Industrial Hemp Bill 2016

Wednesday 29 March, 2017


Second Reading  Adjourned debate on second reading.

  (Continued from 30 November 2016.)

 The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Employment, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (16:51):  I rise today to confirm the government's support for the Hon. Tammy Franks' Industrial Hemp Bill 2016, introduced to the Legislative Council in December last year.

 The government is proposing a number of amendments to this bill. I had intended to go through those 20 amendments and what they do and why they are being introduced, but I do not think I will do that. If anybody has questions during the committee stage, which we will get to, I am happy to talk to those. In summary, the amendments create the regulatory and licensing framework that are, in part, borrowed from the work done by the Hon. David Ridgway in his bill to allow the growing of poppies in South Australia and what was inserted into the Controlled Substances Act in relation to that.

 A number of the government amendments reflect some of that licensing regime that the Hon. David Ridgway put forward. There are a couple of amendments that are drafting amendments, on the suggestion of parliamentary counsel—things as simple as amending the title to be a 2017 bill, not a 2016 bill. Those are drafting matters. Rather than read out all 20 of the amendments and what they do, I might answer any questions if anybody has questions. I know the amendments have been circulated, and I have had a couple of discussions with people about the amendments already.

 I thank the Hon. Tammy Franks for bringing this to the council and for putting this bill up. We support the possibility of this industry in South Australia. We do not know for sure how successful it might be, but this framework provides the opportunity for people involved in primary production to become involved in the hemp sector and to further develop industries through cultivation, processing and manufacturing in a wide range of areas from goods in manufacturing and materials through to areas in cosmetics and a whole range of areas around the world where industrial hemp has been used for that value-adding process. So, I thank the Hon. Tammy Franks and look forward to the speedy committee stage of this bill this afternoon.

 The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (16:53):  I indicate on behalf of the opposition that we will also be supporting the bill and the government's amendments. It is pleasing to see that the amendments have been taken from the work that we did here.

  An honourable member:  Some of them.

 The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:  He says, 'Some of them.' It is nice to know that some of the work I do here is respected and taken on board by the government. This bill seeks to amend the Controlled Substances Act 1984 to authorise and regulate the cultivation of industrial hemp. Currently, South Australia is the only state in which it is illegal to cultivate industrial hemp. Legalising the cultivation of hemp will enable South Australian farmers to access another crop which is currently being farmed in other parts of the country. The state Liberals will always support initiatives that benefit our regions and primary producers, and if farmers decide that it is commercially viable to farm a particular crop, then cultivating industrial hemp could represent a great opportunity for some of the primary producers to do so.

 I note the legislative framework in this bill is quite similar to the opium poppy legislation we introduced back in 2015, which passed parliament last year. It took nearly 12 months. Of course, I am not sure what consultation the Hon. Tammy Franks has had with this bill, but we had the police involved, and a whole range of government agencies, to come up with the right regulatory framework. So, it is very good that we know that we have actually got that right and now it has been borrowed here, in part, for this bill.

 There are trials for poppy growing and I think we will see them in the ground this year, which is great to see. I think TPI has issued a number of licences in the South-East, so I am really looking forward to watching that industry evolve over the next few years, because it is a well-established and quite large industry in Tasmania and, to a lesser degree, in Victoria. I would hope that there can be some significant economic benefits for South Australia with poppies in the South-East.

 It is my understanding that in Victoria and Western Australia the THC maximum limit for industrial hemp is 0.35 per cent in the leaves and the flowering heads of a hemp plant. In the ACT, New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania, there are two THC limits. The leaves and flowering heads of a hemp plant must have less than 1 per cent, while hemp seed may only be used if supplied on the basis that it will not produce hemp plants with THC in its leaves and flowering heads of more than 0.5 per cent.

              The bill before the chamber adopts the latter of the limits prescribed in the respective ACT,

New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmanian legislative frameworks and is based upon the Tasmanian model. As mentioned, it is my understanding that the legislative framework in the bill is similar to our opium poppy legislation passed last year. In order to cultivate hemp, a farmer must obtain a licence and approval from the chief executive of PIRSA.

 There are a whole range of things with poppies, around being a fit and proper person and having the right security and fences and signage. Of course, industrial hemp is not at the same level of hazardousness or concern as poppies, so I expect we will not see that. There are still a number of checks and balances in place to screen the potential applicants, including powers for the chief executive to require documentation so a report can be produced and provided to the Commissioner of Police for review.

