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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 12 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 4346 ..

MRS CROSS (continuing):

Some concern has been expressed that banning smoking totally in hotels and clubs will result in a reduction of trade in those institutions. We might consider recent studies in California where smoking was banned in drinking establishments four years ago. Those studies found that trade had actually increased rather than decreased, as families and non-smokers began to come back to the smoke-free environments after having been scared off in the past. I also noticed recent media stories about a club that banned smoking despite nine of its 12 board members being smokers. The club was almost broke before the ban but is now trading profitably after non-smokers returned in droves.

We are not on our own in legislating for smoke-free enclosed public places. In fact, while we were leading the nation and the world in 1994, thanks in part to you, Mr Speaker, in banning smoking from most workplaces, other jurisdictions have caught up and are moving quickly to overall smoke-free enclosed public places.

There are bills on the table in New Zealand and recommendations in South Australia and Tasmania. In Ireland, where smoking and drinking at the local go hand in hand, they have passed a bill which will be enforced next year. The United States already has around 400 cities and towns where smoking is banned, including New York, as mentioned earlier by my colleague, Ms Tucker. What we are seeing is the recognition of the need to act and not just talk about smoking and the damage it does to the community.

I have an amendment that allows for problems of phasing in this legislation and expiration of the exemptions in place. I am also aware that Mr Smyth and Mr Corbell have amendments to this amendment. My amendment accommodates both the need to allow the exemptions which have already been granted to run their course without penalty and the need to allow the various clubs and hotels time to adjust their public spaces.

Over the past few months I have had many discussions with the key stakeholders-the clubs and hotels, the AMA, the Division of General Practice and members of the Assembly-to achieve what I hope will be a good piece of legislation. These discussions, in fact, have gone on for the most part of this year. My amendment is a result of these discussions and it will help to achieve what the legislation should be-a step forward in harm minimisation to achieve better health outcomes for Canberrans, in particular the workers in pubs and clubs and the visitors to those organisations who are not smokers.

The bill provides for a phase in of 12 months, and I stress this because I found it rather intriguing that the minister wasted no time this morning in sending out an interesting excuse for a press release stating that my bill was otherwise. But those who have actually read the bill would have noticed that the initial phase in period was 12 months. If we as legislators wanted to do what we have personally believed all the time should be done we would want to ban it tomorrow. We would want to do so because nobody in this place, no matter what side of the fence they are on, wants to see the public harmed by smoking or passive smoking.

I have spoken to the clubs industry and the medical profession. Nobody in the clubs industry is interested in harming the community. They are not interested in harming or killing children. At the end of the day they have an interest in looking out for their

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