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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 12 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 4338 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

At the same time, I will outline what we have said and what we have maintained, Mr Speaker. I will do that as well. That is why we decided, and we did so in agreement with the majority of members of the Assembly, to seek to find out what people thought might be a fair time. November 2008 seemed to have some currency late last week and early this week. As of this morning it had shifted. People wanted to bring it forward. We had proposed November 2007, which at one stage today also seemed to have some support, but it would now appear that, based on the minister's amendment, December 2006 will get up. It is the minister's right to propose that, but people need to know the way that this minister operates.

Mr Speaker, the bill put forward, the Smoking (Prohibition in Enclosed Public Places) Bill 2003, is a bill that effectively bans smoking in public places and is a bill that is entirely consistent with the policy of the Liberal Party. It is a bill that provides for a series of offences. Persons shall not smoke in enclosed public places. Persons shall stop smoking if directed to do so by an authorised person, that is, the occupier of the premises, an inspector or a police officer. Occupiers shall not allow persons to smoke on their premises or provide smoking accoutrements. I am not sure whether Mr Stanhope will have conniptions over the use of the strict liability for offences under the bill, as he did over the proposals in Mr Cornwell's bill, particularly when his Health Minister seems to be so much in favour of it.

The Liberal Party is very supportive of the aims of the bill. Our only problem has been with its timing, which is why I have circulated an amendment with a commencement date of 19 November 2008. That was an amendment we had drafted earlier in this week when that date seemed to have some support. I accept that it does not now. That is the nature of politics. But what has gone on with the superseding of that amendment has been some incredibly cynical horse trading by the Health Minister, who has just chucked another tantrum and gone round telling people what he wants, rather than listening, consulting and conducting himself properly.

Mr Speaker, this is a most cynical day. What we want to see is a smoke-free workplace; we have said that. There are a number of ways you can achieve that and there are a number of ways you can minimise risk to the workers. Some things are not being done by this government in terms of keeping a full complement of health inspectors and applying enforcement practices whereby they are going out and checking clubs and pubs to make sure that they are abiding by the current law. The opposition has had reports of certain establishments being raided two or three times and being found to have the smoke evacuation air-conditioning turned off and no action has been taken by the government. That is the message that this government sends out to the community. They do not care because when there are visits people receive no punishment. That shows the cynical nature of this minister and his lack of attention to this portfolio. I think people deserve to know about that.

I will leave my amendment there so that we actually have a debate over what is a fair and reasonable date. I think we need to have that debate. On the one hand, there are health considerations, and they are very important. On the other, there are issues concerning employment and workplace and the value that the club system in particular and a number of small businesses, restaurants, pubs and other places provide to the community. I think it is about getting the right balance. It is about making sure that the enforcement regime

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