Australian court defers ruling on tobacco packaging

Australian judges hearing a legal challenge to new laws requiring plain packaging for cigarettes deferred their decision Thursday until a later date, yet to be decided.

Four cigarette companies, led by British American Tobacco (BAT), have contested the new law in a High Court hearing, claiming it infringes their intellectual property rights by banning brands and trademarks from packets.

The government has said it is confident it will see off the challenge to the legislation, which will see all cigarettes sold in the same drab olive-green packets and graphic health warnings from December 1.

Chief judge Robert French said the court would retire to consider its position and return judgement in the closely-watched case at a future date. It was not clear when the decision could be expected.

Closing arguments in the case saw lawyers acting for Japan Tobacco International (JTI) producing a packet of rat poison in court, saying warnings for the toxic substance were modest compared with those planned for cigarettes.

Government lawyers had argued that the new laws were similar to the regulation of other harmful substances such as rat-killer.

Australia is the first country to mandate plain-packaging, but the ground-breaking move is being closely watched by other countries considering similar approaches, including Britain and Canada.

New Zealand said Thursday it had agreed "in principal" to go ahead with laws mandating similar plain packaging, subject to public consultation later this year as part of a wider strategy to stamp out smoking in the country by 2025.

Canberra says its plan is aimed at reducing smoking-related deaths, but JTI, British American Tobacco, Imperial Tobacco and Philip Morris have argued that it infringes their trademark rights.

Australia estimates it has 15,000 deaths each year from tobacco-related illnesses.

Counterfeit cigarettes and tobacco found in shop raids

COUNTERFEIT cigarettes and illegal tobacco have been seized in a major operation by Swindon Council and Wiltshire police.

There were raids on four stores in Manchester Road yesterday morning and in one, which cannot be named for legal reasons, 340 suspected illegal cigarettes and 400g of tobacco were found.

The operation, codenamed Levi after one of the sniffer dogs taking part, saw trading standards and police search stores across town after intelligence suggested some were involved in the sale of fake or non-duty tobacco.
It was the first time sniffer dogs, provided by private firm Wagtail UK, have been used in a trading standards operation in the town.

Later in the day trading standards officers also visited up to a dozen other premises across the town.

Phil Thomas, the head of public protection for the council, said: “These were co-ordinated raids with police and sniffer dogs on shops we have gathered intelligence on.

“Our main concern is any link to organised crime but there are also the health implications of counterfeit cigarettes.

“The problem is everywhere, it is nationwide – 10 per cent of all tobacco products are illicit.”

PC Paul Bezzant, of the town centre neighbourhood policing team, said: “This trade can have impacts on the community and we know from past experience there is a link to other criminality.”

Cigarette butts are the most common pieces of litter

Do you know the most common piece of litter in the country? Cigarette butts.

They're all over the place! 287 billion cigarettes were sold last year in the United States and many of them end up on roadsides, beaches and parks.

Cigarette butts contain cancer causing chemicals and heavy metals that can make their way into soil and waterways.

As you can see behind me there are hundreds of cigarette butts under the bypass.

People will usually flick it out of their car window before getting on the highway.

And it is doing more damage than you might think.

Billions of cigarette butts are littered each year.

"Over the years people have not thought of that as litter, it has been acceptable to just flick a cigarette butt out of your car window," said Judy Bowles, Keep Albany Dougherty Beautiful.

Contrary to what you may believe, the filters are not biodegradable and Bowles says it can take up to 300 years for them to break down.

And not only are they an ugly sight, but the toxic residue in cigarette filters is damaging to the environment.

"Those cigarette butts go down into the storm drain which takes it directly into the flint river untreated and tobacco is one of the most potent drugs known to man in its pure form, and so it really bothers the ecosystem," said Bowles.

And they are incredibly toxic, loaded with carcinogens and heavy metals that can make their way into waterways, putting marine life in danger.

"So think about all of those bass fishermen wanting to fish, well you know bass will get pretty much anything, and pretty soon you are going to have bass filled with cigarette butts," said Steve Allen, Albany Rotary Club President.

Which is why some civic club members want smokers to stop flicking their cigarette butts along roads. "I've seen people dump their ash trays out, I mean it is just horrendous that these smokers don't think that they are littering when they do this," Allen.

The Albany and Dougherty County Rotary Clubs are active in the "No Butts Please" campaign.

"It brings a little awareness to people, we hand out these little cigarette butts trays for them to keep in their car and we try to ask them if you smoke, please use this and then dump it out, don't throw your trash out to where we have to pick it up," said Allen.

He hopes once people know the truth, they will be much more hesitant to unthinkingly flick their cigarette butts on the ground.

If caught throwing your cigarette butt out of the window, you could receive a fine of up to $1,000.

Transportation officials say 51 billion pieces of litter were thrown on U.S. highways in 2010, and 38 percent was tobacco products.

Cigarettes to double in price from August

The price of cigarettes in Dubai will double from about Dh8 to Dh16, starting in August.
The increase will be in the form of a tax applied by Dubai Municipality.

The move is aimed at making it difficult for young people to buy cigarettes, said Wedad Al Maidoor, head of tobacco control at the Ministry of Health.

"This is great news," she said. "It will make the UAE a pioneer in the region, and others will be motivated to follow. Kids will not be able to afford it because it'll be too expensive."

Qadi Al Murooshid, director general of Dubai Health Authority, also welcomed the price increase. "We are very happy with this step and pleased with this move to protect our environment," he said.

Figures from the authority suggest 17 per cent of Dubai residents are smokers, with men five times more likely than women to smoke, and about 11 per cent of young people smoke cigarettes.

The average cost of a pack of cigarettes in a grocery is Dh8, of which Dh4 is tax. Petrol stations charge a dirham more. Even doubled, the new price will be considerably lower than in the UK, where cigarettes retail for the equivalent of about Dh42.

The UAE imposes a 100 per cent customs tax on all imported tobacco products, but the amount is so small that consumers barely notice it, Dr Al Maidoor said.

Health officials have been working with the Ministry of Finance since 2010 to put an additional 100 per cent federal tax on tobacco, but no action has yet been taken.

"If the tax is implemented, a portion of it would be used for combating tobacco, including educational initiatives and the treatment of chronic diseases such as lung cancer," Dr Al Maidoor said.

"But it's a very difficult and complicated process as each emirate has its own customs port and wants to apply its own requirements."

A bylaw proposed by the health ministry in 2010, which would ban indoor smoking throughout the country and require stores to apply for a licence to sell tobacco products, would raise prices even further, Dr Al Maidoor said.

"An additional tax would be charged to the retailer, and therefore the store would be required to increase the price," she said. "This would bring us even closer to prices in the US or the UK."

Most smokers said yesterday the price increase would cause them to smoke less, but it would not motivate them to give up.

"I will not quit, but I won't smoke as frequently," said Daniel Chaalan, 25, a business owner from Syria. "But this is a great move for school children who have a very low income."

Hassan Khaleel, 29, an IT consultant, said an increase in price would cause him to smoke less but he would "cherish the moment" he has with every cigarette.

"Actually it would make me feel more special," he said. "I would value the cigarette more, enjoy it and try to smoke it at just the right time."

Others said they would find a way around the high prices.

"It simply means I'll have to buy more cigarettes from duty free at the airport, or economy packs from other emirates," said Mohammed Ali, 29, a Palestinian. "To truly make a difference, this would have to be applied countrywide."

Health experts nevertheless praised the price increase as an important step to combat smoking, which is the main risk factor for heart disease, the leading cause of death in the UAE and worldwide.

"There are two important factors to reduce smoking," said Professor Sydney Smith, president of the World Heart Federation. "One is the prevention of second-hand smoking, and the other is taxation. In this part of the world, people start smoking as early as 11 or 12, not 18 or 19, so taxation has great potential here."

Combined efforts in the US have helped to reduce the smoking rate among adults from 30 to 20 per cent. According to last year's G20 report by Bill Gates, a tobacco tax of 10 cents in high-income countries, six cents a pack in middle-income countries and two cents a pack in low-income countries could result in a revenue of US$10.8 billion (Dh39.7bn) a year.

"This is phenomenal, if we could raise that money and get going," Prof Smith said. "It's one of the really easy things we can do. And to do nothing, really, is to allow something bad to happen."

Ft. Worth Weighs Hiring Ban on Smokers

In the bad old days, discriminatory employers posted signs saying: “Irish [or fill in the blank] Need Not Apply.” Now the city of Ft. Worth is considering saying that same thing to smokers.
Though 29 states have enacted legal protections for smokers, Texas isn’t one of them, reports the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram. State and city governments looking to fill jobs can legally tell smokers to get lost.
Already, a variety of private sector employers, including Texas’ Baylor Health Care System, ban the hiring of smokers. As justification, they say smokers claim more sick days and incur higher health insurance costs. The Centers for Disease Control have estimated that smoking or exposure to second-hand smoke is responsible annually for $193 billion worth of medical costs and lost productivity.
Still, no municipality–in Texas or anywhere else–has yet gone as far at Ft. Worth is thinking of going. No final decision will be made until after May 8, when the city’s Human Resources Department will report further on the issue to the City Council.
“I think it’s an infringement on the public’s rights to live their life the way they choose to,” Vince Chasteen, president of the city’s employee association, told ABC affiliate WFAA.
Mayor Betsy Price told the station that the ban is worth looking into.
“Certainly we put taxpayer dollars into health care for our employees, and anything that might benefit the health to make our employees more protective and healthy, we’re going to take a look at,” she said.

Powell might be next to ban smoking in parks

Even with one of the lowest smoking rates in the state, “healthiest county” Delaware is pushing for more tobacco prohibitions.

The General Health District in the county wants to ban smoking in all public parks, starting with Powell.

Delaware has been named the healthiest county in Ohio three years in a row by the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

“Our slogan here at the Delaware General Health District is, ‘We are dedicated to your health,’ and as long as there are situations that are harming people’s health, we’ve got work to do,” said health-district spokesman Jesse Carter.

Powell, where the City Council is being asked to consider the ban next month, has been ahead of the curve before on smoking bans, Carter said. Even before Ohio voters passed the Smoke-Free Workplace Act in November 2006, the city had adopted its own smoke-free indoor-air law.

“Powell’s city leaders have shown repeatedly they want a healthy community,” Carter said.

So has Genoa Township, on the other side of the county, which has banned smoking in its parks and in township buildings and vehicles and on its grounds for years. Ashtrays that used to be outside buildings and parks are gone, said township Administrator Paul Wise.

Preservation Parks of Delaware County has partially signed on to the health district’s plan, asking patrons not to smoke in and around the three park playgrounds. Signs erected last fall read, “Young lungs at play! This is a tobacco-free zone.”

People still may smoke on the trails and in the parks, although it doesn’t appear that many do, said spokeswoman Sue Hagan. Cigarette butts are at a minimum, and during concerts and other outdoor events, smokers light up away from the crowd.

“There were questions about being able to enforce it and whether it made a lot of sense because people were outdoors,” Hagan said. “But we wanted to make a start.”

Neither Metro Parks of Franklin County nor the Columbus parks system bans smoking.

Woody Woodward, executive director of the Ohio Parks and Recreation Association, said he wasn’t aware of any specific parks systems that have banned smoking, but he thinks there are a few.

“I have talked to a couple of folks that looked at that, and it’s pretty difficult to enforce,” Woodward said.

Carter said anything the county can do to reduce secondhand smoke and improve the county’s health is worthwhile.

“When it comes to trying to make sure children don’t pick up the habit, all kinds of support is needed,” he said. “A sign in the park that says ‘No smoking here’ will help along those lines.”

Incoming Lorillard CEO Kessler made $13M in '11

Lorillard Inc. CEO Murray Kessler received a pay package valued at $13 million in his first full year on the job with the nation's third-biggest tobacco company, according to an Associated Press analysis of a regulatory filing.

The pay package came in a year when the maker of Newport, Kent, True and Maverick cigarettes saw its profit rise nearly 8 percent to $1.11 billion and its revenue excluding excise taxes increased about 10 percent to $4.45 billion. Shipments rose nearly 7 percent to more than 40 billion cigarettes, compared with an estimated industry decline of 3.5 percent.

The compensation deal was disclosed in an annual proxy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission filed Thursday.

Kessler, who joined the company in September 2010, received a salary of $1.2 million and a $3.5 million performance-based bonus in fiscal 2011. The value of his stock options and stock awards totaled $8.3 million.

The 52-year-old, who also serves as board chairman, received $3.7 million for 2010.

Lorillard also announced that it will hold its annual meeting May 17 in its headquarters city of Greensboro, N.C., where shareholders will elect two directors to its board. Lorillard, the oldest continuously operating U.S. tobacco company, spun off from Loews Corp. in 2008.

The Associated Press formula calculates an executive's total compensation during the last fiscal year by adding salary, bonuses, perks, above-market interest the company pays on deferred compensation and the estimated value of stock and stock options awarded during the year. The AP formula does not count changes in the present value of pension benefits. That makes the AP total slightly different in most cases from the total reported by companies to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The value that a company assigned to an executive's stock and option awards for 2010 was the present value of what the company expected the awards to be worth to the executive over time. Companies use one of several formulas to calculate that value. However, the number is just an estimate, and what an executive ultimately receives will depend on the performance of the company's stock in the years after the awards are granted. Most stock compensation programs require an executive to wait a specified amount of time to receive shares or exercise options.

Tobacco use examined

St. Olaf may be a dry campus, but it is certainly not to- bacco-free. It is not uncommon to walk out of Buntrock Commons and bump into several students smoking on sur- rounding benches or just outside of the doors. This occurs outside of the entrance to dorms as well, and the phenom- enon is not limited to cigarettes. Students also use pipes, hookahs and cigars.

The fact that some students on campus smoke does not mean that St. Olaf is experiencing a tobacco-addiction epi- demic. However, the amount of tobacco use on campus gave students Miriam Brown ’12 and Juliette Gibes ’14 enough cause to present a documentary entitled “Tobacco: The Un- filtered Truth” in Viking Theater on Tuesday, March 27. By doing so, they sought to educate students about the hard- ships of tobacco addiction and quitting.

Brown commented that the documentary corresponds with previous attempts to address tobacco use at St. Olaf. “We were prompted to show this documentary because of a campaign that was started last year to make campus tobacco-free,” Brown said. “The movie was used as a start- ing piece to generate discussion and conversation about the possibility of St. Olaf being tobacco-free.”

Brown and Gibes hoped not only to give non-smokers an empathetic view of the difficulties of addiction, but also to offer smokers “on-the-screen role models” who had successfully quit smoking. The event was partly held in response to last year’s tobacco-free campus campaign, which Gibes described as being “insensitive to the difficulty involved in quitting smok- ing.”

According to Brown, the documentary advocates important ideas for smokers and non-smokers. “In order to fight to- bacco addiction, we shouldn’t blame those who smoke,” she said. “We need to look at the macro-causes of addiction and target the tobacco companies who profit from the addictive properties of nicotine.”

The event concluded with a discussion on how to assemble a take-home “quit pack.”

“Addiction is an individual journey,” Gibes said. “Not all become addicted the same way or for the same reasons. This is what makes quitting difficult.”

Besides enlightening students about tobacco’s role in the corporate world, “Tobacco” addressed common misunder- standings between non-smokers and ad- dicts.

“I’d like students to learn that it is use- less to simply tell a smoker to ‘just quit,’” Brown said. “They are victims of an addic- tion and of corporations who use trillions of dollars of advertising to ensure that

they stay addicted.” “Don’t bash on smokers,” Gibes added.

“Many try to quit multiple times and some never succeed.”

Although the event was described by Brown as a “stand-alone” associated with the Northfield Office for Public Health, it seems to reflect ideas similar to the cam- paign to ban tobacco on other college campuses, like Gustavus.

Like St. Olaf students, the majority of Gustavus students run into secondhand smoke near entrances to dorms and other school buildings. Over half, 53.1 percent, of the Gustavus population favors a cam- pus-wide ban of tobacco.

Brown notes that “unlike other colleges, onlyaverysmallportionofSt.Olaf’spop- ulation smokes.”

Despite the fact that St. Olaf might not have as many smokers as other college campuses, the film “Tobacco” suggests that there is room for improvement. If Oles make more of an effort to resolve the tobacco phenomenon, it is possible for St. Olaf to become tobacco-free.

There are no plans for related events in the near future. Until a follow-up event for “Tobacco” is scheduled, Brown encourag- es smokers and non-smokers to find more information on and help with addictions at the Wellness Center and health services.

Letter: Dispense with tobacco sales

As a father of two and a resident of Albany County, I have to say that I was disappointed in your editorial opposing the end of tobacco sales in Albany County pharmacies ("Good idea, bad policy," March 12). Arguments against this restriction were made but they just didn't add up to enough.

Becoming a parent has put a welcome burden on me to ensure that I make choices and act to protect my children and help them become healthy adults and citizens. I'm appalled when I walk into a pharmacy with my child, and we're forced to stare at tobacco marketing behind and all around the counter, just in order to purchase medicine.

I agree that individual choice and behavior need to play a strong role in our health. What I don't believe is that individuals or businesses can address the health of our communities alone.
The Times Union expressed concern over government micromanaging our lives, but our communities are already being regulated — by the tobacco industry. They spend $1 million an hour nationally, $1 million a day in this state, marketing their addictive and deadly products.

According to the Center for Public Health & Tobacco Policy at New England Law School in Boston, that's more than double what is spent on marketing for junk food, soda and alcohol, combined.
The concern over potentially regulating every other "unhealthy" product doesn't stick. In order to sell cigarettes, a business has to be a licensed tobacco retailer. I don't recall hearing about licensed junk food retailers or licensed soda retailers. That's because tobacco products are in a league of their own: They kill one to two out of every three people that use them.

The power wielded by the multibillion-dollar tobacco industry is not something that can be countered by individual choice alone. I applaud Albany County Legislator Tim Nichols for taking a stand and representing the collective individuals who aren't against freedom of choice but believe we have a right to be provided the healthy choice first.

Rare loss for tobacco police

Efforts to impose a de-facto prohibition on the sale of tobacco products took a fortunate hit recently when a federal judge struck down a Worcester ordinance banning storefront signs that advertise the availability of specific cigarette brands.

Nobody questions the ill effects of tobacco, which are loudly proclaimed everywhere from TV to the very packaging in which those products are offered for sale. But it remains a legal commodity, and some still choose to smoke or chew it despite knowing it can lead to one's early demise.

An effort to ban it outright, as happened with alcohol in the early part of the last century, would likely have similarly disastrous results and make the current carnage surrounding illegal drug sales pale by comparison.

So some have chosen to get around an actual ban by making it as difficult as possible to sell or consume tobacco.

In North Andover, for instance, the Board of Health is considering a law — already in effect in some two dozen Bay State communities — that would prohibit local pharmacies from carrying tobacco products on their shelves. Should such bans become commonplace, look for chocolate bars and other kinds of candy to become the next target for the self-appointed lifestyle police.

But according to U.S. District Judge Douglas Woodlock of Ipswich, Worcester's advertising ban went too far. In fact, he found it a violation of the First Amendment.

"The broad sweep of the ordinance suggests that the defendants did not consider how to tailor the restrictions so as not unduly to burden the plaintiffs' free speech rights and the rights of adults to truthful information about tobacco products," Woodlock wrote in his decision.

The city has not yet decided whether it will appeal, but we would hope a higher court does not find that the effort to discourage tobacco sales trumps Americans' right to speak their minds.

Out of sight, out of mind: Cigarettes disappear from supermarket displays from today to discourage teen smokers

A ban on tobacco promotion comes into force today in a bid to cut down on the numbers of smokers and deter young people from taking up the habit.
From midnight supermarkets across England were forced to hide cigarettes under the counter or behind shutters.
The Department of Health said the move was in response to evidence that cigarette displays in shops can encourage young people to take up the habit.
More than 300,000 children under 16 try smoking each year and 5 per cent of children aged 11 to 15 are regular smokers, according to its figures.
Meanwhile 39 per cent of smokers say that they were smoking regularly before the age of 16.
Health Minister Anne Milton said: 'We cannot ignore the fact that young people are recruited into smoking by colourful, eye-catching, cigarette displays.
'Most adult smokers started smoking as teenagers and we need to stop this trend.
'Banning displays of cigarettes and tobacco will help young people resist the pressure to start smoking and help the thousands of adults in England who are currently trying to quit.'
Speaking on BBC Breakfast, Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said the ban was part of a move to ensure 'we no longer see smoking as a part of life'.
''It's also about supporting smokers who want to give up.
'There's more than a third of smokers who say they want to stop. Each year we have nearly 800,000 smokers who try to quit, 50 per cent succeed.
'We want to continue to increase that proportion, help more people to stop.'

3 Stores Caught Allegedly Selling Cigarettes to Minors

Employees at three stores in Calabasas were caught allegedly selling cigarettes to minors during a sting operation conducted by the local sheriff's station on March 30, several months after all local tobacco product retailers passed the same inspection.

Clerks at the local 7-Eleven and Ralphs failed to check for an ID when an undercover tried to buy a pack of Marlboro Lights, while a worker at the Shell on Las Virgenes Road examined a minor's ID but sold the pack anways, according to a deputy's report.

Each time a transaction was completed, a Malibu/Lost Hills Sheriff's Station deputy entered the story and cited the employee.

In 2009, the City Council implemented an undercover operation that's conducted three times a year to check if all of the 14 stores permitted to sell tobacco products in Calabasas card minors.

City policy states that businesses that are first time violators can be fined $1,000 and have their license to sell cigarettes revoked for three months.

During the previous inspection last December, all businesses passed the inspection and only two were cited for all of 2011.

"I am extremely disappointed to learn about these violations," said Mayor Mary Sue Maurer. "We have zero tolerance for the sale of tobacco products to Calabasas minors and hopefully the violating businesses will be more diligent in the future."

WTO Rejects US Appeal In Clove Cigarette Case

A World Trade Organization appeals panel Wednesday upheld an earlier decision that a U.S. ban on clove cigarettes discriminates against Indonesia, in a blow to the Obama administration's efforts to prevent youth from smoking.

Taking issue with the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act giving the Food and Drug Administration power to regulate the tobacco industry, the ruling found that the law violated global trade rules by banning the production and sale of cigarettes with cloves and many other flavors but not menthol.

The appeals panel said the design and application of the law "strongly suggest that the detrimental impact on competitive opportunities for clove cigarettes reflects discrimination against the group of like products imported from Indonesia."

Nkenge Harmon, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office, said the administration is "very disappointed" in the decision, but remains committed to protecting public health.

The U.S. "will continue to vigorously pursue public health measures in a way that is consistent with the United States trade obligations," she told Dow Jones Newswires.

Indonesia, the world's leading producer of clove cigarettes, challenged the law in 2010 after losing access to a market worth $15 million a year. Jakarta argued the law unfairly favors U.S.-based menthol cigarette makers.

An earlier WTO decision agreed with Indonesia on the discrimination charge, while acknowledging that the law's aim of discouraging young people from smoking was legitimate.

Some consumer groups have expressed concern that a WTO ruling against the law could undermine U.S. health policy.

"This case underscores why countries must insist that WTO rules be altered and that no new agreements use the same corporate backdoor deregulation model," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. She urged the administration to refuse to comply with the ruling.

However, a group of former U.S. Health Department heads and Surgeons General have argued that banning menthol cigarettes would both resolve the trade dispute and benefit public health.

The heads of The Citizens' Commission to Protect the Truth -- Joseph Califano, Health Secretary under the Carter administration, and Louis Sullivan, Health Secretary during the first Bush administration--wrote a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk in December saying a menthol cigarette ban "not only would benefit public health in the United States, it would bring the United States into conformity with its international treaty obligations and avoid the imposition of retaliatory tariffs by Indonesia," the letter concluded."

Once the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body accepts the appeal decision within the next 30 days, the U.S. will have to come up with a plan to comply or face the threat of retaliation by Indonesia. In the meantime, the ban will remain in effect.