Ms MACKLIN (8:49 PM) —It is unfortunate that the Minister for Health and Aged Care has decided to spit the dummy on this issue, but I guess we should be used to that. I wonder whether the minister has noticed that the title of the act that we are amending is the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992. I wonder who must have been in government in 1992 to move those changes to the legislation. Of course it was the Labor Party—not the coalition, as he would have everybody believe from his petulant little outburst here tonight. The minister would also know that the Herron report was received in 1995, recommending the changes that we are now debating in October 2000, recommending that there be a phase-out of tobacco advertising for these sporting events. It has taken this government all the time it has been in office to get to this stage.

We should also be aware that this bill was finally introduced in May this year and it is now the end of October. The minister came into the chamber in an absolute state saying that if it is not dealt with tonight he will reject the bill and it will be the end of civilisation as we know it. If the minister wanted to show that he is concerned to close this loophole, it would have been far more productive to give us all the advice that he has received. We indicated that we would be able to provide our advice to him. We asked that the bill be delayed for further debate until tomorrow. He refused and insisted that the debate be brought on urgently tonight. Goodness knows what the final urgency is, given that it took him four years to get the bill into the parliament and since May to get it to this stage. I do not know what the final urgency is. If the minister were serious about dealing with this loophole, if he really wanted to get rid of political sponsorship by tobacco companies, he would be willing to sit down with the opposition and sort out what he says are constitutional difficulties.

Regarding our first amendment, last Wednesday we were provided with the government's last piece of legal advice from the Crown Solicitor. In our amendment we were attempting to close this loophole on sponsorship of political events by tobacco companies. That advice was provided and we changed our amendment to try and deal with the legal problems that the Crown Solicitor put forward. We put the amendments to the Senate today. We now find that the government has further legal advice saying that we cannot proceed with this amendment because there may be a High Court challenge. There are two issues. If the government were serious, I would say to the minister, `Provide us with the latest piece of advice. Let's sit down and try and work out an amendment that actually does get rid of political sponsorships by tobacco companies.' That is the first thing. The second is that I would draw the minister's attention to the severability clause in the act, which means that if there were ever a challenge only this section would be invalid; it would not invalidate the whole act.

Another point I would like to make in relation to the whole legal question is that any challenge would be subject to the test of reasonableness, and we have gone to some effort to make sure that tobacco companies continue to have the right to free speech in their own name. We are not interested in seeing the Liberal Party continue to receive sponsorships for Liberal Party dinners, as this minister knows oh so much about. We are not interested in seeing that continue. We would have thought that, if this minister was serious about getting rid of tobacco company sponsorships of Liberal Party dinners, he would agree to this amendment. If there is still a legal problem, why doesn't he provide us with the latest legal advice? Why doesn't he sit down and work with the opposition to get rid of this problem that is a loophole in the legislation that is still allowing political sponsorship of these events by tobacco companies? We see that this minister wants to continue this loophole. If anyone is not serious about tobacco, it is certainly him. (Time expired)