One year of debate before final vote on full smoking ban

The Second Standing Committee of the Legislative Assembly (AL) will begin a public consultation period at the beginning of next month to collect views on the much-disputed revision of the anti- smoking regulations.
At the first meeting to debate the details of the full smoking ban that was approved at the AL plenary, the head of the committee, Chan Chak Mo, revealed that it will take at least one year for the bill to reach the AL for a second vote, as the committee’s agenda is full. In addition, he noted that the legislature’s two-month recess is also approaching.
Authorities have decided to implement a two-month consultation period in order to collect opinions from the general public. One of the motives for the consultation, according to Chan, is that there are conflicting arguments amongst lawmakers regarding several aspects of the revision, such as whether or not to retain smoking lounges in casinos. Meanwhile, different stakeholders, either directly or indirectly linked to the amendment of the law, are also expected to meet with the committee members to express their stances on the issue.
The committee head stressed that some organizations have scheduled meetings with the committee. He said that those yet to be invited were also welcome to come forward and voice their concerns, be they favorable or unfavorable.
“Of course it’s way better if they request to meet. However, we will approach those whom we regard as important even if they didn’t voice their opinions,” said Chan.
Officials from the Macau Prison will be the first on the list to talk to the committee members, as inmates who regularly smoke would not be allowed to smoke inside if the smoking ban were to be made universal.
Aside from the six gaming concessionaires, other potential groups include the Chamber of Macau Casino Gaming Concessionaires and Sub-concessionaries, the Forefront of the Macao Gaming group, the Macau Gaming Enterprises Staff’s Association and groups from the tobacco retail industry.
Despite the fact that the passage of the revised law hinges on policymakers’ approval of the second reading, Chan stressed that the AL’s advisory body would not have the final say in the end result of the article’s text, as the government has discretionary power throughout the discussion.
“If we have given our opinions, whether or not the government would revise the law is indeed a political decision,” said Chan. “Everybody can give their opinions, yet it all comes down to the ratio between those most affected and least affected by the bill. Although we listen to the dominating opinions before we propose any changes, it’s all up to the government whether or not they decide to revise it. I hope that everybody understands this.” Staff reporter