The major parties have moved to block a proposal to introduce medical marijuana in the ACT.

The draft legislation would have permitted sufferers of terminal and serious chronic conditions be allowed to grow marijuana and use the drug to alleviate pain and symptoms.

The major political parties are demanding that there be a national approach agreed to by all States and Territories and that it be closely controlled by doctors. The major offending element of the draft proposal (for Medical marijuana) is that the patient might have more control over his/her health treatment and outside of the 'system'.

Even if it was possible to get national agreement (fat chance!), patients - most already stretched and highly vulnerable where their finances are concerned - will be the political footballs for a long political tussle over the costs to the health system of operating the proposed doctor controlled gate and entrepreneurial suppliers who must make a profit in what would be a highly regulated system.

Is this another instance where control should focus on the person and not on the inanimate object? Just publish the conditions/circumstances that entitle the sufferer to self-treat and grown his/her own pot plants? The 'Nanny State' should step back?

And while our morally corrupt (greedy) politicians argue and pontificate on matters they have no knowledge, those with chronic pain continue to suffer ! Perhaps if in some measure, they tie their pain and suffering to some form of 'travel entitlement' for our political representatives, that may well expedite matters ?

From what I've heard all the relevant scientific testing has apparently been undertaken in the United States, and medical trials prove beyond doubt, the analgesic properties contained in cannabis to be both profound and highly effective. The NSW Premier is in favour of trialling the drug, so please Mr Premier start 'trialling' if you will !

o sung wu,

I lend a hand to someone with rheumatoid arthritis and gout. Nasty conditions. RA affects around 400,000 Australians I believe. It can lead to other complications.

Both are known to be helped by cannabis. Apparently cannabis has been used for 5,000 years for conditions like that without a single recorded death.

However gay marriage is the preoccupation of activists, the ABC (must have put hundreds of hours into it) and the Parliament, notwithstanding the fact that homosexuals already have full rights and any proposal for a civil ceremony without changing the Marriage Act would be ushered in almost immediately.

How much are we paying those politicians again? What about those self-important knobs at the ABC?

Hi there ONTHEBEACH...

Somehow I don't believe whether Gays obtain their marriage rights, will necessarily alter the world ? However a politician who was acknowledged as being responsible for providing the necessary legal instrumentation, that will ultimately provide full access to medically refined cannabis. Their only motive being, to help relieve the awful mind numbing pain of those poor souls who suffer from diseases like Rheumatoid Arthritis. Even if that relief is just for a single day, would be an absolute God-send, I would imagine ?

Anyway isn't that the primary function of our politicians surely, to be of service to the entire community in which they all swear to assist and contribute ?

I'm sure the general population wouldn't mind a bit, if that particular politician, took an occasional helicopter ride, every so often - we'd all agree he/she had definitely earned it !

David Pennington gives us quite a few things to consider
regarding this issue. It's worth a read:

http://www.mja.com.au/journal/2015/202/2/medical-cannabis-time-clear-thinking

I am strongly against the recreational use of marijuana by the young, where there is enough evidence of harm effect to advise against it.

Many of the reports of harm associated with the drug concern recreational use by young people.

There are always concerns that it is not easily shoehorned into the medical/pharma/guvvy control (and profit) matrix. Worse as far as entrepreneurs are concerned, the plant is easily grown, easily prepared for use and there are no risks of dangerous overdose as apply to paracetamol for example, which is sold in supermarkets.

With respect, doctors are also one of the best examples of private entrepreneur, and medical clinics represent big profit centres for some.

My concern is to allow it to be made available to the elderly who are suffering from the chronic usually old-age conditions that reportedly 5,000 years of non-fatal use recommend it for.

High profit alternative medicine and 'health' foods, vitamins and suchlike have been growth industries for years, but there is far less evidence to support their use than medical marijuana and there may be serious risks.

Frankly, having survived past retirement age (say 60) is enough evidence and recommendation that a person is an adult and ought be released from the heavy hand of Nanny State and her public bureaucrats.

I would like the members of the federal parliament to visit the elderly in their homes to inform sufferers why they shouldn't be saving the public purse millions a year (and saving themselves money for some protein) while taking an effective, cheap drug that has none of the serious risks of expensive pharmaceuticals.

If they smoke the dried weed in reasonable privacy, so what? How many others would be consuming alcohol? Not criticising anyone who enjoys a drink and does it responsibly. The elderly can handle their medical marijuana responsibly too.