 Licences are limited to a maximum five-year period and may be suspended or cancelled by the chief executive if a farmer breaches these conditions. The chief executive also has powers which mirror those in the opium poppy legislation to order inspections in which the inspector may seize material and take samples. I assume that is so the THC levels in the industrial hemp can be monitored and are not greater than what the legislation allows.

 The state government has and will be moving a number of amendments which aim to ensure there are appropriate regulatory and security requirements. Some of these amendments bring the legislative framework in line with the existing opium poppy legislative framework. Albeit, the THC levels in hemp are well below those in marijuana, a strict regulatory framework must be in place and we believe the bill before the parliament has adequate safeguards to regulate and prevent possible improper use of industrial hemp.

 I see in the gallery some of the supporters of the industry and I put on the record that I was given a little tub of special hemp oil ointment by Theresa.

            The Hon. K.J. Maher:  It will make your hair grow.

 The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:  It has not made my hair grow but I do use it occasionally when I want to protect the skin on my head. So, thank you very much for that little gift. I have declared it and put on the public record that I have received a little pot of hemp oil ointment. With those few words, we support the bill and its passage through the rest of its stages.

 The Hon. M.C. PARNELL (16:58):  I rise to congratulate my colleague, the Hon. Tammy Franks, for putting this on the parliamentary agenda. Also, to thank the representatives of the Liberal Party and the Labor Party for their support. This is a sensible measure. I agree with the comments that have been made that, whilst we do not know exactly where this industry might go, it does have great potential. We did see some of the products, that supporters of industrial hemp brought into parliament, on display in the Muriel Matters Room in the library. It was very informative and people could see the range of products that, potentially, could be produced in South Australia.

 The point I want to make is that, with climate change, we know that our primary producers are going to need more options to diversify and not less. We heard some time ago from the CSIRO and the Goyder Institute that, with climate change, Goyder's line of reliable rainfall could in fact move up to 100 kilometres further south, so the more crops that our farmers are able to take advantage of the more resilient they will be in an age of climate change.

 I think it is important that this parliament has taken a sensible approach to this bill. Rather than taking a kneejerk reaction because of some supposed association with drugs, I think the parliament is going to recognise that this is an agricultural crop that has great potential. When we are deciding in parliament about the things to allow and disallow, we need to have very good reasons to disallow the growing of certain crops, and there is no good reason to disallow industrial hemp. I thank my colleague for putting this on the agenda and I am delighted that a Greens' private member's bill looks as if it is going to pass this parliament.

 The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:01):  I would like to thank those members who have made a contribution, in particular the Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Kyam Maher, and the Hon. David Ridgway, for their supportive words. I would expect no less of my colleague the Hon. Mark Parnell. Indeed, it is exciting to see a Greens' bill pass through this place. I do understand that the Hon. Kelly Vincent wishes to indicate support and certainly at clause 1 I am sure we may be open to that.

 To address some of the points raised by the Hon. David Ridgway, he is quite right when he observes that this bill is modelled on the Tasmanian and New South Wales regulation in terms of the percentage for both plant and seed. Indeed, those pieces of legislation are more modern than the WA legislation. That is why, when consulting with the industry, we looked to New South Wales and Tasmania, which have taken the lead on this, as the guide. We also did not want to see South Australian farmers put at any disadvantage at all compared to their colleagues across our borders, because South Australian farmers have already, for a long time, been at a disadvantage when it comes to industrial hemp.

 This piece of legislation, as state legislation, will see South Australia as the very last state to legalise industrial hemp since prohibition. Of course, the Northern Territory stands with us at this stage in terms of being on the wrong side of history and, indeed, on the wrong side of the future. Industrial hemp, of course, before prohibition has a long history as a crop, but we have lost the corporate memory required and we are going to be playing catch up with the other states.

 So I commend the government and I commend the opposition for their support tonight, but note that if we were to start behind the eight ball by going with the least advanced version of legislation that we have on industrial hemp, that of WA, we would be further disadvantaging our farmers and our potential industry here. That is why the New South Wales and Tasmanian models have been adopted.

 The Hon. David Ridgway is also quite right when he observes the regulatory frameworks applied here, and I think they are the rightful role of the government. I welcome those amendments that the government will put up tonight. I imagine that they are very similar to those of the poppy legislation. The reason that they would be is, in fact, they are the requirements under the United Nations single convention, so any state or territory legislating in this way would have to have similar regulatory frameworks.

 I note the use of the term 'marijuana'. That is not at all what we are discussing in this bill; it is industrial hemp. Indeed, if you were to attempt to smoke it, you may get a headache but you would not have any other effect. What you may get, I hope, is an alternative crop for South Australian farmers. Indeed, for the manufacturers working in this industry, the wonderful people of the Industrial Hemp Association, you also get the ability for it to be not just produced and promoted as South Australian but South Australian grown as a clean, green crop.

 I would like to thank some people in the gallery tonight who have been part of the push for industrial hemp to be legalised in South Australia, particularly, as I have mentioned, those from the Industrial Hemp Association of South Australia. Teresa McDowell is not only the president of the Industrial Hemp Association of South Australia but also the founder of Hemp Hemp Hooray, the producer of that product that the Hon. David Ridgway may be applying to his scone. I hope it is designed for such use. I am not sure that it will regrow any hair, but it may indeed provide great benefits for one's skin. I certainly have a lot of Hemp Hemp Hooray products at home. I have moisturising cream and other products, as is well established by other outlets such as the Body Shop. They are top quality products, particularly for skincare, but, as we know, there are so many other uses.

 I would also like to thank Graeme Parsons, the treasurer of the Industrial Hemp Association and Ruth Trigg, the secretary of the Industrial Hemp Association. I also want to thank both Di Mieglich and Matthew Roland of the Cannabis Council of South Australia. Di Mieglich would be very well known to many of the members who have shown an interest in this issue for her stalwart efforts in promoting these law reforms that we will hopefully pass tonight.

 I also want to mention Ben Fitzsimons, the founder of the Australian Cannabis Corporation, who has given his strong support and is here in the chamber, and indeed local entrepreneurs and business people such as Chris Martin from Style Kinection. He is also a member of the Industrial Hemp Association, but you would have seen his wares at the display in December that many members attended.

 Indeed, many members attended the showcase that was held in the library on the day I introduced this bill late last year, such as the member for Fisher, Nat Cook; the member for Chaffey, Tim Whetstone; the member for Colton, Paul Caica; the member for Davenport, Sam Duluk; the member for Giles, Eddie Hughes; the member for Ashford, Steph Key; the Hon. Steven Marshall, the Leader of the Opposition and also the member for Dunstan; the member for Morphett, Dr Duncan McFetridge; the member for Stuart, Dan van Holst Pellekaan; as well as my colleague, Mark Parnell; the Hon. John Darley; and the Hon. Kyam Maher.

 I think that showcase proves to members of this place, and members of the public should they see it, the scope and potential of this industry. South Australia should not be turning up its nose at this opportunity: it should be embracing it. Since announcing my bill, I have been contacted by farmers from the Riverland, who are excited to see the potential here, and by people who produce machinery, who would potentially be game changers in harvesting these crops. It is a clean, green environmental crop, but it is also a no-brainer when you have an industry here that wants to not just manufacture these products but indeed source them locally. With those words, I commend the bill.

            Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

            In committee.

            Clause 1.

 The Hon. K.L. VINCENT:  I just want to briefly but strongly put on the record Dignity Party's support for the Hon. Ms Franks' bill to allow South Australia to develop an industrial hemp industry in the state. This has been introduced as an act to authorise and regulate the cultivation of industrial hemp and make a related amendment to the Controlled Substances Act 1984.

 As has already been explained by the Hon. Ms Franks and other speakers on this bill, it deals with industrial hemp. Industrial hemp has no effect as a drug. One cannot get stoned by using industrial hemp, and the matter of medicinal cannabis and the ineffectiveness of the state Labor government to work through this issue thus far will be a matter for another day, but I can say for now that it continues to frustrate me and my constituents, to say the least (and frustrate is a very, very light word for these circumstances), that every day legal and safe access to cannabis for medicinal purposes is still not easily and simply provided in this state, particularly for children with lifethreatening, uncontrolled epilepsy who continue to have multiple seizures, and people in chronic debilitating pain.

 Industrial hemp, returning to the matter at hand, is an alternative crop for South Australian farmers, which could see us producing food, fibre, fuel and components. It would also offer opportunities, it would offer jobs, it would exemplify innovation. I think we are all acutely aware that we need industries that can offer job opportunities, particularly for young Australians at this point in time in this state.

 It can get no cleaner and greener than industrial hemp. It is a hardly crop and resists pests and disease as well, limiting the need for pesticides and other agricultural interventions, yet we have not pursued an industrial hemp cultivation program before in this state, and that is because it is currently illegal in South Australia to grow industrial hemp, despite the fact that, as I have said, it has no properties as a drug. South Australia is the only state, I understand, where this is still the situation.

 Industrial hemp, of course, has a long history. It goes back to some of the earliest times, where members would be aware of its production in things such as paper and rope in ancient times. Industrial hemp can be used for many things. However, it is quite extraordinary to think that it can be used for biofuels, printing, newsprint, cardboard, biochemicals, moulding, carpets, towels, blankets, curtains, apparel, bags, shoes, socks, insulation, animal bedding, mulch, breads, granola, milk, cereals, protein powders, soaps, shampoos, hand creams—I have a few of those in my cupboard, thanks to Hemp Hemp Hooray (I am a recent convert to Hemp Hemp Hooray, and I don't think I'll be going back)—lip balms, oils, paints, solvents, varnishes, lubricants and inks.

 Of course, this would appear to be a long list that I have just read out, but actually it is a small section of the products that could be produced using industrial hemp in South Australia, and which could be grown right now in terms of the raw products for manufacturing in South Australia.

 As the Hon. Ms Franks has already done in this place, I would like to thank many people who continue to lobby on this issue of industrial hemp, including Dianah Mieglich—and I have had the privilege of trying some of her hemp seed cupcakes in this place before and look forward to being able to do so legally in the future—Teresa McDowell, Ruth Trigg and others who were part of the exhibition held in this place in the Muriel Matters Room in this building when this bill was introduced on 30 November last year.

 Of course, appreciation must also go to those who have a great level of involvement in bringing to the forefront their knowledge and the information and education around the push for industrial hemp. Industrial hemp products are being made and sold in this state already, but we are forcing local industry to source their raw materials from interstate or overseas. We could be growing industrial hemp in South Australia already, and we should be. After this bill passes we will be doing this. We are already growing it, it is already benefiting this state, but I look forward to having a simplified and clarified legal pathway for this important industry to continue. With those few words, on behalf of the Dignity Party I commend this bill to the chamber and indicate that we will also support the government's amendment to the bill.

 The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:  I would like to ask a couple of questions of the mover of the bill. Members will recall that the reason I moved for opium poppies is that we had farmers on the South Australian side of the border whose mates, their friends, just across the other side of the little fence called the border were growing opium poppies. Like all of us, many people come to visit me and say, 'I want to grow something. I'd like to have a new industry.'

 My questions are: where else is it grown in Australia—not in Victoria because Victoria goes from desert in the sunset country to alpine, but other areas. Where would you expect it is most likely to grow in South Australia? Does it require any irrigation? What is the sort of season? Opium poppies grow a bit like canola. You plant it in May and it is best if you have irrigation. That is why the SouthEast or the Limestone Coast is the area that I think will see them grown the most. I am interested in knowing what the Hon. Ms Franks sees as the likely areas where this will grow and the type of conditions that it will grow in as well.

 The Hon. T.A. FRANKS:  I thank the honourable member for his question. I know that previously Di Mieglich has provided quite detailed information on request to members who had those sort of questions. This bill deals with growing industrial hemp in South Australia. It is currently able to be grown in every other state and the ACT.

 It will grow where farmers who are interested in growing it will grow it. There is a range of different species. There is a range of different conditions. It has a really short season as well, so it is quite different to poppies in the way that you have described. As I said, I have had expressions of interest particularly from the Riverland on this and so I should imagine that we will be seeing those Riverland farmers step up—not on industrial hemp. I also know of some farmers in the South-East who have been in contact with our previous president, Bob Sneath, are also interested in this sort of diversification.

 The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  Perhaps to assist the honourable member in his question, some of the things that have been expressed to the government have talked about it being, as you said, a crop in between other crops, with a starting date in June or July as a likely starting date for a very short period. I think it is the head of the Grain Growers Association of South Australia (I think a southern Mallee farmer) who has expressed interest in looking at it for that property. However, there are other similar crops that are successfully grown in parts of South Australia.

