Long pull ahead News Archive News

A 368.5 billion bill for damage control, a public acknowledgement that tobacco is addictive and, therefore, should be treated as any other...

June 25, 1997 12:00 AM IST

3 min read

A 368.5 billion bill for damage control, a public acknowledgement that tobacco is addictive and, therefore, should be treated as any other controlled substance, a 75 per cent tax hike per stick, the responsibility to stop youths smoking, a blanket ban on advertising and the likelihood that their business will be declared illegal in 2009.

When the US tobacco firms went in for a general settlement on a slew of class action suits in April, they had not anticipated such devastation. But it should be appreciated that the tobacco war is not yet over. The settlement has to be ratified by the federal legislature and with so many billions to lose, the tobacco barons will not think twice about spending a few more billions on lobbyists to get a lighter sentence. In fact, Chesterfield manufacturers Liggett have already taken the moral high ground by saying that the general settlement will bankrupt them 8212; because they were decent enough to settle claims individually before April.

Similarly, it should not be assumed that the settlement will set the agenda in other countries. Britain is the only country going ahead with a similar class action suit involving 23 lung cancer patients, against Imperial Tobacco and Gallagher Group, makers of Benson amp; Hedges and Silk Cut. In Germany, anti-smoking groups do not expect any reparation or payment of social costs by the tobacco firms. In France, the stock of Seita, makers of Gauloises and Gitanes, dropped when news of the settlement came in on Monday. Then it surged past its weekend level on assurances from every analyst, including Morgan Stanley, that the US experience would never be repeated in France. It was a sensible response, quite in character for the Continent, which has always taken a mature, measured approach to smoking. France, for instance, sent the Marlboro man and Joe Camel packing in 1976, decisively banned all cigarette advertising in 1991, and has not found it worth its while to bother about the issue any more.

But the picture may not be as balanced in the developing countries, which are likely to be the market for more than 70 per cent of the world8217;s cigarette production by 2001. Most of their governments will find themselves in a double bind, saddled with cash-strapped health departments and without the luxury of being able to forgo excise on cigarette production. In fact, it is probably in the developing countries that the last battle of the tobacco war will be fought. Finally, it will go back to first principles, and probably end up questioning the precedent set by the US agreement. Is it right, for instance, to curtail the individual8217;s right to choice on health grounds? Surely a person has the right to slowly poison himself in his own home, if he so chooses. Is it right to blame cigarette companies for getting smokers hooked? Few people go into business for altruistic ends. Besides, most First World smokers can read. They get a nice government subsidy for their education 8212; which is supposed to help them make the right choices. The US settlement has not adequately addressed these questions, and while they are around, the tobacco war will never be over. It will only become a drag.

Tags: