Say No To Nanny

Smokefree Ideology


Nicotine Wars

 

40 Years of Hurt

Prejudice and Prohibition

Road To Ruin?

Search This Site
The Pleasure of Smoking

Forest Polling Report

Outdoor Smoking Bans

Share This Page
Powered by Squarespace
« Latest news from The Free Society | Main | Smoking and pregnancy on Five Live tonight »
Monday
Jun062011

Imperial Tobacco wins Forest plain English award

There are many things I like about my job. Writing submissions for 'public' consultations isn't one of them.

I've lost count of how many times we have responded to local, national or international 'consultations':

Consultation on Smoking in Public Places (Greater London Authority Smoking in Public Places Investigative Committee), Consultation on the Future of Tobacco Control (Department of Health), Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill (SP Bill 22), Green Paper Consultation (Towards a Europe free from tobacco smoke: policy options at EU level) and many, many more.

Most recently we submitted a response to the Consultation on the Draft Tobacco Control Action Plan for Wales, despite the fact that Forest wasn't on the 'List of Consultees'. Nor was any other consumer organisation. Clearly, the consumer is not expected to have an opinion when it comes to tobacco control. You'll do as you're told, that seems to be the message.

Undeterred, we submitted our response anyway because it's important that we take every opportunity to get our message across. If we didn't we may as well pack up and go home. (And as someone else once said, this is a marathon not a sprint.)

Anyway, I was interested to read another submission to the same consultation.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (great title) is Imperial Tobacco's response to the Draft Tobacco Control Plan for Wales and I've singled it out because, unusually for such documents, it's written in plain English and it makes a point of standing up for the sorely neglected consumer.

Here's a taste:

The Government's tobacco control policies have never been subjected to proper evaluation. There is therefore no basis on which to claim that the decline in smoking rates is a direct result of [previous] policies ...

The Plan contains multiple references to unelected anti-smoker groups, indicating an alarming level of undue influence on policy formulation and implementation. For example, ASH Wales are featured no less than 39 times in the 45-page Plan. Such levels of influence from vested interest groups invariably lead to unrealistic, unachievable and ineffective policies ...

Rather than talking up what it sees as the benefits of the smoking ban, we would ask the Government to be more forthcoming in its Plan about the significant unintended consequences, in particular the devastating impact that it has on local community pubs. It is now beyond all reasonable doubt that the smoking ban has had the biggest single impact on accelerating pub closures in the UK since 2007. This provides a stark warning to those considering increasing smoking restrictions in and around pubs ...

Government has no mandate to regulate the private lives of adults who have chosen to use a legitimate product. Furthermore, the evidential base for the introduction of invasive legislation is often absent or highly flawed. For example, one report that was extensively recycled in the media claimed that second-hand smoke was "23 times more toxic in a vehicle than in a home". Such claims are without any substance and have been roundly refuted by the evidence.

The use of the term 'smoke-free' is a deliberate attempt to play down the real intention of the introduction of more restrictions and bans. More bans amount to more restrictions on personal freedoms ... Denormalisation is not a strategy that is pursued in other public areas as it has been shown to be ineffective and counter-productive, alienating those whom policy-makers are trying to influence.

You can download The Good, the Bad and the Ugly here. Definitely worth a read.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (9)

Page not found , Simon

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 11:56 | Unregistered Commentersheila

If that's an example, then good and about bleeding time! Perhaps they finally realise they have a lot more support than Public Health has propagated. Pity they chose to act like scalded children at the important time, though. They've made life difficult for themselves.

Come on, Simon, well done for any efforts on your part in getting BT to get their heads out of their large orifice, now get the hospitality industry to follow.

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 12:14 | Unregistered CommenterFrank

Thanks, Sheila. Should be OK now.

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 12:28 | Unregistered CommenterSimon

Imperial Tobacco really should be congratulated for a frank, no nonsense response.

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 14:43 | Unregistered CommenterDave Atherton

Do you seriously believe the Welsh Assembly will take the slightest bit of notice of this? They haven't listened before why should they now. Only a sea change in the minds of politicians will bring about a deeper understanding, and reasoned argument, however well thought through will fall on deaf ears – well into the future

Before submitting anymore papers, I would suggest you attach another document that strongly requires that your contribution be acknowledged, otherwise what’s the point of all this hard work in putting a document together when nobody is listening.

There’re minds are already made up on this subject. It would be too politically incorrect to listen. A higher media profile would serve us better.

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 14:51 | Unregistered CommenterJJ

I would imagine that it will be dismissed out of hand, unread, since it has been generated by "Big Tobacco". The antis won't countenance anything that they consider the devil's spawn. And Imperial Tobacco is, in their eyes, the devil.

Monday, June 6, 2011 at 16:49 | Unregistered Commenternisakiman

The Government's tobacco control policies have never been subjected to proper evaluation. There is therefore no basis on which to claim that the decline in smoking rates is a direct result of [previous] policies ...

Is there, in fact, a decline in smoking rates? I believe most definitely not. There may well be a decline in the number of tobacco products purchased in the UK, but that is perfectly understandable considering the price. Many people, like us, buy our cigarettes, legally, in Europe.

To my mind, even inferring there has been a decline in smoking is an admission that these denormalisation methods are working!

Other than that, well done Simon and eventually, Imperial Tobacco - it is high time at least one of the Big Tobacco companies stuck their head above the parapet!

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 at 10:45 | Unregistered CommenterLyn

Imperial tobacco could be doing a lot more for its customers. All it seems to be really concerned
with is its shareholders.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 at 21:21 | Unregistered Commentermark

Big Tobacco pulls itself up of the floor in round five after a count of 9 .
About time it was becoming painfull to watch.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011 at 14:53 | Unregistered CommenterC777

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>