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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (17 February) . . Page.. 304 ..


Mr Kaine: I am very patient.

MR HUMPHRIES: And very patient. Mr Speaker, there is no doubting that whoever is Treasurer at that time will be basking in a $73.9m-odd increase per annum in funding under the GST, under the growth tax which the GST is, and many of the problems that this community is facing today as a result of a continuous process of reduction because of tightening financial circumstances possibly will be able to be turned around. That is a possibility. I think that it is certainly a positive long-term outlook. For that reason, I think that we should weather the short-term pain, and there is certainly some of that to be experienced.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

LIQUOR LICENSING STANDARDS MANUAL -

INSTRUMENT No. 252 of 1999

Motion for Disallowance

Debate resumed.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.43): The Government has sought to address the question of sharps units and disposal of used syringes in a very narrow way by introducing into the Licensing Standards Manual presented to the Assembly in October last year a requirement that certain premises where alcohol is sold provide in each toilet facility a disposal bin. A very narrow range of premises are caught up by the requirement. Paragraph 16 of the manual sets out general standards for the toilets, then requires that each of those toilets contain a sharps disposal unit.

I have been advised by the Attorney-General that the definition includes a table of 81 premises in the restaurant, tavern, tavern bar and nightclub categories. The department says that venues such as the Kingston Hotel would be included in the number. When the manual was released last October, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, the Australian Hotels Association made public its objection to the requirement for sharps containers and free water. We see some free water being thrown around at the moment. It objected to the provision of water - - -

MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hird): Some mothers do have them.

MR STANHOPE: Yes. It objected to the provision of the water on the basis that it was designed to stop users of stimulants such as ecstasy and speed from dehydrating. I declare that I have very little sympathy for the argument that has been run in relation to not providing tap water free of charge in these premises. But, as I understand it, the Australian Hotels Association is not proceeding with its objection, at least not that I am aware of, in relation to the provision of tap water.

It is relevant to go to some of the arguments advanced by the Australian Hotels Association on behalf of its members. As the Attorney mentioned this morning, each of us has received representations from the association and from individual tavern and


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