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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 11 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3230 ..

MS MacDONALD: Okay. I am happy to do that, Mr Speaker. I have moved an amendment to Ms Tucker's amendment, which states that we omit the words "last sitting day in December 2002" and substitute that with the words "first sitting day in 2003". The reason for this is that, while we support Ms Tucker's amendment, doing the analysis by December would be impossible. Even trying to achieve that by the first sitting week in 2003 makes for a tight timeframe.

However, we would be happy to consult with Ms Tucker on the methodology so that we can actually fit the analysis into the tight timeframe. It may be that we look at a cross-section of licensed premises being affected, so that we are not looking at the entirety of the premises in question. I recommend the amendment to you.

Ms MacDonald's amendment agreed to.

Ms Tucker's amendment, as amended, agreed to.

MS MacDONALD (3.51): Mr Speaker, I will close the debate. I would like to highlight some information about the scoreboard which I mentioned at the start of this debate. The National Tobacco Scoreboard has been compiled annually since 1994 by the AMA and the Australian Council on Smoking and Health, or ACOSH.

The aims of the scoreboard are to draw attention to the progress being made in tobacco control by state and territory governments, and to stimulate tobacco control initiatives by these governments. This year's scoreboard departs from previous years in that the areas of assessment reflect more closely key areas set out in the national tobacco strategy 1999 to 2002-2003. Two of the areas of assessment in 2002 are enclosed public places and smoke-free workplaces.

The ACT's legislation, which restricts or prohibits smoking in enclosed public places, was enacted in 1994, and reflects what was seen as a reasonable approach at that time. Over the years, however, further evidence has come to light about the health risks of environmental tobacco smoke exposure, and legal opinion and public opinion have strengthened in light of this information. The ACT's legislation is not entirely consistent with the national public health partnership's national response to passive smoking in enclosed public places and workplaces, which endorses a best-practice model.

Other states and territories that had previously lagged behind the ACT have enacted, or are considering enacting, legislation which provides greater protection from tobacco smoke exposure for patrons and employees in licensed premises than does the current ACT legislation. In the ACT, a small number of restaurants and approximately half of all licensed premises-pubs, clubs, bars, nightclubs, the casino and so on-have exemptions that permit smoking in limited areas, resulting in tobacco smoke exposure for patrons and staff. We must fix this.

In closing, I would like to offer some facts and figures for members to consider. As few as three cigarettes a day, or the equivalent passively smoked, can trigger serious heart disease. Women are at higher risk, possibly because smoking affects the female hormone, oestrogen, which gives non-smoking, pre-menopausal-almost made a fatal mistake there-women some protection from heart disease. The University of Copenhagen study followed more than 12,000 men and women for 22 years.

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