by Roy Weavers

Over the course of the past couple of years there have been some major changes in Government legislation governing our leisure time activities that, on the face of it,seem like a fair and equitable way of handling things until you look beyond the political qudos that is inevitable with a 'one for the people' type work place amendment.

The first change was the smoking laws. 

Now before anyone jumps up and down, I'm not  a smoker and haven't been since 11th December 1974, the day my wife told me she was expecting our first child, so there's nothing for anyone to read in my comments to  think I'm biased in any way. 

I think I'm right in saying that the first protective smoking measures originated in Dublin, Ireland where the numerous cellar bars and old fashioned public houses were, no doubt, responsible for an awful lot of passive  smoking cancers in later life within the poor unfortunate bar and kitchen staff.  

The staff would have been the unwitting victims of the lack of adequate ventilation, ignorance of the consequences of passive smoking and no control of what was being smoked from cigars to pipes to untipped cigarettes and so on. 

Now I'm all for protecting the staff who in these case would have spent their days unavoidably inhaling everyone else's smoke. But I'm not sure the 'No Smoking' laws that  subsequently developed to what we have today are exactly what was originally intended.  

The politicians seized upon the idea with such gusto that almost every restaurant, bar and eaterie in the world is now non smoking. Quite right I hear many of you say.  But what has the cost to the establishments and subsequent employment been? 

The no smoking laws were created with the best of intentions but why apply them to open air areas of bars and restaurants?  Of course smoking needs to be confined to areas of  common interest but as a non smoker I don't see the necessity of protecting me from smokers in the fresh air, especially if it means that pubs, bars and restaurants have to lose business as a result of the non-negotiable rules and regulations. 

Each case for non smoking establishments and areas should be considered on a case by case basis not on an-across the board legislation as our short sighted politicians often operate.

There have been many examples of this in Port Douglas, where the areas for smoking have resulted in the diners being herded into smaller corners because the inspectors have insisted on the letter of the law being applied.  Then two days later it all gets changed back again. Then guess what? A few months later it all gets changed again as a different inspector applies the laws in a different way and all because the laws are one rule fits all. 

Let's get some thought behind it and then perhaps the smokers will stop dropping their dog ends on the pavements!

Now another discussion that could be had regarding the need for politicians to think things through before they make new laws is the new penalty rates for Sunday and public holiday working. 

From 1 July this year the public holiday penalty rates increased by 10% and Sunday hourly rate increased by 8%. Over the next five years the penalty rate will almost double for Sunday shifts, and will increase from a 100 per cent loading to 150 per cent for public holidays.

Again, on the face of it this seems like a great win for the poor devils that have to work these unsociable hours but the down side is just beginning to rear its ugly head.

By making the laws apply across the entire country many of the seasonal destinations are having to consider earlier closing or even all day closing rather than their usual seven day trading. 

These new rates may be perfect for the metropolises of Melbourne and Sydney that have resident populations sufficient to maintain all year trading, but in tourist areas the new rates have already had detrimental effects. 

No problem through the school holiday and traditional holiday periods when the tourist towns are full and overflowing with visitors, but most of these towns struggle to maintain that level of visitation all year round. 

Hospitality staff in particular have always been used to working reduced hours during the down times but these new penalty rates have brought an especially harsh reality for restaurant, bar and shop owners.  Now instead of keeping the staff on at standard rates they seem to be compelled to reduce staffing levels even further than they would normally do to keep costs under control. 

So who is the loser out of this situation?  Yep, you guessed it, the staff, the very people it was supposed to reward. 

Many restaurants have already, or are considering, closing on Sundays and public holidays because opening all day is just unviable.  Of course I do understand if you are thinking that all restaurateurs complain about profit margins at any time of the year but I don't believe these employment laws were meant to put this even greater pressure on an already struggling tourism industry. 

Here in Port Douglas the 'Greentime' season is inevitably slower than the high 'Beach' season but it has always maintained a seven day a week strategy.  Under these new regimes the thought of closed shops and restaurants on Sundays and Public Holidays is too horrible to imagine. 

It doesn't exactly put the thriving prosperous image out there that Port Douglas has previously enjoyed. 

It's a difficult dilemma isn't it?  Staff should be paid correctly but if it means they don't have a job, it's rather self defeating!

Once again, perhaps the laws should have been looked at in a little more depth to comprehend the consequences of a law such as this. Or does it demonstrate an innate lack of understanding between cities, lawmakers and rural/tourist regions?

And finally while I'm having a whinge, I'd like to include noise level laws. 

These draconian laws that are suffocating Port Douglas at the moment must have been invented by a music hater or someone who needs 12 hours sleep a night and is a light sleeper! 

The noise level laws are so restrictive that most live bar venues in town can't even have a drummer unless they have digital drums that can be turned down as the evening wears on. 

What a load of twaddle this is! 

We are a tourist Mecca for live music and because of a handful of selfish holidaymakers the rest of our visitors and residents can't have a decent party.  And the laws support the few complainants, whether they are right or not. 

And I believe I'm right in saying that if someone complains about the noise level if in their opinion it's too loud, the police have to attend and will issue a warning to the offending party and the venue will be reported and fined if they are called out again. 

Now don't get me wrong here, if we were talking about a neighbour making outrageous noise and they refuse to turn the music down after you have asked them to, then by all means get the authorities involved.  But I'm talking about venues in a tourist town where the name of the game is entertainment! 

If hotel or resort guests don't like it, why on earth are they staying in the centre of town, there's loads of out of the centre town alternatives where peace and quiet is their middle name.  To ruin the majority of partygoers time because the music is too loud is just downright selfish! 

And needless to say the across the board laws of the land support this selfish minority.  I don't believe these laws were instigated for legitimately licensed premises to be subjected to.  I'm sure t was for noisy neighbours and illegal gatherings. 

Perhaps I had better shut up now before someone complains about the noise.

I look forward to hearing from you.