RF_PH_14_SUDHA.pdf
Media
- extracted text
-
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
RF_PH_14_SUDHA
Subject: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:19:54 -0000
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: "Simon Chapman" <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, <tobaccokills@globalink.org>,
"BOB MECKLENBURG" <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>, <karndorfer@advocacy.org>,
<wvi.gva@prolink.ch >, <israel@globalink.org >, <turnbull@uicc.ch>,
"Andrew Hayes" <hayes@globalink.org>, "Luk Joossens" <joossens@globalink.org>,
<afisynbo@form-net.com>, <susanht@igc.apc.org>, <mjsmith@igc.org>,
<mike.waghome@world-psi.org>, <corinne.bretscher@bag.admin.ch>,
<ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th>, <nilsbillo@compuserve.com>, <KSlama@ingcat.org>,
<KarenBissell@compuserve.com>, <suren.infact@juno.com>,
<lucinda.infact@juno.com>, <ds@iath.org>, <fleitmann@globalink.org>,
<rweissman@essential.org>, <assunta@cap.po.my>, <margross@igc.org>,
<mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
<clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>, <JPatterl 8@aol.com>, <aerickson@mindspring.com>,
"Mike Pertschuk" <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>, <sjones@bma.org.uk>,
"Bill O'Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>, <amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com>,
<karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com>, <Patti.White@hea.org.uk>,
<Ann.McNeill@hea.org.uk >, "Cassandra Welch" <cwelch@lungusa.org>,
<rhamburg@amhrt.org>, "Scott Bailin'1 <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
"Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>,
"COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL" <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in>,
<saloojee@globalink.org>, <tobacco-accountability@igc.org>,
"Anna White" <inbalance@newdream.org>,
"Judy Finn" <Judy.Finn@heartfoundation.com.au >,
"Eric LeGresley" <legres@magma.ca>
TO: Konstantin Krazovsky (ADIC, Ukraine); Mike Pertschuk, Kay Arndorfer
(Advocacy Institute); Allan Erickson, Joe Patterson (American Cancer
Society); Rich Hamburg (American Heart Association) ; Cassandra Welch
(American Lung Association); Clive Bates, Karl Brookes, Amanda Sandford
(ASH, London); Belinda Hughes, Bung On Rittiphakdee (ASH Thailand/Mainland
South East Asia Network); Sinead Jones, Bill O'Neill (BMA) ; Judy Glanz, Matt
Myers, Scott Ballin (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Jean King (Cancer
Research Campaign); Thelma Narayan (Community Health Cell, Bangalore); Ross
Hammond (Consultant, including to Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Eric Le
Gresley (Consultant, Canada);
Mary Assunta (Consumers Association of Penang); Martina Poetschke-Langer
(Deutsches Krebforschungszentrum Im Neuenheimer Feld, Germany); Dr Umaimah
Kamil (Egypt); Rob Weissman (Essential Action/Multinational Monitor);
Sibylle Fleitmann (European Network for Smoking Prevention); Ann McNeill,
Patti White (HEA); David Simpson (IATH); Ambika Srivasta (India); Sanchita
Sharma (India); Lucinda Wykle-Rosenberg, Suren Moodliar (INFACT); Karen
Bissell, Karen Slama (INGCAT); Mohammadmasoud Aboutalebi (Iran); Nils Billo
(IUATLD); Rob Weissman (Multinational Monitor); Corinne Bretscher (MWIA);
Yussuf Saloojee (National Council Against Smoking, South Africa); Judy Finn
(National Heart Foundation, Australia); Beena Sarwar (Pakistan); Roberto del
Rosario
(Philippines); Mike Waghorne (Public Services International); Mele Smith,
Susana Hennessey-Toure (San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition); Anna White
(Senegal) ;
Thuli Shonnwe (Soul City,South Africa); Pamphil Kweyuh (Tobacco Control
Commission for Africa);
Tobacco Accountability Network; TobaccoKills; Luk Joossens, Andrew Hayes,
Archie Turnbull (UICC); Ruben Israel (UICC/Globalink); Simon Chapman
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
(University of Sydney); Robert Mecklenburg (World Dental
Federation/International Association of Dental Research); Eric Ram (World
Vision); Christopher Zishiri (Zimbabwe); Tobacco Kills group; Network for
Accountability of the Tobacco Transnationals.
CC (for info): Natasha Herrara (PAHO,Venezuela) ; Boubacar Diallo (WHO,
Mali); Christina Perez (National Cancer Institute, Brazil); Derek Yach,
Chitra Subramaniam, Doug Bettcher, Karen Lewis, Judith Mackay, Demetris
Vryonides, Barbara Zolty, Therese Lethu, Emmanuel Guindone (TFI, WHO);
Franklin Apfel, Peter Anderson, Patsy Harrington (WHO Europe); Katy Curran,
Jeff McKenna (CDC).
2 March 2000
Dear Friends,
Re:- Framework Convention Alliance
Thanks to everyone who has sent comments on plans for the Alliance at
different times.
We now have basic agreement to go ahead with forming the alliance based
initially on the model in the attached plan. The plan is of course very
likely to evolve over time. A reminder that the key elements of the plan
are as follows:
- Name: The Framework Convention Alliance (FCA)
- Alliance website
- Closed e-mail conference
- Regional contact points
- Small working groups and individuals to take on particular tasks at
different times
As ever, initial preparations have taken a little longer than expected - in
particular preparation of initial Alliance materials, gaining agreement on
Aims and Principles amongst the small working group, etc. Nevertheless, I
have attached a working draft of the Aims and Principles, to give you a
flavour of where we're at.
(Once the small group working on this has agreed
a final draft it will be circulated via the closed e-mail conference for
comments from everyone. As ever, only a text which has consensus amongst all
members will be adopted by the Alliance, so don't worry if you are not
precisely in agreement with this wording.) Please let me know if you can't
open either this or the Alliance plan and I will send you a text version.
If you are basically happy with the attached plan and working draft of the
Aims and Principles at this stage, what I need from you now please are the
following (as soon as possible please - by Weds 8 March if you want to be
included in closed e-mail conference from the outset):
1) A one line e-mail saying that your organisation would like to become a
founder member of the Alliance.
2) The e-mail addresses of individuals in your organisation who wish to
participate in the closed e-mail conference.
3) The general website address for your organisation if you wish it to be
linked to the Alliance website.
4) The website address for any page/s of your organisation's website
containing material relating to the FCTC if you wish it to be linked to the
Alliance website.
5) Further offers for regional contact points.
(Please see attached plan
for more details, including those who have already offered to take on this
role in different regions).
2 of 3
3/3/00 10:07 AM
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
What will happen next is:
1)
The closed e-mail conference composed of founder members will go live as
soon as possible after 8 March. Notification will be sent to all members.
2)
The Alliance website will go live as soon as possible this month once
final wording on Aims and Principles, and other materials has been agreed
via the email conference. The website will include: Aims and Principles;
Questions and Answers on the FCTC; list of members; actions you can take;
links to websites of member organisations etc.
3)
An agenda will be circulated in the next few days for the NGO meeting in
Geneva on Sunday 26th March prior to the Second Meeting of the FCTC Working
Group (for any NGOs that will be attending).
Our task will then be to spread the word amongst the NGO community at large,
and to encourage action to make the Convention as strong and useful as
possible.
Best wishes, and I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible,
Emma
International Campaign Manager
ASH, London
["^Framework Convention Alliance - 2.3.00 - final plan.doc
[jFCA Aims and Principles, Working Draft, 2.3 00.doc
3 of 3
Name: Framework Convention
Alliance - 2.3.00 - final
plan.doc
Type; Winword File
(application/msword)
Emcoding: base64
Name: FCA Aims and Principles,
Working Draft, 2.3.00.doc
Type: Winword File
(application/msword)
i Emcodimg: base64
3/3/00 10:07 AM
e: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Subject: Re: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
©ate: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 15:55:01 +0100
From: "Ruben J. Israel" <israel@globalink.org >
To: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>,
"Simon Chapman" <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, <tobaccokills@globalink.org>,
"BOB MECKLENBURG" <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>, <karndorfer@advocacy.org>,
<wvi.gva@prolink.ch>, <tumbull@uicc.ch>, "Andrew Hayes" <hayes@globalink.org>,
"Luk Joossens" <joossens@globalink.org>, <afisynbo@form-net.com>,
<susanht@igc.apc.org>, <mjsmith@igc.org>, <mike.waghome@world-psi.org>,
<corinne.bretscher@bag.admin.ch>, <ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th>,
<niisbillo@compuserve.com>, <KSlama@ingcat.org>, <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>,
<suren.infact@juno.com>, <lucinda.infact@juno.com>, <ds@iath.org>,
<fleitmann@globalink.org>, <rweissman@essential.org>, <assunta@cap.po.my>,
<margross@igc.org>, <mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
<clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>, <JPatterl 8@aol.com>, <aerickson@mindspring.com>,
"Mike Pertschuk" <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>, <sjones@bma.org.uk>,
"Bill O’Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>, <amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com>,
<karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com>, <Patti.White@hea.org.uk>, <Ann.McNeill@hea.org.uk>,
"Cassandra Welch" <cwelch@lungusa.org>, <rhamburg@amhrt.org>,
"Scott Ballin'1 <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, "Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>,
"COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL" <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in>, <saloojee@globalink.org>,
<tobacco-accountability@igc.org>, "Anna White" <inbalance@newdream.org>,
"Judy Finn" <Judy.Finn@heartfoundation.com.au>, "Eric LeGresley" <legres@magma.ca>
Emma:
Yes ! you can count on us !
UICC:
- International Union Against Cancer
- http:Z/www,uicc■org/
- Isabel Mortara (mortara@uicc.org )
UICC GLOBALink:
- The International Tobacco-Control Network
- http://globalink■org/globdemo/
- Ruben Israel (israel@globalink.org)
OxyGen^ve:
- Pour une Geneve ou il fait bon respirer
- site under construction
- Ruben Israel (israel@globalink.org)
CNCT:
- French Committee for Smoking Prevention
- http://www.cnct.org/
- Christian Peschang (peschang@globalink.org)
Great global effort, greatly appreciated.
Best wishes,
-Ruben
PS: I suggest you post your message on GLOBALink too, if you haven't already done so
of4
3/3/00 11:43 AN"
Re: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
At 02:19 PM 03/02/2000 +0000, Emma Must wrote:
>TO: Konstantin Krazovsky (ADIC, Ukraine); Mike Pertschuk, Kay Arndorfer
>(Advocacy Institute); Allan Erickson, Joe Patterson (American Cancer
>Society); Rich Hamburg (American Heart Association) ; Cassandra Welch
> (American Lung Association); Clive Bates, Karl Brookes, Amanda Sandford
>(ASH, London); Belinda Hughes, Bung On Rittiphakdee (ASH Thailand/Mainland
>South East Asia Network); Sinead Jones, Bill O'Neill (BMA); Judy Glanz, Matt
>Myers, Scott Ballin (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Jean King (Cancer
>Research Campaign); Thelma Narayan (Community Health Cell, Bangalore); Ross
>Hammond (Consultant, including to Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Eric Le
>Gresley (Consultant, Canada);
>Mary Assunta (Consumers Association of Penang); Martina Poetschke-Langer
>(Deutsches Krebforschungszentrum Im Neuenheimer Feld, Germany); Dr Umaimah
>Kamil (Egypt); Rob Weissman (Essential Action/Multinational Monitor);
>Sibylle Fleitmann (European Network for Smoking Prevention); Ann McNeill,
>Patti White (HEA); David Simpson (IATH); Ambika Srivasta (India); Sanchita
>Sharma (India); Lucinda Wykle-Rosenberg, Suren Moodliar (INFACT); Karen
>Bissell, Karen Slama (INGCAT); Mohammadmasoud Aboutalebi (Iran); Nils Billo
>(IUATLD); Rob Weissman (Multinational Monitor); Corinne Bretscher (MWIA);
>Yussuf Saloojee (National Council Against Smoking, South Africa); Judy Finn
>(National Heart Foundation, Australia); Beena Sarwar (Pakistan); Roberto del
>Rosario
>(Philippines); Mike Waghorne (Public Services International); Mele Smith,
>Susana Hennessey-Toure (San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition); Anna White
> (Senegal) ;
>Thuli Shonnwe (Soul City,South Africa); Pamphil Kweyuh (Tobacco Control
^•Commission for Africa) ;
>Tobacco Accountability Network; TobaccoKills; Luk Joossens, Andrew Hayes,
>Archie Turnbull (UICC); Ruhen Israel (UICC/Globalink) ; Simon Chapman
>(University of Sydney); Robert Mecklenburg (World Dental
federation/International Association of Dental Research); Eric Ram (World
>Vision); Christopher Zishiri (Zimbabwe); Tobacco Kills group; Network for
Accountability of the Tobacco Transnationals.
>
>CC (for info): Natasha Herrara (PAHO,Venezuela); Boubacar Diallo (WHO,
>Mali); Christina Perez (National Cancer Institute, Brazil); Derek Yach,
>Chitra Subramaniam, Doug Bettcher, Karen Lewis, Judith Mackay, Demetris
>Vryonides, Barbara Zolty, Therese Lethu, Emmanuel Guindone (TFI, WHO);
franklin Apfel, Peter Anderson, Patsy Harrington (WHO Europe); Katy Curran,
>Jeff McKenna (CDC).
•
>2 March 2000
> Re: Framework Convention Alliance
>
>Thanks to everyone who has sent comments on plans for the Alliance at
>different times.
>
>We now have basic agreement to go ahead with forming the alliance based
>initially on the model in the attached plan.
The plan is of course very
>likely to evolve over time. A reminder that the key elements of the plan
>are as follows:
>- Name: The Framework Convention Alliance
>- Alliance website
>- closed e-mail conference
>- Regional contact points
2of4
(FCA)
3/3/00 11:43 AN
Rc: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
>- Small working groups and individuals to take on particular tasks at
>different times
>As ever, initial preparations have taken a little longer than expected - in
particular preparation of initial Alliance materials, gaining agreement on
>Aims and Principles amongst the small working group, etc. Nevertheless , I
>have attached a working draft of the Aims and Principles, to give you a
>flavour of where we're at.
(Once the small group working on this has agreed
>a final draft it will be circulated via the closed e-mail conference for
>comments from everyone. As ever, only a text which has consensus amongst all
>members will be adopted by the Alliance, so don't worry if you are not
>precisely in agreement with this wording.) Please let me know if you can't
>open either this or the Alliance plan and I will send you a text version.
>If you are basically happy with the attached plan and working draft of the
>Aims and Principles at this stage, what I need from you now please are the
>following (as soon as possible please - by Weds 8 March if you want to be
>included in closed e-mail conference from the outset):
>
>1) A one line e-mail saying that your organisation would like to become a
>founder member of the Alliance.
>
>2) The e-mail addresses of individuals in your organisation who wish to
participate in the closed e-mail conference.
>
>3) The general website address for your organisation if you wish it to be
Pinked to the Alliance website.
>
>4) The website address for any page/s of your organisation's website
>containing material relating to the FCTC if you wish it to be linked to the
>Alliance website.
>
>5) Further offers for regional contact points.
(Please see attached plan
>for more details, including those who have already offered to take on this
>role in different regions).
>
>What will happen next is:
>
>1) The closed e-mail conference composed of founder members will go live as
>soon as possible after 8 March. Notification will be sent to all members.
>
>2) The Alliance website will go live as soon as possible this month once
>final wording on Aims and Principles, and other materials has been agreed
>via the email conference.
The website will include: Aims and Principles;
>Questions and Answers on the FCTC; list of members; actions you can take;
Pinks to websites of member organisations etc.
>
>3) An agenda will be circulated in the next few days for the NGO meeting in
>Geneva on Sunday 26th March prior to the Second Meeting of the FCTC Working
>Group (for any NGOs that will be attending).
>
>Our task will then be to spread the word amongst the NGO community at large,
>and to encourage action to make the Convention as strong and useful as
possible.
>
>Best wishes, and I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible,
>
>Emma
>International Campaign Manager
3 of 4
3/3/00 11:43 AM
Subject: BAT's position on FCTC
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:48:10-0000
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>, <gt-intl@globalink.org>
CC: "Chitra Subramaniam" <subramaniamc@who.ch>, "Derek Yach" <yachd@who.ch>,
"Andy Rowell" <Andy@dirtrack.demon.co.uk>,
"Callard, Cynthia (cctc.ca)" <CCallard@cctc.ca>
Dear Friends,
Earlier this week BBC World Service Education hosted a day of presentations
on global tobacco for a group of its Producers here in London. I gave a
presentation on global NGO activity on tobacco control, including FCTC;
Derek Yach presented on the global tobacco situation and WHO's views. BAT
were also on the agenda, and we were able to stay to hear their
presentations.
Three BAT staff gave presentations: Dr Chris Proctor, Head
of Science S Regulation; Shabanji Opukah, International Development Affairs
Manager; and Simon Millson, International Government Affairs Manager.
Please find below:
1)
My summary of
BAT's key points/angles on the FCTC and WHO
2) A copy of a briefing which BAT handed out to the audience outlining its
position on the FCTC.
(This is a scanned copy so may include a few
glitches).
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASH
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171 613 0531
E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
Web: http://www.ash■org.uk
1) BAT's key points/angles
(Summary of what BAT staff said during their presentations - my words, not
direct quotes) :
"We've been excluded from the process"
"WHO is trying to mobilise the media behind the convention - this is just
the kind of underhand tactic that they always accuse us of"
"It is highly inappropriate that the FCTC is modelled on environmental
conventions because whilst many environmental issues are transboundary,
tobacco isn't"
"The proposals risk undermining governments' self-determination. The FCTC is
contrary to the principle of subsidiarity."
"The WHO is allowing its work to be driven by an international coalition of
anti-tobacco advocates"
"The FCTC has resource implications for governments who have already
BATs position on FCTC
determined their domestic priorities"
"There has been a lack of rigorous analysis about whether the FCTC can
achieve its objectives."
"WHO is exceeding legal authority and powers established in its
constitution"
"FCTC conflicts with established international agreements - incl on free
trade, taxation; agricultural subsidies"
"It is misguided that industrialised countries should tell developing
countries what to do - many developing countries already have better tobacco
control policies than industrialised countries"
"WHO has a prohibitionist strategy - as encapsulated in the title of their
programme 'Tobacco Free Initiative' ”
"WHO is working with the pharmaceuticals industry but it won't work with us"
"WHO want to control the industry from growing to manufacture"
"International action is not appropriate on a number of issues: eg.
taxation; trade; agriculture; marketing"
"WHO advocates the setting up of national tobacco commissions - ie it wants
to exclude governments from tobacco control at the national level"
"It's not just us who are concerned about the FCTC. So are: Japan; USA;
tobacco workers"
"WHO has done no economic impact assessment for the FCTC"
"Who will fund all these measures?"
"What will WHO try to regulate next? alcohol??"
"The WHO relies over heavily on the Work Bank report which is in fact
controversial and disputed by independent economists, commentators and
governments particularly in tobacco growing countries and developing
economies."
How BAT is characterising WHO's published text on "possible subjects of
initial protocols":
"Three draft protocols have been published"
- Advertising: BAT stresses this includes "corporate and community
sponsorships"
- Smuggling: avoids mentioning the word smuggling, and characterises it as
"licensing all stages of production"
- Treatment of tobacco dependence: "likely to cause particular concern for
the health priorities of developing nations"; "proposes that governments
should fund pharmacological 'treatments' such as nicotine patches".
2) Scanned copy of BAT's briefing
Page 1
BRTISH AMERICAN TOBACCO
The WHO Framework Convention
On Tobacco Control: Our View
2 of 7
3/24/00 5:40 PM
BATs position on FCTC
[Summary box]
- British American Tobacco believes that the proposed WHO 'Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control' should involve an open, transparent process
taking proper account of the varying priorities of national governments.
- There has been an unprecedented failure to consult those who would be most
affected, and we are calling on the WHO for constructive engagement with all
stakeholders .
- The WHO appears to be allowing its work to be driven by an international
coalition of anti-tobacco advocates.
- We acknowledge that we manufacture a risky product, and endorse sensible
regulation.
- We believe the WHO has a major role in promoting health policy, but its
proposed Convention is fundamentally flawed. It would not constitute
sensible regulation.
- The proposals are against established principles of good public policy
formation, and risk undermining governments' self-determination. They would
create an additional layer of 'supranational' regulation, when individual
states already have competence and legal powers to regulate the tobacco
industry.
- The WHO may be exceeding the legal authority and powers established in its
constitution, especially in tax, customs and consumer protection.
- The proposals have serious resource implications for many governments
which have already determined their domestic policy needs and health
priorities.
- The WHO has not rigorously analysed whether the proposed Convention can
achieve its objectives.
- Specific proposals appear to conflict with established international
agreements and standards in key areas, including free trade,- taxation, and
agricultural subsidies.
Background
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has proposed a 'Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control', its first attempt to develop a legally binding
international convention on any issue.
The Director-General of the WHO, Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, has made global
tobacco control one of the top two WHO priorities, along with malaria,
despite health priorities in many developing countries being focused on
issues such as HIV or securing medicines to immunise children.
The effort is being spearheaded by a 'Tobacco Free Initiative', a special
unit within the WHO.
The WHO has announced a target date of May 2003
for adoption of its Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This would
require it to be ratified by a two- thirds majority of the World Health
Assembly, the WHO's governing body, consisting of health ministers of the
WHO's 191 member states.
If the Convention is ratified, the 191 members would
be expected to enact it into domestic law.
The WHO intends to submit a draft Convention to the World Health Assembly
meeting in May 2000. If the draft is approved, the WHO would create an
intergovernmental body to negotiate various
'Protocols' with member states. These are expected to cover wide-ranging and
detailed measures affecting almost all aspects of tobacco growing,
manufacturing, trade, taxation and consumption.
Three draft Protocols have been published. One proposes licensing all stages
of production from manufacturer to transporter, warehouser, to retailer.
Another proposes a total global ban on all tobacco advertising and
sponsorship, including corporate and community sponsorships by tobacco
companies.
The third, likely to cause particular concern for the health priorities of
developing nations, proposes that governments should fund pharmacological
"treatments" such as nicotine patches.
The Tobacco Free Initiative is supported and funded by some pharmaceutical
3 of 7
3/24/00 5:40 PM
BATs position on FCTC
companies.
It is also supported by some western governments, and has mobilised an
international coalition of anti-tobacco advocates who appear to be driving
the WHO's work. Tobacco growers, consumers, manufacturers and related
industries have been specifically and deliberately excluded by the WHO from
consultation, despite repeated attempts to initiate dialogue - particularly
on combating under age smoking, an issue of mutual concern.
In its Technical Paper 3, attempting to mobilise non governmental
organisations and media behind the Framework Convention, the WHO publicly
states:
"The tobacco industry, its trade associations and key allies should be kept
from the negotiating process."
We believe that if the WHO sees tobacco control as such a high priority, it
should embark on constructive engagement with all stakeholders.
Page 2
The WHO also aims to engage UN organisations such as the World Bank. In June
1999 the World Bank published a report called Curbing the Epidemic Governments and the Economics of Tobacco Control, which the WHO frequently
sources for claims to underpin its policy directives.
The report is controversial, particularly in its claim that tobacco brings a
net cost to society. This is disputed
by independent economists, commentators and governments, particularly in
tobacco growing countries and developing economies.
We believe there should be an open, transparent
process taking proper account of the varying priorities of national
governments.
Public policy formation and sovereign rights.
The WHO proposals run counter to established principles of good public
policy formation, and would create an additional layer of 'supranational'
regulation. Individual states already have the necessary competence and
adequate legal powers to regulate the tobacco industry.
There is increasing recognition of the principle of 'subsidiarity' - leaving
states to make their own policy and legislative decisions - as embodied, for
example, in the treaty of the European Union.
Sovereign states are accountable to their populations for the cost and other
implications of increased regulation. The WHO proposals risk removing the
right of nation states to make their own legislative decisions in tobacco
regulation, without demonstrating that tobacco regulation is better effected
by supranational means.
The WHO says its proposals are partially modelled on environmental treaties.
The analogy is inappropriate. Many environmental issues are
'trans-boundary '. Tobacco use by consumers in a domestic market is wholly
within the jurisdiction and control of domestic authorities.
Other international regimes, such as those for human rights, require
'supranational' regulation for restraints on state action. The WHO is not
asking for restraint of state action, but to be able to compel states to act
with heavier regulation.
WHO constitution, legal authority and powers.
In pursuing the Framework Convention, the WHO may be exceeding the legal
authority and powers
established under its constitution.
The WHO's objectives, as stated in its constitution, emphasise disease
prevention, particularly to combat the spread of transmittable diseases and
to promote hygiene. Tobacco consumption, despite its related health risks,
is a matter of informed adult consumer choice and is not in itself a
'disease'.
For inter-governmental organisations to stray beyond their core function is
wrong as a matter of constitutional principle. It also creates precedents '
for uncontrolled extensions of their power.
If the WHO can exceed its powers in tobacco, there is no reason why it
should not do so with other products which may be deemed hazardous.
The WHO now appears to be planning to regulate the alcohol industry. It has
4 of 7
3/24/00 5:40 PM
BATs position on FCTC
Pointed to alcohol as having an "impact on global health greater than that
of tobacco or measles" (Alcohol and Public Health in 8 Developing Countries,
WHO, 1999).
The lack of WHO legislative powers is particularly important in respect of
its proposals to address tax, customs issues and consumer protection. For
example, there appear to be no powers in the WHO's
constitution to regulate the domestic tax levels of its member states, or to
amend the World Customs Organisation Kyoto Convention on duty-free.
The WHO has power to make 'recommendations' on a broader range of issues
which would allow members to adopt the recommendations as appropriate.
A binding legal obligation is not necessary for the WHO to have a role in
tobacco regulation, and is not appropriate in view of the complexity and
economic significance of the issues and policies affected.
Serious resource implications for governments.
The proposals would impose an additional burden on many governments which
have already determined their own domestic policy needs.
There are likely to be serious resource implications for many national
governments, particularly in developing countries, which have already
committed stretched resources to health policy matters they consider higher
priority, such as HIV, or securing essential drugs to immunise children
against infectious diseases. Unprecedented failure to consult.
Despite repeated requests to be consulted and offers to participate, major
stakeholders including the world's tobacco growers, consumers, manufacturers
and related industries have not been consulted.
Requests to be consulted on development of the Framework Convention and its
Protocols have been vigorously refused.
It would be unprecedented for a regulatory regime to
be created without serious and concerted consultation with those whom it
would most affect.
Lack of analysis.
The Tobacco Free Initiative has not rigorously analysed whether the proposed
Framework Convention can achieve its stated objectives. For example, no
economic impact study has been published.
Conflicts with existing international agreements
and standards.
The WHO proposals would create a new international institution for tobacco
regulation, where mechanisms for international agreements, co-operation and
standard-setting already exist. There is no apparent justification for
adding an additional layer of international regulation and bureaucracy.
Page 3
Specific proposals also appear to conflict with established international
agreements and standards in key areas.
For example:
-Free trade: By impacting on the movement of tobacco products across
borders, there is a real risk that the proposals would restrict
international trade.
Existing bilateral and international trade rules and provisions are for the
most part administered by the World Trade Organisation and World Customs
Organisation. There is no justification for creating new structures to
duplicate, undermine or contradict the principles these bodies protect.
The member states of the WHO are not the same as the member states of the
World Trade or World Customs Organisations. For example, China, Russia, and
Saudi Arabia do not belong to the World Trade Organisation. There are
constitutional objections to members of one international Organisation
seeking to regulate the
affairs of members of another, bound by different
rules.
- The proposals to harmonise taxes internationally would require national
governments to give up their right to set revenue targets appropriate to
their needs. Tax policy is of central importance to governments, which
historically have avoided ceding taxation authority to 'supranational'
entities.Taxation policy is far removed from the WHO's expertise, competence
and mandate for disease control.
5 of 7
3/24/00 5:40 PM
BATs position on FCTC
~ The proposals on excise duty would enter a complex area characterised by
many World Trade Organisation disputes. Failure to take account of the
complexities of excise policy could lead to an international regime with
discriminatory treatment of imported tobacco products, potentially creating
legal conflicts and contradictions
in international law.
The proposal to abolish all sales of duty free tobacco products would
require amendment of the World Customs Organisation 1973 Kyoto Convention on
the Simplification and Harmonisation of Customs Procedures. There would also
be considerable
practical difficulties, such as the administrative resources needed to
ensure compliance, particularly in developing countries.
- Test methods for cigarettes are supported by the International Standards
Organisation, and are within the jurisdiction of national governments. If
test methods are exploited to restrict trade, the World Trade Organisation
would be likely to act under the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.
There is
no demonstrable role for a new international legal regime.
- The proposals for harmonising packaging, labelling and manufacturing
standards would create great difficulty in setting global standards that are
proportionate and workable. They can benefit multinationals, which can more
easily comply with global standards through economies of scale and world
wide distribution. However developing countries are more likely to find
compliance difficult. Packaging and labelling are included in the World
Trade Organisation Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. Individual
governments make decisions within constraints imposed by the World Trade
Organisation on non-discrimination, transparency and reasonableness.
There are already proposals to make the World Trade Organisation rules more
industry-specific. The WHO proposals could undermine this process.
- The proposed subsidies to farmers to switch from growing tobacco raise
highly contentious legal and political issues in the sensitive area of
agricultural subsidies.
The World Trade Organisation has extensive rules governing agricultural
subsidies and the WHO proposals are likely to run counter to these.
It will not assist the upcoming round of World Trade Organisation
agriculture negotiations if control of agricultural subsidies for specific
crops is debated outside the legitimate international channels.
The proposals also pay no regard to important factors such as local soil and
climate, irrigation requirements or whether markets exist for substitute
crops.
- The proposals to combat smuggling run the risk of conflicting with the
work of customs authorities and many law enforcement agencies including
Interpol, who co-ordinate action against smuggling nationally, regionally
and multilaterally. A new global institution could conflict with the work of
the World Customs Organisation.
British American Tobacco companies do not smuggle; we do not condone or
encourage smuggling, and work actively to help governments and customs and
excise authorities around the world to eliminate it.
We welcome any helpful moves to combat smuggling, but believe that the WHO
is unlikely to have either the jurisdiction or technical competence to act.
- An advertising ban could clash with provisions embodied in national
constitutions on personal liberties such as freedom of speech.
Prohibiting internet sales of tobacco products is already subject to
regulatory discussions in the USA and the EU. As a 'single product' issue,
the proposed Convention on Tobacco Control is likely to further complicate
an already complex regulatory debate.
British American Tobacco March 2000.
6 of 7
3/24/00 5:40 PM
RE: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Subject: RE: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 09:26:26 -0500
From: Mike Pertschuk <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>
To: '"Emma Must"' <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>,
Simon Chapman <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, tobaccokills@globalink.org,
BOB MECKLENBURG <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>,
Kay Amdorfer <kamdorfer@advocacy.org>, wvi.gva@prolink.ch, israel@globalink.org,
tumbull@uicc.ch , Andrew Hayes <hayes@globalink.org>,
Luk Joossens <joossens@globalink.org>, afisynbo@form-net.com, susanht@igc.apc.org,
mjsmith@igc.org, mike.waghome@world-psi.org, corinne.bretscher@bag.admin.ch,
ashthai@asiaaccess.net. th, nilsbillo@compuserve.com, KSlama@ingcat.org,
KarenBissell@compuserve.com, suren.infact@juno.com, lucinda.infact@juno.com,
ds@iath.org, fleitmann@globalink.org, rweissman@essential.org, assunta@cap.po.my,
margross@igc.org, mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org, jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org,
clive.bates@dial.pipex.com, JPatterl 8@aol.com, aerickson@mindspring.com,
Mike Pertschuk <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>, sjones@bma.org.uk,
"Bill O’Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>, amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com,
karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com, Patti.White@hea.org.uk, Ann.McNeill@hea.org.uk,
Cassandra Welch <cwelch@lungusa.org>, rhamburg@amhrt.org,
Scott Ballin <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, Jean King <jking@crc.org.uk>,
COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in>, saloojee@globalink.org,
tobacco-accountability@igc.org , Anna White <inbalance@newdream.org>,
Judy Finn <Judy.Finn@heartfoundation.com.au>, Eric LeGresley <legres@magma.ca>
Yes! The Adovcacy Institute is delighted to join the Alliance.
And much appreciation Emma and her colleagues for a heroic effort in making
this possible!
---- Original Message----From: Emma Must [mailto:emma.must@dial.pipex.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 9:20 AM
To: Simon Chapman; tobaccokills@globalink.org; BOB MECKLENBURG;
karndorfer@advocacy.org; wvi.gva@prolink .ch; israel@globalink.org;
turnbull@uicc.ch; Andrew Hayes; Luk Joossens; afisynbo@form-net.com;
susanht@igc.ape.org; mj smith@igc.org; mike.waghorne@world-psi .org;
corinne.bretscherSbag.admin.ch; ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th;
nilsbillo@compuserve .com; KSlama@ingcat.org;
KarenBissell@compuserve .com; suren.infact@juno.com;
lucinda.infact@juno.com; ds@iath.org; fleitmann@globalink.org;
rweissman@essential.org; assunta@cap.po.my; margross@igc.org ;
mmyersSTobaccoFreeKids.org; jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org;
clive.bates@dial.pipex.com; JPatterl8@aol.com; aerickson@mindspring .com;
Mike Pertschuk; sjones@bma.org.uk; Bill O'Neill;
amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com; karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com;
Patti.White@hea.org.uk; 7Xnn.McNeill@hea.org.uk ; Cassandra Welch;
rhamburg@amhrt.org; Scott Ballin; Jean King; COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL;
saloojee@globalink.org; tobacco-accountability@igc.org; TXnna White; Judy
Finn; Eric LeGresley
Subject: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Importance: High
TO: Konstantin Krazovsky (ADIC, Ukraine); Mike Pertschuk, Kay Arndorfer
(Advocacy Institute) ; TXllan Erickson, Joe Patterson (TXmerican Cancer
Society); Rich Hamburg (TXmerican Heart Association); Cassandra Welch
(TXmerican Lung Association); Clive Bates, Karl Brookes, Amanda Sandford
(ASH, London); Belinda Hughes, Bung On Rittiphakdee (ASH Thailand/Mainland
1 of 3
3/3/00 11:38 AN
RE: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
South East Asia Network); Sinead Jones, Bill O'Neill (BMA); Judy Glanz, Matt
Myers, Scott Ballin (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Jean King (Cancer
Research Campaign); Thelma Narayan (Community Health Cell, Bangalore); Ross
Hammond (Consultant, including to Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Eric Le
Gresley (Consultant, Canada) ;
Mary Assunta (Consumers Association of Penang); Martina Poetschke-Langer
(Deutsches Krebforschungszentrum Im Neuenheimer Feld, Germany); Dr Umaimah
Kamil (Egypt); Rob Weissman (Essential Action/Multinational Monitor);
Sibylle Fleitmann (European Network for Smoking Prevention); Ann McNeill,
Patti White (HEA); David Simpson (IATH); Ambika Srivasta (India); Sanchita
Sharma (India); Lucinda Wykle-Rosenberg, Suren Moodliar (INFACT); Karen
Bissell, Karen Slama (INGCAT); Mohammadmasoud Aboutalebi (Iran); Nils Billo
(IUATLD); Rob Weissman (Multinational Monitor); Corinne Bretscher (MWIA);
Yussuf Saloojee (National Council Against Smoking, South Africa); Judy Finn
(National Heart Foundation, Australia); Beena Sarwar (Pakistan); Roberto del
Rosario
(Philippines); Mike Waghorne (Public Services International); Mele Smith,
Susana Hennessey-Toure (San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition); Anna White
(Senegal);
Thuli Shonnwe (Soul City,South Africa); Pamphil Kweyuh (Tobacco Control
Commission for Africa);
Tobacco Accountability Network; TobaccoKills; Luk Joossens, Andrew Hayes,
Archie Turnbull (UICC); Ruben Israel (UICC/Globalink); Simon Chapman
(University of Sydney); Robert Mecklenburg (World Dental
Federation/International Association of Dental Research); Eric Ram (World
Vision); Christopher Zishiri (Zimbabwe); Tobacco Kills group; Network for
Accountability of the Tobacco Transnationals.
CC (for info): Natasha Herrara (PAHO,Venezuela); Boubacar Diallo (WHO,
Mali); Christina Perez (National Cancer Institute, Brazil); Derek Yach,
Chitra Subramaniam, Doug Bettcher, Karen Lewis, Judith Mackay, Demetris
Vryonides, Barbara Zolty, Therese Lethu, Emmanuel Guindone (TFI, WHO);
Franklin Apfel, Peter Anderson, Patsy Harrington (WHO Europe); Katy Curran,
Jeff McKenna (CDC).
2 March 2000
Dear Friends,
Re: Framework Convention Alliance
Thanks to everyone who has sent comments on plans for the Alliance at
different times.
We now have basic agreement to go ahead with forming the alliance based
initially on the model in the attached plan. The plan is of course very
likely to evolve over time. A reminder that the key elements of the plan
are as follows:
- Name: The Framework Convention Alliance (FCA)
- Alliance website
- Closed e-mail conference
- Regional contact points
- Small working groups and individuals to take on particular tasks at
different times
As ever, initial preparations have taken a little longer than expected - in
particular preparation of initial Alliance materials, gaining agreement on
Aims and Principles amongst the small working group, etc. Nevertheless, I
have attached a working draft of the Aims and Principles, to give you a
flavour of where we're at.
(Once the small group working on this has agreed
a final draft it will be circulated via the closed e-mail conference for
comments from everyone. As ever, only a text which has consensus amongst all
members will be adopted by the Alliance, so don't worry if you are not
precisely in agreement with this wording.)
Please let me know if you can't
2 of 3
3/3/00 11:38 AIM
RE: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
open either this or the Alliance plan and I will send you a text version.
If you are basically happy with the attached plan and working draft of the
Aims and Principles at this stage, what I need from you now please are the
following (as soon as possible please - by Weds 8 March if you want to be
included in closed e-mail conference from the outset):
1) A one line e-mail saying that your organisation would like to become a
founder member of the Alliance.
2) The e-mail addresses of individuals in your organisation who wish to
participate in the closed e-mail conference.
3) The general website address for your organisation if you wish it to be
linked to the Alliance website.
4) The website address for any page/s of your organisation's website
containing material relating to the FCTC if you wish it to be linked to the
Alliance website.
5) Further offers for regional contact points.
(Please see attached plan
for more details, including those who have already offered to take on this
role in different regions).
What will happen next is:
1) The closed e-mail conference composed of founder members will go live as
soon as possible after 8 March. Notification will be sent to all members.
2) The Alliance website will go live as soon as possible this month once
final wording on Aims and Principles, and other materials has been agreed
via the email conference. The website will include: Aims and Principles;
Questions and Answers on the FCTC; list of members; actions you can take;
links to websites of member organisations etc.
3) An agenda will be circulated in the next few days for the NGO meeting in
Geneva on Sunday 26th March prior to the Second Meeting of the FCTC Working
Group (for any NGOs that will be attending).
Our task will then be to spread the word amongst the NGO community at large,
and to encourage action to make the Convention as strong and useful as
possible.
Best wishes, and I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible,
Emma
International Campaign Manager
ASH, London
3 of3
3/3/00 11:38 AN
Statement on consumers
Subject: Statement ©m comsumers
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:08:34 +0200
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>(by way of "Ruben J. Israel" <israel@globalink.org>)
To: fctcall@globalink.org
Statement on behalf on Consumers' International
Second Working Group on the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
29 March 2000
Consumers International would like to endorse the position of the Canadian
delegation that NGOs should be allowed to participate in the negotiation
process. This is consistent with the ECOSOC resolutions about NGO
participation and there is extensive precedent for this in other
international treaty processes, such as the UN Convention on
Desertification.
NGOs have been at the forefront in identifying the health hazards from
tobacco use and have developed extensive expertise in proposing viable
solutions to this problem in alerting and mobilising communities in
advocating for governmental action and in helping the victims of
tobacco-related disease. It is therefore appropriate that NGOs should be
part of the negotiations to the fullest extent possible and that their
voices be heard.
NGOs look forward to working with governments to build the strongest
possible Framework Convention and working with them to develop modalities
for making this possible.
Suren Moodliar, International Organizer
INFACT: 46 Plympton Street, Boston, MA 02118, USA
www.infact.org infact@igc.org
mailto:suren.infact@juno.com
telephone: 01-617-695-2525
fax: 01-617-695-2626
3/31/00 10:24 AM
NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Subject: NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:15:24+1000
From: Maurice Swanson <Maurice.Swanson@heartfoundation.com.au>
To: '"fctcan@globalink.org"' <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear Emma
Please accept my apologies for this meeting. Unfortunately, I will be unable
to attend. I look forward to hearing the outcomes from the meeting. Cheers
Maurice
Maurice G Swanson
Chief Executive
National Heart Foundation (WA Division)
08 93825901 mobile 0414 922902
/I*1
rfl
!
3/27/00 2:35 PM
-Statement Day 3 WG2/FCTC
Subject: Restatement ©ay 3 WG2/FCTC
©ate: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:39:14 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Karen Bissell <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>
CC: Emma Must <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Dear Karen,
Greetings! Good to hear that the movement towards an FCTC is gaining
strength. Thanks for the report of last year's meeting in Geneva. Some
brief news from here.
1.
Our State Govt, has set up a Karnataka Task Force on Health with
14 members, including me. This has been set up by the Chief Minister.
We have been able to raise the issue of the need for Tobacco Control
with Health Minister and the Secretaries for Health and Agriculture.
While action may take time, because of all the vested interests, it is
on the agenda.
2'.
Other medical professionals including cancer specialists,
cardiothoracic surgeons and the State branch of the Indian Medical
Association are also actually committed to the campaign. We are working
in collaboration with some of them.
3.
Our group, the Community Health Cell is conducting a
bidi industry in Karnataka.
study of the
4.
We had conducted a poster competition on Tobacco or Health at a
School of Fine Arts in Bangalore and have got some good posters. We are
wondering whether it would be useful to bring out a small booklet on
Health and other effects of tobacco, using some posters and photographs
as illustration. We will need to raise funds for this. We can also
perhaps print posters.
Best wishes,
Thelma
cc: Emma Must
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt so that we know we have made contact.
Statement Day 3 WG 2 ■’ FCTC
Subject: Statement ©ay 3 WG 2 / FCTC
©ate: Fri,31 Mar 2000 05:11:50 -0500
From: Karen Bissell <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>
To: FCA <fctcall@globalink.org>, GLink Int <international@globalink.org>
Statement made at the close of the WG meeting, Geneva
Statement of Oronto Douglas from Environmental Rights Action (Friends of
the Earth, Nigeria) representing International Union against Tuberculosis
and Lung Disease
We urge the Member States to recognise the needs of many developing
countries for the financial and technical means to fulfil the conditions of
a strong Convention. This is the unique opportunity for many nations to
move towards equitable health for all. In the absence of a strong Framework
Convention, the health gap between rich and poor countries will widen.
We urge the participation of the international community in this process
and look to the Framework Convention to enable developing countries to
accelerate the development of strong tobacco control policies supported by
international measures.
JU>
^Statement Day 3 WG2/FCTC
Su&jeci: Re:StaJem«mO Day 3 WG2/FCTC
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:39:14 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Karen Bissell <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>
CC: Emma Must <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Dear Karen,
Greetings! Good to hear that the movement towards an FCTC is gaining
strength. Thanks for the report of last year's meeting in Geneva. Some
brief news from here.
1.
Our State Govt, has set up a Karnataka Task Force on Health with
14 members, including me. This has been set up by the Chief Minister.
We have been able to raise the issue of the need for Tobacco Control
with Health Minister and the Secretaries for Health and Agriculture.
While action may take time, because of all the vested interests, it is
on the agenda.
2.
Other medical professionals including cancer specialists,
cardiothoracic surgeons and the State branch of the Indian Medical
Association are also actually committed to the campaign. We are working
in collaboration with some of them.
3.
Our group, the Community Health Cell is conducting a
bidi industry in Karnataka.
study of the
4.
We had conducted a poster competition on Tobacco or Health at a
School of Fine Arts in Bangalore and have got some good posters. We are
wondering whether it would be useful to bring out a small booklet on
Health and other effects of tobacco, using some posters and photographs
as illustration. We will need to raise funds for this. We can also
perhaps print posters.
Best wishes,
Thelma
cc: Emma Must
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt so that we know we have made contact.
4/4/00 5:30 PM
3 FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - REMINDER
Subject: JOINING FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - REMINDER
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 14:47:41 -0000
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: "Simon Chapman" <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, <tobaccokills@globalink.org>,
"BOB MECKLENBURG" <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>, <karndorfer@advocacy.org>,
<israel@globalink.org >, <tumbull@uicc.ch>, "Andrew Hayes" <hayes@globalink.org>,
"Luk Joossens" <joossens@globalink.org>, <afisynbo@form-net.com>,
<susanht@igc.apc.org>, <mjsmith@igc.org>, <mike.waghorne@world-psi.org>,
<corinne.bretscher@bag.admin.ch>, <ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th>,
<nilsbillo@compuserve. com>, <KS lama@ingcat. org>,
<KarenBissell@compuserve.com>, <suren.infact@juno.com>,
<lucinda.infact@juno.com>, <ds@iath.org>, <fleitmann@globalink.org>,
<rweissman@essential.org>, <assunta@cap.po.my>, <margross@igc.org>,
<mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids. org>,
<clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>, <JPatterl 8@aol.com>, <aerickson@mindspring.com>,
"Mike Pertschuk" <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>, <sjones@bma.org.uk>,
"Bill O'Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>, <amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com>,
<karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com>, <Patti.White@hea.org.uk>,
<Ann.McNeill@hea.org.uk>, "Cassandra Welch" <cwelch@lungusa.org>,
<rhamburg@amhrt.org>, "Scott Ballin" <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
"Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>,
"COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL" <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in>,
<saloojee@globalink.org>, "Anna White" <inbalance@newdream.org>,
"Judy Finn" <Judy.Finn@heartfoundation.com.au>,
"Eric LeGresley" <legres@magma.ca>, "Eric Ram" <wvi.gva@iprolink.ch>,
"NATT" <tobacco-accountability@igc.topica.com >
Dear Friends,
With reference to my e-mail and attachments of March 2nd:
Thanks to everyone who has replied.
message I
If you have, please ignore this
To others: if you want to be included in the Alliance e-mail conference from
the outset (ie end of this week) please send me (BY MIDDAY GMT THURS 9TH) a
one line e-mail saying your organisation wants to join the Alliance and
e-mail addresses of those from your organisation who wish to be included in
the conference.
Don't'worry if you miss this deadline, you can also join the e-mail
conference later, but I will forward all the names I have to Ruben Israel
tomorrow afternoon to get things started.
Thanks
Emma
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASH
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171 613 0531
3/9/00 1:04 PM
Re: JOINING FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - REMINDER
Subject: Re: JOINING FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - REMINDER
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 15:06:11 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Emma Must <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Dear Emma,
Greetings! Yes our group, the Community Health Cell, would like to join the
Framework Convention Alliance email conference .
Good wishes,
Thelma Narayan
Emma Must wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> With reference to my e-mail and attachments of March 2nd:
>
> Thanks to everyone who has replied. If you have, please ignore this
> message!
> To others: if you want to be included in the Alliance e-mail conference from
> the outset (ie end of this week) please send me (BY MIDDAY GMT THURS 9TH) a
> one line e-mail saying your organisation wants to join the Alliance and
> e-mail addresses of those from your organisation who wish to be included in
> the conference.
>
> Don't worry if you miss this deadline, you can also join the e-mail
> conference later, but I will forward all the names I have to Ruben Israel
> tomorrow afternoon to get things started.
>
> Thanks
>
> Emma
>
> Emma Must
> International Campaign Manager
> ASH
> 102 - 108 Clifton Street
> London EC2A 4HW
> Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
> Fax: + 44 (0)171 613 0531
> E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
> Web: http://www.ash.org.uk
•
1
1 of 1
3/9/00 3:24 PM
Statement Day 3 WG 2 / FCTC
Subject: Statement Day 3 WG 2 / FCTC
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 05:11:50 -0500
From: Karen Bissell <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>
To: FCA <fctcall@globalink.org>, GLink Int <intemational@globalink.org>
Statement made at the close of the WG meeting, Geneva
Statement of Oronto Douglas from Environmental Rights Action (Friends of
the Earth, Nigeria) representing International Union against Tuberculosis
and Lung Disease
We urge the Member States to recognise the needs of many developing
countries for the financial and technical means to fulfil the conditions of
a strong Convention. This is the unique opportunity for many nations to
move towards equitable health for all. In the absence of a strong Framework
Convention, the health gap between rich and poor countries will widen.
We urge the participation of the international community in this process
and look to the Framework Convention to enable developing countries to
accelerate the development of strong tobacco control policies supported by
international measures.
1 of 1
3/31/00 10:37 PM
Subject: FW: NGO meeting Geneva Sunnday 26th
©ate: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 12:04:08 +1000
From: Jeanie McKenzie <jeaniem@nswcc.org.au>
To: '"fctcall@globalink.org"' <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear Emma
Please accept my apologies. I'm afraid I won't be able to attend the first
meeting-of the FCTC in Geneva (much as I'd like to....Australia's just too
far away). I look forward to hearing the outcomes of your deliberations.
Kind regards
Jeanie McKenzie
Manager Cancer Prevention
New South Wales Cancer Council
> > Dear Friends,
> >
> > For those planning to attend the NGO mtg this Sunday prior to the FCTC
> > Working Group:
> >
> > 1) Pls send a one line e-mail round this list (fctcall@globalink.org) to
> say
> > you are planning to attend
>> 2) Pls if possible bring your own lunch (there are shops at the main
> railway
> > station in Geneva for example) - as it has been pointed out to us that
> > opportunities to buy lunch at WHO on Sunday will be limited
>> 3) Agenda is attached again FYI
> >
> > For those not coming:
> >
> > 1) Please send any issues you'd like to be raised during the meeting
> round
> > this list (fctcall@globalink.org) before Sunday
>> 2) Members of the Alliance present will post daily reports on progress
> > during the Working Group Meeting on this list FYI.
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> > Emma
> >
> > Emma Must
> > International Campaign Manager
> > ASH
> > 102 - 108 Clifton Street
> > London EC2A 4HW
> > Tel: + 44 (0)171 739 5902
> > Fax: + 44 (0)171 613 0531
> > E-mail: emma .must@dia.l .pipex. com
•
^c- NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Subject: Re: NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:37:46 +0100
From: "Archie Turnbull" <archie.tumbull@ersnet.org>
To: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>, <fctcall@globalink.org>
I will be there
Archie Turnbull
---- Message d'origine---De : Emma Must <emma.must@dial.pipex.com >
A : fctcall@globalink.org <fctcall@globalink.org>
Date : Friday 24 March 2000 13:18
Objet : NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
>Dear Friends,
>
>For those planning to attend the NGO mtg this Sunday prior to the FCTC
>Working Group:
>
>1) Pls send a one line e-mail round this list (fctcall@globalink.org) to
say
>you are planning to attend
>2) Pls if possible bring your own lunch (there are shops at the main
railway
>station in Geneva for example) - as it has been pointed out to us that
Opportunities to buy lunch at WHO on Sunday will be limited
>3) Agenda is attached again FYI
>
>For those not coming:
>
>1) Please send any issues you'd like to be raised during the meeting round
>this list (fctcall@globalink.org) before Sunday
>2) Members of the Alliance present will post daily reports on progress
>during the Working Group Meeting on this list FYI.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Emma
>Emma Must
>International Campaign Manager
>ASH
>102 -108 Clifton Street
>London EC2A 4HW
>Tel: + 44 (0)171 739 5902
>Fax: + 44 (0)171 613 0531
>E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
>Web: http://www.ash.org.uk
3/24/00 10:19 PM
AW. NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Subject: AW: NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
©ate: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:07:51 +0100
From: Bretscher Corinne BAG<Corinne.Bretscher@bag.admin.ch>
To: '"Emma Must'" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>,
"'fctcall@globalink.org'" <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear Emma
First thank you for all the good job you did.
Second: I'll attend the NGO-meeting this Sunday, 26th.
Third: Looking foreward to a fruitful meeting.
