Chadwick Steve: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chadwick Steve: Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 July 2011. Volume:674;Page:20137. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour) 
: 
 I will join the chorus today that the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill which prohibits the display of tobacco products in 2 years’ time is a great achievement. It is the next step in a long journey and lots of people have mentioned that journey. 
Labour certainly supports the aspirational goal of New Zealand being smoke-free by 2025 and a lot of people have talked about the leadership that is needed to do that. I acknowledge Tariana Turia and congratulate her on actually taking on Minister Ryall and saying that this issue was important to all New Zealanders. I thank her for that and for convincing the Minister of Health that excise alone would not make the difference in smoking cessation; we needed a package and a comprehensive package to make a difference to the health of all New Zealanders. We have talked about Tukoroirangi Morgan; he handed the mantle on. And I enjoyed working under the leadership of Helen Clark who was determined that the original smoke-free environments bill would go through. Minister Turia was in our team at that time and she supported that take way back then. She knew the debates and she knew the challenges we faced with that next incremental step. 
I want to record how times have changed. I got handed the mantle but there was an element of poison about any public health reform to do with smoking cessation—and my bill was just about second-hand smoke. I had death threats. White powder was delivered to my office so security staff ring-fenced it. I had to be escorted back to my home at night after Parliament. The environment in the House was as toxic as tobacco! How it has changed. I hope that at the end of today Minister Turia will get a bouquet of flowers. She gets a bouquet from us in Labour for her leadership. I am sure that intergenerationally this issue will be back before the House. 
I do not usually bring family into debates but one night when I was caught in that toxic environment after sitting in the chair in the House for 5 hours sponsoring the bill I went back to my office and thought the journey was simply too hard. Even with the support of all of the non-governmental organisations that did awhi us through that process then I thought it was just too hard and I felt like walking and pulling the plug. I went home that night and my youngest son said to me: “Mum you look dreadful.” I said: “I feel awful. I’m not sure about this.” He asked: “What is it?”. I told him it was the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill and he said: “Mum keep going. We’re really proud of you because you’re doing the right thing.” That was from my young kids who at that time were about 23 or 24. They knew it was wrong; they went into pubs and bars and they knew that they were inhaling air in an environment that was not good for their health not good for the cleaners and not good for those who choose to live their lives in a clean environment. 
The environment has changed but it has changed because of advocacy and I want to acknowledge all of those advocacy groups including Te Papa Takaro o Te Arawa Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) and the Heart Foundation. Without them I do not think we could have got there actually. They gave us the information they gave us the research and they gave us the evidence and that is what we need as legislators to feel brave about doing the right thing. So I acknowledge them. I heard specific mention of Dr Murray Laugesen and I think he has been amazing along with the evidence from Professor Beaglehole. We could not go wrong actually when we had the evidence—it was so compelling. At that time 380 New Zealanders died every year just from the effects of passive smoke. Now with this legislation 5000 smoking-related deaths will be prevented in this country and that is absolutely fantastic. 
In terms of public health I have been interested to hear Government members talk about the great contribution of an increase in excise tax. That is nothing; it is one leg of the stool in good public health legislation and I wonder when the Government will really understand that it is about leadership it is about advocacy—actually accepting advocacy and lobbying. The environment for lobbyists and advocates in this country was changed dramatically in 2004 when Rodney Hide said it was no longer the place for groups that advocate to get funding from the Government. That was a very very sad day because where else do we get our evidence? That is advocacy in my book. 
It is also about education and information for the public so that they can make choices but also so that we can socialise change. I thank the media that ran the stories. They ran the good the bad and the ugly stories but still they ran the stories that informed the public at that time and I think that is important. 
But above all the slow-burn approach to public health legislation for smoking cessation must be backed by legislation. It is not just excise tax; it is legislation and legislation with teeth. I think that is what we are seeing here today. 
I will talk about incremental change in public health legislation approaches and policy. In 2004 that previous bill was passed. Then there was a petition in 2008 that gave us a very clear steer on where society—the community—wanted to go next with smoking cessation. I recall Tony Ryall the Minister arguing that there was absolutely no international evidence that banning cigarette displays had resulted in a reduction of smoking rates. How wrong he was! But something must have gone on quite magically. I know how persuasive Minister Turia is when she has a bee in her bonnet and she has got Minister Ryall onside and I say well done to her. That is why we are here today; without it you would not have had the backing and we would not have had the backing. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: Well not you Mr Assistant Speaker. You always have our backing. 
I also acknowledge Iain Lees-Galloway. After that public petition he picked up all the recommendations in the petition and put them into his own member’s bill because he knew where we needed to go as a country to reduce the rate of smoking uptake and the effects of tobacco smoke. 
But a gap in the public health approach of 8 years—from the previous legislation to now—is far too long. I put a ring round this matter being back in the House in 5 years. We will be back here with the next legislative shift to keep the foot on the pedal of this slow burner. 
Also we cannot say we are doing enough about smoking cessation when the Government cut public health funding in last year’s Budget. I think it is appalling that people who had made a window-of-opportunity decision to stop smoking found that a lot of the access to the services they needed to stop their habit had been cut. They had made the choice and good on them. We have to catch that golden window but the Government cut smoking cessation programmes. That is sad and it is not a comprehensive response from a Government that really believes in making a difference. 
I have talked about the organisations involved but one other plaudit is for those in the Ministry of Health. I am so relieved to know that there is a small directorate—and I am sure it is not called the tobacco directorate—in the Ministry of Health still advising on public health issues. It will probably move now to alcohol and the effects of alcohol and the effects of obesity but thank goodness those officials are still there to advise the Health Committee. 
I say well done to the select committee. There was a great response to the bill and the committee made good amendments. I am delighted to support this next stage of the bill in the House today.