Book 8 - Parliament of Victoria

ADJOURNMENT
Tuesday, 31 May 2011 COUNCIL 1591
premises and bingo and gaming venues, including the
casino.
In 2006 the government introduced smoking bans in
enclosed workplaces, under-age music and dance
events, and enclosed areas of train station platforms,
tram shelters and bus shelters. In 2006 the government
also reduced the incentives for young people to buy
cigarettes by banning buzz marketing. Smoking in
enclosed licensed premises was banned in 2007. In
2010 a number of other initiatives were taken. Smoking
in motor vehicles carrying children under the age of 18
was banned, and a variety of legislative powers were
given to the Minister for Health to enable him to reduce
the availability of smoking-related products to young
people.
Today, on World No Tobacco Day, when we all
receive Twitter messages from Quit Victoria and the
Cancer Council about the need to maintain vigilance
and a determination to pursue ongoing smoking
restrictions and better public health messages, I was
confused when I received a tweet that suggested that
public policy might be going in a different direction. It
reminded me of a story on ABC radio today that stated
that of British American Tobacco’s political donations
throughout the world in 2010, 97 per cent went to the
coalition in Australia. Could that possibly be true? A
check of the Australian Electoral Commission’s records
indicated that between 2006 and 2010 the Liberal Party
received $124 920 from British American Tobacco and
Philip Morris Ltd.
An honourable member — What’s the question?
Get to it.
Mr JENNINGS — I don’t know whether I will get
time or not.
The PRESIDENT — Order! I am not sure either.
This matter needs to be within the jurisdiction of the
responsible minister. The subject of Mr Jennings’s
adjournment matter so far seems to be party funding
rather than something that falls within the minister’s
jurisdiction. We have a fairly clear position in question
time, which I rely on to some extent even in the
adjournment debate, that the matters raised by members
are not to canvass the internal affairs of parties. I have
some concern about the direction in which this
particular matter is going. Perhaps in the remaining
time Mr Jennings can convince me that this matter falls
within the responsibilities of the minister.
Mr JENNINGS — My adjournment matter asks the
Minister for Health to support reform measures with
respect to packaging and advertising, to increase public
health programs to encourage higher quit rates and
lower take-up rates, and to find ways, either through
legislation, codes of conduct or other measures, to limit
the ability of the tobacco industry to provide political
donations through the political process.
The PRESIDENT — Order! The action
Mr Jennings has sought contradicted some of the
subject matter that supported it. In the spirit of
accepting Mr Ondarchie’s comments tonight I will let
Mr Jennings’s matter stand, but again members need to
ensure that their adjournment matters are a lot tighter. It
is not just slather and whack. Members should be
seeking a serious comment or an action from a minister.
Matters should be about the responsibility of those
ministers, and certainly not about the internal affairs of
other parties and so forth.
Electricity: price comparisons
Mr BARBER (Northern Metropolitan) — My
adjournment matter is for the Minister for Consumer
Affairs, who, conveniently for my purposes, also
happens to be the Minister for Energy and Resources. It
relates to the proliferation of websites purporting to
offer the service of comparing electricity bills to find
the best deal. It turns out that these websites, which are
marketing themselves aggressively, are now funnelling
customers to individual retailers, and it is not apparent
on the surface that that is their purpose.
The Switchwise website lists 20 or so retailers and
therefore discloses that the comparison it provides
between offers is limited to that group. However, on the
Energy Watch website, the name of which mirrors that
of a UK consumer organisation, I cannot find where it
is made clear that the comparison provided as to the
best deal relates only to those retailers with whom
Energy Watch is partnered. In addition, once it has
provided the service of telling its customers what the
best deal is, it then funnels them to those particular
retailers. We are also starting to hear complaints from
people who then sign up through the website and do not
get their power switched on.
The action I suggest the minister could take initially
would be to get ahead of the curve and not to wait until
there are a large number of complaints piling up in his
department. He needs to convene a meeting of the
organisations that are developing these websites and
talk to them about how they can provide better
disclosure on their sites as to the nature of the service
they offer, and, failing that — perhaps through his role
in consumer affairs but certainly in regard to his
responsibilities in energy — he could look at a tighter