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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 11 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3206 ..

MS MacDONALD (continuing):

calls on the ACT Government to address concerns raised by the accumulating information about the harmful effects of passive smoking and about the limitations of ventilation systems to provide effective protection from tobacco smoke.

To put it simply, smoking kills. Smoking kills thousands of people a year and places strains on our health system, and it costs the local and national economy money, which we just can't afford. And to make things worse, we are allowing many hundreds of employees in the ACT to work in a hazardous environment. We are allowing them to work in an environment which we can control. ACT governments in the past, as well as governments right around the country, have not taken and are not taking the dramatic steps needed to address the issue. Let us not fool ourselves: the debate will be watched closely by the public and any following action will cause many in this Assembly to feel the heat of the tobacco industry and also possibly hospitality representatives.

Mr Speaker, you would know the Labor Party has always opposed the exemption system. In researching this issue, I was able to locate the dissenting report from former MLA and now federal MP, Annette Ellis, to the report of the Standing Committee on Conservation, Heritage and Environment on the Smoke-free Areas (Enclosed Public Places) Bill. In her report, Ms Ellis made some observations about Australian Standard AS1668.2, which refers to the ventilation requirements of public places seeking exemption from smoke-free regulations. In 1994, eight years ago, Ms Ellis said this:

I disagree with the Committee's application of AS1668.2, which relates to ventilation requirements. I do not accept that the Committee has been provided with sufficient evidence for it to conclude that this standard was intended for, or can be reasonably used for, the public health regulation of ETS exposure in indoor environments.

Further to that, the dissenting report from Ms Ellis said this:

While I accept the use of AS1668.2 as a reasonable standard for ventilation for all mechanically ventilated buildings, I also conclude, from evidence presented to the Committee, that it would be inappropriate to rely on AS1668.2 as a health-based standard with reference to ETS.

ETS, for those members who are unaware, is an acronym for environmental tobacco smoke. This is probably the most important point for members to understand.

The 1994 bill, and therefore existing regulations, is based on a flawed premise that a decent airconditioning system is going to protect workers. It does not. In fact, we now find that Standards Australia have weakened the ventilation requirements by about 30 per cent. This means that exempted premises will have more polluted and more dangerous air. That standard, which so many people rely on for their health, is not and never was a health-based standard. It has always been a comfort-based standard. Unfortunately for those victims of passive smoking-related illness, a comfortable environment does not equate to a safe and healthy environment.

Michael Moore and Kate Carnell were completely manipulated and misled by the tobacco industry when the debate was held nearly a decade ago in this place. Non-smoking advocates knew it then, and the groundswell of information now available

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