Page 206 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 23 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
SMOKE-FREE AREAS (ENCLOSED PUBLIC PLACES) BILL 1993
Debate resumed.
MR DE DOMENICO: Had Mr Berry listened to industry he would have heard it say, "We need time. We agree. Let us try to ban smoking outright in a phased-in way over a three-year period, if there are no adequate extraction systems and air changing systems". Mrs Carnell and Mr Moore quite adequately covered that area. Once again, Mr Berry should take advice from his people, because they are the ones who told Mr Moore what the rules and regulations were regarding environmental protection in the United States and here as well.
Let us also have a look at tourism potential. It is a fact that a lot of foreign tourists, especially Asians and people from the Middle East as well, enjoy a cigarette. Whether you agree with smoking or not, that is a fact of life. No wonder Mr Berry has not decided to ban smoking in the casino.
Mrs Carnell: What about Chinese restaurants?
MR DE DOMENICO: That is another point, Mrs Carnell. Mr Berry has quite openly said that the casino will be exempt from these sorts of rules and regulations. Why is that? I stress again that passive smoking is bad for you. We all agree that it is bad for you, whether you inhale tobacco smoke in a casino, in a club, in a bar or in a restaurant. To target a particular section of the industry does not make any sense whatsoever.
Hopefully, Mr Berry will do something very shortly to make sure that smoking will not be allowed on ACTION buses. Whether there are passengers on the buses or not, one hopes that any government that is committed to this sort of thing will make sure that ACTION bus drivers do not smoke. We will see what happens there. We will also assume that Mr Berry or someone will attempt to gazette the whole precinct of the new Assembly building, including balconies, as a place where you cannot smoke. That is really the crux of the matter. Let us see how fair dinkum this Government is. Madam Speaker, I think Mr Humphries really hit the nail on the head. This was the issue that was going to make Wayne look really good in the electorate. God knows he needs something. He really needs something, so he said, "Let us do it. Let us do it quickly. Draft me some legislation".
Quite obviously, the legislation is flawed. The legislation does not make sense. The arguments presented by the Minister and others make no logical sense whatsoever. You are going to hear the members of the Opposition say time and time again that there are two ways of doing things. There is the way that sensible people do things, and there is the way that Mr Berry and some of his colleagues do things. We have proved time and time again, as we did especially in the last session in 1993, that if you do things in a sensible way, by consultation, by talking to people, by letting people know exactly what you want to do and by listening, usually there is a way around every problem. There is a way around this problem. I think Ms Szuty's proposed motion is the best way to deal with this problem. Let us put this Bill to a standing committee of this Assembly and let us have a look at the legislation line by line, clause by clause. Let us listen to all the interested players, who by the way could have been behind Mr Berry holus-bolus had he taken the time to do it properly, to do it sensibly, and not in his usual way.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .