Letter from the Corporate Affairs Director
Imperial Tobacco Group plc to the Clerk of the Committee (TB 13C)
Thank you for your letter dated 14 January to
Mr. Davis.
The supplementary information and responses
requested by the Committee are as follows:
RESEARCH
Our total research expenditure is approximately
£8.5 million per annum. Our turnover net of excise duty is
£1.2 billion per annum and therefore as a percentage of turnover
research spending is 0.7 per cent. We do not separately account
for research "geared towards the health risks of smoking".
However, doing the best we can, we would estimate that figure
to be between £5.5-6 million per annum. The vast majority
of this is expended in research and development of modified products
to meet the Government's tar reduction requirements.
SCOTH
Mr. Justice Hidden recently decided that the
SCOTH report was not amenable to judicial review. Accordingly,
the Applicants' request that part or all of the report be quashed
was rejected by the Court. There will be no appeal against that
decision. Imperial Tobacco Limited was a party to those proceedings.
DSM-IV AND ICD 10
We agree that nicotine could be regarded as
addictive by reference to DSM IV and ICD 10 but this does not
mean that smokers are unable to stop smoking if they choose to
do so.
ANSWERS 1, 3 AND
5
Imperial accepts that cigarette smoking may
be a cause of lung cancer, cardiovascular disease and respiratory
diseases, such as emphysema, and that cigarette smokers are more
likely to develop these diseases than non-smokers. However, Imperial
does not know whether or not there would be fewer deaths from
these diseases in the absence of cigarette smoking.
ANSWERS 2,
4 AND 6
We do not agree that smoking causes the diseases
you identify beyond all reasonable doubt.
RESEARCH MATERIALS
1. The Committee asked Mr. Davis to send
them the documents from scientists and doctors employed by Imperial
which have led Imperial to the conclusions which he communicated
to the Committee.
Our views on smoking and health are based on
monitoring of the scientific literature, attending scientific
conferences and meetings with and advice from external scientists.
We maintain a substantial collection of smoking and health documents,
consisting of articles from the scientific literature and other
published material, and we are willing to furnish you with copies
of these documents. However, we imagine that that may not assist
the Committee both because they are readily available from other
sources and because of their volume. The advice given by external
scientists was not given in writing. If the Committee would find
it helpful in its deliberations, we would be willing to ask the
external scientists, who have advised us, to summarise their views
and conclusions regarding smoking and health issues in writing.
2. Additionally, the Committee asked Mr.
Davis to send them copies of any written interchange between Imperial
and the scientists listed in paragraph 17 of our submission. Any
such documents will relate to research undertaken in the 1950s
and 1960s or its interpretation. We will identify any such documents
and supply them to you as soon as possible.
CONCLUSION
The scientific issues which lie behind your
questions are complex and answers can only be given on the basis
of an exercise of judgment. Imperial's views on these issues reflect
the judgment of the scientists whose advice it has received.
We agree that smoking may be a cause of disease.
We recognise that other scientists and public health authorities
have formed the judgment that smoking is a cause of certain diseases.
This has been the consistent public health message for decades.
We agree that there should be one consistent public health message.
This is why, whatever our views on these complex issues, Imperial
does not challenge the public health message. It has not done
so for almost forty years and intends, in the future, to continue
its policy of not challenging the publc health message that smoking
causes these diseases.
20 January 2000
| 
