Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
1
Ban smoking in all outdoor dining
areas.
√
Currently outdoor dining areas are dominated by smokers, who as a result of
their habit obtain preferential dining positions in the summer months. Non
smokers are unable to enjoy alfresco dining unless they are prepared to submit
themselves and family members to second hand smoke (SHS). As smoke
does not remain confined in a smoking section, segregation is not an effective
control mechanism against drifting smoke.
Research by Stanford University provides evidence of the levels of ETS in
outdoor areas. This research found that particles levels near active sources
over the course of 1 or more cigarettes was comparable to indoor SHS particle
levels observed in living rooms or bedrooms during active smoking.
Klepeis, Ott & Switzer, (2007) J Air & Waste Management Association 57:522-534.
2
Remove the 3 metres exemption
permitting patrons to smoke at
tables within 3 metres of an
entrance/exit to an eating
establishment.
√
Whilst the current legislation which requires smokers to go outside is
commendable, their congregation at entrances poses a SHS hazard for nonsmokers, children, infants and ex-smokers. The cumulative effects of multiple
people smoking outside entrances of venues makes entry or exit impossible
without inhalation of ETS which is often present in high levels. Implementation
of extended smoke-free perimeters should not only apply to eating venues, but
to a range of public buildings including casinos, pubs, restaurants, banks and
hospitals.
“Studies in Australia and overseas have shown that exposure to
environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) increases the risk of lung cancer and
heart disease, as well sore throats, nasal symptoms, asthma, chest
infections and eye irritation. In children, it increases the risk of middle ear
infections, croup, bronchitis and asthma.” Evidence from the Stanford study
found that exposure decreased significantly with distance from the source.
www.cancercouncil.com.au/editorial.asp?pageid=2248
3
Ban smoking in all pedestrian
Pedestrian malls and bus shelters are areas of high pedestrian use,
Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
malls, bus malls and covered bus
shelters.
√
frequented by the general public, including children and infants. Around
Tasmania, malls are situated in all city centres and are therefore areas of
importance for shoppers, workers and tourists alike. High levels of smoking
in malls detract from their appeal to the non-smoking public, and are contrary
to the clean green image we attempt to portray in Tasmania.
According to the research of Klepeis et al, “it was found that a person sitting
or standing next to a smoker in an outdoor setting can inhale smoke that is
many times more concentrated than background air pollution level... that
these levels could reach the equivalent of those inside a tavern where
smokers are present. Electronic monitors were used to measure airborne
particles emitted from cigarettes at a number of settings including open-air
cafes, outdoor pubs and footpaths”.
www.cancercouncil.com.au/editorial.asp?pageid=374
Klepeis, Ott & Switzer, (2007) J Air & Waste Management Association 57:522-534.
4
Ban smoking within enclosed
children’s playgrounds or within
10 metres of any children’s
playground equipment in
unenclosed areas.
√
Due to the inherent health risks from SHS exposure, particularly to
children, smoking within their vicinity should be prohibited. In addition,
modelling of healthy adult behaviour which reinforces a non-smoking
norm should be encouraged. For children who are subjected to indoor
smoking parents, an opportunity to play in a smoke free environment is
essential.
Precedents for this move already exist with legislation to this effect in
place in Qld, WA and several local councils including Launceston,
Monash & Mosman.
http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-15-smokefree-environment/15-5outdoor-areas
5
5.1 Ban smoking in all outdoor
It should become the norm that smoking is unacceptable in sporting, cultural
and public events, with the expectation that smokers either abstain for the
Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
sporting stadia and cultural
venues, OR
√
5.2 Further restrict smoking in all
outdoor sporting stadia and
cultural venues by:
duration of the event, or exit the premises for the purposes of smoking. The
rationale for this is the same as at other venues, ie second hand smoke is
harmful and is retained to significant levels in some outdoor areas such as
stadiums. Whilst one smoker may not produce high levels of ETS, smokers
often gather together and the cumulative effect from groups of smokers
produce significant levels of ETS.
According to the US Surgeon General (2006), “exposure of adults to SHS has
immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and causes coronary
heart disease and lung cancer. There is evidence that there is no risk-free
level of exposure to second hand smoke”.
5.2.1 Prohibiting smoking within
10 metres of any seating area in
the stadium or cultural venue, OR
These bans will protect the rights of non-smokers including children and exsmokers enabling them to avoid SHS. Allocation of smoking areas cannot
guarantee that smoke is confined to smokers unless enclosed ‘smoking rooms’
are provided.
5.2.2 Prohibiting smoking in all
seating areas of the stadium or
cultural venue, OR
5.2.3 Prohibiting smoking in all
areas of the stadium or cultural
venue except for designated
smoking areas
An exemplar of these bans is the Melbourne Cricket Ground whose rules state:
“Smoking is not permitted within the MCG or within the designated smoke-free
areas outside the stadium.
http://surgeongeneral.gov.library/secondhandsmoke/report/executive summary.pdf
6
Ban smoking within 20 metres of
the competition area at all
sporting events where children
are participating.
.
7
Ban smoking at all public
swimming pool complexes.
√
√
Smoking behaviour should be denormalised by its prohibition at public
events, especially those which are child focussed such as Little Athletics.
Whilst sporting events have traditionally been the domain of the Tobacco
Industry for advertising, making such events ‘smoke free’, would enable
children and adults to break the association between sporting activity and
smoking.
Smoking within all areas frequented by families with children should be smoke
free to prevent exposure to ETS. Banning smoking in these areas will provide
child and family friendly activities which promote a healthy lifestyle whilst
Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
assisting in the denormalisation of tobacco use.
8
Ban cigarette vending machines.
Vending machines make cigarettes accessible to people, without security
measures such as ID checks. It therefore allows children easier access to
purchase cigarettes. Reducing access to cigarettes may assist current
smokers to reduce their smoking habit and may eventually result in quitting
attempts.
√
“Ready access to cigarettes is a predictor of uptake of smoking. Surveys
confirm that children obtain their cigarettes from retail outlets, vending
machines, friends, siblings and parents. The most recent survey on
schoolchildren’s smoking rates shows that around a quarter of Australian
schoolchildren smoke. The decision to take up smoking is generally made
between the ages 12 and 16, with smoking prevalence among seniors
mirroring that of smoking rates among adults. Seventy thousand children
commence smoking each year.” http://www.ashaust.org.au/pdfs/fact07.pdf
9
9.1 Ban specialist tobacconists’
displays:
√
9.2 Cap the number of specialist
tobacconist to remain at the
existing level:
9.3 Phase out specialist
tobacconists:
√
√
Whilst all other stores are expected to cover their cigarette display,
tobacconists have an exemption to this requirement, allowing the continued
advertising of their product. With the introduction of plain packaging, the
benefits of display will be diminished. However, allowing the display of
cigarettes packages with/without plain packaging advertises their presence and
acts as a prompt for smokers and non-smokers alike. The aim of this
legislation should be to discourage young people from commencing the habit
hence; any move which removes this temptation should be implemented.
Recent research has found “A study of smoking behaviour over time in over
1600 children aged 11-14 shows exposure to retail tobacco displays is a risk
factor for smoking initiation raising the risk by around 60%.”
Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
Henriksen,Schleicher, Feighery, Fortmann (2010) A Longitudinal Study of Exposure to
Retail Cigarette Advertising and Smoking Initiation, PEDIATRICS July
http://www.ashaust.org.au/lv3/action_POS.htm#RESEARCH EVIDENCE
Specialist tobacconist stores should be phased out by non-renewal of licences.
The demand for cigarettes will decrease as the number of smokers decreases,
and therefore specialised cigarette vendors will become redundant.
9.4 Introduce a new category of
specialist tobacco licensing.
10
Remove tobacco and tobacco
products from reward schemes.
11
Ban tobacco sales at all temporary
events such as music, sport or art
festivals or where the majority of
patrons are likely to be under 18.
√
√
√
Tobacco should no longer be considered as a prize or reward because of the
well known health risks. Provision of tobacco products could make
organisations vulnerable to litigation in the future.
Stealth marketing by tobacco companies has become the latest tool of the
industry to overcome strong tobacco regulation. Banning sales at these
targeted events prevents the marketing activities which go along with their
provision which are specifically aimed at capturing the youth market. Ideally,
these public events should become ‘smoke free’ events. Whilst initial
opposition to these proposals may be strong, community acceptance and
adherence will grow as it has over the previous decades to new smoking
restrictions.
http://www.cancercouncil.com.au/editorial.asp?pageid=731
12
Enable confiscation of tobacco
and tobacco products in the
possession of a child.
√
If under-aged children are caught smoking in public, police should have the
power to confiscate the product as their possession of these products is illegal.
Stricter, enforceable penalties should be considered for adults who provide
tobacco products to children, thereby discouraging this source of supply.
Support
Proposal
Number
Proposal
Do not
Support
Reasons
Please √
Research amongst children has shown that family, friends and peer group are
their main source of tobacco products. The result of this supply is that children
become addicted when they are too young to make an informed decision about
the consequences of smoking. Ethically, as children are deemed incompetent
to make an informed decision, laws which prevent their possession and use are
justified.
As a State we need to halt the smoking habits of young Tasmanians who will
go on to develop long term smoking addiction and subsequent chronic disease
by implementing a range of stricter public health measures as necessary.
Fox, B.J. (2005) Framing tobacco control efforts within an ethical context,
Tobacco Control, 14 Supp 2.
http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-5-uptake/5-11-accessibility-oftobacco-products-to-young-sm