Australia first to ban tobacco logos

Australia is poised to become the first nation to require tobacco products to be sold in plain packages, and other countries will follow suit and crimp earnings of companies like British American Tobacco.

Laws passed by the lower house on Thursday and due in the Senate next month will ban logos and colour variations on cigarette packets.

Packets will have to be olive green and carry health warnings within six months from January 1 next year.

“Other countries will follow,” said Anne Jackson, the chief executive of Ash Australia, a non-profit lobby group funded by Cancer Council Australia and the Heart Foundation. “This is a light shining the way for others to do the same and many countries are already considering it.”

Health Minister Nicola Roxon announced the move last April, along with a 25 percent tobacco tax increase and a A$85 million (R643m) advertising campaign to combat smoking, which the government says kills 15 000 Australians each year. Companies have since introduced their own advertising campaigns and legal actions against the move.

This week British American Tobacco lost an appeal for the release of Australian government documents the company said would help it fight the law. The company plans to ask the Australian High Court to review the ruling.

The company would next take its case to the Parliamentary Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, with a hearing scheduled for September 13, Scott McIntyre, a spokesman for the tobacco company, said.

So far the focus had been on the health aspect of the legislation, he said.

“There are a lot of issues outside of health that have to be looked at,” McIntyre said. “There are serious repercussions here. The tobacco company will pursue the case in courts, seeking billions of dollars in damages, if the law is enacted.”

Smoking costs Australia about A$31 billion a year in health and workplace costs, according to the government.

With 15.1 percent of the population aged 14 or over smoking daily, it was the country’s top drug and preventable health issue, the government said.

“There isn’t any safe amount of tobacco you can smoke,” Roxon told Channel Ten television. “It will kill you eventually and we obviously want to make sure the message is loud and clear.”

The tobacco companies say the bill is a breach of the Australian constitution, since plain packaging exceeds the Commonwealth’s acquisition powers. They said they would seek damages for losing the right to use their trademarks, which they claim the government was seizing illegally.

“This would clearly undermine the value of manufacturers’ trademarks and destroy the goodwill built up over many years in consumer brands,” British American Tobacco said in a June 6 submission to the government. “Plain packaging will frustrate brand identification and consumer choice, making smuggled branded products more acceptable to consumers.”

Tobacco retailers convicted

AN investigation by western Sydney health officers recently led to the conviction of four retailers for selling tobacco to people under the age 18.
The offenders were fined various amounts up to $700 and now have criminal convictions.

Under the NSW Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2008, it is a criminal offence to sell cigarettes to anyone under the age of 18 and the maximum penalty is $11,000.

Population health manager Vicky Sheppeard said three tobacco retailers in the Wentworthville area were convicted and fined along with an Erskine Park business.

"Stopping young people's access to cigarettes is important as most adult smokers start smoking before they are 18," Dr Sheppeard said.

"Research shows if the onset of smoking is delayed beyond the age of 18, people are less likely to become regular smokers. It also shows that nearly half of 11 to 15-year-olds who smoke buy their own cigarettes."

Dr Sheppeard said it was a concern that young people could still easily buy cigarettes.

"We want tobacco retail outlets to know that those who break the law can expect to be prosecuted,"' she said.

Merck, Reynolds, Wells Fargo, BofA, Morgan Stanley, Cordish in Court News

Merck & Co. doesn’t have to pay a $32 million jury award to the family of former user of the company’s Vioxx painkiller who died of a heart attack, the Texas Supreme Court ruled.
The court said on Aug. 26 that the family of Leonel Garza didn’t produce adequate evidence showing Vioxx caused the heart attack. Merck, the second biggest U.S. drugmaker, agreed in 2007 to pay $4.85 billion to settle thousands of injury claims over the drug.
Lawyers for the Garzas “did not present reliable evidence of general causation and therefore are not entitled to recover against Merck,” the state’s highest court concluded in an 18- page decision.
Kathy Snapka, one of the Garza family’s lawyers, didn’t immediately return a phone call or e-mail seeking comment on the Supreme Court ruling.
Officials of Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck pulled Vioxx off the market in 2004 after researchers linked it to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Former users also criticized the company for downplaying the drug’s health risks and manipulating studies to help promote the drug.
Merck officials countered that Vioxx wasn’t the cause of users’ heart attacks and that the company had properly warned doctors and consumers about the painkiller’s risks.
Merck won 11 of the 16 cases over Vioxx that went to trial starting in 2005. Under the November 2007 settlement, Merck excluded some of the cases it lost, including Garza’s, from being included under the accord.
A jury in Rio Grande City, Texas, ruled in April 2006 that Merck failed to warn doctors of Vioxx’s risks and that the drug caused the fatal heart attack of Garza, 71, in 2001. The jury awarded $32 million to Garza’s widow, which Judge Alex Gabert cut to $8.73 million because of a state cap on punitive damages.
“Today’s decision reaffirms that there is simply no reliable scientific evidence that Vioxx caused” Garza’s heart attack, Ted Mayer, a lawyer for Merck, said in an e-mailed statement.

Merck, Reynolds, Wells Fargo, BofA, Morgan Stanley, Cordish in Court News

Merck & Co. doesn’t have to pay a $32 million jury award to the family of former user of the company’s Vioxx painkiller who died of a heart attack, the Texas Supreme Court ruled.
The court said on Aug. 26 that the family of Leonel Garza didn’t produce adequate evidence showing Vioxx caused the heart attack. Merck, the second biggest U.S. drugmaker, agreed in 2007 to pay $4.85 billion to settle thousands of injury claims over the drug.
Lawyers for the Garzas “did not present reliable evidence of general causation and therefore are not entitled to recover against Merck,” the state’s highest court concluded in an 18- page decision.
Kathy Snapka, one of the Garza family’s lawyers, didn’t immediately return a phone call or e-mail seeking comment on the Supreme Court ruling.
Officials of Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck pulled Vioxx off the market in 2004 after researchers linked it to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Former users also criticized the company for downplaying the drug’s health risks and manipulating studies to help promote the drug.
Merck officials countered that Vioxx wasn’t the cause of users’ heart attacks and that the company had properly warned doctors and consumers about the painkiller’s risks.
Merck won 11 of the 16 cases over Vioxx that went to trial starting in 2005. Under the November 2007 settlement, Merck excluded some of the cases it lost, including Garza’s, from being included under the accord.
A jury in Rio Grande City, Texas, ruled in April 2006 that Merck failed to warn doctors of Vioxx’s risks and that the drug caused the fatal heart attack of Garza, 71, in 2001. The jury awarded $32 million to Garza’s widow, which Judge Alex Gabert cut to $8.73 million because of a state cap on punitive damages.
“Today’s decision reaffirms that there is simply no reliable scientific evidence that Vioxx caused” Garza’s heart attack, Ted Mayer, a lawyer for Merck, said in an e-mailed statement.

Three in court over dropped cigarettes

SMOKERS who drop used cigarette butts in the city centre have been warned to expect big fines after four litter louts were prosecuted in court.

Four people were fined at Peterborough Magistrates’ Court yesterday for discarding their cigarette butts on the floor in the city centre.

The Peterborough City Council prosecutions came on the same day The Evening Telegraph started the Bin It campaign to keep the city streets clean after highlighting how the £12.8 million new look city centre has been blighted by yobs spitting chewing gum on to the paving stones.

Of the four summoned to appear at court yesterday, only Alessandro Vacca attended.

Vacca (42) of Four Chimneys Crescent, Hampton Vale, pleaded guilty to throwing down a cigarette butt outside Yorkshire Bank near St John’s Square on April 27.

Vacca was fined £100, and ordered to pay £50 costs and a £15 victim surcharge. The three other litter bugs were all found guilty in their absence.

Marian Marko (51) of Cromwell Road, Peterborough was fined for dropping a cigarette in Long Causeway near Cathedral Square, while Aida Raio (22) of Gladstone Street, Peterborough, was also found guilty of dropping a cigarette in Long Causeway,

Tracey Beckett (43) of Padholme Road, Eastfield, was found guilty of dropping a cigarette butt outside Eastfield News in Eastfield Road,

The trio were fined £125, and ordered to pay £50 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.

The fines were handed out by magistrates after all four were given a fixed penalty notice of £75 at the scene - but failed to pay within 21 days.

The sentence was welcomed by council cabinet member for environment capital Cllr Sam Dalton.

She said: “When the economy is suffering people should think of the additional cost to the council. If we didn’t have to clean up litter unnecessarily we would save money that could be spent elsewhere.

