Tobacco Documents Online

27.2.1981 IP Schl/mp ITEM 6.2 T REPORT ON EC TASK FORCE In the European Community, smoking and health questions are dealt with at present mainly un- der the two headings of the draft Second Action Programme for Consumers and the UK tar surcharge, and in the context of the various research pro- jects initiated by the Commission. These three items were also the main topics of the EC Task Force's recent work. A meeting was held on the 4th February 1981. 1. Draft Second Action Programme for Consumers. 1.1 The Commission's original draft presented to the Council in June 1979 and published in August 1979 did not mention tobacco prorJuc'Ls cxpressly. During rreyul.iuLiurFs in tlie l'uuncil's Wurkiny Party a separate paragraph on tobacco and alcohol was ad- ded. It stipulates thaL the Commission shall pre- sent proposals for possible Community measures in the areas of tobacco advertising, labelling, re- search and distribution, as well as consumer edu- cation and information (interestingly, the provi- sions for alcohol are much weaker: they refer only to excessive consumption, the Commission may pre- sent proposals, and there is no mention of label- ling and distribution). 1.2 As I showed in my last report, the situation threate- ned to be aggravated by far-reaching proposals in the European Parliament's opinion on the Action Pro- gramme. In the report drawn up by Mr. O'Connell on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection these proposals have been maintained but the Parliament, in its Plenary Session of 16th October 198o, voted a more modera- te resolution calling for Community measures aimed at reducing the misuse of tobacco. If we try to see the positive side of this we can be relatively con- tent about the terms 'misuse' and 'reducing' and about the strict distinction obtained in the resolu- tion between tobacco misuse, alcohol misuse, misuse of pharmaceuticals and drug addiction - the latter three to be prevented, curbed, counteracted.

2 1.3 The problem we are facing now is, however, that the Council's Working Party has not drawn any consequences from the Parliament's resolution. In the text it sub- mitted to the Permanent Representatives the proposed paragraph still stands unchanged. 1.4 On the other hand, the Action Programme is still con- troversial among the member states' delegations. Par- ticularly, Denmark opposes certain provisions on the grounds that they belong to the area of public health and education which is not covered by the competences assigned to the Community by the Treaty of Rome. 1.5 Action: 1.5.1 In the situation as it is now, changes can only be ob- tained through national governments. As a first step, in order to make sure if and how governments can be influenced, all members of the Task Force have under- taken to explore for the countries which they are mo- nitoring, how strictly the governments tend to insist that EC institutions and EC legislation keep to the limits of competence established by the Treaty. It is known that at least in certain countries different mi- nistries have differently stron3views on this question. 1.5.2 In this context it will also be tried to find out how Denmark reached such a strong determination to resist any extension of EC competences into the field of pub- lic health. 1.5.3 Furthermore it was decided to contact the UNICE (Euro- pean Industry Association) and draw its attention to- wards the dangers which the Action Programme contains for a wide variety of products. 1.5.4 Finally, it was agreed that NMA's could be moved to initiate counteractions which would be sponsored by INFOTAB if so approved by all members. 1.5.5 After the meeting of the Task Force we were made aware of a new Commission's proposal to amend the proposed paragraph on tobacco and alcohol in a less stringent form and, mainly, under the aspects of harmonisation of legislation and of initiatives supporting national measures against excessive consumption. This latest development still has to be evaluated.

- 3 - 2. UK Tar Surcharge. 2.1 Some time ago, it had already seemed that this issue would 198o. find The its solution automatically by the end of UK Government's proposal, as a contribution towards the aims of the WHO, to extend the possibility of levying a tar surcharge to the whole of the Com- munity, has created a new situation. That is why the Board of Directors, at the Bermuda Meeting, asked our Task Force to take appropriate measures. 2.2 Meanwhile, however, the Commission published its report on the UK tar surcharge. This states clearly the Com- mission's view that the tar surcharge has fulfilled its possible targets in the UK and cannot, for various rea- sons, be recommended for the whole Community. This re- port is obviously a help and an excellent defense which we can refer to although we certainly do not accept all the views expressed in it and in the papers annexed to it. 2.3 This does not mean that the danger is already over. It does not seem absolutely clear that all member states will reject the UK proposal: Italy, for example, has expressed sympathy for the proposal, although for reasons different from those of the 11K. 2.4 Action: Research commissioned will be continued in order to have published material sLaLing that the Tar Tax is not com- patible with tax harmonisation and the principles laid down in the,Treaty of Rome. 3. Commission's Research Projects. 3.1 I stated in my previous report that it was planned to contact the Commission's General Directorate V to give them advice on a number of questions they had, mainly with regard to the interpretaLion of the results of their research project on methods of smoke analysis. In the meanLime, I had ruceived informaLion that such coiilact and the submission of informative material did not seem advisable as GD V had decided to present the first re- sults without previous industry contacts. They also did not hold the symposium on smoking methods which they had envisaged. They had, however, asked two independent in- stitutes to present studies on the comparability of smo- king methods and we have reason to believe that one stu- dy contained the sort of information that we ourselves would have given in a direct contact.

- 4 - 3.2 In its report on the UK Tar Surcharge and in a separate paper annexed to it, the Commission has published first conclusions from its research on the health effects of smoking and on the methods of smoke analysis. The main chapters of the paper titled 'Evaluation of the Effects on the Health of Smoking Tobacco' deal with - The constituents of tobacco smoke and their analysis, - The constituents of tobacco smoke and their effects, - Passive smoking, - Epidemiological data on the health effects of cigarette smoking. Although the paper contains a number of grave mistakes, the Task Force felt that for several reasons it seemed not advisable for us to try to correct this paper. 3.3 As to the methods of smoke analysis, the Commission's papers show that they still do not know how to interpret the results of their research. We must regard it as pro- bable that the Commission will continue gathering know- ledge about smoking methods in order to be able to har- monise them under some possible future aspect of smoking and health policy. 3.4 In any case, the Commission has been accepted as a mem- ber of the ISO Technical Committee 126. There, the 18 laboratories' test is now being prepared which is to open the way for the twofold Cambridge Filter and Electro- static ISO standard. With the Commission in this impor- tant gremium - as a learner and as a natural opponent of parallel standards - it would of course be absolutely self-defeating if our industry scientists would not speak with one voice. They must not only vote for the double standard but they must be beyond doubt even in discussions that they mean what they vote. I am relieved and grateful that in the past months our scientists have shown great understanding for this political situation. But we can- not yet be sure that the final outcome, presumably in spring 1982, in the TC 126 and in the ISO Plenary is gua- ranteed. Forgive me, therefore, that I an repeating my- self in asking you once more to make everyone involved, in any country involved, aware of the necessity of this one-voice approach.

- 5 - , 4. Other Matters 4.1 Also in the EC, many of our opponents are consequently using the semantic strategy to denounce tobacco pro- ducts as drugs and the smoking habit as drug addiction in order to justify measures on a national, harmonised or Community level. Our Task Force agreed, therefore, to try to place research projects with independent ~ scientists in Benelux, the UK and Germany which would prove scientifically that smoking has nothing to do with drug addiction. 4.2 Our Task Force discussed whether it would be possible to obtain more knowledge about the mental and sociolo- gical structure of our opponents in the militant anti- smoking groups in the EC countries. This could be of help in order to destroy the credibility of these groups. It was proposed to start a pilot study in Germany. If the results seemed to be of use, a connection could possibly be established with research that has just been completed by SAWP. In any case, the decision on the possible use of the results would have to be re- served until after the completion of the pilot study. C. R. Schlunk