That tobacco control plan in full
Wednesday, March 9, 2011 at 11:41 The Department of Health has now released its Tobacco Control Plan.
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has confirmed plans to implement Labour legislation to ban the display of tobacco in shops.
Retailers will be given additional time to prepare. The regulations will now begin on 6 April 2012 for large stores and 6 April 2015 for all other shops.
On plain packaging, "the Government has an open mind and wants to hear views". There will be a consultation and an "assessment of the impact" before the end of 2011.
Quoting directly from the written statement, the Tobacco Control Plan has three "national ambitions" to reduce smoking rates in England by the end of 2015:
- From 21.2 per cent to 18.5 per cent or less among adults
- From 15 per cent to 12 per cent or less among 15 year olds, and
- From 14 per cent to 11 per cent or less among pregnant mothers
"These ambitions represent reductions in smoking rates that exceed the reductions we have seen in the past five years."
The Government has set out key actions in the following six areas:
- stopping the promotion of tobacco;
- making tobacco less affordable;
- effective regulation of tobacco products;
- helping tobacco users to quit;
- reducing exposure to secondhand smoke; and
- effective communications for tobacco control.
Full Government statement here.
See also: Forest attacks tobacco control plans (press release),
Brand ban no way to a Big Society (Tom Miers, The Free Society)
Simon Clark
Media coverage includes:
Big tobacco counter cover-up (Daily Mail)
Tobacco displays to be banned from shops (BBC News)
Tobacco display to be banned in UK in push to cut smoking-related deaths (Bloomberg)
There's also an amusing piece the Daily Mash:
H/T Tom Miers
Reader Comments (42)
No political party will ever ever have my vote again. They are all tarred with the same brush. Mickey and Mouse are a waste of space.
The tobacco product industry seems to be mute in all of this, in fact their silence is deafening!!!
I don't think that politicians would care if there was only a 10% turnout to vote - they really don't give a toss about legitimacy. The exception is the minor party which is still struggling and needs every vote it can get. I'll continue to vote UKIP on the grounds that it is the only party (apart from that whose name we dare not speak) which has had the balls to actually criticise tobacco control.
Panorama the other evening had HMRC bleating about loss of revenue thourgh smuggling yet HMG is planning to make tobacco even less affordable. They must have been reading Arnott's recent article in the Graun. Such a policy defies common sense.
If, as Simon's post says, they plan to further reduce exposure to SHS we won't have long to wait for a new wave of restrictions.
Personally, I think that the only course left is to protest - but that means reaching smokers who aren't online and who, like most of the population, presently just accept whatever comes along.
Simon
Were you asked to appear on BBC Breakfast with Bill Turnball this morning? - I thought not. I just wondered as they had some creep from ASH singing the praises of the proposed ban on displays and plain packaging. I had to leave to get my train to London so did not see all of the show. Do they really think plain packaging and displays will stop kids under 18! They just go up to people smoking outside and ask for one or get their elder siblings to buy them for them! If they are really serious about stopping the next generation from taking up the "habit" they are going about it all the wrong way as forbidden fruits always taste the sweetest! The more people keep nagging me to stop, the more I dig my heels in and I am sure this will apply to younger people as well.
UKIP the rest are all the same.
This nonsense came straight from Brussels via the WHO.
People are protesting Joyce by switching political support but they are not taking to the streets to riot - rather in quiet dignity on the doorstep canvassing. If you want to register your protest, then join UKIP and get involved in talking to smokers and non-smokers directly on the doorstep. You'll find that in the real world, there is no support for this lifestyle oppression other than in the warped ivory towers of Westminster.
60 - 70% of people don't vote because they can see nothing to vote for among today's career politicians. Real people on the doorstep telling them they hold the balance of power in their hands and there is a real alternative might just motivate them to actually take part in democracy.
There really is no other way given this latest assault on us by the latest leadership of the LibLabCon. Make your protest count!
There are several scary things about their aims.
"To cut down on promotion of tobacco." What promotion? If it wasn't for the likes of ASH constantly trying to make sure their funding doesn't dry up, you'd never see anything about cigarettes.... ever. So what do they plan to do? I predict smoking on TV (in Eastenders etc) is next. Let's face it, there isn't much left TO do. (Although banning ASH would reduce exposure to tobacco related news by 99.9%).....
"Reduce exposure to second hand smoke." Considering the draconian smoking ban, how do they intend to do this? The only other step they can take is banning it in the street, in cars or in the home. "All your private property are belong to us!" says Lansley (in full on Computer-game Tyrant mode)!
Oh, and the 21% figure they use is clearly an ASH number. Didn't the Eurostat figures say nearer 28% smoke in the UK?
Presumably when these measures fail to affect smoking rates (like the Ban, which has increased smoking in the UK and Ireland) the Government will stop listening to and funding ASH and try some other approach? Nah, thought not.
My colleague Donna Edmunds from Progressive Conservatives has a piece on "A truly progressive Government would lower tobacco duty." Comments invited again at Conservative Home.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2011/03/donna-edmunds-a-truly-progressive-government-would-lower-tobacco-duty.html
After the fiasco of the Freedom Scam and the Great Repeal Scam, backed by such progressives, it's obvious they are just not listening. If they had at any point since they came to Govt we would not be discussing this oppressive plan for smokers today. We would be celebrating at getting our lives back and the end of the hate campaign against us.
This TC plan when taken in conjunction with the overal plan for the NHS bodes ill for the future.
The NHS plan allows for more local control in Public Health including areas such as Snoking, Alcohol and Fast food. (The same areas the WHO set out in their stategies and also the EU).
The fuss about Branding seems to have overshadowed the actual banning of displays. The display ban is almost passé.
It is a pity that the coalition have chosen to continue these policies and even to accelerate them, even though there is a lot of opposition,
Donna Edmunds' commentary is welcome, even the misnamed 'Progressive' Conservatives seem to have little influence.
I intend to vote UKIP, now, being a very disillusioned Tory. I would ask Pat Nurse to try and get the powers that be in UKIP to make a lot more out of this issue than they do at the moment. It's been too low level.
They do have a policy on the smoking ban in their manifesto which is to allow landlord and owner choice. They have nothing specific on denormalisation but as I gave a speech a couple of years ago on the abolition of funding smoke free "charities" (which almost all voted in favour of) I'll make enquiries about raising the issue again at Eastbourne in Sept where I think the new manifesto will be discussed. It is added to all the time. UKIP is, however, a smoker friendly party that recognises it's recent rise in popularity has come just as much from disaffected smokers as disaffected voters against the denial of choice on in or out of the EU.
and this is perhaps more high profile but probably won't get an airing in the main stream press
http://www.ukip.org/content/european-issues/2173-cig-advert-ban-protest-by-farage
With the lights going off in the UK in a few years' time as well - unless these scum are promptly removed from power - this is really going to be a great place to live.
And you can bet you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Sorry, Folks - but you were warned.
Luckily, there is an alternative - though will people in sufficient numbers have the sense to grasp it ? And will ‘loyal’ (or stubborn) Big Three supporters finally summon up the courage to make the leap to Freedom, or will they continue to invest their hopes for our nation in the toxic waste dump that Westminster has now become - to say nothing of the cowboy operators that run it ?
The time for buggering about is now long gone.
I find Andrew Lansley’s remark that the government remains open minded about plain packaging less than comforting. To give new service to a thought from A.C. Grayling and John Dewey, I fear that when it comes to tobacco the government has reached a level of open-mindedness at which its brain has fallen out.
Pat Nurse: Thanks and good luck with it. I'm aware of that part of the existing manifesto but I still feel it should be highlighted more. There's a lot of support with nowhere to go. The Europe issue is now a no brainer, anyway i.e. most of us would like a referendum but wont get one as it stands.
Douglas Carswell is on the money here too.
http://www.talkcarswell.com/show.aspx?id=1838
UKIP has to be careful. I used to attend regional meetings (I was in UKIP for a couple of years) and I came across some vicious anti-smokers at local/regional level. Nigel Farage is great - a smoker himself and mentioned smokers being driven out of pubs on Question Time a few weeks ago. Godfrey Bloom is a tolerant non-smoker who, to the best of my knowledge, believes in choice. I'm no longer a member of any political party as I prefer to sit on the fence and watch everything.
The AV (Alternative Vote) is due on May 5th. I know that UKIP is tolerant and that the BNP believes that smoking should be at the discretion of the landlord etc. I do not wish to enter into or provoke a negative discussion at this point (with regard to my mention of the BNP), but I am deeply saddened that the Conservative-led coalition has decided, today, to ban displays. I thought that most conservative MPs were more tolerant regarding choice. This step has shown me that the coalition has absolutely no intention of repealing or relaxing the anti-smoking legislation and is obviously following in the footsteps of their predecessors. A sad day for democracy in our country - what we regard as democracy anyway. :(
@Jenny
I am sure UKIP do have anti smokers. I was chatting Paul Nuttall UKIP MEP for the North West and he has fielded questions from members who disagree with UKIP on the ban. His point is that it is UKIP policy and will not be changed.
Thanks Dave. That is true. I've met a couple of antis in UKIP myself but they are generally told that if this issue matters that much, then they have a choice of three other parties to choose from where they will find plenty of other vicious anti-smoker like minded people. Get involved and help shape the party. I find it welcomes input from the ground and suggestions can become policy.
Why not just shoot 3% of smokers?
"They" will reach their target immediately and can then shut up!
Stupid b*stards.
This is a joke. Good God what Next? This Government is making our country a laughing stock.
I just can't help it, I'm naturally conservative and as a matter of principle, I can no longer vote for any party that has so clearly embraced the concept of social denormalisation.
It's as simple as that.
You only have to read the ASH comment on the strategy
http://www.ash.org.uk/media-room/press-releases/:britain-on-track-to-be-first-european-country-to-put-tobacco-products-in-plain-packs
to realise that they call the shots here. Why did we bother having an election?
"stopping the promotion of tobacco;
making tobacco less affordable;
effective regulation of tobacco products;
helping tobacco users to quit;
reducing exposure to secondhand smoke; and
effective communications for tobacco control. "
Well, there we have it. To quote Evelyn Waugh, "The enemy was at last in plain view, huge and hateful, all disguise cast off."
This is nothing less than the final stage of the Godber Blueprint, and for it to be voluntarily inflicted upon us by the Tories shows them for utter hypocrites - at least NuLab didn't try to pretend that they were anything other than interfering, nannying busybodies.
This pathetic piece of window dressing pretending to be a policy doesn't seem to have gone down that well even with non smokers. There are 695 comments on the BBC HYS site, which seems to have closed somewhat early! Perhaps it's because you have to search long and hard to find anyone who thinks it's a good idea. The last time I looked at Sky News website it was a similar story and their 'nanny state' poll showed 88% of people thinking we do, indeed, have a nanny state.
The comments below Simon's piece on Conservative Home has produced a near 100% against reaction too.
Dont't blame me I voted UKIP. Cameron is a vacuous, policy-free zone.
ITV news had Lansley on pompously saying he refuses to talk to the tobacco industry. If he'd any integrity he'd also then refuse its money.
Martin V! Glad to see you back - missed your comments :)
It's not even about the packaging, they can wrap them in brown paper like any other herb, for all I care.
It's this silly game of hide the cigarette that annoys me.
I don't suppose that ASH bothered to tell Lansley that nicotine is not unique to tobacco, but is found in tiny amounts in ordinary vegetables, before he made a fool of himself.
What next, hide the cauliflower? ( yes, really )
Martin V - me too.
Refusing to listen to the industries that will most affected, smacks of corruption to me. I think we need a public enquiry on what is going on behind the scenes and how and why an unelected lobby group like ASH controls Govt and is making policy designed to ruin British business while increasing child smoking through the promotion of the black market.
@Rose 2
There is no significant level of nicotine in vegetables.
According to the New England Journal of Medicine, 10kg of aubergine is equivalent to one cigarette. what's more, absorbtion rates from ingestion are low and nicotine is quickly metabolised, so the effect isn't nearly the same.
That's why I said "tiny", Max, but thank you for the confirmation.
I really worry for our staple foods, if this gets even further out of hand.
Despite the usual sea of green arrows for freedom-liking posts and red arrows next to the (few) anti posts, I see my comment about "No Smoking Day" being a Charity that is wholly tax-funded without even a single penny being raised in voluntary donations got deleted by the Mail moderators. Ho hum.
Good to see that public opinion (judging from the comments sections on various papers) seems very much against this move, as are many non-tobacco-related think tanks and organisations. Yet I continue to be flabbergasted by Tobacco Control's power. STILL they rake in millions while teachers and soldiers and police are sacked and libraries are closing down. Still they dictate (if not actually draft) policy despite the weight of public opinion and the despite the disapproving clamour of grassroots Party Political activists. I just don't understand why Lansley is doing this - does he actually expect this to do any good? No, of course not - he said himself only a year ago that it was a nonsense idea and cited the evidence against it. Does he expect it to be a vote-winner? Surely not - he can't be that stupid, surely. Many of the comments I've seen today are (as per usual ) from tolerant non-smokers. But I've even seen comments from people who thought the Smoking Ban was a good idea criticising this latest move in the strongest terms. So what is he trying to do? Who is he trying to please? What pressure has been applied to him? Forget smoking in itself - it's this pressure (whether it be from the UN, the EU, WHO or some shady Illuminati group (if that is your bag)) that goes directly counter to public opinion that will end democracy in this country. More and more people are seeing that they are quite simply being ignored, and it doesn't matter who you vote for at elections. I hope they are content keeping Tobacco Control happy because it is doing a hell of a lot to destabilise public trust, public faith in Government and faith in the State. I really believe that within the decade we will have our own revolution if public opinion is not listened to. This current chipping away and wilfull ignoring of public opinion will do serious damage to the fabric of our society.
It's gone way beyond smoking now - increasing numbers of people are thinking, "Hang on, why s my library closing down when these nanying busybodies continue to rake in the cash? How can I silence these people? How can I make them go away?" And then they are realising that they can't. So much for democracy.
Tobacco Control will be exposed eventually but I fear it will be a messy business, possibly involving the rise of extremist Parties or yes, even bloodshed. I hope I'm wrong and we see an announcement that ASH, Alcohol Concern and the rest are having their funding withdrawn. But I suspect that, given the lack of self-interest (even! I'm discounting the fact that common sense or principles may be at play here!), that is displayed by the politicians, that we'll see MPS working for free before that ever happens.
Joyce and Pat -
Many thanks for your kind comments - much appreciated.
Just to be clear - in case you were wondering - I made The Leap some time ago. As have quite a few of my friends.
And I ain't going back . Nor are they.
Time for all the other suckers to give themselves an even break !
Does Nigel Farage have a contact address?
Thanks.
Nigel Farage was speaking to a 'puritan' (his own words) on Sky News today. He was brilliant.
"Yet I continue to be flabbergasted by Tobacco Control's power."
Mr A
Friends in high places?
WHO LAUNCHES PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY TO HELP SMOKERS QUIT - 1999
http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1999/en/pr99-04.html
The BBC (Panorama's 'Smoking and the Bandits' 7 March) reported on Monday an eye-watering £4bn is lost in tax revenue to the burgeoning trade in smuggled and counerfeit cigarettes. Less than 48 hours later, Andrew Lansley announces a ban on displaying cigarettes in shops and a plan that all tobacco poducts be sold in plain packets. These two measures will blur the distincton between legal and illicit products, which can only be welcome news to all the smugglers and fraudsters who control the illegal market.
The Dept of Health's announcement doesn't look like a considered and responsible proposal to regulate the sale and consumption of cigarettes to consenting adults - and it certainly doesn't take account of the implications for HMRC or the Home Office with respective responsibilities for excise collection and law & order (the illicit trade as Panorama explained has moved into the hands of a vast network of organised crime).
Isn't it time for a co-ordinated set of tobacco laws and controls which address all the issues of public concern which tobacco and smoking raise - public education of the health risks of smoking, preventing youth access, promotion of smoking cessation programmes and products, promotion of smokeless and less harmful products, excise collection and the illicit trade, cigarette litter (repeatedly identified as the UK's no 1 litter problem).
Surely that would be the Responsible approach - which would fit with this Government's creed? - come on Messrs Lansley and Osborne, get everyone round the table to make it happen!
Charles Hamshaw-Thomas
Principal, CSR Solutions
Has anyone come up with a figure as to what the 'cost to the taxpayer' would be if we all quit ? The Panorama programme at least brought a wry smile to my face - on the one hand - there they were telling joe public how much tax revenue is being lost to criminal gangs (this didn't include the substantial cost of the police and revenue officials trying to stop them) - the next day we learn of the further anti - smoking measures to be taken by the Government , all of which will no doubt help increase the customer numbers of these very gangs. The total revenue lost to the treasury as a result of illegally purchased tobacco plus that purchased legally outwith the uk (as I have done for a decade) amounts to billions of pounds.
With levels of smoking RISING since the ban, anyone with half a brain cell could surmise that it has NOT worked, and moreover, the punitive level of taxation on tobacco is ineffective as a deterrant.
As to the proposal for plain packaging, I am saving up my empty cartons (bought in the USA so no nasty pictures or health warnings) though I usually port my cigs into one of the number of stylish cigarette cases I own. At the very least, any self respecting smoker should refuse to carry a fag box covered in warnings and ghastly images of (allegedly) smokers lungs etc.
It's obvious that our ruling politicians refuse to listen. They take no notice of the majority of the general public's wishes. If AV (Alternative Voting) does go ahead, perhaps they will be made to listen. Rome is burning, yet our Government, like Nero, prefers to fiddle.
But sure what else would the likes of Lansley and ASH and all the other quangos do, in cahoots with the govt, only to continue to manufacture further laws to restrict smokers, to keep their cushy jobs and big fat salaries.
They cant stop now, they can only continue to flog Niquitin, tv ads and hypnosis courses for so long before people get immune to that bullshit and continue smoking regardless.
No siree, they have to revert to the sharp shock of the jackboot again to make people sit up and take notice that they're still around making waves.
They know that the 'real statistics' on smoking havent changed a jot since their stupid ban was introduced in the first place, so they have to bring out further tortures and inconveniences to keep the brainwashing trend alive.
Why dont we all lobby to have cigarette sales banned altogether to save the taxpayer from further interference by Big Govt and Quangos, so that we could be left in peace from further harrassment, and put the ball back in their court.
And we could all make do with buying our fags on the black market.
Charles -
Re: "Isn't it time for a co-ordinated set of tobacco laws and controls which address all the issues of public concern ...?"
Does that include freedom to smoke in the pub with the landlord's permission ? The destruction of that precious liberty (and all it entails) is also an 'issue of public concern'. No ?
I have a better idea. Let's just drop all this mindlessly expensive crap completely, and let people make up their own minds - whilst catering (naturally) for the tiny minority of Tobacco Neurotics among us.
I've always been in favour of 'respecting minorites' - as any civilised person is, of course.
In order to guarantee an 'informed choice', I propose setting up a website dedicated to all the 'health issues' (both harmful and beneficial) associated with tobacco use. Needless to say, the information would need to be well-researched and scientically impeccable, with any potential bias removed.
It should be run jointly by representatives of the Health Industry (for such it is) and the Tobacco Industry - in the interests of 'balance'.
Needless to say, a call centre should also be established to help all those potential quitters who lack the ability to do things on their own. The staffing problem would be solved by immediately disbanding all the anti-smoking agencies and their hundreds - if not thousands of workers and supernumeraries - and releasing them for productive labour elsewhere (eg the aformentioned call centre).
Anti-smoking 'charities' should have all public funding withdrawn, and be compelled (like any other business) to rely upon voluntary contributions from the public. This would also engender a healthy spirit of competition, and ensure that only the most popular would survive - whilst providing a ready-made barometer of public opinion on the matter (no more need for all those tiresome 'surveys', with their often dubious methodology).
A substantial reduction in Tobacco Duty would also help to undermine smuggling, and may (paradoxically) even lead to a long-term increase in revenue to the Exchequer.
With the money thus saved (and possibly even gained), we may then be able to offer their jobs back to some of the eleven thousand soldiers that No-Fly Zone Cameron has just given their marching orders to. I'm sure you can cite similar examples.
That, at any rate, is my idea of a 'co-ordinated' response to what many still consider (though most do not) a 'problem'.
Please let us know if you had something different in mind, though.
Thats a brilliant plan Martin, we need people like you in govt. but its a hard road to break up the voting system aka Quangos, that puts political parties in power these days.
The smoking ban is only an incidental and a sacrificial lamb on the road to achieving power.
Too many favours sought and given when they get there for a reversal.