Tobacco companies challenge display ban
Monday, April 26, 2010 Three of the world's leading tobacco companies are fighting government plans to ban the display of tobacco in shops. This morning Imperial, JTI and British American Tobacco have each announced plans to seek a judicial review of the proposed legislation.
Gareth Davis, chief executive of Imperial Tobacco, said: "Banning the display of tobacco products is a further example of the Government's unreasonable and disproportionate approach to regulating tobacco. There is no credible evidence to support the idea that children start smoking or that adult smokers continue to smoke as a result of the display of tobacco products.
"If this misguided legislation is implemented it will simply fuel the growth in the illicit trade of tobacco and create a huge cost burden for retailers who are already under considerable pressure as a result of the difficult economic climate."
Daniel Torras, MD of JTI UK, commented: “Despite the fact that public policy must be based upon clear evidence and sound research, the UK Government has failed to provide such support to justify the display ban.
“Whilst JTI agrees with the key rationale that children and young people should not smoke and should not be able to buy tobacco products, there is no credible evidence that hiding cigarette packs from view at retail outlets will achieve the objective of further reducing youth smoking.
He added: “The proposals will have serious unintended consequences such as a negative impact on small business and risk increasing the trade in illicit products supplied by criminals who sell to children and encourage law-abiding people to break the law.”
Likewise British American Tobacco has announced that its UK subsidiary, two retailers and a German cigarette manufacturer are seeking a judicial review.
General manager Michelle Healy said: “The display ban will damage both competition and the livelihoods of tens of thousands of small businesses by imposing high compliance costs on them. Driving the legal trade from public view will also play into the hands of illegal traders.
“These unwelcome effects are unjustified as there is no credible evidence that it will reduce smoking rates in the UK.”
Simon Clark
Tories back cigarette companies' effort to turn over ban on display of tobacco products (Daily Telegraph)
Update: in an interview with Retail Newsagent (April 24, 2010) Penning confirms that, if elected, the Conservatives will bring the proposals to ban the display of tobacco in shops back before Parliament, giving MPs the chance of a "freer" vote:
"I do not think it can be right to impose additional burdens on shops to introduce a measure for which evidence is lacking. My belief is that a dispassionate analysis would conclude there is insufficient evidence to press ahead. In the first Canadian province to introduce a PoS [point of sale] ban, the proportion of smokers initially increased from 21 per cent in 2002 to 24 per cent the following year."
Reader Comments (12)
This is part of a paper I am hoping to have published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ).
"Cocaine and heroin are worth as a worldwide market $135 billion, (2) dwarfed by tobacco at $400 billion (3) at 2000 prices, probably is $500 billion today. Even only with excess duty and taxes it is a lure for organised crime, the Real IRA, (4) Mafia, Al Qu'eda and the Taliban. (5) To what degree will society become destabilised by a lucrative tobacco trade, with reference to American prohibition of alcohol? You mention in your PDF version “..levels for instance, to that of regular illicit drug use (around 6% in England and Wales). So 6% of the population are drug addicts who are responsible for “…. the great majority of some types of crime, such as shoplifting and burglary” (inc 85% of shoplifting, 70-80% of burglaries, 54% of robberies).” (6) You will then consign to criminals a market that is four times as large?"
2. http://www.havocscope.com/indexes/products/
3. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/9/2/206.abstract
4. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1161530/U-S-businessman-funded-Real-IRA-soldier-killers-smuggling-cigarettes-Ireland.html
5. http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/tobacco/articles/entry/1441/
6. http://www.tdpf.org.uk/Policy_General_Strategy_Unit_Drugs_Report_phase_1.htm
About bloody time the tobacco companies got off their asses and and did something about this shambolic display ban.
Better late than never I suppose.
Its a pity someone normal (if there is such a body) would follow suit and get rid of the non govt agencies and all the bloody quangos that have brought the tobacco and pub industry to its knees.
Sack the lot of them and make them work in a trade and do some good for the country instead of sticking their nose into other people's business by telling us how to live our lives with their mock concern for our health just to keep themselves in a job at our discomfort and expense!
True the potential profits for criminal gangs are huge.
Those huge profits will also lead to corruption as the moneys will be available to bribe unscrupulous public servents.
Here we go now...
Chicago Chicago de de de de de .
Or Fat Sam's wham bam de de de de ,speak.... easy .
Yes Dave Atherton is right again here.
Trouble is they won't listen to common sense will they.
Although it's obviously bad news for the convenience store, the display ban is nothing more than mildy irritating for the average smoker - most of us know what we want to buy anyway.
Surely the level of inconvenience is nothing at all compared to the smoking ban, which has so devastated all our social lives. Pity the tobacco companies can't be persuaded to do a bit more to fight that.
Sorry to have to rain on your parade Rose…but why should tobacco companies fight on our behalf. Their bottom line isn’t affected by the smoking ban….so what would be their incentive?
There is perhaps more smoking now than there ever has been in the past. I can’t remember the figures now but Imperial Tobacco have been posting very robust profits since the smoking ban came into force.
Yes, of course they have the funds to defend someone in court in order to force some kind of judicial review (the Italian court case springs to mind with its wonderfully wise judgement)…but you and I and every other smoker haven’t stopped smoking because of the ban…we just don’t go to our local pub anymore, but stay at home and smoke.
I have always said this…that unless and until a prominent court case is brought about by someone with deep pockets and successfully defended, or at least makes politicians sit up and take notice…then this nasty spiteful piece of social engineering that crawled its way on to the statute book in 2007 will not be going away any time soon.
Do you know what, Chris, you're absolutely right. I hadn't thought of it like that :-(
"....then this nasty spiteful piece of social engineering that crawled its way on to the statute book in 2007 will not be going away any time soon."
Nor, Chris, will the maggots eating away at the soul of our nation.
Pick up - as I did last night - any DVD featuring the irreplaceable Fred Dibnah (one of my favourite Englishmen), and marvel at the brilliant and joyous inventiveness of our ancestors (most of them 'uneducated').
And then contemplate the masterful built-by-committee inanity of the Dome at Greenwich (of all places).
Need I say more ?
Actually I have to disagree with Chris - the tobacco companies should be shoing more support to smokers, purely as we are their customers. I have been a loyal purchaser of Phillip Morris products for years (OK, so they're addictive - but thats irrelevant) and I expect them to be doing more. I'd love someone to launch a libel action against ASH and the NHS about their passive smoking claims - let a jury decide. Imagine the political earthquake when it comes to smoking issues if the libel action was won. This would likely have an impact on other areas of nanny state as people start to question the received wisdom. I do want the tobacco companies to start be far more agressive in protecting smokers rights. No one else will.
Well said, Mark.
Mark, there's no question in my mind that the tobacco companies SHOULD support their loyal customers exactly as you've said ... I think Chris was merely pointing out that unfortunately they're not LIKELY to, given the lack of effect on their bottom line. I fear that's sad but true.
With three of the world's leading tobacco companies now coming out and fighting government plans to ban the display of tobacco in shops, it seems that at long last we have some power and money on our side.
But, as so many posters on here keep saying, why aren't any of the political parties backing us as well?
Before anyone jumps up and starts shouting about "that party which dare not speak its name", but begins with "U", yes I know they are on the smoker's side, but hardly the big voice that we need are they?
We need one of the Big Three to back us ( a few weeks ago, I would have said one of the Big Two). Whenever I mention the Tories, as the only party with MPs that actually do back us, and the fact that only 25% of them voted for a total ban compared with something like 85% or more of Labour and Lib-Dems, I am constantly shouted down.
A few weeks ago I was still hearing about a Tory minister who served about 18 years ago, and allegedly stole some kid's milk (turned out not to be true anyway, and she got off with an Asbo). But now the voice of the anti-Tory has swung away from the old left, to the new left of the Cleggites, and the HungParliament Party.
So if we all rush out and vote for Clegg or any other idiot in a monkey suit who wants to see democracy thrown out of the window in the country, that will help us to fight the smoking ban will it?
Personally I don't think so. In fact there is only one of the Big Three, that has offered to help the tobacco industry with the proposed display ban, and that is the Conservatives. And I think that if they are ready to concede on this point, then they are in the running to go further, if elected on May 6th.
You can read about their offer to help here
I am sick and tired of what various governments have done to this country. We lost most of our manufactoring industries in the eighties. Over the last two years hundreds of privately owned pubs have had to close down due to the smoking ban now whoever gets in is likely to bring hundreds of small shops down due to the amount of money it would take to alter their displays. Pity we weren't all bankers, then we would all get exactly what we want I cannot bring myself to vote UKIP but would back anyone of the big three that ended this illegal ban of the sale of a legal substance.