Tobacco Documents Online

COPY REQUEST FORM BRITISH A,~,4, E R I C A ~ TOKACCO REQUEST No 2444 IOrganisation 1 The Department of Justice (Legal Health) REQUEST DETAILS I DATE: 2 .Cj j~ U G ~0[}1 File Number: Box Number: ~Ic o~S-~ ~ Zo~ z_ PAGE RANGE ,,, FIRST PAGE .5 o o 2::::'CJ Copy Detait~ Copied By: /' Date : 'Copy Checked By: Date: o ~ r ~ i LAST.PAGE - 50 o ~o Z 2_ ~me}: 6~ ~ / 0 f Deliver), Details Checked By: Date: Sent By: Date: BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001

....... ,_ _ . ! - | " ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE Improving the Quality of Public Debate: Strategies FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY II I II II I I - NOVEMBER 1990 r j! C~ C, O BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 TT[ ....... r- INI I II

CONTENTS i. Introduction. ' . ? • . ~. • 2. BAT's Response to ETS issues. 3. Timing of ETS-reiated actb'ides. 4. Key elements of programmes. Checklis: of allies/resources. 6. ETS: Hea!th Effects and indoor Air Quality. 7. Public Smoking. 8. Smoking On Board Aircraft 9. Smoking and Public Transport. 10. Smoking in the Workplace. BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001

I'~TRO D UCTI ON Communication of science to the pub!ic is notoriously bad. h is not because scientists theft;selves are unable to transla;e their ~ork and thoughts into eve~day terms. Rather, it is because the media and the public generaliv are more in[erested in sweeping headline stories than in the rumple,tides, uncertainties and inconclusbeness that so often charac:erise truly scientific research and debate. One of the unfortunate consequences of this is that scientific research and opinion is often misregorted, sensationaIised, or treated selectively and promoted to the public as if it were uncontested andconclusive, when in fact it may be little more than speculation. This [s pat-dcular% true with smoking issues, and especialI:, ETS - environmental tobacco smoke - which is the subject here. On the one hand there are the results of so[entitle investigations which show ;hemselves to be fragile, urea contradictory, and inconclusive; on the other, there are the populist assertions which deny that there is doubt and which claim certainty for the proposition that ETS seriously damages the health of non-smokers. Public debate about ETS should be concerned with the results of scientific research and investigation. Instead, in many places around the world, the public debate has short-circuited that stage and moved on to a,%gument about political action to restrict smoking in order to protect the health of the non-smoker. It is important that the debate is brought back to the roots orthe unsubstantiated health claims that are made against ETS. "I'he challenge that this presents to the tobacco industry and to the company if formidable. That is why this guide has been.produced. However, it is not a scientific treatise. Its purpose is t~ofotd: first, to state the company's ~-iewpoint and position on ETS; second, to suggest action which operating companies should take in order to ensure that there is balanced and fair consideration of the facts by all concerned. The situation differs from country to countw. In some, ETS is a well developed issue of high. pubhe awareness. In others, ETS has barely eme~ed as a subject of public debate. It is a matter for the management of each operating company in collaboration with Millbank, to determine what action is most appropriate for them. It is hoped that the ideas presented here v-ill be found to be oflnterest and • practical help. They are based largely on the e.x'-perience of BAT companies around the world and information provided by them. The structure of this guide such that, after reviewing general policies and objectives on the ETS issue, five individual areas where action should be considered are identified: ETS health effects and indoor air quality. Public Smoking Smoking on board aircra~ Smoking and public transport Smoking in the workplace. O L33 ,_..O BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 ............ ~[i ...... I .... !li

For each of the above ureas, objectives, strate~es and tactics a:e provided. It is the intention that each of these sections should stand alone; there is therefore of necessity a ce:"tain amaun: of repetition between the sections. It is not the intention that e~,'er7 operating company should consider applying all oft.he tactics considered with in each of the sections. Some tactics clearly will not be app,'-opriate for cer:.ain operating companies, or may simply be impossible to implement. However, eac.h operating company should use the information contained within this document to prepare a plan on ETS-related issues, taking into account (a) the present level of awareness of the issues in their countD." and (b) the suitability of the supg, gested approaches for their situation. The section "Timing of ETS-related activities" provides guidelines for establishing at which stage otthe public debate action is necessary., and the q, qpes or activity that are most suited to countries at :Lose various stages. The section entitled 'Key elements oC programmes' considers the pros and cons or using certain materials such as Brochures, advertising campaigns etc. and gives general ~m.tidanee on when the'," mar be appropriate. However, in al__l cases when companies are considering an E"I'S pro~amme, planning and use of resources and materia!s should be discussed with Millbank beforehand. At the end of each of the five strateo~ sections is a list of "interriew points'. This is essen.Natly a checklist of important points on the issue that can be made in a press {nter',-iew, government discussion, briefing document etc, It is not intended to be a source of detailed argumentation. For more specific or more detaiied information, companies should refer to the recently distributed 'Smoking Issues: Claims and Responses' document or to Millbank. Summary statements of company policy on ETS issues are provided in the section entitled "BAT's response to ETS issues'. L...,r~ C.O c9__~ C) Gc G", BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 :i i Ili;i Ill tIa~ ....

Annoyance and ~rrritation There is nothing new in people [1riding :he habi,'s and behaviour oC others unnoying, irritating, oe perhaps e~en objectionabie. Intolerance, howe',er, is a trait which remains uncurbed at a 7rice. That principle must apply between smokers and non-smokers, v,-ith each respecting the fandar:',ental personal freedoms of the other, Research has sho~x~ that ETS is a minor contributor to the quanti:? of chemicals in the air. Nevertheless, ETS can be physically i.'Titating to non-smokers and smokers alike, if it is confined within an ill-ventilated room or building. In those circumstances, an~ irrespective of people's smoking habits, it is proper first to consider the need to improve ventilation and to encourage the circulation ofctean a{r. Re~tr{ctions on smoking. It is accepted that smoking muss be restricted in some build!rigs and areas because of the potential fire haz.ard, or for reasons of hygiene. However, proposals to restrict smoking on the grounds of a claimed association between ETS and adverse health effects are scientificaiIy unjustit2ed and should therefore be strongly resisted. If the ~ounds claimed for restrictions on smoking are about annoyance to non-smokers, it should be possible to deal with them through the exercise of common sense and courtesy. The tobacco industrw does nee oppose the voluntary designation of non-smoking areas in public places as a courtesy to those who object to tobacco smoke. Ifthis is not possible, then improved ventilation should be considered. If even that is not enough, then it ,~-iIl be more effective and acceptable to everyone concerned if restrictions are introduced on a voluntary rather than a compulsory basis: in the workplace, restrictions should be a matter for discussion and agreement be~een management and the work.force; for other business premises, customers should decide whether they want restrictions and of what kind. Matters of Law? There is a balance to be struck in the law between the precious right of individual freedom and the need to protect other members of society. Therefore the law only generatly proscribes those acti,,-ities of an individual which have a demonstrable injury on others. There is no body of scientific evidence to support the contention that ETS, and thereby smoking, should be regulated. Q ~"4 BATCo document for Legal Services " Health Canada 29 August 200!

2. BAT'S RESPONSE TO ETS ISSUES CL-k.[.",IS TI-L&T .aRE 5t.kI)E AGAINST ETS Non-smokers do not always objec: to the habit ofsmoking. Some. however, find it [,'-ritafing, annoying, or perhaps even objectionable. The,,' may not like the small of lit tobacco: find it discomforting to the eyes, or nose and throat, particularly when the en,dronment is adequately ventilated; or simply thoroughly disapprove orthe smoking habit. They may cite that ETS is an invasion of their privacy, :heir right to clean air and personal freedom. Nevertheless, the main thrust of assertions against ETS is that it is a serious hazard to the health of non-smokers. Several re~malatory and advisory bodies around the world have concluded that exposure to ETS poses a small risk to non-smokers in terms of the development orlung cancer in adults and short term respiratory effects in very young chiIdren. The same bodies agree, boy, ever, that there is insufficient evidence to establish that ETS is associated with any other adverse health effect, such as heart disease. Anti-smoking activists have concluded that, where smoking may affect non-smokers, prohibition or restrictions on smoking are justified. The argument is put with considerable emotional appeal to non-smokers: that non-smokers have the right to smoke-free air and should not be exposed to the health hazard that they claim ETS presents; that smoking should therefore be prohibited in certain public places; that segregation should apply in other cases. The logical progression of the ar,m.~ment of anti-smoking activists is that smoking should be outlawed, except in the home ',,,here it is conceded that the individual should have the tight to smoke, if he or she wishes. THE BAT RESPONSE ET$ - health claim~ Scientific studies have not proven that ETS causes disease in non-smokers. The evidence is weak and conflicting and indi'ddual studies have been taken out of context and misused by anti-smoking groups. Responses to individual health claims about ETS and various diseases can be found in 'Smoking Issues: CIaims and Responses', claims no. 1-9, I3. ET$ - indoor air quality The actual amount of ETS that is present in indoor spaces is small and has been greatly exaggerated by anti-smoking groups. Studies of ETS levels in restaurants, offices, homes, aeroplanes, public transport and a wide variety of other public places have been conducted throughout the world. The results consistently show that ETS dissipates rapidly in real-life conditions. Improving ventilation in indoor environments will lead to the rapid elimination not only ETS, but orthe many other chemicals in indoor air that are present in far greater quantiw than ETS. Responses on indoor air quality, issues can also be found in "Smoking Issues: Claims and Responses', claims no. 10, t-t, 15. :.,....r'2. O7. k....d' BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 .... :Wi - 1 Ili I Ii~ ....

3. TIMING OF" ETS.REL-~.TED a(_TTI~,qTIES Factors influencin_~ the [ikelihoGd of ETS debate/introduction of smokin~ restrictions - Public awareness of health claims about ETS. - Media coverage - local, or taken from overseas. - Presence of anti-smoking organisations. - Major "~%TIO/'PAHO influence. E~ent of current government re.~trictions/regulatians on advertising, labelling etc. ~ the need for action In theory., if, in a .g-iven country,, all ofthe above are negative (i.e. no public awareness or media coverage, no WHO influence, no current restrictions) then it could be ar~aed that ETS is unlikely to become a major public issue in the near future and there is no need for pre-emptive action at present. However. this is true for very few, if any, countries around the world. Most companies will find the above factors operating, albeit to a variable e.x'tent, in their markets, and an increase in activities of just one of these factors could very rapidly result in a high degree of public awareness of ETS or even in the introduction of smoking restrictions by government. Even in countries where the smoking and health debate has historically not been a major cause of concern, the mere fact of WHO pressure on governments can result in the introduction of smoking restrictions virtually overnight. This was certainly the case recently in Guatemala. Similarly, if a government previously inactive on smoking legislation begins to introduce re,lotions relating to advertising or labelling, then the chances are that smoking restrictions could be the next ones to be proposed. Virtually all anti-smoking groups around the world have ETS/smoking restrictions on their agenda and are likely to begin lobbing government to introduce restrictions, or talking to the media about ETS. Even a small number of ETS stories syndicated from overseas can dramatically raise public awareness of the issue. The release of a major US report such as that expected in I99I from the US Environmental Protection Agency will inevitably increase coverage and v-ill usually have credibility in the eyes of the general public. In all countries where such activities are taking place, it cannot be too soon to begin taking pre-emptive action, or developing resources to deal with the issue as it develops. Although it is quite clear that no company would wish to create an ETS issue where one does not yet really exist, there are certain D'pes of pre-emptive action that can be taken to reduce the likelihood of si~maificant restrictions occurring. Some of these are listed in the next section. ,._. , --.. -.-.2 BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 " " q! ....... 7 .... lilIillll

[n countries where si~mnit~c2nt restrictions already e~s~ on ETS, there isstii',a need For aztivitw. Voluntarvrestric'tlonsor bans can be reversed, and legislation may be amended or repealed. Again, su~este~ ac:ion is listed in the ne~ sections. In summaQ, /here are few, if any, countries in which no action should be taken at present. In countries where ETS is not yet a major issue, but the ['actors discussed in the previous sectien are operating, pre-emptive action should be taken and resources shouid be developed. In coutnries where level of awareness is high but restrictions are no~ yet widespread, more specific and targeted activities should be undertaken. In countries uhere restrictions are widespread or le#slation is already in force, every attempt should be made to have them ove~ur,ned or amended. Examples nf pre.emptive action on ETS" Preparation and pianning preparing and knov, ing where to find material, argumentation, consultants etc. developing contacts with government, media and influential organisations that can be used when crises occur. Examples ar action ,*here ET$ is a public issue* 1. 2. 3. 4. Develop contacts in areas or" business that may be affected by restrictions if they are proposed - employers, airlines, hospitality, industry etc. Discuss the issue of restrictions and provide alternative suggestions e.g. ventilation • to try to prevent the introduction of restrictions. Argue strongly for tolerance and courtesy, and for volunta~ reg'aiation. Continue with courtesy campaigns. Develop and distribute scientit~cally-based arguments on ETS and indoor air quMi~. Encourage local consultants to comment en media articles/statements about ETS. Examples of action when restricti0n~/lemslation a.r~ l)r~posed* 1. Introduce taroeted campaigns for the specific audiences relevant to the proposed restrictions (e.g. employers/unions etc. it" workplace restrictions are proposed). Using advertising, brochures, brieHngs etc. as appropriate. Lobby all government, media, business contacts and other allies, and provide them with argumentation on science, the practicality and advisability, of restrictions, potential costs of restrictions etc. 2. (..f~ C'" C_2 BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 .... ~! .... i Ili i] !i

F_,xamples oFac[if,~n when restric[ions/le.mslation is widespread- 1° Develop infm-mation about the cost or the restrictions or le~s[ation compared to an)" benefits that were proposed. Rese'~rch examples of instances where restcictiaas/legisiation have caused inconvenience, embarrassment, loss of'job etc. etc. and use them with the media and with government. Point out practical dif'ficuities in complying vdth the legislation/ restrictions. 3. As a result of the above, lt:bby to have legislation amended or repealed, or restrictions overturned. Keep up media campaigns on health issues- do not assume all is completely lost if restrictions or legislation are introduced. Continue to report on the conflicting evidence and the results of conferences stating that there is no conclusive proof. Public opinion about ETS can still be influenced even if restrictions are commonplace. N.B. This is not an exhaustive List (which is the purpose of the body of this document) but a list of examples to give an indication of appropriate types of activiD-. q..,~ (.'5 BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 29 August 2001 i ....~ ..... I1:1 ]i " "