Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you for that, Senator Whish-Wilson. I probably do not use too many beauty products, as is evident. But, nevertheless, I should have known that. We learned in that inquiry, as Senator Whish-Wilson probably already knew, that plastics break down in the environment. They do not disappear; they do not dissipate; they become microplastics. Plankton take up the microplastics, little fish eat the plankton, big fish eat the little fish and we eat the big fish.

What really drew my attention particularly to this exercise, and why it is relevant to this discussion, is the fact that there is a growing body of evidence that those microplastics are getting into the cells of human beings. Of itself, that is important enough to protect the oceans from plastics. I accept that. But when we cross that boundary to the realisation that we may well be looking at a circumstance of adverse human health as a result of this, you can bet your life—through you, Madam Deputy President, to Senator Whish-Wilson—that my focus of attention elevated.

I come back now to that comment associated with privacy. Yes, it is an invasion of privacy to tax something to the level where it probably becomes unattainable for a lot of people. Again, if that is the decision of an adult—to place themselves at risk from a health point of view—one could say that the role of government and others is to warn them of that and to let them make their own decision. That is probably right. But when it comes to the health of other people, it is not right.

The statistic that Senator Fawcett gave to us in his contribution was interesting—that is, in 2001, 22 per cent of adults in Australia smoked. That had gone down to 16 per cent by 2010. It is now 14 per cent. I actually want to give credit to the then health minister, Mr Tony Abbott. If you look at that dramatic decline—of 22 per cent at the beginning of the decade, down to 16 per cent by the end of the decade—it was in his capacity as health minister that the placing of those offensive warnings on packets had the biggest effect on young people not smoking. Again, I do give credit, as others have done, to Ms Roxon in her move towards plain packaging. I did not like it very much, but, nevertheless, it is apparent that we have seen a further reduction in adult smoking levels. So I give her credit for that fact.

I also make mention of the illicit trade in cigarettes. I note that there are funds intended to be directed for border protection to control further this issue. I also do understand, through sources, that the import illegally of cigarettes into this country is so lucrative that, if a consignment is intercepted by border protection and is, therefore, removed, the suppliers will actually supply the illegal importer, free of charge, with replacements of that number of cigarettes. So it really does become an issue of enormous importance to us. Others have mentioned the loss of excise by illegal imports of tobacco and cigarettes. But I also say that it must be so lucrative and so pervasive if the suppliers of those illegal cigarettes are willing to actually replace the products free of charge.

I am also aware that there is technology available here in Australia which, I understand, electronically identifies and marks packets and individual sticks so that government regulators can actually identify whether a packet or a cigarette has been legally or illegally obtained prior to its purchase. I would urge government—the relevant ministers—to pursue this technology further. I know that in the last couple of years I have actually recommended that those who supply such products and services meet with relevant ministers. Anything that can be done to wipe out, diminish or minimise this illegal trade, in my view, should be undertaken.

I want to turn to the impact in financial terms. My understanding is that over the forward estimates this legislation will deliver some $4.6 billion to the overall revenue base. As I understand it, all sides in this chamber support the legislation—certainly, the Labor Party, the coalition and the Greens support the legislation.

I was loud in my praise of Ms Roxon a few minutes ago with regard to her move for plain packaging of cigarettes. On the other hand, I now want to draw the attention of the chamber to something that I think was a mistake Ms Roxon made in her earlier capacity. That was when she introduced the alcopops legislation, which was always about raising tax. The coalition had no difficulty with a proposition that was going to raise tax. She should have said that it was a tax measure and she would have received little if any criticism. The mistake actually was to try to tie it up not in terms of it being a tax measure but in terms of it being a health measure, because by increasing the tax significantly on alcopops young people would in some way stop consuming them. Well, they stopped consuming them all right. As we all said would happen, instead of buying a can of mixed drink that had vodka, whiskey, brandy or whatever it was in with a mixing soft drink—of course, that was taxed out of existence—the kids then all went and bought 750 millimetre bottles of the spirits and bought the mixes separately, whether it was Coke or dry ginger ale or whatever. So, instead of just drinking the smaller quantity of alcopops they ended up drinking a larger quantity, because, as we know, no-one of that age is likely to stop drinking until the bottle is empty.

So I applaud the government and everyone in the chamber for the decision to explain very bluntly what this is. And it is two-fold. First, it is to improve directly the health of the community itself and the health of those affected by smoking, whether they smoke or they are in a smoky environment. Second, it is a measure to make sure that we can repair some of the budget.

In support of those comments I want to applaud the finance minister, the Treasurer and the shadow financial portfolio of personnel for what I understand is a measure and a move to pass the omnibus bill, which will achieve some $6 billion in savings. There has never been a more important time in the modern history of this country for us to get our debt and our deficit under control. There are black clouds over the entire world economy, and we are not immune. The best way that we can guarantee to the Australian people that there is sufficient funding for education, for health, for the legendary NDIS program, for welfare generally, for pensions, for defence and for border protection—for all of those purposes that we, and the community, regard government as having a primary role in—is to have a strong budget and move towards a surplus. So, instead of wasting $12-$15 billion a year paying interest on our debt, the Treasurer and the finance minister can turn that $12-$15 billion into savings and into supporting the lifestyle that this country has come to expect.

For those who do not think there are black clouds hanging over the world economy, you need look no further than Western Europe, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, the United States and Asia. So I commend the legislation and I commend the chamber for its support.