Archive for October 2009
Bill C-32 is now law!
At about 1:33pm, the Speaker of the Senate read a letter from Rideau Hall that Governor General Michaëlle Jean had given Royal Assent to Bill C-32 today. Bil C-32 is now an Act of Parliament. Representatives of health groups, and youth representatives, were present in the Senate gallery for the announcement.
Royal Assent triggers implementation dates. With Royal Assent today for bill C-32, implementation dates will be as follows: Immediate – for the ban on tobacco advertising in newspapers and magazines
April 6, 2010 – ban on flavoured cigarettes, cigarillos and blunt wraps comes into force at the manufacturer/import level (180 days after Royal Assent)
July 5, 2010 – ban on flavoured cigarettes, cigarillos and blunt wraps comes into force at the retail level (270 days after Royal Assent)
Big Win!
An update from Rob Cunningham at the Canadian Cancer Society:
Excellent news.
Bill C-32 today received third reading and final approval by the Senate at around 3:15pm. Third reading was given with all party support and without opposition.
A tobacco industry lawyer and a duty-free lobbyist were present in the Senate gallery at third reading.
The ban on tobacco advertising in newspapers and magazines comes into force immediately following Royal Assent, expected this week. The ban on flavoured cigarettes and little cigars comes into force 270 days from Royal Assent.
Royal Assent is likely on Wednesday or Thursday this week.
Thank you to the very many people who worked in support of this bill, both inside Health Canada, among parliamentarians, and across Canada outside government.
This is a huge win.
Great update on Bill C-32
In the Senate today, Senator Art Eggleton (Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology) tabled the Committee’s report on Bill C-32 with the full Senate. The Committee recommended that the bill be adopted without amendment.
Third reading was referred to the next sitting of the Senate, which is Tues. Oct. 6. This does not mean that the bill will necessarily receive third reading on Tuesday, but this is possible.
Below is a column by Andre Picard in today’s Globe and Mail, news items from yesterday (English/French), and a news release from The Lung Association (Eng/Fre).
Also below is an exchange from House of Commons Question Period yesterday, including between Opposition Leader Michael Ignatieff and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
————————————————————————-
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, a good government must protect our children from the tobacco industry.
But the Conservatives—at least a few of them—do not agree. The member from Beauce said: “Consumers must not be deprived of their legitimate free choice without justification. It is a question of principle.”
And now the chair of the Quebec Conservative caucus wants “to remove certain irritants from the law”.
Does the Prime Minister share the views of his MPs?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, this government introduced a bill to protect children from tobacco. The Liberal government refused for years to do so.
We have also heard some industry concerns. However, our priority continues to be to protect children from tobacco.
Mr. Pablo Rodriguez (Honoré-Mercier, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, he should perhaps explain that to his Quebec caucus.
In recent decades, a great deal has been accomplished in the fight against smoking. However, much, much more work is required. That is why we are surprised that a number of members of the Quebec caucus are working behind the scenes to oppose the bill that prohibits the sale of flavoured tobacco. Who does fruit- or candy-scented tobacco target? It targets our children and young teenagers, and they are against prohibiting these products.
Will the Prime Minister listen to his Quebec caucus and cigarette manufacturers or will he listen to us and protect our children?
Hon. Josée Verner (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister for La Francophonie, CPC):
As the Prime Minister mentioned, and in line with the government’s position, Bill C-32 is a bill that seeks to protect our children. The objective has not changed.
Having said that, members from the Quebec City area are also concerned about the impact on Rothmans and we are confident that we will find a solution
———————————————\
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2&DocId=4113811&Lnk=0&Language=F
M. Michael Ignatieff (chef de l’opposition, Lib.):
Monsieur le Président, un bon gouvernement doit protéger nos enfants de l’industrie du tabac.
Mais des conservateurs — quelques-uns — ne sont pas d’accord. Pour le député de Beauce, et je cite: « Les consommateurs ne doivent pas être privés d’un libre choix légitime sans justification. C’est une question de principes. »
Et maintenant le président du caucus conservateur québécois veut « soustraire à la loi certains irritants. »
Le premier ministre partage-t-il le point de vue de ses députés?
Le très hon. Stephen Harper (premier ministre, PCC):
Monsieur le Président, ce gouvernement a présenté un projet de loi visant à protéger les enfants contre le tabac. C’est une mesure que le gouvernement libéral a refusé de prendre pendant des années.
Nous avons également entendu certaines préoccupations de l’industrie, mais en même temps, notre priorité reste la protection de nos enfants contre le tabac.
M. Pablo Rodriguez (Honoré-Mercier, Lib.):
Monsieur le Président, il devrait peut-être expliquer cela à son caucus du Québec.
Au cours des dernières décennies, beaucoup de travail a été fait sur le plan de la lutte contre le tabagisme, mais il faut plus, beaucoup plus. C’est pourquoi on s’étonne que plusieurs membres de leur caucus québécois manoeuvrent en coulisses pour contrer un projet de loi qui interdit le tabac aromatisé. Du tabac aromatisé aux fruits ou aux bonbons, cela vise qui? Cela vise nos enfants et nos jeunes adolescents, et ils s’opposent à ce qu’on interdise ces produits.
Le premier ministre va-t-il écouter son caucus du Québec et les producteurs de cigarettes ou va-t-il nous écouter et protéger nos enfants?
L’hon. Josée Verner (ministre des Affaires intergouvernementales, présidente du Conseil privé de la Reine pour le Canada et ministre de la Francophonie, PCC):
Monsieur le Président, tel que le premier ministre l’a indiqué, et conformément à la position du gouvernement, le projet de loi C-32 est un projet de loi qui vise à protéger nos enfants et l’objectif demeure le même.
Cela étant dit, nous, les collègues dans la région de Québec, nous nous préoccupons également des effets sur la compagnie Rothmans et nous sommes confiants de trouver une solution.
————————————————————————
Andre Picard’s Second Opinion
Note to MPs: Our kids are more important than your re-election
Fierce lobbying by Big Tobacco is threatening legislation aimed at cracking down on marketing to young people
Andre Picard
Last updated on Thursday, Oct. 01, 2009 10:27AM EDT
Does the shamelessness of tobacco companies – and politicians for that matter – know no bounds?
After a summer of fierce lobbying by the tobacco giant Rothmans Benson & Hedges – namely, a threat to close a factory in Quebec City that employs 300 people – an important bit of health legislation is now at risk.
The Cracking Down on Tobacco Marketing Aimed at Youth Act, Bill C-32, has passed second reading in the House of Commons with the support of all the major political parties.
But now it’s stalled in the Senate, where an amendment to gut a key provision of the bill is being proposed, and the move has the backing of a powerful Quebec Conservative MP, Maxime Bernier. Amended or not, final passage of the bill could be threatened by these political machinations.
Honestly, how many times will we fall victim to the blackmail of tobacco companies? And how can our politicians be so naive as to buy into the illusory promises of job creation from a dying (not to mention lethal) industry?
Sure, there’s a federal election on the horizon. And, yes, the battle for the seats in the Quebec City area will be fierce.
But do our politicians – elected and non-elected – not have the decency and principles to say: “The lives of Canadian children are more important than a few jobs without a future – even in an election year.”
Let’s examine the provisions of Bill C-32, which will bring three important amendments to the Tobacco Act:
Prohibit the addition of fruit flavours and other additives such as vitamins or sugar that give a candy taste to cigarillos, cigarettes and blunts (sheets or tubes of tobacco).
Make it mandatory for cigarillos and blunts to be sold in minimum quantities of 20, like cigarettes, to eliminate so-called kiddie packs.
Remove the exception that allows tobacco ads in publications with an adult readership of at least 85 per cent.
This is a far cry from a tobacco ban and not exactly oppressive legislation.
The intent of the Cracking Down on Tobacco Marketing Aimed at Youth Act is to make tobacco products less accessible and less appealing to the most vulnerable segment of our population – young people.
About 18 per cent of Canadians older than 15 are regular smokers, according to the Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey. That number is falling. The only reason the industry has a future is that the highest rate is found among young adults, more than 28 per cent of whom smoke.
So why does the tobacco industry, which says it does not want to market or sell tobacco products to children and adolescents, object to the new rules?
The beef of Rothmans Benson & Hedges – 100-per-cent owned by international tobacco giant Philip Morris – is with the crackdown on additives.
There is little doubt that products such as banana-split flavoured “juicy double blunts” and pina colada cigarillos are designed to make a toxic product more appealing to a younger clientele, just as kiddie packs are designed to make the addiction more affordable.
But in their everyday legal poisoning of adults, tobacco manufacturers use flavouring products such as licorice, cocoa, vanilla and other additives to soften the bitter taste and mask the smell of tobacco.
By banning additives that give tobacco candy flavours, the legislation would also make it illegal for tobacco companies to use these more traditional flavourings in “American-blend” cigarettes, which are normally mixed with other substances to soften the taste. (Canadians are more accustomed to Virginia-style tobacco without the additives.)
Some senators are now considering an amendment to exempt non-candy-flavoured additives from the ban, saying they are not popular with young people so it will not detract from the goal of the legislation.
While that may be true, there are already exemptions in the law. Menthol, a long-time additive, is still permitted and the new rules do not apply to cigars without a plastic tip.
The remaining “American-blend” products are marginal. They make up only 0.5 per cent of the domestic Canadian market and 3 per cent of the duty-free market for tobacco, so the financial argument does not really hold up.
But the tobacco industry is fighting this part of Bill C-32 for a reason: It is looking for a loophole. And this industry has proved itself more than adept at exploiting loopholes over the years.
If the proposed amendment is accepted, manufacturers will still be allowed to use additives such as cocoa – and how long do you think it will be before they begin marketing “chocolate” cigarillos?
To pretend that this provision of the law will result in a massive curtailment of production at the Quebec City factory of Rothmans Benson & Hedges and job losses that could result in the plant closing is at best disingenuous. And to argue that without the legislation there might be an expansion of the plant is so fantastical that only a politician up for imminent re-election could believe it.
But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that it is true, that the plant’s future is threatened by the new law.
Tough. Our children are worth it.
———————————————————-\
http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/flavoured+cigarillos+closer+becoming/2052115/story.html
Ban on flavoured cigarillos closer to becoming law
By Mia Rabson and Sarah Schmidt, Winnipeg Free Press and Canwest News Service
September 30, 2009
OTTAWA — A proposed ban on flavoured tobacco products cleared a Senate committee Wednesday without any amendments, allaying fears that Conservative senators planned to water it down at the request of the tobacco industry.
The Cracking Down on Tobacco Marketing Aimed at Youth Act passed the Senate committee on social affairs as is, and it’s expected to receive royal assent after it passes the Senate as a whole later this fall.
In addition to banning “kiddie packs” of little flavoured cigars called cigarillos, the law will prohibit flavour and additives in tobacco products, with the exception of menthol. This means fruit- and candy-flavoured cigarillos available in flavours such as chocolate, grape and tropical punch will no longer be available for sale in Canada.
The law will also put an end to all tobacco advertising in outlets that may be viewed or read by youth.
The idea to ban the flavoured cigarillos began with a private members’ bill from Manitoba NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis. It was picked up by the Conservatives, who made it a promise during the 2008 election and introduced the bill earlier this year.
Wasylycia-Leis said this all stemmed from a youth movement from kids who didn’t like to see cigarillos made more appealing to kids by making them taste and smell like candy.
“Hallelujah,” she said after the bill cleared the Senate committee. “I think it shows Parliament working at its best. It’s not a perfect bill, but it is consistent with the principles established at the outset.”
The bill passed the House of Commons unanimously in June with the backing of all three opposition parties, but lobbying by the tobacco industry in Quebec loosened the resolve of some Conservative MPs.
Philip Morris International, and its Canadian unit, Rothmans, argued the bill put at risk 300 jobs at its factory in Quebec City because it doesn’t just ban flavours in cigarillos, but also captures some American blended cigarettes, made with sweeteners such as licorice, cocoa or vanilla, which soften the bitter taste.
At the senate hearing Wednesday, tobacco industry representatives said Canada should have gone the same route as Australia, which banned tobacco products that taste sweet or fruity, but not the additives that make the flavours, which is what Canada has done.
Debra Steger, an expert in international trade law and spokeswoman for Rothmans, Benson & Hedges, said Health Canada put the bill together too fast and didn’t “do its homework.”
“They didn’t consult with stakeholders and, as a result, it made a mistake,” Steger said.
However, anti-smoking advocates told the committee they believed the tobacco industry was trying to blow smoke in the committee’s eyes, and even use the legislation as an excuse to close the Quebec plant.
“It’s inevitable Rothman’s Benson and Hedges is going to close their plant,” said Francois Damphousse, the director of the Quebec office of the Non-Smokers’ Rights Association. “The only reason that plant is still here is to blackmail you.”
A Health Canada official told the Senate committee Wednesday the bill is intended only to apply to the manufacturing of products intended for the Canadian market. That means American blended cigarettes manufactured in Quebec can continue to be exported, even if they contain any of the flavours and additives banned in Canada.
Some senators abstained from voting on some parts of the legislation, including Conservative Hugh Segal, who said some of his abstentions come because he didn’t like the fact the industry hadn’t been consulted enough.
The confusion in the Conservative camp continued all day Wednesday, and suggested signs of division between the Quebec caucus and the rest of the party.
Health Minister Leona Agglukaq emerged early in the day to say the Quebec caucus was onside with the bill. Prime Minister Stephen Harper put his weight behind the bill in the House of Commons in the afternoon.
“This government proposed legislation to protect children against tobacco,” Harper said. “It’s a measure that the Liberal government refused to do for years. We have also heard some concerns from industry, but at the same time, our priority remains to protect children against tobacco.”
But Josee Verner, a Quebec MP and the minister of intergovernmental affairs, told the House of Commons she and others in her party were worried.
The legislation “is aimed at protecting our children,” she said. “Our goal is the same, but our colleagues from Quebec, including myself, are concerned about the industry and we are trying to find a solution.”
Verner represents a Quebec City riding where Rothmans, Benson & Hedges has a factory.
Health Canada and anti-tobacco advocates said an amendment to restrict the flavour and additives ban to products that taste sugary or fruity would create a big loophole in the law, and undermine the government’s push to reduce youth smoking.
Cynthia Callard, executive director of Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada, also said the threat by Rothmans about job losses was just a scare tactic to sow divisions in the government’s Quebec caucus. She called this a common tactic by the tobacco industry in their fight against government regulations.
——————————————————\
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Canadian-Lung-Association-1052621.html
The Lung Association
Sep 30, 2009 10:01 ET
Senate Must Not Bow to Tobacco Industry by Amending C-32: Lung Association Says
OTTAWA, ONTARIO–(Marketwire – Sept. 30, 2009) – The Lung Association today released the following statement with regards to Bill C-32 which is currently before the Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs:
“The massive increase in sales of flavoured tobacco in the past number of years is due to tobacco companies targeting children and young people. For years there were very few flavoured tobacco products. Because tobacco kills about half of its long term users, tobacco companies have to spend huge amounts of money to entice new users to this addictive, killer substance. Flavoured tobaccos target young Canadians. The best thing we can do for health care in Canada is reduce the attractiveness and availability of tobacco for young people.
We ask Senators to oppose the amendment supported by the tobacco industry that would allow flavours in cigarettes. Supporting this amendment would serve only to weaken the bill and put Canada’s children as risk”.
About The Lung Association
Established in 1900, The Lung Association is one of Canada’s oldest and most respected health charities, and the leading national organization for science-based information, research, education, support programs and advocacy on lung heath issues.
For more information, please contact
The Lung Association
Cameron Bishop
Director of Government Affairs and Media Relations
613-569-6411, ext, 223
————————————————————\
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gCTFfjl3jk_iO8vy2ztTC4rTu2NA
Cigarettes aromatisées: des députés québécois se rallient au parti
De Marie Vastel (CP) – Il y a 19 heures
OTTAWA — Après s’être opposés publiquement à un projet de loi visant à bannir les cigarettes aromatisées au pays, deux députés conservateurs québécois se sont ralliés à leur parti, mercredi, à la suite d’une discussion avec la ministre de la Santé.
La ministre des Affaires intergouvernementales, Josée Verner, et l’ex-ministre des Affaires étrangères, Maxime Bernier, s’étaient prononcés contre le projet de loi C-32. Ils réclamaient un assouplissement du texte, car le libellé actuel mettrait en péril les plus de 300 emplois de l’usine Rothmans de Québec, selon la compagnie propriétaire, Philip Morris.
Arguant vouloir sauver les jeunes et protéger la santé des enfants avec leur projet de loi, les conservateurs semblaient cependant s’être mis à dos certains députés de leur bastion électoral dans la région de Québec.
Mais en point de presse sur un tout autre sujet, la ministre de la Santé, Leona Aglukkaq, a certifié avoir l’appui des conservateurs du Québec.
“J’ai parlé au caucus québécois ce matin (mercredi) et ils appuient le projet de loi tel qu’il est”, a-t-elle souligné, en conférence téléphonique.
La ministre Aglukkaq s’est jointe à la réunion du caucus québécois, mercredi matin, et un consensus semblait avoir été atteint, à sa sortie. Mais comme les caucus se tiennent à huis clos, impossible de savoir ce qui a été dit.
“La ministre a surtout écouté les recommandations qui ont été faites”, a néanmoins expliqué le sénateur Jacques Demers.
Le projet de loi des conservateurs prévoit actuellement d’interdire la fabrication et la vente des cigarettes contenant des additifs, parmi une liste de plusieurs milliers. Mais de la façon dont elle est rédigée présentement, la législation bannirait une sélection trop vaste de produits du tabac, plaident des experts et des représentants de l’industrie.
Et M. Bernier était du même avis, jusqu’à mercredi.
Maxime Bernier semble effectivement s’être rallié au gouvernement, en corrigeant le tir sur son blogue. Après avoir écrit, il y a une semaine, qu’il s’opposait au projet de loi tel que libellé par les fonctionnaires de Santé Canada, le député de Beauce a avoué se ranger derrière son parti.
“Le débat au sein de notre parti a toutefois malheureusement mené à une décision contraire à celle que j’appuyais. En politique, on gagne parfois des batailles, on en perd d’autres. En tant qu’homme d’équipe, je me rallie donc au large consensus au sein de mon équipe, sans toutefois renier les principes que j’ai défendus”, a-t-il fait savoir sur son blogue.
M. Bernier s’est cependant refusé à tout autre commentaire. La semaine dernière, il défendait le libre choix des fumeurs et affirmait que fumer est une activité qui demeure légale. Il écrivait également que la loi pourrait avoir des conséquences négatives, en citant notamment le risque de fermeture de l’usine Rothmans de Québec
Interpellée sur le sujet à la période des questions, aux Communes, la ministre Verner a elle aussi démontré s’être ralliée.
“Le projet de loi C-32 est un projet de loi qui vise à protéger nos enfants et l’objectif demeure le même. Ceci étant dit, nous, les collègues dans la région de Québec, nous nous préoccupons également des effets sur la compagnie Rothmans et nous sommes confiants de trouver une solution”, a-t-elle répliqué aux questions des libéraux.
Le parti conservateur semble donc avoir convaincu son caucus québécois. Mais en comité sénatorial, en après-midi, les critiques émises contre le projet de loi actuel ont de nouveau été mises de l’avant.
Même si Santé Canada a confirmé que l’interdiction de la fabrication et de la vente de cigarettes contenant des additifs ne concernait pas l’exportation, le président du syndicat des employés de l’usine Rothmans Benson & Hedges, Richard Brousseau, n’a pas été rassuré.
“On a voulu faire un projet de loi, mais on a ratissé tellement large. (…) Il faudrait que le projet de loi n’exclut que ce qui donne un arôme de fruits et de confiseries”, a-t-il réclamé, soutenant que des additifs se retrouvent également dans les cigarettes au goût de tabac.
Des inquiétudes qui ont été reprises par une experte en droit commercial international, venue témoigner au comité.
“Une exemption des exportations ne règle pas le problème. Le problème, c’est que la loi est beaucoup trop large et que ce n’est pas la façon dont ont procédé les autres pays”, a déploré Debra Steger.
“Ce serait tellement simple pour eux d’ajouter l’amendement que nous avons suggéré, d’interdire uniquement les cigarettes qui ont ce goût de fruits. Mais de se baser sur la saveur et non de bannir tous les additifs”, a-t-elle soutenu, à sa sortie du comité.
—————————————————-\
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=1052622&lang=F5
L’Association pulmonaire
30 sept. 2009 10h01 HE
Le Sénat ne doit pas céder à l’industrie du tabac en amendant le Projet de loi C-32, prévient l’Association pulmonaire
OTTAWA, ONTARIO–(Marketwire – 30 sept. 2009) – L’Association pulmonaire a publié aujourd’hui la déclaration suivante concernant le Projet de loi C-32, qui est présentement à l’étude auprès du Comité permanent des affaires sociales du Sénat :
“L’augmentation massive des ventes de tabac aromatisé au cours des dernières années est due au fait que les compagnies de tabac ciblent les enfants et les jeunes. Pendant plusieurs années, il n’y a eu que très peu de produits de tabac aromatisé. Mais puisque le tabac tue environ la moitié de ses consommateurs à long terme, les compagnies doivent dépenser des sommes exorbitantes pour attirer de nouveaux utilisateurs de cette substance toxique qui engendre une dépendance. Les produits de tabac aromatisé ciblent les jeunes Canadiens. La meilleure chose que l’on puisse faire pour les soins de santé au Canada est de réduire l’attrait et la disponibilité du tabac auprès des jeunes.
Nous demandons aux Sénateurs et Sénatrices de s’opposer à l’amendement appuyé par l’industrie du tabac, qui permettrait l’aromatisation de cigarettes. L’appui à cet amendement ne ferait qu’affaiblir le projet de loi et exposer les enfants canadiens à des risques.”
Au sujet de l’Association pulmonaire
Fondée en 1900, l’Association pulmonaire est l’un des organismes de bienfaisance les mieux respectés et des plus durables, au Canada, et un chef de file national en matière d’information scientifique, de recherche, d’éducation, de soutien et de plaidoyer sur les enjeux liés à la santé pulmonaire.
