Adelaide's Premier Development and Construction Site
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=776
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 82,00.htmlSmoker 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.
that is the most random bump I have seen.SueJohnson wrote: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.
Well my brain hurts after reading that.. But thankfully my feet won't get sore with those anti-fatigue matsSueJohnson wrote: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
Exactly as I predicted.neoballmon wrote:Well my brain hurts after reading that.. But thankfully my feet won't get sore with those anti-fatigue matsSueJohnson wrote: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
Before the bans going out meant you returned home with your clothes stinking of smoke.neoballmon wrote: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!
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.monotonehell wrote:Before the bans going out meant you returned home with your clothes stinking of smoke.
UIVMM most of that cost is borne by the smokers and drinkers themselves rather than the taxpayers.Dog wrote: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.
I understand the theory but shit I'm sick of the nanny state pushing taxes on people's vices.Dog wrote: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
UIVMM most of that cost is borne by the smokers and drinkers themselves rather than the taxpayers.Aidan wrote:Dog wrote: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.