mum wasn't alive, and so my Dad had two jobs. His two jobs were to take me to the hospital, when I was in labour, and to take me home afterwards. I remember being in the hospital, and, you know, each day they'd sort of say to me, you know, 'Are you ready to go home?' And I said, 'No. No, I'm not ready.' And I was really struggling to breastfeed, and I thought, 'If I can't even feed my baby, 'I'm not going home.' And so, I kind of stayed, and I stayed, and I stayed for five days. And then my dad took me home, and I remember standing in the kitchen, and I just begged him not to leave me, cos I was really scared about how to look after this, you know, brand new baby. And probably, one of the other really, really lasting memories I have is walking along Dominion Rd and walking into the Work and Income Office and admitting I couldn't financially look after myself and my baby. And, you know, that was an incredibly difficult time. And I think ,you know, one of the things that kind of got me through it was I just kept` I kept focusing on the fact that I thought I could do it. But I didn't know how, day-to-day. But, actually, I wanted to stand on my own two feet. I wanted to be able to say, you know, I can look after myself. I can look after my baby, and as a family, we'll get there. Um, and we did. Lots of mums out there who need a huge amount of support, which is fundamentally why I wanted to introduce the member's bill which is three days post-natal stay, because, you know, as a mum, whether it's the first time or the fifth time, actually, you want to have a couple of days where you're being looked after, your baby's looked after, and more than anything, you're confident to go home. But, you know, those first three years I had with my son were absolutely incredible. And I don't think that I'd have the relationship with him now if I hadn't. You know, he's 21; he's a big, strapping lad; he's gorgeous. If anyone had said to me 20 years ago that I would own goats, I would've laughed. I would have laughed hilariously at them, but, yeah. They're fantastic. I really enjoy them. This is the big boy; this is Ronnie. (SNAPS FINGERS) Come on! Do you want some? Come on. Good boy. Good boy. Hey? (LAUGHS) No! No. Just being greedy. Watch that cord. Watch that cord. He'll` (JOURNALIST YELPS) (LAUGHS) (LAUGHS) Trying to eat the cord! So, I think when I eventually retire, maybe I could have, like, a little petting zoo or something. (LAUGHS) I was Minister for Women, and there was a particular article written about, you know, whether I was a feminist or not. And it was really frustrating, because when I was asked the question, they sort of said to me, you know, 'Do you call yourself a feminist?' And I'm like, 'Well, no. I don't go round calling myself a feminist.' You know? I'm a mum. I'm an MP. But I don't` I don't use that label. I don't describe myself that way. And, um, and I thought that was a... quite an unfair way of portraying me. You know? And if I look back at the family I was raised in, at the example I set for my children, it's absolutely about equality, all the way. But actually, I expect it, you know? I expect it. I know you have to work for it, but actually, I expect it. And so that was probably one of my low points. And at the end of the day, you know, to try and kind of recover it was just like, 'Well, I'm gonna move on from there, and I'm just gonna demonstrate my beliefs by my actions. And really simple things, like getting the Future Directors Programme up and running, which gives, you know, young women the potential and the opportunity to have a go as a director, to be on a board without having a formal role, is a very, kind of, practical example of the sorts of things that make a difference. So I thought, 'Right, I'll make a move from there.' One of the challenges with a rural electorate is you can spend three or four hours a day driving, which, you know, can be pretty frustrating. Population is rapidly growing. So you'll only see a few, kind of, rural supply stores now. There's far more great, um` great cafes. Get a flat white, please. To have here? Take-away? Uh, have here. I'm a closet petrolhead. So, I used to have a rotary turbo RX7. Actually, I took a motor mechanics course when I was 19 or 20. My first car was a Daihatsu Charade 1.3. And, um, this mechanic completely treated me as if I was an idiot and totally ripped me off. And I swore no one would ever do that to me again, so I enrolled in a night course and did a motor mechanics course, basic motor mechanics. And so, next time, I went back to that mechanic, and he attempted to talk to me like I was stupid. He then realised I had a bit more than he expected. (LAUGHS) Wow, so did you walk out of there quite...? (LAUGHS) It was great. It was great. I didn't take my car there. I just wanted to tell him what for. One of the things I love about my job is I bring myself to work every day, warts and all. And I think that's what hopefully makes me a good MP, is that I listen to people, I understand what their challenges are, and I work incredibly hard to do what I can to make their life better. That's petrolhead Louise Upston there. Stay with us. We're back after the break. Welcome back, and we are back with our panel ` Peter Dunne, Russell Brown and Lance Norman. So, the government announced its electric vehicle policy this week with some feebates. Peter, do you think this is going to be effective? In the long term, it might be. I think their heart's in the right place. I just don't think that the detail's quite going to achieve it. You've got 0.3% of the market electric vehicles at the moment. You don't have a massive infrastructure in terms of charging facilities ` that's improving ` and price is still the big one. So does it need to be bolder? Does it need to be bolder, this policy, do you think, Russell? Well, I think it's something that people can understand. I know the economists say, you know, the pure way to do this would be to let the ETS have its way, and I'm not even quite sure how that works. But I must say, as someone who rides a bike in Auckland, if it means fewer giant utility vehicles that I have to share intersections with, I am all for it. Those things are becoming a hazard. OK. Well, speaking of that, Lance, you drive something that's a gas-guzzler, isn't it? Yeah, I've got a big gas-guzzler. So how do you feel about this policy? I think it's a step in the right direction. We definitely need to show some leadership in the country. I like models where you have rebates or discounts to encourage people. I don't necessarily like where you tax people who are currently in that system, because it becomes a burden to some parts of the community, but it's a good step in the right direction. Peter, is there a chance that this is actually going to affect the poorer parts of the community? Well, I think that's the question. You know, is this actually going to mean that people in poorer parts of New Zealand are able to access electric vehicles? I'm not sure that's the case immediately. It may lead to it over time as you start to get a sort of interchange of second-hand electric vehicles coming on to the market, but I think it's too soon to say that this is the panacea. OK. Let's talk about the new Human Rights Commissioner, Meng Foon. So, do you think, Lance, that he is the right man for the job? Well, I think he's` Sorry, I said` Race Relations Commissioner. Yeah, he's a good` I think` In the Maori world, I think everyone wants a Maori leader. We want a Maori prime minister. We want a Maori mayor. We want a Maori race relations person. So is this a missed opportunity, then? I think it's a bit of a missed opportunity, but he's also a great person. So, I've personally sat next to him at Orakei Marae. He's done a full mihi whaikorero back to the kaumatua there. He's fluent in Te Reo Maori. He understands tikanga Maori principles. He is of Asian descent also, so it's race relationships ` it's not Maori relationships. We should be mindful of that. So, he is a very good appointment. So, on the balance,... On the balance. ...you are happy? I'm happy, yeah. Would you agree with that, Russell? Yeah, I do, although there is some suggestion that perhaps he's at times afraid to frighten the horses. Oh, OK. I know that Amnesty talked to him about their refugee outreach programme in there, and he really wasn't interested. He was one of the few mayors not interested. But I think, yeah, overall, for the same reasons Lance said, I think he's a great choice. So, Peter, is he gonna have a big job? Because we haven't had an appointment in that position for a year. Yes, I think he does have a big job ` big shoes to fill in terms of all his predecessors, and the gap, I guess, does heighten some of the tensions. The thing I like about Meng Foon, though, is he's got a foot in just about every camp of New Zealand. He's got the` obviously the fluency in Te Reo, which is fantastic. He's got the Asian New Zealand dimension. He's provincial New Zealand. He's been around the traps for a long time. I think he's got a whole lot of skills, but he's gotta use those almost from day one to recreate the role. This is a hard job, though, isn't it? It is, and it's a necessary job, but it's the sort of job that you've got to work at and you've got to put your stamp on, and he's gotta do that from as soon as he can. OK, and we've got time for just one more quick question on Winston Peters. Now, he had a meeting with his Australian counterpart and did not raise the issue of deportation of Kiwis from Australia. Russell, should he? Of course he should have. I mean, you sort of wonder when it is going to be confronted. No, that's disappointing, although not surprising, because it keeps not being raised. What do you think, Peter? Well, it's just like he didn't raise the issue in Turkey of the video with President Erdogan about the Christchurch attacks. He's got a tendency to be nice and friendly to people he meets overseas but not actually raise the tough issues. Would you prefer to see him raising those issues up front? Most definitely. I mean, that's his role as Minister for International Affairs. But also having Australia so close as a counterpart on everything we do, we can't avoid these conversations. Is it that fear of upsetting the big brother, perhaps? It might be, but that's what we do. That's why you're appointed. CHUCKLES: Is that what we do, Russell? I think the other thing is that any invitations to get involved with anything to do with Iran ` that invitation should be left unopened on the mantelpiece. LAUGHS: OK. So you don't want us to be part of a coalition` a naval coalition over there? No way. No, look, we've over the years established an independent foreign policy. I think we stick out of other people's business where we're not directly affected. All right. Thank you very much to the panel this morning ` Russell, Peter and Lance. Cheers. OK. New Zealand farms are facing many challenges, but some are meeting them head-on. Palliser Ridge is one of those, taking out the 2019 Ballance Farm Environment Award for the Greater Wellington region. John-Michael Swannix went to find out what they've been up to. JOHN-MICHAEL SWANNIX: It's the first Sunday of the month at Palliser Ridge, and Marilyn Law and Lisa Portas are hosting their monthly knitting event in the woolshed. Basically, it came from Lisa, because we're not on the beaten track and you've got to come here. But once it started, I mean, you can see people, they just like it. It was actually Rosemary, that lady there, she was the very first one to buy a cone of wool when we first set them up. Suddenly, got all these cones of wool ` what are we gonna do? I was actually selling wool out of the back of my car. (LAUGHS) When I was playing tennis, and the ladies, those that are knitters want it. And it's lovely wool, and they know where it comes from. So, we've had a good name from the start. All of the scouring and all of the spinning of the yarn happens in New Zealand. And then, now that we've moved on to some home furnishings and things, that's happening in New Zealand. And I guess we just have that belief that if we keep doing production here, then these guys will all get so busy that maybe, you know, there'll be another factory open up, and just, all of that stuff will come back. Is this what you hoped for when you bought Palliser Ridge? Well... Could you have imagined this? I could never have imagined it, probably, no. So we feel so happy. Yeah. After an enjoyable afternoon, I'm back the next morning to get out on the farm. There's 8000 sheep and 1600 cattle to look after on the 1300ha in South Wairarapa. But first, farm manager Kurt and farm owner Jim, along with the rest of their team, have a wetland to plant. Previous farmers here had tried to use this as farming land. But it was really unproductive. It was too wet and also dangerous for stock. We lost cattle beast in here. So a simple solution was fence it off and plant it out. We've put 9000 trees in just this one wetland. We roughly put in one wetland a year, 20-odd years, so probably 20 different wetlands. So we might do three shoulder belts, so that's for the stock, with shade and shelter. Especially in the southerly, they've got something to hide behind. And also for the bees and the birds. When it comes to things like climate change, what are some of the things that you think about, or how you go about, you know, reducing your carbon footprint? Yeah, so, if you've got a deeper soil, then you're gonna be able to capture more carbon in that soil, and you can do that through rotational grazing, so animals are crucial. So that's the first thing. The second thing is, you know, all this native tree planting that we do, and the poplar pole planting. You know, 500 trees a year and 4000 natives ` that's a lot of carbon getting absorbed. Much assistance from the, you know, the government or local council? Yeah, well, pretty much, we get either a 50% subsidy to plant these native trees. Yeah, I think most councils now are assisting with this kind of work. But a lot of farmers are doing this, you know. What we're doing, there are thousands of farmers in New Zealand doing exactly the same thing. Kurt was just 23 when he was made farm manager at Palliser Ridge, and five years ago, he and Lisa were offered equity in the farm by Jim and Marilyn. What kind of keeps you coming back? Like, what gets you up in the morning? Oh, I think it's just so diverse. You need to be a scientist. You need to be your own accountant. You need to be a mechanic. Yeah, you know, you need to look after animals as well. So, you know, it's just... Everything's different. Every day is different. I've held up Kurt for long enough, and it's time the sheep are moved over the hill. Handily, that's also where the farm's getaway retreat is located. Before we started doing any tourism, this was, like... we would come up here with the kids for fish and chips. Cool. So, this is our Kaikoura lookout. One of the reasons we decided to build here was what you can see on a really good day is the Kaikoura Ranges. Bit of a lesson in, you know, hosting people and having them here. But we have tried to set it up in a way that means that people wanna come and have some time out and switch off ` is kinda how we describe it. And so one of the great things about the lookout is that it's all solar-powered. What's been the benefits of diversifying? I guess there's an element of having some risks spread. You know, we've got the core business, which is really great. But, you know, we live in such a changing world, you know? Who knows? Kurt and I are a bit competitive, so maybe the diversification might give him a bit of a run for his money one day. But the idea is that these two will just really, collaboratively sit next to each other. It's not just the tourism side of the business that Lisa is in charge of, but the honey side too. When we started looking at the diversification and things like that, it was really important to find the people who could sit alongside us, and we were just super lucky to have Sam and his family who live locally and look after hives, and we knew them already from playing rugby together. And where they pottle up the honey is only 20 minutes from where the hives are. So it's pretty cool. Palliser Ridge has also partnered with the local Greytown Butchery to process some of their meats, which are then supplied to local restaurants like The Offering. The Offering is all about what the region offers, and so when we sort of bought it ` obviously, we had Gav next door, who I've known for a long time ` we wanted to get some partnership. So, everything we try to do, we try to source locally. So it made sense when we did lamb. We went to Gav, and he said, 'I know the perfect people.' And so that's where it started to build from. And these guys can say, 'Hey, I've been to the farm,' or 'I know Kurt and Lisa,' and that's cool, you know? It gives people that closeness to what they're eating, which I think is important. It's now early afternoon at Palliser Ridge, and the whole team is back in the shearing shed for a quick smoko. I think it's worked. The vision we had, to have a great farm, or certainly a good farm, has worked. We get great satisfaction from walking around the farm and seeing good pastures, protected native bush areas, wetlands, and of course, very good stock, and then a good team. And I think the team feels valued, because we value them. Everybody's important, really, and that's quite critical, I think, isn't it? The whole team. But I think the other thing is that everybody has signed into the vision we have to restore the property to being a first-class farm, with good production and a very good environment. You know, it adds to the pride. It helps sell our products ` particularly on the wool side ` to kind of get the message out. The knitting group ` they're demonstrating what has been done with wool. It's not a one-size-fits-all in this industry. Everyone kind of has a different path or a different story or different resources. Yeah, every farmer's trying to make their farm better than what it was yesterday, and that's what sort of drives us. And that's all from us for now. Thank you very much for watching, and we will see you again next weekend. Captions by Alex Walker, Catherine de Chalain and John Gibbs. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2019 This programme was made with the assistance of the NZ On Air Platinum Fund.