Government-Business Essay

Environmental Tobacco Smoke Kills

Submission to the Queensland Government on the

Review of Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 2001

Bill Smith

For

John Kane

This assignment is approximately 1287 words in length

Contents

Introduction to Queensland Cancer Fund …3

Environmental Tobacco Smoke …3

Key Developments …3

The Silent Killer …4

Litigation …4

Existing No Smoking Bans …5

Benefits of Smoke Free …6

Conclusion …6

References …7

Introduction to the Queensland Cancer Fund.

From a desperate need in the community during the 1960’s to address concerns regarding cancer, the Queensland Cancer Fund (QCF) was born. Forty years on, the QCF is strategising to continue raising funds to combat the dreaded disease and supply sufficient treatment facilities for cancer patients. The organisation remains a ‘not for profit’ firm, although employing a range of professional staff for the services provided. The activities conducted by the QCF are diverse, but structured to allow the organisation to achieve its aims that include advancing cancer research and treatment and to increase community awareness of cancer. Similarly, research into cures for cancer, facilities for patients, cancer help lines and education programs all represent key areas that the QCF are involved in.

Environmental Tobacco Smoke

This submission addresses the concerns of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in public places, namely pubs, clubs, casinos and restaurants that causes illness and death to workers and patrons. Research is extensive and supports the long held belief that tobacco smoke is harmful. It is fact that over 4000 chemicals are contained in tobacco smoke including tar, addictive nicotine, carbon monoxide and carcinogens that cause cancer (Jarred, 2001:2 and AHMAC, 2000:3). Passive smoking, as ETS is often referred to, occurs when non-smokers inhale smoke that is either exhaled or emitted by smokers. For the thousands of hospitality workers and patrons exposed to ETS in licensed premises, the proposed review by the Government of the Queensland Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 2001 is extremely overdue.

Key Developments

Scientific research first began to appear during the 1970’s linking passive smoking and respiratory diseases but it wasn’t until 1981 that medical research on the effects of passive smoking was first published (Hirayama cited Jarred, 2001:16). Decades later in 1995, the Herron Report recommended that smoking not to be permitted in enclosed places including restaurants and hotels. Further, the report suggested the inclusion of outdoor areas specifically for smokers and that employees not be forced to service these areas (PEHS, 2000: 4). A few years later, the National Tobacco Strategy 1999-2002/3 was endorsed by all State and Commonwealth Health and Police Ministers with the major aim being the reduction of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. The Queensland Tobacco Action Plan 2000/01 – 2003/04 emerged soon afterwards. The strategy objectives and key strategy areas were to reduce exposure to tobacco smoke thus forming the framework of the document (Turner, 2001). Finally, Queensland followed the majority of the states with ETS legislation and passed the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products (Prevention of Supply to Children) Amendment Bill 2001 on May 3 2001 to be effective 31 May 2002 (NOHSC, 2001).

The Silent Killer

The statistics reveal a frightening story for the effects of tobacco smoke. For the thousands of scientific publications linking tobacco smoke to over 50 diseases, more than 3000 Queenslanders die annually due to tobacco related causes (QCF, 2002a:8). With less than a quarter of the state’s adult population being smokers, their filthy habit significantly contributes to this annual death toll that incidentally, far exceeds the state’s yearly road toll. Worst of all, smoking is the leading preventable cause of premature death and illness in the state but the Government still haven’t acted to end the disgusting conditions that hospitality workers or patrons have to endure in licensed premises. Instead, the community has to suffice with a measly review only of the act instead of immediate action of no smoking bans. Smoke free areas within an establishment simply do not work, as smoke drifts and ventilation systems are useless, exposing non smokers to environmental tobacco smoke (TDHHS, 2003). Research shows that workers and customers are being exposed to high levels of cardio and geno toxic tobacco by products that cannot be removed via ventilation systems (Repace and Lowry, 1993).

Litigation

For further consideration by the Government, is the emergence of litigation surrounding passive smoking. Several cases over recent years highlights that the judicial system is recognising the links with ETS and illness incurred by individuals. The National Occupational Health and Safety Commission published the findings of two recent cases. In the first instance, $466,00 was awarded by the NSW Supreme Court to a bar worker against her former employer in May 2001 who had served 23 years with the company. The jury found her throat cancer was a direct result of second hand smoke being inhaled by the bar attendant. In another case, a restaurateur had to pay $7600 in damages to an asthma sufferer who suffered a 2 month bout of severe asthma triggered by ETS in the restaurant. The court found the restaurant liable on breach of contract, breach of duty of care in negligence an occupier’s liability. The Government has ignored since 1986 the potential of liability of employers relating to tobacco compensation claims. Specifically, the Commonwealth Attorney General noted that ‘injury from passive smoking is reasonably foreseeable and that consequently such an injury could give rise to an action for damages at common law’. Five years later, the same was emphasised by the President of the Senate ‘the onus now appears to fall on employers and managers of facilities to take a more positive role in protecting non smokers’ (PEHS, 2000:6) The Government cannot disregard any longer the plight of workers or patrons in environments filled with tobacco smoke.

Existing No Smoking Bans

Finally, the idea of completely smoke free licensed premises is not new. Other countries have already implemented legislation banning smoking in restaurants and bars demonstrating their commitment and concern to non smokers. Ottawa introduced smoke free by laws in 2001 (NOHSC, 2001). The by laws ban smoking in all public places and workplaces. A year later, El Paso in Texas also found itself with similar bans (Huang, De and McCusker, 2004). Most impressive was Ontario’s bans in 1998, which sets them as pioneers in the field of no smoking bans in licensed premises (Ascenzi, 1998). By January of this year, five US states and 72 municipalities have passed laws that prohibit smoking in almost all workplaces, restaurants and bars. This is excellent and now Queensland must lead the way for Australia’s turn in implementing permanent smoke free legislation to protect all non smokers. The Premier of Queensland, Mr Peter Beattie, on a recent trip to Ireland was able to observe first hand no smoking in licensed premises in pubs visited. Mr Beattie, take the challenge and lead the ‘Smart State’ into introducing no smoking legislation immediately.

The Benefits of Smoke Free

In anticipating the hospitality industry association’s defence in not wanting this type of legislation to be introduced for fear of financial loss, the QCF wish to advise that non smoking premises are good for business. Evidence from those countries with no smoking bans in place have reported encouraging effects to their revenues. Sibbald (2001) found that a positive impact occurred in Canada after the bans were introduced. Restaurants and bars in Ontario are attracting more non smoking patrons while retaining smokers (either lighting up outside in the street or reducing their intake) (Ascenzi, 1998). A little more closer to home, an entrepreneurial bowls club on the Sunshine Coast went smoke free in 2001 (QCF, 2002b). The Maroochydore Swan Bowls Club has since enjoyed a substantial increase in membership of over 150% since the ban. The claims that smoke free policies would cause financial hardship simply aren’t true, as this research shows.

Conclusion

This submission has presented research and evidence that supports legislation of no smoking at all in licensed premises. The notion of conducting a review of the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 2001 is inadequate. The sole recommendation is to introduce legislation immediately to ban smoking in all licensed premises for the protection of both workers and patrons. The effects of ETS are well documented and researched and cannot be ignored any longer by the Queensland Government. Action must be taken now to stop the premature death of thousands of Queenslanders that can be prevented with clean air that workers and patrons deserve.

References

Ascenzi, Joseph (1998) Bars and Patrons Adjust To - and Ignore – New Law. The Business Press, Ontario, Jan 19 1998

ASH (2003). Smoke Free Public Places For The A.C.T. Action on Smoking and Health. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.ashaust.org.au/publications/ACTsubm03.doc

Huang, P., De, K. A. and McCusker, M. E. (2004) Impact Of A Smoking Ban On Restaurant and Bar Revenues. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Atlanta, Feb 27 2004

Jarred, W. (2001) Towards Improved Public Health, Research Bulleting no 3/01. Queensland Parliament Library. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Parlib/Publications_pdfs/books/rb0301wj.pdf

NOHSC (2001). Environmental Tobacco Smoke Watching Brief 2001. National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.nohsc.gov.au/ResearchCoordination/watchingbriefs/etspages/ETSWatchingbriefSept2001.pdf

NPHP (2000). National Response To Passive Smoking In Enclosed Public Places and Workplaces. A Background Paper. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.nphp.gov.au/publications/legislation/smoke_passive.pdf

PEHS (2000). Smoke Free Public Places. Regulatory Impact Statement. Public and Environmental Health Service. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/publichealth/smokefreeareas/pdfs/smokefree_RIS.pdf

QCF (2002a). Smoking Kills, A Submission On Behalf Of Public Health And The 553, 000 Queensland Smokers Who Want To Quit. Queensland Cancer Fund. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.qldcancer.com.au/cancer_info_and_services/PDF/SmokingKills.pdf

QCF (2002b). Smoke Free Club Bonanza. Queensland Cancer Fund. 14 May 2002, media release. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.qldcancer.com.au/Whats_New/Default.html

QCF (2004). Premier Checks Out Irish Smoking Bans For Queensland. Queensland Cancer Fund. 1 May 2004, media release. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.qldcancer.com.au/Whats_New/Default.html

TDHHS (2003). Smoke Free Areas Review. Tasmania Department of Health and Human Services. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.interact.dhhs.tas.gov.au/supportingdocs/89/smoke_free_areas_report.pdf

Turner, Paul. (2001) Tobacco Advocacy. Queensland Cancer Fund. Downloaded 10th May 2004

http://www.qldcancer.com.au/cancer_info_and_services/PDF/TobaccoAdvocacyWebsite01.pdf