ANNEX 1: TOBACCO AND PUBLIC HEALTH
243. In evidence given to our recent inquiry into
The Tobacco Industry and the Health Risks of Smoking the
Royal College of Physicians described cigarette smoking as "the
single largest avoidable cause of premature death and disability
in Britain" and "the greatest challenge and opportunity
for all involved in improving the public health".331[338]
According to official figures some 120,000 people are killed by
tobacco in Britain alone. Tobacco kills half of those who use
it over a life time and causes one in ten of all deaths worldwide:
as the tobacco epidemic continues its progression from developed
to less developed countries, abetted by the cynical marketing
strategies of the major tobacco companies, this figure will rise
to one in six deaths by 2030 or ten million deaths a year.332[339]
244. Smoking is also a prime cause of health inequalities.
As we noted in our previous report, smoking prevalence has fallen
by 50% in the most advantaged sectors of society since 1974, but
has remained static amongst the least advantaged.333[340]
Teenage quitting is highest in affluent households. According
to the General Household Survey, in the manual group 35% of men
and 31% of women smoked, whereas in non-manual households the
figures were 21% of men and 21% of women. Men in the unskilled
manual groups were almost three times as likely to smoke as those
who lived in professional households.
245. We undertook an extremely wide ranging analysis
of the tobacco industry and the Government's tobacco policy set
out in its White Paper Smoking Kills published in December
1998. We took evidence from all the major tobacco companies in
the UK, leading health specialists in the field and pressure groups
both for and against greater tobacco control. We also looked at
the role of advertising agencies serving tobacco companies, assessed
the impact of Formula One on tobacco marketing and looked in particular
at allegations of British American Tobacco's involvement in the
smuggling of tobacco worldwide. We reviewed thousands of pages
of evidence, including hitherto confidential material held by
the advertising agencies which made particular disturbing reading.
This evidence alone has already informed research conducted by
the World Health Organization and has also prompted wider debate
in Europe.
246. The depth and thoroughness of our inquiry last
year means we have not specifically examined tobacco control and
public health in this inquiry. We would, however, like to return
to our previous conclusions in the light of the Government's subsequent
response.334[341]
In simple numerical terms most of our recommendations were accepted
in part or in whole by the Government, a response which we welcome.
However, our key recommendation was as follows:
"The final conclusion of the Royal College of
Physicians in its Report Nicotine Addiction in Britain
was that 'an independent expert committee should be established
to examine the institutional options for nicotine regulation,
and to report to the Secretary of State for Health on the appropriate
future regulation of nicotine products and the management and
prevention of nicotine addiction in Britain'. We concur. It seems
to us entirely illogical that treatments for nicotine replacement
therapy are subject to stringent regulation whereas the infinitely
more deadly tobacco products they are designed to supersede escape
any fundamental regulation. So we believe a Tobacco Regulatory
Authority should be introduced."335[342]
We felt that such a body could examine nicotine:tar
ratios to determine how these could be optimised to minimise exposure
to toxins; consider the marketing of tobacco products, looking
at areas of promotion going beyond advertising; and explore the
technological means to make cigarettes safer and less addictive,
perhaps setting upper limits and progressive reductions for known
carcinogens.
247. The Government told us it: "agrees with
the Select Committee that tobacco products need to be regulated
more effectively than at present. We believe that much of this
regulation will be most effective if it is done at the European
level, which is why we continue to argue strongly for tighter
regulation and greater openness in negotiations with our European
partners".336[343]
We ourselves had argued that a European wide regulatory authority
would be the ideal, but that such a body could have no credibility
whilst the Common Agricultural Policy still supported tobacco
production in Europe and the Commission had only one official,
working part time, on tobacco control.
248. We would welcome a clear statement of principle
by the Government on the desirability of a Tobacco Regulatory
Authority. We feel that our report was one of the most comprehensive
analyses of the tobacco industry ever undertaken in the UK, had
access to documentation that had hitherto been concealed, and
got very much to the heart of the behaviour of the tobacco companies.
We would like the Government unequivocally to support our recommendation
and - when parliamentary time permits - introduce appropriate
legislation to support it.
3
338 31
Second Report of the Health Committee, Session 1999-2000, The
Tobacco Industry and the Health Risks of Smoking, (HC 27),
p. xiii. Back
3 339 32
These figures are sourced from evidence adduced in The Tobacco
Industry and the Health Risks of Smoking, p. xiii. Back
3 340 33
The Tobacco Industry and the Health Risks of Smoking, p.xviii. Back
3 341 34
Published as Cm 4905, October 2000. Back
3 342 35
The Tobacco Industry and the Health Risks of Smoking, p.lxi. Back
3 343 36
Cm 4905, p.17. Back
| 
