British M.P. putting the squeeze on smokers

Press, 17 January 1986, Page 16

British M.P. putting the squeeze on smokers

From

ROBIN CHARTERIS

in London

Another squeeze is being put on the steadily shrinking world of the smoker in Britain by the introduction of a bill seeking to ban the use of tobacco in most public places. The Private Member’s Bill, tabled in Parliament by the Labour M.P., George Foulkes, would ban cigarettes, cigars, and pipes from pubs, shops, banks, restaurants, and most public places, unless designated smoking areas are set aside. The bill, which comes up for its second reading next month, also calls for smoking while driving to be outlawed, as it is in Norway. The bill is not seen as having any chance of success — the strong tobacco industry lobby in Britain should see to that. But the prime purpose of the bill, according to its sponsor, is to generate further Bublic debate which could result in le Government later incorporating the proposals in legislation of its own.

In Britain, as in other countries, public opposition to smoking is increasing. On present trends, fewer than one adult in three will be a smoker soon, down from more than one in two 20 years ago. Two decades ago there were virtually no bans on smoking anywhere in Britain, except for work places where it was considered hazardous, such as mines. Now, the list of restricted areas is growing. Smoking is not allowed these days in theatres, tube trains, or supermarkets, or in one half of cinema seating and a quarter of most bus seating. Many local body offices have banned the habit, expecting staff who smoke to do so only in designated areas at designated times.

A number of private companies and factories discriminate against smokers, including one which pays employees who smoke $5 less a week than non-smokers, and others, such as Cambridge University Press, which requires staff to clock

off for a puff. The anti-smoking lobby here, which has declared March 12 “National No-Smoking Day,” insists that the habit is on the way out and that by the turn of the century smoking could be a private, segregated activity. Action on Smoking and Health (A.S.H.) points out that smoking is very much a minority habit — only 36 per cent of men and 32 per cent of women over the age of 16 in Britain indulge. Cigarette sales peaked in 1974, it says, and are now steadily declining. Nevertheless, smoking produces an enormous amount of money in taxation. Fully 75 per cent of the $3.50 (approximately) cost of a packet of cigarettes goes to the Government, producing about $l3 billion a year. In addition, the tobacco industry spends almost $3OO million a year in advertising and promotion. Observers estimate that the tobacco industry can muster support from as many as 80 M.P.S. Several already accept consultancy fees from tobacco companies; others have interests through advertising and public relations accounts; and many others have constituencies containing large tobacco factories.

Other sources of strength for the tobacco companies result from the high level of sponsorship of sporting and cultural events, and also from the indirect support of the Royal Family. A.S.H. has approached Buckingham Palace and individual members of the family to persuade the Queen to withdraw royal warrants from tobacco companies, without success. Arguments over the health hazards of smoking are not as keenly contested by the pro-smoking lobby as before. Medical evidence has clearly shown the dangers, including new results just released indicating that health risks from

tobacco are shared by non-smokers who inhale the fumes to an even greater degree than previously recognised. Seven hours in a smoky room can produce toxin levels equivalent to smoking three cigarettes, substantially increasing abstainers’ risk of contracting illnesses such as lung cancer and heart disease, the Royal College of Physicians says.

The hazard for non-smokers in such an event is 50 times that of working in a building insulated with asbestos.

Meanwhile, the British Government is backing a survey by St Thomas’s Hospital, London, and

Bristol University to establish whether smoking low tar cigarettes is less harmful to health than using high tar brands. More than 3000 males at present smoking high tar cigarettes are to be sold cigarettes at a discount for six months. They will be supplied with a mixture of low, medium, or high tar cigarettes with three different nicotine levels, all in plain packets especially manufactured for the survey. Over six months the health of the participants will be closely monitored every fortnight, with particular emphasis on bronchial systems and functions.

As well as assisting medical research, the findings of the survey will be important for the tobacco industry, whose three-year voluntary agreement with the Department of Health to reduce annually the amount of tar in cigarettes runs out this year. British cigarettes today contain up to 18 milligrams of tar, a sizeable reduction from 20 years ago when brands such as Capstan full strength contained up to 28 milligrams. Capstan — cork, plain, mild, full strength, filter — has long disappeared from the market.