Page 209 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 23 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR CORNWELL: Very well, but I do not think I am going to try to do 200 kilometres an hour. What I am saying, Madam Speaker, is that there are inconsistencies. They abound, and that is one example. I have not yet seen any attempt by any government, Federal or State, to cut back the maximum speed shown on speedometers in motor vehicles. We continually whinge about the death toll and the injury toll on the roads, yet we do nothing. We do not even take a simple step like this to try to control death and injury on our roads.
As I say, I do not believe that the referral to a committee is necessarily going to solve all of my problems. However, I believe that the question of the level of ventilation does need to be examined by a committee away from this bear pit of debate. Mr Berry claims that there is no safe ventilation level. I do not know how he reconciles that statement with the ventilation that has been put in at the casino, but that might be something that the committee would like to address. They can speak to Mr Berry; they can speak to the casino; they can speak to ventilation engineers; and they can see who is right and who is wrong.
I would like the committee to pursue this selective choice of where smoking is going to be banned and where it is not. Like numbers of people on this side who are using sheer commonsense in this matter, I find it very difficult to imagine that smoking is somehow terribly dangerous in restaurants but is not terribly dangerous in a bar or a tavern. I find this a strange inconsistency. We may in fact have made some major medical breakthrough by discovering that if you smoke in a restaurant you are likely to end up with cancer; however, if you smoke in a bar you will not. Maybe the Lancet or the British Medical Journal will be able to benefit - - -
Mr Kaine: The alcohol probably breaks down the smoke!
MR CORNWELL: As I say, we may have made some great medical breakthrough. Let us pursue this. After all, we are here to represent the people. We are here to do the best we can on behalf of our constituents, but in this case we may in fact assist people elsewhere in this country. There are problems with health issues, I accept. I accept that it cuts both ways. There was something in the Canberra Times this morning which indicated that smokers apparently suffer less stress in some cases. I notice that the Chief Minister is nodding agreement. She obviously read the article.
Ms Follett: So do those around them.
MR CORNWELL: I found that an interesting point. It may be explored by the committee. I do not think that we should just dismiss the health issues as being entirely one-sided. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I believe that there is every justification for this Assembly to refer this matter to a committee, so that the issues that we have properly raised can be investigated and the inconsistencies of the Government's legislation can be properly explored and examined.
MR STEVENSON (4.45): What the Bill seeks to do has been discussed in quite some detail. Mr Berry has made it quite clear that he seeks to ban cigarette smoking in many enclosed public spaces, using a graduated approach over a period of time, though he is not saying a specific time. I want to look briefly at the case for and the case against, as presented to me by many organisations and individuals who have been good enough to take time to see me, phone me or send me letters or faxes.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .