Blog | ASH > Action on Smoking & Health

FIFTH SESSION of the CONFERENCE of THE PARTIES to the WHO FCTC (COP5) – NOV 12-17, 2012

By shoestring | Published September 6, 2012

(Nov. 12-17, 2012 / Seoul, Korea) The Conference of the Parties (COP) is the governing body of the WHO FCTC and is comprised of all Parties to the Convention. It keeps under regular review the implementation of the Convention and takes the decisions necessary to promote its effective implementation, and may also adopt protocols, annexes and amendments to the Convention. ASH is proud to support the FCTC and the COP by serving as the secretariat to the Framework Convention Alliance. For more information on the COP please visit FCA and the WHO FCTC. To learn about ASH’s role and how you can help please contact ASH at info@ash.org

Plain Package Cigarettes Reduce Smoking Appeal: Study

By ash | Published September 4, 2012

A new study has discredited the tobacco industry’s assertion that there is no proof plain packaging on cigarette packs reduces the appeal of smoking.

Scientists from Canada, the United States and Brazil conducted a study of 640 young Brazilian women to determine if cigarettes had the same appeal when presented in plain packaging.

“The women in this study rated branded packs as more appealing, more stylish and sophisticated than the plain packs,” said study leader David Hammond of the University of Waterloo, Canada.

“They also thought that cigarettes in branded packs would be better tasting and smoother. Removal of all description from the packs, leaving only the brand, further reduced their appeal. In the pack offer test, participants were three times more likely to choose the branded pack as a free gift.”

British American Tobacco New Zealand (BATNZ) last month launched a print, television and radio campaign costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in response to the New Zealand Government’s plan to strip all branding from cigarette packs to make them less attractive to smokers.

BATNZ’s general manager Steve Rush said plain packaging created a “disturbing precedent” for other industries, adding that the British Government was considering a similar proposal for alcohol.

He said New Zealand should not “blindly follow Australia’s lead” with policy he said was unproven in helping to curb smoking.

But the latest study adds to mounting criticism of such claims.

Professor Alistair Woodward, head of the University of Auckland’s School of Population Health, said the findings fitted in with what had been observed elsewhere – that tobacco packaging affects the opinions and behaviours of smokers.

“The tobacco industry knows very well the value of brand packaging. This is why they have invested so heavily in design and illustration in the past, and why the industry now opposes plain packaging so vehemently,” he said.

Janet Hoek of the University of Otago’s Department of Marketing said the paper added to the growing evidence base supporting the plain-packaging measure.

“Overall, this study reinforces earlier work showing how plain packaging will reduce perceptions of smoking and diminish the benefits smoking is perceived to deliver.

“In addition, New Zealand research has found that plain packaging not only affects smokers’ perceptions, but influences their choice behaviours – significantly fewer select ‘plain’ packages – and likelihood of making a quit attempt.” Health Minister Tony Ryall said last month that BATNZ was “wasting its money” on its campaign.

He believed New Zealanders were turning against tobacco companies and their marketing strategies.

“New Zealanders have moved on from being influenced in this way. There is a lot of support for what the Government is doing in tobacco.”

The Ministry of Health has put out a consultation paper on plain packaging and expects to report back on the findings on October. The Government has agreed to support the policy change in principle.

By Matthew Theunissen

See this article at its original location>

What is ISDS and What Does it Mean for Tobacco Control

By ash | Published August 30, 2012

ISDS stands for Investor State Dispute Settlement. I know, spelling it out doesn’t help comprehension much. It is a term of art for trade law policy wonks. Unlike most unnecessarily long bits of lingo, this one is dangerous, especially for tobacco control. The United States is insisting that it be included in the TransPacific Partnership Agreement, a massive free trade agreement currently under negotiation with ten other countries. What does ISDS do? Let me give some context first.

You may recall earlier this year when the U.S. lost a legal appeal over its ban on candy flavorings for cigarettes, flavorings clearly meant to attract children to start smoking. The plaintiff in that case was the nation of Indonesia, which exports a lot of clove-flavored “bidis” to the U.S. The court was an international trade tribunal formed by the World Trade Organization. Under WTO rules, a country may drag another country to court over any laws that it feels violate trade rules. The decisions are binding, and the trade tribunals’ final decisions cannot be overruled, even by the U.S. Supreme Court.

ISDS creates a similar right to sue over any law that impacts trade, except that it allows any corporation to sue a country in an international trade tribunal. In the example above, the Indonesian tobacco industry would not have needed to convince the government to sue on its behalf. It could do so on its own. And the suits need not be against federal laws. They could go after state and local tobacco laws and regulations as well.

The reason this is particularly problematic for tobacco is that the tobacco industry has publicly stated that its strategy is to sue even when they don’t have a good case, just to impose an economic punishment on governments who try to reduce smoking. Trade cases cost millions of dollars each, win or lose. The federal government may be able to afford a vigorous defense, but states, counties and cities already facing historic deficits are a different story. Industry’s goal is to “chill” governments from passing tobacco control laws in the first place, just to avoid costly court cases.

For a real life example of what ISDS can mean in the face of a cynical, rich industry, read about Australia’s experience>

Posted in Blog | Tagged Carve Out, Court Rulings, Global News, Indonesia, Tobacco & Trade, Tobacco Treaty, TPP, TPPA, U.S. News, WTO | Leave a comment

Unleashing the Campaign Contributions of Corporations

By ash | Published August 29, 2012

Way back in February of this year, more than two-thirds of Californians believed raising more money from tobacco companies to finance cancer research was a good idea. That was before industry money kicked in.

Don Blankenship, former chief of Massey Energy, supported Brent Benjamin.

In just over three months, opponents spent $41 million to defeat the initiative — a proposition to levy an extra $1 on the sale of a pack of cigarettes — five times what its supporters spent. On June 5, it was defeated by 50.2 percent to 49.8 percent.

Similar forces in the next couple of months could shape the November elections. All the funds raised for the presidential and Congressional races so far pale in comparison to the money expected to rush in after the party conventions this week and next.

This is the first presidential election since the Supreme Court’s decision in the Citizens United case removed the last barriers to campaign spending by corporations and other groups. Analysts are bracing for a tidal wave of money from rich individuals, companies and labor unions that could alter the political landscape and transform American democracy.

Voters have always worried about the role of corporate money in election campaigns. Surprisingly perhaps, there hasn’t really been that much.

Gordon Tullock, one of the first social scientists to study the effects of corporate money in politics, remarked 40 years ago that it was a mystery that companies didn’t spend much more given the huge potential return of swaying legislators’ votes.

Ten years ago, Stephen Ansolabehere, John M. de Figueiredo, and James M. Snyder from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology picked up the theme with a study called “Why Is There So Little Money in U.S. Politics?” They noted that campaign spending over the last 100 years had remained stagnant and perhaps even declined as a share of the nation’s gross domestic product.

In 2000, the average contribution to a legislator by political action committees associated with unions, companies or industry groups was only $1,700, they found. This was way below the $10,000 legal ceiling and a trivial amount considering the goodies at stake. In 2000 the military procurement budget was $134 billion. Yet military contractors and their employees contributed less than $25 million to the campaigns of 1998 and 2000.

“The discrepancy between the value of policy and the amounts contributed strains basic economic intuitions,” Mr. Ansolabehere and his colleagues wrote. “Given the value of policy at stake, firms and other interest groups should give more.”

Even the nearly $4 billion in campaign spending in 2010 pales against the government’s $1 trillion in discretionary spending. And corporate money made only a small percentage of the total.

It may seem unbelievable that there has been “too little” corporate money in politics. But it makes some sense. Corporations don’t give more money because most of the time it isn’t really that effective in producing the outcomes they desire.

Some elections — for example, the mayoral race in New York — seem to have been decided by a magnate’s or a corporation’s overwhelming campaign spending. Pressure from Wall Street lobby groups almost certainly contributed to the demise of the Glass-Steagall Act, which had barred banks from engaging in some businesses.

But, over all, there is little evidence that money is effective at swaying legislation or improving the corporate bottom line. One study found that changes in campaign contribution laws from 1971 through 2002 had no impact on the stock price of companies that were heavily engaged in campaign spending.

On the other hand, playing politics can hurt a company’s brand. The chief executive of Target had to apologize two years ago when the company’s contribution to the campaign of Tom Emmer, the Republican candidate in Minnesota’s race for governor and a staunch opponent of gay marriage, led to threats of a boycott of its stores.

Campaign contributions can affect the priorities of elected officials, opening the door for interest group lobbyists. Studies have found that companies that lobby intensely are more profitable, on average, than those that don’t. Still, the evidence suggests most companies do not get any return from their lobbying expenditures. And though businesses have historically spent much more lobbying legislators than on campaign contributions, lobbying expenditures also are small compared with the benefits they could reap.

Richard Hall of the University of Michigan notes that interest groups dedicate most of their campaign contributions and lobbying efforts to legislators they already agree with, helping them make their case, and spend little time trying to persuade opponents. And big donors don’t have exclusive access to legislators, Mr. Hall found. Legislators also grant access to like-minded interest groups with little money to give.

In a way, this narrative may make more sense than the persistent fear that interest groups are shaping policy by getting their allies elected and telling them what to do.

See the rest of this article at it’s original location>

Posted in Related News | Tagged Campaign, Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, U.S. News | Leave a comment

Smoke Signals: Plans of Big Tobacco Plain to See

By ash | Published August 29, 2012

IT’S easy to laugh at Big Tobacco. Fresh from defeat in Australia’s High Court, it has taken its fight against plain cigarette packets to New Zealand where British American Tobacco warns such legislation could expose the nation to legal challenges (no kidding), and to Hong Kong where Philip Morris moved the shares of its Australian subsidiary – presumably to take advantage of an obscure 1993 Hong Kong-Australia investment treaty.

Philip Morris Australia, now known as Philip Morris Asia, will argue the treaty prevents Australia from depriving a Hong Kong entity of its investments or subjecting it to ”measures having effect equivalent to such deprivation”. Which it does, with a caveat. As a party to the treaty, Australia is permitted to deprive a Hong Kong company of its investments so long as it does so ”under due process of law for a public purpose related to the internal needs of that party on a non-discriminatory basis”. So Australia ought to be in the clear.

But the almost comic attempt to get mileage out of the treaty (moving from Australia to Hong Kong in order to complain that it was being discriminated against because it was from Hong Kong) masks a broader, more serious attempt to turn trade treaties into instruments that allow corporations to sue governments.

The World Trade Organisation allows no such thing. Its disputes settlement procedure allows a nation to haul another nation before a disputes settlements panel, but not corporations to do so.

That could be why on Friday it will be Ukraine that will ask the WTO to set up a panel to hear its plain-packaging dispute with Australia rather than a tobacco company. There’s a suspicion that Ukraine is acting on behalf of a tobacco company, perhaps fuelled by its ranking on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (at the corrupt end of the scale, sandwiched between Russia and Zimbabwe) and by the fact that it has next to no tobacco trade with Australia.

The dispute will take four months to hear. With appeals, it could take up to 14 months. But it won’t unduly trouble Australia. A member of the WTO rather than a corporation will be taking action, it will have to show clearly how Australia’s plain packs law offends against WTO rules (which allow non-discriminatory measures that benefit health) and because Ukraine’s national interests are not at stake it is likely to run out of enthusiasm before Australia does.

Big Tobacco, and fellow travellers in surprising places, want much more. They want what is known as an Investor State Dispute Settlement Mechanism. They want it in order to allow them to drag Australia and other sovereign governments before specially constituted international courts.

They don’t usually put it that bluntly. Here’s how Philip Morris International put it in a briefing note for the US trade representative negotiating the so-called Trans-Pacific Partnership with 11 nations including Australia: ”Philip Morris International considers the availability of an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism – including the right for investors to submit disputes to independent international tribunals – a vital aspect of protecting its foreign investments.”

It is clear what Philip Morris is getting at. Four of the 30 paragraphs in the briefing note seen by BusinessDay complain about Australia’s plain-packaging law. As it happens, the US trade representative is unable to do the bidding of Philip Morris. US law prevents federal agencies from promoting the sale of tobacco overseas. But the trade representative is willing to do the bidding of other corporations that would like to sue foreign governments in supranational courts.

In fact in all but one of the 13 free trade agreements negotiated by the US, its representatives have managed to insert such a clause. The exception is the free trade agreement with Australia. Although criticised at the time for giving too much away to the United States in return for very little, on the question of an outside Investor State Dispute Settlement Mechanism the Howard government stood firm.

The Gillard government is standing firm, too. The multinational nature of large Australian corporations means it would effectively be giving them (but not our citizens) an international right of appeal against laws approved by the High Court.

The US is unlikely to give up. It already has such a clause in its agreements with Canada, Chile, Mexico, Singapore and Peru – five of the nations that would form part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Its best hope would be that a new Abbott government saw things differently. It would, if it succumbed to lobbying from Australia’s own Chamber of Commerce and Industry. ACCI is lobbying hard, putting out a statement this month headed crudely: ”Australian Foreign Investment Requires Right to Sue Foreign Governments”.

It says its ”campaign” is backed by the International Chamber of Commerce, which is hardly surprising but also hardly a sign the backers have Australia’s interests at heart.

Julia Gillard and Trade Minister Craig Emerson are standing up to them. Will Tony Abbott?

By Peter Martin

See this article at its original location >

Two Silver Linings to Graphic Warnings Decision

By ash | Published August 27, 2012

As anyone who follows tobacco-related news now knows, last Friday an appeals court upheld a lower court ruling striking down the FDA’s proposed graphic warnings for cigarette packages. In a 2-1 decision, the court found that the warnings violated “corporate speech” rights. The finding places the rights of tobacco companies to market an addictive and deadly product over the rights of people to be fully informed of the consequences. If the decision stands, there can be no doubt that lives will be lost because of it.

Those of us who place life higher than corporate profit can find some solace. First, a different appeals court in Cincinnati came to the opposite conclusion in March, which means that the Supreme Court is very likely to hear the case (assuming the FDA appeals). We can’t be sure how the highest court will rule, of course, but a number of legal scholars have opined that the case against the warnings is flawed.

Second, there was an excellent opinion from the dissenting judge:

“The government has an interest of paramount importance in effectively conveying information about the health risks of smoking to adolescent would-be smokers and other consumers.”

Given that the tobacco industry has already been found guilty of criminal racketeering in their efforts to hide the health impacts of their products, this opinion makes a lot more sense than protecting criminals’ rights to free speech.

Posted in Blog | Tagged Court Rulings, Plain Packaging, Tobacco & Human Rights, U.S. News, U.S. Supreme Court | Leave a comment

Reynolds Adds Aids to Stop Smoking

By ash | Published August 27, 2012

Reynolds American Inc. is taking a bold — perhaps audacious — approach to entering the nicotine-replacement therapy marketplace, analysts say.

With the Zonnic gum of its Niconovum pharmaceutical subsidiary, Reynolds is asking consumers, particularly smokers, to trust the company that got smokers hooked on nicotine to have the expertise to produce the right cessation product for them.

Until four years ago, Reynolds’ evolution into a “total tobacco company” was met with steep skepticism, if not derision, by anti-tobacco advocates.

However, the launch of Zonnic in retail outlets in Des Moines, Iowa, on Sept. 3 represents just the latest innovation for Reynolds, following up on Camel Snus and three Camel dissolvable products.

Also on tap is Reynolds’ version of an electronic cigarette (Vuse), smokeless pouches and pellets (Viceroy) and nicotine extract products such as lozenges. Vuse and Viceroy are being test-marketed in the Triad at select Tarheel Tobacco outlets.

“We hope the focus of Zonnic is on the message of the product, and not the messenger, because we believe Zonnic takes the smoker’s perspective into cessation,” said Tommy Payne, president of Niconovum USA Inc., based in Winston-Salem.

The gum represents Niconovum’s first product introduction in the United States. Reynolds bought Niconovum AB, based in Sweden, in 2009 for $44 million. Its products, which also include pouches and spray forms, are sold in Denmark and Sweden.

Payne said Zonnic already has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Zonnic is the latest entrant into a nicotine-replacement therapy marketplace occupied by well-hyped products that have yielded mixed results at best in helping smokers quit.

The long-term effectiveness of NRT products was called into doubt in January by a study released by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health and the University of Massachusetts at Boston.

The study of 787 adult smokers in Massachusetts found that the products, specifically nicotine patches and gum, “are no more effective in helping people stop smoking cigarettes in the long term than trying to quit on one’s own,” said Hillel Alpert, a research scientist with the Harvard group and the study’s lead author.

Gregory Connolly, director of the Center for Global Tobacco Control at Harvard, said the study “showed clearly that while the NRT products can help with quitting and withdrawal over two weeks to six months, they are not really designed to help with relapsing.”

Payne said that although about 70 percent of smokers annually express a desire to quit smoking, only 10 percent are successful. Of that 10 percent, about 6 percent are successful through the use of NRT products, he said.

Stop-smoking aid

Read the rest of this article at its original location >

Posted in Related News | Tagged Cessation, Reynolds American Inc. | Leave a comment

States Urge USTR To Seek Tobacco Carve Out from TPP

By ash | Published August 27, 2012

Two state governments have called on the USTR to carve tobacco out of the TransPacific Partnership Agreement over well-grounded concerns that their own state and local tobacco control initiatives will be threatened by international trade tribunals. Maine and Vermont, both leaders among U.S. states in protecting their people’s health, sent letters to U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk last week, calling for a carve-out and asking for consultations.

Read the Maine Letter

Read the Vermont Letter

For analysis of the trade threats to tobacco control, click here >

Posted in Blog | Tagged Carve Out, Tobacco & Trade, USTR | Leave a comment

U.S. Court Strikes Down Graphic Warnings on Cigarettes

By ash | Published August 24, 2012

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Friday struck down a law that requires tobacco companies to use graphic health warnings, such as of a man exhaling smoke through a hole in his throat.

The 2-1 decision by the court in Washington, D.C., contradicts another appeals court’s ruling in a similar case earlier this year, setting up the possibility the U.S. Supreme Court will weigh in on the dispute.

The court’s majority in the latest ruling found the label requirement from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration violated corporate speech rights.

“This case raises novel questions about the scope of the government’s authority to force the manufacturer of a product to go beyond making purely factual and accurate commercial disclosures and undermine its own economic interest — in this case, by making ‘every single pack of cigarettes in the country mini billboard’ for the government’s anti-smoking message,” wrote Judge Janice Rogers Brown of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The FDA “has not provided a shred of evidence” showing that the graphic labels would reduce smoking, Brown added.

Five tobacco companies representing most of the major cigarette makers in the United States challenged the FDA rules: Reynolds American Inc, Lorillard Inc; Commonwealth Brands Inc, which is owned by Britain’s Imperial Tobacco Group Plc; Liggett Group LLC and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co Inc.

The FDA has argued the images of rotting teeth and diseased lungs are accurate and necessary to warn consumers — especially teenagers — about the risks of smoking.

The health agency said on Friday that it does not comment on possible, pending or ongoing litigation. The U.S. Department of Justice, which argued the case for the FDA, said it needs to review the ruling before deciding on next steps.

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, which has vigorously supported stricter cigarette laws, urged the government to appeal.

“Today’s ruling is wrong on the science and law, and it is by no means the final word on the new cigarette warnings,” said Matthew Myers, the group’s president, in a statement.

YOUTH EPIDEMIC

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates some 45 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, which are the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. And the World Health Organization predicts smoking could kill 8 million people each year by 2030 if governments do not do more to help people quit.

The U.S. Surgeon General warned in March that youth smoking has reached epidemic proportions, as one in four U.S. high school seniors is a regular cigarette smoker, paving the way to a lifetime of addiction.

Judge Judith Rogers, who wrote the dissenting opinion, said the FDA warnings were factual, and necessary to counter tobacco companies’ history of deceptive advertising.

“The government has an interest of paramount importance in effectively conveying information about the health risks of smoking to adolescent would-be smokers and other consumers,” she wrote.

Congress passed a law in 2009 that gave the FDA broad powers to regulate the tobacco industry, including imposing the label regulation. The law requires color warning labels big enough to cover the top 50 percent of a cigarette pack’s front and back panels, and the top 20 percent of print advertisements.

The FDA released nine new warnings in June 2011 that were meant to go into effect this September, the first change in U.S. cigarette warning labels in 25 years. Cigarette packs already carry text warnings from the U.S. Surgeon General.

The ruling against the FDA means tobacco companies will likely not have to comply with the requirements for now, given divergent court rulings.

The U.S. Appeals Court for the 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, upheld the bulk of the FDA’s new tobacco regulations in March, including the requirement for warning images on cigarette packs.

The difference in the two cases is that the FDA had not introduced the specific images when the companies filed the 6th Circuit suit. While the Washington suit focused on the images, the appeals court in Cincinnati addressed the larger issue of the FDA’s regulatory power.

Most countries in the European Union already carry graphic images to illustrate the health risks of smoking. Earlier this month, Australia took a further step to limit smoking advertising by banning company logos on cigarette packs, and the EU said it was considering a similar ban.

By David Ingram and Anna Yukhananov

See the article at its original location >

Tobacco Boss Says Some Regulation OK

By ash | Published August 22, 2012

New Zealand’s tobacco industry is already heavily regulated and the Government’s plain packaging proposals for cigarette packets is a step too far, the country’s biggest cigarette manufacturer has said.

In a rare media interview, Steve Rush, general manager of British American Tobacco New Zealand, agreed smoking was harmful and that it should be regulated.

But he said just because a regulation is anti-tobacco, doesn’t make it good policy.

The powerful tobacco company has launched a campaign to persuade the government against plain cigarette packaging, a move already underway in Australia.

New Zealand already had “a very comprehensive” tobacco control policy in place, Rush said, and the Government had to examine the efficacy of the new proposals before “blindly copying” Australia.

The industry had felt the brunt of regulation for more than 20 years, he said, including banning tobacco advertising, sponsorship and office workplace smoking in 1990.

Then in 1997, packs of fewer than 20 cigarettes and loose tobacco pouches were banned, followed by a full ban on smoking in restaurants, pubs, clubs, factories, schools and the like in 2003. Graphic health warnings were introduced in 2008 and a programme of three 10 per cent excise increases above the CPI over three years came in 2010.

