Page 3826 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 27 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Dear Minister,
I am in receipt of your letter dated 22nd August 2008.
this is dated Tuesday, 26 August 2008—
Unfortunately, a majority of businesses won’t receive this letter until after you propose debating the Amendments to the Tobacco Bill and therefore will not be made aware of your changes. This is not fair.
While your staff have heard some of our arguments, it is obvious they were not listening or did not relay our concerns to you. I’m sure you are aware, but I would like to point out the status in other states; New laws passed in Tasmania last November will allow for specialist tobacconists to be given dispensations from the total bans.
In July this year, NSW introduced bans, but have given specialist tobacconists four years to prepare for the changes.
Victoria has released a tobacco control strategy for public consultation—they have stated they will consider a ban or restriction on tobacco point of sale displays in retail outlets.
If the information session that was facilitated by Minter Ellison back in 2006 was the start of the consultation period, then why after two years have we not seen a copy of the Regulatory Impact Study the Government is obligated to provide to businesses before new legislation is introduced?
I did have a briefing on this. This was an interesting thing. I had been emailing the minister’s office and I was told from the minister’s office finally, after tracking somebody down, that there seemed to have been a breakdown in communication. Somebody thought the minister was doing it and the minister thought somebody else was doing it. I then found out that the Greens had been given a briefing. Therefore, I asked for a briefing. At this briefing I did ask about the regulatory impact study or statement and was told that the government simply would not be releasing that because it was cabinet-in-confidence.
This is, sadly, the way that this government gets the community off side; it just hides everything. If there is a strong case to be had for the banning of point-of-sale displays then why not provide the regulatory impact study or statement to these people? Surely, it would firm up the government’s case. But to hide it or refuse to table it, or refuse to expose it, only gives cause for concern to those people who are wondering what the government is trying to hide.
Mr Lovett goes on:
Minister, there are still too many areas to be clarified and agreed upon before you can ask your Assembly colleagues to debate this.
Regards
Kym Lovett.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .