Fight for American tobacco access to Asia Pacific nations in Trans-Pacific Trade

Is it right to push American tobacco abroad? Two days ago, Malaysia introduced a proposal to a Trans-Pacific Trade pact being negotiated by Pacific rim nations that would allow complete freedom for participating pact nations to follow tobacco control measures, preventing the tobacco industry and its allies from challenging such measures as a violation of the agreement. The proposal is designed to stop the tobacco industry from challenging tobacco control measures as trade violations, a tactic the industry has used around the world to fight efforts to reduce tobacco use. American tobacco is still a significant industry, and tobacco interests aim to keep it that way as they argue and lobby for free trade access to Asian Pacific countries. In a New York Times op-ed, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York points out that the recent U.S. position on the trade talks regarding tobacco is a retreat from a previous position of allowing tobacco control measures a 'safe harbor,' allowing them to continue without contest from trade partners. Bloomberg charges that the new U.S. proposal is weak, the result of pressure from the tobacco industry and would allow trade partners to challenge a country's tobacco control measures. Data from the Bureau of Labor statistics put employment in the manufacture of tobacco and tobacco products at 13,650. Significant, but to put it in perspective note that total employment in U.S. manufacturing was almost 12 million. But the real clout of U.S. tobacco comes from the profits. The Tobacco Atlas estimate is that in 2010, profits at the six leading tobacco companies totaled $35 billion. Those billions of dollars can bring a lot of influence. Admittedly, a tougher stance on American tobacco and its ability to market product freely abroad can hurt some whose jobs depend on tobacco. This is especially true in the southeastern states of the United States. Tobacco growers in North Carolina and Kentucky, for example, depend on the crop for their livelihood. And it is not only the growers who would be hurt, but it is the suppliers to the famers and their employees that would take a hit. Erica Peterson, the executive vice president of the North Carolina Agribusiness Council, said to Mcclatchydc.com, "There is the fertilizer, the pesticide. There is the dealership that sells the truck to the farmer. ... Any of the employees they hire on the farm to payroll ...all these folks are going to be impacted." But surely, the United States can design a program of direct help to American workers and small businesses that rely on tobacco, while following a policy of expanded trade that would still allow countries to follow sensible public health anti smoking campaigns, including banning advertising and high taxes on the sale of cigarettes. We already have a program that is supposed to help workers affected by expanding free trade called Trade Adjustment Assistance. The program as now constituted should be expanded, made more generous and flexible to provide more help to trade affected workers than it now does. And perhaps it should be more proactive, getting in to help workers in an industry and a state before disaster of a job losses strike, offering retraining and relocation assistance in anticipation. All on the assumption that it is not good and humane policy to promote smoking abroad just for the profits that can be had. The Office of the United States Trade Representative lists the 12 countries currently negotiating the TPT trade pact as Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam. There has been discussion and debate in Indonesia about becoming a potential partner in the trade pact. However, in January a Jakarta Post news report stated that Indonesia had little interest in joining. Indonesia needs to step up its anti smoking efforts. Remember the smoking baby photos. One report was that in 2010 he was down to one to two packs per day. Another report put it at 15 cigarettes a day. Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/fight-for-american-tobacco-access-to-asia-pacific-nations-trans-pacific-trade

City focusing on education before fines with new outdoor smoking bylaw

Concerned parents and anti-smoking advocates hoping for a swift crackdown on tobacco use in city playgrounds and sports fields will have to wait a little longer.

Almost a month after city hall banned smoking near stomping grounds for children, officials have not fined any violators, though they have received three complaints. City officials say they are still trying to educate the public about the new rules, which came into effect Aug. 1. They expect to have a better idea in September when they will start handing smokers $100 fines for lighting up within five meters of outdoor pools, skate parks and other outdoor play areas. At Riley Park in Hillhurst, Darnell Fortune threw his butt to the ground before walking into the fenced-in park surrounding the wading pool, but not because of the new city rules. He said he didn’t want to smoke around children.

“I have kids of my own, and I don’t smoke in the house and I don’t smoke in my vehicle,” said Fortune, who called the rules a cash grab. Abdul Rafih, acting manager of Animal and Bylaw Services, said city hall’s goal is not to hand out tickets, but to encourage smokers to freely comply with the newly amended bylaw. He said it’s why officials have allowed for a grace period, to give Calgarians time to adjust. For now, the city’s roughly 100 peace officers and bylaw officials will respond to complaints, but instead of handing out fines they will tell whomever is around about the new rules, Rafih said. If they see violators on their regular patrols, they’ll do the same thing. City officials are also working with sports organizations and community groups to get the word out. “The fact that there have only been three complaints may be a strong indicator that people are being respectful in those areas,” Rafih said. There are concerns that city hall will have a hard time enforcing the bylaw, given that smokers may have enough time to butt out their cigarettes by the time officials respond to a complaint. “We just don’t have enough bylaw officers to be able to have them drop everything they’re doing to run and catch someone with a cigarette in their hand,” said Ald. Jim Stevenson, who had voted against the bylaw amendment.

“The jury’s out as to how it’s going to work. I don’t see it being very effective, but they will have to do what they can with it.” Jessica Vanderhoef, a non-smoker who sat near a playground in Riley Park on Monday, said she supported the anti-puffing rules, though she was disappointed to learn officials had not started enforcing them. She said city hall should have workers patrolling parks, if they’re handing out tickets for other violations. “There should be some kind of consequence for smoking around children,” said Vanderhoef, who was with her five-year-old son, Jacob. City hall had taken the cue from other Canadian cities, such as Toronto, Edmonton and Grand Prairie, that ban smoking close to certain outdoor areas. In the United States, authorities had prohibited smoking in almost 850 parks and on 150 beaches by 2011, according to a recent study by Columbia University. Those bans were based on concerns with second-hand smoke, pollution caused by butts and the influence on youngsters watching adults smoke. But the study’s authors concluded there is no concrete evidence to support these claims.

They suggest authorities should instead make the case that the bans “de-normalize” the bad habit and encourage smokers to butt out more often. In Calgary, the ban was first proposed last November by Ald. Andre Chabot, a lifetime smoker who suffers from lung problems. The Canadian Cancer Society, which is among a coalition of health and community groups called Smoke-Free Calgary, backs the ban as a means to reduce children’s exposure to smoking, in the hopes it reduces the likelihood they will pick up the habit. “There is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure,” said Sarah Hawkins, a public policy analyst with the cancer society. “And while it can be harder to monitor outdoors, we know that it can be a harm.”

Source: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Education+trumps+enforcement+outdoor+smoking+bylaw/8835726/story.html

Research and Regulation Is a Must

Cigarette smoking is a significant public health problem and efforts to reduce its burden are critically needed. Approximately one in five of the adult U.S. population smoke cigarettes and 440,000 Americans will die from a smoking-attributable cause this year. Quitting smoking is difficult and therefore alternatives are worth investigating, but questions must be asked about any new product.

All smokers are not the same and therefore will respond differently to novel smoking cessation aids, including electronic cigarettes. The limited existing data supports that an electronic cigarette is safer than a tobacco cigarette, which is not to say it is absolutely safe. However, there is a paucity of research on how individuals actually use electronic cigarettes. What about those who might have a chance of quitting smoking altogether but instead end up replacing the tar and nicotine from traditional cigarettes with e-cigarettes? What about those who lean on electronic cigarettes to circumvent smoking restrictions at work and in social settings but continue to smoke tobacco products as well; how much are they increasing their nicotine intake?

Nicotine is an addictive drug and therefore electronic cigarettes should be subject to some form of regulation. Production standards must be enforced so that consumers can be properly informed of the amount of nicotine and other constituents present. Regulations to prevent misleading marketing and labeling of electronic cigarettes is also important.

Other considerations include the use of flavorings, which have been banned in tobacco cigarettes, and the perception that electronic cigarettes are less harmful, less addictive, and more attractive than traditional cigarettes, especially when it comes to adolescents who would otherwise not be interested in inhaling nicotine. Until we have a sense of how the public will actually use the product we must carefully and continually monitor this emerging health issue.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/08/20/the-ambiguous-allure-of-the-e-cig/research-and-regulation-of-e-cigarettes-is-a-must

Winston maker says reduction in tobacco use way below expectations

Higher excise tax rates may have fueled an increase in government revenues, but tobacco consumption fell at a pace much slower than what Philippine officials were hoping for, according to the Japanese maker of the Winston and Camel brands of cigarettes.

In a press briefing last week, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) Philippines general manager Manos Koukourakis said the Aquino administration can exceed its P51.6-billion excise tax collection target for cigarettes this year. "From a government perspective, this is a successful legislative measure, because at the end of the day, it will achieve the target it has. The government in that respect did a good job," Koukourakis said. In the first six months, excise taxes slapped on cigarettes reached P22.4 billion, or 53 percent more than the P14.6 billion raised in the same period last year. The tax take from alcohol products hit P16.2 billion in the first half, or 37 percent more than the P11.8 billion a year ago. Taxes raised from both "sin" products climbed 46 percent from P26.4 billion last year to P38.5 billion this year. But while tax collections improved, cigarette use -- another policy objective of the law hiking sin taxes -- fell in the low double-digits, or way below the government's forecast of halving tobacco consumption. "If we go back one year ago, other companies in the market said that the introduction of excise tax will reduce the consumption of cigarettes by 50 percent. Our company was a little more optimistic, we were thinking about 40 percent," Koukourakis said. At the height of the policy debates over excise taxes, the government cited a University of the Philippines study showing that higher rates would cut tobacco consumption by at least 51 percent. Philip Morris Fortune Tobacco Corp (PMFTC), which accounts for at least eight out of every 10 sticks of cigarette sold in the Philippines, made the same forecast in raising concern about the potential job loss of an increase in taxes. "What happened is that we were all mistaken. The reality is that the total market consumption fell by around eight to 12 percent, or more or less 10 percent, and not by 50 percent," Koukourakis said. He said the less sharp drop in cigarette use can be traced to the entry of cigarette brands that sold for P1 a stick or P17 a pack. "Before the 'sin' tax enactment, you had less than 10. Now you have more than 30 products. That means that consumers have cheaper choices than they had before," Koukourakis said. Despite the influx of these cheaper brands, JTI expects to maintain its 3.2 percent share of the local market. "Our company decided consciously not to participate in this. JTI Philippines will have no brands at P1 per stick, or at below P20 per pack. We could never be in a position to do it," Koukourakis said, adding that competing with cheaper brands would result in losses of P8-10 a pack for the company. "We are doing okay, slightly better than our targets. Even with the sin tax, we expect that we will meet our targets," he said. "The Philippine market is a lucrative market. One thing that is certain is our company is here to stay," he added. Apart from Winston and Camel, JTI also manufactures and distributes the Mevius brand (formerly Mild Seven). JTI used to outsource production of its cigarettes to Fortune Tobacco Corp. Source: http://www.interaksyon.com/business/68920/after-sin-tax-hike--winston-maker-says-reduction-in-tobacco-use-way-below-expectations

Law fails to curb tobacco sales near school premises

Though nearly a decade has passed since the introduction of a ban on the sale of tobacco products near educational institutions, the situation has largely remained the same with much of the sales continuing to target school and college students. Lack of coordination between police, local bodies and school authorities is mostly to be blamed.

The sale of tobacco within a 100-yard radius of educational institutions was prohibited in 2004 under Section 6(b) of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COTPA) from January to May 2013.

The act made it mandatory to install display boards outside educational institutions declaring the zone as tobacco-free. "Though occasional inspections are conducted by police, no coordinated effort is on," feels Sruthi Ravikumar, a parent residing at East Hill. School authorities are also not keen in tackling the issue, she complained.

According to statistics with city police, cases have been registered against 98 persons this year till May for selling tobacco products in such places. Police also collected fine of Rs 19,600 from offenders. But not a single case has been registered under section 6(a) (Prohibition and sale of tobacco products to minors) of COTPA during this period. On the other hand, no cases were registered for the sale of tobacco products in school premises in 2012. "Statistics reveal that we have intensified action against tobacco sellers," said a senior police official. Though I can't provide recent data, I believe the number of cases have gone down as cops now have less time for such operations owing to frequent protests by political parties and feeder organizations," he said.

Educational institutions too have a significant role in addressing the menace but they chose to keep mum. Few schools in the city have affixed 'Tobacco- Free Area' boards at their entrance. The direction to constitute anti-tobacco cells in all educational institutions has also not been followed by most institutions.

Police alone cannot stop the sale of tobacco to youngsters, said a police official. Coordination of parents and teachers is essential as they would be better aware of shops that sell such products to kids and operate in the prohibited area, he said, adding that they were planning to intensify the activities of school protection groups to curb the menace.

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kozhikode/Law-fails-to-curb-tobacco-sales-near-school-premises/articleshow/21836925.cms

Jersey City Police Officer Charged with Cigarette Cargo Theft and Scheme to Rob Drug Courier

A Jersey City, New Jersey police officer appeared in Newark federal court this afternoon to face charges that he stole more than 600,000 cigarettes from a trailer and conspired to rob $20,000 from a drug courier, U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman announced. Mario Rodriguez, 39, of Jersey City, is charged by complaint with one count of cargo theft and one count of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act extortion under color of official right. He appeared this afternoon before U.S. Magistrate Judge Cathy L. Waldor in Newark federal court and was released on a $250,000 bond and confined to home incarceration with electronic monitoring. The complaint also charges Anthony Roman, 48, also of Jersey City, in the conspiracy. Roman was arrested at home August 2, 2013, and appeared in court the same day. He was released on a $250,000 bond. According to the complaint: The Cargo Theft On July 3, 2013, Rodriguez and an individual working for the FBI as a confidential informant (CI) drove to a warehouse in Secaucus, New Jersey to break into a trailer and steal cigarettes they planned to sell to the CI’s associate for $5,000. Law enforcement agents had parked the trailer there and established surveillance of the area. Rodriguez used bolt cutters to cut the lock off of the trailer, and he and the CI loaded 50 cases containing approximately 600,000 cigarettes and six televisions from the trailer into their vehicle. As they drove the stolen items to a parking lot in Staten Island, New York, Rodriguez made several phone calls seeking buyers for the TVs. The pair met the CI’s associate—actually an undercover officer—in the parking lot to get the $5,000 payment for the cigarettes. Rodriguez kept $3,000 of the cash and three of the TVs. The Extortion On July 10, 2013, Rodriguez and the CI met in New Jersey with undercover law enforcement agents and discussed the possibility of robbing a drug courier—actually another undercover officer. Later that month, the group met again in Staten Island to discuss the plan. The undercover officers told Rodriguez the courier would be delivering cocaine to them that day in a Jersey City mall parking lot in exchange for a $20,000 payment, after which Rodriguez would steal the money. Rodriguez called Roman to help him with the robbery. Rodriguez and Roman drove a Toyota RAV-4 truck to the location on July 24, 2013, where law enforcement agents had established surveillance and staged the car containing $20,000 cash in a plastic bag. Rodriguez and Roman robbed the woman they thought was a drug courier of the money after identifying themselves as law enforcement officers—which Roman is not—and pretending to arrest the CI. Later that day, Rodriguez, the CI and the undercover met in a hotel room at a Pennsylvania casino to split the cash. The cargo theft and conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act Extortion charges carry a maximum potential penalty of 10 and 20 years in prison, respectively. Both counts also carry a maximum fine of $250,000. U.S. Attorney Fishman credited special agents of the FBI, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Aaron T. Ford in Newark; the Special Investigations Unit of the Jersey City Police Department, under the direction of Acting Chief Joseph Connors; the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office, under the direction of Acting Prosecutor Gaetano T. Gregory; and criminal investigators of the U.S. Attorney’s Office with the investigation leading to the charges. He also thanked the Bayonne Police Department, Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, IRS-Criminal Investigation, U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General, and the New Jersey State Commission of Investigation for their significant contributions to the investigation. The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan W. Romankow of the U.S. Attorney’s Office Organized Crime/Gangs Unit in Newark. The charges and allegations contained in the complaint are merely accusations, and the defendants are considered innocent unless and until proven guilty. Source: http://www.fbi.gov/newark/press-releases/2013/jersey-city-police-officer-charged-with-cigarette-cargo-theft-and-scheme-to-rob-drug-courier

Kevin Rudd's tax hikes on tobacco will save lives and cut health system costs and should be applied to alcohol

That's what Kevin Rudd would have told Cabinet colleagues who baulked at the Federal Government's tax hike on cigarettes last week.

With 3.3 million smokers in Australia's pool of 14.5 million voters, Rudd's maths add up. He might alienate 23 per cent of an electorate happy to cough over their ballot papers, but Rudd gets clean air from a non-smoking 77 per cent who'll happily accept the $5.3 billion the extra tobacco tax will earn the Federal Government. Smokers, anarcho-liberals and other flat-earthers will cry "nanny state" crocodile tears as they deny the link between price and consumption. It doesn't matter how much ciggies cost, they'll say, poor blue-collar workers will still smoke, even if it means giving up milk and bread for the kids. But that's nonsense. There's overwhelming evidence that "sin taxes" reduce the consumption of legal but dangerous substances. In 2011, international research found that, for every 10 per cent of increased tax on cigarettes, we can expect 4 per cent of smokers to quit. Indeed, Australian medicos claim Rudd's tobacco tax could see up to 200,000 Australian smokers give up the habit. The gains for the Australian economy are huge. The worth of the lives saved is immeasurable.

My only beef with the Rudd vision is that it doesn't go far enough. If the Federal Government has the stomach to stand up to tobacco interests, why falter in the face of the alcohol industry? The price mechanism works just as well on booze. After Rudd's alcopops tax was introduced in 2008, for example, we saw a huge decline in the sale of sweet ready-mix drinks. But critics slammed the tax because it didn't reduce youth drinking overall. In that sense, the alcopops levy was ill-conceived public policy because it didn't go far enough.By taxing only one corner of the grog market, the policy merely shunted kids into other, equally dangerous, consumption patterns. Instead of pineapple flavored passion pop, youngsters instead guzzled on "goon" or swigged strong spirits. In that sense, the alcopops levy was ill-conceived public policy, simply because it didn't go far enough.

By taxing only one corner of the grog market, the policy merely shunted kids into other, equally dangerous, consumption patterns. Instead of pineapple flavored passion pop, youngsters instead guzzled on "goon" or swigged strong spirits. Had the tax hike been consistent across all alcohol products - beer, wine and spirits - there's no doubt youth binge drinking would be lower today and some of the 60 people who die each week from alcohol could have been saved. Enter that rare place where morality and politics meet. Rudd's tax isn't just about plugging a Budget black hole left by an amended carbon price. It's also about taking a moral ground above the Coalition. Labor campaign ads, for example, are already asking Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to defend the federal Liberals' acceptance of about $3 million in donations from tobacco companies over the past 12 years. It's a fair point. Happily, All Labor branches have refused tobacco donations since 2004 and both Labor and the Coalition in New South Wales NSW have banned donations from the tobacco, alcohol and gaming industries, and from property developers. Less heartening is the possibility the NSW Government will soon rescind those bans. But both major parties elsewhere can hang their heads in shame at the amount of cash they've accepted from the alcohol industry.

There is, of course, the $400,000-plus dollars the Australian Hotels Association slipped the NSW Liberals just before the 2011 state election. Then there's the $160,000 the Australian Hotels and Hospitality Association gave Victorian Labor in 2010 and the more than $140,000 handed to the Victorian Coalition that same year. Coopers Brewery also gave the South Australian Liberals more than $16,000 in 2010, and the list goes on. It seems alcohol and not oil lubricates Australia's electoral machinery Predictably, the free marketeers will again accuse me of "nanny state" politics. But I can never fathom why radical libertarians would allow people to injure themselves in the name of personal liberty. Even if they don't care about protecting the health of their fellow man, surely they see the economic argument of keeping Australians out of hospital which, in turn, keeps income tax down. For those who deny they need help in lowering their alcohol and tobacco consumption, price mechanisms are the way to go. Dr Paul Williams is a Griffith University School of Humanities senior lecturer.

Source: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/kevin-rudd8217s-tax-hikes-on-tobacco-will-save-lives-and-cut-health-system-costs-and-should-be-applied-to-alcohol/story-fnihsr9v-1226691674874