In New South Wales it is an offence to smoke within four metres of a hospital entrance - and that carries a fine of three hundred dollars as the penalty. So far, not a single person has been put before a court and convicted. Now the Cancer Council is calling for that law to be enforced.
This anti smoking crusade has been slowly tightening the screws. It is no longer permissible to light up on a public beach. Smoking is banned on railway platforms and around bus stops. Ash trays have long disappeared from banks and supermarkets and all enclosed food outlets are entirely smoke free. The numbers of people who continue to smoke is steadily dwindling.
The greatest change has been in public perception. Drawing nicotine into your lungs is still a legal option and the government draws millions from the tax on cigarettes and tobacco products. They are no longer allowed to be publicly displayed in shops and the actual packaging has been deliberately designed to repulse buyers. Today's smokers are conscious that public opinion has changed and that smoking in public is seen by many as a form of "social etiquette " breach !
Officialdom has wisely taken the "softly softly "approach to enforcement. People smoking on public beaches are more likely to get a mild reproof from lifesavers and council officers than a harshly written demand for a court appearance. All forms of tobacco are still a perfectly legal product and to some people restrictions on where smoking can take place is seen as an infringement on their civil liberties. The health people counter this with medical facts. It is proven that those exposed to "sidestream smoke " suffer similar medical disabilities as actual smokers.
So far, hospital staff have more or less ignored the people who cluster outside their entrances for a quick puff, and that is a humanitarian gesture. Many are the "walking wounded ", those recovering from surgery and wearing a dressing gown over pyjamas. The addiction to nicotine is specially intense when the person is under stress in a hospital and at least occasional relief assists recovery. If the patient is a habitual smoker, enforced abstinence may do more harm than good if that person is suffering intense pain and concern and has a need for the relief that nicotine delivers. Enforced abstinence could be seen as a form of cruelty that delays recovery.
This call for enforcement of the smoking ban within four metres of hospital entrances raises the responsibility question. In most cases, those entrances empty onto a public street and this raises the option for fines to be levied by whatever council has that street within it's jurisdiction. There is a very real possibility that a new form of revenue will see Council Rangers tasked with policing the areas outside of hospitals to glean $300 fines for Council coffers.
Some Councils deliberately milk every fine opportunity to assist their revenue flow. Their Rangers are under unrelenting pressure to meet fine quotas and they dwell on trivialities to impose fines. Will we see chalk marks on pavements to determine which offender was within that magic four metre mark from hospital entrances - to become eligible for a smoking ban fine ?
When this four metre embargo was being considered it was supposed to stop cigarette smoke being drawn into a supposedly sterile hospital environment when the doors were opened. It also probably offended officialdom to see a bevy of smokers puffing away on their doorstep. The medical people who actually interact with their patients know what stress a stay in hospital can cause and welcome any measure that brings relief.
It is doubtful if hospital staff are going to commence handing our fines and enforcing this law, but there is a very real danger that avaricious councils will sool their rangers on what they see as a new revenue flow. It seems that the "If it aint broke - don't fix it " rule best suits this situation !
No comments:
Post a Comment