With the legal smoking age now 18 years, does this suggest that age laws are not working?  What age restriction does imply is a rite of passage to smoking and we know that there is never a right age to smoke. It is a deadly and poisonous product.

The greatest disappointment to me in The Examiner article is the statement attributed to Mr Goddard relative to the outright prohibition in the “smoke free generation proposal” and therefore the need to avoid the hazards it presents.

With the greatest of respect to Mr Goddard, that is not right. It is not a “smoke-free generation proposal” but instead is a “Tobacco-Free Generation (TFG)” proposal and there is a vast difference.

The TFG Bill, if passed, would prevent retailers selling tobacco products to those born after 2000 – it does not stop these young people from smoking and is not prohibition.

The TFG concept does not criminalise those born after 2000 who unwisely take up smoking.

Increasing the age to 21 or 25, whatever else it might be, is prohibition as it prevents those people from smoking and criminalises those who do. I do not support criminalising young people. Interestingly, in the latest survey conducted by the Cancer Council Tasmania, overall support for the TFG concept in Tasmania has increased from 70 per cent to 75 per cent. That is resounding support for the proposal.

I READ in (The Examiner, May 13) an article written by Toli Papadopoulos, saying Quit Tasmania wants to hike up cigarette prices to deter people from smoking.

Here's a thought: increase the cost of alcohol which fuels brawling and family violence. Shut down gambling outlets which plunge people who are addicted into debt, theft and again, family violence.

This state is the only one where smokers are penalised by our purchases not being included in frequent shopper points. What gives this state the right to penalise adult smokers who have worked all their lives, are self-funded retirees and who harm nobody by their smoking?  

ABOUT Hawthorn’s “new business plan” , this should be its core element:  four games a season, hosting two of the 10 Victorian clubs (in a five-year roster), one SA/WA club (four year roster) and one Sydney/SEQ club (also a four year roster), which helps answer those never-ending whinges about ‘crap’ teams.

As well, the (real) AFL to match our government subsidies dollar-for-dollar to address another ongoing whine, and all games to start near 1.15pm, so that their last quarters begin at above-zero temperatures.

Finally, a really big reality check for that “One Team, One State” eight games a year mirage: it will need a Melbourne club’s president and/or CEO to tell its AGM this ‘news’.

By the way, your club will have only three home games in Melbourne next season, ‘because we’ll be playing the other eight down there in li’l ol’ Tassie”.

Letters commenting on election issues must bear the name and full address of the writer(s), and a day telephone number for verification purposes only. Responsibility for election comment in this issue is accepted by Fairfax Tasmania group managing editor Mark Baker, 113 Cimitiere Street, Launceston. Writers should disclose any alliance with political or community organisations. Election candidates should declare themselves as such when submitting letters.