Copyright © Government of South Australia 2002
All legislation herein is reproduced by permission but does not purport to be the official or authorised version. It is subject to Copyright. The Copyright Act, 1968 (Cth) permits certain reproduction and publication of South Australian legislation. In particular s. 182A of the Act enables a complete copy to be made by or on behalf of a particular person. For the reproduction or publication beyond that permitted by the Act, permission should be sought in writing from the South Australian Attorney-General's Department. Requests in the first instance should be addressed to the Attorney-General.

TOBACCO PRODUCTS REGULATION (INDIRECT ORDERS) AMENDMENT BILL

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Tobacco Products Regulation Act 1997. Read a first time.

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Tomorrow is World No Tobacco Day, so it is most appropri­ate that I am introducing this bill today. Some weeks ago a woman who purchases her groceries online received an email message to advise her that tobacco products would now be available for all purchasers who used this online service. You can click on any of the online supermarkets—they are still relatively new here in Adelaide but they are growing in popularity—and there you will be able to search for tobacco and purchase it online. I checked one site and it had four brands of tobacco, a total of 10 variations in terms of tar content, whether menthol or light, but they were offering them in cartons as a bulk purchase, with 20 packets per carton. They also sell pouches of tobacco, papers and filters for roll-your-own cigarettes and cigars.

We know that nicotine is a dangerous drug and is deliv­ered to the body through legally available tobacco products. I stress how dangerous this is. Earlier this year the highly regarded British medical journal, The Lancet, released a report ranking the harm caused by 20 drugs. Tobacco was ninth, just after amphetamines and ahead of cannabis, GHB and LSD. So, we are talking about a highly damaging legal drug. I have concerns about this in terms of minors, who might not be able to purchase tobacco products over the counter but who could get away with purchasing it in this way. It would be very easy to do this online and then, when the grocery order turns up, for a minor to be at the door to collect it and say, `Mum or dad is not here at the moment, but here's the money.'

For that reason this bill deals with a range of related methodologies by which people can order cigarettes in addition to the internet, and that includes mail, phone or fax. I raised my concerns about this new way of obtaining cigarettes with Dr Brenda Wilson of the Cancer Council and she responded:

This form of promotion and access to tobacco products is particularly focused on young people and is open to abuse in terms of undermining current advertising and marketing laws and investments made toward reducing sales to minors (policing age is more problematic when ordering over the internet).

She also mentioned, and this did come as a surprise to me:

It should be noted that this issue has already been identified as a priority by the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, which agreed in May 2005 that all governments would work collaboratively to ban the sale and advertising of tobacco products over the internet.

I must say I am a bit flabbergasted by that, if this is a priority. In May 2005, two years ago, it was listed as a priority, but it seems that nothing has happened. The world does move slowly, it seems. Because tobacco is a much more restricted product than it was 20 years ago, tobacco companies are always seeking news ways to maintain or increase their market share.

We should acknowledge that increasing market outlets for a restricted product such as tobacco is developing a new market for the product. It is not necessary to have tobacco products available over the internet. Tobacco kills—of that we can be certain. The facts and figures are there, we have a mountain of evidence proving that tobacco causes sickness, disability and death, so why have the Liberal Party at national level and the Labor Party at state level allowed this new market to emerge unhindered? Big tobacco thrives as we legislators stall. It is not in the interest of public health to simply sit and wait for action at the federal level.

In preparing this speech I became aware that this matter was raised at the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy last week, so it will be most interesting to hear what minister Gago has to say in regard to this bill. I have also just become aware today of a media release provided to me from the Victorian health minister, Bronwyn Pike, which has a very distressing content. It reads:

Victorian health minister Bronwyn Pike has called on Canberra to reverse a decision not to close a loophole which allows the internet sale of cigarettes. Ms Pike said she had put the matter on the agenda of the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, to be held in Canberra today [this is dated 19 May].

She said the Federal Parliamentary Secretary for Health, Christopher Pyne, had early last month announced that the federal government would not be addressing concerns around the sale and marketing of tobacco products on the internet. In a press release issued at the time, Mr Pyne said:

`The government has completed a review of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act. . . (and) the government does not intend changing this act at this time. . . the review has found that the act is working well to protect the Australian public from advertising messages.'

I am absolutely floored at this. I believe this is the same Christopher Pyne who tries to present himself as being tough on drugs—yet, and as I have already mentioned, tobacco is way more harmful than cannabis, GHB and LSD. The media release from the Victorian health minister Bronwyn Pike goes on:

Ms Pike said Canberra had inexplicably missed a golden opportunity to address concerns around the growing used [sic] of the internet to market and sell cigarettes—particularly to young people. `The commonwealth legislation needs urgent amendment. By dragging its heels, it is acting irresponsibly and endangering the health of young Australians,' Ms Pike said. Ms Pike said Canberra knew about the loopholes 18 months ago when it was reviewing the legislation. She said it was clear then that it would lead to cheap cigarettes being sold over the internet. `This allows tobacco companies to evade health warning regulations and payment of taxes through internet sales. It also appears that most internet vendors have weak or non-existent age verification procedures.

I think that is a matter of grave concern, and I believe it gives more strength to my arguments for the passage of this bill.

I know that this move would be more powerful if it were done at the federal level and, should the federal government decide to bring in a ban on internet tobacco sales, I will gladly let my bill lapse. Given that the parliamentary secretary for health and now the Minister for Ageing, Christopher Pyne, has said that the federal government will not do that, it is going to come down to state governments to take action. No other state governments are doing this at this time, but I would like to think that, by moving this bill today we in South Australia are taking the first step and leading the way, and, if this bill can be passed, we will be bringing other states along with us. Meanwhile, the inaction of the federal government necessi­tates a swift legislative response at state level to intervene to stop the sale of tobacco products over the internet.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER secured the adjournment of the debate.