APPENDICES TO THE REPORT
Letter to the Chairman of the Committee from Yvette Cooper, Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State, Department of
I am writing to you as chairman of the Joint Committee
on Human Rights. In its Eighth Report for the current Session
your Committee covered Lord Clement-Jones's Bill on Tobacco Advertising
and Promotion. You recommended that evidence be made available
to each House about the likely effect on tobacco consumption of
Paragraph 21 of your Report states that there should
be clear evidence to support the contention that only a comprehensive
advertising ban would be sufficient to bring about the desired
reduction in tobacco consumption.
I believe that such evidence exists. A 1999 Report
from the World Bank
stated (Page 49) that "policymakers who are interested inn
controlling tobacco need to know whether cigarette advertising
and promotion affect consumption. The answer is that they almost
certainly do, although the data are not straightforward. The key
conclusion is that bans on advertising and promotion prove effective,
but only if they are comprehensive, covering all media and all
uses of brand names and logos." The World Bank suggested
that EU directive 98/43/EC which included measures similar to
those of the Tobacco Advertising Bill could have reduced cigarette
consumption within the European Union by nearly 7 per cent.
A study of data from 22 countries
concluded that " ... tobacco advertising increases tobacco
consumption. The empirical research also shows that comprehensive
advertising bans can reduce tobacco consumption, but that a limited
set of advertising bans will have little or no effect. A limited
set of advertising bans will not reduce the total level of advertising
expenditure but will simply result in substitution to the remaining
non-banned media. When more of the remaining media are eliminated,
the options for substitution are also eliminated."
Your Committee also recommended, at paragraph 33,
that evidence be made available to each House to enable Members
to assess the link between brandshared products and increased
tobacco consumption. I enclose a report prepared for my Department
by the Centre for Tobacco Control Research at Strathclyde University,
part of which has been published in the British Medical Journal.
This found that "where other factors which are known to be
associated with teenage smoking are held constant, awareness of
coupon schemes and brand stretching and tobacco marketing in general,
are all independently associated with current smoking."
I am copying this letter to Lord Clement-Jones and
placing it in the Libraries of each House.
17 January 2002
to the Clerk of the Committee from Lord Clement-Jones CBE
The report of the Joint Committee on the Tobacco
Advertising and Promotion Bill, a private member's bill I am sponsoring
in the Lords, has been drawn to my attention.
Following the deliberations of the Committee on the
17th December, Lord Campbell of Alloway tabled an amendment to
the Bill, which was debated at committee stage. This has now been
retabled for report stage, due to take place on the 1st March.
I enclose a copy.
Lord Campbell gave the impression at Committee that
his amendment is in line with the views of the Joint Committee
of which he was a member.
As I read the Report, however, in particular paragraph
19, this is not the case and the amendment is not supported by
the Report, since the Committee took the view that the measures
in the Bill would (subject to their being "justifiable restrictions")
be unlikely to fail the test of being "prescribed by law"
for the purpose of Article 10 of the ECHR.
Since I was not given the opportunity of making representations
to the Committee when the Bill was considered by it, I would appreciate
your arranging to put the Committee's views on the amendment on
record so that this would be available in time for Report Stage
in the Lords on 1st March.
15 February 2002
of David Pannick QC on the Civil Partnerships Bill
1. At present, English law recognises only very limited
rights for cohabiting couples, heterosexual or homosexual, in
relation to inheritance, pensions, social security and a range
of their interests.
2. The Civil Partnerships Bill will enable unmarried
couples, including same sex partners, living in a mutually supportive
relationship, to make legal provision for their joint protection.
Couples who assume joint responsibility for their common affairs
and who choose to enter a civil partnership will have specified
legal rights and obligations. The Bill provides a procedure for
registration of the partnership and states the legal consequences
3. The provisions of the Bill are compatible with
the Convention rights, as defined in the Human Rights Act 1998,
in the sense that the Bill (if enacted) will not breach any of
4. Indeed, the Bill will do much to ensure that English
law provides greater protection for Convention rights, and avoids
potential breaches of Convention rights:
(1) The first relevant Convention right is the
right to respect for private and family life, guaranteed by Article
8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is well-established
that an unmarried heterosexual couple enjoy family life under
Article 8. Although the European Court of Human Rights has yet
to accept that homosexual relationships are within the scope of
family life, the caselaw does accept that such relationships may
be covered by the concept of private life. To deny legal protection
to cohabiting couples, heterosexual or homosexual, may well involve
breaches of their rights to respect for private and family life
under Article 8.
(2) The second relevant Convention right is the
right to property, guaranteed by Article 1 of the First Protocol
to the Convention. Many of the interests protected by the Bill
are property rights for the purposes of Article 1 of the Protocol.
The State has a duty to maintain a fair balance between the public
interest and the rights of property owners. To deny legal protection
to cohabiting couples, heterosexual or homosexual, may well involve
breaches of their property rights under Article 1 of the Protocol.
(3) The relevance of Article 8 of the Convention
and Article 1 of the First Protocol is all the greater when those
provisions are consideredas they must betogether
with Article 14 of the Convention, which prohibits arbitrary discrimination
in the enjoyment of the substantive rights such as the right to
respect for private and family life, and the right to property.
To the extent that cohabiting couples, heterosexual or homosexual,
are treated less favourably than married couples in the areas
covered by the Bill, this may well involve breaches of rights
guaranteed under Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol
read together with Article 14.
30 December 2001
12 Curbing the Epidemic Governments and the Economics
of Tobacco Control ISBN 0-8213-4519-2 Back
The effect of tobacco advertising bans on tobacco consumption
Henry Saffer, Frank Chaloupka Journal of Health Economics 19(2000)
BMJ 5 March 2001 Vol. 322, 513-517 Back
Not printed Back