Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tobacco firms seek to overturn tough Canadian law
Yahoo News ^ | 9 September 2002 | Charles Grandmont

Posted on 09/09/2002 7:23:13 PM PDT by SheLion

MONTREAL, Sept 9 (Reuters) - Canada's big three cigarette makers presented final arguments on Monday in a landmark court fight against the country's stringent anti-smoking legislation, seeking to overturn restrictions on advertising and packaging in the name of free speech and free enterprise.

Rothmans Benson & Hedges Inc., JTI-Macdonald Corp. and Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. presented their closing statements in Quebec Superior Court, arguing that Ottawa's fight against smoking has taken a "ridiculous" turn given the sweeping restrictions the companies face.

Canadian anti-smoking rules are seen as among the world's toughest, requiring that graphic images of such things as lung tumors and diseased gums cover half of cigarette packs, and banning sponsorship of cultural and sporting events by tobacco companies.

The only form of promotion allowed is "information advertising" and "brand-preference advertising", banning any "lifestyle" ads such as ones associating a brand with sports or cultural activities.

"We're claiming the government is going too far. You must see that a law that bans evoking emotions is a bit ridiculous," Simon Potter, lead counsel for the tobacco makers, told reporters outside the court.

Rothmans Benson & Hedges is a unit of Philip Morris Cos. Inc. and Rothmans Inc., Imperial Tobacco is a wholly owned unit of British American Tobacco, and JTI-Macdonald is a unit of Japan Tobacco Inc.

The tobacco business generates sales of about C$2.5 billion ($1.6 billion) a year in Canada, and the companies make about 40 Canadian cents of profit on each dollar sold.

During the trial, the cigarette makers presented studies showing no direct link between consumption and advertising. They said restrictions imposed on their constitutional freedom of speech were therefore unjustified because there was no issue of public health.

"It's the same thing with advertising for gas or laundry detergents: it's there to make you choose one brand instead of another. People don't drive more because of gasoline ads," Potter said.

Canadian health officials, who consider smoking the most serious health problem in the country, contend the restrictions on the tobacco industry are justified given the deadly nature of the product.

About one out of four Canadians smoke, and health authorities say about 45,000 Canadian die each year because of tobacco.

Julie Desrosiers, lawyer for the Canadian Cancer Society, which was granted an intervenor status in the case, dismissed the contention that tobacco advertising is harmless.

"The tobacco industry doesn't want to inform smokers on the characteristics of its products. They prefer to associate their products with the cool events of life," Desrosiers told reporters.

The case is the biggest test of a law enacted in 1997, after the tobacco industry successfully challenged previous legislation before the Supreme Court of Canada in 1995.

Any ruling by the Superior Court is expected to be appealed at the Supreme Court.

In addition to advertising and packaging restrictions, anti-smoking policies include bans on smoking in public buildings and in the workplace, as well as forbidding the sale of tobacco products to those under 18.

"Tobacco usage is at its lowest rate ever in Canada now, and that's certainly directly linked to the whole tobacco-control policies put in place by the government of Canada over the last 15 years," Desrosiers said.

($1=$1.56 Canadian)



TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Canada; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: antismokers; butts; cigarettes; individualliberty; niconazis; prohibitionists; pufflist; smokingbans; taxes; tobacco

"Tobacco usage is at its lowest rate ever in Canada now, and that's certainly directly linked to the whole tobacco-control policies put in place by the government of Canada over the last 15 years," Desrosiers said.

Oh really?  I truly believe that Canadians are rolling their own or headed to the Net to buy cigarettes.  Just like their American friends.

And it's about time Big Tobacco started standing up.  Might be a little too late.

1 posted on 09/09/2002 7:23:13 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *puff_list; Just another Joe; Gabz; Great Dane; Max McGarrity; Tumbleweed_Connection; red-dawg; ...
Bad Moon Rising Over Canada
2 posted on 09/09/2002 7:28:22 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Canada is a classic example of PC and liberalism run amuck; socialized medicine, multilingual division, judges declaring that women can run around topless, hate laws that prevent churches from discussing issues of morality, anti smoking nazis....etc, etc.

Watch and learn my friends -- don't let it happen here.

3 posted on 09/09/2002 7:35:40 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Tobacco companies fighting back?
I don't know what to say bump.
4 posted on 09/09/2002 7:39:00 PM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Canadian anti-smoking rules are seen as among the world's toughest, requiring that graphic images of such things as lung tumors and diseased gums cover half of cigarette packs,

I see. And should Big Mac wrappers be half-covered with pictures of clogged arteries and diseased hearts? Or packages of candy half-covered with pictures of toothless people?

5 posted on 09/09/2002 7:43:56 PM PDT by altair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: altair
They will be working on that next!
6 posted on 09/09/2002 7:44:49 PM PDT by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
I don't know what to say bump.

Was that a BUMP or a BURP, Joe? heh!

7 posted on 09/09/2002 7:51:55 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Was that a BUMP or a BURP, Joe? heh!

Half a bump and half a gasp.

8 posted on 09/09/2002 7:55:17 PM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Khepera
I know, they're already working on it.
9 posted on 09/09/2002 8:56:42 PM PDT by altair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: altair
BTTT
10 posted on 09/09/2002 9:46:14 PM PDT by Max McGarrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
Watch and learn my friends -- don't let it happen here.

Got news for you friend, it's been happening there as well.

11 posted on 09/10/2002 8:12:16 AM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
The Canadian cancer society claims Canada has the lowest number of smokers ever, that may be true, but these numbers hasn't changed much in the last 10 years, proving the fanatisism doesn't work.
12 posted on 09/10/2002 12:20:35 PM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Great Dane
Did you see this one? I can't believe this stuff Great Dane.

Canada considers legalising cannabis

Has this been on Free Republic yet? Canada wants to legalize POT! Yet they are trying to ban tobacco. Go figure. They are all nuts!

"The specially appointed committee said in a 600-page report that the current system of prohibition does not work and should be replaced by regulations similar to those that license alcohol use."

Terrific, just terrific!

13 posted on 09/10/2002 3:38:22 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Canada wants to legalize POT! Yet they are trying to ban tobacco. Go figure. They are all nuts!

Not only that, but they want 16 year old kids to be allowed to smoke it, and they have to be 19 to smoke cigs.

14 posted on 09/10/2002 4:31:20 PM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Great Dane
Not only that, but they want 16 year old kids to be allowed to smoke it, and they have to be 19 to smoke cigs.

This is absolute BS, Great Dane. I am beginning to believe that martians have over taken the bodies of our lawmakers. I swear to God, they aren't all there in their heads OR bodies. Some foreign body has over taken them! /scarasm

15 posted on 09/10/2002 4:42:55 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson