Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I commend Deputy Gino Kenny on his fantastic work on this Bill. I would also like to mention the members of his back-office team who have put a great deal of work into it. I am very proud of the Deputy and of the fact that we are here to do something that will benefit many people and alleviate the suffering they are going through. I thank the other political parties that have facilitated the taking of this Bill and the Deputies who have indicated either that they are willing to support the Bill or that they will not oppose it so that it moves on to Committee Stage. I acknowledge that the Minister and his officials have engaged with Deputy Kenny, and more recently with me, in a genuine way to discuss this Bill with a view to trying to get agreement across the House on how we can make progress with it. Regardless of how sceptical I might be at times about the so-called new politics, I think this is an example of how new politics can function in a progressive way. The biggest thanks have to go to the people in the Gallery, particularly people like Vera Twomey who have fought this case on behalf of others who are enduring suffering. Vera has been determined to get medicine to alleviate the suffering of her daughter, Ava. When this Bill is eventually passed, with whatever changes are necessary to get it through, I think we should call it Ava's Bill as a tribute to the love of a mother for her daughter. That is what this is about.

I take seriously the concerns of people like Deputy Harty regarding this Bill. I respect our differences of opinion in this regard. It seems to me that if we can do something to help the tens of thousands of people like Ava who are ill and whose suffering can be alleviated by medicinal cannabis, that must be our priority and it must override absolutely everything else. I assure Deputy Harty that it is not the intention of this Bill to do something by the back door. We have differing views on the wider question of the decriminalisation and recreational use of marijuana. We make no bones about saying we want to have a debate on that question on another day. We had it before when a Bill was introduced by Luke 'Ming' Flanagan. I was on his side on that occasion. I commend him on all the work he has done. However, the intention of Luke 'Ming' Flanagan's Bill is not the intention of this Bill.

We have indicated clearly that we are willing to work with the Government and the other parties to amend the Bill before the House. This is why the Government has agreed to let it go to Committee Stage. There may be debates and disputes about how best to proceed on Committee Stage. I will move on to some of the issues that have been raised. We do not fully agree with some of the Government's concerns and some of the other concerns that have been raised. If there is agreement that at the end of this process, medicinal cannabis should be made available to anybody whose suffering and illness could be alleviated by it, we have a duty and an obligation to ensure that is what happens. That is what is driving us. We are inspired by Vera Twomey and others. We are determined to have the legislative clock ticking so that this has to happen. That is not to say that there is not a great deal of work yet to be done. Deputy Gino Kenny and our Anti-Austerity Alliance–People Before Profit colleagues would be the first to admit that we are not perfect legislators. There are issues with this Bill that have to be dealt with, but we want it to happen for the sake of the people who will benefit from it. I join Deputy Jonathan O'Brien in appealing to Deputy Harty not to cause a division on this Bill. We need to work on it and make it the best legislation it can be. It seems that despite Deputy Harty's difficulties with the Bill as it stands, he shares the objective of ensuring medicinal cannabis is available to those who desperately need it. That seems to be a shared objective of all Members of the House.

Others have made the point that there is substantial evidence that cannabis-based products can be of assistance across a range of suffering and illness. I do not doubt that this significant evidence needs to be researched more. It seems to me that we should not be in any way conservative about trying to explore the considerable experiential and anecdotal evidence that the suffering and pain associated with a wide range of illnesses can be alleviated by medicinal cannabis products. I know the Minister has expressed concerns about the proposed research institute. If that is an obstacle to making progress with this legislation, we are quite willing to take it out. I suggest the idea of further research in this area is something we should all be in favour of, even if it is not part of this Bill. While there is significant evidence that cannabis could make a difference to those with Parkinson's disease, psychoneurological disorders and so on, we do not have all the evidence in respect of those conditions. It seems to me that if there is even the slightest chance that these products could be beneficial, we have an obligation to research that stuff. If all that can be rolled into the Health Products Regulatory Authority, we are absolutely open to that. The main thing is to get it through. We can work out our differences of opinion on Committee Stage.

I believe the stigma that has been attached to cannabis has prevented us from exploring some of its benefits. That should not be the case. There are concerns about the possible adverse effects of cannabis, but the truth is that there are multiple concerns about all sorts of other drugs that are already legally available. As Deputy Gino Kenny said, there is no known instance of a fatal overdose from the use of cannabis or cannabis-based products. That cannot be said about almost any other drug. One could quite easily overdose on a range of other drugs that are legally available. The evidence suggests that the possibility of addiction arising from the use of other drugs is far greater than the possibility of addiction to cannabis-based products. I am not saying that there cannot be side-effects, or that there are no side-effects. We need to look at and be concerned about some of those anxieties.

However, there is no evidence whatsoever that anything we might say about cannabis in that regard would lead one to say there is a range of other drugs that should not be available that are available and whose regulated provision is accommodated already. We need to get rid of the stigma because the prize of alleviating a wide range of illnesses and suffering is such a big one that we have to go to the nth degree to do that. There is considerable evidence that it would replace drugs already being dispensed by the health system which are more damaging and dangerous.

People should read a very good article in The Irish Timestoday about a Canadian study that has shown that almost 500 medicinal marijuana patient surveys reported that 80% of those surveyed successfully substituted cannabis for prescription drugs in the treatment of pain related conditions. In other words, cannabis has become a more beneficial, less dangerous replacement for drugs that have worse side effects. For that reason, we should progress this Bill as quickly as possible and not be frightened of doing so.

See this speech in context