Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to speak on the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010 and make some remarks on behalf of the opposition. The opposition will be giving its support to this bill. Everyone understands the importance of promoting positive health outcomes and encouraging healthier lifestyles amongst all Australians. We in this House all have a common desire to achieve a healthier society. The coalition believes that it is important to focus on preventative health. Treating people with chronic, preventable diseases helps alleviate the substantial economic and social costs and helps alleviate a very significant burden on out healthcare system.

Approximately a third of Australia’s burden of disease is attributable to modifiable risk factors, and tobacco smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable chronic disease amongst Australians. The National Preventative Health Taskforce identified that tobacco is currently the single biggest preventable cause of death and disease in Australia. Over three million people—that is, approximately 18 per cent of Australians aged 14 years and over—still smoke, with almost 2.9 million people smoking on a daily basis. About half of these smokers who smoke for prolonged periods will die early. This cost the community $31½ billion in 2004-05. Incredibly, almost one in five pregnant women report smoking during pregnancy, including 42 per cent of teenagers and 54 per cent of Indigenous women. This poses serious risks to the mothers and has long-lasting and far-reaching effects on their offspring. For every 1,000 smokers who quit, at least 40 will be spared a diagnosis of chronic illness.

So the figures are very clear. While reducing the incidence of smoking has been one of the success stories in health promotion over the last 20 or 30 years, it is clear that it has not all been in one direction. When the effort is not substantial, the smoking rates do plateau. It is obvious that the successes in health promotion here have been the result of actions by government, by the health professions and by individuals themselves in reducing the rates of smoking.

Australia has, overall, one of the lower smoking rates in the OECD and one of the lower smoking rates in the world. But, as the Preventative Health Task Force identifies, there are wide variations in the prevalence of smoking. Smoking remains very high in our Indigenous population, it is high in lower socioeconomic groups and it is high in groups with low education as well.

Of the actions that have been taken in the past, I am very proud that the coalition, when in government, changed the taxation of tobacco from a per weight basis to a per stick basis. That was a recommendation in the context of the new tax system in 2000, which was supported by all of the health groups and was seen as an important tobacco control measure. We, in opposition, also proposed an increase in the tobacco excise per stick in the Leader of the Opposition’s budget reply in 2009.

What this bill does is to update the legislation with regard to tobacco advertising. The Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act was introduced in 1992 at a time when advertising on the internet was much less widespread. This legislation makes it an offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet and in other electronic media. By restricting internet advertising of tobacco products in Australia, this goes some way to targeting smoking and its harmful effects. At present there is a lack of clarity over the regulations governing advertising on the internet. This legislation aligns tobacco advertising in the electronic media with restrictions in other media and at other retail points of sale.

This bill does not ban sales on the internet but bans advertising on the internet. It also makes it a requirement that the health guidelines and the health warnings are included in internet sales. For example, Coles and Woolworths do sell tobacco in their online sales, but this legislation will make clear the requirements for those online sales. Logos, pictures of packages and so on are not allowed under this legislation.

The Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act, which this is amending, currently governs the advertising of tobacco products in Australia. Currently, it bans advertisements via print and electronic media such as TV, radio, film et cetera. However, when the act was passed back in 1992, the use of the internet was not nearly as widespread as it is now. Consequently, the regulation application of the legislation was designed for more conventional media platforms.

On behalf of the opposition, I have engaged in extensive consultation with key stakeholders and there was widespread support for this legislation. Of course, the health groups and the anticancer groups are very supportive of tighter regulations for tobacco. The tobacco companies also did not see any issues with this legislation for them.

The coalition are supporting the passage of this legislation because we recognise there is more to be done in the area of preventative health and there is still more to be done in the area of tobacco control. We will be supporting this legislation and its objectives.

Craig Thomson (Dobell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

While recently flicking through the pay TV sports channels—and my wife always chides me for doing that far too often—I noticed that they were running highlights of an old one-day cricket match, a World Series match between Australia and Australia A. I was firstly captured by the host of iconic names such as Merv Hughes, Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath who were out there strutting their stuff. But it was not so much the big names of Australian one-day cricket that stood out. What was also impossible to ignore on the TV screen was the large ad for cigarettes in the background. These prominent banners plastered over the fence at the ground were placed strategically in the line of the TV cameras to gain maximum visual impact amongst the viewing audience.

It was not that long ago that this tobacco advertising was being beamed into the lounge rooms of millions of Australians during prime time sports programs. It would not have been thought of as out of the ordinary to see these big cigarette ads filling so much of the TV screen because they were still permitted then. The cricket highlights I spoke about were part of the 1994-95 World Series, just 15 years or so ago. Part of the reason tobacco advertising stood out in those old cricket highlights is that the norm now is that such advertising is nowhere to be seen, at least not on television.

Australia has made great progress in preventative health when it comes to smoking, and much of that has been attributed to the crackdowns on tobacco advertising. Smoking rates in Australia have been declining since the mid-1970s when advertising bans first started—down from around 35 per cent to around 18 per cent to 19 per cent today. But, despite what may be seen as a dramatic drop in the rate of tobacco use, it remains Australia’s single largest cause of premature death and disease, killing 15,000 Australians a year and costing our economy $31.5 billion.

Quite a revolution has been occurring in the way that sellers of any products get their message across to potential buyers. As digital technology evolves at a rate which is sometimes difficult to keep up with, advertisers are constantly finding new and innovative ways to sell products. This advertising, unfortunately, includes tobacco. Cigarettes are now being heavily promoted on the internet and there are serious concerns and growing concerns that both online advertising and social network sites are being used to promote tobacco to young Australians. Young people, especially those between the ages of 24 and 29, currently have the highest rate of smoking amongst Australians. Just as tobacco marketers have in the recent past infiltrated youth-friendly venues, it is most conceivable that they would have a presence on youth-friendly websites.

While the internet is being used extensively to sell cigarettes, its largely unregulated status holds much potential as a vehicle for both promoting smoking and advertising tobacco products. Internet use by young people is part of their everyday life. More than half of Australia’s youth and young adults use the internet on a daily basis. Many popular youth websites rely on users to provide content in the form of videos, diaries, photographs and music. There is the potential for the anonymous exploitation of these sites, including by tobacco marketers and retailers, to reach a large audience, particularly youth, by both promoting and culturally undermining smoking.

One study examining the tobacco content on the video-sharing website YouTube found that tobacco imagery is ‘prolific and accessible’ on the site. Videos with pro-smoking content ranged from images of young men and women smoking, to smoking fetish scenarios, to magic tricks featuring cigarettes. Additionally, vintage cigarette advertisements appear on the site. While the research was unable to determine whether the tobacco industry had posted any of this material on the website, there was evidence that distributors of the Swedish smokeless tobacco had posted promotional videos on the site. A content analysis study of pro-tobacco websites revealed that tobacco has a pervasive presence on the internet, especially on e-commerce sites and sites featuring hobbies, recreation and fetishes. Only 11 per cent of the sites examined contained health warnings. The pro-tobacco sites frequently associated smoking with glamorous and alternative lifestyles and with images of attractive, young males and females. Many of the websites offered interactive site features that are potentially appealing to young people.

Several Australian websites also sell cigarettes. These sites often do not post health warnings, nor do they comply with state and territory based legislation surrounding point-of-sale advertising. In May 2005, following media reports about internet tobacco sales, the Australian Federal Police announced an ongoing investigation as to whether owners of tobacco sales sites are breaking laws prohibiting tobacco advertising. We are now further toughening our laws on tobacco advertising. Our internet tobacco legislation will mean that online sales, advertising and promotion of tobacco will now be subject to the same kinds of restrictions that are placed on over-the-counter sales. This is an important step in reaching the benchmarks set under the COAG National Healthcare Agreement of reducing smoking rates to 10 per cent by 2018 and halving the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander smoking rate. Together with our efforts to mandate the plain packaging of tobacco products from 2012, Australia is on track to have the world’s toughest measures against tobacco.

The main impact of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010 will be on retailers who advertise their products without the required health warnings, and as being ‘tax free’. Retailers, including the major supermarket chains and specialist tobacco and cigar retailers, will be consulted on a draft of the regulations once developed.

Let us have a quick look at some of the background to this bill. On 29 April 2010, the Minister for Health and Ageing announced that the government would legislate to restrict Australian internet advertising of tobacco products, bringing the internet into line with restrictions already in place in other media. This followed consultation with stakeholders on the legislation conducted from 2007 and was part of a package of measures to tackle smoking which also included increasing tobacco excise by 25 per cent above normal CPI adjustments; legislation to require plain packaging for tobacco products; and a targeted social marketing campaign to curb smoking among high-risk and disadvantaged groups.

This bill addresses an ambiguity that exists regarding internet advertising of tobacco products, amending the act to specifically include advertising over the internet and other electronic media. Regulations will be made under the amendment act to prescribe specific requirements as to the size, content, format and location of tobacco advertisements; the inclusion of health warnings, including graphic health warnings; warnings about age restrictions on the sale of tobacco products; information about any fees, taxes and charges payable in relation to tobacco products; and age restricted access systems for access to tobacco advertisements.

Part 8 of schedule 5 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 provides carriage service providers—for example, internet service providers and internet content hosts—with legal protection from civil and criminal proceedings in relation to the content they provide. This protection will be unaffected and the proposed legislation does not seek to impose any obligation on internet service providers for monitoring content accessed via their sites. It is expected that the proposed amendments will have little or no impact on the three major tobacco companies. The main impact will be on retailers who advertise their products without the required health warnings and as ‘tax free’, therefore advertising ‘cheap’ cigarettes. Retailers, including the major supermarket chains and specialist tobacco and cigar retailers, will be consulted on a draft of the regulations once developed.

While the amendments will apply to the promotion of tobacco on social networking sites, the identification of the publisher of a tobacco advertisement on a social networking site is difficult. Many of the advertisements or promotions on sites such as Facebook, YouTube and MySpace are placed by anonymous users, so identifying or prosecuting the publisher can be difficult.

This bill is an important bill in relation to the progressive nature of trying to make sure that we can reach the targets of reducing smoking in Australia. It makes it an offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet and in other electronic media such as mobile phones or computers unless the advertisement complies with state and territory legislation or Commonwealth regulations. The offence provisions contained in section 15A of the proposed amendments will apply to any person who publishes a tobacco advertisement on the internet or via any electronic means.

The meaning of ‘published in Australia’ has been extended in the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Act 2010, the amendment act, to apply to circumstances where the advertisement did not originate in Australia, or its origin cannot be determined and the advertiser had a significant Australian connection. Such a connection would be where a publisher who may or may not be the defendant publisher is: an Australian citizen; a permanent resident; an entity that was incorporated or formed in Australia; a foreign person in Australia; or a foreign entity or unincorporated body with its central management and control in Australia. Therefore, the offence provision would have, to some extent, extraterritorial operation. This is justified on the basis that the internet and other electronic media are potential means of publishing material that is accessible to the public in Australia that would be prohibited under the amendment act if other means of publication were used. This extraterritorial operation of the provisions is restricted by the fact that there must be an Australian connection, as explained.

It has been proven through much research and by way of a range of studies and gathering of facts and figures that tobacco advertising does encourage people to smoke, especially younger Australians. Therefore, we must do everything we can to limit the opportunities tobacco marketers have to increase the sales of their products through the new media, mainly via the internet, on social networking sites, and through personal communication devices such as mobile phones.

It is important that the coalition support this, and I note that the shadow spokesman has. We hope the opposition take the next step, like the Australian Labor Party, and ban donations from tobacco companies as well because that is part of making sure we do everything we possibly can to discourage Australians from smoking. I would welcome that announcement from the opposition some day soon.

This bill will make it much tougher for tobacco retailers and marketers to exploit the vulnerability that younger people in particular may have in trying their products and potentially becoming addicted to smoking. Smoking, as I have already said, costs the Australian economy $31.5 billion a year and sees 15,000 Australians dying every year. We need to be doing everything we possibly can to encourage people not to take up this habit. This bill is an important step in making sure that that happens, and I commend it to the House.

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010 is very important. As you have heard from our shadow spokesman, we certainly agree with the government that we need to do all that we can to reduce the number of Australians starting to smoke and to help those who are already addicted to drop this very unhealthy habit. We need to ensure that the intentions of all governments to continue restrictions on tobacco product advertising extend to the internet and other electronic media. As the member for Dobell has just said, so many interactions now take place in the electronic media. It is not simply enough to ban billboard, paper, television and radio advertising. We need to understand that a lot of modern communication takes place via the internet, on Facebook and other social networks, via electronic media and, therefore, tobacco advertising must also be banned from those mediums.

Tobacco advertising restrictions have been in place since 1973 in Australia. The health hazards associated with smoking have been known for a very long time. Since 1973, Australian governments, one after another, have tried to make sure that Australians were aware of the health hazards and have curtailed advertising. We have come a very long way since the First World War and Second World War, when cigarettes were given as part of a serving man’s rations and tobacco smoking was seen as a harmless relaxation and in fact was thought to do some therapeutic good in helping to calm the nerves and helping people through difficult and stressful situations.

We now understand that tobacco has an enormous human toll, not just for those who smoke but for people who are in the way and inhale cigarette smoke second-hand. We have been very successful in reducing smoking rates in Australia. We have seen a drop in the number of Australians smoking from 30.5 per cent in 1988 to 16.6 per cent in recent times. That is a very substantial drop in the numbers. This means that many more Australians are having a chance to lead a healthy life. However, 15,000 Australians still die from smoking related diseases every year and that costs the economy some $31.5 billion, not to mention the sadness and distress associated with losing a loved one who has died as a consequence of their smoking habit.

In 2007, some 16.6 per cent of Australians aged 14 and over were smoking daily. That is a very sad statistic because it is the young, particularly young females, who are now taking up smoking, even though the cost of a packet of cigarettes is very substantial.

This bill is part of a package which included the 25 per cent tobacco excise increase introduced in April 2010, record investment in antismoking social marketing campaigns, and legislation to mandate plain packaging of tobacco products by 2012. This is a very important part of that package. In 1992 a very rigid ban on tobacco advertising was passed—the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992. This act is the primary vehicle governing advertising of tobacco products in Australia. It makes it an offence to give publicity to or to promote tobacco products. Giving away samples also needs to be banned, given the vulnerability of the very young. The act applies to all tobacco products, including pipes, cigars, pipe tobacco, loose tobacco and cigarette papers. It is very important to remember that tobacco does not just come in ready-made cigarettes.

Since the passage of the act in 1992 the use of the internet as an advertising medium has become increasingly widespread. That is why this 2010 bill, which we are debating in 2011, is so important. The internet is clearly a major vehicle by which young people in particular can be exposed to tobacco advertising. Clearly, Australia has always been concerned about the effects of tobacco advertising since the health impacts became well known. We are now, today, seeking to strengthen the arm of the government in ensuring we do not have tobacco advertising continuing in the electronic media.

While we are strong on trying to help people give up tobacco smoking and strong on trying to stop people taking up smoking, which is so addictive, as we know, on the other hand we ignore the harmful effects of alcohol and the advertising of alcoholic products. For example, we still do not have labelling on alcohol which warns that it is a significant health risk particularly for women who are pregnant, that alcohol abuse is harmful to your health and that alcohol is harmful for minors in particular. Other countries that have health warning labels on alcohol include the United States, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, India, Sweden, Taiwan, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

So we have to wonder: why is Australia dragging the chain when it comes to advertising the harms of alcohol on products such as beer and other alcoholic beverages? A lot of our wineries and beer producers export their products to the countries that require label warnings. Those bottles or containers of alcohol must be labelled according to the other country’s laws before the product can enter into those countries. It seems extraordinary that we stick a label on Australian products so that they can go into the United States—a government warning that says ‘According the to Surgeon General women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects’, and if we send wine into France it must say, ‘Alcohol abuse is dangerous to health’, but we do not make it absolutely clear in Australia to those who pick up a bottle or a container of alcohol that alcohol is damaging to the health in the same way that smoking of cigarettes is dangerous to health.

A review of food labelling law and policy, called Labelling Logic 2011, has just been delivered to the Australian government. It is in remembrance of Dr Trevor Beard OBE, whose passionate contribution to this review and food reform more generally is acknowledged and appreciated. The panel members included Neal Blewett, Nick Goddard, Simone Pettigrew, Chris Reynolds and Heather Yeatman. They have put a number of recommendations to this government and one of them, recommendation 24, is:

That generic alcohol warning messages be placed on alcohol labels but only as an element of a comprehensive multifaceted national campaign targeting the public health problems of alcohol in society.

I could not agree with that recommendation any more strongly. I think it is an important recommendation. I repeat, it is extraordinary that in a country like Australia—where we have comprehensively understood the dangers of cigarette smoking, have sought to prevent people taking up cigarette smoking in the first instance and have tried to help people give up smoking—we ignore another product, which causes serious health effects. Alcohol causes serious problems for family members in terms of alcohol fuelled violence. It causes serious problems with accidents, lack of productivity and non-genetic birth defects in children. In fact, foetal alcohol syndrome is a serious problem amongst Australian children, particularly in some Indigenous communities. That condition is a consequence of the mother consuming alcohol during the early stages of her pregnancy. The sad thing about the permanent intellectual and physical disabilities that are manifest in foetal alcohol syndrome in the newborn is that this condition is totally preventable. If the mother had not consumed alcohol during her pregnancy the baby would not have been born with permanent, irreversible intellectual and physical handicap.

Surely a country like ours must bite the bullet. We must now pick up the task of trying to make sure that Australians—despite a great drinking culture that is well entrenched in our society—tackle alcohol abuse. We must do this, in particular, through labelling, in the way that we sought to reduce the harm from tobacco smoking with a very effective ban on advertising and through quit smoking campaigns.

I commend this bill to the House. This bill makes sure that tobacco advertising will also be banned if it occurs in the electronic media. I strongly urge this government to consider also the need to ban alcohol advertising and to ensure—in line with other countries, both developed and developing, who want to protect their citizens from the harms of alcohol abuse—that labelling on alcohol products reflects that it is a health hazard.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010, and I do so as a former smoker. I know only too well the damage that I have done to my own body by smoking and I firmly believe that the government has a responsibility to encourage smokers to quit and to discourage people—especially young people—from taking it up.

At the core of this bill is the unfortunate reality that every time you smoke a cigarette you are contributing to your own demise. Recent anti-smoking ads tell us that if you are smoker, lung cancer does not discriminate. We should not exempt tobacco advertising from the prohibition simply because that advertising it is delivered on a particular platform.

I also support this bill due to an unfortunate reality that exists in my electorate of Greenway. According to the New South Wales Department of Health, Western Sydney, where most of my electorate lies, experiences some the highest rates of avoidable deaths from causes amenable to health care. This research shows 77.4 per cent of males under the age of 75 will die of avoidable deaths. A study undertaken by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare in 2007 compared lung cancer mortality rates amongst people living in Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales and Australia. This study found that people in Western Sydney experienced the highest lung cancer mortality rate when compared to the aforementioned regions, and this is why I have a special responsibility to my electorate to support this bill.

Labor has a proud anti-smoking record. In April last year, the government announced its plans to increase tobacco excise by 25 per cent. We have invested record amounts in anti-smoking social marketing campaigns and we have proposed legislation to mandate plain packaging of tobacco products. But we can always do more to reduce smoking rates and that is why I am very pleased to speak in support of this bill.

This legislation builds on the government’s proud record of taking action against smoking, making it an offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet and in other forms of electronic media, such as mobile devices or computers. As the bill’s explanatory memorandum states:

The offence provisions contained in section 15A of the proposed amendments will apply to any person who publishes in Australia a tobacco advertisement in the Internet or via any electronic means.

The bill extends the definition of the term ‘published in Australia’ to include circumstances whereby the advertisement did not originate in Australia or where the origin is unknown and the advertiser had a significant Australian connection. This could include a situation in which the publisher is an Australian citizen, a permanent resident, a foreign person in Australia or a foreign entity. Consequently, the offence provisions would have, to some extent, extraterritorial operation. The maximum penalty offence under these amendments is $13,200.

As members would be aware, the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992 banned most forms of tobacco advertising, specifically the broadcasting and publication of messages and images promoting the use of tobacco products. This was a response to an increase in incidental advertising by tobacco companies, specifically through the sponsorship of major sporting events and competitions. For example, the Cancer Council highlights the fact that in 1980 the biggest sponsors of sport in Australia were Phillip Morris, Amatil and Rothmans, who also happened to be the three largest tobacco companies in the country at that time.

Like the member for Dobell, I remember growing up and watching the cricket on TV over the summer holidays and the Benson & Hedges logo was plastered in nearly every shot. In fact, the Cancer Council’s research reports that the Benson & Hedges name received a full 88 minutes of televised coverage on just one day of the Sydney test in 1988. Similarly, a longstanding sponsorship arrangement between Rothmans-Winfield and the New South Wales Rugby League required the league to assist Rothmans in the advertising and promoting of Rothmans’ products. To achieve this objective, the league was required to fly the Winfield flags at all competition matches, to play the Winfield theme music at matches, to refer to the competition as the Winfield Premiership, to display the Winfield and Rothmans logos at match venues, and to display floats and other visuals featuring Rothmans’ products during the grand final.

Such a blatant means of promoting tobacco now seems highly inappropriate; however, at the time it was considered the norm. It was a dangerous norm that directly contributed to an uptake of smoking by many people, especially young people. Considering the popularity of sport in Australia, the close connection between tobacco companies and sporting competitions would have glamorised smoking. Indeed, there is a paradox in linking tobacco advertising and sport. As Stephen Martin, who as a member of this place in 1992 and who introduced the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Bill to the House, said:

There can hardly be a more bizarre association than that between a product which is known to be a killer and the health giving nature of sport.

The bill that was introduced in 1992, and subsequently passed, put an end to this insidious practice. However, there is no way that the law-makers of 1992 could have foreseen the rapid expansion of the internet and the development of online advertising. The growth of the internet and online advertising has in turn created an element of ambiguity as to how the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act should be applied. I am pleased that this legislation addresses this ambiguity.

Study after study shows a clear link between tobacco advertising and rates of smoking, and in turn there is a clear link between tobacco advertising and smoking related diseases. For instance, it is estimated that banning tobacco advertising could lead to a reduction in smoking by six per cent. It is also clear that incomplete or ambiguous bans on tobacco advertising have a limited effect on reducing smoking levels. A 2000 study published in the Journal of health economics, ‘The effect of tobacco advertising bans on tobacco consumption’ argued that incomplete bans have had:

… little or no effect (on smoking rates) because companies transfer expenditure to media in which advertising is still allowed.

There is one other point I would like to raise—that is, the issue of political donations from tobacco companies. I believe it is wrong. Despite the fact that tobacco is a known killer, the coalition knows that it receives money from tobacco companies. I would like to note that the Labor Party does not receive funding from the tobacco industry. This industry makes a product that is responsible for the deaths of over 15,000 Australians every year, costing the economy $31.5 billion per annum. This loss of life and the social costs can be prevented by a reduction in the level of smoking across our community. This issue requires leadership and this is the government to provide that, as was evident in Labor’s decision to stop taking money from tobacco companies in 2004. I urge those opposite who have been touched by preventable deaths from cancer—and statistics tell us that it is just about all of us—to make a principled stand on the issue. I assure you the community will back you, those on this side of the House will back you and the children of those parents who will die from lung cancer will also back you.

The prohibition of tobacco advertising has a central role to play in reducing the rates of smoking, particularly amongst young people. Young people who smoke occasionally or socially become heavier smokers as they become older and have greater difficulty quitting. This becomes even more alarming when we consider the fact that only five years ago seven per cent of young people aged 12 to 15 years and 17 per cent of young people aged 16 to 17 years were smokers.

The popularity of new media technology amongst our youth has allowed advertising to access our young people in extremely pervasive and indirect ways. Targeted ads are a form of internet marketing. Using sophisticated data-collecting technologies, websites can combine a user’s personal information with surfing preferences to create ads that are specifically tailored for that user. On Facebook alone there are over 200,000 people who list smoking as an interest, allowing advertisers to specifically target this group of people and their friends. It is no secret that those besieged by smoking advertisers are our young people. I believe this worrying reality can be curtailed by passing this bill.

Blacktown City Council, in which much of my electorate lies, has the highest number of smoking attributable hospitalisations compared to any other local government area in New South Wales. For this reason I believe I have a special obligation as a member in this place to support measures that reduce the rates of smoking across our community, and that is what I will be doing by voting in favour of this bill.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like my Labor colleagues, I am very pleased to be able to add my support for the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010. I am sure they, like me, are very proud to be part of a government that has made tackling smoking rates and tobacco one of the major priorities in our health reform package. A lot of what we are doing to regulate tobacco, including prohibiting advertising and increasing the excise on tobacco products last year, have come out of the recommendations of the National Preventative Health Strategy. This is definitely something that is part of our broader health reform program—where preventative health is seen as a key to not only improving the quality of life of people but also making sure that our health budget in Australia is able to meet the future demands that are going to be placed on it. We really need to make sure that as a government we send clear signals and provide relevant assistance to people right across the community so they can take more responsibility for their health and improve their own health and wellbeing.

The bill before us today is the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010. This bill takes Australia further down the road that we have been on for some decades now in restricting and regulating the advertising of tobacco products. Australia has had a really good record in bringing down smoking rates over the past few years, and it is common sense that a big part of that reduction in smoking rates could be attributed to the tightening of tobacco advertising that has happened through successive pieces of legislation.

We have heard from previous speakers that this very much goes back to the 1970s when the first national ban was imposed on direct tobacco advertising on radio and television. There were all sorts of loopholes and ways around that particular regulation in those days, and so there have been iterations over the following decades to try to tighten these up. In 1989 the Commonwealth government imposed a ban on print advertising of tobacco products, and in 1992, an attempt was made through the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act to close some of those loopholes and to get some uniformity across Australia because different things were appearing in different states and this allowed advertising of tobacco products to happen through the backdoor. So in 1992 the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act was introduced, and since then it has become the primary vehicle governing the advertising of tobacco products in Australia. It makes it an offence to give publicity to or to promote tobacco products.

Since then we have seen the explosion of new media technologies. Advertising and communication can now happen in ways that were not even dreamt of in 1992. Of course the use of the internet and social media sites have become very popular ways of communicating, particularly in getting messages across to young people, so that is where the Australian government has seen a need to act and that has brought about this bill. This bill is about clearing up any ambiguity that might still be in place about the legality of people advertising tobacco products on the internet. The amendment we are debating today makes it a specific offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet and all other electronic media and future technologies, unless such advertising complies with state or territory legislation or with Commonwealth regulations.

Section 34 of the act allows:

The Governor-General may make regulations prescribing matters:

(a)

required or permitted by this Act to be prescribed; or

(b)

necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.

It is proposed that regulations will be made under the act to prescribe specific requirements as to the size, content, format and location of tobacco advertisements; the inclusion of health warnings; warnings about age restrictions on the sale of tobacco products; information about any fees, taxes and charges payable in relation to tobacco products; and age-restricted access systems for access to tobacco advertisements. The maximum penalty for each of those offences is $13,200.

We see this as an important part of our overall strategy in reducing smoking in Australia: 2.9 million Australians smoke each day and smoking continues to be the leading cause of preventable deaths in Australia. Each year smoking kills 15,000 Australians and costs the economy more than $31 billion. The Labor government has made this a priority in our preventative health strategy, and we have already taken the lead in things like the increase in tobacco excise. It was the first increase in tobacco excise, above inflation, in more than a decade—an increase of 25 per cent.

We are really trying to tackle the use of tobacco with everything at our disposal as a government, and we need to make sure that everything is pointing in the same direction, so we are increasing the cost of tobacco products as an incentive for people to give up smoking. We are also, through the legislation that is before the House today, making sure that we strictly regulate the advertising and promotion of tobacco, particularly to young people. As has been well-publicised, we have also foreshadowed that legislation will come before this House later this year to introduce plain packaging of cigarettes and tobacco products—a world first. That is going to be a major step forward in the regulation of tobacco in this country, and another part of the government’s determination to bring smoking rates down below the already internationally low rates that we have here in Australia.

We have also seen the start of a major advertising campaign. We saw the start of the new ads focusing on the health effects of smoking earlier this year. These are all things that have been recommended by the National Preventive Health Taskforce, and we really do remain committed to bringing down the smoking rates and doing everything we need to do as a government to make that happen.

There is one important thing I have neglected to mention which also came into effect earlier this year, and it underscores the fact that this is a very comprehensive policy agenda. At the start of the year we also added nicotine patches to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, making sure that people who want to reduce or quit smoking are given every assistance to do so. If they are low-income earners they are able to get those products very affordably, thanks to the subsidy under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

As I have said before, I am very proud to be part of a government that has made this a priority. As the member for Greenway pointed out, it is often the people in our electorates who can least afford tobacco products and the kinds of treatment that would be required if they were diagnosed with cancer or other health effects of daily smoking. We really owe it to them to stand up to tobacco companies and make it as difficult as possible for them to get their message out and recruit new smokers and new consumers for their products. This is what this legislation today is all about. I am really pleased that it is part of a comprehensive package of measures, including the excise increase last year and the addition of nicotine patches to the PBS. I cannot wait to debate the bill later on in the year. That will see Australia take the lead in this area of tobacco regulation, by introducing the plain packaging of cigarettes. In the meantime, I commend this current bill to the House.

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak about the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010. The bill addresses an ambiguity that exists regarding internet advertising of tobacco products, amending the act to specifically include advertising over the internet and other electronic media. This bill makes it an offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet and other electronic media such as mobile phones and computers unless the advertising complies with state and territory legislation or Commonwealth regulations.

The Gillard Labor government is committed to reducing the effects of tobacco on Australia’s population. We acknowledge that tobacco remains one of the leading causes of preventable deaths amongst Australians. Our message is clear: smoking kills. Research tells us that people who begin smoking in their teen years are more likely to become regular smokers, smoke more heavily, have difficulty quitting and are at greater risk of getting smoking related diseases. The majority of adult smokers say they wish they had never started and that they would like to stop. In fact, around 80 per cent of Australian smokers have made attempts to quit. Tobacco causes more illness and death than any other drug. In 2004-05, 14,900 died from smoking related diseases, which accounts for around 89 per cent of all drug caused deaths. Research estimates that one in two lifetime smokers will die from a disease caused by their smoking.

Current marketing practices by the tobacco industry may be contributing to an increased rate of smoking amongst children. Whilst tobacco users are quitting every day, they are replaced by new smokers, most of whom are adolescents. The fact that adolescents smoke the most highly advertised brands indicates that they are responsive to these marketing campaigns. Research tells us that 70 per cent of young people are receptive to tobacco advertising. The tobacco industry’s advertising and promotional products are filled with messages and images that reflect the qualities teenagers value, such as popularity, independence and ‘coolness’. The marketing approaches imply that these qualities can be achieved by using their tobacco products.

There is a strong linkage between tobacco promotional activities and the uptake of smoking among adolescents. Brand loyalty is usually established with a child’s first cigarette. Children relate their brand selection to the influences of advertising, free sampling, promotional items, package design and the implied health benefits of low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes.

Large promotional pushes by cigarette marketers have been linked with increased levels of daily smoking among adolescents. Tobacco marketing is a stronger influence in encouraging adolescents to initiate the smoking uptake process than peer, family or other social influences. There is clear evidence that children’s attention is attracted by cigarette advertising and that they remember it. A comprehensive ban would have the largest impact on youth and young adult smoking.

On average, people smoke their first cigarette at the age of 16. Therefore, we need to target mobile phone and internet forms of advertising to ensure this age group are not bombarded with pro-tobacco marketing. This bill does exactly that. The media platforms that are accessed by young people today are continually evolving. The internet is a major vehicle through which young people can be exposed to tobacco advertising. Unregulated internet marketing and the promotion of tobacco products undermine the effectiveness of the TAP Act. That is why this amendment is so important.

We need to change the perception that is portrayed in advertising that smoking is the norm and bring retail and internet sales in line with each other. ComScore, a global leader in measuring the digital world, has estimated that nearly nine million Australians visited a social networking site in June 2009, making it one of the most popular content categories on the web. This includes websites such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter. Facebook was the most visited social networking destination, with more than six million visitors, growing 95 per cent from the previous year. MySpace ranked second, with 3.5 million visitors, up by five per cent, followed by Windows Live Profile with nearly two million visitors. Twitter witnessed the most substantial growth, surging to 800,000 visitors in June, up from just 13,000 a year ago. It is concerning that tobacco products are advertised and targeted on the internet using social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook. It means that young people can easily be exposed to cigarette advertising that may not contain any health messages at all.

To demonstrate the effectiveness of social network marketing, information on advertising on Facebook can be found in the 2010 Nielsen online Asia-Pacific report. From this report we learn that social media is having an increasing impact on consumers’ purchasing decisions. In the Asia-Pacific, online product reviews are the third most trusted source of information when making purchase decisions, behind family and friends. A survey of 117 companies in September 2009 by E-tailing shows that Facebook, blogs, Twitter and customer reviews are considered the most effective tactics for mobilising consumers to talk up products online. Tobacco companies know online advertising works.

While the amendments will apply to the promotion of tobacco on social networking sites, we acknowledge that the identification of the publisher of a tobacco advertisement on a social networking site is difficult. Many of the advertisements or promotions on sites such as Facebook, YouTube and Myspace are placed by anonymous users, so identifying or prosecuting the publisher can be difficult. This should not deter the passing of this legislation.

We need to do all we can as a government to limit the harmful advertising that is already available. The cost of tobacco use in Australia is high. According to Quit Victoria, in the financial year 2004-2005, the total social cost of tobacco use in Australia was $31.5 billion. This accounted for 56.2 per cent of the total social costs of all drugs, including alcohol and illicit drugs. Social costs include costs to government, business, smokers and their families. The figures include some costs of involuntary smoking, such as second-hand smoke exposure in the home and the exposure of unborn children to the effects of their mothers’ smoking. These costs are mostly imposed upon the young. Children under 15 years account for 25 per cent of deaths, 96 per cent of hospital bed days and 91 per cent of hospital costs attributable to involuntary smoking.

In my research into smoking, I came across a harrowing phrase: ‘imagine if a passenger airplane crashed in Australia each week’. This is approximately how many people die from smoking each week: 290 people. I will say it again: smoking is the largest single cause of death and disease in Australia. We as a government have a responsibility to try to curb smoking levels.

Consider the health effects: Some of the diseases caused by smoking include: cancer of the lip, lung, tongue, mouth, throat, nose, nasal sinus, voice box, esophageus, pancreas, stomach, kidney, bladder, cervix and bone marrow, along with heart disease, stroke, emphysema, asthma and blindness. As a former administrator at the Launceston General Hospital, it is evident to me that smoking not only has a terrible effect on health but also is a strong addiction that is hard to kick. Too many patients in every hospital around this nation are suffering because of tobacco. World renowned medical practitioners agree. Former US Surgeon General Dr Charles Koop once stated:

… cigarette smoking is clearly identified as the chief, preventable cause of death in our society …

Some 20 years earlier, Dr Luther Terry, another US Surgeon General, released the first Surgeon Generals report on smoking and health. This landmark report linked smoking with cancer, heart disease and emphysema. He stated:

… no reasonable person should dispute that cigarette smoking is a serious health hazard.

I wanted to speak on this very important bill today because in my home state of Tasmania there is evidence that smoking rates have increased despite decreases in national trends. Alarmingly, a large number of Tasmanian women continue to smoke during pregnancy. In 2005, 27.6 per cent of pregnant women were found to have smoked during pregnancy—15.8 per cent having smoked fewer than 10 cigarettes per day and 11.8 per cent having smoked more than 10 a day. The high rate of smoking by women of child-bearing age is a major concern, not only for the health and wellbeing of young women but also because of the impact on fertility rates and on babies and small children exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. In 2004, 50 per cent of the Tasmanian Aboriginal adult population were found to be current smokers. This is far too high.

I am most pleased to say that, in my local community, the Launceston City Council has taken a proactive approach to curb smoking in public areas such as the mall and near bus stations in the city centre. I extend to them my thanks and congratulations. The move was not without community debate, but it was the right decision. Our state Labor government was the first in Australia to introduce a ban on indoor smoking, such as in restaurants, pubs and clubs. What a great difference that made. They followed this by enacting legislation making it an offence to smoke in a car with person under the age of 18.

Tobacco use is Australia’s single largest cause of premature death and disease, killing 15,000 Australians a year and costing our economy $31.5 billion. Now is the time to act. This amendment should not be delayed. Our internet tobacco legislation will mean that online sales, advertising and promotion of tobacco will now be subject to the same kinds of restrictions that are placed on over-the-counter sales. This, in my opinion, is a great step forward. As VicHealth CEO Todd Harper said of tobacco companies:

We must ensure they aren’t able to use the internet to recruit young smokers.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Companies promoting cigarettes on the internet currently do not have to display the same health warnings on their products as retailers with a physical point of sale. The legislation shuts this loophole. That amendment is also an important step in reaching the benchmarks set under the COAG National Healthcare Agreement of reducing smoking rates to 10 per cent by 2018 and halving the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander smoking rate.

Together with our efforts to mandate the plain packaging of tobacco products from 2012, Australia is on track to have the world’s toughest measures against tobacco. Australia’s comprehensive approach to tobacco control, with sustained and coordinated actions from the Commonwealth and state governments—including excise bans, advertising bans, bans on smoking in workplaces and public spaces as well as anti-smoking advertising campaigns—over several decades, has seen smoking rates cut from 30.5 per cent in 1988 to 16.6 per cent in 2007. This is a fantastic achievement.

13:22:19

The main impact of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010 will be on retailers who advertise their products without the required health warnings and as being ‘tax free’. Essentially this amendment fosters a level playing field because restrictions placed on over-the-counter sales of tobacco products and online sales will no longer be different. I am pleased the Gillard Labor government is taking a strong stance on smoking. We have much more to do, particularly with educating our young people so they do not start smoking in the first place. I commend the bill to the House and I hope those on the opposite do the same.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I speak in support of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010. Growing up in a sports-mad household in Ipswich, as I did, playing rugby league, soccer, basketball and cricket, as so many of my friends did and my brothers—we were absolutely fanatics when it came to sports in my area; that is perhaps one of the reasons you see me jogging around the lake and in the gym—one of the things I remember doing when I was in high school, at what is now known as Bundamba State Secondary College, was an assignment in biology on the short-term and long-term effects of smoking on the respiratory and circulatory systems of the human body. At that particular time I recall that many of my mates in basketball and soccer smoked. Indeed, I recall that for one or two of them the last thing they did before they got on the court to play basketball was to light up a cigarette. In those days our coaches did not think anything of it. Indeed, we had sports idols smoking and promoting cigarettes.

I can recall as a young fella going to the cricket at the Gabba and seeing advertising for tobacco companies—and at Lang Park for rugby league. The rugby league Bulimba Cup games between Ipswich, Toowoomba and Brisbane usually had tobacco advertising festooned around North Ipswich Reserve, Lang Park or up at Toowoomba. You did not think anything of it. Looking back it just appalls me that we knew from the early 1950s the effect of smoking on the human body. Now we have seen the evidence from large tobacco companies in the United States before congressional committees denying their knowledge of the impact of tobacco on people’s health and the deaths caused from cancer initiated by tobacco.

We have come a long way with respect to these issues, but in so many of our trading partners in the East—in Asia, North Asia and South Asia—you can see, when you travel through them, the advertising that was common in Australia for a long time continuing over there. These tobacco companies are insidious when they target young people, vulnerable people and people who could be influenced by sports stars. They will use every form of media and every opportunity they can take to get into hearts and minds and to influence people—whether it is sports stars, media stars or even the way they do it in product placement in movies. How many heroes in our movies light up? Whether it is after acts of copulation or courage, it does not make any difference—they light up in the movies. These companies engage in those sorts of activities to promote their products. In this particular piece of legislation we are trying to close another loophole, because they will take any opportunity to promote their products in this way.

Smoking is the greatest cause of preventable death in the developed world. That is the reality. If people stopped smoking, 15,000 Australians would simply cease to die prematurely. We have made a big effort with respect to smoking in this country. I outline the fact that you no longer see the Benson & Hedges World Series Cricket and you no longer see the Winfield Cup in rugby league. You do not see tobacco company advertising festooned or labelled across football teams. You do not see it and that is terrific.

We have seen the smoking rates cut, as the minister said in her second reading speech, from 30.5 per cent in 1988 to 16.6 per cent in 2007. But we do know—the facts are there—that smoking and deaths from smoking cost $30 billion each year. We are talking about 16.6 per cent of Australians aged between 14 years and over smoking daily. We know as federal members when we go to a railway station to hand out our pamphlets—some would call it propaganda—during a campaign, how many young people smoke, how many young girls smoke, how many young pregnant women smoke. We can see it. This is damaging not just to themselves but to their unborn babies.

Every time a person lights up it impacts on their health, and, often, impacts on the health of their loved ones and their friends. So I am pleased we see smoking banned in so many hotels, motels and public places. I think it is a good thing. We need, of course, coordinated efforts from state and federal governments to introduce tough anti-smoking laws. I am proud of the fact that I represent not just the constituency of Blair but a political party that refuses to take donations from tobacco companies. I am proud of the fact that we have taken this stance, because I think it is the honourable thing to do—and I urge all political parties, including those opposite, to similarly take that stance.

The Cancer Council of Queensland has advocated strongly that we should take steps to fight tobacco consumption across the country. They have urged smoke-free cities and towns in the lead-up to the World No Tobacco Day each year. They have endorsed and supported, of course, federal and state government decisions on tobacco control, stamping out these types of activities. Cancer in Queensland is a serious issue. Each year nearly 21,000 Queenslanders are diagnosed with cancer and over 7,000 Queenslanders die of the disease. It is a tragedy in my state. It is a tragedy nationally as well. Thousands of Queenslanders refuse to give up, but I am pleased that we were able to announce at the end of last year that nicotine patches would be subsidised under the PBS, and the Cancer Council of Queensland endorsed that activity.

We have had clear evidence since the 1950s of the dangers of smoking, but still there are nearly three million Australians smoking. Cancer of the lung is one of the most deadly killers of both genders. The National Preventative Health Taskforce has set a national target to reduce smoking rates to less than 10 per cent; that is a reduction of about a million smokers each year. This would prevent the deaths of so many Australians.

This legislation is part of a package that we have undertaken that includes the 25 per cent tobacco excise increase which was introduced on 29 April 2010, the record investments we have undertaken in antismoking social marketing campaigns that you can see when you watch the media, and the legislation which we propose to bring in to mandate plain packaging of tobacco products by 2012. I think that is a good initiative. I know that some people have concerns about the handling of plain packaging products by retailers, in relation to the design, but I think this is an important measure. The changes will not be popular with everyone, but I think we have a responsibility to encourage smokers to quit and to discourage people, particularly young people, from taking up this filthy habit.

I was pleased to hear the announcement by the Minister for Health and Ageing on 29 April 2010. It is a good initiative that she released in terms of the package. This bill will make it an offence to advertise tobacco products on the internet or in any other electronic media such as mobile phones and computers, unless we have compliance with state and territory legislation or Commonwealth government regulations. The meaning of ‘published in Australia’ has been extended in the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Act 2010 to apply in a variety of different circumstances where the advertiser has a significant connection to Australia or is an Australian citizen or a resident of Australia. Where it is an entity or a company, a connection would be where it is incorporated or formed in Australia, is a foreign person in Australia, a foreign entity or an incorporated body with its management or control—such as its board of directors—in Australia. I think that extra territoriality is a good thing to broaden the opportunity and scope for the legislation to apply. Of course, the internet knows no borders and Australians buy goods and services over the internet across the world.

The bill looks at an obscure provision regarding the internet advertising of tobacco products and amends that legislation specifically to include advertising over the internet, so it closes the gap with respect to that and other electronic media. I think that this legislation brings internet advertising into line with television, radio and print advertising. We have legislation to restrict advertising in those areas in cultural and sporting activities, whether it is horseracing, rugby league, AFL, or even at the movies.

We do anticipate that there will be some opposition to even these types of amendments, but we think—and I am sure the minister has made this plain to the large tobacco companies—that it will not really have much impact on tobacco companies’ activities. They will continue to sell their product; I wish they did not, but they will continue to do it. The main impact will be on the retailers who advertise tobacco products without the requisite health warnings and tax free—advertising what they would describe as less expensive or cheap cigarettes. Those retailers will be consulted; we will not do this in the absence of having some discussions with them. They will include the big chains that we buy our goods from each day. You can imagine that organisations like Woolworths and Coles will be consulted and other tobacco and cigar retailers will also be in the loop in discussions in relation to those issues.

I urge all the schools and community groups in my electorate to think clearly about the need to address this issue. I really welcome the initiative and the establishment of the Medicare Locals. On Friday I met Kim Morrish, the CEO of the Ipswich and West Moreton Division of General Practice. That division works closely with the Brisbane South Division of General Practice. Vicki Poxon is the CEO of that particular division. One of the aspects I would urge the Medicare Locals in the West Moreton and Oxley region to take up is the idea of funding and targeting services in terms of not just local diabetes care, which is a big issue in the western corridor, but also some antismoking activities and targets. I think that is an opportunity for the Medicare Locals in my area who work with primary health care, particularly doctors.

The Division of General Practice in the western corridor do a great service. We have got the psychology clinic attached to the University of Queensland, where the GP superclinic is. But improving patient care by dealing with antismoking activities in our schools, in our community groups, across the medical practices in the western corridor in the Ipswich and West Moreton area is a good focus for the Medicare Local which will be established. I welcome the new boundaries in that area, and I think this is a great opportunity for the new Medicare Local to undertake some antismoking activities by advertising and really reaching out with doctors, allied health professionals and nurses in the schools and the various groups.

The Prime Minister made it plain in her press release on 22 February 2011, when we released our new guidelines for the Medicare Locals, that they would help health practitioners. They will improve the patient journey through developing integrated and coordinated services. I can think of no better activity for the new Medicare Local in the West Moreton and Oxley region than to undertake an antismoking activity and coordinated campaign.

I think this is a good opportunity to do that because it will get doctors and allied health professionals from the south-west of Brisbane, the Brisbane Valley, the Lockyer Valley and the Boonah Shire involved in this particular case. There are people, doctors and other allied professionals in that corridor with particular expertise in this area, so I would urge Kim Morrish, Vicki Poxon and all the people associated with the new Medicare Locals, which will be established in my region, to think about this type of campaign. I think this is a very effective way for primary health care to be delivered in the West Moreton region and I strongly urge them to do this. The primary healthcare service confronting the issues of smoking and the use of tobacco is so important. This legislation is good legislation which will help my community and communities across the whole of Australia.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak in support of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Amendment Bill 2010. This bill brings internet advertising of cigarettes and tobacco products in line with advertising of tobacco products via other methods. Over the years governments around the world have imposed advertising restrictions as part of their antismoking strategies. It seems, however, that there are always new and sometimes very clever tactics used by tobacco manufacturers and retailers to market their products. We are all familiar with many examples, whether that is by using retailers to promote different products, having films and celebrities effectively being advertising agents for them, being associated with a whole range of sports events or, as we are seeing now, marketing via Facebook and the internet.

No product that I am aware of is as regulated by governments as is tobacco. One has to wonder, given that we go to such extents to regulate tobacco use in this country and around the world for that matter, why we continue to allow it to be a legally sold product. The World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which was adopted on 21 May 2003 and came into force on 2 February 2005, has been adopted by 171 parties. It was ratified by Australia on 27 October 2004. Article 13, which I will not go into detail on because it is a fairly lengthy section of the framework, specifically relates to advertising, promotion and sponsorship.

The intention of this bill is to clarify the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act by, firstly, making it a specific offence to advertise or promote tobacco products on the internet and all other electronic media and future technologies unless compliant with state or territory legislation or Commonwealth regulations; and, secondly, enabling the making of regulations in relation to internet tobacco advertising to, firstly, prescribe the size, content, format and location of tobacco advertisements, secondly, to include health warnings, age restrictions on the sale of tobacco products and information about any fees, taxes and charges payable in relation to tobacco products, and, thirdly, to implement age restricted access systems for access to tobacco advertisements.

Existing legislation has simply not kept up with technological change in this regard, with cigarettes being marketed to children and teenagers through websites and social media networks. This bill will remove ambiguity regarding internet advertising of tobacco products. This bill also forms part of a raft of measures enacted by the government to reduce the harm caused by tobacco. Other measures enacted include the 25 per cent tobacco excise increase, investments in antismoking marketing campaigns, and legislation to mandate plain packaging of tobacco products by 2012.

I want to touch on a range of matters associated with the use of tobacco products. Other speakers in the course of this debate have highlighted the fact that smoking in Australia leads to some 15,000 deaths per annum and that it costs this nation around $31.5 billion per year. What is interesting is that, following World War II, throughout this country about three-quarters of the male population smoked and about a quarter of the female population smoked. By the mid-1970s the number of male smokers had dropped to around 43 per cent of the population, but the number of female smokers increased to 33 per cent and hit its peak around that time. It is interesting to follow those trends.

A range of campaigns associated with the promotion of cigarette products clearly appeal to different sectors of society. Today, about 19 per cent of the population are smokers, but what is particularly important in that figure of 19 per cent is that most became smokers at a very young age. It has been suggested that around 80 per cent of smokers are addicted at below the age of 18 years. In fact, on the flip side of that, it has also been suggested that only about five per cent of smokers took up the habit after the age of 24 years. That is critical and interesting to this legislation because it highlights that it is in those years that the most effective marketing campaigns by tobacco companies will occur—the campaigns that specifically target younger people.

We all know—and statistics will bear this out—that young people are the most likely to use the internet. They are the most familiar with it and the most likely to spend more time on it than any other age group in society. Therefore, it is not surprising to see the internet being used as a marketing tool by the tobacco companies. The people whom they need to target to become addicted to smoking are the very people who use the internet most. This particular bill is so important because it begins to provide some restrictions on the kind of advertising that is available through the internet. I have no doubt that tobacco companies will always continue to find smart ways of trying to get to that age sector, but this is one step that we need to take in order to try and reduce their ability to influence young people before they take up the habit.

Debate interrupted.