Ms MARYANNE STUART (Heathcote) (14:59): With great urgency, I strongly support the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. While vaping goods have been banned irrespective of nicotine content in New South Wales and Australia since 1 July as part of Commonwealth reforms, the purpose of the bill is to introduce supply and possession offences in New South Wales legislation that are aligned with those reforms. The changes will enable our officers appointed under New South Wales legislation to use their existing enforcement powers to enforce the new offences. E-cigarettes, also known as vapes, pose a serious public health threat, hooking a new generation of users into a lifetime of nicotine addiction. They are a danger to decades of progress in New South Wales and across Australia in reducing tobacco smoking rates.

The Government is aware from its extensive enforcement activities and from published evidence that e‑cigarettes are being marketed to children and young people. In my electorate of Heathcote, numerous tobacconists selling e-cigarettes do business near schools. That is especially the case in the suburbs of Thirroul, Bulli and Heathcote, where tobacconists are across the road from primary schools and are in clear view from the schoolyard. There are now four tobacconists within a five-minute walk from my office in Engadine, half of which have opened within the past six months. After school the streets are filled with young students walking to the train station or interacting with local businesses. Young people are at risk of being targeted by the tobacco industry every time they walk past one of those tobacconists.

E-cigarettes with lolly and fruit flavours, with cartoon characters on packages or those even shaped like games and toys are a danger to our youth. Restricting appealing flavours will reduce the attractiveness of vapes to young people. The proposed amending bill will protect young people from being targeted by tobacco industry marketing strategies and becoming hooked on nicotine. All e-cigarette users are exposed to chemicals and toxins that have the potential to cause harm. When someone uses an e-cigarette, the aerosol they inhale can contain over 200 chemicals, some of which have been shown to be harmful to health and can cause cancer and heart disease. While the evidence is still emerging, known health harms associated with vaping include throat irritation, breathlessness, cough, dizziness, headaches, nausea and lung damage. Rechargeable vapes can also explode, causing serious burns and trauma. I especially fear the effect that these harmful chemicals will have on our young people not only in my own electorate but also across the State.

The Government has been a leader in addressing this emerging public health threat. NSW Health has a comprehensive program of activities to help protect young people and the broader community from the harms of e-cigarettes and tobacco. This includes funding for public awareness and education campaigns, support to quit smoking or vaping, compliance and enforcement of smoke-free and retailing laws, and targeted programs for groups with high smoking or vaping rates. In 2023-24 the Government invested an additional $6.8 million over three years to boost enforcement efforts against the sale of illegal vapes and increase support for young people to quit vaping.

Earlier this year, the Government launched the $3 million "Every vape is a hit to your health" public health campaign targeted at young people, which connects young people to more information about vaping and support to quit. But more must be done. The bill introduces supply and possession offences that are modelled on references to Commonwealth laws in the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act to help facilitate stronger compliance efforts against e‑cigarettes. They will enable New South Wales inspectors to efficiently and effectively carry out compliance and enforcement activities across the State.

The NSW Health comprehensive e-cigarette and tobacco compliance program has seen impressive results. In the 12 months from 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024, NSW Health conducted over 2,300 retail inspections, seizing over 425,000 nicotine vapes, 8.3 million illegal cigarettes and 2,600 kilograms of other illegal tobacco products, all with a street value of over $23.5 million. The legislative changes in New South Wales will assist those efforts. I acknowledge the wonderful Minister for Health. He is extremely passionate about this issue and about ensuring that we put every possible prevention strategy in place to assist our young people and make sure that they do not become addicted to these products. We thank him, his staff and NSW Health for their efforts. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms KELLIE SLOANE (Vaucluse) (15:04): I lead for the Opposition in debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. The Opposition is supportive of measures to help combat the harmful and dangerous trade of illicit tobacco. It is a fight that is getting bigger every day, underpinned by organised criminals whose arms reach into almost every suburb and town in our State. Illegal tobacco and illegal cigarettes are primarily sold through tobacconists, which are proliferating at a rate that is, quite frankly, alarming. There are 19,500 shops in our State, growing at an average rate of 1,000 new shops every year. They are popping up in our suburbs; we see them near our schools and in prime shopping strips, selling under-the-counter vapes and illicit tobacco. I have witnessed it firsthand, and it has to stop. It is so much more than cheap cigarettes and vapes. The Australian Border Force Commander, Ken McKern, said:

There are well documented links between the distribution and sale of illicit tobacco in Australia and serious and organised crime syndicates.

Organised crime syndicates use illicit tobacco income to fund other illegal activities that cause significant harm to our community – such as illicit drugs.

Organised syndicates pressure tobacco retailers across Australia to buy and sell their illicit product. They use gangs to enforce compliance including torching tobacco shops, stand over tactics and shootings.

Evading excise duty on tobacco also costs the community millions of dollars that could be spent on essential community services.

We must act. A licensing scheme as proposed in the bill is welcome, as are increased penalties for those involved in the illicit trade of tobacco. We will support that approach. We will not stand in the way of attempts to do the right thing. But the Opposition will move amendments because we must do more, and we need to do more. This is a weak bill. It is weak when compared with the level of fines being introduced in other jurisdictions. It is weak when compared with the fines for vaping introduced in this place only a few weeks ago. It is weak when it comes to the checks and balances of a licensing scheme. We will propose higher penalties and the introduction of a fit and proper person test when considering a licence application. I will talk to the amendments later. That is a no‑brainer, given the clear links between organised crime and the illicit tobacco trade. That should be clearly set out in the bill.

It is embarrassing for the Government that its Labor counterparts in Victoria today announced sweeping and comprehensive changes, the toughest in the country, including a licensing scheme with a fit and proper person test, more powers to police, more dedicated inspectors, and penalties for individuals of up to $355,000 or up to 15 years in jail, while businesses face more than $1.7 million compared with a maximum of $110,000 proposed in the bill. Smaller penalties might have been appropriate a few years ago, but then the firebombing started and the number of shops started expanding. Changing times demand changed measures.

Tobacco smoke accounts for about half of the estimated preventable cancer deaths in Australia. While we have seen a decline in smoking rates in New South Wales from 18.9 per cent in 2007 to 9.5 per cent in 2022-23, at the same time we have seen an increase in the number of tobacconists opening in New South Wales. It is important that we do more to prevent a reversal in the trend that we have fought so hard for: a declining rate in tobacco use and smoking in New South Wales.

The sale of illicit tobacco—or chop‑chop, as it is colloquially known—is a growing issue in this country. In stores throughout New South Wales people can easily purchase illegal cigarettes. They appear not in the proper packaging. They do not have health warnings and they are often paid for with cash. That cash is going straight into the pockets of criminal gangs. The Australian Tax Office [ATO] estimates there were 1,656 tonnes of illicit tobacco undetected in the Australian market in 2022‑23, representing 18 per cent of the total tobacco market. That is huge. The ATO estimates that the total amount of illicit tobacco either imported into Australia or grown in Australia has increased from 1,073 tonnes in 2016‑17 to 3,834 tonnes in 2022‑23. That is worth $6.3 billion. That is a lucrative trade for organised crime syndicates. Those criminals do not care about people's health. They are looking to make a profit. We have seen the lengths that they will go to to continue making that profit.

In Victoria there are on average two firebombings a week related to tobacco turf wars. Since last year, New South Wales has seen six alleged arson attacks on tobacconists from the North Coast to the Central Coast to inland. Those turf wars have spread to South Australia as well. We want to ensure that we have tough legislation in New South Wales so that criminal gangs do not see our State as a soft touch when it comes to the illicit tobacco trade. We must ensure that our laws are tough enough to smoke those crooks out when it comes to illicit trade. That is why, along with the amendments the Opposition is proposing today, we will once again be calling for a parliamentary inquiry into this evil and dangerous trade. The issue has now moved beyond just health; it has become a full‑blown crime crisis across our country.

While the recent inquiry into e-cigarettes covered part of that ground, our proposed inquiry would have a clear focus on organised crime links to tobacconists and money laundering schemes operating within tobacconists, including the use of ATMs. It would look at landlord protections and accountability; departmental responsibility for enforcement; enforcement, resourcing and staffing, especially in regional New South Wales; and the impact on small businesses and communities in metropolitan, regional and rural New South Wales. No stone should be left unturned in tackling the organised crime gangs that are making enormous profits from illicit tobacco. I hope the Government and crossbench will support the inquiry. We are happy to work on the terms of reference in a bipartisan manner.

The bill proposes to amend the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2008 to create a positive licensing scheme for the wholesale and retail sale of tobacco products and non‑smoking tobacco products. The bill will also increase a range of existing penalties for tobacco sales to align with community expectations and to better recognise the seriousness of those offences. The bill will require that any person wishing to sell tobacco by retail or wholesale will need a licence. The bill creates offences for the sale of tobacco without a licence that carry penalties of up to $44,000 or 400 penalty units for an individual, and $220,000 or 2,000 penalty units for a corporation.

The secretary may refuse to grant a licence on the grounds that the applicant has been convicted of an offence related to tobacco or vaping goods in New South Wales or another jurisdiction. If a person is convicted of a relevant offence after obtaining a licence, the secretary will also have the power to revoke the licence. Each retail premises or online shop where tobacco is sold will be required to have a licence. A wholesaler will need a licence but can operate in more than one location with that licence, reflecting that a wholesaler's office and warehouse may not be at the same location. Each licence will be for a period of up to 12 months and must be renewed annually.

The bill provides broad regulation‑making powers to assist with enforcement as well as administrative matters, including fees for applications for new licences and renewal of licences, the keeping of records, the display of licences, and the monitoring and enforcement of the licensing provisions. It also provides for the secretary to establish a register of licences. Transitional provisions will enable existing retailers and wholesalers to apply for a licence and continue to trade while waiting for their application to be considered. The licensing provisions will commence on proclamation to provide sufficient time to communicate the new requirements to businesses. The Opposition would like an indication of how long the Government envisages it would take before the laws come into effect. The concern around no fixed date has been raised by the Legislation Review Committee. We certainly would not like to delay the introduction of a licensing scheme unnecessarily, but we do support the need to work with businesses further to ensure a seamless transition to the licensing scheme.

The bill also proposes increasing penalties on a range of existing offences in the tobacco Act. Penalties for sales to minors are increased to $110,000 or 1,000 penalty units for the first offence, and $220,000 or 2,000 penalty units for a second or subsequent offence for a corporation; and $22,000 for a first offence, and $110,000 for a second or subsequent offence for an individual. For sales of tobacco not in a manufacturer's package, penalties are increased to $22,000 for individuals and $110,000 for corporations. For sales of tobacco without a health warning, penalties are increased to $22,000 for individuals and $110,000 for corporations. For obstructing a tobacco inspector, the penalty is increased to $11,000. As indicated, the Opposition will propose amendments to increase some of the penalties.

The Opposition has also had the opportunity to consult with a range of stakeholders, including those in the health space and the retail space. By and large, all stakeholders were supportive of introducing a licensing scheme. However, retailers have told me they would be very supportive of tougher penalties and a fit and proper person test in that licensing scheme. Legitimate retailers are being squeezed out by organised crime and we need to ensure that the laws are fit to protect their businesses and the public.

A number of stakeholders would also welcome the issues being further considered through a parliamentary inquiry. Stakeholders also want to ensure that, when they pay their licence fee—which I understand will be $1,100—that money will go into enforcing the issues. Multiply the licence fee by 19½ thousand stores and we get over $21½ million. We seek confirmation that that will be used in enforcement via regulation. Some retailers have expressed a desire to see enforcement moved out of health and into justice. A parliamentary inquiry could consider that further.

I thank the Minister and his office for providing briefings to me and my office on the bill. This is an issue that both the Minister and I are passionate about. I encourage the Government and the crossbench to work with the Opposition on amendments to the bill and to support a further parliamentary inquiry. We are doing good work in New South Wales, but we should continue to pursue ways to further crack down on illicit tobacco because we know what smoking does to people's health and that every dollar in the pocket of organised crime only helps fund further misery.

Mr EDMOND ATALLA (Mount Druitt) (15:17): I support the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. This is a critical piece of legislation that reflects our Government's ongoing commitment to protecting public health and addressing the widespread challenges posed by tobacco and non‑tobacco smoking products. The bill introduces essential reforms that seek to regulate the sale and distribution of tobacco products while strengthening our ability to combat the illicit tobacco trade, which has become a growing concern for many in our community. The objective of the bill is to introduce a licensing scheme to regulate the sale of tobacco and non‑tobacco smoking products for both retail and wholesale businesses, as well as significantly increase penalties for offences related to the improper sale and display of the products, especially in cases involving minors.

The provisions are in direct response to the escalating concerns voiced by parents, educators, community leaders and legitimate businesses about the accessibility of illegal tobacco and vaping products, particularly among our youth. Tobacco use remains the single largest cause of preventable death and disease in New South Wales. While we have made tremendous progress in reducing smoking rates, with adult daily smoking rates falling from 18.4 per cent in 2003 to 8.2 per cent in 2023, the illicit trade in tobacco threatens to undermine those gains.

At the heart of the bill is the introduction of a comprehensive licensing scheme for tobacco retailers and wholesalers. Under the scheme, businesses selling tobacco products, whether over the counter, through vending machines or online, will be required to obtain a retail licence. Similarly, wholesalers who supply tobacco for reselling will need a wholesale licence. That move will bring New South Wales in line with other States and Territories, all of which already have licensing regimes in place. The bill makes it clear that selling tobacco without a valid licence will result in significant penalties. For individuals, the maximum penalty will be 400 penalty units, equating to $44,000, while for corporations, the penalty will rise to 2,000 penalty units, or $220,000. This robust licensing framework will not only ensure that businesses selling tobacco are properly regulated, but it will also allow us to target illicit activities more effectively.

The illicit tobacco trade is a lucrative industry that undermines public health efforts and disproportionately impacts young people. Those products, often sold at a fraction of the price of legal tobacco, do not carry the mandated health warnings and evade excise and customs duties. They are an attractive option for young people who may be drawn to their low cost and availability. The availability of those illegal products is a major threat to our public health efforts, and the bill is designed to combat that threat. The bill also increases penalties for several existing tobacco-related offences, particularly those concerning the sale of tobacco to minors and the improper display of tobacco products. The penalties are designed to reflect the gravity of those offences and provide a stronger deterrent against noncompliance.

For example, under the current law, individuals selling tobacco without proper packaging or health warnings face a maximum penalty of 100 penalty units, or $11,000. The bill doubles the penalty for individuals to 200 penalty units, or $22,000, and increases the penalty for corporations to 1,000 penalty units, or $110,000. Those changes reflect the seriousness with which we regard noncompliance with tobacco laws, particularly in relation to public health warnings that are crucial to informing the public about the dangers of smoking.

To support the enforcement of those new laws, the Minns Labor Government will significantly increase the resources available to inspectors. In 2023, when the Minns Labor Government came to office, there were only seven inspectors tasked with enforcing tobacco laws across New South Wales. That number has now doubled to 14, and we are expanding the team to 28 inspectors. In total, we will have around 68 inspectors working across the State to ensure compliance with tobacco laws. Those inspectors will work closely with the NSW Police Force, the Australian Taxation Office and Federal agencies to crack down on the sale of illicit tobacco.

In summary, the bill represents a significant step forward in our efforts to regulate tobacco and non-tobacco smoking products in New South Wales. By introducing a licensing scheme and increasing penalties for noncompliance, we are taking decisive action to protect public health, particularly for our youth. The Government is committed to tackling the illicit tobacco trade, ensuring that businesses comply with the law and providing our inspectors with the resources they need to enforce those laws effectively. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr GURMESH SINGH (Coffs Harbour) (15:23): I make a short contribution to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024 introduced by the Government. While the bill attempts to tackle the pressing issues surrounding the supply of tobacco products and the illicit tobacco trade in New South Wales, it falls short of implementing the robust measures needed to effectively combat those challenges. The bill proposes a licensing scheme requiring individuals and businesses to obtain a licence to sell tobacco products, with penalties for noncompliance. However, the measures outlined are insufficient for several reasons. Firstly, it lacks a fit and proper person test. Unlike other States such as Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia, the bill does not include a fit and proper person test in the licence application process. That omission allows individuals with potential links to organised crime to obtain licences, undermining the integrity of the system.

Secondly, the penalties are simply inadequate. The proposed penalties—up to $44,000 for individuals and $220,000 for corporations selling tobacco without a licence—are not commensurate with the scale of profits generated by the illicit tobacco trade. For organised crime syndicates profiting from over $2 billion in evaded duty annually, the penalties are merely a minor inconvenience—a minor cost of doing business. The Government's bill does not adequately address the severity of the illicit tobacco problem. The number of registered tobacconists in New South Wales has surged to 19,500, an increase of 4,000 in just four years. Australian Border Force Commander Ken McKern highlighted the connection between illicit tobacco and organised crime. He said:

Organised crime syndicates use illicit tobacco income to fund other illicit activities that cause significant harm to our community—such as illicit drugs.

Organised crime syndicates pressure tobacco retailers across Australia to buy and sell their illicit product, using gangs to enforce compliance including torching tobacco shops, stand over tactics and shootings.

Since 2023 there have been six firebombing attacks related to tobacconists in New South Wales. In Victoria the situation is even more dire, with over 100 arson attacks on tobacconists. Those facts underscore the urgent need for stronger legislative action than the current bill proposes. While the bill's intent is to align New South Wales with other States and Territories, it neglects crucial elements that make such licensing schemes effective elsewhere. Without stringent measures, the bill risks becoming a token gesture rather than a substantive tool against illicit tobacco and organised crime.

To address the shortcomings of the Government's bill, the Opposition will propose to make amendments, including by adding a fit and proper person test similar to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia. The test would allow authorities to refuse a licence if the applicant has links to organised crime or fails to meet integrity standards. By scrutinising applicants more thoroughly, we can prevent criminal elements from exploiting the licensing system to legitimise their illicit activities. Another amendment will propose raising the penalties for corporations by increasing the maximum penalty for corporations from $220,000 to $770,000, which aligns our penalties with those of Queensland. That adjustment reflects the substantial financial gains made from illegal activities and serves as a much stronger deterrent. It also signals zero tolerance. Higher penalties convey a clear message that involvement in the illicit tobacco trade will have significant financial repercussions.

The Government's bill in its current form is a missed opportunity to make a meaningful impact on public health and to combat the escalating influence of organised crime associated with the illicit tobacco trade. It lacks the necessary provisions to ensure that only reputable individuals and businesses can operate within the tobacco industry. We cannot afford half-measures when our communities are endangered by criminal syndicates profiting from illegal tobacco sales, funding further illicit activities and perpetrating violence against those who stand in their way. I urge the Government to acknowledge those critical gaps and to incorporate the proposed amendments into the bill. By doing so, we can create legislation that not only aligns with other States but also sets a higher standard for protecting our citizens and upholding the rule of law.

Today the State of Victoria has announced further reforms to its legislation to include a fit and proper person test, a new tobacco regulator with dedicated inspectors to work closely with the police, and the toughest penalties in Australia. I acknowledge the Minister's office has been great to us by providing briefings and discussions on the matter. I acknowledge that it is unrealistic for us expect the bill to exactly reflect Victoria's bill, given that that announcement was only made this morning.

However, the Opposition is calling for an inquiry into the illicit tobacco trade in New South Wales to address the problem in a more detailed and thorough way. Whether that includes some of the measures taken by other States, such as South Australia and Victoria, or whether it includes looking at tougher penalties, which I would encourage, an inquiry can get to the bottom of those issues. It will allow our communities to make submissions, before we become subject to the kind of violence and firebombings we have seen in Victoria. What happens in some States is often easily transferred to New South Wales. The last thing we want to see is more criminal elements moving from Victoria to New South Wales because our penalties are not as severe as they are south of the border. So, in a bipartisan way, we should demonstrate our commitment to the health and safety of the people of New South Wales by strengthening this bill with our amendments and effectively address the challenges at hand.

Ms LIESL TESCH (Gosford) (15:29): I speak in debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. Vaping is a serious threat to health. Like smoking in the early days, we do not necessarily know the long-term consequences. But this bill is yet another step to reduce the amount of vaping across communities in New South Wales and also look at what is happening with illegal tobacco. I thank the Minister for the initial bill. Vaping has been illegal in New South Wales since July 2024, but we must move further to eliminate what is going on across New South Wales. The bill proposes to create a comprehensive licensing scheme for the wholesale and retail sale of tobacco and non-smoking tobacco products. In doing so, the New South Wales Government is sending a clear message: There is no place for illicit tobacco and vapes in our community.

I know that this bill will make people in my community happy. There have been numerous complaints as we have seen vaping and tobacco shops open up in Umina, Ettalong and Woy Woy. It is disappointing, and I definitely do not want to see this in my community. The clear goals of the bill are to enhance our regulatory powers over the supply of tobacco, align with the measures taken by other States and Territories, and address the community's growing concerns about illicit tobacco sales. The proposed licensing scheme is central to this amendment. It will require any individual or entity wishing to sell tobacco products, whether retail or wholesale, to obtain a valid licence. This will ensure that only qualified individuals and businesses are involved in the sale of these controlled products and give the Government stronger powers to control and monitor tobacco sales in New South Wales. The introduction of this scheme aims to bring New South Wales in line with existing regulations in other jurisdictions and demonstrates our commitment to meeting community expectations on this critical public health issue.

The bill will introduce stringent penalties to deter unlicensed sales. Any individual selling tobacco without a licence will face fines of up to $44,000, and corporations could face penalties as high as $220,000. Additionally, those with a history of tobacco- or vaping-related offences may be refused a licence or may have their licences revoked in the case of offences committed after the granting of a licence. This provision enables the secretary to uphold a high standard in granting and revoking licences, ensuring that only responsible sellers operate in this sector. The bill will further require that each retail outlet, as well as online stores, holds an individual licence. Wholesalers, meanwhile, will need just one licence, even if they operate across multiple locations. Each licence will be valid for a period of up to 12 months and will require annual renewal. To facilitate the effective operation of this licensing scheme, the bill will also empower the secretary to establish a comprehensive register of licences. That is important as we move forward.

The bill addresses penalties associated with tobacco-related offences. The bill will increase fines for several offences under the existing tobacco Act, aligning penalties with community expectations. Penalties for selling tobacco to minors will rise significantly, with first-time offenders facing fines of up to $110,000 for corporations and $22,000 for individuals. Repeat offenders will face even steeper penalties of $220,000 and $110,000, respectively. Fines for selling tobacco without health warnings and for sales not in the manufacturer's original packaging will increase, reaching $22,000 for individuals and $110,000 for corporations.

The bill will also introduce a penalty of $11,000 for obstructing a tobacco inspector, underscoring our commitment to enforcing these regulations. Additionally, the bill will introduce a new offence for using a price board to advertise tobacco products, allowing us to close a loophole that has previously hampered enforcement efforts. I look forward to going around to these supposed sales locations in my electorate and actually explaining the new legislation to them, because I know that what is going on in some of those shops is definitely not okay. I thank our health inspectors. It is really important that we have doubled the number of health inspectors in New South Wales. I commend them for their work, particularly on the Central Coast in raiding shops.

Recognising the operational impact of these changes, the bill includes transitional provisions. Retailers and wholesalers will be granted time to apply for their licences, ensuring they can continue to trade lawfully while awaiting the scheme's full implementation. The licensing requirement will commence upon proclamation, allowing ample time for communication and adjustment. That is particularly important in my community, as we saw an arson attempt on the Central Coast. About three months ago the beautiful, sleepy little town of Ettalong was disrupted by a fireball and explosion at a business, which also disrupted a number of businesses around it. It was quite frightening for our community. Anything we can do to restrict and oversee the operations of these tobacconists is very important. With over 35,182 illegal nicotine products seized across the Central Coast by NSW Health inspectors up to August 2024, it is clear that continued efforts to stem the flow of illegal nicotine products are essential.

The bill is an important step in safeguarding public health by tightening regulations around the sale of tobacco products. By establishing a licensing scheme, increasing penalties for offences and closing enforcement gaps, we are continuing to take decisive action to combat illicit tobacco sales, protect young people from accessing tobacco and ensure that all sales align with health regulations and community expectations. In closing, I thank our passionate Minister for Health. He has two young boys and does not want to see anyone's health impacted by illicit vapes or tobacco—and neither do any of us. I thank the Minister and his team for continuing to work hard on this. In introducing this bill, the New South Wales Labor Government reinforces our commitment to a healthier and more responsible New South Wales.

Mr ADAM CROUCH (Terrigal) (15:36): I make a brief contribution to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. The Opposition supports the bill with amendments, as was outlined earlier in this debate in the excellent contribution by the shadow Minister for Health, the member for Vaucluse, and also by the shadow Minister for Regional Health, the member for Coffs Harbour. As the member for Gosford outlined, the Central Coast, including Terrigal, has seen a proliferation of smoke shops recently. Understandably, there is community concern about the rapid growth in their number. In the past four years alone over 4,000 of these shops have sprung up across New South Wales. Let us be really clear: An enormous amount of money is being raised by these businesses. Sadly, in a lot of cases that money is being funnelled back through organised crime. Not that long ago all members of this House supported removing the illegal activity around vapes. Now we are seeing the Government do the right thing by looking to put tougher penalties in place around retail and wholesale tobacco use.

But, as the member for Vaucluse outlined, this bill does not go far enough. We are talking about an industry that the Australian Taxation Office estimates to be evading over $2 billion of duty. That is just the duty; that is not the retail sales of these products. As other members have outlined, those products are colloquially known as "chop-chop", which is an attempt to diminish the severity of what smoking addiction can do to people. There is a lack of oversight of the retail sale of these products across New South Wales. The local business chambers on the Central Coast raised their deep concern about the recent firebombings in the electorate of the member for Gosford, and I have had similar concerns raised by business chambers in my community. Those organisations want to see harsh penalties applied to make it clear to perpetrators of this crime that they will be caught and punished.

I also want to note the contribution of the member for Vaucluse about a parliamentary inquiry. That is absolutely necessary. Some of us have been legislators in this place for a long time. The member for Shellharbour is in the Chamber. She knows as well as I do that legislation is always playing catch up with what is actually happening in the community. It is up to us and beholden to us as legislators—and the member for Wagga Wagga is here as well—to make sure that legislation that is introduced stays in front of the curve when it comes to dealing with criminal activity. These people are very, very good at manipulating the system and trying to find workarounds and ways to continue to ply their illegal trade. One of the clear ways to address that is to provide stiffer penalties.

I acknowledge the Government is putting penalties in place for illegal sales—that is, $22,000 for an individual and $110,000 for a corporation. But those corporations are turning over hundreds of millions of dollars. Quite frankly, that is not even a slap on the wrist. We need to be serious about this. There is a proliferation of individuals starting up small businesses to illegally sell tobacco. That has become clear to everybody because of the turf wars that are occurring in other States and, concerningly, are now starting up in New South Wales.

I commend the member for Vaucluse for the Opposition's proposed amendment to increase those penalties to $770,000 for corporations and $154,000 for individuals. While those figures are not as high as what was announced today in Victoria, they will create a very clear message that if someone tries to perpetrate these crimes in New South Wales they will receive stiff penalties—stiffer than what is being proposed in this piece of legislation, as drafted by the Government. It is also important to note that other States have the test for a fit- and- proper person. The amendment proposed by the Opposition—and hopefully supported by the crossbench—will insert the need for a fit-and-proper person test. We do not want the secretary to have to retrospectively remove people who should have never been given a permit in the first place. That is a waste of time, resources and effort that could be better spent if there is a fit-and-proper person test for those people.

I welcome also the initiative of a regulator. Today it was announced that Victoria will have a regulator. It is good to have that consistent oversight. Right now, we do not know whether Health is the right agency to maintain the regulations, given the incredibly rapid growth. Does it have the resources to apply the necessary infringement notices to the perpetrators? As the member for Gosford said, 35,000 illegal products were seized on the Central Coast alone. That is an enormous amount in just one region in one part of the State. We need a parliamentary inquiry, which we have all the time for so many things. As someone who has been on many committees, I believe one of the best things about the New South Wales Parliament is its robust and detailed committee structure. Every member has served on one. They help create clear messaging and dialogue around what can be amended and what can be improved for governments of all persuasions moving forward. Acts and regulations are living documents, and it is up to us to say in front of the curve.

While this is a good bill, it needs to be better. The reality is that the penalties need to be significantly increased to send a clear message to perpetrators that they are not going to get just a slap on the wrist. A parliamentary inquiry might find that we need to go even further with these sorts of penalties. That is what we do so well in the New South Wales Parliament. We come together in a bipartisan way to look at how to make legislation better to help and improve the situations and lives of the people of New South Wales. It is very clear to most small businesses on the Central Coast that this is a grave concern. Business chambers are contacting all members to raise significant concerns about the antisocial behaviour around the proliferation of smoke shops.

My good friend the brand new member for Hornsby was in the Chamber earlier, and he mentioned two shops that have popped up at train stations right next to schools in his electorate. That happened very recently. They do that because they know they can make a bucketload of money out of it and scoot around the rules. The regulations are welcome, but we need to do more. That is why I recommend that both the Government and the crossbench think very seriously about supporting the tougher penalties recommended by the Opposition in this place. I acknowledge that the Minister's office spent a great deal of time with the shadow Minister. That is how we work collectively.

Let us all be very clear: We know the dangers of smoking. We are all old enough to have seen the ads and know the damage smoking does to people's lungs. We all remember the graphic ads where sponges were wringed out with tar from smoking. We all grew up with that. But there is a generation of younger people who have not been exposed and do not understand the dangers of smoking. We are getting to the point where illegal tobacco products are being sold with no warnings on the packaging and none of the imagery that we have all seen very clearly. Those images are big visual deterrents to stop people from wanting to get involved in what is a very difficult substance and habit to break. Smoking is one of the toughest addictions to give up. I come from a family with a few smokers.

The cost becomes prohibitive as well, but with the illegal activity, these products are being sold at a fraction of the normal retail price. Massive profits are still being made by organised crime. That is being indicated and made clear by the turf wars popping up and the firebombing of retail stores. It is not only the retail stores being targeted, but also the neighbouring stores that are affected by that sort of behaviour. The member for Gosford knows that the smoke and fire damage spreads. It also starts to create a level of fear and trepidation in our communities, which is totally unacceptable—whether it be on the Central Coast, the South Coast or anywhere in between. We need to send a clear message to these people, organisations, individuals and corporations that this is not acceptable, and they are on notice. We need to give the legislation the teeth it needs to send that fear and monetary impost to the perpetrators.

I welcome the bill. I am really pleased the Government has introduced this legislation, but it can go a lot further to make significant inroads with the messaging to say, "This won't be tolerated. You will be found and fined, and the fine will be commensurate with the criminal activity you are taking part in." The amendment proposed by the member for Vaucluse around the fit-and-proper person test is important. We know there are no unintended consequences of that, because it has already been done in other States. They know that having a fit- and-proper person test works and cuts it off at the beginning, before it goes too far. I thank all members who have contributed to debate. I thank the member for Vaucluse for her contribution and her proposed amendments. I commend the bill and the amendments to the House.

Dr JOE McGIRR (Wagga Wagga) (15:46): I speak in support of the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No. 2). Indeed, earlier this year, I was so concerned by the explosion of illegal tobacco in my electorate and across the State that I drafted my own private member's bill to require licensing of tobacco retailers and increase penalties for offenders. I am very pleased that the Government has largely reflected the content of my bill in the bill we are debating today. Since becoming aware of the escalating scale of the problem of black- market tobacco sales, I have become increasingly alarmed at the lawlessness that is driving this serious behaviour. Legitimate retailers—small and large-business owners who do the right thing—are paying a heavy financial price for the plague of illegal tobacco shops, which are popping up like flies at a picnic.

Quite simply, honest retailers cannot compete with criminals. As everyone can probably imagine, I do not support smoking. But we have a system of health warnings and restrictions around the sale of tobacco, and legitimate retailers comply and help us in the work to get people off cigarettes. But their business model is undermined by illegal activity, criminals and, I suggest, organised crime. In assessing the full scope of this problem, I am grateful for the advice and support I have received from other members. I note the strong advocacy of the member for Kiama. Many other members of this House have spoken to me about what is happening in their electorates. I have had good discussions with the member for Vaucluse as well. I appreciate her interest in this issue.

I express my gratitude to Wagga business owners, including Neville Jolliffe and Kellie Willis, who first brought this issue to my attention earlier this year. The fact is that illegal tobacco shops have been popping up in my electorate and elsewhere for years. It is usually once or twice, and the public health unit shuts them down pretty quickly. But this year there was an absolute explosion. Within 500 metres of my office, there were 10. Some of them were clearly marked as selling illegal tobacco and some were masquerading as supermarkets. That was happening in other suburbs, and it happened pretty quickly.

There was a pattern, with movements up from the border. When I raised this topic in this House—I think I was the first to raise it—other members came to me and said what was happening in their electorates. It was pretty clear, from my subsequent discussions with police and with the Crime Commissioner, that we were dealing with organised crime—that is my view—and that this was going to explode. I thank Neville Jolliffe, Kellie Willis, and other business owners, who were among the early victims of this scourge, for raising the issue with me; they have done a great service to our State.

Many legitimate traders have faced financial hardship. They have also been intimidated by criminals who target small operators with barely veiled threats to fall into line or face worrying consequences. It makes a mockery of the law, degrades the health messaging around tobacco use and raises concerns that New South Wales could go the way of Victoria with the potentially deadly arson attacks, risking lives and destroying livelihoods. When framing my private member's bill, it was my intention to throw a spanner into the works of illegal operators by requiring them to be licensed. That would make criminals more accountable, and easier to regulate and punish. Increased penalties will provide a more effective deterrent, because the current fines are seen by illegal operators as just a manageable cost of business in a very lucrative trade.

I do not pretend that licensing and tougher penalties will entirely solve the problem, but they will provide a framework that is now lacking. In that framework, we can begin to hit black marketeers where it hurts—in the hip pocket. We do not allow purveyors of alcohol to sell their product to whomever they like whenever they want. Quite rightly, alcohol retailers are licensed, monitored and expected to do the right thing, and for the most part they do. We need to apply similar restrictions to the sale of tobacco—which, after all, is a deadly product—so that we can at least begin to bring the problem under control. I note that other States in Australia have licensing regimes, but until this point New South Wales has not had one.

I acknowledge the work of the Minister and the speed with which the Government has responded to my private member's bill. I also acknowledge the work of ministerial staff and departmental staff, including Dr Kerry Chant, with whom I met earlier this year to discuss my private member's bill. It is pleasing that the Government has adopted so much of my bill, reflecting the wishes of my community and many others across the State. While the bill offers an important new weapon in the fight against crime, I will propose amendments to make it even more effective. My initial proposal included reference to a test for a fit and proper person, which is not in the current bill. I have been informed that the Government will not support that proposal because of the administrative challenges around it.

I accept there is a real degree of urgency about this issue, and it is important that we are clear about that. I have been told that when the bill is assented to the fines will come into effect. If we can get the bill through the Houses of Parliament next week, then we can have a regime in place by July. We cannot wait any longer than that, so I am prepared to accept the Government's view that the fit and proper person test would pose a delay. I support the Opposition's amendment, but I accept that the Government does not, so I will propose an amendment that will help fill that gap by enabling the health secretary to act upon advice from a law enforcement agency in considering whether to grant, refuse, renew or revoke a licence. That at least gives a method by which the police can inform the regulators around the presence of organised crime. That is a partway step forward. It is not as robust as a fit and proper person test, but it does provide extra powers to weed out applicants who are manifestly unfit for the privilege of holding a licence to sell tobacco.

In recognition that the bill is a work in progress, I will also propose an amendment to provide for a statutory review of the entire bill after five years to determine what is working and what could be done better. Further, a report on the outcome of that review is to be tabled in each House of Parliament within 12 months after the end of five years from the commencement of the amendments made by part 5. These amendments will help to ensure that the bill remains fit for purpose and continues to do what it sets out to do. Mention has been made of the need for a parliamentary inquiry. I am not opposed to the need for a parliamentary inquiry because aspects of the bill could be improved, which might benefit from additional scrutiny. However, I am also convinced that we have an urgent need to get this legislation through in the form in which it is being proposed, with some amendments, because that is what is needed right now. In the form proposed, the bill will make a big difference to the impact on the community.

In preparing my private member's bill, I consulted widely with stakeholders across the industry, the health agency and the wider community to get their feedback. That feedback included calls for tougher penalties than those originally proposed in the Government's bill. I welcome the Government's support in revising those penalties upward in the bill that is now before the House. I thank the stakeholders who helped to shape this important reform. Time does not permit me to acknowledge all of them, but I particularly thank the Australian Association of Convenience Stores, the Australian United Retailers Limited, British American Tobacco Australia, Cancer Council NSW, MGA Independent Businesses Australia, the NSW Crime Commission and Phillip Morris Limited.

I acknowledge and especially thank my electorate team and my research consultant, Rachelle Kell, who did so much to source and collate the feedback, ensuring that it was all put to good use. I also acknowledge the work of my research officer, Mr Paul Terry, who has worked on the bill and on the feedback. The bill and its amendments will help to control a serious problem before it gets worse. Failure to do so is to surrender to lawlessness, to give up on efforts to manage tobacco as a health issue and to send a message to honest businesspeople that criminal competitors cannot and will not be stopped. We cannot have that. The bill is important. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms ANNA WATSON (Shellharbour) (15:55): I start by acknowledging the incredible work of the Minister Park and his dedicated and professional team, who are always so friendly and approachable. Minister Park is a passionate advocate for public health and always has been. I do not think that we have seen such a fantastic Minister of Health in the past 15 years or that we will see again in the next 15 years. I call out the incredible Mel Haskew, who is in the gallery today. I thank the entire team for all of their hard work, their dedication and their professionalism.

I speak in support of the Public Health Tobacco Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. I thank the Minister for bringing this important bill to the House. Tragically, smoking continues to be the biggest preventable cause of death across New South Wales. Smoking is a major risk factor for many diseases, including coronary heart disease, stroke and many types of cancers. As the member for Terrigal has said, it is a highly addictive, bad habit. For over 100 years, big tobacco companies have hooked people on nicotine, preferably addicting them as young as they can so that they have customers for life.

Tobacco use creates a substantial burden on the New South Wales health system. In 2021-22 the number of hospitalisations attributable to smoking in New South Wales was over 56,000 people, which was almost 2 per cent of all hospitalisations. In New South Wales, in 2021 over 6,600 deaths were attributed to smoking. Furthermore, exposure to second-hand smoke causes disease, and premature and preventable death in children and adults who do not smoke. The George Institute found that in 2022-23 tobacco use was responsible for almost $160 billion in economic and social costs across Australia, comprising treatment and lost productivity costs.

The bill strengthens our comprehensive approach to help reduce the use, impact and associated costs of tobacco. The bill introduces stronger controls over the sale of tobacco and tougher penalties for those who breach tobacco laws, including selling tobacco products to children—one of the most abhorrent things that any retailer can do. The increased penalties for breaching tobacco retailing and illicit tobacco offences reflect the New South Wales Government's commitment to addressing the health impacts of tobacco smoking on the New South Wales community.

Illicit tobacco is tobacco grown or manufactured in Australia or imported into Australia without appropriate excise or customs duties being paid. It is often significantly cheaper than factory-made cigarettes and therefore appeals to people, especially young people, because of its attractive price. Its availability and affordability undermine the Government's public health efforts. Daily smoking rates have declined over the past 20 years—which is great—among New South Wales adults from 18.4 per cent in 2003 to 8.2 per cent in 2023. We want those rates to continue to decrease.

NSW Health takes smoking seriously and is implementing comprehensive approaches to continue to reduce smoking rates, and they are working. NSW Health is delivering a suite of initiatives, including social marketing, support to quit smoking, community programs, regulation and specific support for communities with high smoking prevalence. That work is complemented by Australian Government actions such as tobacco taxes and plain packaging laws. The set of initiatives introduced in this bill will promote better health and reduce the costs of ill health by reducing the demand for tobacco and regulating its supply.

I also speak briefly about our comprehensive statewide compliance program, which is now in place. The program employs inspectors who are authorised to conduct tobacco and vaping goods compliance activities across the State. I am pleased that the Government has doubled the number of those inspectors, as the member for Gosford said. Enforcement is a key part of NSW Health's overall response to tobacco control, which includes delivering public awareness and education campaigns, quit smoking support and targeted programs for groups with high smoking rates. NSW Health will bolster the workforce of inspectors to implement and enforce the new tobacco licensing system. Over the coming months an additional 14 enforcement officers will be recruited to strengthen compliance efforts across the State. That will double the number of inspectors employed by the Ministry of Health.

NSW Health's compliance program includes targeting the sale of illicit tobacco and illegal vapes in regional, rural and metropolitan local health districts. Across NSW Health approximately 60 staff are authorised to undertake inspections. That includes the recent addition of four enforcement officers to boost regional enforcement capacity, acknowledging that tobacco retailing is not limited to metropolitan areas only. In my electorate there are four such stores on one street, about 50 metres from each other. Clearly, something needs to be done quickly, which is why the bill is so important. NSW Health works in close partnership with State regulators like the NSW Police Force and national regulators like the Therapeutic Goods Administration and Australian Border Force. Those partnerships will continue to be fostered and will strengthen. That enhanced workforce is critical in supporting the success of the new tobacco licensing scheme. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr MICHAEL HOLLAND (Bega) (16:01): I am pleased to support the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. The bill responds to community expectations that the New South Wales Government urgently addresses the soaring increase in the illicit tobacco trade, which is targeting young and vulnerable people in our community. I note that the parliamentary inquiry into e-cigarette regulation and compliance in New South Wales conducted by the Committee on Law and Safety recommended that a positive licensing scheme be introduced to support comprehensive and targeted enforcement.

The tobacco licensing scheme introduced by the bill will ensure that New South Wales has accurate, up‑to‑date information on tobacco retailing and wholesaling activities across the State. Every retailer and wholesaler selling tobacco products in New South Wales will need to have a licence, with all licensees required to renew their licence every year. The bill will give the Secretary of NSW Health the power to reject an application or revoke an existing licence if the applicant has been convicted of an offence relating to the sale or supply of tobacco or vaping goods under relevant Australian legislation.

Between 1 July 2024 and 30 September 2024, NSW Health inspectors seized more than 3.2 million cigarettes and over 600 kilograms of other illicit tobacco products, with an estimated value of over $3.7 million. Year on year, seizures of illicit tobacco have continued to rise. The scheme in the bill will support comprehensive and targeted enforcement to identify and penalise those retailers and wholesalers doing the wrong thing. That is why this Government is aiming to commence this much-needed scheme around 1 July next year. The cost of a licence will be set by way of regulation; however, it is anticipated to be $1,100 per year for each premises for both retailers and wholesalers. The fees will cover the costs of developing, implementing and enforcing the licensing scheme on a cost-recovery basis, and will ensure the proper implementation of the scheme.

Tobacco licensing has become the norm in Australia. All other States and Territories either already have an equivalent scheme in place or are in the process of developing one. A positive tobacco licensing scheme in New South Wales will create a level playing field across all jurisdictions. A licensing scheme in New South Wales will also act as a deterrent for tobacco retailing businesses seeking to operate outside the law. The bill includes penalties of up to $220,000 for corporations and $44,000 for individuals for selling tobacco without a licence under the new scheme. This new initiative will ensure greater oversight of the tobacco retail industry and make it more difficult for illicit tobacco to flourish in New South Wales. We must act now.

I was pleased to contribute to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill 2024, which provided an important platform in order to ensure enforcement of supply and possession of vaping goods and e‑cigarettes to protect young people from the harms of vaping and the gateway to tobacco smoking. I also believe this bill will have important public health implications. Smoking kills people; smoking disables people. It causes strokes, heart attacks and lung disease. It causes numerous cancers, from the upper respiratory tract to the lung, and increases the risk of bladder and cervical cancers. It increases the complications of pregnancy, from miscarriage to stillbirth. As long as this filthy, lethal habit remains legal, governments must reduce harm from addiction. The bill will help to control supply and reduce demand. I commend the bill to the House.

Mrs WENDY TUCKERMAN (Goulburn) (16:06): I contribute to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024, which is an important piece of legislation that aims to address the escalating issues surrounding tobacco sales, particularly in relation to the illicit trade of tobacco products. The Opposition acknowledges the necessity of the bill, which proposes amendments to the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2008 that aim to create a comprehensive licensing scheme for both the wholesale and retail sales of tobacco products, including non-smoking tobacco options. The Government has put forward this licensing regime with the intention of providing greater powers to control the supply of tobacco. That is a critical measure, especially in light of the increasing prevalence of illicit tobacco sales that have become a substantial concern in our communities. By bringing New South Wales in line with other States and Territories, we are taking a necessary step toward better regulating tobacco sales and protecting public health.

The bill also recognises the need to enhance existing penalties for tobacco sales. It is clear that the current penalties do not reflect the seriousness of the offences, nor do they align with community expectations regarding tobacco regulation and public health. As representatives of our constituents, it is imperative that we address those concerns in a meaningful way. However, the Opposition believes that the Government's bill does not go far enough. While we welcome the efforts to increase penalties, we contend that they remain weak in comparison with the newly established penalties for vaping products. That inconsistency raises questions about the Government's commitment to tackling the broader issue of tobacco regulation effectively. Furthermore, when we compare our proposed penalties with those in States such as Queensland, it becomes evident that New South Wales must adopt a more robust approach to ensure that our communities are adequately protected.

Illicit tobacco sales have grown into a significant challenge, particularly in rural areas, where organised crime groups often operate with little oversight. Those groups pose an increasing threat to public safety and undermine the effectiveness of legitimate businesses that comply with existing regulations. To highlight the gravity of the situation, I draw attention to recent law enforcement actions. According to the Hume Police District, a joint operation conducted on 16 and 17 October targeted illicit tobacco sales in the regions of Boorowa, Young and Goulburn. During that operation, authorities seized an extraordinary total of 1,478,989 illegal cigarettes, 12.5 kilograms of loose illegal tobacco and 1,019 vaping devices. The operation underscores the scale of the issue and the need for stronger regulatory measures. The law enforcement efforts did not end there. On the following day, additional searches were conducted in two shops in Goulburn in collaboration with NSW Health, resulting in the seizure of 187,740 cigarettes, 3.7 kilograms of loose tobacco and 108 vaping devices. This demonstrates that, even with existing measures in place, the problem of illicit tobacco is persistent and requires more substantial action.

In response to these challenges, the Opposition proposes a series of amendments to the licensing scheme that would strengthen its effectiveness. First and foremost, we advocate for the inclusion of a fit and proper person test as part of the licensing application process. This test is already utilised in States such as Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania for liquor licence applications. Implementing a similar requirement for tobacco sales in New South Wales would ensure that individuals with a questionable background or connections to organised crime are effectively excluded from obtaining licences to sell tobacco products.

Furthermore, the Opposition believes that it is crucial to establish that a licence can be refused if the applicant demonstrates any links to organised crime. This provision is essential to safeguard our communities from those who would seek to exploit vulnerabilities in the State's regulatory framework for their gain. Finally, the Opposition urges the Government to review and strengthen the penalties associated with the sale of illicit tobacco, particularly in relation to our proposed amendments to last session's vaping bill. By aligning the penalties for illicit tobacco sales with the strict measures the Opposition will propose for vaping products, the Parliament will send a clear message that all forms of illegal trade will be met with serious consequences.

In conclusion, while the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024 is a step in the right direction, it is essential that further action is taken. The Government must demonstrate its commitment to protecting public health and ensuring the safety of our communities. The Opposition calls for a more comprehensive approach to tackling illicit tobacco sales that includes stronger penalties, rigorous licensing requirements and a commitment to collaboration with law enforcement agencies. The Government must take meaningful steps to curb the illicit tobacco trade and protect our communities from its harmful effects.

Mr GARETH WARD (Kiama) (16:11): I reluctantly support the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. This is not just about health anymore; it is about community safety and organised crime. As it stands, Minister Park's bill is so weak that it practically advertises that New South Wales is open for business to anyone looking to make a quick dollar off illegal tobacco. With six firebombings in New South Wales already, we cannot afford more. Weaker licensing schemes, regulatory controls, fines and penalties make New South Wales the go-to place for organised crime to do business. Our communities deserve better protection, not policies that fall far short. It is time for the Minister to show that he is serious by demanding a fair allocation of Federal tobacco excise for New South Wales. That is real money that can fuel real enforcement.

I know the Minister wants real enforcement—I am not saying that he does not—but there are other avenues that have not been pursued. If they are not pursued, then he needs to seriously jack up the fines to $1 million, like the South Australian Labor Party has done under Premier Malinauskas. I commend the South Australian Labor Party and his government for doing that. Without that, all the Government has is a weak bill and hollow promises. If the Minister does not make New South Wales a hostile environment for illegal tobacco, he will be rolling out the welcome mat for criminals.

Funds from increased fines or from a fair allocation of Federal tobacco excise should be dedicated to enforcement and compliance, preferably by an agency under a jurisdiction that would better regulate this area, such as the justice cluster or Liquor and Gaming NSW. When the Victorian Government announced its reforms today, its Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation stood with the Victorian Premier. To me, that makes much more sense. The annual report of the health department shows the number of investigations is minuscule compared with South Australia, which has its equivalent of the Department of Fair Trading oversighting this issue. Regulating the sale of tobacco is not naturally within the wheelhouse of the health department. I have even received claims, although I have not verified them, that people who work for the health department have resigned from their positions as investigators because they have been intimidated by organised crime. I do not know whether those claims are true, but they have been made.

If New South Wales is serious about combating the tobacco wars, then the right agency needs to be on the job. I am not convinced that the health department—people who are concerned with health and welfare—should regulate an industry that often deals with organised crime. New South Wales needs tougher penalties, real deterrents and an inquiry to get to the bottom of how illicit tobacco is flooding into this State. As members of Parliament we have a duty to act decisively, which is why I will back the Opposition's push for a full inquiry into the tobacco industry. People deserve more than a watered-down bill that is all smoke and mirrors. An inquiry would give us an opportunity to send a clear message that New South Wales will not tolerate being a playground for organised crime. Our communities deserve protection, and the toughest laws in the country are needed to make sure that protection is real.

Today the South Australia Government announced, amongst other things, that its penalties for individuals will be $355,000 and up to 15 years in prison. By having delineations in rules and penalties, and by having a weaker regime, New South Wales is inviting more organised crime and more firebombings of businesses. The bill does not include ministerial shutdown orders or a fit and proper person test. Quite extraordinarily, the Government claims that it does not have time to implement a fit and proper person test, but one already exists across government in a number of agencies. That is a nonsense argument, and the Minister and the department know it. To offer that excuse to members of Parliament is absolutely unacceptable and unreasonable.

I will go through the penalties in South Australia for bodies corporate advertising tobacco products, because this is important. Its government has increased penalties from $10,000 to $750,000 for the first offence, or $1.1 million for subsequent offences; the penalty for selling without a licence has increased from $20,000 to $750,000 for the first offence, or $1.1 million for subsequent offences; and the penalty for sale to a minor is up to $1 million for a first offence and $1.5 million for subsequent offences, having been increased from $20,000 and $40,000 respectively. The penalty for sale of illicit tobacco, or possession for the purposes of sale, has been increased from $50,000 to $750,000, or $1.1 million for subsequent offences; and the penalty for the new offences of possession for the purposes of sale of e-cigarettes or other prohibited products is up to $750,000 for the first offence and $1.1 million for subsequent offences.

The legislation also includes ministerial powers, which I mentioned earlier, to close down illegal tobacco shops. Orders will apply for an initial 72 hours and can be extended to up to six months with approval from a magistrate. Any business that violates such an order can be hit with a penalty of up to $1.1 million and an individual can be hit with a penalty of up to $700,000. I do not understand why this bill contains differences that penalise small businesses. For instance, the proposed licence fee for New South Wales is $1,000 but in Queensland retailers pay $474.88 and wholesalers pay $674.16.

For all those reasons, we are laggards in New South Wales compared with other jurisdictions like Queensland and Victoria. We are not following other jurisdictions. We are also not using the right agency. Other jurisdictions, like South Australia, the Northern Territory and Victoria, are moving to systems that involve agencies that are set up to regulate this type of activity. The health department is the wrong department to be doing this. That is why this bill needs to be more comprehensive and mirror the other penalties, which the shadow Minister outlined, to make sure New South Wales has tough regulation in place, rather than this entrée—this weak, insipid approach—that invites organised crime into our State from other States where there have been firebombings of businesses. There have also been impacts on insurance premiums for anyone who has a tobacconist in their building because insurers are worried about the impact of organised crime. All these flow-on effects are being felt by people in this State. I appreciate that the police have indicated that they will be able to assist. But, as I have already mentioned, the Department of Fair Trading would be a better agency to carry out the support and enforcement mechanism.

I know that the Minister, to his credit, is an ardent anti-smoker and he has been a great advocate of combating tobacco and extolling the message of getting off nicotine. I would appreciate from him in his speech in reply a better understanding of why New South Wales seems to have a poorer, weaker approach than other States. There has to be a reason for it. It cannot just be that we are cobbling together legislation at the last minute and that this is a rush job—"Let's just get something through. At least we have some laws in place." Why not have the best laws in place? Victoria just announced them this morning; it is as simple as copy and paste. If the Government were to drop those laws on the table I would support them right now, as I suspect would the majority of members of the House.

I sincerely hope that there is not some political motivation here. I have heard it said by Government members in the corridors of this building that this is a way to have a weaker regime because they are worried about the political blowback from people in Western Sydney who like the cheap chop-chop. If that is the case, those opposite are mortgaging public health, risking people's health and inviting organised crime for political motivations. If that is the reason, then I am even more appalled. I certainly would not accuse this Minister of that. I know he is better than that, but some of his colleagues are not.

This legislation should go a lot further. This Parliament can do a lot better. We owe it to the public health of our community, but this has now gone beyond that. This is about public safety. We have seen the effects of illegal tobacco in Queensland and Victoria. For goodness sake, we have seen it in our own State in regional New South Wales. I have seen it in my own electorate. That is why I am so worked up about the weak nature of the bill, which can go a lot further. I hope that this is the start, not the end. I would have liked it to be the much stronger start that we have seen in other jurisdictions, which have had the guts to take this head on, to make sure that we get it right the first time.

Mr GREG WARREN (Campbelltown) (16:20): I am delighted to make a short contribution to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024. I acknowledge that the Minister is in the Chamber. I thank him for his hard work on this fundamental, iconic reform. I refer to the commentary of my learned friend the member for Kiama in relation to this bill being an "insipid" move, "not going far enough" and supposedly encouraging organised crime in west and south‑west Sydney. What a load of rubbish. The bill is nothing more than a Minister and a government taking action where action has not been taken before. Can legislation go further in certain times? Of course it can. But, as members and the Minister know, legislation is about finding the balance. To do so, a government needs good stakeholder relations, good engagement and a sensible approach. Given the progressive nature of this Government and, indeed, the good Minister, I am certain that if there are further reforms required into the future he will be the first one to enact them.

As it stands right now, the bill before the House is a most welcome move to tackle the insidious illegal tobacco market. To suggest that it is encouraging organised crime is an absolute absurdity. No member in this place, I believe, would do anything through legislation to support or promote organised crime. My learned friend the member for Kiama should know that. He knows the Minister and he knows the importance of the honourable process of legislative reform that goes through this Assembly. Briefly, the licensing scheme will require that any person wishing to sell tobacco by retail or wholesale will need a licence. The bill creates offences for the sale of tobacco without a licence carrying penalties of up to $44,000, or 400 penalty units, for an individual and $220,000, or 2,000 penalty units, for a corporation. That is no small feat. All members know that the authorities work very hard to regulate the market. This is about providing those authorities with the legislated tools to go out and do their job.

I agree with the member for Kiama that the bill is about community safety and making sure we have safe processes. No-one knows that better than the Minister. He and his team have introduced this legislation to the House. I am advised that this is only the first piece of legislative reform in this area. The previous Government potentially knew that this matter needed to be addressed and had ample opportunity to do something, but it simply did nothing. My learned colleague member for Kiama was in the previous Government's Cabinet, and what did we see? Nothing. I would not go so low as to suggest that any member in this place would promote organised crime or support any piece of legislation that did so. However, I say to members, as is commonly said, that the standard we walk past is the standard we accept. Those opposite walked past this illegal market, but this Government and this Minister will not. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr RYAN PARK (Keira—Minister for Health, Minister for Regional Health, and Minister for the Illawarra and the South Coast) (16:25): In reply: I thank members for their contributions to debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2) 2024: the member for Heathcote; the shadow Minister for Health, the member for Vaucluse; the member for Mount Druitt and Parliamentary Secretary; the member for Coffs Harbour, the shadow Minister for Regional Health; the member for Gosford and Parliamentary Secretary; the member for Shellharbour and Parliamentary Secretary; the member for Terrigal; the member for Wagga Wagga; the member for Bega, who is also my Parliamentary Secretary; the member for Goulburn; the member for Kiama; and the member for Campbelltown, who is also a Parliamentary Secretary. I also thank from my office the hardworking Dr Vivienne Moxham-Hall, who has worked tirelessly on this piece of legislation, supported by Melanie Haskew and the team from my office and ably advised and supported by the team at the Ministry of Health, in particular Hugh Percival, Meredith Claremont and, of course, Dr Kerry Chant, who needs no introduction in this place.

The bill amends the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2008 to create a licensing regime for the wholesale and retail of tobacco products and non-tobacco smoking products. A licensing regime will provide better oversight of the retail and wholesale supply of tobacco and will help to reduce the sale of illicit tobacco. Importantly, from my perspective, this will bring New South Wales in line with other States and Territories. I have been very clear that I wish that we had acted on this earlier, under the previous Government. The bill will also increase the penalties for a range of existing offences relating to the sale of illegal tobacco to align with community expectations and better recognise the seriousness of the offences. Smoking continues to be the biggest cause of preventable death and disease in New South Wales and Australia. It is a major risk factor for many diseases, including coronary heart disease, stroke, many types of cancer and asthma. The sale of illicit tobacco undermines efforts to reduce those health risks, which the bill aims to address.

I note the Legislation Review Committee issued theLegislation Review Digest No. 22/58 today. I thank the committee for its report. Most matters raised in that report have been considered in the debate today. As noted by the committee, the licensing scheme is to commence on proclamation for practical reasons. Businesses will be given advance notice of the date the scheme will commence. It was also noted that the bill includes transitional arrangements to ensure there is sufficient time for business to seek a licence. Listening to the debate from my office, I know that was an issue that the shadow Minister rightly raised. The bill is a direct response to community expectations regarding the need to tackle the trade in illicit tobacco and ensure robust enforcement of tobacco retailing laws. I commend the bill to the House.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Consideration in detail requested by Dr Joe McGirr and Ms Kellie Sloane.

Consideration in Detail

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): By leave: I will propose the bill in one group of clauses and schedules. The question is that clauses 1 to 2 and schedules 1 to 2 be agreed to.

Dr JOE McGIRR (Wagga Wagga) (16:29): By leave: I move my amendments Nos 1 to 4 on sheet c2024-241A in globo:

No. 1Grounds for refusing or cancelling licences

Page 3, Schedule 1[1], section 4(1). Insert after line 5—

law enforcement agency means the following—

(a)the NSW Police Force,

(b)a Police Force of another State or a Territory of the Commonwealth,

(c)the Australian Federal Police,

(d)another authority or person responsible for the enforcement of the laws of the Commonwealth or the State, another State or a Territory of the Commonwealth.

No. 2Grounds for refusing or cancelling licences

Page 8, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 39A(4). Insert after line 19—

(c1)on the recommendation of, or receipt of relevant information from, a law enforcement agency,

No. 3Grounds for refusing or cancelling licences

Page 9, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 39C(4). Insert after line 26—

(c1)on the recommendation of, or receipt of relevant information from, a law enforcement agency,

No. 4Grounds for refusing or cancelling licences

Page 10, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 39G. Insert after line 24—

(d1)on the recommendation of, or receipt of relevant information from, a law enforcement agency.

These amendments have the effect of ensuring that, in the case of people connected with criminal organisations, information or recommendations can be made in terms of the licensing process. As I said in my contribution to debate on the bill, my original bill had a full description of a "fit and proper person". The Government has indicated that that will create administrative issues. I accept the Government's views on that because I am concerned about the urgency of passing the bill. I have worked with the Government on a solution that will at least in part pick up the issue of making sure that people involved in organised crime or criminal elements can be identified and excluded from the licensing process. The clauses I have suggested allow that, on the recommendation or receipt of relevant information from a law enforcement agency, that can be included in the grounds for refusing or cancelling licences. I believe these are sensible amendments, and I commend them to the House.

Mr RYAN PARK (Keira—Minister for Health, Minister for Regional Health, and Minister for the Illawarra and the South Coast) (16:31): I refer to the member for Wagga Wagga's amendments. I thank the member for his continued and tireless advocacy on tobacco regulation. This is an issue that, to be honest, needs a lot more bipartisan support. We will not make improvements to this type of reform unless we work together, and I thank the crossbench and the Opposition for that. The Government supports amendments Nos 1 to 4 on sheet c2024-241A. The amendments seek to amend the bill to provide the secretary with a basis to refuse an application for or to renew a licence or to revoke a licence on relevant advice or information provided by a law enforcement agency. The amendments define a law enforcement agency as the NSW Police Force, the police force in another jurisdiction and the Australian Federal Police.

It is critical to stop the supply of illicit tobacco. The bill currently provides that the secretary can reject an application or renewal of a licence or revoke a licence where the person has been convicted of an offence relating to tobacco or vaping products. However, I acknowledge that there may be circumstances where law enforcement agencies from New South Wales or other jurisdictions may have relevant information in relation to applicants or licence holders. I accept that. This is a sensible amendment and the Government supports it.

Mr GARETH WARD (Kiama) (16:33): I place on record my sincere thanks to the member for Wagga Wagga, who has led the way in tobacco law reform. All members in the House appreciate how fortunate we are to have a member like the member for Wagga Wagga, who has such a lifetime of experience and applies it incredibly well, particularly in this area. I thank him for rattling the cage on this issue. I also thank the Minister for his comments.

I reiterate, though, that I would like, at some further stage, the Government to consider what other States have done in relation to the fit and proper person test. I do not accept the notion that there is an administrative burden, when other States have managed to do the same thing and in a relatively timely manner. Having been a cabinet Minister, I know that departments will tell Ministers all sorts of things until they push back on them to get the advice that is wanted rather than the advice that they necessarily want Ministers to receive.

In that vein, even though the bill does not go as far as I would like it to go, the member for Wagga Wagga has done a good job working with the Minister, and the Minister working with the member for Wagga Wagga, to get the best possible outcome at this point. I place on record that we can do better. Other States have done better. New South Wales should be leading, not lagging. I would like to see the law tightened in this area at a future date, although this is an improvement on the bill that was initially proffered. Therefore, I support the amendments.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that amendments Nos 1 to 4 on sheet c2024-241A of the member for Wagga Wagga be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Dr JOE McGIRR (Wagga Wagga) (16:35): I move my amendment No. 5 on sheet c2024-241A:

No. 5Review of Act

Page 12, Schedule 1. Insert after line 31—

[13A]Section 61

Omit the section. Insert instead—

61Review of certain provisions

(1)The Minister must conduct a review of the reviewable provisions to identify if—

(a)the policy objectives of the reviewable provisions remain valid, and

(b)the terms of the reviewable provisions remain appropriate for securing the objectives.

(2)The review must be commenced within 6 months after the period of 5 years after the commencement date.

(3)A report on the outcome of the review must be tabled in each House of Parliament within 1 year after the last day by which the review must commence.

(4)In this section—

commencement date means the date on which the amendments to Part 5 made by the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Act (No 2) 2024 commence.

reviewable provisions means the provisions inserted into Part 5 by the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Act (No 2) 2024.

This amendment seeks to incorporate a statutory view into the legislation. That is an important period. The review must be commenced within six months after the period of five years after the commencement date, and the outcomes of that review must be tabled in each House of Parliament. There has been much discussion about the need for a parliamentary inquiry. I would support a parliamentary inquiry. However, working with the Government, a statutory view, at least, is an important part of working out whether this legislation has been effective, particularly given discussions around the fit and proper person test. I commend the amendment to the House.

Ms KELLIE SLOANE (Vaucluse) (16:36): I thank the member for Wagga Wagga for his amendment. I move:

That the amendment be amended in proposed section 61 (2) by omitting 'within 6 months after the period of 5 years after the commencement date', and inserting instead—

(2)by 30 June 2025.

In effect, my amendment achieves an earlier statutory review that would commence middle of next year and complete within a year. That would give us some feedback in a timely manner. We have seen a sense of urgency with the introduction of the bill. We are happy to support that urgency, the amendments and the action that we know is well and truly needed, but we seek a parliamentary review because we know that this is not just a public health issue but also a considerable law and order issue that is impacting communities right across our city and our State. There must be time to consider the findings of any parliamentary review that might be held and also the efficacy of the amendments being proposed today. I note that there are a variety of different approaches in different States including in Victoria, which announced today some wide sweeping and very tough penalties. I seek an earlier review so that we have an opportunity, as a Parliament, to reconsider the amendments and make adjustments if necessary.

Mr RYAN PARK (Keira—Minister for Health, Minister for Regional Health, and Minister for the Illawarra and the South Coast) (16:38): I will break down the amendments. I understand that members have every right to move amendments. We all moved amendments in opposition. We have no problems with that at all. In relation to the member for Wagga Wagga's amendment around a review of the licensing provisions in the bill after five years, it is important that the changes in the bill operate as intended—no-one has an issue with that—and provide benefit to the community. A review of those provisions will provide important information to the Government in that regard. We have no problem with that amendment. The problem with the Opposition's amendment, respectfully—and I am not mocking it—is that the scheme will not have been rolled out until mid‑next year. I am not poking fun at amendments because I understand that things happen on the run. I am not doing that. But that amendment is not sensible. In the spirit of sensible changes, that is not one. The scheme will not start until 1 July, and a review into something that has not started is not smart. We do not accept that.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that the Opposition amendment to amendment No. 5 on sheet c2024‑241A of the member for Wagga Wagga be agreed to.

Amendment negatived.

Dr JOE McGIRR (Wagga Wagga) (16:39): As I understand it, we are now voting on my original amendment. I commend the amendment to the House.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that amendment No. 5 on sheet c2024‑241A of the member for Wagga Wagga be agreed to.

Amendment agreed to.

Ms KELLIE SLOANE (Vaucluse) (16:40): By leave: I move Opposition amendments Nos. 1 to 3 and 11 on sheet c2024-237B in globo:

No. 1Prohibition on certain sales

Page 3, Schedule 1[2], proposed section 6, penalty, lines 21 and 22. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

(a)for a corporation—7,000 penalty units, or

(b)for an individual—1,400 penalty units.

No. 2Prohibition on packing and sale of tobacco product without health warning

Page 3, Schedule 1[3], proposed section 7, penalty, lines 26 and 27. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

(a)for a corporation—7,000 penalty units, or

(b)for an individual—1,400 penalty units.

No. 3Prohibited words

Page 3, Schedule 1, insert after line 27—

[3A]Section 8 Prohibited words

Omit section 8(1), penalty. Insert instead—

Maximum penalty—

(a)for a corporation—7,000 penalty units, or

(b)for an individual—1,400 penalty units.

No. 11Proceedings for offences

Page 12, Schedule 1, insert after line 10—

[12A]Section 54(3)

Omit "12 months". Insert instead "2 years".

These amendments increase the penalties across the range of provisions that deal with illicit tobacco, making them tougher so that there is less of an incentive for criminal gangs to do their work. I will give an example. A single container of illicit tobacco from overseas is worth about $250,000. When it hits Australian shores, the value skyrockets to between $7 million and $13 million. It is huge. In that context what have those criminals got to lose if they only get a slap on the wrist from the laws in New South Wales? What have they got to lose when the penalties are, as one stakeholder said to me today, a slap in the face with a feather? We do not want that in New South Wales and we certainly do not want it in the context of new laws. Our border State of Victoria has far greater penalties. Other States like Queensland also have far greater penalties. We do not want any unintended consequences by having laws that are considered to be a soft touch.

We are looking to change the range of penalties for offences in sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Act. They go right to the heart of illegal cigarettes. We should be passing tougher penalties on those that are not in the correct packaging, that do not have health warnings or that have prohibited words. In Queensland the supply of illicit tobacco as part of a business activity comes with a penalty of $322,600 or two years imprisonment, or both, for a person. To possess illicit tobacco as part of a business activity comes with a $161,300 penalty or one year imprisonment, or both, for a person. In South Australia it is $350,000 for a first offence for an individual, and $700,000 for a subsequent offence, and $750,000 and $1.1 million respectively for a body corporate. Victoria's proposed laws, which have been announced today, would include fines of more than $355,000 or up to 15 years in jail for individuals. Businesses will face fines of more than $1.7 million. Today the Government is proposing that our maximum penalty be $22,000 for individuals and $110,000 for corporations. In anyone's language, that is very weak.

The Opposition believes we can find a middle ground, where the maximum penalty is $154,000 for an individual and $770,000 for a corporation. The amendments are consistent with the amendments we introduced in this place only a matter of weeks ago for the vaping bill. Those amendments were defeated because we would be readdressing the penalties in debate on the Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment Bill (No 2), which is this bill. I suggest that we do it properly. We are open to working with the Government and the crossbench on increasing the penalties. If the Victorian bill passes, it is clear that New South Wales will be the weakest link when it comes to tobacco laws. I acknowledge that the fines are increasing off a low base, but we simply cannot compare what happened a number of years ago with what is happening today. What has happened in the past few years is an explosion, as the member for Wagga Wagga said, in this illicit trade. Tobacconist shops are popping up all across our State. Tobacconists are proliferating, and harm and danger are growing.

More than a hundred firebombings a year occur across Victoria. That means two firebombings a week in that State and we are now seeing that activity extend into New South Wales, with alleged arson attacks in six different locations in recent times. It is time to put a stop to it. These penalties will assist. We are seeking to have a parliamentary inquiry as well, but at the moment we are seeking support for these amendments from the Government and crossbench. I thank the Minister and his advisers for the constructive way in which they have had conversations with us and the crossbench about this issue. I commend the amendments to the House.

Mr RYAN PARK (Keira—Minister for Health, Minister for Regional Health, and Minister for the Illawarra and the South Coast) (16:45): The Government supports Opposition amendments Nos 1, 2, 3 and 11 on sheet c2024‑237B. We have some issues with the other Opposition amendments but I will deal with these first. The amendments seek to amend the bill to increase penalties for existing offences for selling tobacco not in the manufacturer's packing, without a health warning and containing prohibitive words. These penalties are higher than those proposed in the bill, with a maximum penalty of 1,400 penalty units for individuals and 7,000 penalty units for corporations.

The Government recognises the importance of the issue to the community and the serious impact illicit tobacco has on public health. The Government supports the amendments in the spirit of trying to work across the Chamber to make sure that something important to all of us is dealt with in a spirit of cooperation. Amendment No. 11 seeks to extend the maximum period from 12 months to two years in which proceedings for offences must be brought before a court. It is important for proceedings to be dealt with efficiently; however, it is not always possible. Additional time would provide greater ability to enforce the legislation, particularly in the context of a brand new scheme we are introducing. The Government supports the amendments.

Mr GARETH WARD (Kiama) (16:46): I commend the shadow Minister and the Minister for working together to have a stronger enforcement regime, which was always a concern of mine. I outlined that in the second reading debate. I do not want us to be the State with the lowest penalties. Victoria still looks like it will have the highest penalties, but ours can be examined through a parliamentary inquiry and, indeed, the statutory review, which has already been brought into the bill. The only thing that concerns me is the Government is not supporting the fit and proper person test, which is another amendment proposed by the Opposition. For reasons outlined earlier, crossbench members need to consider carefully whether New South Wales will be better off without including this in the legislation, given that other State jurisdictions, particularly on the east coast, have made sure that it was a feature of their legislation. I dare say there is no reasonable ground as to why that could possibly be the case. The Opposition's amendment to include that should be supported.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that Opposition amendments Nos 1 to 3 and 11 on sheet c2024-237B be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Ms KELLIE SLOANE (Vaucluse) (16:48): By leave: I move amendments Nos 5 and 7 to 10 on sheet c2024‑237B in globo:

No. 5Relevant applicants and relevant applications

Page 4, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 31. Insert after line 29—

relevant applicant means a person who has made a relevant application.

relevant application means—

(a)an application for a licence under section 39(1), or

(b)an application to renew a licence under section 39B(1).

No. 7Deciding applications for licences

Page 7, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 39A(2), lines 37–44. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

(2)The Secretary must not grant a licence unless the Secretary is satisfied the applicant is—

(a)of good repute, having regard to the applicant's character, honesty and integrity, and

(b)a fit and proper person to carry on the business or activity to which the proposed licence relates.

(2A)Without limiting subsection (2)(b), a person is not a fit and proper person to carry on the business or activity to which a proposed licence relates if—

(a)the Secretary has reasonable grounds to believe from information provided by the Commissioner of Police in relation to the person—

(i)that the person is a member or close associate of, or regularly associates with 1 or more members of, a declared organisation within the meaning of theCrimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Act 2012, and

(ii)that the nature and circumstances of the person's relationship with the organisation or its members are such that it could reasonably be inferred that improper conduct that would further the criminal activities of the declared organisation is likely to occur if the person is granted a licence, or

(b)the applicant, or a relevant person for the applicant, has been found guilty of an offence relating to the sale or supply of tobacco products, non-tobacco smoking products or vaping goods under—

(i)this Act or the regulations, or

(ii)another Act or law, including a law of the Commonwealth or another State or Territory.

(3)The Secretary is not, under this or any other Act or law, required to give any reasons for not granting a licence because of subsection (2A) to the extent that the giving of those reasons would disclose any criminal intelligence.

