Ministerial statement on plain packaging: tobacco control still spinning
Friday, July 12, 2013 at 10:58 The Department of Health has issued a Written Ministerial Statement on plain packaging:
Here's a taste:
Many thousands of responses to the consultation were received, and the views expressed were highly polarised, with strong views put forward on both sides of the debate and a range of organisations generating campaigns and petitions. Of those who provided detailed feedback, some 53% were in favour of standardised packaging while 43% thought the Government should do nothing about tobacco packaging.
Having carefully considered these differing views, the Government has decided to wait until the emerging impact of the decision in Australia can be measured before we make a final decision on this policy in England.
Currently, only Australia has introduced standardised packaging, although the Governments of New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland have committed to introduce similar policies. Standardised packaging, therefore, remains a policy under consideration.
In the meantime, the Government in England will continue to work to reduce smoking rates through ending the display of tobacco in all shops, running national behaviour change campaigns to encourage smokers to quit and through supporting local authorities to provide effective stop smoking services. Our strategy is working – we are recognised as the leading country in Europe for tobacco control and for the first time since records began, adult smoking rates are under 20%.
Interestingly, you have to download and read the actual report on the consultation in order to discover that:
In total, 665,989 campaign responses were received from 24 separate campaigns. Around two-thirds of campaign responses received were from people who are opposed to the introduction of standardised packaging (total of 427,888 responses) and one-third of campaign responses received were from people who are in support (238,101 responses) ...
Bizarrely the report claims that "the consultation was not intended, or designed, to elicit representative samples of public opinion".
As someone has just commented, "Is that not exactly what a ‘public’ consultation is intended to do?!"
One has to conclude that this is a face saving exercise on the part of civil servants at the Department of Health, hence they continue to spin to the bitter end.
There's only one thing that matters, however. The Government has formally announced that it will not introduce standardised packaging of tobacco any time soon.
I think we'll chalk that one down as a little victory.
Click here to download the Consultation on the standardised packaging of tobacco products: summary report.
Reader Comments (11)
Enjoy the little victory but remember, the Conservatives are messing up in ways that matter more to people which will result in a Labour win at the next election by default and then without consultation, evidence, care, consideration or tolerance, Labour will enforce plain packaging.
I expect by the end of their next 5 years term they'll also criminalise us to create that "smoke free future" which won't be. It will criminalise the future's children who may grow up to be smokers and it will drive tobacco underground into the hands of criminals. But then at least the snobs in Labour won't have to see it or smell it. Maybe Dianne Abbott is a Big Pharma stooge like a former predecessor Pat Hewitt who was exposed as a £3000 per day taxi for hire for Big P Lobbyists at the time the blanket ban without promised exemptions was forced upon us. It's a shame that her very clear conflict of interest wasn't known when the ban was imposed or we may have had those exemptions.
As Labour is about the tell the unions to take their money and shove it, the party will need new funders and Big P has far more money that what is now Little Tobacco.
All together now - It's Not About Health!
"Of those who provided detailed feedback, some 53% were in favour of standardised packaging while 43% thought the Government should do nothing about tobacco packaging. "
"people who are opposed to the introduction of standardised packaging (total of 427,888 responses) and one-third of campaign responses received were from people who are in support (238,101 responses) ."
Try as I might I cannot reconcile those two statements. Obviously there is however,in reality, no dichotomy and I just need to simply brush up on my "Political Double Speak" ...or "LYING" as my Gran, benighted simple peasant Volksdeustch woman that she was, would have called it.
I heard a chap from CRUK on the radio this morning speaking of his organisation as if it is dependent for its funds on the donations of little old ladies. I paraphrase a bit but that was the impression left by the exchange, the implication being that CRUK is an innocent minnow faced with the mighty shark, 'Big Tobacco'. Bring on the violins! The moment passed before more details of the charity's funding could be requested.
The mystery of the conflicting statistics neatly explained here http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/plain-packaging-officially-ditched.html
@ Norman.
I think that CRUK does still get a lot of money from individuals by way of bequests. That would be from the days when people thought that CRUK actually did 'cancer research'. Many of the wills donating to CRUK will have been written decades ago.
So, yes, it would not surprise me if CRUK get millions per an in bequests. Unlike ASH, which receives virtually no money from the public. Much of its public donations come from a few people with a vested interest who contribute around £500 per an out of their salaries which are partly dependent upon the existence of ASH. That is where ASH's £10,000 per an of public contributions come from. Remember that ASH does not do 'members'. It terms interested members of the public as 'subscribers'.
Why not quote all the figures Jeremy?
TBD - Jeremy Hunt has been disingenuous in just quoting these figures 53% in favour of plain packs and 43% against. These figures are indeed correct, but why only quote one set of figures that suit the government's agenda. These figures only apply to categories of respondents which relates to whether you were a member of the public, from healthcare, or from business or an organisation. This number totalled 2444 respondents generally.
When this figure is broken down however it reveals a preponderance of NHS organisations and other affiliates such as NGOs which would have access to multiple votes. So, businesses totalled 220, but organisations totalled 530. So you would therefore expect a greater number of elicited votes from health quango’s etc, giving the 53% number.
However when you consider the impact of campaigns run by Forest and the likes of ASH you actually get an accurate picture of how the man and woman in the street would vote, and the 2 to 1 against is a true picture. This really is an important vote that matters, after all the smoker, as a consumer, has the right to voice their opinion on a product that they freely choose to consume and pay heavily for the privilege. This then gives the tolerant non-smokers and smokers the right to be involved at the heart of this consultation and their votes should be quoted with any other figures.
Here is their true intent.
‘The consultation rather, sought information and views relating to the policy on the possible options to standardise tobacco packaging’.
In other words unless similar or derivative options are put forward then the government would go with the plain pack option as if it’s a done thing from the outset.
Politicians just can’t speak in a straight line for more than two sentences!
Incidentally this consultation asked respondents whether they had links to the tobacco industry, what a cheek – no equivalent question was asked as to whether any respondents were linked to health NGOs or any tobacco control lobby grouping.
Sky news
http://news.sky.com/story/1115012/anger-over-cigarettes-and-alcohol-u-turn
Dianne Abbott v Angela Harbutt
Abbott shaking her head when Angela was describing the slippery slope!
Dear god, Dianne Abbott really laboured (pun not intended) the "think of the cheeldren" line in that discussion. I found it difficult not to scream at the monitor.
An interesting concept, that of tobacco companies having "recommended levels" of smoking which will kill half of all users. I haven't come across that one before! There's nothing printed on my packs of Golden Virginia suggesting that I smoke twenty (or however many Ms Abbott thinks is "recommended") cigs a day.
I'll have to watch Angela V Diane Abbott, However, The Evening Standard reported it was all down to David Cameron's adviser Lynton Crosby but as I have said before the Conservative's are petrified of UKIP and they know voters are turning there backs on them and originally an announcement was made and also the ban on smoking in cars was not going ahead just before the recent County Council elections, and of course the hard work that Simon & Angela contributed to the "Hands of our packs"campaign and pointing out that plain packaging will lead to many counterfeit cigarettes flooding the market.
Abbot would not answer the question, "Why not ban tobacco?"