A new law banning the display of tobacco came into force last month.

The High Court in Australia last week ruled that plain packaging legislation did not contravene the Australian constitution. Its plain packaging policy is due to take effect in October. A consultation document on a similar proposal for New Zealand was released last month but the policy is under a cloud of probable legal action.

British American Tobacco is preparing submissions to put to Government in October.

Rush said plain packaging diminished intellectual property rights at the expense of New Zealand brands and his company will highlight the impact this proposal may have on international trade and the “troubling precedent” its sets for the wider economy.

There were real dangers, too, he claimed that the proposal could foster illegal trade and make tobacco more affordable, counter to the Government’s objectives.

“Removing the rights of a legal business to use their own branding would have repercussions far wider than tobacco,” he said.

The listed London-based British American Tobacco Group is currently ranked eighth on the FTSE-100. British American Tobacco New Zealand is the country’s largest tobacco company, with a 72 per cent market share.

Its brands include Dunhill, Lucky Strike, Benson and Hedges, Rothmans, Pall Mall and Holiday and roll-your-own tobacco Port Royal and Park Drive.

Last year BATNZ paid $875.1 million in excise and GST along with company taxes of $47.1m – some 1.8 per cent of all government tax revenues, it claimed.

By Nick Krause

See this article at its original location >

14th Round of TPP Negotiations – SEP 6-15, 2012

By ash | Published August 21, 2012

(Sept. 6-15, 2012/Leesburg, VA)

The next negotiating round of the Trans- Pacific Partnership will take place in Leesburg, Virginia from September 6-15, 2012. USTR will be hosting a Direct Stakeholder Engagement event on Sunday, September 9, 2012. ASH urges the United States Trade Representative to submit its draft tobacco exception when negotiators meet in Leesburg Virginia to discuss the TPP, a giant free trade agreement among 11 countries. USTR announced the exception in May, but two negotiating rounds have now come and gone and our negotiation partners have yet to see it.

For additional information visit USTR >

Posted in Events, Featured News & Events | Tagged Tobacco & Trade, TPP, TPPA, U.S. News | Leave a comment

Hidden Hand of Big Tobacco Leads to WTO Challenge

By ash | Published August 20, 2012

BIG tobacco has opened a new front in its war against Australia’s plain packaging law.

The World Trade Organisation has revealed that within hours of the government’s victory in the High Court, Ukraine upgraded to formal a complaint against Australia’s law and demanded the establishment of a disputes panel.

Australia will have to argue its case before the WTO in a hearing and appeals process that could take up to 14 months.

“It’s a remarkable coincidence,” the Trade Minister, Craig Emerson, said. “Ukraine was engaged in informal talks with us up until the High Court win, and then went formal.”

Asked if he thought the big tobacco companies were behind Ukraine’s decision, Dr Emerson said that he was “not aware of tobacco being a big industry in Ukraine, so one would wonder why it would have a big interest in this”.

Ukraine, once a substantial tobacco grower, now imports tobacco to manufacture cigarettes for export, mainly to Europe.

An adverse finding would put Australia in breach of WTO rules requiring compensation or a backdown.

A recent finding on quarantine rules led to this country opening its market to apples from New Zealand for the first time in 89 years.

“Members usually abide by the umpire’s decision,” Dr Emerson told the Herald, “but we do not expect to lose. The WTO rules allow us to regulate for health.”

The hearing will not prevent Australia withdrawing branded cigarette packets from sale on December 1 as planned and allowing only the sale of cigarettes in plain olive-green packets until the dispute is resolved.

The government is battling big tobacco on a second front in negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) encompassing Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.

At the behest of tobacco companies, including Philip Morris International, the US is demanding that the agreement includes a so-called investor state dispute settlement mechanism, which would allow firms such as Philip Morris to appeal to an outside body about sovereign decisions it did not like. The provision goes further than anything in the existing Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement.

”This is being pushed by US representatives. Australia is saying ‘no’,” Dr Emerson said.

Labor and the Coalition combined in the Senate on Thursday to vote down a Greens resolution that would have required Australia to make public its negotiating position in the TPP.

”The negotiations are being conducted in secret,” the Greens spokesman on trade, Peter Whish-Wilson, said. “While draft texts of the agreement were provided to AT&T, Verizon, Cisco, the Motion Picture Association and other industry lobbyists, advocacy organisations and other citizens are denied access.”

Dr Emerson said there was no point in publishing draft negotiating positions because they “shifted around”.

By Peter Martin

See the article at its original location >

Philip Morris International Expands its Portfolio

By ash | Published August 20, 2012

Dips toe into alternative tobacco products worldwide

NEW YORK – Philip Morris International, the largest tobacco company in the world recently announced yet another stream of revenue growth. With more regulation threats being imposed on tobacco companies and smokers, Philip Morris is looking to explore alternatives, according to a contributed column on Seeking Alpha.

Governments globally have been attempting to regulate how and if cigarette companies can advertise. In addition, governments have hiked tax rates on cigarettes in an attempt to break people’s addictions by robbing their wallets. Philip Morris has responded by beginning to seek revenue through electronic cigarettes, chewing tobacco and snuff.

Though Philip Morris’ smokeless effort is minimal right now compared to the tobacco industry, the company does have revenue coming from their joint venture with Swedish Match AB in 2009. The smokeless products from this joint venture are currently being marketed and sold in Russia and Canada. Revenues are expected to grow significantly too, as this is only the beginning of their marketing campaign, the column states.

Philip Morris is also looking to follow in the footsteps of competitor British American Tobacco and begin marketing electronic cigarettes. Electronic cigarettes offer a somewhat healthier alternative to traditional cigarettes because when you smoke them, you inhale water vapor mixed with nicotine rather than harmful smoke. This is easier on your lungs, although the nicotine still has its normal effects. With consumers becoming more aware of the consequences of smoking, some have looked to electronic cigarettes as an alternative to help preserve their lung function.

Long-term Philip Morris believes that electronic cigarettes will expand its revenue opportunities worldwide, the writer states. Philip Morris has the highest EPS growth rate among the tobacco sector for the next fiscal year; it’s estimated to be 11.2%, ahead of Lorillard, Altria Group and Reynolds American. Its revenue growth for next year is also expected to triumph in its sector by growing by a projected 5.51%. Philip Morris yields 3.3% at its current price.

CSP Daily News

See this article at its original location >

Posted in Related News | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Philip Morris | Leave a comment

The Global Tobacco Epidemic is Far from Over

By ash | Published August 20, 2012

The global tobacco epidemic is far from being over. A recent study published in the Lancet suggests that the number of tobacco users remains very high in many parts of the world, particularly low and middle income countries. Over 60% of Russian men and over 28% of Bangladeshi women use tobacco. No wonder tobacco stocks are doing so well during these tough economic times.

While we have seen the passage of some public health policies, clearly much more needs to be done. All of these countries, which are Parties to the tobacco control treaty, the FCTC, must increase the allocation of resources needed to adequately implement and enforce the measures in the treaty. They can do this by working with development partners and by implementing fiscal policies that will decrease tobacco consumption and generate new revenues for health.

All branches of government must cooperate with each other in order to reverse these embarrassingly high rates of tobacco use. If they don’t, we will be judged as the global generation that allowed a billion totally preventable deaths to take place this century.

To read the abstract of the Lancet report please click here >

Posted in Blog | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Global News, Lancet | Leave a comment

World Cancer Leaders’ Summit – AUG 27-30, 2012

By ash | Published August 18, 2012

UICC and partners will be hosting the 2012 World Cancer Leaders’ Summit in Montreal Canada. The 2012 summit provides education and training opportunities throughout the program linked to one or more of the World Cancer Declaration targets. For more information please visit the UICC website >

Posted in Events | Leave a comment

Fund profits from an addictive investment

By ash | Published August 17, 2012

THE taxpayer-owned Future Fund is profiting handsomely from tobacco investments, despite Canberra’s plain packaging laws.

As the High Court’s landmark ruling in favour of plain packaging triggered a slide in global tobacco stocks, latest figures show the fund’s tobacco shares, valued at $210 million, have delivered far higher returns than the overall fund.

The fund’s largest tobacco holding, a $55 million parcel of British American Tobacco shares, has returned 8.3 per cent a year since it was bought, figures published this month show.

A $48 million investment in American company Lorillard, which owns the Kent and Old Gold brands, has delivered bumper annual returns of 16.7 per cent.

Philip Morris shares, in which the fund has invested $44.8 million, have returned 15.7 per cent a year.

These returns are far higher than the fund’s average returns of 4.9 per cent a year since it was set up in 2006 to pay for public service pensions.

The investments are attracting growing criticism from health groups, and the High Court’s ruling on plain packaging has reignited the debate.

With tobacco companies vowing to fight plain packaging through other legal avenues, Greens Senator Richard Di Natale said it was hypocritical for the government to invest in tobacco.

‘In one way we’re helping fund this toxic industry to take legal action against us,” said Senator Di Natale, who has proposed a bill forcing the fund to sell its tobacco shares. ”It makes no sense whatsoever.”

The fund says its investments in 15 tobacco companies are allowed by its internal policies because tobacco is a legal product.

Global tobacco shares fell in response to Canberra’s plain packaging rules, but have remained popular with investors because their earnings are not affected by the economic cycle.

British American Tobacco stocks fell 2 per cent on Wednesday night, but are up 27.5 per cent for the year. Philip Morris was down 0.2 per cent but is up 34.6 per cent in the past year.

“Those stocks still have a defensive quality to their earnings in turbulent times, notwithstanding the sustained anti-smoking movement,” said CCZ Statton Equities director Dave Hofman.

Peter Warnes, head of equity research for Morningstar Australasia, said: “Why do people still think tobacco stocks are a good investment? Because nicotine is addictive.”

by Clancy Yeates National Times

See this article at its original location >

Posted in Related News | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Global News, Investment | Leave a comment

Campaign Against Missouri Cigarette Tax Hike Gears Up

By ash | Published August 16, 2012

JEFFERSON CITY • Off-brand cigarette-makers are shouldering most of the cost so far of the campaign against a cigarette tax increase on Missouri’s Nov. 6 ballot.

Cheyenne International LLC of Grover, N.C., and Xcaliber International LTD LLC of Pryor, Okla., each gave $200,000 this month to the fight against the proposal, according to reports filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission.

The tobacco tax increase, which has been labeled Proposition B, would generate at least $284 million for public schools, state colleges and universities, and smoking cessation programs.

Proponents say the proposal also would save the state money by reducing long-term health costs linked to smoking.

Missouri currently has the lowest cigarette tax in the country — 17 cents per pack. Proposition B, which was placed on the ballot by an initiative petition drive, would raise it by 73 cents per pack.

Because of the way the proposal is written, the impact would be even greater on cigarettes made by smaller tobacco companies, such as Cheyenne and Xcaliber.

Companies that didn’t participate in the national tobacco settlement in 1998 currently can sell cheaper cigarettes in Missouri than major manufacturers, such as R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., can.

The larger companies pay the state about $150 million a year under the settlement, to help cover diseases caused by smoking.

Companies that didn’t sign the settlement pay a portion of their revenue into a state escrow fund, but they have been allowed to recoup their money at the end of each year.

The ballot proposal would eliminate that advantage.

As a result, the off-brands could face an additional cost of 57 cents per pack, on top of the 73-cent tax increase, said Ron Leone, executive director of the Missouri Petroleum & Convenience Store Association.

“That’s why they have even more skin in the game,” Leone said.

The association’s PAC is running the opponents’ campaign. Their ads will focus on “this outrageous and unfair 760 percent tax increase,” Leone said, citing the impact on the smaller companies’ brands.

The ballot proposal also would impose smaller tax hikes on other tobacco products, such as cigars.

The opponents’ campaign had $116,694 in the bank on July 26, before the recent surge.

Though Big Tobacco’s money is noticeably absent so far, retailers are helping out. For example, U-Gas Inc. of Fenton, Mo., recently chipped in $50,000 while Dallas-based 7-Eleven Inc. added $25,000.

Missourians for Health and Education, the committee campaigning for the proposal, has already spent $1 million on the initiative and had $126,452 in the bank, at last report.

The American Cancer Society, which has provided much of proponents’ funding, added $11,564 this week. Other big checks came from World Wide Technology Holding Co., Inc. of St. Louis, which kicked in $25,000, and Gray Ritter & Graham, a St. Louis law firm, which contributed $10,000.

By Virginia Young St. Louis Post-Dispatch

See the article at its original location >

Posted in Related News | Tagged Campaign, Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Tax | Leave a comment

WHO Welcomes Landmark Decision from Australia’s High Court on Tobacco Plain Packaging Act

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

Statement by WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan
15 August 2012

The World Health Organization (WHO) strongly welcomes the landmark decision from Australia’s High Court to dismiss a legal challenge from the tobacco industry, and calls on the rest of the world to follow Australia’s tough stance on tobacco marketing.

Several major tobacco companies challenged Australia’s legislation to require cigarettes and other tobacco products to be sold in plain packaging without any branding. But the industry’s attempt to derail this effective tobacco control measure failed. As of December 2012, Australia will be the first country to sell cigarettes in drab, olive-green packaging without branding.

With Australia’s victory, public health enters a brave new world of tobacco control. Plain packaging is a highly effective way to counter industry’s ruthless marketing tactics. It is also fully in line with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The lawsuits filed by Big Tobacco look like the death throes of a desperate industry. With so many countries lined up to ride on Australia’s coattails, what we hope to see is a domino effect for the good of public health.

The case is being watched closely by several other countries who are considering similar measures to help fight tobacco.

The evidence on the positive health impact of plain packaging compiled by Australia’s High Court will benefit other countries in their efforts to develop and implement strong tobacco control measures to protect the health of their people and to stand resolute against the advances of the tobacco industry.

Tobacco use is one of the most preventable public health threats. Tobacco products will eventually kill up to half of the people who use them – that means nearly six million people die each year. If governments do not take strong action to limit exposures to tobacco, by 2030 it could kill more than eight million people each year.

The WHO Framework Convention for Tobacco Control entered into force in 2005. Parties are obliged over time to take a number of steps to reduce demand and supply for tobacco products including: protecting people from exposure to tobacco smoke, counteracting illicit trade, banning advertising, promotion and sponsorship, banning sales to minors, putting large health warnings on packages of tobacco, increasing tobacco taxes and creating a national coordinating mechanism for tobacco control. More than 170 countries are Parties to the Convention.

For further information, please contact:

Glenn Thomas
Communications Officer
WHO
Telephone: +41 22 791 3983
Mobile: +41 79 509 0677
E-mail: thomasg@who.int

Read this release at its original location >

Posted in Featured News & Events, Related News | Tagged Court Rulings, Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Global News, Plain Packaging, WHO | Leave a comment

Historic Plain Packaging Measure Highlights Need for Stronger Action in U.S.

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

Plain Packaging of Cigarettes Upheld by Australia’s Highest Court

Historic Measure Highlights Need for Stronger Action in U.S.

Yesterday, Australia’s highest court found against the tobacco industry and in favor of the government’s right to protect public health by upholding plain packaging for tobacco products. The new package requirements, which will include large graphic health warnings against a drab green background with only the name of the brand without any colors or other indicators, will go into effect on December 1^st.

Australia is the first country to introduce plain packaging, a measure recommended under the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, the world’s first public health treaty. While over 50 countries now require graphic health warnings, Australia’s plan goes a step further. Having banned all other tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, plain packaging removes the last public space for the tobacco industry to market its deadly products. Several other countries, including New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the European Union, are considering plain packaging.

“This is a milestone in our decades-long global effort to end the tobacco epidemic,” said Laurent Huber, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), the nation’s oldest anti-tobacco organization. “With the injunction against FDA-mandated graphic warning labels, the U.S. has fallen far behind in efforts to protect people from addiction and early death from tobacco use.”

A federal court found that new U.S. warning labels, which depicted the harmful effects of smoking, were unconstitutional. The decision is currently under appeal.

Canada had considered plain packaging in the late 1990s, but backed off when the tobacco industry threatened to sue under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Trade agreements have increasingly been used by Big Tobacco to block or impede tobacco control measures. Australia’s victory in its high court is not the only legal barrier to be overcome – Philip Morris International has sued under an Australia-Hong Kong bilateral investment treaty, and three countries (Ukraine, Honduras and the Dominican Republic) have filed complaints with the World Trade Organization.

“The international trade legal regime was never envisioned to preclude governments from protecting the health of their people,” said Chris Bostic, Deputy Director of ASH. “The tobacco industry should not be permitted to abuse the international legal system in an effort to intimidate governments.”

In addition to Australia, the tobacco industry has launched trade lawsuits against Uruguay and Norway, among others. Earlier this year, the United States lost a trade dispute with Indonesia over its ban on flavorings, including candy flavorings clearly aimed at children.

We applaud Australia’s courage to stand up to the tobacco industry, their determination to protect the health of their citizens and be a world leader in public health.

###

Posted in Featured News & Events, News & Events, Press Releases | Tagged Court Rulings, Global News, Plain Packaging | Leave a comment

ASH Poster Presentations at the 2012 NCTOH

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

: ASH Presents “The NCD Summit: An Opportunity for Global Tobacco Control”

: ASH Presents “FCTC Ratification Seven Years Later”

: ASH Presents “How the US is Falling Behind in Global Tobacco Control”

: ASH Presents “Industry Interference in US Tobacco Control Policy”

: ASH Presents “Graphic Warning Labels Around the World”

Posted in Blog | Tagged NCTOH | Leave a comment

Australian Court Approves Tobacco Pack Logo Ban

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

(Reuters) – Australia called on the world to match its tough new anti-tobacco marketing laws that will ban logos on cigarette packs, after its highest court on Wednesday dismissed a challenge from global manufacturers.

The decision means that from December 1 cigarettes and tobacco products must be sold in plain olive green packets with graphic health warnings, such as pictures of mouth cancer and other smoking-related illnesses.

Although the impact of Australia on their global business is small, the law could have a major effect if it is adopted as a precedent in other countries, especially the fast-growing economies that cigarette firms see as markets of the future.

The laws are in line with World Health Organisation recommendations and are being watched closely by countries including Britain, Norway, New Zealand, Canada and India, who are considering similar measures to help fight smoking.

British American Tobacco (BATS.L), Britain’s Imperial Tobacco (IMT.L), Philip Morris (PM.N) andJapan Tobacco (2914.T) challenged the laws in Australia’s High Court, claiming the rules were unconstitutional because they effectively extinguished their intellectual property rights.

In a brief statement, the High Court said a majority of its seven judges believed the laws did not breach Australia’s constitution. A full judgement will be released later.

The World Health Organisation estimates that more than 1 billion people around the world are regular smokers, with 80 percent in low- and middle-income countries.

Shares in tobacco groups dipped lower with BAT off 1.8 percent at 3,384 pence and Imperial Tobacco down 1.9 percent at 2,486 pence by 11:40 a.m. British time in a slightly lower Londonmarket.

Supporters of the measure hailed the legal victory as an important step for public health in Australia and any other countries that may copy it.

Australian Attorney-General Nicola Roxon hailed the ruling as “a watershed moment for tobacco control around the world”.

“The message to the rest of the world is big tobacco can be taken on and beaten,” said Roxon, whose father, a smoker, died of cancer when she was 10.

“Without brave governments willing to take the fight up to big tobacco, they’d still have us believing that tobacco is neither harmful nor addictive,” she said after the ruling.

According to the global Tobacco Atlas, a report on smoking produced by the World Lung Foundation and the American Cancer Society, 17 percent of male deaths and 14 percent of female deaths in Australia are due to tobacco.

Read the rest of this article at Reuters >

Posted in Related News | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Global News | Leave a comment

Imperial Tobacco Admit Giving Staff Free Cigarettes ‘For Research’

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

New Zealand Tobacco Manufacturer Imperial Tobacco is under investigation for allegedly providing their 250 employees with free cigarettes samples. Imperial Tobacco Commercial Boss Brendan Walker confirmed the giveaways saying “It’s purely for research” and “it’s entirely up to an individual whether they see it as a perk or not”. Legislation in New Zealand bans manufacturers from giving away their products free or at a discount.

Read the original article here

Posted in Smoke Alarms | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, Global News | Leave a comment

Cigarette Makers Help Fund Anti-Tax Effort

By ash | Published August 15, 2012

The Missouri Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association PAC received a $200,000 donation from Cheyenne International a North Carolina based company and maker of Decade cigarettes. The donation is to help fund the opposition efforts to the Proposition B proposal that would add 73 cents to the cost of a pack of cigarettes and appear on November 6^th ballots. Proposition B would also increase the tax on loose tobacco by 25% and increase the tax on cigars and other tobacco products by 15%. If passed the measure would provide funding to publics schools, universities and smoking cessation programs. The Missouri PAC reportedly has $116,000 prior to the $200,000 donation. Big tobacco companies such as R.J. Reynolds and Altria claim they will not contribute to their efforts.

Read the original story here

Posted in Smoke Alarms | Tagged Eye on Tobacco, Eye on Tobacco Industry, U.S. News | Leave a comment

Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on a Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products 5th Session MAR 29-APR 4, 2012

By ash | Published August 14, 2012

The Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) on a Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products met for a final (fifth) session on 29 March – 4 April 2012 in Geneva, Switzerland.

It agreed the text of a draft protocol, which will be up for adoption at the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in November 2012 in Seoul.

Posted in News & Events | Leave a comment

FIFTH SESSION of the CONFERENCE of THE PARTIES to the WHO FCTC (COP5) – NOV 12-17, 2012

What is ISDS and What Does it Mean for Tobacco Control

Two Silver Linings to Graphic Warnings Decision

States Urge USTR To Seek Tobacco Carve Out from TPP

14th Round of TPP Negotiations – SEP 6-15, 2012

The Global Tobacco Epidemic is Far from Over

World Cancer Leaders’ Summit – AUG 27-30, 2012

Historic Plain Packaging Measure Highlights Need for Stronger Action in U.S.

ASH Poster Presentations at the 2012 NCTOH

Imperial Tobacco Admit Giving Staff Free Cigarettes ‘For Research’

Cigarette Makers Help Fund Anti-Tax Effort

Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on a Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products 5th Session MAR 29-APR 4, 2012

Connect & Stay Informed

The Ash Blog

Recent Tweets

Ash Smoke Alarms

Recent News