ASH, 102 Clifton Street, LONDON, EC2A 4HW.
Tel 020 7739 5902 Fax 020 7613 0531

[VIEW HTML VERSION
http://www.globalink.org/nbuk]

ASH Daily News

19 October 2004

HEADLINES

Ministers accused of suppressing passive smoke study
Tobacco groups say their human rights being denied

FULL TEXT

Ministers accused of suppressing passive smoke study

Following the reporting in yesterday's Evening Standard of a leaked
government report that concluded that passive smoking can kill and that
'no child or adult should be exposed to other peoples smoke', there is
widespread coverage of the story in today's papers.

The Times reports the story under the headline: "Reid 'buries'
second-hand smoke study":

Ministers were accused yesterday of delaying the publication of a report
on the damaging effects of passive smoking for fear of increasing
pressure on the Government to ban smoking in public places.

The leaked study, by the Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health,
suggests that no one should be exposed to second-hand smoke because of
the health hazards.

Campaigners claim that the report was released four months ago but has
been buried by John Reid, the Health Secretary, amid concerns that it
will lead to calls for an outright ban on smoking in workplaces.

The report states that the chances of contracting lung cancer and heart
disease rise by about a quarter after contact with second-hand smoke.
The pro-smoking lobby and the tobacco industry have disputed claims that
passive smoking is a significant danger to non-smokers, but the report
states that the case is overwhelming. It concludes that "second-hand
smoke represents a substantial public health hazard".

James Johnson, chairman of the British Medical Association, said that Mr
Reid appeared to be ignoring evidence of the effects of passive smoking
because it lent greater weight to the need for a smoking ban.

Ministers are preparing to publish their Public Health White Paper next
month, which is expected to include measures to limit smoking in public
places but stop short of a total ban in restaurants and pubs.

"It beggars belief that the Health Secretary is still talking about
'possible' health effects of second-hand smoke," Mr Johnson said. "What
other evidence does he need? If John Reid really wants to protect public
health he should introduce a ban on smoking in public places without
delay."

Source: The Times, 19 October 2004

Times coverage:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2-1317042,00.html
The Independent coverage:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/story.jsp?story=573605
The Guardian coverage:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1330477,00.html
Daily Mail coverage:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in
_article_id=322437&in_page_id=1774



Tobacco groups say their human rights being denied

Britain's tobacco industry yesterday claimed that proposed restrictions
on point of sale advertising were a breach of its human rights.

Cigarette companies, headed by British American Tobacco and including
Imperial and Gallaher, told the High Court that new regulations were so
"draconian" that they amounted to a complete ban on informing consumers
about legal products.

David Pannick, QC, acting for the tobacco industry, said that the
restrictions were disproportionate to the Government's aims of promoting
public health and protecting the interests of children and young people.

The new regulations, which follow a ban on poster advertising in
February, would allow only an A5-sized piece of card to hang at a
cigarette display to promote a brand. Of this promotional poster, 30pc
must be taken up by a health warning that must be surrounded by a black
border of between three and four millimetres wide.

The tobacco companies, which have diverted large amounts of advertising
spend into their point-of-sale activities, are claiming that this is a
breach of their commercial human rights because they "impair the very
essence of commercial free speech".

Health Secretary John Reid is resisting the companies' application for a
Judicial Review of the plans. The companies say that the regulations are
"too blunt an instrument" and prevent the companies from informing
customers about the characteristics of each brand. They claim that they
also prevent companies from establishing new brands.

Mr Pannick also pointed out that the Treasury gets a substantial sum
each year from the sale of tobacco and that the Government has not
banned the sale of tobacco to adults on public health grounds.

Financial Times article:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/313b4e74-216b-11d9-9db7-00000e2511c8.html
Source: Financial Times, Daily Telegraph, Daily Mirror, 19 October
2004


---------------------------------
Unsubscribe:

Public subscribers: http://www.ash.org.uk/?unsubscribe
Globalink members: http://member.globalink.org
----------------------------------