Page 2190 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, ANTA will be an important body, and it is certainly true that there is something of an interstate contest going on about the ultimate location of ANTA. I think a factor that we should be aware of is that it is expected, though by no means certain, that a reasonable number of Commonwealth officers may be applicants, probably strong applicants, for various positions in ANTA. The authority will run up to some 40 people. Members would be aware that ANTA is the body about to be established to handle the new funding arrangements for TAFE and training across Australia.
It was expected that a week or so ago a postal ballot would have been held to determine the location amongst the competing States. The main competitors, I suppose, were Brisbane, Canberra and Melbourne. That postal ballot did not proceed. There certainly were claims and counterclaims about deals having been made. The ballot did not proceed, but the matter will emerge again. I believe that it is the Federal Minister's hope that it will be concluded at the next AEC and MOVEET meeting, which is scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, the week after next. Certainly it will be debated, although there will be some confusion because one State will not be represented there. But there will be a lot of continuing lobbying, and perhaps parameters will be set around that argument.
The ACT's approach has been that, rather than argue for a city, we should establish the criteria that should determine the location. Where is it most strategically to be placed? Perhaps that was the sensible argument for us because we believe that, if such criteria were established, they would determine that the ACT should be the location. That is the situation, Madam Speaker. I believe that the ACT is logically the place. We would run, I suppose, a low-key approach, expecting that if other cities fell off the list - certainly Brisbane did not appear to be a logical choice - then we would be the preferred choice. The matter will be heavily debated at AEC. I will let you know the outcome at that time.
Teenage Drinking
MR STEVENSON: My question is addressed to the Chief Minister, Rosemary Follett. It concerns the promotion of "cheap" or "free" drinks or "all you can drink" advertised at hotel and nightclub promotions. In 1991 a Federal government survey found that more teenagers were drinking hard liquor and that 70 per cent of those who did were consuming liquor to excess. The survey showed that the huge increase - and this is of most concern - in the drinking of spirits among 14- to 17-year-olds was linked to heavy exposure to alcohol advertising. I think a lot could be done in the area of self-regulation. I well understand that some of these nightclubs are not members of the Hotels Association and so do not come within their voluntary code, but what has been done or is being done to discourage the practice of advertising "all you can drink", "free" drinks, et cetera?
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, I thank Mr Stevenson for the question and also for giving me notice of it as it does, in fact, cross over a number of portfolios and it is a matter that the Government is extremely concerned about. In the area of alcohol advertising and its impact upon young people, we are active in preventive education for young people who are exposed to the dangers of alcohol consumption, and there is no doubt in my mind that those dangers are very real in the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .