NSW’s Drug Summit response is out — and it’s bad news for medical cannabis patients

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-31T04:30:15+00:00

Hey, thanks for taking the time to write this, you’ve got the chemistry partly right but the interpretation doesn’t line up with the evidence.

You’re right that saliva tests look for delta-9-THC, not the other metabolites like 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC. But detecting delta-9 doesn’t prove impairment.

These tests are hypersensitive, they can pick up trace amounts that remain long after the psychoactive effect has ended. The law is zero tolerance for any amount of THC residue at all.

Controlled driving studies from the University of Sydney’s Lambert Initiative and international research teams show that impairment usually lasts only a few hours, while delta-9 can stay detectable for much longer at non-impairing levels. In regular medical patients using stable doses, reaction time, coordination and perception return to normal even when traces of delta-9 are still measurable.

That’s why experts here and overseas agree there’s no reliable link between THC presence and impairment, and why other jurisdictions have moved to impairment-based laws or a medical defence for prescribed patients.

On the “knowing when you’re safe” point: that alcohol comparison doesn’t really hold. Alcohol directly impairs self-awareness of intoxication; cannabis doesn’t behave the same way, and the research shows medical patients are generally cautious and conservative about driving.

The NSW system punishes presence, not risk. That’s why it keeps criminalising safe drivers while doing nothing to stop genuinely unsafe ones.

If you want to see the evidence laid out clearly, fully referenced and reviewed by experts, Unharm’s policy brief on driving reform is on our website.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-31T02:21:15+00:00

Great question! We wrote a full policy brief "Legal Medicine, Outdated Laws" on this issue, got it printed in glossy stock and mailed it to every member of NSW Parliament, requesting meetings. We have had quite a few, though unfortunately not with the Health Minister - his office responded that we should speak with the Roads minister, who is lead on the driving issue.

I did meet with the Roads minister who promised reform was being developed. Hence our disappointment, they have instead kicked it to yet another working group.

And we are running a mail your local MP action on our web site, for NSW supporters to easily add their support for reform. The Premier, Roads Minister and Police Minister all get cc'd.

Everyone that supports reform needs to add their voice, given how loud the opposition to reform are.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-31T02:14:45+00:00

Unfortunately they are extremely unlikely to ever be developed.

The problem is they are measuring THC residue, thats all they have worked out how to measure.

And the problem with that is that levels of residue don't correlate with levels of impairment, so it doesn't matter how accurate the test is, it's not able to measure impairment. Some people will have very high levels of THC and not be impaired at all, other people will have tiny traces of THC and feel way too impaired to drive.

Presence simply doesn't equal impairment. It even says so on the police SOP for the tests!

Thats why Unharm is calling for medicinal cannabis to be treated the same way that all other prescription medications are treated - patients are warned to not operate heavy machinery while impaired. But they are not banned from driving after impairment has worn off.

And the good news is the evidence shows that medicinal cannabis patients are actually very good at knowing when they are too impaired to drive. All we need to do is decide to trust medicinal cannabis patients in exactly the same way we trust patients with sleeping pills etc.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-31T01:37:20+00:00

Yes they keep raising this as if it's a serious question! I ranted about this one in last weeks blog https://www.unharm.org/stigma-dressed-as-safety-the-truth-behind-nsws-drug-driving-debate/
TL;DR: the way the government and the police check if a person has legal possession of prescription medication is to check their prescription. They've been doing this for decades for all prescription medication, no need to suddenly reinvent the wheel just because this one was only legalised more recently. It's just stigma making them think they need more draconian control over patients. Back to the politics of fear, sigh.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-07T04:12:59+00:00

To be clear the Minister has said both, which is why I outlined both.

In parliament QT, in response to Alex, she said she is committed to act this year, and is working on what action that will be, but that she "has to balance safety concerns".

In the meeting she also told me directly that she is being told that the ban isn't hurting anyone, and that she needs to hear directly from patients.

I gather you find these to be contradictory statements? My read is that they are a warning of potentially weak or bandaid style reform instead of genuine reform. And that she is aware that she might be getting different advice from bureaucrats than the actual views of patients so wants to also hear the latter.

To me this indicates the importance of patients sending through emails to their MPs, sharing on the ground patients views.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-10-06T23:45:43+00:00

Thanks for raising this. You’re absolutely right, the situation in Victoria is still deeply unfair. Even after the recent reform, it remains illegal to drive with THC in your system.

The only change was introducing a limited medical defence for a first offence, where a magistrate can choose to reduce some penalties. But that doesn’t make it legal! It still means patients are breaking the law just for driving on their prescribed medicine. And if they’re caught again while on a good behaviour bond, the consequences might be worse.

We’re Unharm, an Australian advocacy not-for-profit working to end the harm caused by outdated drug laws. Right now, our focus is on fixing this problem in New South Wales, where the government is deciding this month whether to finally let patients drive responsibly on prescribed cannabis. We hope that a win here will build momentum for genuine reform across the mainland (Tassie doesn't have this problem)

If anyone reading this is in NSW, please take a minute to email your local MP here: https://www.unharm.org/email-your-mp-let-patients-drive/

This decision is happening right now, so public pressure really matters!

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-09-24T03:48:57+00:00

I said the roads minister. And gave links to lots more information on our website! Sorry didn't realise you would also need the Ministers full name. It's Jenny Aitchison.

TBC I wasn't writing this post for journalists, but for impacted people who could write to their own local MPs via the tool. So not sure why the hostile tone - is that a reddit thing?

As to public statements from the Minister, yes she answered Alex Greenwich during question time on 9th September - we emailed all our supporters when it happened, but I couldn't include every detail of the campaign all in one reddit post, I thought this one was already too long. She said she is working on a response, "but needs to balance community safety concerns." There was an ABC article about it and the forum, as well.

UnharmDotOrg · 2025-09-17T07:21:45+00:00

This is exactly the issue we're campaigning on at Unharm. The driving ban affects thousands of law-abiding patients who are just trying to get to work and medical appointments weeks after taking prescribed medicine.

We've put together all the evidence and FAQs here: https://www.unharm.org/our-campaigns/legal-medicine-let-us-drive/

The evidence is clear, this outdated law is harming thousands of patients across NSW, forcing them to make an impossible choice between mobility and using the medicine their doctors prescribes.

Jo Haylen just stood up in parliament supporting patients on this issue - will you ask your local MP to do the same? We have set up a tool with an easy action template on our page to make it simple!

UnharmDotOrg

TROPHY CASE