Australian Retailers' Association against lifting Tasmanian smoking age

While the Australian Retailers' Association welcomes the Hodgman Government's statement that it will not implement this, comment from a retail perspective is appropriate.

Nobody disputes the need to address smoking rates in Tasmania, but the proposal from Independent Windermere MLC Ivan Dean to lift the smoking age to 21 - whilst well-intentioned - is a simplistic approach that wouldn't work, would cost jobs, and a slippery slope toward the age of majority being increased to 21, if not 25.

We strongly suggest that Mr Dean's Bill is the wrong approach to what we nonetheless agree is a problem that must be tackled.

His latest move to increase the smoking age to 21 follows a previous attempt to ban smoking for anyone born from 2000 onwards. Were it supported by the Upper House, we understand that Mr Dean's fellow

Independent MLC Michael Gaffney would move to increase the age further to 25 years.

Mr Dean openly states he does not believe the human brain is fully developed until 25 and argues that should his legislation ever succeed, an increase to 25 is his ultimate objective.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest 18 is an appropriate age for the majority, with nearly every country in the world making this the threshold for adulthood.

Does Mr Dean also want the age for voting, gambling, drinking, and serving in the armed forces raised to 25?

To be clear, and lest anyone think otherwise, the ARA supports meaningful action to reduce Tasmanian smoking rates.

Indeed, we have supported several recent initiatives to this end.

Since 2015, these have included dramatically increased penalties for selling or supplying smoking products to children, significant increases in Tobacco Sellers' Licence fees, and strict sales reporting mechanisms.

Yet despite these measures having insufficient time to take effect, Mr Dean advocated a simplistic response.

We believe education and socio-economic status are key drivers of ongoing smoking rates; any plan to meaningfully impact smoking rates in Tasmania must address these factors to succeed.

In contrast to preventative measures that may more wholistically be applied, Mr Dean's proposal would create a new class of 'underage person,' marooned in limbo as neither child nor adult.

Further, if it ever came to pass, this new class of person would change by definition in each of the first three years as the proposed changes are staggered, creating further difficulty understanding and applying the law for consumers, law enforcement personnel, and our retail members alike.

It would also put Tasmania out of step with the rest of Australia.

If a single state were to implement these changes, businesses in that state would lose trade and their employees would lose their jobs as smokers go interstate, online, or to criminals peddling illicit product (which already accounts for 14 per cent of all tobacco sales in Australia) to buy cigarettes.

Given return flights to Melbourne are available for less than $100, it's easy to foresee that instead of boxes of Krispy Kreme doughnuts coming in as hand luggage, a booming trade in contraband tobacco between Tasmania and the mainland would soon ensue.

Despite all this, there's no evidence Mr Dean's proposal would even work; the 2016 National Drug Strategy Household Survey shows the average age people start smoking is 16.

Given Tasmanian laws prohibit smoking until 18, how would changing that to 21 or 25 stop this?

If 16-year-olds smoke now, they will continue to do so irrespective of the passage of the "Dean Bill" if a change in the age at which tobacco may be purchased is made in isolation from any other relevant factor.

Importantly, we understand the Council of Australian Governments is also considering raising the smoking age to 21 on a national basis.

If the issue is to be examined, this is the best forum to do so.

Everyone wants solutions to tackle smoking but if it's going to happen, let's do it properly, not in some ad hoc social experiment creating a new class of 'underage people' who are effectively neither child nor adult.