ASH, 102 Clifton Street, London EC2A 4HW Tel: 0171 739 5902
Fax: 0171 613 0531

ASH Daily News

9-11 October, 1999

Headlines

‘Government retreats on tobacco advertising’
‘Tobacco Firms hold Hague to ransom’
‘Safety first is a policy not a promise’
‘Spain’s tobacco deal rolls up two inefficient drags’
Choosing an ethical annuity fund
‘Why gifts from the Net can bring the Vatman calling’
‘British Business link to US political funds’
‘Bad People Deserve Better’
‘6 of the best cigar-friendly restaurants’


Full Text

‘Government retreats on tobacco advertising’

‘The Government has backed down from its tough stance against the
tobacco industry’ reports Sunday Business.

The article continues that ‘The government will please the
anti-smoking lobby with news that the secretary of state will have
powers of enforcement against rebel firms, in addition to enforcement
by trading standards officers.’

The Sunday Mirror reports that ‘Government attempts to impose a
blanket ban on tobacco advertising face a set-back this week in High
Court’ as the tobacco industry is challenging the ban in the European
Court of Justice. The claim ignores the section of the directive that
permits member states to go further than the directive, and argues
that any action can not be taken until the squabble is settled.

Clive Bates, director of ASH, in the Independent said, “We should
still keep in mind and applaud the approaching end of tobacco
advertising”.

The Independent further reports that the Government views this as ‘a
“sensible compromise” between the health benefits of a crackdown on
tobacco and the concerns of the industry.’

However, ‘Instead companies will be given a period of grace for
transitional arrangements…The delay will revive accusations that Tony
Blair’s Government is too much in the pocket of big business’ reports
the Daily Mail.

Source: Sunday Business, Sunday Mirror, The Independent on Sunday,
Daily Mail, and all other Sunday Newspapers, 10 October 1999.

‘Tobacco firms hold Hague to ransom’

‘Tobacco firms are to starve the Tory Party of cash until leader
William Hague reverses his anti-smoking policies. In the last decade
the industry has handed over £1 million to Conservative coffers’
reports the Sunday People.

Source: Sunday People, 10 October 1999

‘Safety first is a policy not a promise’

Peter Riddell in the Times discusses the issue of risk. ‘The public’s
attitude is irrational. Existing risks are far more willingly accepted
than new ones. There is no way that tobacco would be allowed as an
addictive new product today. Yet millions of people still smoke
despite overwhelming medical evidence that this will shorten their
lives’.

‘But the public gets alarmed about the tiny risk of being killed by
infected beef or by a homicidal maniac.’

On external costs related to risk takers, he argues that ‘it is right
that, say, smokers and drivers should contribute through higher taxes’
.

However, The Better Regulation Taskforce under Lord Haskins: ‘Whilst
we recognise concerns over, for example, transport or food safety, it
is important that people understand that the State cannot remove all
health or safety risks, and that a risk-free society is unachievable
and indeed undesirable.’

Source: The Times, October 11, 1999

‘Spain’s tobacco deal rolls up two inefficient drags’

The merger of Seita and Tabacalera ‘combines two small, fat and badly
managed companies. The signs are that it will produce one large, fat
and badly managed company’ writes the Economist.

The Sunday Business lists the two companies problems as including,
poor productivity, over-reliance on its former monopoly positions, two
head offices and joint chairs based in Paris and Madrid respectively
and shareholder’s who have seen no return on their investment.

However the Economist concludes that, ‘the success of the merged firm
could ultimately depend on the behaviour of their European peers’
adding that a number of tobacco companies could also join the group,
including Britain’s Gallaher and Imperial.

Source: Sunday Business, 10 October 1999, The Economist 9 October
1999.

Choosing an ethical annuity fund

Jill Insley, reports that £2.5 billion is held be retail investments
funds that exclude tobacco, armaments, alcohol or that test products
on animals.

However, because they exclude themselves it is argued that they have
very little influence on them’. Some experts argue that a strict
screening system is no longer suitable but a ‘socially responsible’
method of selecting stocks is more suitable. This system invests in
companies ‘that are trying to make positive changes to the way they
operate’ like BP.

In a similar article, ‘Pick your preferred shade of green’, Sarah
Cunningham points out these funds can also be termed ‘light green’.
However, ‘Most light green funds were too new for anyone to judge how
they were doing’ said, Amanda Davidson, a partner in ethical advisers
Holden Meehan.

Source: The Observer, October 10, 1999

‘Why gifts from the Net can bring the Vatman calling’

Ross Davies provides further coverage that Customs and Excise intends
to clamp down on ‘distance selling’. Traders, like Spanish based
internet trader, cigworld, are breaking the law if they do not arrange
prior arrangements to account for UK charges. Customers, if they do
not pay the extra taxes, face confiscation of the product.

Source: Evening Standard News Extra, 8 October, 1999

‘British Business link to US political funds’

‘British businesses are bankrolling American politicians with
corporate and employee donations worth millions of dollars’ claims
Adam Jones.

The article lists BAT industries, mainly through it’s US arm Brown &
Williamson, as being at the top of the donor’s table. Since 1997, B&W
has donated $681,300 in donations to political organisations as ‘it
tried to find support against tobacco litigation’. The company’s
employees have donated $527,821 to Political Action Committees that
support individual candidates.

Source: The Times, October 11, 1999

‘Bad People Deserve Better’

Emma Simon reports that, ‘specialist annuity providers, such as
Stalwart, offer preferential rates to smokers, as well as the unfit
and unwell. But most life offices refuse to offer better terms’

The article continues that, ‘Insurers claim it would be “immoral” to
pay higher rates to smokers. Adrian Boulding of Legal & General said:
“If we paid higher rates, it might be seen as encouraging people to
start smoking. It would not give older smokers any incentive to give
up”

Source: Sunday Telegraph, October 10, 1999


‘6 of the best cigar-friendly restaurants’

In London, The Lanesborough SW1, Che SW1, Wilton’s SW1, Teca W1, Monza
SW3, Blueprint Café SE 1 are listed as six of the best cigar-friendly
restaurants.

Source: Evening Standard Es Magazine, 8 October 1999


Karl Brookes
Project Manager
102 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171-739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171-613 0531
0589504040 (Mobile)
01426109768 (Pager)
Web: http://www.ash.org.uk