Page 4245 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

---

4

DURING THIS TIME, ACTION CANNOT BE TAKEN AGAINST THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE, AND IF THE ADVERTISEMENT IS REMOVED WITHIN THE THIRTY DAYS, NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN AGAINST THE PERSON.

WHILE THIS WAS A REASONABLE REQUIREMENT DURING THE INTRODUCTION OF THE ADVERTISING BAN, IT CAN PROVIDE -- AND HAS PROVIDED -- A LOOPHOLE FOR SHORT-TERM ADVERTISING WHICH HAS NOT BEEN EXEMPTED UNDER THE ACT.

AS A RESULT, ADVERTISERS AND PROMOTERS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DISPLAY TOBACCO BRAND NAMES OR TRADEMARKS IN WAYS OTHERWISE PROHIBITED BY THE ACT.

I WOULD WISH TO POINT OUT THAT A PERSON ADVERTISING ILLEGALLY IN A SHOP OR PUBLIC PLACE IS NORMALLY WARNED AND GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE THE ADVERTISEMENT BEFORE A WRITTEN NOTICE IS ISSUED WITH THE THIRTY-DAY COMPLIANCE PERIOD.

THE PRESENT BILL SEEKS TO AMEND THE ACT TO REDUCE THE THIRTY-DAY PERIOD TO A SPECIFIED PERIOD NOT EXCEEDING TWO DAYS.

4245

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .