Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to government amendments to be moved to the Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011. The memorandum was circulated in the chamber on 7 November 2011. By leave—I move government amendments (1) to (3) on sheet BN220 together:

(1)   Clause 2, pages 2 and 3 (table), omit the table (not including the note), substitute:

[commencement]

(2)   Clause 18, page 21 (lines 7 to 9), omit paragraph (3)(c), substitute:

  (c)   the inside lip of the cigarette pack must have straight edges, other than corners which may be rounded, and neither the lip, nor the edges of the lip, may be bevelled or otherwise shaped or embellished in any way;

[inside lip]

(3)   Page 28 (after line 11), after clause 27, insert:

27A Legal effect of sections 18 to 27

     Sections 18 to 27 have no legal effect other than to specify requirements, and provide for regulations specifying requirements, for the purposes of the definition of tobacco product requirement in subsection 4(1).

Note:   Chapters 3 and 5 contain the offences and civil penalty provisions for failing to comply with a tobacco product requirement.

[legal effect of sections 18 to 27]

The government is committed to reducing the national smoking rate to 10 per cent of the population by 2018 and halving the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander smoking rate. The Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011 is a crucial step in the government's anti-smoking action which includes the 25 per cent excise increase announced in April of 2010, record investment in anti-smoking social marketing campaigns, legislation to restrict advertising of tobacco products on the internet, listing of nicotine replacement therapies on the PBS and investments in Indigenous tobacco control. Plain packaging will remove one of the last remaining forms of tobacco advertising. It will restrict to industry logos, brand imagery, colours and promotional text.

The bill was passed by the House of Representatives with the accompanying Trade Marks Amendment (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Bill 2011 on 24 August of this year. Following delays to parliamentary consideration of the bill and to ensure that there is sufficient time for the industry to comply before the penalty provisions commence the government proposes amendments to the bill. These amendments do not alter the bill's approach to plain packaging of tobacco products. Amendments to the commencement of the bill are proposed in order to allow a longer lead time for implementation of the bill following its delayed package.

Under this proposal the preliminary provisions that previously commenced on 1 January 2012 will now commence on royal assent. The offences relating to prohibition of manufacture of noncompliant product in Australia will now commence on 1 October 2012; previously 20 May 2012. The remaining offences relating to retail sale of noncompliant product will now commence on 1 December 2012; previously 1 July 2012.

In addition amendment to the commencement of clauses 17 to 27 is proposed to move their commencement date to be in line with the commencement of the manufacturing offences on 1 October 2012. This amendment is intended to make clear that these provisions have no legal effect independent of the offences in chapter 3 and the enforcement provisions in chapter 5 of the bill. This change is supported by the second amendment which inserts a new provision at clause 27A to state that sections 18 to 27 have no legal effect other than to specify requirements or permit regulations that specify requirements to be made for the purposes of the definition of tobacco product requirement in the bill. Finally, I am introducing a minor amendment to paragraph 18(3)(c) to address a technical implementation issue relating to the requirement that the inside lip of cigarette packs have a straight edge. Meeting this would require retooling of machinery, which would lead to implementation delays. The amendment I am introducing will allow the use of rounded corners on the inside lip to avoid the need for change to manufacturing processes, which would be difficult to achieve within the proposed implementation time frames. I commend the amendments to the chamber.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a number of questions, given the way that the debate is now being structured, in relation to the timetables. I also have some questions in relation to the track-and-trace regimes, some legal ramifications and some questions in relation to the impact on small business. So perhaps we could deal with the timetable issues first.

I note that the bills have only been delayed by approximately two months and that they will still be passed by the Senate before the original time frames were set to start. I note the earliest date of commencement in the original draft was 1 January 2012 but the time lines have been extended for five months from 1 July 2012 to 1 December 2012. My question is: doesn't this show that the government's original time frames were somewhat unrealistic? Was the delay in the Senate the real reason for the extension of time or were there other reasons behind this?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you for the question. The answer to the assertion you made in your question is: no. The government is committed to reducing the national smoking rate to 10 per cent of the population by 2018, and halving the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rate. Plain packaging will remove one of the last remaining forms of tobacco advertising. It will restrict industry logos, brand imagery, colours and promotional text. As I said in my summing up speech, following delays to parliamentary consideration of the bill and to ensure that there is sufficient time for the industry to comply before the penalty provisions commence, the government proposed these amendments to the commencement provisions of the bill.

As I said, I have gone through the extensions of time. I think you understand those. It was simply the delay in getting this legislation into this chamber that necessitated a change to the timetable for implementation.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the amended implementation time frames, the date that the regulation-making power comes into effect, section 27, is now the same date as the implementation date, where under the original time frames the regulation-making power commenced five months earlier than the implementation date. Will the regulations for the tobacco plain packaging bills be promulgated and released prior to the implementation date—

Senator McLucas interjecting—

Yes, I know there is a lot of noise in the chamber.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Carr and others, if you could just keep the noise down to a minimum that would be great.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was trying to tell them to shut up and listen to you.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senators. If senators are waiting for another division I might say that we will not be dividing on the third reading. That might make it easier for some of the—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can we just get the amendments done? That would be really helpful.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Fierravanti-Wells, you have the call.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Maybe we will divide, Senator Carr.

Will the regulations for the tobacco plain packaging bills be promulgated and released prior to the implementation date of 1 October 2012?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to that question is: yes, of course.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have other questions that relate to the bill but not directly to the amendments. So perhaps at this point we could put the amendments so that Senator Carr can go off to whatever he needs to do next. I did not want to inconvenience you, Senator Carr, but I do have other questions relating to the bills generally.

Question agreed to.

During the second reading debate a number of speakers have encouraged the government to examine the track-and-trace schemes, which are used in jurisdictions such as Massachusetts, California and Canada. They are an effective way of clamping down on elicit tobacco and this is recognised in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This has been offered as a practical suggestion for the government to adopt. Can you tell me, Parliamentary Secretary, what steps the government has taken to examine track-and-trace schemes for tobacco excise, since the minister offered in August, during her summing-up over the tobacco plain packaging bill in the House?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said in my summing-up speech, the plain packaging legislation allows the tobacco companies to place an origin mark on the packet. It is an alphanumeric code which, as I said, will be on the packet. It is on a voluntary basis but I understand the industry is quite interested in protecting their product. It will assist the industry in that tracking and tracing that you referred to.

The legislation also allows for tobacco companies to continue to use other anticounterfeiting measures such as taggart ink and forensic-level differentiation of packaging materials.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Could you tell me what organisations the department and/or the minister has met with regarding a practical track-and-trace regime? Is the Department of Health and Ageing considering this or other viable options?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry; what was the second part of the question?

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the minister and/or the Department of Health and Ageing considering this or any other viable options?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is not possible for me to give you a list of who the minister may have met with on this issue. I think I have indicated to you that we have accommodated the position, in the legislation, which goes to the origin mark and the issue around taggart ink and forensic-level differentiation of packaging materials. I think that shows that the government are (1) very well aware of the need to ensure that illicit tobacco is not on the market and (2) that we are working very closely and doing the best we can to ensure that we do not end up with illicit tobacco out there in the marketplace.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If it is appropriate, perhaps you could take on notice the part of the question in relation to the organisations.

If I understood your answer correctly, you implied that tobacco companies were going to be able to put origin labels on packaging. As I understand it, that is against WHO best practice, which says that it should be kept out of their hands. Should there not be some degree of neutrality? Could you please explain that? That is as I understand the situation.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am advised that negotiations on the draft protocol to eliminate illicit trade in tobacco products, which addresses the issue of track and trace, are ongoing. I think the assertion you are making is that the WHO has come to a position. I do not know that that is the case. I understand those negotiations are continuing.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Parliamentary Secretary, could you go back to the issue of origin. Did I not understand you to say that the tobacco companies were going to be responsible for putting that information on? There was a lot of noise in the chamber. Could you explain that, thank you.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will read it again:

… the plain packaging legislation allows for tobacco companies to place an origin mark, which is an alphanumeric code, on the packaging on a voluntary basis to assist the industry in tracking and tracing.

It is on a voluntary basis.

It also allows tobacco companies to continue to use other anticounterfeiting measures such as taggart ink and forensic-level differentiation of packaging materials.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Much has been said during the debate in relation to potential legal claims. How much has the government budgeted for legal costs as part of this measure?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I cannot give you the answer to that question, if in fact there is one. I will take it on notice and see if Minister Roxon has anything to add.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am surprised. I would have thought it would be prudent, considering that it has been very much in the public arena that tobacco companies could mount a legal challenge. It has been raised by quite a number of speakers here, so I would have thought it would be the first question you could provide an answer to.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, that was not a question.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In that case, could you tell me from which budget stream this funding is to be appropriated. It was made very clear at estimates. This has been raised at estimates, Parliamentary Secretary; I am surprised that you do not have an answer here. Could you also take on notice which budget stream this funding is to be appropriated from.

Also, are you confident that you are on strong legal grounds on all potential avenues for legal challenges over this legislation and not just under a claim for acquisition of property on other than just terms?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In terms of your question about what budget stream it may or may not come from, that it is a hypothetical question. Whilst we have had threats from the tobacco industry, we do not have a legal case. Let's jump that bridge when we get there—or if we get there.

In terms of whether we are on strong legal ground, Minister Roxon has made it very clear that she believes—and the advice she has received does make her believe—that she is on strong legal ground. I would certainly encourage your side of politics to be progressing the success of this legislation rather than almost cheering—it is not from you, Senator Fierravanti-Wells but from others—when certain tobacco companies start the threatening language that they use from time to time.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is appropriate that the coalition pursue this line of questioning. Last time you told us that you were on strong legal grounds you ended up in the High Court with your failed Malaysia solution. Having been a government lawyer for 20 years before I came into this place, I repeat: are you confident that you are on strong legal ground, because unfortunately your government does not have a very strong record in relation to this. Indeed, the reason I am asking this here is that unfortunately the coalition were not given the opportunity to ask the minister these questions in the lower house, where our shadow minister responsible was there waiting to ask questions on 15 June. In this debate, comments have been made in relation to Minister Roxon. She has never really come clean over her cosy relationship with the tobacco companies. On that day, when she was supposed to front up to the consideration in detail of the Health and Ageing portfolio in the Main Committee, she just did not show. She did not show because she was running and hiding. Quite frankly, that would have been the appropriate time for questions of this nature to have been dealt with in detail with the minister, but it was very clear that the minister was very embarrassed. She had obviously misled the Australian public, because she had been publicly saying one thing and leading the Australian public to believe that she was taking a certain course of action in relation to tobacco companies, yet privately she was writing to tobacco company executives seeking their financial support. Indeed, it was really quite irresponsible for the minister not to front up, because there were legitimate questions for her to be asked.

Also, a motion was moved by Mr Dutton in the other place on 15 June calling on the minister to attend the chamber and publicly explain certain matters. It was very clear that the government protected the minister on that day when she refused to attend the chamber. The problem with this minister is that, if you do not agree with her 100 per cent, there is this accusation across the chamber that somehow we must be in the pocket of tobacco companies. We have seen it time and time again in this debate. If anybody has been in the pocket of the tobacco companies—and this is a classic case of: people in glass houses should not throw stones—it was the minister herself. I must say that to this day we still do not know the extent to which that the minister herself was in the pocket of big tobacco. She has been prosecuting this issue with such a degree of zeal, but, of course, that zeal sits very uncomfortably with her hypocrisy.

As Senator Cash, I think, mentioned earlier, it was only recently that, despite the Labor Party's edict, so to speak, to place a so-called ban on the party from taking donations from tobacco companies, you have your New South Wales Australian Labor Party secretary still this year offering Philip Morris $5,000 places at a business dialogue and country business forum. The reason we now have to ask these questions is that the minister at no stage has fronted up to answer these questions.

Parliamentary Secretary, have you sought legal advice on the position under the trade related aspects of individual property rights agreements with regard to the Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were quite a number of questions there and I will try to assist you where I can. In relation to a question you asked earlier around funding for this hypothetical litigation, I can advise the chamber that no funding has been specifically provided for potential litigation costs. Regarding your question that went to the level of confidence that the government has of its strong legal position, I will quote from Minister Roxon's press conference today, where she said: 'I am very happy to say to the public that we are well prepared. I think we are on very strong legal ground. We won't be bullied by tobacco companies threatening litigation and we are prepared to fight them if they do in fact take that step.' That is very clear.

I also refer to your slurring in some respects of Minister Roxon. Minister Roxon has explained very clearly, and I think most people would have picked this up: 'I have already explained that the letters in 2005 were clearly a mistake. The facts are'—

Senator Cash interjecting—

You do not make mistakes? You have never made a mistake, Senator Cash?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't make excuses for soliciting political donations like the minister did.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator McLucas has the call.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She said: 'The facts are: big tobacco did not donate to me. They did not donate to the campaign. They did not attend the 2005 event.' I will come back to you to confirm I am absolutely accurate on that quote. She continued: 'While donations were made to the Labor Party and campaigns prior to 2004, they have not been made since.' I think that makes it perfectly plain.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps you might like to explain to us Minister Arbib's transgressions in this area, which I think Senator Cash also—

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's listen to his excuses now.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let us hear his excuses as well in relation to taking donations. Parliamentary Secretary, has the government sought legal advice on its position under the Australia-Hong Kong bilateral investment treaty and the possibility of being sued?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think you are asking me to give you an indication of our legal advice. As a lawyer of some standing—

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I simply asked: have you sought advice? I have not asked what that advice was.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Senator McLucas has the call.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those sorts of questions do go to the nature of the advice. It would be silly in the extreme for the government, with the sorts of threats that we have been receiving from the tobacco industry, to be going to the nature of the legal advice that we may have. I am somewhat astonished, to be frank, given your profession, prior to entering this place, as a lawyer and particularly a government lawyer.

Senator Fierravanti-Wells interjecting—

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Senator Fierravanti-Wells, you should wait to receive the call before you speak. You now have the call.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Parliamentary Secretary, if you had listened to my question, it was simply: has the government sought legal advice on their position under the Australia-Hong Kong bilateral investment treaty? I ask that question because this was one of the very important issues raised by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. In particular, they were concerned that the legislation may violate the 1993 Australia-Hong Kong investment treaty. The possibility was raised that Philip Morris may sue the Commonwealth over plain packaging under the expropriation and investor state dispute settlement provisions of the treaty. As Ms Gleeson and Mr Legge of the School of Public Health and Human Biosciences at Latrobe University explained:

Expropriation, in ordinary usage, means dispossessing property owners of their property.

This was raised in the hearing. My question is not what is the legal advice; it is simply whether you have sought legal advice.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government has received substantial legal advice on its proposed tobacco plain packaging requirements. The government is pursuing tobacco plain packaging as a public health measure and is confident that the measures are consistent with the Constitution and Australia's international legal obligations. The government, of course, does not comment on the content of its legal advice. The government will defend any challenges to the measures.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That does not answer my question specifically about the Australia-Hong Kong investment treaty. I repeat: have you sought legal advice on your position in relation to that treaty?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can advise that the government is reviewing the statement of claims made by Philip Morris under the Hong Kong bilateral investment treaty. We are confident that plain packaging is consistent with Australia's international obligations.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I take that as a yes. Has the government assessed the practical impacts of this legislation on small business and small retailers?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

While the advisers are seeking further information on that question, Senator, can I say that what we are trying to do is to stop people smoking cigarettes. That is the intention of this legislation. The intention is to remove a piece of marketing that they currently have in the cigarette packet, which is put into and taken out of a shirt pocket or a purse sometimes 20 to 30 times a day. Every time that happens, it is like a billboard. It is a reminder. You wonder why these packets are gold and silver, and glossy with beautiful silvery bits on them. They want them to look glamorous. These things kill people. They kill 15,000 people a year. Our job is to stop people using them. Our aim in this is to stop people smoking. Fifteen thousand families a year lose someone whom they love. Fifteen thousand people a year use our hospital system and our health system, and cost us an enormous amount of money. The intent of this is to stop that pain, anguish and cost to our community. That is the goal.

In January and February 2011, the department consulted with the following organisations representing small retailers about implementation of the plain-packaging measure: Council of Small Business Organisations of Australia, Australian Newsagents Federation, Master Grocers Australia, Service Station Association, Tobacco Station Group and National Independent Retailers Association. The consultations with the retailers took as the starting point the department's approach in testing visibility of font from one metre to enable ready brand identification in retail settings.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. Will the government be monitoring the impact on small business of this measure after its implementation, and how will that be done?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think we will have to take that one on notice.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to counterfeit and illicit tobacco, can you explain the government's interpretation of the neutral track-and-trace scheme?

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In respect of your previous question, I am advised that a post-implementation review will be required to assess the regulatory impact on business. There will be a post-implementation review, so I think that answers your question on monitoring the impact on small business. On neutral track and trace, we will have to take that one on notice. It seems to be a term not known by the advisers I have here.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to go to articles 15 and 20 of the World Health Organisation framework, which recommend implementing a track-and-trace regime for tobacco products and strengthening the legislation against illicit trade in tobacco products. My concern is that the government has instead let the tobacco companies manage their own tracking of tobacco products, on a voluntary basis, and this is despite article 7.2 of the draft protocol to eliminate illicit trade in tobacco products, as published by the World Health Organisation, and article 7.12, which states:

Obligations assigned to a Party—

of the framework convention on tobacco control—

shall not be performed by or delegated to the tobacco industry.

Minister, I am surprised that your advisers are not aware of those provisions, given that they were also the subject of consideration in the committee hearing.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I indicated earlier, there is no World Health Organisation recommendation for a mandatory government-run track-and-trace system for tobacco products. Negotiations on the draft protocol to eliminate illicit trade in tobacco products which address the issue of track and trace are ongoing.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I understand it, it is a recommendation. As I understand it, despite the recommendation of the World Health Organisation, you are going to a voluntary scheme, where the tobacco companies manage their own tracking, rather than following the recommendation of the World Health Organisation, which is basically talking about a track-and-trace regime. I just want to understand the nuance between the position that the government is taking and what the World Health Organisation is recommending.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will say it really clearly. You are saying that the World Health Organisation is recommending it. This is a draft document. It is still being negotiated. To jump to say that this is a WHO recommendation set in concrete, set in stone, is probably not accurate. These negotiations are ongoing as we speak, so to say that we are not following a WHO protocol would, I think, be inaccurate.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am going on the basis of articles 15 and 20 of what I understand to be a World Health Organisation framework that makes certain recommendations. I will not pursue it at this point, but I would appreciate it, Parliamentary Secretary, if you could take some of these issues on notice, because there appears to be a difference—at least a difference in nuance and perhaps a practical difference—in relation to these matters.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To assist, I hope: the government continues to play an active and constructive role in the negotiations for the draft World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to eliminate the illicit trade in tobacco products. We are negotiating. We are playing an active part. It is a draft protocol.

Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011, as amended, and Trade Marks Amendment (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Bill 2011 agreed to.

Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011, as amended, and Trade Marks Amendment (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Bill 2011 reported; report adopted.