MEPs vote to slash tobacco guidelines
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 There aren't many things that leave me speechless. The news that the European Parliament wants to reduce to 400 the number of cigarettes that can be brought into the country for personal use is one of those moments.
A brief recap: prior to 2002 the guideline for the number of cigarettes that could be brought into Britain from the EU was 800. Thanks to record levels of taxation in the UK, thousands of British residents travelled abroad in search of cheaper tobacco - and the guideline was frequently ignored.
In order to enforce the guideline - and crack down on genuine cases of smuggling - Customs took a tough line with consumers and the many coach operators who were ferrying people across the Channel.
Lots of innocent people - smokers who were quite legally purchasing tobacco abroad for their own personal use - had their goods (sometimes even their cars) confiscated. On any Monday morning, the Forest office was awash with tales of woe from people who had endured a weekend in hell courtesy HM Customs & Excise.
Following a successful court case on behalf of one smoker whose tobacco had been seized, Forest started a campaign that led eventually to the government increasing the guideline to a more reasonable 3,200 cigarettes. Since then we have received very few calls from cross-Channel shoppers and order appeared to have been restored.
Now MEPs want to reduce the guideline to 400, which will presumably over-ride current British policy. If this goes ahead, I guarantee that smuggling will go into over-drive. Criminal gangs will make a fortune selling cigarettes at half their retail price on the black market.
Some consumers will benefit from the easy availability of cheap tobacco. Others, especially the elderly and the low paid, who have been able to save hundreds of pounds by going on cheap coach trips every six months or so, will be hit hard.
The government, meanwhile, will lose billions of pounds in lost taxation (as they did in the years immediately prior to 2002). Imagine, moreover, the cost of enforcing the new guidelines. More Customs officers, more scanning equipment, and further inconvenience for passengers at Britain's ferry ports.
Finally, it is reported that the European Parliament is driven by a desire to impose "stricter guidelines on what constitutes personal consumption". Excuse me? Some people smoke ten cigarettes a day; others 20, 30 or more. Surely it's up to the consumer, not politicians, to decide what "constitutes personal consumption"?
Full story HERE.
Europe
Reader Comments (9)
Who did we vote for in our last General Election, our British Government or a group of non elected MEPs?
Has anyone thought to ask why the EU wants to restrict just the UK? Are we a part of Europe or aren't we? If we are, then why are we alone, being singled out for restrictive practises? If, on the other hand we are not, which I am sure at least 80% of the populace desire, then why are the unelected EU representatives, being allowed to dictate policy to us?
Has anyone thought to question the fact that the rest of Europe, in fact the rest of the world, pays only a fraction of the revenue on tobacco that we here in the UK pay?
It is making me sick to the stomach, to read yet more of what we are going to be bullied into doing. This is my country, and I want a say in how it is run, that is the reason I vote, that is the reason I speak my mind. This Government and their unholy alliance with the EU is stemming my say, it is stemming all our voices, and if we do not do something very soon, we will not even be allowed a voice any longer.
The time has come to rise up and say no. We need to demand that our Government starts listening to us, to what we, the people want. We must demand that they stand up to these EU bully boys.
This isn't just about smoking and tobacco control, it is about control from birth to death, which is the religion of the Labour Party.
We need to write and contact MPs of all persuasions, and put our case to them. We need to demand action now.
Exactly like you say Simon, more black market and criminals. What this government is doing with the tax on ciggies, is criminal enough. They created the problem of the booze cruises, now it will just get worse. UKIP will definetly get my vote, they did this year at local level. It was the only good thing about being in the EU.
For those of us who will not be forced into giving up, that will just mean less money to spend on other products. Not good for the economy, but they already know that.
This has me ranting. It doesn't over effect me, as I've not bought a packet of ciggies in this country for years due to the ridiculous tax placed on them. Luckily my sister (non-smoker) travels a lot and brings them for me as she thinks it's daft as well.
I suppose in the eyes of this government though, that this classes me as a non-smoker? I know lots of people who refuse to buy here.
Peter, your arguement is correct. If this government wants to wage war with it's citizens, then so be it.
This weak government is the only one that abides by all the EU rules and has paid its price with the death of its citizens. Every other country pays lip-service to the EU. Rightly so, in my mind.
I never heard the announcement that the UK had 'surrendered', but obviously, we have. What a laughing stock we have become!
I'm just hoping that this EU ruling will get more off their backsides to see exactly what's going on.
We need a strong government in charge, particularly in this current climate, not one that bows down to an extremist/CP agenda.
I have to contradict here, Ireland is worse and is being restricted too. We were the first with the smoking ban, plastic bag ban, chewing gum regulations and bans too numerous to mention. Indeed its ireland that has been called the so called leaders in europe.
At the behest of the eu bullies we were first with most things including the recession. At least to give some cred to the ordinary irish people when they stood up to the diktat of all the main policitical parties and voted no for the Lisbon treaty. Of course we're going to be forced to vote again until we give them the answer they want, in fact the brainwashing has already started.
The purpose of the eu was supposed to be the free moventment of goods and people. Its funny how they can move the goalposts when it suits them. Democracy (particulary if you're in a minority) has taken a back seat on many issues nowadays.
Maybe I'm slow on the uptake but I'm beginning to wonder is there any point at all in voting for any political party in ones own country any more, as from what I see they seem to be looking more and more like eu puppets every day. After all isnt it a cozy number just being a law enforcer for their faceless bosses in the eu without having to take the flak from the great unwashed and be able to say to us its not the govt its an eu directive, while at the same time picking up their fat paychecks and bloated pensions.
I look forward to the day when our fat cat politicians and the unelected and unaccountable eu bullies are back in the sewer where they belong.
Hi Ann.
It is funny that you say that the idea of the EU was to facilitate the free movement of goods and labour. I too live in Ireland but on the border and given the collapse in Sterling busloads of Southern Irish are coming across with purseloads of Euro to buy everything from electrical goods to the weekly shopping.
A couple of years ago the situation was the reverse but in addition to the strength of the Euro the Irish government has been pushing up taxes on everything making the North much cheaper now.
The irony is that the Irish government is calling the cross border shoppers 'Traitors' for exercising their rights as Europeans. I did not hear them say a word when the money was flowing the other way.
There is no "other way", Michael. The EU works one way only, and that is their way, the unfair way.
In fairness Peter, I am pro-European in principle and believe that there have been great benefits in closer co-operation. The idea of free movement of goods and services and the removal of barriers is a good one. It just annoys me that we seem to now only get the crap and the benefits are being eroded.
Harmonisation was supposed to be the aim but obviously harmonisation only means for some things and not for all. They can make as many excuses about health and sovereignty as they like but this boils down to money and self interest by the government.
I wonder why the states such as Spain and France who have benefitted from the booze and fag imports are not up in arms about these restrictions unless they have been bunged something in return. I see that the British and Irish fishermen are getting sc**wed again which is probably Spain's payoff so I suppose the Common Agricultural Policy will stay to in it's current form to buy off France.
Yes indeed Michael I too am one of those cross border shoppers and our PM aint too pleased about the chickens now coming home to roost. He has even called us unpatriotic for talking down the economy for gods sake, as if it was our fault we're in a recession. In fact before he copped on that we were all crossing the border he had told us to shop around for bargains!!
I hope he doesent start following Gordy's lead by putting levies on our trips because our govt loves to copy the bigger players especially if its new laws or bans. He has already given away our fisheries industry to the eu and now I am getting very nervous that if Gordy caves in to his eu pals over the cig restrictions from abroad it would just be a matter of time until we followed suit because the irish govt has never recovered their strutting since the no vote on lisbon. The shame of it all when they had to face their eu masters and admit they hadnt pulled it off, so this new restriction could be a nice little bridge builder "going forward".
I am not convinced that the MEPs create totally independant policies all the time. I read somewhere that one of the MEPs (not from the UK) said that these new guidlines were based on it being unfair for UK citizens not to pay the duty on tobacco and alcohol which their own government imposed on them - hmmm, I wonder where that view came from?