http://www.cumbriapartnership.nhs.uk/rollercoaster-smoking-time-machine-app.htm
April, 2013:
Smoking near kids equal to violence, says Latvia
http://www.daijiworld.com/news/news_disp.asp?n_id=171684
|
Moscow, Apr 26 (IANS/RIA Novosti): The parliament of the northern European republic of Latvia has passed a bill that would make smoking in the presence of children equal to an act of physical violence. The Delfi news portal said the draft law, which proposes amendments to the current law on the protection of children’s rights, puts smoking in the presence of children on a par with any form of physical or emotional cruelty, sexual violence, negligence or any other behaviour that could be detrimental to a child. The bill, which still has to be passed in a third reading and signed by the president, does not stipulate the punishment for smoking near children. Two months ago, Latvia adopted legislature that tightened bans on smoking in public places, in particular prohibiting smoking on balconies and in the stairwells of residential apartment buildings, as well as on the premises of other public facilities. |
Two tonnes of tobacco seized in Sydney | SBS World News
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1756124/Two-tonnes-of-tobacco-seized-in-Sydney
Five men are accused of smuggling and possession offences after two tonnes of tobacco turned up in Sydney, hidden under bamboo blinds.
RELATED
Future Fund drops tobacco investment
Five men have been charged after two tonnes of illicit tobacco was seized from a Sydney cargo facility.
Customs and Border Protection said in a statement officers at the Sydney Cargo Examination Facility on Monday found 2250 kilograms of tobacco concealed within bamboo blinds in a shipping container sent from Indonesia.
On Wednesday four men were arrested and charged over importation and possession offences.
Customs and Border Protection officers later arrested a fifth man and charged him with importing tobacco products with the intent to defraud revenue.
The smugglers are accused of trying to evade $996,997.50 in duties.
“This result highlights the seriousness of the offence and should serve as a warning to all involved in the illicit tobacco trade,” Customs national investigations manager Kingsley Woodford-Smith said in a statement on Sunday.
“It doesn’t matter if you smuggle, possess or convey these goods, if caught you face a serious fine and up to 10 years in gaol.”
Recent amendments to the Customs Act have increased the maximum penalty for smuggling illicit tobacco products.
If caught, criminals now face up to 10 years prison or a fine equalling five times the duty evaded, or both.
Tobacco
Tobacco Control and Govt’s BS reply
http://7thspace.com/headlines/436478/lcq13_tobacco_control.html
LCQ13: Tobacco Control
Hong Kong (HKSAR) – Following is a question by the Hon Christopher Chung and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today (April 24):
Question:
I have recently received complaints from members of the public about the ineffective enforcement of the tobacco control legislation by the Tobacco Control Office (TCO) under the Department of Health. Regarding the enforcement of the tobacco control legislation, will the Government inform this Council:
(a)of the number of fixed penalty notices/summonses issued to smoking offenders in each of the past five years, broken down by law enforcement agency in Annex 1;
(b)whether there is any difference between TCO’s procedure for handling complaints about smoking offences received during office hours and outside office hours; if so, of the details; of the criteria adopted by TCO for deciding whether or not to send their officers to the scene to look into a complaint;
(c)of the mode (unannounced or regular) and frequency of inspection by TCO’s officers on the black spots of smoking offences and other no-smoking areas;
(d)of the number of complaints received by the authorities from members of the public in the past three years about the ineffective enforcement of the tobacco control legislation by TCO, and the top five situations with most complaints about the ineffectiveness in law enforcement; whether they have assessed the effectiveness of TCO’s law enforcement work; if they have, of the details; if not, whether they will conduct such an assessment;
(e)how TCO follows up those complaints with evidence of smoking offences (e.g. photographs as well as information about time and places) and complainants’ contact information attached;
(f)of the measures taken by the authorities to tackle the situations where the venue managers condone smoking offences in their venues and disregard related complaints;
(g)of the current number of TCO’s law enforcement officers and whether the authorities have assessed if it is adequate; if the assessment outcome is in the negative, whether they have plans to increase the manpower in the short term; and
(h)whether it is an offence to smoke electronic cigarettes in no-smoking areas?
Reply:
President,
The Government has been taking a progressive and multi-pronged (CTA: BLUNT and outdated) approach in its tobacco control policies (CTA: BACKWARDS) , comprising legislation, enforcement, publicity, education, smoking cessation and taxation, with a view to minimise the harmful effects of tobacco on the public and the community. To further enhance tobacco control, the Department of Health (DH) established the Tobacco Control Office (TCO) in 2001 to promote a smoke free culture.TCO promotes smoking prevention and cessation through publicity and education programmes, and operates a Smoking Cessation Hotline to coordinate the provision of smoking cessation services in Hong Kong. China is also a signatory of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and the relevant aspects have been extended to Hong Kong since 2006.
My reply to Hon Chung’s question is as follows:
(a)The number of fixed penalty notices and summonses (in brackets) issued by various law enforcement agencies in relation to smoking offence in the past five years is set out in Annex 2.
(b)Tobacco Control Inspectors (TCIs) of TCO are mainly responsible for frontline enforcement work, which includes handling enquiries and complaints about smoking, and inspections and prosecutions under the Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance. As the act of smoking usually lasts for a short period of time, and given the larger number of public areas and indoor workplaces designated as no smoking areas designated in various districts, it is impossible for TCIs to inspect the concerned venues immediately upon receiving reports of smoking offence.TCO follows up on all complaints about smoking offences received during and outside office hours according to established procedures, and contacts complainants for the details of each case, including the time and location of the smoking offence. Based on the information received in a complaint, surprise inspections on these premises may be conducted at specific time in the future.
(c)Besides during office hours, TCIs also conduct inspections on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays as well as at night time and in the early morning. In premises where smoking offences are prevalent, TCO takes vigorous enforcement actions and initiates more frequent inspections. From time to time, TCO conducts joint inspections and enforcement actions with other law enforcement agencies such as the Police. In 2012, TCIs received about 18 000 complaints on smoking offences, conducted more than 26 000 inspections and issued over 8 000 fixed penalty notices and about 180 summonses.
(d)The number of complaints received by TCO in relation to enforcement in the past three years (i.e.
2010 to 2012) is shown in Annex 3.
The major areas of complaints include inadequate manpower of TCO, failure for TCIs to arrive immediately at the venue concerned in a complaint and demand for expansion of no smoking areas.
The Administration monitors closely various statistics and indicators relating to tobacco control. The proportion of daily smokers (people who have a habit of smoking daily) among the population aged 15 and above dropped steadily from about 23.3% in the early 1980s to 11.1% in 2010.The declining trend in smoking prevalence is a useful indicator on the effectiveness of the progressive and multi-pronged approach in tobacco control and the sustained efforts by the community as a whole.
(e)Upon the receipt of a complaint on smoking offence from the public, TCO will contact the complainant for information and inspect the locations concerned to collect evidence in accordance with established procedures. Where there is sufficient evidence, TCO will take prosecution action.
(f)The Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance empowers (CTA: BUT SHOULD LEGISLATE) the manager of no smoking areas to enforce the relevant law to ensure that no person smokes in the premises he manages. The manager may (CTA: THE LAW SHOULD BE CHANGED TO ‘MUST’) call for police assistance if necessary. To enhance the knowledge of tobacco control legislation of managers of no smoking areas and to provide them with procedures and practical tips on implementing smoke free policy, TCO has drawn up a series of guidelines on implementing smoke free policy and organised regular talks on tobacco control legislation. Moreover, TCIs also disseminate these messages to venue managers when conducting inspections. Members of the public may express their views to TCO by telephone, facsimile or email.TCO follows up and carries out investigation on every case, and arranges for TCIs to inspect and take enforcement action on the premises concerned.
(g)The number of TCO staff carrying out frontline enforcement duties is 99.The Administration will review the manpower establishment from time to time to cope with needs. (CTA: TOTALLY INADEQUATE)
(h)Smoking of electronic cigarettes in a no smoking area is also an offence. If TCIs witness an offence, they will prosecute in accordance with relevant legislation and established procedures.
(CTA: AND WHEN WAS THE LAST EXCISE TAX INCREASE ? SINGAPORE $76 PER PACK MARLBORO <CONTROL>, BRISBANE $ 139 PER PACK, HKG JUST $ 50 PER PACK)
Source: HKSAR Government
ASH Daily News for 25 April 2013
|
HEADLINES |
|
Lancet Oncology: Editorial in support of plain packaging |
| An editorial in The Lancet Oncology comments on the series of advertisements by Japan Tobacco International against plain, standard tobacco packaging. The journal notes that the inferences in the ads are fallacies as there is very clear evidence that branding of cigarette packages makes them more appealing to young people. The article concludes:
“The cynical lobbying of the tobacco companies—and their renewed attempts to sway public opinion with misleading advertising—to continue to market a substance that is known to be a leading cause of cancer should not be tolerated. Enough is enough, it’s time to quit.” |
|
|
Cigarette packets: the case for a new law |
| Peter Kellner, President of pollling company YouGov, explains why he believes there is a case for standard tobacco packaging. He concludes:
As in the past, the [tobacco] industry has been highly imaginative in trying to link their opposition to arguments about civil liberties, intellectual property rights, tobacco smuggling, free trade and unemployment. The bottom line is that, as for the past half century, they have been fighting a rearguard action to defend their right to kill their customers. In the next few weeks we shall find out whether the ministers find the pro- or anti-arguments more persuasive. |
|
|
Plain cigarette packaging ‘puts women off smoking’ |
| Women get less satisfaction and enjoyment when smoking cigarettes that come in plain packaging, Scottish research suggests.
A study by researchers at Stirling University involved 187 young female smokers who used plain brown packs. The women said they were more embarrassed about smoking from plain packs and felt more negative about it, even though they were using their usual brand. They also reported smoking fewer cigarettes, stubbing out cigarettes early, smoking less around others and thinking more about quitting. |
|
|
Call for plain packaging to cut toll of young Rotherham smokers |
| An estimated 952 young people in Rotherham have taken up smoking in the last year.
MP Kevin Barron has again urged the Government to commit to plain cigarette packs as Cancer Research UK’s figures were revealed. A public consultation on packaging was launched 12 months ago but the Government has yet to issue a response. Mr Barron, who represents Rother Valley, said: “It is appalling that so many children are being tempted into taking up smoking. “Cigarette packs are designed to make smoking look cool and attractive yet the reality is a life-time of addiction, illness and premature death.” |
|
|
Café in Hendon fined for allowing customers to smoke shisha in cellar |
| The former manager of a shisha bar in Hendon, north London, has been prosecuted for breaking the smokefree law. .
Meysan Ebra has been ordered to pay a fine and costs totalling £1,347.58 for allowing customers to smoke shisha pipes in a downstairs cellar at Casablanca Café in Queens Parade. The prosecution was brought after Barnet Borough Council’s environmental health inspectors visited the café on several occasions where they issued warnings to the management and owners requiring them to stop serving shisha inside the premises. |
|
|
India: West Bengal smoking tax to aid ‘duped investors’ |
| The leader of India’s West Bengal state has announced a new tax on cigarettes to raise money for thousands of investors allegedly duped by a private company into losing their savings.
Mamata Banerjee said a 10% tax on cigarettes would help set up a special fund for them. Businessman Sudipto Sen, who ran the investment company, has been arrested. India has over 100 million smokers and the government says smoking kills nearly a million people a year. Ms Banerjee apologised for the 10% tax increase on cigarettes and “all kinds of tobacco products”. But she said the money raised would be put towards a good cause. |
|
|
|
|
allAfrica.com: Zimbabwe: Tobacco Exports Gross U.S.$86 Million
http://allafrica.com/stories/201304020298.html
‘Hong Kong has significantly increased its uptake of Zimbabwean tobacco
with more than 1,3 million kg worth US$10,9 million from 415 800kg worth
US$2,7 million taken up last year.’
Sebastien Aymeric: Tobacco industry’s plain packaging fight a lost cause
By Sebastien Aymeric
5:30 AM Tuesday Apr 23, 2013
- ✩
Cigarettes are not different from any other FMCG product. Photo / Getty Images
If you’ll pardon the pun, there’s no doubt there will be plenty of fuming legal debates that go on once the idea of plain packaging of cigarettes moves beyond an idea and into everyday New Zealand life.
Intellectual property lawyers like myself are moved to ponder questions such as: does plain packaging amount to a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act? Is it a compulsory acquisition of property rights by the government? And, does it “unjustifiably encumber the use of a trade mark” in breach of our international obligations as a WTO member?
Before answering these questions, we must first look again at the importance of trade marks. Intellectual property rights such as trade marks and rights in packaging “look and feel”, together with associated reputation and goodwill can be a business’ most valuable assets.
A brand or logo acts as a “badge of origin” and enables customers to know what they are buying, and from whom it came.
This is particularly valuable in the fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) industry, where consumers have very distinct preferences for Pepsi over Coke, say, or Adidas rather than Nike.
These loyalties exist largely because it is marketing and branding, more than anything else, which make an FMCG product distinctive.
This is why New Zealand has strong intellectual property laws (such as the Trade Marks Act 2002, the Fair Trading Act 1986, and the common law tort of passing-off). It is critical for businesses to protect the intangible assets they have gained over the years.
Cigarettes are not different from any other FMCG product in the sense that they are interchangeable and it is brand rather than actual product content that is the key differentiator. It is therefore unsurprising that the tobacco industry becomes nervous when the New Zealand Government starts talking about following Australia and introducing plain packaging of tobacco products this side of the Tasman.
In fact, the industry has articulated a principled stance in defence of its intellectual property rights (in opposition to the proposal) and promised to legally challenge any introduction of such legislation.
Are tobacco companies entitled to the same protection offered by New Zealand law as any other business? The decision of the High Court of Australia to allow plain packaging certainly sets a persuasive precedent, and many legal commentators have since weighed in with their thoughts.
However one point missed by most commentators is that regardless of how much of a legal fight the tobacco industry puts up, and even how strong its legal position might be, the New Zealand judiciary has very limited power to override the clear intention of Parliament.
This has been shown in the courts before. One example can be found in the High Court’s decision in the 2000 retrial of Teina Pora.
It is a fundamental principle of law that a heavier penalty cannot be imposed than the one applicable at the time the offence was committed. Yet, the government of the time, as a result of public sentiment after a spate of high profile home invasion cases, legislated to increase non-parole periods from 10 years to 13 years for home invasion murders, even if committed before the commencement of the new legislation.
No amount of judicial interpretation enabled the High Court in December 2000 to avoid applying the Crimes (Home Invasion) Amendment Act 1999 and the Criminal Justice Amendment Act (No 2) retrospectively.
In that decision, Justice Keith delivered the majority opinion, stating that Parliament’s words and purpose were so plain that breaches of our Bill of Rights Act could not be removed by judicial interpretation.
Courts in New Zealand have always been reluctant to be interventionist or act as social engineers. Unlike in Australia and the United States which both have a written constitution, our legal and political system does not give our Supreme Court latitude to decide on social issues like plain packaging.
The one glimmer of hope is that the Prime Minister has indicated the Government would be guided by any ruling issued by the World Trade Organisation.
But in the absence of this, it seems the tobacco industry might be ultimately unsuccessful in any legal action to prevent plain packaging.
One thing is clear: the plain packaging debate demonstrates that intellectual property rights in the form of trademarks are powerful marketing tools indeed.
Why else would the tobacco industry fight so vehemently to retain them?
Sebastien Aymeric is an Auckland-based solicitor for intellectual property law firm James & Wells and a member of the litigation and commercialisation team.
ASH Daily News for 23 April 2013
|
HEADLINES |
|
Manchester: Police Commissioner backs plain cigarette pack plan |
| Greater Manchester’s Police and Crime Commissioner Tony Lloyd is backing plans to standardise cigarette packaging in a bid to deter youngsters from smoking and reduce the financial burden on public health care services.
He has also dismissed claims by tobacco companies that standardised packaging will increase the sale of illicit tobacco. |
|
|
Northern Ireland: Health Trust campaign to cut smoking in pregnancy |
| A Northern Ireland campaign to help women to stop smoking during pregnancy has been launched by midwives in the South Eastern Health Trust.
The trust’s figures show that 15% of its maternity patients smoke during their pregnancy, despite the damage it does to their unborn children. |
|
|
Smoking shisha is a not safe alternative to cigarettes, warn experts |
| A study carried out by University of California San Francisco has found that whilst smoking shisha exposes users to different chemicals than cigarettes, they are still harmful.
Research chemist Peyton Jacob said: ‘People want to know if it is a lesser health risk if they switch from cigarettes to smoking a water-pipe on a daily basis. ‘We found that water-pipe smoking is not a safe alternative to cigarette smoking, nor is it likely to be an effective harm-reduction strategy.’ See also: |
|
|
USA: New York City proposes to raise the age at which tobacco can be purchased from 18 to 21 |
| No one under 21 will be able to buy cigarettes in New York City, under a new proposal that marks the latest in a decade of moves to crack down on smoking in the nation’s largest city. |
|
|
US supreme court rejects challenge to new cigarette labeling |
| The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected a tobacco industry challenge to a controversial 2009 federal law that mandates graphic warning labels on cigarettes. The high court refused to hear the case, essentially upholding a lower court ruling in favour of the government’s labeling changes. |
|
|
USA: California mulls $2 tax for cigarettes |
| California’s anti-smoking advocates are asking their legislature to back a $2 state tax hike on cigarettes – double the increase voters rejected last year – on the heels of President Barack Obama’s urging a federal cigarette tax increase earlier this month.
The proposed increase in California would lift its excise tax on a pack of cigarettes to $2.87, steeply raising the cost of smoking in the most populous U.S. state to help fund health-care programs. |
|
|
Smoking just a few cigarettes a day can DOUBLE a woman’s risk of arthritis
Smoking just a few cigarettes a day can DOUBLE a woman’s risk of …
You +1’d this publicly. Undo
Daily Mail–22 Apr 2013
Smoking just a few cigarettes a day more than doubles a woman’s risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis, according to a new research.