Volume 1
The tobacco industry and the health risks of smoking : second report / Health Committee.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Health Committee
- Date:
- 2000
Licence: Open Government Licence
Credit: The tobacco industry and the health risks of smoking : second report / Health Committee. Source: Wellcome Collection.
57/92 page 55
![tobacco distribution in the UK goes through unregulated channels in that bootleggers are unlikely to exercise much scruple in selling their products to children. Imperial told us that it estimated that cross-border trading now comprised at least 80% of hand rolled tobacco sold in the UK and at least 20% of cigarettes.’’* The counter arguments put forward by ASH is that the great majority of tobacco smuggling comes not by means of the “white van trade” but through highly organized large scale activity; and that smuggling also occurred in low duty countries. 161. We endorse the Government’s strategy in using price as a weapon of tobacco control although we believe that a number of factors need to be taken into account in pursuing this strategy. Firstly, as we have noted previously, smoking is already an activity strongly skewed towards the poorest groups in society. The addictive nature of nicotine means that this product is not one that the poorest smokers can easily sacrifice. So we believe that if this strategy is not to add to the social and health inequalities which smoking generates, the highest priority will need to be given to other smoking cessation services targeted at these individuals. 162. Secondly, we believe that if the Government is to make price its main weapon against smoking there needs to be a more explicit recognition that the duty increase is a health-promotion tax. We were surprised that the Department’s officials had conducted no systematic analysis of the costs of smoking to society as a whole in the UK.”” We asked the Department to estimate the social costs of smoking and they arrived at a figure of £2.32 - 2.35 billion per annum to cover fire damage to property, the costs of treating disease caused by passive smoking, the costs of treating smoking related diseases amongst current smokers and invalidity benefit relating to smoking related diseases. The Department admitted this analysis was “patchy”.*”° 163. In terms of the income tobacco products yield in the UK the figures are not in dispute. HM Customs and Excise collected £8.2 billion in tobacco revenues in 1998/99.” It is within this context that we think the views of Dr Yach, Programme Manager of the WHO’s Tobacco Free Initiative, need to be assessed when he told us “we find ... that when there is earmarking of tax for tobacco control activities, you have greater levels of public acceptance and you have a sustained institutional capability in countries to continue tobacco control beyond the pricing mechanism ...”.?”* The Chancellor has, recently, shown himself willing to hypothecate some of the additional moneys accruing from the duty increases on tobacco towards the NHS. In his Budget Statement in March 2000, the Chancellor raised cigarette taxes by 5 per cent above inflation (25 pence per packet) and said that “every penny of the extra revenue....[would go] to funding our hospitals and the National Health Service”.’” We believe that, given the huge imbalance between the amounts the Treasury receives from smokers and the amount it spends on treating diseases caused by tobacco and on smoking cessation, the Government should earmark some of the increased tobacco revenues directly for smoking cessation strategies. We also believe that the Government needs more precise data on the actual costs of smoking to society. 164. If imbalances in tobacco duties between different EU countries prompt smuggling we believe this is a matter for law enforcement agencies. HM Customs and Excise itself estimates that £2.5 billion of revenue was lost as a result of tobacco smuggling.” The Government recognises that tobacco smuggling is on a “strong upward trend” and has designed a strategy to tackle it. This strategy consists of: a national network of scanners to detect high volume smuggling in freight containers; marks on packs to make identification of smuggled goods easier; tougher punishment for convicted smugglers; more customs officers; and a publicity campaign to raise public awareness.”*! The Government has committed up to £209 million over the next three years for extra staff and resources for Customs. This will fund up to 950 extra staff devoted to combating tobacco smuggling. Although these figures are not yet finalised, an immediate allocation of an additional £30 million each year from 2000-01 was announced in March 2000.78? The Government hopes that this will “slow the growth of smuggling in the next financial year, and ... put smuggling into decline in the third year”.”” It estimates the new measures will result in an extra £2.25 billion being collected in 274 Ey., p.223. 05255: 276 Fy. p.490. gM Customs and Excise Annual Report 2000, Cm 4616, p.22. Q293. 219 Oficial Report, 21.3.00, c 869. a Tackling Tobacco Smuggling, HM Customs and Excise, HM Treasury, March 2000, p.5S. 281 ibid. p.1. 282 ibid., p.11. 283 ibid., p.11.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b32221083_0001_0057.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
