Page 4584 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 14 December 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
OMBUDSMAN (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 2) 1993
Debate resumed from 25 November 1993, on motion by Mr Berry:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
TOBACCO (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
Debate resumed from 25 November 1993, on motion by Mr Berry:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MRS CARNELL (Leader of the Opposition) (9.37): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Liberal Party will be supporting this legislation. This Bill will increase the effective enforcement of legislation against the illegal advertising of tobacco products which has arisen because of a loophole in the legislation. On the surface it is not an unreasonable thing to remedy. However, any legislation should be put to at least some public consultation, and at the very least the relevant industry organisations should have the opportunity to examine it. In the case of this Bill this simply has not happened. The Canberra Business Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Restaurants Association and, for that matter, everybody else we could think of asking were not aware of the legislation before we drew it to their attention. The Labor Party seems to be very fond of consulting only when it suits them. One observation made to a member of my staff was that the Liberal Party brings more legislation to the attention of these groups than does the Government.
Mr Lamont: They say the same thing to us.
MRS CARNELL: Therefore they spread it around. It is unfortunate, Mr Deputy Speaker, that legislation of this type has not been brought to the attention of the people who will need to enforce it. As we already know, the Government does not have enough staff or inspectors to make sure that tobacco products are not being sold to under-age people and that appropriate behaviour is happening in shops that sell tobacco products. Unless the people actually out there in the marketplace know of this sort of legislation it is very hard to understand how any sort of enforcement will be able to happen.
A case in question here - this shows just how important it is to appropriately consult - is the comments made by Canberra ASH Inc. Canberra ASH have asked why this Bill was not used to clarify the illegality of cigarette brand name promotions on the outside of shops but within a covered area such as a mall. If the Government had appropriately consulted, maybe this Bill could have addressed that situation. As I understand it, this Bill does not address a situation where an illegal sign is under an awning of a shop but inside a mall.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .