Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Cigarette Smuggling

Prioritise Anti-tobacco Smuggling Measures

Health Groups Call On Chancellor To Prioritise Anti-tobacco Smuggling Measures And Sign EU-Wide Agreements

ASH news release: Embargo: 00:01 Thursday 21st February 2008

On behalf of 22 health groups, ASH will be meeting the Exchequer Secretary, Angela Eagle today to present plans on tackling smuggling and raising tobacco taxes, ahead of the forthcoming Budget. [1]

ASH and more than 20 other health groups are calling on the Chancellor to:

– Re-introduce the real price escalator to raise the tax on tobacco by at least 10p per pack above the rate of inflation [2]
– Maintain the 5% VAT on nicotine replacement therapies that was introduced in last year’s Budget (the tax was reduced from 17.5% as an incentive to increase uptake)
– Implement a revised anti-smuggling strategy with challenging new targets
– Sign up to Agreements reached between other EU countries and two of the world’s leading tobacco companies – Philip Morris International and Japan Tobacco International – which put the responsibility for reducing smuggling on the tobacco companies themselves

As the UK is the only EU country not to have signed the new anti-smuggling agreements, ASH will be asking the Treasury to sign up without further delay. In December 2007, Japan Tobacco International signed an Agreement committing the company to stiff seizure payments if its products were found to be illegally traded within the EU. As JTI now owns the British company Gallaher, it commands around 40% of the UK tobacco market. Therefore there is a compelling reason for the UK to be a signatory to the EU Agreement. [3]

ASH will also be asking the Government to explain its policy on measuring counterfeit tobacco, since the latest published estimate suggests that only a quarter of the illegal cigarette market consists of counterfeit product, yet the focus of attention has been on the counterfeit trade. [4]

Deborah Arnott, Director of the health campaigning charity ASH, said:

“Now is the time for the Government to build on the popularity of the smokefree legislation and demonstrate its ongoing commitment to reducing smoking by increasing tobacco taxes. Raising the price of tobacco is the single most important measure but this must be done hand in hand with effective anti-smuggling measures.”

Notes and links:

[1] Budget 2008: Tobacco tax submission by ASH and 22 other health organisations. Available here.

[2] Research has shown that there is widespread public support for raising tobacco tax if it is used to fund anti-smoking policies. A survey by Professor Robert West found that 78% of the adult population would favour a 20p per pack tax rise if the money raised was used to fund tobacco control measures. See here.

[3] For further information about the JTI anti-smuggling agreement see here.

[4] Although there has been a rise in the number of seizures of counterfeit products in recent years, the latest Government estimate suggests that only around a quarter of the smuggled cigarette market is counterfeit. Thus legitimately manufactured cigarettes that are sold onto the black market still represent the bulk of the illicit market share. HMRC Press release, 26 Sept 2006

Tobacco Groups (Could) Face Fines Over Contraband

By Frances Williams in Geneva – The Financial Times

Published: February 16 2008 02:00 | Last updated: February 16 2008 02:00

Tobacco companies could be made responsible for clamping down on cigarette smuggling, with stiff financial penalties for failure, under proposed guidelines for a new global treaty to tackle the multi-billion dollar illicit trade in tobacco products.

The trade is estimated to deprive national exchequers worldwide of $40bn-$50bn (£20bn-£25bn) in lost taxes every year and undermines the drive to raise cigarette prices, which experts say is the single most effective way of deterring people from smoking, especially the young.

At the end of a week of negotiations in Geneva involving about 130 countries, delegates said yesterday there was broad agreement to require companies to track and trace tobacco products from manufacture to point of sale and fine them if contraband is seized.

The proposals are modelled on an existing agreement between 26 of the 27 European Union countries (excluding the UK) and two tobacco companies, Philip Morris International and Japan Tobacco International, that has already led to a big decline in cigarette seizures in the EU.

The negotiations, conducted under the auspices of the World Health Organisation, marked the first step towards a legally binding protocol on illicit tobacco trade under the WHO’s 152-member Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which took effect in 2005.

Other measures envisaged for the protocol, scheduled for adoption in 2010, include strengthened international co-operation to prosecute smuggling gangs, tougher penalties for offenders and better law enforcement, and help for poorer countries to put the measures into effect.

Ian Walton-Georges of the EU’s anti-fraud office, who chaired the negotiations, said he planned to draft a protocol that was “practical, effective and strong” ahead of a second round of negotiations later this year.

The Framework Convention Alliance, a coalition of some 300 anti-tobacco groups, says the global illicit trade – dominated by organised criminal gangs – may have amounted to nearly 11 per cent of total sales, or 600bn cigarettes, in 2006.

Contraband trade is particularly rife in Russia and other countries in eastern Europe, in Latin America, and especially Brazil, and in Africa and the Middle East.

Chinese Smokes Burning Issue

By IAN ROBERTSON, SUN MEDIA

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/National/2008/02/11/4839286-sun.html

BOWMANVILLE — Ship containers packed with illegal cigarettes smuggled into Canada from China are fuelling the growing, lucrative trade in underground smokes, Sun Media has learned.

Such cargoes — including one with 10,320,000 counterfeit cigarettes recently shipped through Vancouver’s port and seized in Toronto — not only cut deep into tax coffers.

Some illegal cigarettes from the People’s Republic are made “in underground operations . . . caves and old warehouses,” and could have unknown, dangerous or unhealthy contents, RCMP Const. Guy Martin said.

“Every country has different quality controls,” he said. Smokes from China “don’t likely meet our standards.”

The packaging may also contain benzene, a flammable, cancer-linked toxic hydrocarbon solvent, Martin said.

In the Greater Toronto Area Customs and Excise Section lockup here, some seized cigarette cartons bore only Chinese characters. Others had some English text.

They were far more legitimate-looking than clear plastic-wrapped bags of smokes recently seized from a Central Ontario man. They bore labels with a smoking warning from the “Surgeon General.” Canada does not have such an official, Martin said.

“These cigarettes were smuggled in from the U.S.,” he added.

The 51,600 made-in-China cartons intercepted last month by his unit, which works with Canada Border Services Agency investigators, contained fake U.S.-branded Marlboro cigarettes.

Estimated to be worth at least $3.6 million if sold, the RCMP estimates the 10.3 million cigarettes would have resulted in lost duties and taxes worth $1.135 million.

Ming Kai Cheng, 44, and Yiu Lam Li, 55, of Scarborough, and Zhehao Song of Markham, are charged under the Excise Act with unlawfully possessing tobacco products.

Some buyers love beating tax collectors out of their 74-per-cut cut from each smoke, others want to save up to $60 a carton, Martin said. Regardless of the motive, sales of bootleg or bogus smokes “all comes back to the almighty dollar.”

Health issues are important, but his unit focuses on contraband for lost revenue, Martin said. Governments survive on taxes “and if they don’t get them from one thing, they’ll increase taxes elsewhere, such as on fuel.”

Smuggling costs federal and provincial taxpayers $1.6 billion in lost taxes, the tobacco industry says.

Ontario revenue ministry spokesperson Scott Blodgett said $1.236 billion in cigarette taxes were collected in the year ending March 2007. That’s 12.35 cents each, or $24.70 per carton of 200.

Calling 31.5 per cent of the province’s cigarette sales illegal, the Ontario Convenience Store Association asked Premier Dalton McGuinty last month to consider the negative impact of tobacco taxes.

After several fierce gun battles between police and organized crime smugglers in the Cornwall area, Canada cut tobacco taxes in February 1994, resulting in a drop in federal and provincial revenue of more than $1.2 billion in fiscal 1994-1995.

Ontario lost $450 million.

Pressured by lobbyists demanding higher taxes to force smokers to butt out, and seeing a way to regain funds for its general tax coffers, the Liberal government boosted provincial tobacco taxes three times from 2003 to 2005.

Last Monday, the Canadian Coalition for Action on Tobacco appealed to federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty to implement measures in his next budget to control the “crisis” of cigarette smuggling. “Cigarette smuggling has negative ramifications in terms of youth smoking, public health, government revenue loss, border security and crime prevention,” the group’s chairperson, Aaron Levo, said. “Unless urgent action is taken, things will get even worse.”

The group also insisted Ottawa get Washington to shut down illegal cigarette-makers at a large New York reservation. The main sources of contraband smokes in Ontario are smuggled from the U.S. sector of the Akwesasne reservation in New York, made on reserves here, and illegal overseas imports, Blodgett said.

Reserve cigarettes usually reach the GTA in clear plastic bags, bought by smokers or underground wholesalers from outlets where natives can legally buy untaxed tobacco.

Some are sold in U.S. brand packages by merchants who get them at a discount.

Usually priced at $10-to-$15 per 200 instead of a retail price averaging $70, Martin said some contain tobacco scooped off floors. Cut-rate workers also chop up stalks and sometimes leave in lumps due to blunt cutters.

“It’s just human nature for people to save a dollar,” the 10-year investigator said. “But it’s not good in the long run.”

The risks of cancer and emphysema could end up as an added expense for the health-care system, he said.

One Toronto business owner who buys reserve-made cigarettes said, “This way the government gets cheated out of the taxes. They’ve been cheating me all my life.”

A companion who joined him outside a coffee shop to puff cigarettes they transferred to a recycled brand-name package from freezer bags, said “they taste similar” to a name brand, “but you can tell the difference.”

In some cases the filter tips “don’t go on quite right.”

The first man, a 40-year smoker, said if governments “were serious about stopping smoking, they’d go after the big tobacco companies.

“They say this raises money for hospitals? Right!”

To combat contraband tobacco, Ontario has boosted penalties several times since 2004, Blodgett said. And with the recent hiring of more Revenue Ministry investigators and inspectors, last year’s monthly retailer inspection rates are expected to increase by 300 to about 800 a month.

Some cases are before the courts, so totals were unavailable. But convictions under Ontario’s Tobacco Tax Act doubled from 2005 to 2007, he said, adding in the two years ending March 13, officials seized 14 million smuggled cigarettes, 112,000 untaxed cigars and an undisclosed amount of fine-cut tobacco.

Fines can hit $10,000 at the provincial level, “plus three times the tax owing, and imprisonment for up to two years,” Blodgett said. Buyers also face similar fines, with $500-to-$1,000 minimums.

Federal penalties include civil court fines of $22 per smuggled carton of smokes to cover lost taxes, plus a criminal conviction fines of 16.5-to-24.5 cents per smoke.

Martin said seized contraband cigarettes are eventually destroyed. But instead of burning them, which poses a risk to the environment, they’re crushed and buried.

Tobacco Companies Linked to Criminal Organizations

Tobacco Companies Linked to Criminal Organizations in Lucrative Cigarette Smuggling

When Tommy Chui failed to show up at the grand opening of his wife’s new boutique in downtown Singapore, alarm bells rang 1,600 miles away in the offices of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption. It was March 29, 1995, and the news that Chui was missing devastated the commission’s assistant director, Tony Godfrey. He immediately sent two investigators to Singapore. Three days later, on April 1, his worst fears were realized. Dockworkers found Chuis bloated body floating in Singapore Harbor. A former director of British American Tobaccos biggest distributor of contraband cigarettes to China and Taiwan, the 38-year-old Chui had been abducted, ritually tortured, gagged, suffocated and thrown into the harbor just weeks before he was to testify against his ex-associates. Chui was the star prosecution witness in an international tobacco smuggling investigation launched in 1993 by Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption. He was about to blow the lid off a $1.2 billion smuggling operation to China and Taiwan and implicate three former British American Tobacco executives in a HK$100 million bribery scandal. In addition, his testimony was key to the prosecution of his two former business associates, several corrupt customs officers and various members of Asias most notorious criminal gang, the Triad.

Read more on this report at the The Center for Public Integrity

Five Years For Cigarette Smuggler

BBC News – February 4, 2008

A lorry driver has been jailed for five years for attempting to smuggle almost eight million illegal cigarettes into the UK through Immingham docks.

Egidijus Navalinskas, 42, of Lithuania, was sentenced at Hull Crown Court after a 10-month investigation by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) officers.

They found 7.7m cigarettes in a cargo of frozen blackcurrants when he came to Immingham from Denmark in April 2007.

The duty lost on the cigarretes was estimated at £10m, the court heard.

In sentencing Recorder Ekins said: “The figures involved are vast, on one count alone the duty evaded is £1.2m.

“The offences are aggravated by the repeat imports and the complex and sophisticated operation of which you are a part.

“Without you this operation would not have been possible.

“You are a trusted driver, relied upon to do the organisation’s bidding and no other sentence but a custodial one can be passed to act as a deterrent to others.”

John Kinghorn, from HMRC, said: “This was a sophisticated attempt to flood our streets with illegal counterfeit cigarettes.

“People offered cheap fags are not getting the bargain that they think they are but an un-regulated product that can contain harmful chemicals.

“They are also damaging the local economy by removing the local shopkeepers’ livelihood.

“This sentence sends out a strong message to those involved in this illegal trade.”

Increases In Tobacco Tax Can Help Put Off Young Smokers

2nd Feb 2008 – SCMP

I strongly support a substantial rise in tobacco tax in the forthcoming budget, as suggested in the timely letters from Tony Hedley (“Make tobacco giants pay for causing addicts so much misery”, January 27) and W. Y. Man (“Tax is best way to fight tobacco”, January 28).

Price measures have been shown around the world to be the single most effective measure in reducing tobacco use, especially among the young. How can anyone oppose this?

Hong Kong is now under international treaty obligation to the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which calls upon governments to adopt tax and price policies that reduce tobacco consumption. It is no accident that the first protocol being negotiated within the convention is on smuggling. It is recognised that, even in spite of smuggling problems, tax increases significantly reduce cigarette consumption.

Smuggling seriously harms public health, helps finance criminal groups and reduces government revenue. But cigarettes are smuggled across all borders, often multi-directionally. The solution to this, as with all crimes, is for governments to fight crime and not reduce commitment to public health.

Tax increases are a win-win situation: they benefit public health and also generate more government revenue.

Hong Kong should go a step further and follow Singapore’s example of abolishing duty free cigarettes.

There can be little justification for making cheap and therefore more affordable cigarettes available, especially to the young.

We are falling well behind our neighbours in Asia, for example, Thailand uses 4 per cent of tobacco tax to fund tobacco control and public health.

The time for a further tax increase in Hong Kong is long overdue. Our graphic health warnings have received international recognition, for example, they were recently featured in a full page of a newspaper in India. Let us do the same with our tobacco taxation policy.

Dr Judith Mackay, director, Asian Consultancy on Tobacco Control

European Commission and JT International (Japan Tobacco) sign 15-year Agreement to combat contraband and counterfeit cigarettes

Brussels,

14 December 2007

The European Commission, together with 26 participating Member States of the European Union[1], and JT International (JTI) today announced a multi-year agreement that includes an efficient system to fight against future cigarette smuggling and counterfeiting. Through the Agreement, JTI will work with the European Commission, its anti-fraud office OLAF, and law enforcement authorities of the Member States to help in the fight against contraband, including the problem of counterfeit cigarettes. The Agreement includes substantial payments by JTI, which total USD 400 million over fifteen years. “I welcome the conclusion of the negotiations of this important agreement. It is to the advantage of the EU because it protects its financial interests,” said Commission President José Manuel Barroso. “This Agreement represents a further major step forward in the continuing battle against contraband and counterfeit cigarettes,” said Vice-president Siim Kallas, responsible for the fight against fraud. “Contraband and counterfeit products cheat everyone: governments, consumers and legitimate businesses. This new agreement will further enhance the ability of the European Commission and of the Member States to combat the illegal trade in cigarettes, which results in the loss of substantial tax and customs revenues each year. It sends a strong signal to the world that agreements between authorities and industry to fight illegal trade work and bring substantial benefits,” he added.

Fight against counterfeit

The Commission and the EU Member States point to several reasons why they view expanded anti-counterfeit and anti-contraband efforts as requiring significant priority. Among other reasons, the European Community and the Member States are losing hundreds of millions of Euros in unpaid taxes from counterfeit cigarettes. In addition, counterfeit and other forms of contraband create a parallel illegal supply chain that invades and compromises legitimate distribution channels and competes unfairly with genuine products distributed through legitimate channels.

Over the last few years, the incidence of contraband JTI cigarettes has been greatly reduced, but during the same time period, counterfeit cigarettes have become a growing threat to the European Community and the Member States. The Commission has therefore announced that it will build on existing efforts to combat the illegal trade in cigarettes which consist of: – vigorously investigating cigarette counterfeiting in close cooperation with the Member States and law enforcement officials in key locations worldwide; – targeting and interrupting the production of counterfeit cigarettes with the goal of preventing counterfeit cigarettes from being introduced into the European Community; and – recording and pursuing seizures of counterfeit cigarettes in the European Community to identify the source of the product and other relevant information.

Fight against contraband and money laundering: Know your customers and tracking and tracing

The Agreement builds on the efforts of all parties and introduces innovative procedures to combat the diversion of JTI’s products into contraband channels in Europe and around the world. Today’s agreement reflects the reality that success in defeating the contraband and counterfeit cigarettes trade can be aided greatly through a joint agreement whereby major manufacturers like JTI and European law enforcement combine their resources and enhance their coordination in combating contraband and counterfeiting.

The Agreement contains strong provisions, approved by all parties, which provide them with a mechanism for the long-term prevention of any large-scale smuggling of genuine Japan Tobacco cigarettes in the European market. The Agreement requires JTI to build on its existing review process for selecting and monitoring customers, to enhance its capabilities to track and trace certain packaging, and to provide expanded support to European law enforcement in its battle against the illegal trade in cigarettes. Under the Agreement, JTI agrees to continue limiting its sales to volumes commensurate with legitimate market demand. The Agreement also incorporates and builds into a comprehensive contractual framework JTI’s existing compliance programmes.

Historically, a key concern for the European Community has been the introduction of contraband cigarettes into the European Community. For that reason, the European Community has taken vigorous action to address cigarette smuggling. European law-enforcement efforts have resulted over the past several years in the reduction of the amount of cigarettes that enter the EU as contraband. The European Commission has determined that constructive and forward-looking agreements, such as this Agreement with JTI, are useful tools in addressing these issues.

The initiative includes far-reaching product-tracking procedures that will facilitate law enforcement efforts to determine the point at which any genuine product is diverted from the authorised sales channel. Consistent with the Agreement, JTI will mark certain packaging with information indicating the intended market of retail sale, mark “master cases”[2] of cigarettes with machine-scannable barcode labels, and implement other procedures useful for the tracking and tracing of its products.

These obligations embody a far-reaching, joint tracking and tracing initiative which is consistent with the anti-contraband provisions of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and which will underpin the efforts of the EU to promote a strong Protocol to that Convention on the Illicit Trade in Tobacco products.

Obligations under the Agreement

The European Community and the participating Member States will receive substantial payments over a number of years. The amount of JTI’s payments under the Agreement totals USD 400 million over 15 years to the EC and participating Member States.

The Agreement also includes a guarantee by JTI to make payments in the event of future seizures in the European Community of its genuine products above defined quantities. These payments will be made without regard to fault or wrongdoing by JTI. These payments will be available to all participating Member States.

The Agreement excludes any future lawsuits against JTI for civil claims arising out of past conduct related to the manufacture, sale, distribution or storage of cigarettes. On April, 18 2007, JTI purchased the Gallaher group. The parties have therefore agreed on a framework and a timetable in which JTI will bring former Gallaher entities up to the standards of the Agreement, with a view to bringing them within the full scope of the Agreement.

Other future Agreements

The Commission is always prepared to have discussions with manufacturers who are willing to commit the necessary resources to improve ways to combat illegal trade in their products and associated criminal activity, such as money laundering. Producers also have a responsibility to fight illegal trade in their products, in full cooperation with relevant government authorities. This Agreement should therefore serve as a further model for those cigarette companies that have yet to assume fully such responsibilities.

Combating The Illicit Trade In Tobacco Products

See why a protocol to the WHO-FCTC is needed on Combating The Illicit Trade In Tobacco Products here.

Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products

COMMENTS ON THE TEMPLATE FOR A PROTOCOL ON ILLICIT TRADE IN TOBACCO PRODUCTS

Introduction:

Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) recognize, in Article 15.1, that the elimination of all forms of illicit trade in tobacco products, including smuggling, illicit manufacturing and counterfeiting, is an essential component of global
tobacco control.

Illicit trade in tobacco products undermines high tobacco taxation policy, which evidence shows is one of the most effective ways to reduce tobacco consumption,1 and deprives governments of billions of dollars in taxation, thereby reducing the funding available for public health and other policies. In addition to being a major health problem, illicit trade in tobacco products poses a significant threat to the maintenance of law and order. There is evidence that illicit trade in tobacco products is carried out by organized transnational criminal groups, and that money gained from illicit trade in tobacco products is used for other serious criminal enterprises, including terrorist operations.2

The Framework Convention Alliance (FCA) estimates that the global illicit cigarette trade represents approximately 10.7% of global sales, or 600 billion cigarettes annually, and that losses to government revenue as a result of illicit trade in tobacco products total approximately $US 40 to 50 billion annually.3

Illicit trade in tobacco products is a transnational problem, the resolution of which will require international cooperation. While Parties to the FCTC have already accepted important obligations with respect to illicit trade in Article 15 of the Convention, an effective approach to the problem will require Parties to commit to the implementation of additional measures, including a comprehensive system of international cooperation. The need to supplement the provisions of Article 15 with additional commitments was recognized by the first session of the Conference of the Parties to the FCTC (COP-1), which noted ‘the need to further develop the obligations set out in Article 15 in an internationally binding legal instrument’,4 and decided to establish an expert group to prepare a template for a protocol on illicit trade, to be presented to its second session (COP-2).5

At COP-2, the Parties to the FCTC decided to establish an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate a protocol on illicit trade.6 The decision recognised that the template prepared by the expert group establishes a basis for initiating the negotiations by the INB. As such, it invited Parties and accredited intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations to provide comments on the template, at the latest three months prior to the first session of the INB. In its capacity as an accredited nongovernmental organization, representing over 300 nongovernmental organizations from more than 100 countries, the FCA submits these comments in support of the template prepared by the expert group.

The content of the template: key elements of a protocol on illicit trade On the basis of a firm recognition that illicit trade in tobacco products ‘significantly contributes to the global death and disease burden caused by tobacco consumption by making cigarettes cheaper, more accessible and more difficult to regulate’,7 the template prepared by the expert group recommends the adoption of a protocol to the FCTC under which Parties agree to implement a comprehensive set of measures – at both the domestic and international levels – to combat illicit trade. Key elements of a protocol, as identified in the template, include:

  • measures dealing with control of the tobacco product supply chain, including tracking and tracing of tobacco products, licensing of participants in the tobacco business, obligations on tobacco manufacturers to control the supply chain for their products, record keeping obligations, anti-money laundering measures, and restrictions on internet sales of tobacco products;
  • measures dealing with criminalization and enforcement, including establishment of offences, sanctions and penalties, search, seizure, tracing, freezing, confiscation, destruction and disposal, enhanced law enforcement capacity, special enforcement techniques, and establishment of jurisdiction; and
  • international cooperative measures, including information sharing, cooperation in scientific, technical and technological matters, cooperation in training, cooperation in respect of investigation and prosecution of offences, mutual legal and administrative assistance, and extradition.

The template also discusses a number of significant measures which may support the core commitments proposed, including public awareness raising and an appropriate institutional framework to support the protocol and its implementation (including financial resources and implementation mechanisms such as reporting and compliance monitoring).

Each of the measures identified in the template prepared by the expert group will be significant in an effective protocol to combat illicit trade in tobacco products. The rationale for the inclusion of each of these measures, and the content which should be considered for inclusion in a protocol, is discussed below.

See the entire Framework Convention Alliance ‘Comments on the template for a protocol on illicit trade in tobacco products‘ here.

About The New Anti-Smoking Bill In Hong Kong

Thursday, October 19, 2006 – Tobacco Control Radio

Experts slam ‘half-baked’ anti-smoking bill: Allowing brand promotion on non-tobacco items will mean heavy public health cost, says professor Anthony Hedley.

The city will pay heavily for a bill that still allows tobacco companies leeway to promote their products, anti-smoking experts have said.

Anthony Hedley, chair professor of the University of Hong Kong’s department of community medicine and director of its tobacco control research and policy unit, said he was unhappy that after much delay in scrutinising the anti-smoking bill, it was still not good enough.

“For this city to come out with such a half-baked piece of legislation is just unbelievable. I’m very disappointed. It’s not an effective public health document,” he said.

“What we are seeing is continued and actually successful methods to maintain normality of tobacco in this town. and we will pay for that with public health.”

The Smoking (Public Health) (Amendment) Bill 2005 was still having its second and third readings in Legco last night.

The bill imposes a smoking ban in bars and restaurants on a staggered basis from January 1 next year to July 1, 2009.

All cigarette packets will have to carry a graphic health warning and terms such as “low tar” will be banned from 2008. Tobacco advertising will be banned at all retail outlets from November 1 next year and at all licensed hawker stalls from November 1, 2009.

Last year, the University of Hong Kong estimated the total cost of active and passive smoking was HK$5.3 billion, not including 6,920 deaths last year related to smoking. Professor Hedley warned the delayed enforcement of the law would be costly.

“We can’t say where that figure is now,” he said. “We definitely can say there will be a cost in terms of tobacco promotion and recruitment of young people to nicotine addiction. Because of the brand extension issue, there will be a cost to the health of the hospitality industry’s workers, and there will be a cost which will be attributable to the `light’ and `mild’ terms. If that is not effectively dealt with, then we will still have a large number of people who believe these cigarettes are safer, that they are not as lethal as they really are.”

Professor Hedley singled out the way the government inserted a clause allowing brand extensions – the use of tobacco brand names and logos on non-tobacco products such as clothes and shoes.

“There are very serious questions to be answered about how this [clause] got into the consultation document, why it was not changed, and why the bureau refused to consider it now,” he said.

Judith Mackay, senior World Health Organisation adviser on tobacco, wanted to know why the government took five years to legislate.

The green paper was first tabled in 2001, when the smoking bill had not been amended since 1997.

“Why this huge delay? Was it because of some Legislative Council members? Was it something like Sars? Or was it [government] ineptitude,” Dr Mackay asked.

The next step would be to implement the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. “Hong Kong has to be more vigorous against smuggling,” she said.

Professor Hedley said one measure was to increase tobacco duty, which had not risen for six years. “That is a device which has made our tobacco some of the cheapest in the world now relative to GDP,” he said.

An international brand cost HK$22 per pack, compared with HK$35 to HK$36 before, he said.

“It does not make any sense. This is supposed to be a business-orientated government. It should be making money out of the tobacco industry, not the tobacco industry making money out of the government and the people.”

The much-delayed and amended bill that will ban smoking from January 1 at most indoor workplaces and public places was finally passed into law yesterday.

But controversy continued over the last-minute revelation by Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food York Chow Yat-ngok that the government will study the feasibility of smoking rooms in restaurants and entertainment venues.

The Smoking (Public Health) (Amendment) Bill 2005 was passed 2-1/2 hours after the debate resumed yesterday. The meeting was adjourned after nine hours on Wednesday night as legislators went through 18 amendment clauses.

Dr Chow hailed its passage as “historic”.

“In the end the government managed to find a balance to help Hong Kong move towards a no-smoking society. Today was a historic moment for both the community and for myself,” he said. “It makes Hong Kong one of the most widely controlled smoking areas in the world.”

But before the bill went through its third reading, bills committee chairman Andrew Cheng Kar-foo, of the Democratic Party, pressed Dr Chow as to why there was an apparent U-turn on the government’s position on smoking rooms.

Mr Cheng said verbatim records of the committee’s meetings on three occasions showed Dr Chow’s bureau and the Department of Health insisting that smoking rooms were “unacceptable in the absence of WHO safety standards”.

Dr Chow argued: “The Democratic Party looks at it conspiratorially, whether there is a plot behind it. I would not be influenced by anybody.”

Much of yesterday’s debate focused on Mr Cheng’s amendment to prohibit the sale of tobacco products to children in school uniform.

But catering sector legislator Tommy Cheung Yu-yan, who wore his school colours, said: “We are not legislating to catch vendors selling cigarettes to young people.”

Judith Mackay, director of the Asian Consultancy on Tobacco Control, who watched the debate from the public gallery, said she was disappointed the amendment banning sales to children in school uniform was not passed.

“That seems extraordinary. The vendors are not allowed to ask for ID cards. It would have been much easier for the vendors if there was a ban on school uniforms,” she said.

The Committee on Youth Smoking Prevention, which represents 310 primary and secondary schools and 10 parent groups, said it was outraged. “We would like to register our extreme anger,” it said in a statement. “The government says it wants to discourage children from smoking yet it would not support the school uniform amendment.”

The law empowers the secretary for health to appoint inspectors to enforce the ordinance and removes the statutory requirement for managers to display no-smoking signs. The grace period before licensed hawkers must not display tobacco ads will be extended from one year to November 1, 2009.

Nightclubs, commercial bathhouses, massage establishments, mahjong parlours, designated mahjong rooms in clubs and certain bars must implement the smoking ban by July 1, 2009.

Public parks will have designated smoking zones. The law prohibits the display of descriptive words on tobacco packets and retail containers that may have a misleading or deceptive effect.