 The Limestone Coast is an area where many crops will grow without need for irrigation. I think the honourable member has asked questions about trials that have previously taken place in South Australia. I think I was going to bring back a reply in question time but if I may use this opportunity as I have a little bit of information about trials that have previously occurred in 1995 at Kybybolite in the South-East, Maitland on the Yorke Peninsula and Turretfield between the Barossa and Gawler.

 For various reasons they were not particularly successful. The reasons that were given to me were that the varieties that were grown were not, perhaps, the best suited for the areas they were being trialled in and that some areas tried dryland farming and others tried irrigation. However, it has been 22 years since those trials took place and there has been a lot of development in different strains for different purposes.

            Clause passed.

            Clause 2.

 The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I might move the amendments standing in my name without explanation and if people want an explanation for any particular amendment I might do it. Having said that, I move:

            Amendment No 1 [Employment–1]—

                Page 3, line 5—Delete '3 months after it is assented to by the Governor' and substitute:

                               on a day to be fixed by proclamation

 The Hon. T.A. FRANKS:  I rise to indicate that I support this amendment. Currently, as my bill stands, it provides that the act will come into operation three months after it is assented to by the Governor. The reason a private member's bill often has such a clause is because we do not trust the government to enact our legislation should it pass the parliament. In this case we are clearly in a different position, where the government has taken leadership and shown support, so I have every confidence that this will see this legislation enacted more quickly than mine would.

 The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:  I indicate that the opposition will be supporting this amendment and all of the subsequent amendments proposed by the government.

            Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

            Clause 3.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 2 [Employment–1]—

                Page 3, line 13 [clause 3, definition of Chief Executive]—Delete 'under the' and substitute 'under a' Amendment No 3 [Employment–1]—

  Page 3, after line 15—After the definition of Chief Executive insert:

  criminal intelligence means information relating to actual or suspected criminal activity (whether in this State or elsewhere) the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to prejudice criminal investigations, to enable the discovery of the existence or identity of a confidential source of information relevant to law enforcement or to endanger a person's life or physical safety;

Amendment No 4 [Employment–1]—

  Page 4, after line 4—After the definition of industrial hemp licence insert:

                                                                                industrial hemp register means the register established under section 20A;

Amendment No 5 [Employment–1]—

 Page 4, line 5 [clause 3, definition of inspector]—Delete 'a person appointed as an inspector under section 13' and substitute:


(a)           a person appointed as an inspector under section 13; or

(b)           a police officer;

Amendment No 6 [Employment–1]—

  Page 4, after line 6—After the definition of licence insert:

                                                 licence holder means—

(a)           the holder of an industrial hemp licence; or

(b)           the holder of a special licence;

 The Hon. T.A. FRANKS:  I rise to say that the Greens are supportive of the government amendments in their entirety.

  Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

  New clause 3A.

  The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 7 [Employment–1]—  Page 4, after line 26—Insert:

  3A—Meaning of associate

(1)           For the purposes of this Act, a person who is of or above the age of 18 years is an associate of an applicant for a licence or a licence holder if the person—

(a)           holds any relevant financial interest, or is entitled to exercise any relevant power

(whether in right of the person or on behalf of any other person) in the business of the applicant or the licence holder (being the business to which the application or licence relates), and by virtue of that interest or power, is able to exercise a significant influence over or with respect to the management or operation of the business; or

(b)           holds any relevant position (whether in right of the person or on behalf of any

other person) in the business of the applicant or the licence holder (being the business to which the application or licence relates).

(2)           In subsection (1)—

                                                                                relevant financial interest in relation to a business means—

(a)           any share in the capital of the business; or

(b)           any entitlement to receive any income derived from the business;

                                                                                                                relevant position, in relation to the business of an applicant or a licence holder, means—

(a)           the position of director, partner, trustee, manager, secretary or other executive position, however designated; and

(b)           any other position determined by the Chief Executive to be associated or

connected with the ownership, administration or management of the operations or business of the applicant;

   relevant power means any power, whether exercisable by voting or otherwise and whether exercisable alone or in association with others—

(a)           to participate in any directorial, managerial or executive decision; or

(b)           to elect or appoint any person to any relevant position.

            New clause inserted.

            Clauses 4 and 5 passed.

            New clause 5A.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 8 [Employment–1]—  Page 5, after line 20—Insert:

                5A—Interaction with Commonwealth law

(1)           A provision of this Act has no effect to the extent of any inconsistency with the

Commonwealth Act (and this Act is not to be taken to authorise the performance of a function or the exercise of a power under this Act that would result in operational inconsistency of this Act with the Commonwealth Act).

(2)           In this section—

                                               Commonwealth Act means the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 of the Commonwealth.


                                                                See section 7A of the Commonwealth Act in relation to its interaction with State

and Territory laws.

            New clause inserted.

            Clause 6.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 9 [Employment–1]—

                Page 5, line 24 [clause 6(1)]—After 'cultivate' insert ', process'

Amendment No 10 [Employment–1]—

                Page 5, line 32 [clause 6(2)]—After 'cultivate' insert ', process'

            Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

            Clause 7.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 11 [Employment–1]—

                Page 6, line 24 [clause 7(4)(c)]—Delete '28' and substitute '60'

            Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

            Clause 8.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 12 [Employment–1]—

                Page 6, line 33 to page 7, line 3—Delete the clause and substitute:

                8—Suitability of applicant—fit and proper person

(1)           The Chief Executive must not grant a licence to an applicant, or renew a licence on

application by a licence holder, unless the Chief Executive is satisfied that—

(a)           neither the applicant nor any associate of the applicant has been found guilty of a drug related offence; and

(b)           the applicant and each associate of the applicant are fit and proper persons to

be concerned in or associated with the cultivation of hemp or industrial hemp (as the case requires); and

(c)            the applicant meets the prescribed requirements (if any). 

(2)           For the purpose of determining whether an applicant or a licence holder is a fit and proper person under this Act, the Chief Executive may consider any of the following:

(a)           the character, honesty and integrity of—                                                             (i)             the applicant or licence holder; and

(ii)            the associates of the applicant or licence holder; and

(iii)           the relatives of the applicant or licence holder; and

(iv)           any person in a position to exercise control or significant influence over the conduct of the applicant or licence holder;

(b)           whether the applicant or licence holder or any associate or relative of the

applicant or licence holder has been found guilty by a court (whether in or outside South Australia) of any offence;

(c)            whether the applicant or licence holder or any associate of the applicant or

licence holder has a history of non-compliance with the Act;

(d)           in the case of an applicant or licence holder that is not a natural person—whether

the applicant or licence holder has a satisfactory ownership, trust or corporate structure;

(e)           the financial circumstances of the applicant or licence holder, including any matter that may significantly limit the applicant or licence holder's capacity to meet obligations in conducting activities under the licence in compliance with the terms and conditions applying to the licence.

(3)           In this section—

                                                                                                                 domestic partner means a person who is a domestic partner within the meaning of the

Family Relationships Act 1975, whether declared as such under that Act or not;

   relative means a person who is—    (a) a spouse or domestic partner; or

(b)           a parent; or

(c)            a step-parent; or

(d)           a sibling or step-sibling; or

(e)           a child, step-child or adopted child;

                                                                                                 spouse—a person is the spouse of another if they are legally married.

  Amendment carried; new clause inserted.

  Clause 9 passed.

  Clause 10.

  The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 13 [Employment–1]—

  Page 7, lines 14 to 31—Delete the clause and substitute:

  10—Terms and conditions of licence

(1)           A licence has effect for a period of 5 years from the day on which it is granted, or such shorter period as specified in the licence, unless it is sooner suspended or cancelled.

(2)           A licence is subject to the prescribed terms and conditions (if any).

(3)           The Chief Executive may, at any time by notice in writing to the holder of a licence—

(a)           impose a term or condition on a licence; and

(b)           vary, suspend or revoke a term or condition of a licence,

                                                and such a term, condition, variation, suspension or revocation takes effect when notice

is given to the holder of a licence or on such later date as specified in the notice.

(4)           The Chief Executive may exercise a power under subsection (3)—                                                 (a)           on the application of the holder of a licence; or

                                                (b)           in the Chief Executive's discretion.

(5)           An application by the holder of a licence under subsection (4)(a) must—

(a)           be in writing; and

(b)           be accompanied by the relevant prescribed fee (if any); and                                            (c)            be accompanied by any prescribed particulars.

(6)           Without limiting subsection (3), the conditions of a licence may require—

(a)           the keeping of records and other documents; and

(b)           the provision of information, records or other documents to the Chief Executive

relating to—

(i)             the activities carried out under the licence; or

(ii)            the source of seeds from which hemp or industrial hemp is cultivated; or

(iii)           a change in the position of director, trustee, partner, manager,

secretary or other executive position, however designated, or the structure of the business to which the licence relates; or

(iv)           any other matter that the Chief Executive reasonably requires in

relation to the licence or the licensed activity.

(7)           A licence is not transferrable.

                10A—Renewal of licence

(1)           The holder of a licence may apply to the Chief Executive for the renewal of the licence.

(2)           A renewal application must be made to the Chief Executive at least 3 months before the

licence is due to expire.

(3)           A renewal application must—

(a)           be in writing; and

(b)           be accompanied by any information relevant to whether or not the applicant and

each associate of the applicant is a fit and proper person; and

(c)            be accompanied by the relevant prescribed renewal fee (if any); and

(d)           be accompanied by any other information the Chief Executive reasonably

requires to assess the application; and

(e)           contain any prescribed particulars.

                10B—Chief Executive must investigate renewal application

(1)           On receipt of a renewal application under section 10A, the Chief Executive must carry out any investigation or inquiry necessary to determine the renewal application.

(2)           The Chief Executive must provide a copy of a renewal application made under section 10A and any accompanying documents to the Commissioner of Police.

(3)           The Commissioner of Police must—

(a)           inquire into and report to the Chief Executive on any matters concerning the application that the Commissioner of Police believes are appropriate or reasonably necessary; and

(b)           inquire into and report to the Chief Executive on any matters concerning the

renewal application that the Chief Executive requests; and

(c)            within 60 days of receiving the application from the Chief Executive notify the Chief Executive in writing of the Commissioner of Police's decision to support or oppose the renewal of a licence and provide the reasons for the decision.

(4)           If the Chief Executive is notified under subsection (3)(c) that the Commissioner of Police opposes the renewal of a licence, the Chief Executive must not renew the licence.

  10C—Determining a renewal application

(1)           After considering a renewal application and any investigation under section 10B, the Chief Executive must determine the renewal application by—

(a)           renewing the licence for a period not exceeding 5 years; or

(b)           refusing the application.

(2)           A renewed licence expires on the date specified by the Chief Executive, unless the licence is sooner cancelled or suspended.

(3)           The Chief Executive must—

(a)           notify the applicant in writing of the decision under subsection (1)(a); and

(b)           if the Chief Executive refuses to renew a licence under subsection (1)(b), provide

reasons for the decision.

  Amendment carried; new clauses inserted.

  Clause 11.

  The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 14 [Employment–1]—

  Page 7 line 32 to page 8 line 12—Delete the clause and substitute:

  11—Suspension or cancellation of licence

(1)           The Chief Executive may, by notice in writing to a licence holder, suspend or cancel the licence—

(a)           if the licence holder requests suspension or cancellation; or

(b)           if the Chief Executive is satisfied that the licence holder has contravened or failed to comply with the provisions of this Act or a term or condition of the licence; or

(c)            if the Chief Executive is satisfied that the licence holder or any associate of the licence holder is no longer a fit and proper person to be concerned with or associated with the cultivation or supply of hemp or industrial hemp (as the case requires); or

(d)           if the Commissioner of Police requests suspension or cancellation on the basis

of criminal intelligence concerning the licence holder or an associate of the licence holder; or

(e)           if the licence holder ceases to carry on the activity to which the licence relates;


(f)            if prescribed circumstances exist.

(2)           Before suspending or cancelling a licence under subsection (1), the Chief Executive must—

(a)           notify the licence holder that the licence holder may, within 30 days before the

licence is to be suspended or cancelled, show cause why the licence should not be suspended or cancelled; and

(b)           consider any submission under paragraph (a).

(3)           If a licence is suspended or cancelled under subsection (1), the Chief Executive must notify the Commissioner of Police regarding the suspension or cancellation.

(4)           The suspension or cancellation of a licence takes effect from the day specified in the notice, or in the case of a suspension, for the period specified in the notice.

