Page 220 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 23 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore: What about occupational health and safety for those?
MR BERRY: You never even mentioned employees. You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Michael. All reasonable - - -
Mr Moore: I did, and discussed it with you.
MR BERRY: Yes, because you have been caught out. All reasonable steps must be taken to prevent tobacco smoke from entering smoking-prohibited areas, and reasonable steps must be taken to discourage persons under the age of 18 from entering smoking-prohibited areas. Madam Speaker, whether smoking is banned or not in enclosed public places, employers will be expected to fulfil their obligations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. This obligation includes the new code of practice on passive smoking in the workplace which is being developed following public consultation.
Mr Moore: We will trust you on that one, too!
MR BERRY: You can, Michael, and people know that. Clause 6 gives the Minister the power to appoint persons as inspectors and to direct inspectors to perform such duties as the Minister determines for the purpose of promoting compliance. I emphasise this last phrase, as it goes to the heart of what inspectors are all about. Perhaps "inspectors" is a misleading term, but other Territory legislation calls public servants "inspectors" where they are appointed to implement legislation. We do not hear sensational stories about other inspectors with references to "the litter police", "the food police" or "the occupational health and safety police"; yet some sections of the business community seem intent on promoting stories about "the smoke police". It tells you where they are coming from.
Having someone available on the end of the telephone to advise proprietors, to answer questions about the law and to be available to request that people stop smoking hardly constitutes a 24-hour vigilante force - something which is being promoted by Mrs Carnell in weaving her web of deception - and no amount of ludicrous scare tactics, Mrs Carnell, will make it otherwise.
Clause 7 outlines what inspectors have the power to do. They do not have the power to issue on-the-spot fines. They can ask a person to stop smoking and, if the person does not stop, they can ask for the person's name and address in order to take further action if necessary. Clause 8 says how smoking is to be restricted - that is, smoking must not occur in a place where it is prohibited or in a manner contrary to specified conditions. A person who smokes in a smoking-prohibited place must stop smoking at the direction of an inspector or an occupier, unless he or she has a reasonable excuse. That is fair enough. In other words, if you light up in a smoke-free area, you must stop when asked to do so; if you do not, you must have a reasonable excuse. That is fair. It is hardly the stuff of social upheaval and the end of civilisation as we know it, contrary to claims by the supporters of Mrs Carnell in their advertising.
Clause 9 sets out what an occupier must do. He or she must display the necessary signs and must take reasonable steps to avoid smoking occurring in a non-smoking place. Again, these are pretty basic requirements that are no different from those which most proprietors are already familiar with in regard to other public health obligations. Clause 9 also provides two defences for an
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .