Smoking Bans

[Pistol]

MHS you are so out of touch with reality it's not funny.

My avatar will be in power for the next decade if liberals have leaders like this.

[Shuz]

Rann for the decade. I think we are fully aware of Rann's potential as a leader, but he fears the election cycles, and persistently would rather achieve things manageable within the 4 year timeframes. Having said this, with the state of the Liberal party in absolute disarray both at state and federal level, he should have nothing to fear for the next election, and may as well utilize the time until 2014 (7 years) to manage achievements within that timeframe.

MHS - Stay in power as long as you can. You'll never get elected.

Anyways... sorry for the off-topic rant. Very interesting stats on Greece.

[Cruise]

When is the next state election?

[Shuz]

2010.

[Mants]

Smoker ban hits legal hurdle

December 22, 2007 11:28pm

A LIBERAL MP's controversial plan to ban smoking in the City of Adelaide for two days a year would be unenforceable unless State Parliament granted parking inspectors sweeping new police-like powers.
Adelaide Lord Mayor Michael Harbison was sympathetic to the concept but noted council officers have no powers to demand names and addresses of rogue smokers in order to issue fines.

The smoking ban plan triggered a storm of reaction from the public amid warnings of further erosion of freedoms.

Liberal MP David Ridgway plans to introduce a Private Members Bill banning smoking in public in the city for two days, to coincide with World No Tobacco Day and the Christmas Pageant.

If it passes into law, people smoking on streets, footpaths or parks in the city on those days would face fines of up to $200.

Mr Ridgway said the move would come with support for smokers to help them kick the habit for the day.

Revelation of the plan in the Sunday Mail last week unleashed a flood of reaction with people ringing talkback radio and logging more than 150 comments on the Adelaidenow website.

These covered a wide cross section of opinions, from smokers angry at the ban to non-smokers annoyed at yet more legislation governing behaviour in public.

Under the plan, Adelaide City Council officials would be responsible for handing out fines to rogue smokers, with the cash to go to the Cancer Council. However, Mr Harbison said council officers have no power to demand names and addresses of offenders.

"It is an interesting proposal and certainly on Pageant Day I think it would even have support of smokers with so many children in the city," he said. "However, we have no mechanism to make people give names and addresses like the police have.

"Our people can deal with property or vehicle issues because you can trace ownership, but if a smoker doesn't want to give their name and address to a council officer there is nothing we can do. We would need special powers that now only rest with the police."

The world-first plan for a smoke-free city has support from health groups but Council for Civil Liberties chair Mr George Mancini warned the move was the "thin end of the wedge".

"There is a civil liberties argument in respect of the right of people to use a lawful product in an outdoor, public area," he said.

Minister for the City of Adelaide Jane Lomax-Smith refused to discuss the plan while Health Minister John Hill's office passed inquiries to Substance Abuse Minister Gail Gago, who was unavailable.

Her spokesman, Mr Richard Lower, released a statement saying the move would confuse the public.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 82,00.html

as others have said, there is no way this can be policed, and no-one should have to give their personal details to anybody if they do not wish to, unless that person is a police officer.
not to mention that it is taking away the rights and freedom of smokers.

[DanielC]

I hate smoking as much as anyone but a total ban seems pretty silly. As long as people don't smoke in my face I couldn't careless, although banning smoking in pubs/clubs was one of the best things introduced by the Rann government, about time too.

[Waewick]

Pub areas smell a lot because there are lot of people smoke and just brush the spread on the carpet and sometimes smash the remaining on the floor on the carpet and thus accumulating on the carpet all the ashes the room always smells a little smoky.

that is the most random bump I have seen.

smoking ban has been fantastic.

[monotonehell]

The almost not nonsense usually means that Sue will be a time bomb spammer.

They'll come back later and spam something.

Then they will be insta-banned.

BOOM!

[neoballmon]

Pub areas smell a lot because there are lot of people smoke and just brush the spread on the carpet and sometimes smash the remaining on the floor on the carpet and thus accumulating on the carpet all the ashes the room always smells a little smoky.
X

Well my brain hurts after reading that.. But thankfully my feet won't get sore with those anti-fatigue mats


On smoking bans though, I can't even imagine smoking in these venues. I turned 18 in 2007, so never really went out to a smoking pub or club before then. And just being in there now, I have to wonder how people were even allowed to smoke in there in the first place.. Designated beer gardens seem more than enough!

[monotonehell]

Pub areas smell a lot because there are lot of people smoke and just brush the spread on the carpet and sometimes smash the remaining on the floor on the carpet and thus accumulating on the carpet all the ashes the room always smells a little smoky.
X

Well my brain hurts after reading that.. But thankfully my feet won't get sore with those anti-fatigue mats

Exactly as I predicted.

On smoking bans though, I can't even imagine smoking in these venues. I turned 18 in 2007, so never really went out to a smoking pub or club before then. And just being in there now, I have to wonder how people were even allowed to smoke in there in the first place.. Designated beer gardens seem more than enough!

Before the bans going out meant you returned home with your clothes stinking of smoke.

[Nathan]

Before the bans going out meant you returned home with your clothes stinking of smoke.

Yep, I remember always having to hang my clothes up outside after getting home to try and air them out overnight. Hate to think what it was like for staff.

[Dog]

We actually only collect about half the true cost of both smoking and Alcohol in taxes and excise, so we appear happy for the Tax payer to subsidise these industries by some $35bn a year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Aidan]

We actually only collect about half the true cost of both smoking and Alcohol in taxes and excise, so we appear happy for the Tax payer to subsidise these industries by some $35bn a year.

UIVMM most of that cost is borne by the smokers and drinkers themselves rather than the taxpayers.

[Waewick]

We actually only collect about half the true cost of both smoking and Alcohol in taxes and excise, so we appear happy for the Tax payer to subsidise these industries by some $35bn a year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I understand the theory but shit I'm sick of the nanny state pushing taxes on people's vices.

Smoking I get, passive smoking kills. But when I have a couple of beers I don't hurt anyone, which is the same for the vast majority of Australians

[Dog]

We actually only collect about half the true cost of both smoking and Alcohol in taxes and excise, so we appear happy for the Tax payer to subsidise these industries by some $35bn a year.

UIVMM most of that cost is borne by the smokers and drinkers themselves rather than the taxpayers.

"There is an overwhelmingly strong link between alcohol misuse and offending, especially in the Adelaide CBD where, over recent years, there has been an increase in the number of licensed premises, and an increase in the trading hours of some premises in the CBD.

SAPOL data indicates that in 2008-09 in the Adelaide CBD, 58% of victim-reported crime was alcohol-related. Also in that period, of all apprehensions by police in the CBD:

62% of offences against the person were alcohol-related
65% of serious assaults were alcohol-related
65% of minor assaults were alcohol-related
81% of incidents of assault police were alcohol-related
53% of non-arson property damage were alcohol-related
76% of disorderly or offensive behaviour were alcohol-related
77% of hindering police/resisting arrest were alcohol-related
It has been estimated that in Australia in 2004, alcohol-attributable crime costs amounted to $1.73 billion which included the costs of: policing ($747 million); loss of productivity of prisoners ($368 million); violence ($187 million); and prisons ($141 million). Other crime-related costs include: criminal courts $85.8 million; property $67.1 million; and insurance administration $14.3 million (Collins & Lapsley 2008)."



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk