{"id":1267,"date":"2016-07-15T06:19:35","date_gmt":"2016-07-15T06:19:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/tc\/?p=1267"},"modified":"2016-07-15T07:30:38","modified_gmt":"2016-07-15T07:30:38","slug":"australia-progress-on-tasmanias-tobacco-free-generation-legislation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/tc\/2016\/07\/15\/australia-progress-on-tasmanias-tobacco-free-generation-legislation\/","title":{"rendered":"Australia: progress on Tasmania’s tobacco free generation legislation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kathryn Barnsley, University of Tasmania<\/p>\n

In 2012<\/a> and 2014<\/a> we reported that the Australian state of Tasmania was developing mechanisms for implementing the tobacco free generation (TFG).<\/p>\n

Tasmania has been paradoxically both a leader in legislative reform and a laggard<\/a> in allocating resources to tobacco control.<\/p>\n

The Public Health Amendment (Tobaccofree Generation) Bill 2014 <\/em>was tabled in the Tasmanian Parliament in November 2014<\/a> by an Independent MP Hon. Ivan Dean. The Bill proposes to phase out the sale of tobacco products to any person born after the year 2000. The Bill is a measure to curtail supply; smoking would not be criminalised and there would be no penalties for using or possessing tobacco. The Bill was referred to a Parliamentary Committee in March 2015. It has been debated and scrutinised for well over a year. The committee was asked to look at the workability and practicality<\/strong> of the Bill.<\/p>\n

The Committee, brought down its report<\/a>\u00a0in July 2016, making the following key findings:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. There does not appear to be any significant legal impediment to the operation of the Bill in delivering the policy intent.<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n
  2. The Parliament should take a measured and cautious approach in considering a Bill which could limit or \u2018extinguish\u2019 fundamental rights relating to age, equality and liberty.<\/em><\/li>\n
  3. The Bill raises some practical legal issues in relation to online sales and the impact of the Bill on tourism\/tourists. The proposer of the Bill may wish to give consideration to amendment of the Bill to avoid negative impacts on tourism.<\/em><\/li>\n
  4. Should the Bill be supported, appropriate education programs would be required to effectively implement the Bill. This would incur a cost and would be a matter for the Government of the day.\u201d<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    A number of submissions were made including one from Lois Ireland<\/a>,\u00a0a retailer, who said:<\/p>\n

    \u201cI made a conscious decision to stop gaining a profit from sales of a product that I knew to be highly addictive and that was causing long term health issues with those who I knew personally as members of my community. I knew they would go elsewhere to purchase their cigarettes but I did not wish to be further implicated in their poor health choices.<\/em><\/p>\n

    As a result, I fully endorse any moves that make it more difficult for young people to take up\/continue smoking, despite any effects such measures may have on businesses. To be honest I\u2019d be happy to see a ban on all sales \u2013 think how much lower our hospital costs would be!\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

    Other submissions were made by the tobacco industry and their front organisations including the Alliance of Australian retailers (AAR) which was set up to lobby against plain packaging – but seems to have extended its reach. The UK University of Bath website has exposed AAR<\/a> as a tobacco industry front organisation.<\/p>\n

    The Cancer Council of Tasmania (CCT) carried out two surveys of public opinion on smoking matters including questions on TFG. The CCT survey<\/a> shows that 75% of Tasmanians support the idea of a tobacco free generation, an increase on previous surveys.<\/p>\n

    The Bill<\/a>:<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n