Issues, matters arising from the Anti-Tobacco Campaign
By Akinyemi Williams
What could
possibly pass for the take off of Anti Tobacco Campaign can be said to have
started in 1632 when it became illegal to smoke publicly in Massachusetts. But
this had to do more with the moral beliefs of the time and not the health
concerns.
However, in the
1950s, more and more claims linking smoking to lung cancer began to emerge. In
1965, television cigarette ads are taken off the air in Great Britain. In 1971,
television ads for cigarettes are finally taken off the air in the U.S. Anti
Tobacco campaign and their activities have grown over the ages and assumed a
global height in the late 1990s.
This has led to
countries adopting strict measures to curtail smoking and tobacco use. The
reasons for this are few, but the most touted appear to be public healthy.
Canada, Australia and South Africa are among the countries that have latched on
to the bandwagon. The state of New York is also known to be pondering the idea
of further regulating smoking within the state. Recall that Governor of New
York, Michael Bloomberg is one of the funders of the Anti Smoking Campaign
groups.
There
is an inherent danger that the global drive to eliminate tobacco use and
manufacture will take on the same outlook that the drive to eliminate poverty
took in developing countries. The attempt to eliminate poverty through the use
of aid granted to many countries in Africa did not achieve its intended
objectives. In recent years, multi-lateral agencies and others have changed
their strategies, believing more in socio-economic growth or poverty reduction
enabled by either foreign or local investment.
As
funding for tobacco control increases, so also have the organizations involved
in the race to address tobacco related issues. The demand for smoking has
persisted despite the increase in funding and tobacco control advocacy, and in
many situations and countries where stringent regulation have been enacted,
smuggling of tobacco by criminals and terrorists has also increased
tremendously, leading to a decrease in government revenue with no protection
for public health. Australia, Canada and South Africa are ready references.
In Nigeria, Anti
Tobacco Campaign groups have established themselves. In fact, they have revved
up their activities in recent time so much that they have three Anti Tobacco
Bills seating with different arms of government. While one seats with the Lagos
State House of Assembly, another is currently with the Federal House of
Representatives while the third is executive bill championed by the Ministry of
Health.
The
bill seeks to ban smoking in public places and forbids persons under the age of
18 to sell and buy tobacco products. The proposed law, which would amend the
1990 Tobacco Control Laws of Nigeria, also forbids communication between the
manufacturers and consumers.
Drawing
from the Canada misadventure with tobacco regulation, many, this writer
inclusive feared the security implications of allowing the illegal trading in
tobacco to return.
Analyzing Tobacco control
It is
imperative that the debate on social costs and benefits of smoking be assessed
based on empirical economic evidence in our quest to identifying the
appropriate mechanism for controlling tobacco (if there really is the need to),
as the war on tobacco companies has not yielded any meaningful results, in
countries that it has been introduced.
For laws to be properly drafted all issues must be considered and
all stakeholders heard. Developed countries are domesticating the FCTC articles
not only through inclusive strategies but also in the context of their
operating environment. An earlier move
by the UK health department to introduce plain packaging in the UK was aborted
after extensive deliberations with all stakeholders, including the tobacco
industry, simply because such a move would have other unintended consequences
such as increased smuggling among others.
While industry practices must be monitored, there are benefits
associated with the existence of tobacco companies. The reality is that it is
the tobacco companies, and not the tobacco control advocates, who have over the
years assisted the country to reduce smuggling, replacing counterfeit tobacco
products with products that several regulatory agencies can now monitor and
regulate.
Globally, huge sums of money have been pumped into tobacco control
advocacy over the last few decades by philanthropists and many others. However,
the demand for tobacco consumption persists and illegal markets continue to
thrive. As the advocates continue to
focus their energies on the tobacco industry, so do the criminals, smugglers
and illegal marketers continue to smile to the bank, to the detriment of the
public health which the Anti Tobacco groups claims to be protecting.
On one hand, tobacco control advocates report that the incidence
of smoking in some of countries has declined, while on the other hand the media
and enforcement agencies continue to report increased incidences of smuggling.
Tobacco smuggling is often linked to the funding of terrorism and other
criminal activities. Countries like Canada, Ireland and even New York, USA are
some of those affected.
A CNN online report of 17th May 2013 stated
that “A
cigarette smuggling scheme that cost New York State millions of dollars in
sales tax revenue may have raised funds for militant groups.” The reality is that the
strategies deployed by tobacco control advocates are attempting to push the
legitimate businesses out of the picture yet these same strategies are
consequently fueling the entry of smugglers into the scene.
In the case of Nigeria, what needs to be considered is how we are
going to tackle the issue of smuggled tobacco products when the legitimate
tobacco businesses have been driven out. Can the problem of smoking be solved
through the current strategies without proffering alternative approaches?
Definitely not! Millions of people will still smoke, law or no law.
The advocates must ensure that the confusion and distraction that
has arisen recently must not divert all concerned from simple logic, which is
to protect the man on the street who has chosen to smoke irrespective of the
harm associated with doing do. For this
to happen their focus and strategy must change and the existing funds received
must be devoted to less complex areas which will achieve the results. If the
legislators or government are pushed into drafting a bad tobacco law, they will
invariably make matters worse.
This is the bitter truth for whoever cherishes it.
Akinyemi Williams writes in from Lagos, he is
a Public Affairs Analyst and Commentator
0 comments: