As the international health community increases its efforts to fight smoking, the International Tobacco Growers Association (ITGA) is worried about the impact it would have on the livelihoods of millions of African tobacco growers. The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), established under the World Heath Organization (WHO), calls on signatory countries to implement measures to reduce tobacco use in member countries. To date, 168 governments have signed onto the treaty.

Countries operating under the anti-tobacco treaty have taken a variety of measures to reduce tobacco usage. In Canada, cigarette packages are concealed under the counter to reduce visual temptation to buy them. Estonia prohibited the introduction of tobacco-vending machines, and Brazil promised that it would work on helping its tobacco growers switch to sustainable alternative crop.

But António Abrunhosa, CEO of ITGA, says the treaty is flawed because it excludes the interests of tobacco farmers.

“For some inexplicable reason, tobacco growers, the very people most affected by the guidelines, are officially excluded from any discussions. Even ministries of agriculture or economy seem unaware of the discussions taking place within the FCTC. There doesn’t seem to be any balanced form of representation whatsoever,” said Abrunhosa in a statement.

ITGA represents over 30 million tobacco growers around the world and says that in some countries, entire communities depend on tobacco as a cash crop, a crop that has been able to maintain a stable market despite the recent global economic recession.

However, countries such as Malawi, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania, which most-heavily depend on tobacco farming, could face the loss of millions of jobs if the demand for tobacco exports is significantly reduced.

At the same time, Africa is also one of the world’s largest consumers of cigarettes, inflicting high health costs on impoverished nations. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, in 2007 Africans smoked 400 billion cigarettes, 15 percent of which came from the illicit tobacco market.

ITGA President Roger Quarles said that the WHO has not yet proposed a viable alternative industry that could replace tobacco farming in Africa.

The director of the FCTC tobacco framework, Laurent Huber, says that to completely implement the treaty in every country would take time, as tobacco-growing countries must find alternative income-generating industries.

“We are promoting public health through the Framework Convention Alliance. … Tobacco is still growing at this stage, there is not immediate risk,” says Huber.

Huber also said that in Africa in particular, the farmers barely make any money from tobacco crops since they need to import the seeds and the pesticides.

Hubert went on to say, “Tobacco is not a normal, usual product. It needs to be treated a little differently because it’s a leading cause of mortality … it’s not an unreasonable response for a major global problem.”

Quarles makes the point, however, that even if banned, tobacco would find its way into the black market since there will always be people who smoke.

“There will always be that 15 percent of people who know the [health] risk factors and are willing to accept the consequences,” says Quarles, pointing out that already a large number of cigarettes are smuggled across the border into Canada to avoid paying high taxes.

But Huber thinks this argument does not hold, and anyone who makes a living off of a product will try to create a sense of fear if such product is at risk of leaving the market.

“Tobacco, like anything else will enter the black market and is an issue of corruption,” he said, adding that most of the cigarette trafficking is coordinated by the tobacco industry in the respective countries.

From theepochtimes.com, June 25, 2010

June 22 marks the first time in American history that terms like light, ultra-light, low, mild and medium can no longer legally be used in the marketing and sale of cigarettes. The United States will be the 71st country (we’re behind, of course) to outlaw the labeling of cigarettes as “light” — an underhanded ploy promoting the idea that certain cigarettes have lower tar and nicotine content than others. Given that “light” smokes account for about half the cigarette market, the antismoking legislation, passed last year, stands to throw a wrench in tobacco companies’ deceptive marketing practices. But the tobacco industry is revving up to try to deceive smokers and potential smokers in different ways that may circumvent the new law.

Already major light brands are being repackaged with colors associated with, well, lightness. Camel Lights will be Camel Blues. Marlboro Lights and Ultra-Lights will, respectively, be Marlboro Gold and Silver. Pall Malls previously trumpeted as filtered, lights and lights menthol will now come in a rainbow of colors intended to convey tobacco “intensity” — red, blue and orange.

The brains behind the $13-billion-a-year cigarette marketing industry know that colors and packaging make a difference. Research has shown that 79 percent of people think that cigarettes packaged in a light blue box contain less tar and are safer than those in a darker hued package. And certain colors — like blue — are perceived to be less strong than, say, red.

In other countries where the practice of labeling cigarettes “lights” has been banned for a while, marketers have turned to using letters and numbers that similarly skew consumers’ perception of the health drawbacks to smoking cigarettes, and ultimately deliver the “same messaging as light or low,” says Gregg Haifley of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Big Tobacco goes to all this trouble, of course, because it pays off. The whole concept of light cigarettes was born of the Surgeon General’s 1964 report that directly linked cigarettes and smoking to cancer and other diseases. Fearing a drop-off in smokers, the industry spun the story that you should pick light or mild cigarettes as an alternative to quitting. (Around that time, a cigarette brand called True featured a female tennis player saying: “Considering all I’d heard, I decided to either quit or smoke True.” The athlete, naturally, picked True.)

Although contemporary cigarette companies officially claim only that “light really refers to flavor,” they’ve been more than happy to let consumers reach their own conclusions.

From alternet.org, June 22, 2010

WASHINGTON – With the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act due to take effect June 22, tobacco companies are lightening up their packaging colors on “light” or “mild” cigarette brands, USA Today reports. The act prohibits the use of the words “light” or “mild” on cigarette advertising or packaging. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and the American Lung Association have accused the tobacco companies of being disingenuous for using lighter colors to convey the “light” or “mild” brands. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued guidance that found many smokers think cigarettes called “light” or “mild” have fewer health risks.

The color changes are “a transparent attempt by the tobacco industry to evade the law and mislead consumers,” said Waxman.

“The tobacco industry is masterful in its knowledge of consumer behavior and marketing,” added Paul Billings, vice president for national policy for lung association.

R.J. Reynolds countered that the “smoking experience” is what smokers enjoy about “light” cigarettes. Coloring the packaging on those brands will alert smokers that the taste they enjoy is still available, said David Howard of R.J. Reynolds, which makes the Salem brand.

Salem cigarette packages had been the same green shade but now “lights” are housed in a lighter green and white, while “ultra lights” come in a pale gray and white. “The bottom line is there is no safe cigarette…and that is certainly well-known among adult cigarette consumers,” said Howard.

FDA spokeswoman Kathleen Quinn said the ban encompasses “mild,” “light” and “low” but that the agency would look into any probably violations on a case-by-case basis.

nacsonline.com, June 15, 2010

National’s Tau Henare says tobacco company Philip Morris may be forced to appear before the Maori Affairs select committee’s inquiry into the tobacco industry. British and American Tobacco have previously fronted but Henare, who chairs the committee, told the Sunday Star-Times that Philip Morris had refused. “It’s about respect for the constitutionality of the Parliament. We make laws, we get rid of laws, and I think we deserve a bit of respect,” Henare said.

He wrote to the company last week warning it he will ask Parliament’s Speaker Lockwood Smith to issue a summons to force it to show up.

Under Parliament’s rules this is possible but is rarely used.

A spokeswoman for Philip Morris said the company “would consider the committee’s request to appear before it.”

June 7, 2010, tvnz.co.nz

We examine China’s plan to ban smoking in public by January 2011, despite being home to a third of the world’s smokers. When the smoking ban goes into effect in China next year, smoking will be banned in all public venues, workplaces and public transportation. However, anyone who lives or has lived in the world’s biggest tobacco consuming country — 30 percent of the worlds smokers, world’s largest tobacco grower and cigarette producer — rightfully doubts how effective the new law is going to be.

Try, try again

In 1995, the Guangzhou government banned smoking in public spaces, but the minor fine of RMB 20 dished out to offenders did not deter people. After a while, the smoking ban existed on paper only.

