❓ A WA parliamentary question challenges the government's decision to ban smoking in nightclubs while exempting hotels and taverns, alleging unfair competitive advantage. The response claims the decision was based on broad consultation and a pragmatic path to a total smoking ban, not competitive advantage.
AnsweredQoN 1324Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Government’s phasing-in approach to implementing smoking bans in public places. (1) Will the minister explain how the decision was arrived at to ban all smoking in nightclubs by December 2006 but to allow continuing exemption for hotels and taverns? (2) Is the minister aware that by discriminating against nightclubs in this way the Government is giving a competitive advantage to Australian Hotels Association members to the detriment of nightclubs? (3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(1) Will the minister explain how the decision was arrived at to ban all smoking in nightclubs by December 2006 but to allow continuing exemption for hotels and taverns? (2) Is the minister aware that by discriminating against nightclubs in this way the Government is giving a competitive advantage to Australian Hotels Association members to the detriment of nightclubs? (3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(2) Is the minister aware that by discriminating against nightclubs in this way the Government is giving a competitive advantage to Australian Hotels Association members to the detriment of nightclubs? (3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(1) Will the minister explain how the decision was arrived at to ban all smoking in nightclubs by December 2006 but to allow continuing exemption for hotels and taverns? (2) Is the minister aware that by discriminating against nightclubs in this way the Government is giving a competitive advantage to Australian Hotels Association members to the detriment of nightclubs? (3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(2) Is the minister aware that by discriminating against nightclubs in this way the Government is giving a competitive advantage to Australian Hotels Association members to the detriment of nightclubs? (3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(3) How does the minister justify this discrimination in how the smoke-free regulations are applied to licensed venues? The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
The PRESIDENT: That question sounded remarkably argumentative. However, we will see what the parliamentary secretary has to say. Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(1) The decisions on the new smoking and health regulations were made by Cabinet following broad consultation with the Department of Health, the wider community, industry and other interest groups. (2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
(2)-(3) Issues of potential competitive advantage were not a consideration in determining the approach taken in implementing the regulations. The approach taken was considered to be an effective and pragmatic path to the goal of a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.