(5)           A licence holder may surrender hemp, industrial hemp or other material cultivated under this Act to the Chief Executive on suspension or cancellation of a licence, and the surrendered material must be dealt with in accordance with the regulations.

            Amendment carried; new clause inserted.

            Clause 12 passed.

            Clause 13.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 15 [Employment–1]—

                Page 8, after line 33—After subclause (4) insert:

(5)           The Chief Executive must provide each inspector (other than an inspector who is a police

officer) with an identification certificate setting out the provisions of this Act for which the inspector is authorised to be an inspector.

(6)           An inspector must, at the request of a person in relation to whom the inspector has exercised, or intends to exercise, powers under this Act, produce the inspector's identification certificate.

(7)           In this Part, a reference to an identification certificate in relation to an inspector who is a police officer is a reference to written evidence of the fact that the inspector is a police officer.

            Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

            Clause 14.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 16 [Employment–1]—

                Page 9, line 1 [clause 14(1)(b)]—After 'any' insert 'vehicle or'

Amendment No 17 [Employment–1]—

                Page 9, line 2 [clause 14(1)(b)]—After 'cultivation' insert ', processing'

Amendment No 18 [Employment–1]—

                Page 9, after line 18—After subclause (1) insert:

  (1a) An inspector must not exercise any powers under this Act if the inspector fails to produce the inspector's identification certificate for inspection on request by the occupier of the place or the person in charge or apparent control of the place.

            Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

            Clauses 15 to 20 passed.

            New clause 20A.

            The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 19 [Employment–1]—  Page 10, after line 25—Insert:

                20A—Industrial Hemp Register

(1)           The Chief Executive must establish and maintain an industrial hemp register.

(2)           The industrial hemp register must contain the following information:

(a)           the name of each licence holder;

(b)           the location of the premises at which hemp or industrial hemp is authorised to

be cultivated or processed under the licence;

(c)            other information as required by the regulations.

(3)           The Chief Executive must ensure that the industrial hemp register, or any part of the register, is only accessed by a prescribed person, or a person of a prescribed class who is authorised to do so by the Chief Executive.

(4)           The Chief Executive must ensure that personal information in the industrial hemp register is only disclosed in accordance with this Act.

(5)           Unless a disclosure is authorised under this section, a person authorised to have access to the industrial hemp register or any part of the register must not disclose to any person the following information in the register:

(a)           personal information;                                            (b)           the location of specified premises;

                                                                          (c) commercial in confidence information.

                                                                                                Maximum penalty: $15 000 or imprisonment for 12 months, or both.

(6)           The Chief Executive or a person authorised to have access to the industrial hemp register or any part of the register may disclose personal information in the industrial hemp register to a public authority—

(a)           for the purpose of law enforcement; or

(b)           as required by or under any Act or law; or

(c)            if the Chief Executive or a person authorised to have access to the register

believes on reasonable grounds that to do so is necessary to enable the proper administration of the Act.

  New clause inserted.

  Clauses 21 to 24 passed.

  Schedule 1.

  The Hon. K.J. MAHER:  I move:

Amendment No 20 [Employment–1]—

  Page 11, lines 31 to 35—Delete the clause and substitute:

  2—Amendment of section 31—Application of Part

(1)           Section 31(1)—after paragraph (ag) insert:

   (ah) the cultivation, processing, possession, sale or supply of a plant, or the sale, supply or possession of a substance by a person who is acting in accordance with the Industrial Hemp Act 2017; or

                                                                                                           (ai)               the possession of industrial hemp that is cultivated or supplied pursuant to a

licence under the Industrial Hemp Act 2017; or

(2)           Section 31(3)—before the definition of relevant controlled drug insert:    industrial hemp has the same meaning as in the Industrial Hemp Act 2017; This amends schedule 1.

  Amendment carried; schedule as amended passed.

  Title passed.

  Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

  The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:30):  I move:

  That this bill be now read a third time.

In doing so, I would like to add to my thank yous, in particular to Jamnes Danenberg, my former staffer, who first brought the idea and raised my awareness of industrial hemp, not only as my staffer but also in 1995, when I was state president of the National Union of Students South Australia and we ran a campaign on hemp.

  Bill read a third time and passed.

Stay Connected

Sign Up to news and updates from Tammy.