Home

Finally there is an acknowledgment of the dangers of secondhand smoke by the City Of Melbourne and Frankston councils.

Melbourne City Council will roll out there zero tolerance crackdown on smokers dropping their butts on the footpath with a $234 on the spot fine for discarding a lite cigarette or $117 fine if it’s extinguished.

Frankston City Council are taking a tougher stance with a proposed exclusion zone for smoking which is still to go before council for approval. If common sense prevails, the new trial will commence in September and end on the first of March 2011. This will ban smoking on 3 major streets including opposite the railway station.

With all the documented studies of the dangers of second hand smoke, I find it strange why smoking is still allowed where members of the public are exposed to this carcinogenic toxic gas.

Making changes, whether to your eating habits or changing smoking behavior is usually slow, too many immediate changes leads to people reverting back to their old habits within a short period of time or resisting the change all together.

The major breakthrough was the ban of smoking in pubs , cafes and restaurants, followed by the ban of smoking in outdoor areas, within 5 meters of children’s playgrounds and then in cars with children.
Of course there was the fear mongering saying that patronage would be effected which is wasn’t so of course fear will be more fear mongering campaigns, especially when the big tobacco companies are the big losers.

Great to see smoking is banned in cars where there are children. As there is an acknowledgment by the government about the dangers of smoking in confined spaces, this ban should be introduced/extended across any confined public space.

Yes it is fantastic that it will be illegal to smoke while a minor or person under 18 years old is in the car as it is assumed that a minor is powerless to stop an adult from smoking.

I find it strange how smoking is still allowed in cafe’s, restaurant’s and bars where there is a wall missing, ie the window and front wall has been removed with the wall being reinstated further back to create an pseudo open space.

Is it possible for 100% of the smoke in these pseudo courtyards to miraculously rise without disturbance to the ceiling and travel out towards the street and towards the heavens? NO I don’t think so. We have this situation in Australia where the smoking lobby puts undue pressure on the government and the addiction to sales tax revenue on cigarettes is too string, the public are subjected to this health threat.

There has been some movement with the Moreland Council proposing a 5 meter smoking ban from Childrens playground that highlights the dangers of secondhand smoke. More importantly that the council acknowledges that exhaled cigarette smoke does not necessarily travel towards the sky.

We need to follow the leadership taken by the Queensland government in introducing more appropriate anti smoking laws.

When it comes to health, smoking is one aspect that has a huge impact. Unlike other staes in Australia, Queensland has shown true leadership in introducing smoking bans that actually reduce the exposure of secondhand smoke to innocent bystanders.

Pretty simple stuff, outdoors means no roof or a ceiling or enclosed by a solid covering, surrounded by walls (as my example), high fences and timber palings.

Pretty logical stuff, while there are always loop holes in these definition, it catches most places in Victoria that are legally defined as outdoor but really are enclosed.

So what’s stopping Victoria from adopting these tougher smoking laws in public spaces?

With all the warnings and the revised packaging is it really having an effect?

Well yes and no, my neighbour is utterly mortified by the cigarette pack that has a picture of a female with mouth cancer.
So disturbed in fact by this graphic image that he will keep an old packet so in the event that he gets the lucky dip of cigarette packets with the image of the female with oral cancer the contents can be transferred.
Yes it is having the desired effect but the behavior is being modified to get around the effect.

Something that has worked anecdotally in New Zealand have been the banning of ANY outdoor smoking, including any area that is merely covered by a roof with open walls.
The result, to $%^%ing hard for people to smoke, result they are forced to give up by the situation as the highly restrictive nature of smoking makes the effort greater than the reward.

So in Australia we have relaxed the laws and outdoor smoking has replaced indoor smoking at bars, cafes & pubs.
The Australian Government’s lack of leadership in following the Kiwi’s initiative demonstrates that the real effects of such a ban will really take effect, not for the premises where the smokers attend but to the the taxes generated from cigarettes.

I don’t know about you but I have never, I repeat never seen smoke from either :
a. A cigarette
b.The exhaling smoke from a person smoking going in a directly vertical direction.
With all the publish research about the effects of second hand smoke, why does the government surrender their powers to other interested parties?