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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1537 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

the Hotels Association has been a mouthpiece for the tobacco industry because the tobacco industry worked out a long time ago that they could never defend their case. It is a lost cause as far as the argument is concerned, but the AHA has been doing pretty well on their behalf, and I understand that. The proprietors of pubs and clubs do not want to change, the same as restaurants and others did not want to change in the past. Mr Mulcahy said:

I made it quite plain to the Chief Minister that we believe that confrontational approaches are not in the best interests of the public and not in the best interests of business.

That is a bit rich coming from the Tobacco Institute. He continued:

The Chief Minister has given me an assurance, after I appealed to him to intervene in this affair, that he will direct the Health Minister to resume talks with the interests I represent -

that is, the tobacco interests -

and will also direct him to resume consultations with other affected groups in the ACT that appear not to have been approached on this issue.

That is one in a chain of events where the Tobacco Institute or the industry, by one means or another, has tried to slow down the process. In this case, one assumes from this article that Mr Humphries was leant on by the then Chief Minister. Mr Humphries complained about the Tobacco Institute trying to drive a wedge between him and the Chief Minister, and he said then:

I think that the industry is playing a little bit dirty.

They still are, Mr Humphries. Nothing has changed.

Mr Humphries: Why are you telling me this? I know all about it already. You are not telling me anything I do not know.

MR BERRY: Those who are not as grey as you are or as bald as I am from being in this place may not recall these events too clearly. That is an important part of history in relation to the legislation. Later on, Labor came back to office and proceeded to draw up more legislation to deal with the issue.

Mrs Carnell dealt rather scantily today with some comments I made in relation to the legislative process Labor had undertaken. That legislation was in the form of smoke-free areas in enclosed public places. It was intended that it would not apply to licensed premises in the first place but would apply to restaurants and that in the longer term there would be a process involving legislation which set out certain areas where people could smoke but, at the same time, would rely on the Occupational Health and Safety Act to ensure that tobacco consumption was reduced in the workplace. That would not surprise anybody, given Labor's commitment to workers and safety in the workplace.

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