RAHUI KATENE (Māori Party—Te Tai Tonga) Link to this
I move, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill that it have the authority to consider and, if it thinks fit adopt, the amendments in my name relating to the registration of tobacco sellers. The reason I am moving this motion today is very simple: the Māori Party is absolutely committed to a smoke-free Aotearoa. We are committed to saving lives. We are committed to a healthy smoke-free environment, so we are determined that we will leave no stone unturned in our pursuit of comprehensive and effective solutions to create a smoke-free nation. In January 2010 the New Zealand Medical Journal stated that the scale of harm from tobacco use in New Zealand has not been matched by appropriate Government action to advance tobacco control. George Thomson, Nick Wilson, and Richard Edwards from the department of public health of the University of Otago laid down the challenge fair and square: “New Zealand political parties now need to engage with the idea of the end of commercial tobacco sales in a finite and predictable timetable, rather than using small steps to control the tobacco epidemic.”
This motion is to ensure that our pathway towards becoming smoke-free takes every contingency into account. We want to broaden the debate today to enable registration to be mandatory and a condition of selling tobacco. The problem my amendment seeks to address is that currently there is not a central list of tobacco retailers. As a consequence of that, all national estimates for the number of retailers vary widely. In a letter I saw today from Professor Richard Edwards, Dr George Thomson, Professor Chris Cunningham, Dr Heather Gifford, Professor Janet Hoek, and Stephanie Erick there was a clear message: with tobacco displays moved out of sight there will be difficulties in identifying tobacco retailers. Their letter makes a very clear statement, which I again will cite for the record. “We see such a register as the minimum system necessary to enable health enforcement officers to effectively and efficiently do their job of working with retailers. Furthermore such a register would help to keep track of the growing move by tobacco companies to market tobacco products through temporary outlets at festivals and other events.” I want to make it explicitly clear: we are tremendously proud of the profile that the Māori Party and, in particular, Tariana Turia in her capacity as an Associate Minister of Health have been able to achieve in the area of tobacco control. The ongoing tobacco tax increases have triggered—
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER Link to this
This is a narrow instruction to the House. You cannot get into the debate on its merits. State just the facts. It is a very narrow instruction that you are asking the House to consider, so confine your comments just to that.
Thank you. Our amendment today is in many respects to supplement and strengthen the rapid progress that Tariana has been able to achieve in tobacco control in general and in this bill specifically. This is ground-breaking legislation to phase out tobacco retail displays—out of sight, out of mind. But, of course, there is the catch-22 dilemma that removing tobacco retail displays—
Hon Steve Chadwick Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This does not appear to be a point of order; it is rather more of a speech.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER Link to this
It is not a point of order. The member has the right to move, which she has done—[ Interruption] No, no she can also debate it. This is a debatable motion, and she has moved it. She is speaking and she has 10 minutes in which to speak. It is not a point of order. Her comment earlier on was not correct, but I have accepted that. She is moving a motion. She is asking for an instruction from the House to the Committee of the whole House to include her amendments.
Thank you. There is of course the catch-22 dilemma that removing tobacco retail displays might lead to out of sight, out of scrutiny. A mandatory register of all tobacco retailers is a perfect response to the declared need expressed by many health enforcement officers to keep track of retailers with complete and current data.
We understand that ASH, Action on Smoking and Health, is in full support of these amendments. There are four strong reasons underlying its support: one, a register is cost-effective—
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER Link to this
The member is now getting into the debate. As I mentioned earlier this is very narrow. You are asking the House to accept your amendments going into Committee. Members can read what your amendments are, because they have been tabled. This debate is very narrow, asking permission of the House by way of an instruction to go into Committee. You cannot get into the debate of what the content of the amendments are; they are tabled for members to look at. So, just come back to the instruction that you are asking for.
I am not somebody who randomly stands in this House to put forward points of order and move motions for debate, to pass the time of day. In fact, in my entire parliamentary career to date I think one would be hard-pressed to find more than a couple of times when I have stood to do something like this. I have taken this action today because the Māori Party is so committed to saving lives and to doing something about the 5,000 people this country loses every year under the assault of tobacco harm. We truly believe that this measure is needed now and that this register will significantly enhance the efficiency and implementation of the entire Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. It should be debated now.
In closing I return to the submission I quoted earlier. It stated that it is highly anomalous that anyone can set up as a retailer of tobacco products given their highly hazardous and addictive nature and in light of the continued evidence of widespread availability of tobacco products to children. This motion and the amendments it relates to address this deficiency by requiring that at least health officials know who is selling tobacco, through a register of tobacco retailers. I implore the House to at least give consideration to debating these amendments at the Committee stage.
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) Link to this
I rise to take a brief call on this motion on behalf of Labour. We very much support instructing the Committee to debate Supplementary Order Paper 257 in the name of Rahui Katene. We think this is an important issue that requires debate—
Jo GoodhewI raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I feel that perhaps the member is under the misapprehension that we are debating the whole Supplementary Order Paper.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER Link to this
The motion from Rahui Katene asked for an instruction. If we look at Speaker’s ruling 79/3 and Standing Order 172(2) we see that any member has the right to seek, by way of an instruction, for the whole House to recommend to the Committee as a whole to include an amendment. This is not an amendment that would be done in the normal process of the Committee stage; it is an amendment that adds value, in the member’s view. It is debatable and any member can seek a call. At this stage the call has gone to Iain Lees-Galloway. I remind the member, as I reminded the mover of this motion, that this debate is very narrow. It is not a debate where we get into the details of what is in the amendment that has been tabled.
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY Link to this
Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I hear what you just said. As I said, I rise to speak in support of the motion to instruct the Committee to debate Supplementary Order Paper 257.
Although the issue is clearly outside the scope of the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill, hence the motion being moved by the member, it is a matter that came up a number of times in submissions to the Māori Affairs Committee’s inquiry into the effects of tobacco on Māori in New Zealand. A range of different options were offered. One was to license tobacco retailers and the other was to have a register. I think it is a valuable debate that is worth having. Although it falls outside the question of advertising, which is what the bill is about, I think the member made the very, very good point that one of the unintended consequences of the removal of tobacco displays is that tobacco can be out of sight and therefore might not be watched as closely as we would prefer. This is one mechanism by which that close scrutiny could be achieved. There are a number of mechanisms that might be appropriate, but this is certainly one mechanism by which that close scrutiny could be achieved.
We on this side of the House think that this is a valuable debate that needs to be held. There will be arguments—I have no doubt—for and against such a measure, but it would be unfortunate to not take the opportunity to have that debate. I congratulate the member on bringing this matter before the House. I for one would like to see this issue debated at the Committee stage. I would like to have that on the record for the member, so that she knows that Labour is absolutely behind her and that we would like to see this debate occur.
A party vote was called for on the question,
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the whole House on the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill that it have the authority to consider and, if it thinks fit adopt, the amendments in my name relating to the registration of tobacco sellers.
Ayes 57
- New Zealand Labour 42
- Green Party 9
- Māori Party 4
- Progressive 1
- Independent 1 (Carter C)
Noes 63
Motion not agreed to.