Page 1461 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Obviously we have to get to a place where we have got to cut our health bills significantly. If we can do that through legislative measures without becoming the nanny state and overregulated, as we are often accused of, then it is all to the good. The question is: will the government provide the necessary resources to achieve a full ban on smoking in outdoor areas? We are all very much aware of the dangers that both primary and secondary smoke can cause to our health. I hold concerns about the modelling of behaviour by children, for example, and agree that wherever possible smoking in front of children should be discouraged.
In closing, let me say this. I believe that the debate about smoking in outdoor public places should be centred in the first instance on achieving full smoke-free environments at major sporting events or facilities, Floriade or outdoor concerns in our parks. It is a contentious issue and it is one that we will probably get a lot of flak on, but, as Ms Porter has said, as long as we as an Assembly can work in a bipartisan way—we come sensibly into the arena with this debate and we do not seem to be hitting people over the head with big sticks—we can bring people with us. Then, down the track, I think that we will see more than 80 per cent of Canberrans committing to saying, “I want to give up; I want to quit.” Not the least of the argument is that smoking not only costs a lot of money to the individual but also costs an incredible amount of money to taxpayers via our health system.
I commend Ms Porter’s motion to the Assembly and thank her for bringing it on today. I move:
Add the following words after paragraph (2):
“(3) calls on the ACT Government to:
(a) make public the proposed control measures by 30 June 2007; and
(b) report to the Assembly by the last sitting day of September 2007 on the outcomes of the consultation.”.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (12.19): I would like to speak both to the original motion and to the amendment. I thank Ms Porter for bringing it on and Mrs Burke for giving it the consideration that is required in order to move an amendment.
On the whole, the debate about the impacts of passive smoking has largely been won. We have seen that over the years here in the ACT, first with the removal of smoking from restaurants, which I think happened in the late 1980s, and then with progressive moves. Even smokers appreciate being able to eat, drink and recreate in a smoke-free place. Second-hand smoke is an extremely unpleasant experience, and now we have more and more knowledge about its health impacts. Before that it was just “my hair smells” or “my jacket is all smoky”. But we know that it is not just the way it makes us smell; it is also the impacts. The occupational health and safety issues that have been raised were probably a counter-factor for the clubs as they made their protestations, to some extent, about the potential loss in business when they did the renovations that were required to comply with the 75 per cent rule.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .