Politics is politics, but does anyone really think that the State Government's recent announcement on selective statewide smoking bans around schools, kindergartens and playgrounds is in responseto Richard Fosters unworkable proposed CityWide blanket ban on smoking?
Richard Foster thinks so. (Twitter)
I wonder if #faillieu gov wouldve moved on smoking laws if Melb wasnt looking at wide ranging,world-leading reform. Looking to us for policy
— Richard Foster (@Richo_Foster) February 7, 2013
abc.net.au/news/2013-02-0… Smoking restrictions a good thing but playing catch-up politics doesn't go far enough. #faillieu 1/2
— Richard Foster (@Richo_Foster) February 7, 2013
But #faillieu won't support a smoking ban in alfresco dining areas.Where's the support for smokers in his policy on the run? Just fines? 2/2
— Richard Foster (@Richo_Foster) February 7, 2013
One step at a time.
One proposal is constructive and feasible. A Citywide ban is not.
Richard Foster's proposed Citywide smoking ban has failed to receive support from his fellow city Councillors and has not been listed for discussion on the City Council's agenda.
The City Council has the right to impose a selective smoking ban on Council owned property. It could even consider imposing a smoke-free zone as part of the Council's on-street trading permit conditions.
A better approach is to install advisory signs in nominated public areas. "Please consider others and refrain from smoking in this area".
A blanket ban beyond Council owned property should not be within the Council's legislative jurisdiction.
HOWEVER it has highlighted concern for the need to provide State Government oversight and right of veto over Municipal laws.
No comments:
Post a Comment