In 1997, Hunan Province introduced a smoking ban in public venues, but it met the same end as the Guangzhou law. The Beijing government declared a smoking ban in public places in May 2008, nonetheless, the ban did little and anti-smoking volunteers, when they were around, were ignored with no enforcement ability.

Shanghai implemented a partial smoking ban before the 2010 Expo and although it has helped a bit, technically smoke-free venues around town still have ashtrays on the tables.

Take with one hand, give with the other

It is soon going to be five years since China signed the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control whether the decision by China’s Ministry of Health to ban smoking in January 2011 is merely lip service to meet the commitment that China signed over four years ago.

“Can such a big policy that will have huge effects in so many aspects be carried out within such little time?”

The article is doubtful at best, considering, it says, that China’s state Tobacco Bureau plans in the next five years to create 12 new tobacco brands that will achieve projected sales of RMB 40 billion, and most of the products are to be sold to domestic consumers.

While the Ministry of Health is working hard on realizing the promise made to the WHO, another government body is working on their tobacco sales strategies. We agree, that it doesn’t seem to add up.

If the government could cut the supply of tobacco, and also persuaded smokers not to smoke, then it’d work, but it’s almost a fairy tale, declared researchers.

What people say

Although some voices in cyber space give their blessings to the smoking ban, those in favor are few and far between. Most Chinese citizens have responded negatively to the policy.

“Drainage oil is tolerated but second-hand smoking is not?” asks Yidong Xinyewu.  “With all the cigarettes I’ve smoked in my life, I don’t release as much smoke as any factory chimney. Why not close down some factories first?”

“No smoking in Internet cafes? No smoking at restaurants and bars?! How ridiculous! I suggest the government take control on housing prices and close the gap between the rich and the poor before they deal with cigarettes,” vents citizen Lao Biaoge from Liangshan.

Another comment by Er Yu Xiao Heng compares smoking with drinking. “Smoking only damages health while drinking damages the society and health. Why isn’t drinking banned?”

With such strong voices against the ban, others express their skepticism about how it will be enforced, a common problem for previous provincial smoking regulations.

“It is funny to talk about smoking ban unless a pack of cigarettes was sold for RMB 50 several times more than they are currently sold for or punishment for smoking was as heavy as taking drugs,” says Kuaile Rensheng from Dongguang. “But the government simply doesn’t want to lose the huge tax income from tobacco.”

“If all tobacco factories were closed, no one would be smoking, but there’d be so much tax loss,” agrees Gu Guanglin.

With cigarettes so cheap and the country’s long smoking history, this smoking ban looks like the government is drawing in more than it can exhale. We look forward to finding out. At least until 2011 Chinese scientists have found a good use for all those cigarette butts lying around.

The popularity of brands such as Lucky Strike and Pall Mall cigarettes continues to boost sales at British American Tobacco, although the company said that a shrinking tobacco market and cash-strapped consumers were denting cigarette volumes.

“Our consumers are finding economic conditions difficult and volumes suffered as a result of market size declines,” said Paul Adams, chief executive of British American Tobacco.“However, there was continued pricing momentum and good growth in market shares, leading to solid revenue growth. We remain on track for the year.”

Sales volumes of Lucky Strike grew by 8 per cent in the three months to the end of March, whilst Pall Mall grew by 10 per cent. The Dunhill brand increased volumes by 24 per cent, after BAT changed the brand of its Carlton cigarettes in Brazil to “Carlton by Dunhill”.

In the three months to the end of March, revenues in constant currencies grew, helped by the acquisition last year of the Indonesian tobacco group Bentoel Internasional Investama, although BAT declined to give figures for the increase in turnover.

However, in spite of this sales growth and the gains made in its major brands, total cigarette volumes fell in the period, with organic volumes down 4 per cent, whilst volumes from BAT’s subsidiaries down by 1 per cent.

BAT attributed some of the decline in volumes to a reduction in the size of the overall tobacco market, with total tobacco consumption falling fastest in the markets of Brazil, Japan, Ukraine and Romania.

Notwithstanding a reduction in the size of the Japanese tobacco market, Asia Pacific was the only region in the world where BAT increased its sales volumes, with the group selling 45bn cigarettes, up 5 per cent on the same period last year. The region now accounts for 25 per cent of sales volumes.

In eastern Europe, however, sales volumes fell 7 per cent to 25bn cigarettes, with volumes also falling in western Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, although stable in the Americas.

Shares in British American Tobacco fell 14½p to £21.26 on Wednesday.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don’t cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

By John O’Doherty, Ft

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. — Customers may already have noticed the change—although it has been subtle thus far. But they will starting March 1. That’s the official launch date of the latest line extension from R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.’s Camel brand: menthol cigarettes containing a menthol burst capsule that enhances menthol flavor when squeezed.

The new cigarette supplanted Camel Menthol cigarettes in August 2009 and evolved from the “wonderful success” of Camel Crush (launched September 2008), according to Brian Stebbins, senior marketing director for Camel cigarettes. Crush also contains the menthol capsule, but squeezing it turns that cigarette from nonmenthol to menthol. “Whenever we launch something new, we try to find out who’s interacting with it, who likes it, who doesn’t like it and who has an idea of how to make it even better,” Stebbins told CSP Daily News.

“We identified that there’s a pretty large group of adult menthol smokers who are interested in the capsule technology, but they want to see us use it differently,” Stebbins said, adding that they want to use it to use it to make menthol cigarettes “even fresher and even cooler at the moment of their choosing, or on demand.”

The soft launch in August included “very minimal communication on packs and on the website for those who were interested.” Stebbins added, “And the idea there was to let those smokers who already choose Camel Menthol have an opportunity to experience the innovation first, let them experience the product first, let them let us know what they think and the response has been very positive.”

As for March 1, Stebbins said, “That is where we actually go out and try and tell the story to a broader audience about the innovation on Camel menthol.” The launch will mean a new look for the packaging, retail communications, retail merchandising and a “very solid” launch promotion program—including direct mail, emails and person-to-person engagements in bars, nightclubs and festivals.

Stebbins described the new packaging as having “a fresher, cooler color pallet that menthol smokers respond very nicely to” and said it will also “tell the story of the product within,” using the Camel mascot. Stebbins also said the name of Camel Menthol Lights will change to Camel Menthol Silver; Camel Menthol will keep the same name. He added, “We will still have a couple of menthol products that are in the market that will not have capsules in them, but they are not a primary marketing emphasis…. That really just kind of depends upon the business opportunity in those markets and retailer choice about what they carry.”

He said the product’s demographics are wide ranging. “Our testing indicates that the adult smokers who are interested span different age groups, they span different brands that they buy from today and it’s male/female. It’s a very broad opportunity, and I think that’s mostly because it’s a provocative innovation. We’re talking about a category, menthol cigarettes, where there’s a lot of sameness, and Camel cigarettes is the exact opposite of that.”

According to a Jan. 17, 1997 New York Times article, Reynolds briefly tested a menthol version of Camel in 1966, but never sold it nationally. Camel Menthols were nationally launched in 1997.

“I think the ‘new news’ here is menthol is growing considerably in the category, and to be frank, until we had introduced Camel Crush, Camel wasn’t getting its fair share of that growth,” Stebbins said.

Although menthol is “expressly permitted” under the recent flavored cigarette ban, there has been concern in the industry. David Howard, an R.J. Reynolds spokesperson, told CSP Daily News, “Obviously, as [U.S. Food & Drug Administration] regulations take effect, one of the things is that there will be a committee looking into menthol…. And certainly, whatever information is needed from us, we’re going to cooperate for any information that they need or assistance that we can provide in that study. But at this time, menthol is specifically not part of the flavored bans and permitted by FDA regulations…. And certainly, we believe it’s a viable product category, obviously; it’s a very large and growing category with adult smokers.”

According to the National Survey on Drug Use & Health Report, published by the Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration, on Nov. 19, 2009, among past-month smokers, the rate of smoking menthol cigarettes increased from 31% in 2004 to 33.9% in 2008. Past-month smoking of menthol cigarettes was more likely among those who were recent smoking initiates (i.e., began smoking in the past year) than among those who were longer-term smokers (i.e., initiated use more than a year ago) (44.6% vs. 31.8% respectively).

By Linda Abu-Shalback Zid, Cspnet.com
February 5, 2010

A new flavor kicked up sales sharply for a Marlboro brand of snuff and helped to boost profits at Altria Group Inc.

And as the tobacco giant’s aggressive push into noncigarette businesses starts paying off on the bottom line, directors yesterday voted to share more of future profits with stockholders.

Other Richmond corporate giants also reported profit gains yesterday for the end of one of the toughest years ever for American business.

At Henrico County-based Altria, parent company of Philip Morris USA, strong earnings led directors to decide they’ll pay about 80 percent of future profits as dividends, up from 75 percent now.

Altria’s profits rose despite a more than doubling in cigarette taxes that led some smokers to quit and others to switch to discount brands.

Though U.S. sales of all makers’ cigarettes fell about 8 percent, smokeless tobacco rose – a trend that many health advocates fear will keep Americans hooked on a deadly product.

For Altria, smokeless tobacco is starting to play an ever-moreimportant role in its business.

One big signal: a 15 percent jump in sales of Copenhagen snuff in the fourth quarter, to 77.9 million cans, mainly because of a new wintergreen-flavored variety launched toward the end of the quarter.

“When you look at the growth in Copenhagen it’s really strongly being driven now by Copenhagen long-cut wintergreen,” Altria Chairman and CEO Michael E. Szymanczyk said yesterday.

The wintergreen-flavored snuff was only the fifth product in Copenhagen’s 187-year history, but Altria Executive Vice President David R. Beran said yesterday that the company is introducing two more varieties early this year.

“Clearly, Cope’ wintergreen is off to a pretty good start,” Goldman Sachs analyst Judy Hong said.

Szymanczyk said Altria’s top brand, Marlboro, hung in strongly in a year that saw a 62-cents-a-pack federal tax increase as well as a 9-cent-a-pack price increase in the spring and a 6-cent-a-pack price increase in the fall.

“The loyalty factor remains high. It ended the year in pretty good shape,” Szymanczyk said. Marlboro’s market share slipped just 0.1 percentage point last year.

Beran said Marlboro’s menthol varieties were among the fastest-growing brands last year, largely because of the new Blend 54 version.

He said Marlboro will introduce two new nonmenthol varieties this year, both to be called “Special Blend” and both based on the Marlboro “Red” blend.

Cigarette price increases and what Szymanczyk called a “disciplined” approach to promotions – that is, not doing them as aggressively as some tobacco firms – meant the company’s net revenue per pack rose to $1.27 from $1.15 the previous year. The figure excludes federal taxes and various fees.

Altria’s earnings from continuing operations last year rose 4 percent to $3.2 billion, as revenue increased 21.7 percent to $23.6 billion.

Its shares rose 4 cents to close at $20.03.

Reporting from Denver – The Paragon Theatre’s artistic director, Warren Sherrill, has thought about staging “Agnes of God” for a while.

Problem is, one of the key characters is a psychiatrist who chain-smokes. And in Colorado — one of 25 states with indoor smoking bans — actors can’t light up on stage.

The state Supreme Court last month found the 2006 smoking restriction constitutional, rejecting theater companies’ argument that it infringed on their freedom of speech and stifled artistic expression. Actors, the justices noted, had alternatives to convey the act of smoking.

For Sherrill, the decision means he’ll keep passing on plays in which smoking is integral to the plot or to character development; he refuses to employ methods he considers unacceptable.

Miming is silly, he said. Talcum cigarettes are ridiculous. “The talcum lasts for a couple of puffs. If your actor sucks in rather than blows out, they’ve just swallowed a bunch of talcum,” he said. “And it’s going to look incredibly fake.”

Altering the stage direction so that the character doesn’t light up is equally distasteful, Sherrill said. “To me, that’s sacrificing the writer’s integrity.”

Instead the Paragon, along with Denver’s Curious Theatre, will pursue a legal case, hoping to win an audience with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Of the states that prohibit smoking in public venues such as restaurants and bars, at least six — including California — provide a theatrical exemption, according to the group Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights.

When Colorado passed its ban, theater companies objected. They weren’t demanding to smoke tobacco, but wanted at least the option of using cigarettes made of herbs or tea leaves, said attorney A. Bruce Jones. Such alternatives weren’t harmful, the Paragon and Curious theaters argued, and would allow them to replicate the act and ambience of smoking.

But the law banned smoking of all kinds.

While secondhand tobacco smoke is measurably harmful, particularly to those with heart disease, the risks associated with herbal cigarettes are less understood, said Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer with the American Lung Assn.

However, he said, smoke from non-tobacco sources can be troublesome for people with smoke sensitivities, such as those with asthma. “Just a whiff of smoke will tighten their airways,” Edelman said.

Proponents of the smoking law argue that there is no need for actors to light up. After all, they point out, theater is all about make-believe.

“They aren’t allowed to use real guns. There’s no reason they should be allowed to use cigarettes, because there’s no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke,” said Annie Tegen, senior program manager with Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights.

“No, you don’t shoot a gun, but you don’t shoot a toy water pistol from Kmart, either,” said Chip Walton, artistic director for Curious Theatre. While some props can appear realistic, fake cigarettes don’t do the trick, he said. And smoking often is key to the development or expression of a character, he said.

The Denver theater companies have attracted the support of 1st Amendment advocates, including the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression.

Director Robert O’Neil noted that his group does not take issue with the validity of smoking bans. “But in order to serve those purposes, [states] don’t need to prohibit an otherwise 1st Amendment-protected activity related to artistic integrity,” he said.

The issue of whether actors can puff away on stage may not seem to be a critical one, O’Neil said. “But if you view it as a question of government intervention in a way that destroys artistic integrity, that’s a different matter.”

Mike Saccone, spokesman for the Colorado attorney general’s office, which defended the smoking law, praised the state Supreme Court’s findings. “We’re glad to see they sided with us,” he said. If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to the review, “it would be a fascinating 1st Amendment case.”
By DeeDee Correll
January 18, 2010

LANSING — It could be light up or lights out for a statewide smoking ban this week in the Legislature.

Senate Republicans will take another stab at prohibiting smoking in all workplaces, including restaurants and bars. But whether to exempt Detroit’s casinos remains a key question.

“It’s time to get it moving,” said Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks, who is prodding fellow Senate Republicans with a compromise.

That plan would ban smoking in all public places, but possibly allow it to some extent at the Detroit casino on gaming floors, as well as in cigar bars. Smoking would be banned at the Detroit casino restaurants and hotels, possibly answering concerns of bar owners about giving a competitive advantage to the casinos.

Jelinek and others said with only a couple of weeks before a long holiday break, the Legislature is under pressure to act on an issue that’s been in stalemate for more than a decade.

“It’s an emotional, important issue. They want it done,” said Rep. Bert Johnson, D-Highland Park, who wants Detroit’s casinos exempt from any smoking ban.
Casinos a wild card in smoking ban

Like Godzilla, the push to ban smoking in Michigan doesn’t sleep forever.

The issue resurfaced last week, as Senate Republicans discussed cracking a long-standing impasse: whether to exempt Detroit’s three casinos and cigar bars from a smoking ban that restaurant and bar owners generally oppose.

The revived effort brought Christopher Ilitch, president of Ilitch Holdings Inc., to the Capitol to personally lobby against a smoking ban for casinos. His mother, Marian Ilitch, owns the MotorCity Casino-Hotel.

“Some feel strongly there should be no exceptions, others say there need to be exceptions,” said Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks, who is drafting a compromise bill. “Some say they don’t care, let’s get something done. I think that’s where I am.”

In May 2008, the GOP-led Senate approved a total smoking ban statewide. The Democratic-run House in turn passed a smoking ban that would exempt Detroit casinos, cigar bars, bingo halls and horserace tracks.
No compromise was reached and the issue died unresolved.

Michigan is one of 13 states with no general smoking ban, although the state forbids smoking in state workplaces.

Last month, anti-smoking advocates stepped up lobbying for a total ban. They say smoking is a health hazard to employees — like waiters and waitresses — in workplaces who are exposed to potentially deadly secondhand smoke.

Restaurant and bar owners say the state should not decide whether their customers can smoke in their establishments. They say more and more restaurants become smoke-free as customers demand it.

But Detroit’s casinos remain the wild card.

They argue that a smoking ban would cost them tens of millions of dollars in lost business, as customers go where smoking is allowed, such as tribal casinos that are not subject to state smoking bans. Most of those casinos are in northern Michigan.

The likelihood of competition from new casinos in Ohio also threatens Detroit casinos.

Those cries of potential lost business and jobs in Detroit have been a powerful deterrent to a smoking ban, especially among Detroit-area House Democrats.

One is Rep. Bert Johnson, D-Highland Park, who said there’s no need for a state ban that might harm casino profits.

“I’m an optimist,” Johnson said. “There are cool heads at the table. The people on both sides respect the fact that what we sent over from the House is 98% of what strong advocates want.”

Anti-smoking crusader Sen. Ray Basham, D-Taylor, disagrees. He said allowing smoking anywhere exposes those employees to secondhand smoke.

Basham said if the Legislature can’t reach an agreement, he’ll help lead a campaign for a ballot issue to ban smoking, adding, “I expect it would pass, and it won’t have exemptions.”

That would take money the anti-smoking coalition doesn’t have, said Judy Stewart, spokesperson for the Campaign for Smokefree Air.

“We’d support it in any way,” Stewart said. “It’s just not financially possible.”

To further expand its smoke-free environment, Susquehanna Health has adopted a new policy that prohibits the hiring of smokers and other tobacco users.

Health system officials and legal experts noted the policy, to take effect Jan. 1, is perfectly legal under state law. It affects every position within the health system.

“In Pennsylvania, tobacco users are not a protected class under the law,” explained health system spokeswoman Tracie Witter. “So prohibiting the hiring of tobacco users is not discrimination.”

Everyone who seeks health system employment must apply online, Witter noted. At that time, they are made aware of the policy.

“We have been testing for drugs. We are adding a nicotine component,” she said.

Smokers already employed by the health system will not be screened.

“We are encouraging all our employees to quit smoking,” Witter said.

However, smoking and tobacco use at the three hospital campuses as well as physician practices will continue to be prohibited, a policy that went into effect two years ago.

The smoking ban for new employees, Witter said, means the health system is joining a growing list of hospitals and businesses around the nation that already have adopted similar practices.

The health system’s most recent policy would stand up in a court of law, according to Williamsport attorney Clifford Rieders.

“It is not illegal to discriminate against a smoker. The reason for that is an institution may discriminate against smokers,” he said.

Rieders noted any argument that the American Disabilities Act would protect smokers as a special class of people who cannot reasonably be accommodated fails from a legal standpoint.

On the other hand, that argument successfully could be made in the case of people suffering from certain medical conditions.

Witter noted that as yet, no one has offered up a challenge to the health system’s new policy.

“We are aware that we may lose some top candidates as a result of this policy,” Witter said. “It’s really a demonstration of our commitment to promote healthy behaviors.”

The local chapter of the American Cancer Society endorsed the new policy.

Announcement of the health system’s policy coincides with today’s annual American Cancer Society “Great American Smokeout,” which embraces smoke-free lifestyles.

“As a regional health system and a leader in both medical education and community health improvement, we have an important obligation to practice the healthy behaviors we promote to the general public and to our own employees,” said Susquehanna President and CEO Steven P. Johnson.

“This decision is highly appropriate and consistent with our mission, vision and values, which address the health and well-being of individuals in the communities we serve,” he added.

By MIKE REUTHER
November 19, 2009

Cars, patios and pharmacies are all in the Saskatchewan Party government sights as they plan “quite encompassing” new anti-tobacco legislation expected to be introduced later this fall, Health Minister Don McMorris said Monday.

The government promised new anti-tobacco measures in the throne speech starting the legislative session last week.

Among the measures being contemplated are banning smoking on restaurant and bar patios and in vehicles carrying minors, setting new limits on how close people smoking can be to public buildings and curtailing tobacco sales in pharmacies.

“Allowing pharmacies, especially the big box store pharmacies, to be selling tobacco products, it’s a little counterintuitive to be passing out (smoking) cessation … medicine, for example, as well as selling tobacco at the same time,” McMorris told reporters at the legislature.

He noted some provinces have banned stores with pharmacies from selling cigarettes or have required groceries and big box retailers to keep tobacco products separated from the pharmacy in an area with a distinct entrance.

McMorris said that details of the province’s legislation still need to be worked out but Saskatchewan must take steps to deal with smoking rates that are among the highest in Canada.

“All provinces are looking at the whole piece of trying to drive down the use of tobacco, denormalize it and more importantly, protect the people around a smoker from second-hand smoke,” he said.

Under the NDP, the provincial government instituted a province-wide smoking ban in enclosed public places at the start of 2005. Outdoor patios in bars and restaurants were exempt although some communities, such as Saskatoon, instituted local restrictions on smoking on decks.

A number of jurisdictions meanwhile, including Ontario, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Yukon have already implemented bans on smoking in vehicles carrying minors, with the cut-off point ranging from 16 to 19 years of age.

“Children in particular are especially susceptible to the poison in second-hand smoke, particularly in an enclosed, confined space like a car,” said Donna Pasiechnik, tobacco control co-ordinator of the Canadian Cancer Society’s Saskatchewan division.

In response to concerns about infringing on a drivers’ rights, Pasiechnik notes that cars are already regulated spaces, pointing to seatbelt laws, mandatory children’s seats and drunk-driving restrictions.

As well, the Sask. Party government intends to introduce legislation banning hand-held cellphone use while driving during this legislative session.

As for restaurant and bar patios, Peter Van Loon, an educator with the Lung Association in Saskatchewan, said smoking should not be allowed in spaces where people are gathered together.

“Usually in a patio situation you’re clumped quite closely together, and frequently there’s not actually good wind flow because there can be partial roofing and that kind of stuff around there. And frequently the servers are very close, so it’s a concern for the people working there,” he said.

Van Loon said another benefit of a province-wide ban on smoking on patios is that it would level the playing field between restaurants that are able to have decks and those that can’t and between communities.

But Tom Mullin, president of the Saskatchewan Hotel and Hospitality Association, said the move will be a blow to rural hoteliers who were hard-hit by the smoking ban four years ago.

Many businesses sunk a considerable investment into building patios precisely because of the smoking law, he said.

However, the association won’t be “duking it out” with the government this time because public opinion is likely on its side, said Mullin. Instead, the hospitality industry will press for a better deal with the province on liquor sales.

Ray Joubert, registrar of the Saskatchewan College of Pharmacists, said pharmacists would welcome a move to ban tobacco sales from pharmacies, noting that many already don’t sell cigarettes.

“Generally, it’s a product that’s not compatible with good health and pharmacies are places where one goes for good health, health care,” said Joubert, adding that such legislation would level the playing field between small players and large retailers.

By JAMES WOOD, 27/10/09 Paherald