Smoke Free Environments Bill - third reading

In my view, the passage of this bill today will be a great moment in our Parliament because I am certain it will do more to improve the quality of life in New Zealand than any other piece of legislation in this term of Parliament.

I am certain too, that in a few years time we will look back with incredulity and wonder why it was that we allowed people to smoke inside public places and pollute the very air we breathe with a toxic waste that contains 50 known carcinogens.

I am certain we will look back with incredulity and wonder why it was that the majority of people who don't smoke — the 75% of us — allowed the minority who do to put the health of all of us at risk by their habit, because the terrible truth about smoking is that every time someone lights up a cigarette indoors they put at risk the health of any other person who happens to be around them.

I am certain too, that we will look back and say what was all the fuss about — all those predictions of gloom and doom, of businesses collapsing because they are required to be smoke free.

I am not normally a betting woman but I will confidently bet that there will be a renaissance, not a collapse, in the hospitality industry, as customers revel in the new clean, pleasant indoor environment of the pub and the café.

I confidently predict that New Zealand's bars and clubs and cafes will enjoy a new life, once we have cleared the air.

And in making this prediction I would like to quote from an article by a sceptic who visited New York recently, determined that he was going to hate the newly imposed smoke free regulations.

"Neither the ban's proponents nor the principles underlying it have anything to commend them", he wrote. "Except for one thing: it works. Its impact has been magnificent. I'm just back from a week in New York city, much of that time in bars and restaurants and I've had a unique experience: not only do my clothes not reek of tobacco smoke, I've managed to enjoy all my food and drink without being nearly asphyxiated by neighbouring smokers."

"In New York the impact of legislation has been truly wonderful, reclaiming the city from smokers who almost never act considerately. I'll bet a jumbo packet of Marlboro Lite that it would work elsewhere too. So rise up and unite, clean air freedom lovers of the world, let's push to make our cities places in which we can all breathe freely."

The Green party is delighted that New Zealand is taking up this challenge, and that New Zealand will be only the third country in the world, after Norway and Ireland, to have smoke free hospitality industries. We are delighted that we are once again, leading the world in protecting our workers — in this case from the hazards of second hand smoke-- and by ensuring that all of can breathe clean, unpolluted air when we go out socially.

One issue which has been largely ignored in the debate is the fact that the OSH has identified second hand smoke as a work place hazard. With the new Health and Safety Act in force, employers have an obligation, a legal obligation, to remove workplace hazards, and so all employers in New Zealand, including bar and café owners, have a legal obligation right now to remove the hazard of second hand smoke from their workplaces.

So even if this legislation did not come into force I am certain we would have seen a raft of prosecutions from OSH, as a result of complaints by employees in the hospitality industry claiming that their health is being put at risk by being continuously exposed to a workplace hazard.

We expect employers to protect their employees from other workplace hazards such as asbestos and toxic chemicals. So why would we not expect them to protect their workers from the hazards of second hand smoke?

Contrary to what the nay sayers will claim, this bill is widely supported in the community. Thousands of New Zealanders are quietly cheering from the sidelines, and literally counting the days until we can go to work, or to eat or drink and breathe clean unpolluted air and not have to come home smelling like an ashtray.

We have witnessed a campaign of resistance against this legislation, filibusters by certain members and a concerted attempt to ridicule the legislation. Let us remember that there has been similar resistance, similar dire warnings, wherever legislation such as this has been introduced. In California and New York the critics were adamant — it was simply not going to work! It was going to be a disaster, Well it hasn't been, the majority of Californians and New Yorkers are absolutely delighted that no longer have to risk their health to go to work or have a drink in a pub.

A core argument of opponents of this bill is that people's property rights should take precedence over the rights of people to breathe clean air and have their health protected in public places.

If smokers were only harming themselves with their habit, then these arguments might sound credible. But the irrefutable fact is that two thirds of the smoke from a cigarette is exhaled into the air as second hand smoke and everyone around breathes it into their lungs even if we do not smoke. And that is the central reason why we need this legislation.

The Heart Foundation warns us that bars and places where smokers concentrate pose the greatest risk to passive smokers because of the concentration of smoke in these places. So I am confident we will see reduced staff sickness and absenteeism in the hospitality industry, as well as reduced chances of litigation.

We are pleased that two of our amendments have been accepted in the legislation: one prohibiting the sale of toy tobacco products to under 18 year olds, including toy cigarettes, and a second amendment that removes penalties from individual smokers.

Instead of waving a great big stick, and stigmatising smokers, this act will rely on social pressure, not heavy handed penalties, to get smokers to comply with the new law.

We note the predictions from the opposition that social sanctions will not work, but they have worked elsewhere, so why wouldn't it work here too? The truth is that the vast majority of smokers are aware that they are putting other people's health at risk every time they smoke indoors, and readily accept the necessity to go outside when they smoke.

The Green party is pleased that this legislation will extend to herbal products and cannabis if it is ever decriminalised. We find it odd and extraordinarily hypocritical that some of those who are most in favour of keeping penalties for cannabis smokers — who rail and demonise cannabis in fact — are opposed to any restrictions on smokers and appear happy to allow our bodies and lungs to be poisoned by second hand tobacco smoke.