102 Clifton Street,London EC2A 4HW Tel: (020) 7739 5902 Fax: (020) 7613 0531

EU Tobacco Product Directive

Letter sent by ASH to British MEPs on 6^th June

Dear ...

Re: Tobacco Directive

I am sure youwill be aware of the forthcoming important decisions to be made regarding theproposed tobacco Directive - which will be considered by the EuropeanParliament during the plenary on or around 13^th June with a vote atmidday on the 14th.  In summary, the directive:

• Reduces tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide yields for cigarettes
• Increases the size and clarity of health warnings
• Requires disclosure of additives to tobacco products and their purpose
• Bans misleading light and mild branding
• Creates a process for updating the directive in the light of evolving scientific knowledge.

This is an importantpackage of public health measures aimed at ensuring that the single marketoperates with a high level of health and consumer protection, as required andjustified by the Amsterdam Treaty.  Inno other part of the single market is the need for health and consumerprotection more pressing - over 500,000 EU citizens die each year as a resultof smoking.  Even small changes in thetotal consumption of tobacco have enormous absolute public health implications.  For this reason every decision about tobaccopolicy is essentially a life and death matter.

We are callingon British MEPs to adopt a three-pronged approach to the directive in nextweek's plenary:

1. Resist wrecking delays

It is clearthat there is a concerted campaign to stall the proposed Directive usingprocedural tactics.  I hope that BritishMEPs will do everything possible to ensure the Directive passes through theearly stages of the plenary of 13^th June.  If the Directive is delayed in its passage through the Parliamentnext week this will trigger a delay of 6 months and probably longer.

2. Dismiss challenges to the legal base

The Directiveis part of the European Union's attempt to raise the level of health andconsumer protection within a properly functioning single market.   Because the EU already regulates healthwarnings and tar yields of cigarettes, it is difficult for member states totake action independently and it is therefore properly a matter for theEuropean Union.  There have been moves -notably in the Legal Affairs Committee - to suggest the Directive does not havea proper legal base.  In our view, thisis a wrecking tactic primarily inspired by tobacco interests rather than rootedin any genuine concern for the correct application of EU law.   In fact, the Directive is well foundedunder Article 95 of the Amsterdam Treaty, which requires the single market tooperate with a high level of health and consumer protection. The legal servicesof the European Parliament have recently issued an opinion to this effect andthis concurs with the views of the legal services of the Council and theCommission - and, frankly, with common sense. The proposed Directive is a recasting of existing Directives whose legalbase is assured and unchallenged and the legal objections really do not holdwater.  I hope the Environment Committeewill roundly dismiss spurious objections related to the legal base.

3. Adopt the Environment Committee report and amendments

The report andpackage of 48 amendments proposed by the Environment Committee is carefullycrafted and represent a very constructive development.  In total this a worthwhile improvement ofthe Directive beyond the Commission proposal and current view of the Councilworking party.  We are advocating astraightforward approach of endorsing the Environment Committee's report (PE232.878) in full.

A note about health warnings

On thecontroversial matter of the size of warnings, the evidence supports the simpleconclusion that 'size matters', and the bigger the warning the better theimpact.   We have assembled evidence tothis effect with links to original documents on the ASH web site at www.ash.org.uk/papers/warnings.html.   Even if the improved consumer informationand warnings leads only to (say) a 0.1% change in consumption, the publichealth benefit would be several hundred lives saved each year - greater thanmany high profile public health issues confronting the EU.  The evidence from Poland, where warningswere increased to 30% of the pack face is that the effect would be many timesgreater than this.

On this basis,we advocate warnings as large as possible, and we support the EnvironmentCommittee proposal to have warnings covering 40% of the front and 50% of theback of the pack.  We would stronglyoppose any position taken in the parliament that led to warnings covering lessthan 30% of the pack face - it would be completely unacceptable for the EU tobe setting standards below those already operating in Poland, and we should beaspiring to the best practice.  Warningsin Canada will soon be increased to 50% of both pack faces - located at the topand with pictorial content to strengthen the impact.

I would like tostress the importance of the Parliament's deliberations to the health communityin the UK.  Some 600 organisations from around the country are represented in the TobaccoAction Network co-ordinated by ASH. We are keen to involve them all in campaigning for the best possibleoutcome at the plenary.  You can, therefore,be assured of a considerable show of support in the UK for a progressiveposition adopted by the parliament during the plenary.

Please contactme by phone or e-mail if I can help in any way or clarify the pointsherein.  My e-mail address is clive.bates@dial.pipex.com.

Yours sincerely
Clive Bates
Director

Registered Charity No 262067
Action on Smoking and Health is a company limited by guarantee.  Registered inEngland No 998971.  Registered address as above