No. 8Deciding applications to renew licences

Page 9, Schedule 1[8], proposed section 39C(2), lines 2–10. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

(2)In deciding the application, the Secretary must consider whether the applicant is—

(a)of good repute, having regard to the applicant's character, honesty and integrity, and

(b)a fit and proper person to carry on the business or activity to which the licence sought to be renewed relates.

(2A)Without limiting subsection (2)(b), a person is not a fit and proper person to carry on the business or activity to which the licence sought to be renewed relates if—

(a)the Secretary has reasonable grounds to believe from information provided by the Commissioner of Police in relation to the person—

(i)that the person is a member or close associate of, or regularly associates with 1 or more members of, a declared organisation within the meaning of theCrimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Act 2012, and

(ii)that the nature and circumstances of the person's relationship with the organisation or its members are such that it could reasonably be inferred that improper conduct that would further the criminal activities of the declared organisation is likely to occur if the licence is renewed, or

(b)the applicant, or a relevant person for the applicant, has been found guilty of an offence relating to the sale or supply of tobacco products, non-tobacco smoking products or vaping goods under—

(i)this Act or the regulations, or

(ii)another Act or law, including a law of the Commonwealth or another State or Territory.

(3)The Secretary is not, under this or any other Act or law, required to give any reasons for not renewing a licence because of subsection (2A) to the extent that the giving of those reasons would disclose any criminal intelligence.

No. 9Investigations and information relating to applications for licences and licence renewals

Page 11, Schedule 1[8], proposed Part 5, Division 2, Subdivision 8. Insert after line 37—

39LAInvestigations, inquiries and referrals in relation to relevant licence applications

(1)If the Secretary receives a relevant licence application, the Secretary may carry out any investigations and inquiries in relation to the application the Secretary considers necessary to properly consider the application.

(2)Without limiting subsection (1), the Secretary may—

(a)refer to the Commissioner of Police details of the application, together with any supporting information in relation to the application, that the Secretary considers appropriate to refer to the Commissioner of Police, and

(b)ask the Commissioner of Police to inquire into, and report to the Secretary on, matters relevant to the Secretary's consideration of the application.

(3)The Commissioner of Police may inquire into, and report to the Secretary on, any matters relating to the application requested by the Secretary.

39LBSecretary may require further information

(1)Without limiting sections 39(4) and 39B(4), the Secretary may, by written notice, require a relevant applicant, or a close associate of a relevant applicant, to do any of the following things—

(a)give, in accordance with directions in the notice, information that the Secretary considers relevant to the investigation or proper consideration of the application and that is specified in the notice,

(b)produce, in accordance with directions in the notice, any records the Secretary considers relevant to the investigation or proper consideration of the application and allow—

(i)the examination of the records, and

(ii)the taking of extracts from the records, and

(iii)the copying of the records,

(c)authorise a person described in the notice to comply with a requirement of the kind referred to in paragraph (a) or (b),

(d)give the Secretary any authorisations and consents the Secretary requires for the purpose of enabling the Secretary to obtain information, including financial and other confidential information, from other persons about the person and the person's associates.

(2)A person who complies with a requirement of a notice under this section does not on that account incur a liability to another person.

(3)The Secretary may refuse to decide a relevant application if a requirement made under this section in relation to the application is not complied with.

No. 10Proceedings for offences

Page 12, Schedule 1[12], line 10. Omit "2,000". Insert instead "7,000".

These amendments relate to a fit and proper person test. As indicated, we want to strengthen the bill by including the provision that the secretary must consider a fit and proper person test when granting or renewing a licence.

Those tests are included in other Australian jurisdictions' tobacco licensing schemes. We have sought to follow closely what is set out in the New South Wales liquor licensing laws. That will ensure some alignment between tobacco licensing and liquor licensing. Given the clear links between organised crime and illicit tobacco, it is a sensible proposal to include that a fit and proper person to hold a tobacco licence is someone of good repute and not someone who is a member of, a close associate of, or someone who regularly associates with a declared criminal organisation. That type of test is set out in the South Australian legislation and I understand that, based on today's announcement, it will be included in the proposed Victorian legislation. Western Australia, Tasmania and Queensland also require that a person authorising a licence consider whether someone is a fit and proper person. That is included in their legislation.

I understand the Government is disinclined to support the proposal because it is difficult and administratively burdensome. I am not sure why that is uniquely the case for New South Wales when other States can manage it. The bill does have prescribing powers, but the Opposition believes it is more appropriate to set out a fit and proper person test clearly in the legislation rather than in subordinate regulations. Substantive matters like considering a person's links to organised crime should be included in the legislation and not in the regulations. I note thatLegislation Review Committee Digest No. 22/55, which was just released, makes a similar point. It said:

The Bill seeks to amend the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2008 by deferring several significant matters to regulations, including eligibility requirements for retail and wholesale licences for tobacco and non-tobacco smoking products, standard conditions on licences, and processes for licence application, variation and revocation.

The Committee generally prefers substantive matters to be dealt with in principal legislation, rather than regulations, to facilitate an appropriate level of parliamentary oversight. The Committee acknowledges that the provisions may be intended to build more flexibility into the regulatory framework, and to allow regulators to better respond to changing circumstances under this new licensing regime.

However, the Committee notes the seriousness of the provisions and, as discussed above, the significant penalties for non-compliance with the new licensing regime. For these reasons, the Committee refers this matter to Parliament for consideration.

The Opposition is happy to work with the Government and the crossbench to amend the bill to include a fit and proper person test. We feel it would be a mistake to pass the bill without it. We have an opportunity to ensure strong legislation, and I do not think the test should be delayed until a review of the legislation in a few years. We do not believe it would cause an undue administrative burden for consideration to be given to whether someone is linked to organised crime. That should be basic stuff. Just like getting a Working with Children Check or a liquor licence, the same should apply to tobacco.

I note that NSW Health enforcement already works very closely with police on enforcement activities. I note also that with no fixed date for commencement, the department will have time to work with businesses to ensure the application process is efficient but also effective. We are sending a strong signal to organised criminals and their associates that if they are thinking about getting a tobacco licence to somehow make their businesses seem legitimate, they can forget about it. But we cannot dismiss that; we cannot let them sign up without the appropriate checks and balances. The majority of retailers are doing the right thing, but the amendment will ensure that dodgy retailers with links to organised crime do not have a licence.

Mr RYAN PARK (Keira—Minister for Health, Minister for Regional Health, and Minister for the Illawarra and the South Coast) (16:52): I will go through the arguments carefully. We must strike a balance here. We must make sure we get a scheme in place as quickly as possible and without delay. My advice is that this type of approach will delay the introduction of the scheme. I note also that amendments moved by the member for Wagga Wagga have been passed that will allow us, through the secretary, to get information directly from law enforcement—and we outlined that that would be the NSW Police Force, other police jurisdictions and the Australian Federal Police [AFP]—about a person's character and whether there had been any issues. We think that is a very good compromise that takes into consideration some of the concerns raised by the member for Vaucluse.

I must be honest—and this is not a political comment—I am deeply concerned that we do not have a licensing scheme in place in New South Wales. I do not want to waste another moment putting one in place. We have already passed amendments moved by the member for Wagga Wagga—and rightly so—that would allow the Secretary of NSW Health to take into consideration feedback, information and intelligence directly from law enforcement, including our own NSW Police Force, other jurisdictional police and the AFP. The Government is aware of the links between organised crime and illicit tobacco, as we have seen in Victoria, in particular. But the reality is that the majority of retailers do the right thing.

Opposition members might be surprised to hear that I am concerned that the amendments are unnecessary for legitimate businesses, and we must take them into consideration. Supermarkets and small retailers must go through a burdensome process to assess whether they are fit and proper to sell tobacco. The bill aims to stop the sale of illicit tobacco to minors and the unlawful supply of vaping goods. If a person is convicted of one of those offences, the bill already gives the secretary the ability to refuse an application or revoke a licence. Importantly, the amendments moved by the member for Wagga Wagga that we passed today—I am not taking any credit for them; those amendments were moved by the member for Wagga Wagga—allow law enforcement into that process to provide feedback and intelligence. They include police, other jurisdictional police and the AFP and will not slow down the licensing process. Only on that basis, the Government will not support the Opposition's amendments.

Ms KELLIE SLOANE (Vaucluse) (16:55): This does not have to be an either/or provision; the bill could be very robust by including both provisions. I pay credit to the member for Wagga Wagga for the incredible amount of work he has put in over the space of a year to develop legislation that is now achieving life through the Government's bill. That is how our democracy works. Our democracy would be strengthened if we included both the amendments of the member for Wagga Wagga and the amendments of the Opposition. Our amendments proactively weed people out. Under the amendments of the member for Wagga Wagga, we will catch people who have been through the system or whom the police already have a heads up about.

But with the Opposition's amendments we could capture the prevention side and also provide a net to grab those criminals when they are discovered. The bill states that it "may" give the secretary the opportunity to check that applicants are fit and proper persons; our amendment proposes that the secretary "must" have the opportunity to do that. Such a system is found across the board in other States. I believe we should implement this measure today to ensure that criminals do not have the upper hand and we can weed them out before they get into the shops and do damage to our communities.

Mr GARETH WARD (Kiama) (16:56): In relation to the time frames that were raised by the Minister, the Government, like all governments, has the ability to delay the commencement of any particular provision through the Executive Council and gazettal process. If the Government agreed to the introduction of this particular provision, as other States have done, it does not have to start the minute the legislation passes the other place. I suspect that the matter will be further litigated in the Legislative Council. We may end up dealing with this amendment again—we will see. But just because the provision is in the bill does not mean it must start on day one of the operation of the scheme; it could start at a later point.

Ducking, weaving and ignoring the provision leaves the bill deficient when compared with other States, and that will leave us open to organised crime, as the member for Vaucluse has rightly pointed out. That is a risk, and we may see more of it in regional areas, as we have already seen in Queensland and Victoria. I agree with the Minister that there are provisions in the bill that allow police to be involved in the licensing scheme. That was a very good move. But we are not going as far as we could have done when compared with other States. This is another serious and significant deficiency that will impact on our ability as a State to combat organised crime. I support the Opposition amendments.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that Opposition amendments Nos 5, 7 and 8 to 10 on sheet c2024-237B be agreed to.

The House divided.

Ayes37

Noes48

Majority11

 

 

 

Amendments negatived.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The question is that clauses 1 and 2 and schedules 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2 and schedules 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.

Third Reading

Mr RYAN PARK: I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Clayton Barr): It being 5.00 p.m., pursuant to standing and sessional orders, the public interest debate will now proceed. Before calling the member for Mount Druitt, I remind members that I have a list of those members who have been placed on calls to order today.