“It takes no time at all to put out a cigarette butt and put it in a bin. We have recently put new bins in the city centre so there is really no excuse.

“If people drop litter deliberately they should be prepared to take the consequences and be accountable for their actions. You wouldn’t drop litter at home so why do it in public?”

n Anne Canham, of Flore Close, Westwood, was also prosecuted yesterday for dropping an envelope in Flore Close, and fined £125, ordered to pay costs of £50 and a £15 victim surcharge after being found guilty in her absence of littering.

Donatas Mazonas (24) of Midland Road, West Town, Peterborough, was fined £125, ordered to pay £75 costs and a £15 victim surcharge after being found guilty of leaving three bags of household waste in grassland at Benland, Bretton.

Poor Indonesian families spend more on cigarettes

DESPITE their financial hardships, many low-income families in Indonesia prioritise spending on cigarettes rather than on other needs.

According to the 2009 National Socioeconomic survey, poor households spent 19 per cent of their income on staple foods and 11 per cent on tobacco, 2 per cent for education and 3 per cent on health care. Six out of 10 low-income households report spending on cigarettes.

Ekowati Rahajeng, the Health Ministry's director of non-communicable diseases, said the spending habits could be related to the economic conditions that made low-income people resort to smoking cigarettes, without realizing that spending on cigarettes would only pull them deeper into poverty.

Abdillah Hasan from the Demography Institute at the University of Indonesia calculated the potential loss of consuming cigarettes.

'Let's say they consume a pack of cigarettes a day that cost them Rp 10,000 (S$1.42). In a month, they will spend Rp 300,000 and Rp 3.65 million in a year," Mr Abdillah said. He went on, saying that in 10 years they could save Rp 36.5 million, which could be spent on a down-payment for a house, or pay admission fees to a university for their children.

Therefore, the institution urged the government to issue cigarette control regulations through, among other methods, increasing the cigarette tax, a total ban on cigarette advertisement, health warnings through pictures printed on the cigarette packs and imposing smoke-free areas.

Four nabbed for allegedly smuggling cigarettes

Four individuals were arrested last week for smuggling cigarettes in Cecil County in two separate incidents, according to the state comptroller's office.
On July 30, Maryland State Police pulled over Hammam Sharhan, 19, of Inwood, N.Y., and Jean William, 25, of Far Rockaway, N.Y., on Interstate 95 in a routine traffic stop.
Trooper Joseph Twardowski observed a significant amount of Marengo cigarettes in their 1996 Jeep Cherokee during the traffic stop and contacted the comptroller's Field Enforcement Division, the office reported.
Comptroller agents seized 2,000 packs of illegal cigarettes, valued at nearly $12,000, as well as confiscating the Jeep registered in Georgia.
On Aug.3, comptroller agents arrested Ashraf Bakar, 25, and Jennifer Whisenhunt, 27, both of Germantown, N.C., after receiving a tip from Sgt. Michael Connor of Maryland State Police, the office reported.
Bakar and Whisenhunt were found to be transporting 5,810 packs of contraband cigarettes in Cecil County, worth about $35,000. Agents seized the cigarettes and their 2011 Chevrolet Suburban used to transport them.
All four individuals were charged with transporting contraband cigarettes and possession of contraband cigarettes in the state of Maryland. The transporting charge is a felony, which carries a $50 per carton fine and/or two years imprisonment; and the possession offense is a misdemeanor, carrying a $1,000 fine and/or imprisonment, not exceeding one year.
Statewide last week, comptroller agents confiscated nearly 15,000 packs of the contraband cigarettes and arrested nine people in five separate cases. So far in fiscal year 2012, Comptroller agents have arrested 31 individuals for tobacco violations, seizing nearly 40,000 packs of contraband cigarettes and more than 3,200 packages of Other Tobacco Product (OTP) valued at more than $240,000.
"I am very proud of my agents for their tenacity in ridding our streets of contraband," Comptroller Peter Franchot said Friday. "My office remains committed to aggressively pursuing cigarette smugglers and tax scofflaws to protect the public and law abiding small businesses."
Caron Brace, a spokeswoman for the comptroller's office, said residents are legally allowed to bring two packs of cigarettes across state lines. Maryland tobacco taxes are currently set at $2 per pack, she added.
"Tobacco smuggling disrupts the level playing field that our state's businesses are supposed to operate under," Brace said.