On Monday 11 July 2011, West Australian Nationals Member for O'Connor, Federal MP Tony Crook (born 23 June 1959) past endeavors of controversy boycott Coles, Woolworths and I-G-A branded milk to support the local dairy industry? Where else would supermarkets buy the majority of goods! has accused tobacco companies of recruiting people to call MPs anonymously and criticise proposed plain packaging laws. He suspects “callers have been coached, because they always raise the same issues”.

It is obvious to me that Tony Crook is not on the same page as everyone else on this matter, obviously Tony Crook is not aware that cigarette packets have included a card on how to make contact with local MP’s in protest proposed ‘Bills’, as it is difficult for allot of people to know whom to contact, let alone getting in contact with such.

Making such claims is outrageous! No one has been coached how to criticise on issues, people have registered online with full required details and have made MP contact via template emails (user-friendly), with some also following up MPs via telecommunications (number timely supplied) if they elected to do so.

This tell us that you have a problem with the public making contact with your offices in protest to any ‘Bills’, that you have no intention, nor have any duty of care in interest towards empathy and support on public’s opinion or freedom to express towards their dissatisfaction of such ‘Bills’ being passed.

Maybe this ‘Bill’ is one of those instances not seen much, as people generally move to slow, not to mention unorganised prior to ‘Bills’ getting passed, before any action can be taken let alone accounted for.

House of Representatives’ ‘Bills List Status’ for this Bill is ‘Tobacco Plain Packaging 201199 Referred to House Health and Ageing Committee 7/7/11’; ‘Trade Marks Amendment (Tobacco Plain Packaging) 2011100 Referred to House Health and Ageing Committee 7/7/11’.

The Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon had submitted the ‘Bill’ on Wed Jul 6, 2011, one day prior to being referred via Government (screenshot), now registered on the 7th of July, 2011 at Comlaw ‘Trade Marks Amendment (Tobacco Plain Packaging) 2011’.

Legislation Summary:
*Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011
*Restricts branding, other than product brand name, on cigarette packs and tobacco products sold
*Includes restrictions on symbols, logos and other design features such as novel packaging material, embossing and foils
*Cigarette packs must be a specific shade of dark olive brown in matt finish.
*Brand name can appear on top, bottom and front of packs in a specific font legible from one metre.
*Anti-counterfeiting techniques allowed, including unique alphanumeric codes.

If passed, comes into effect January 1, 2012 with retail to comply with by July 1, 2012

Health Minister Nicola Roxon in charge of the proceedings currently for this Bill made this statement recently "We're taking this action because tobacco is not like any other legal product. When used as intended it is lethal".

This really outlines that such processes in ‘Bills’ passed, are more of the one-sided with conflicts of committee interest, when in approach to passing legislation through parliament via seat vote.

It’s is obvious our investment somewhat in boosting retail revenue was a little premature, with these legislations coming into affect on plain packaging etc.

Recently South Australia passed law forcing retailers and video libraries to now display films rated R in plain packaging, forcing more online purchases, because consumers need to know what they are purchasing. I could be wrong, but I assume that adult shops etc generally don’t have visual displays seen from the street? Has this addition been added to Trade Marks Act 1995?

How far do we intend to go with plain packaging besides reduced convenience store sales, as well as increase fuel prices at the pump. Additionally, local communities also suffer. You now see that such hype may give a win here and win there but affects you elsewhere, through ripples created on introduction.

Such ripples have shown in statics recently that people now are spending more in bottle shops rather than local businesses, with loss of potential revenue in Hospitality in Restaurants, Hotels and Clubs etc.

Ripples have also shown in alcohol-pops statics stating decrease in purchases of such products, congratulations! only to have increased in purchases of sparkling wine and other such types of drinks.

The Plain Packaging Act will prevent tobacco advertising and promotion on tobacco products and tobacco product packaging in order to:
 reduce the attractiveness and appeal of tobacco products to consumers, particularly young people;
 increase the notice ability and effectiveness of mandated health warnings;
 reduce the ability of the tobacco product packaging to mislead consumers about the harms of smoking; and
 Through the achievement of these aims in the long term, as part of a comprehensive suite of tobacco control measures, contribute to efforts to reduce smoking rates.

Already tobacco is concealed in displays; young people cannot purchase tobacco, only those 18 years of age classed as adults and not children of the nanny.

Regulations for tobacco will be made under a new section 231A of the Trade Marks Act 1995 last amended 14 Jan 2011, with an equivalent provision in subsection 189A(3) of the Trade Marks Act in relation to goods or services, not governed by the Plain Packaging Act, this stated below.

189A Regulations implementing the Madrid Protocol (3) Regulations made for the purposes of this section: (a) may be inconsistent with this Act; and (b) prevail over this Act (including any other regulations or other instruments made under this Act), to the extent of any inconsistency.

In observation over the years sifting through various documentation of regulations and legislations, one thing keeps coming to mind, we as a country love to contradict, so much so that we produce document after document for the purpose of convenience to walk-around what has already been stated in mainstream acts.

The Government is lacking somewhat in required personal details of voters for the tax hike and plain packaging, but so far have push through one of the two. The Government claims that 88% voted on this increase Australia wide on tax contradicting online polling, yet was that this year? Strangely enough the average percent over 7 years 1987 – 1998 I examined outlined that of 88%, showing up the fact that the exact same voters of prior date where the ones contacted to revote again as assurance. (National consistency is unlikely in random vote)

Survey with 88% results consistent on average is ‘Approve tax increase funds being used to discourage children from smoking’, sourced statics produced by: Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria, Anti-Cancer Foundation of the University of South Australia, New South Wales Cancer Council, Tasmanian Cancer Committee, Queensland Cancer Fund, Australian Medical Association, and Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria.

Smokers are people that so far have been bullied, lied too in relation to quantities per pack of harmful toxics via media broadcasting. These are people that have been pushed out of Pubs, Restaurants, Shopping centres, Parks and zoned off like prisoners and lepers alike, ostrized for the freedom to choose.

Smokers are the ones injustice here, these poor people workers mostly of a low income seeking just to be accepted and not demeaned further than they already have been.

Smokers have the right to smoke wherever they like outdoors and science have clearly explained that fact is passive smoking outdoors is not as likely, as getting associated diseases or cancers from ‘Industrial Pollution’, ‘Climate Change’, ‘Exhaust Chemicals’, ‘Oral Sex’ or ‘Age (+.1 difference)’ with simular and/or same resulting cancers and disease. (Some of the 15,000 annually may just include a percentage of such)

These people pay good money to smoke, with quarterly increases prior to the corrective tax increase, now will be totalling nearly 400% mark-up, a majority being that of tax rather than actual cost of producing a packet of cigarettes at 4¢ cig est.