Kindest regards
Corinne Bretscher
MWIA
---- Ursprtlngliche Nachricht----Von:
Emma Must [SMTP:emma.mustSdial.pipex.com]
Gesendet am:
Freitag, 24. MSrz 2000 13:06
An:
fctcall@globalink.org
Betreff:
NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Dear Friends,
For those planning to attend the NGO mtg this Sunday prior to the
FCTC
Working Group:
1) Pls send a one line e-mail round this list
(fctcall@globalink.org) to say
you are planning to attend
2) Pls if possible bring your own lunch (there are shops at the main
railway
station in Geneva for example) - as it has been pointed out to us
that
opportunities to buy lunch at WHO on Sunday will be limited
3) Agenda is attached again FYI
For those not coming:
1)
Please send any issues you'd like to be raised during the meeting
round
this list (fctcall@globalink.org) before Sunday
2) Members of the Alliance present will post daily reports on
progress
during the Working Group Meeting on this list FYI.
Best wishes
Emma
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASH
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171 613 0531
E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
Web: http://www.ash.org.uk
3/24/00 10:18 PM
NGO ■neeting Geneva Sunday 26th
Subject: NGO meeting Geneva Sunday 26th
U>ate: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:05:53 -0000
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Dear Friends,
For those planning to attend the NGO mtg this Sunday prior to the FCTC
Working Group:
1) Pls send a one line e-mail round this list (fctcall@globalink.org) to say
you are planning to attend
2) Pls if possible bring your own lunch (there are shops at the main railway
station in Geneva for example) - as it has been pointed out to us that
opportunities to buy lunch at WHO on Sunday will be limited
3) Agenda is attached again FYI
For those not coming:
1) Please send any issues you'd like to be raised during the meeting round'
this list (fctcall@globalink.org) before Sunday
2) Members of the Alliance present will post daily reports on progress
during the Working Group Meeting on this list FYI.
Best wishes
Emma
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASH
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171 613 0531
E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
Web: http://www.ash.org.uk
p|NGO mtg agenda final.doc
Name: NGO mtg agenda final.doc
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
Emcodimg: base64
3/24/00 10:19 PM
Sunday
Subject: Sunday
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 15:02:15 +0100
From: Karen Slama <KSlama@ingcat.org>
Organization: JNGCAT
To: "fctcall@globalink.org" <fctcall@globalink.org>
I'll be coming.
Karen Slama, PhD
Chief, Tobacco Prevention Division, IUATLD
Coordinator, INGCAT
68 bd Saint-Michel
75006 Paris, France
tel: 33/1 44 32 03 70
fax: 33/1 43 29 90 87
e-mail: kslama@ingcat.org
http: / /www. ingcat. org
1 of!
3/24/00 10:23 PM
Re- Framework Convention Alliance
Subject: Re: Framework Convention Alliance
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 10:55:06 +0100
From: ENSP <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: "Emma Must" <emma.must@diai.pipex.com>,
"Simon Chapman" <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, <tobaccokills@globalink.org>,
"BOB MECKLENBURG" <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>, <kamdorfer@advocacy.org>,
<wvi.gva@prolink.ch >, <israel@globalink.org >, <tumbull@uicc.ch>,
"Andrew Hayes" <hayes@globalink.org>, "Luk Joossens" <joossens@globalink.org>,
<afisynbo@form-net.com>, <susanht@igc.apc.org>, <mjsmith@igc.org>,
<mike. waghome@world-psi. org>, <corinne. bretscher@bag. admin. ch>,
<ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th >, <nilsbillo@compuserve.com>, <KSlama@ingcat.org>,
<KarenBissell@compuserve.com>, <suren.infact@juno.com>, <lucinda.infact@juno.com>,
<ds@iath.org>, <fleitmann@globalink.org>, <rweissman@essential.org>,
<assunta@cap.po.my>, <margross@igc.org>, <mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
<jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com >, <JPatterl 8@aol.com>,
<aerickson@mindspring.com>, "Mike Pertschuk" <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>,
<sjones@bma.org.uk >, "Bill O'Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>,
<amanda. sandford@dial. pipex. com>, <karl. brookes@dial. pipex. com>,
<Patti. White@hea. org. uk>, <Ann.McNeill@hea. org. uk>,
"Cassandra Welch" <cwelch@lungusa.org>, <rhamburg@amhrt.org>,
"Scott Ballin" <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, "Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>,
"COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL" <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in>, <saloojee@globalink.org>,
<tobacco-accountability@igc.org>, "Anna White" <inbalance@newdream.org>
CC: <jwm0@cdc.gov>, "Curran, Katy M." <kgc6@cdc.gov>, <pan@who.dk>, <zoltyb@who.ch>,
<jmackay@pacific.net.hk>, <klewis@advocacy.org>, <subramaniamc@who.ch>,
<yachd@who.ch>, <vryonidesd@who.ch>, <lethut@who.ch>, <fap@who.dk>,
<pha@who.dk>, <guindone@who.ch>, "Doug Bettcher" <bettcherd@who.ch>
Dear Emma,
Sorry for the delay in answering.
I am happy to inform you that the ENSP Board has given its agreement for
ENSP to become a founder member of the Framework Conventioin Alliance.
Best regards,
Sibylle Fleitmann
Secretary General
European Network for Smoking Prevention
48 rue de Pascale
1040 BRUXELLES
Belgium
At 23:05 26/01/00 -0000, Emma Must wrote:
>TO: Konstantin Krazovsky (ADIC, Ukraine); Mike Pertschuk, Kay Arndorfer
>(Advocacy Institute); Allan Erickson, Joe Patterson (American Cancer
>Society); Rich Hamburg (American Heart Association); Cassandra Welch
>(American Lung Association); Clive Bates, Karl Brookes, Amanda Sandford
>(ASH, London); Belinda Hughes, Bung On Rittiphakdee (ASH Thailand/Mainland
>South East Asia Network); Sinead Jones, Bill O'Neill (BMA); Judy Glanz, Matt
>Myers, Scott Ballin (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Jean King (Cancer
>Research Campaign); Thelma Narayan (Community Health Cell, Bangalore); Ross
>Hammond (Consultant, including to Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids); Mary
>Assunta (Consumers Association of Penang); Martina Poetschke-Langer
>(Deutsches Krebforschungszentrum Im Neuenheimer Feld, Germany); Dr Umaimah
>Kamil (Egypt); Rob Weissman (Essential Action/Multinational Monitor);
3/23/00 10:14 AM
Framework Convention Alliance
>Sibylie Fleitmann (European Network for Smoking Prevention); Ann McNeill,
>Patti White (HEA) ; David Simpson (IATH) ; Ambika Srivasta (India); Sanchita
>Sharma (India); Lucinda Wykle-Rosenberg, Suren Moodliar (INFACT); Karen
>Bissell, Karen Slama (INGCAT); Mohammadmasoud Aboutalebi (Iran); Nils Billo
> (IUATLD) ; Rob Weissman (Multinational Monitor); Corinne Bretscher (MWIA) ;
>Yussuf Saloojee (National Council Against Smoking, South Africa); Beena
>Sarwar (Pakistan); Roberto del Rosario (Philippines); Mike Waghorne (Public
>Services International); Mele Smith, Susana Hennessey-Toure (San Francisco
>Tobacco Free Coalition); Anna White (Senegal); Thuli Shonnwe (Soul City,
>South Africa); Pamphil Kweyuh (Tobacco Control Commission for Africa);
>Tobacco Accountability Network; TobaccoKills; Luk Joossens, Andrew Hayes,
>Archie Turnbull (UICC); Ruben Israel (UICC/Globalink); Simon Chapman
>(University of Sydney); Robert Mecklenburg (World Dental
>Federation/International Association of Dental Research); Eric Ram (World
>Vision); Christopher Zishiri (Zimbabwe)
>
>CC (for info): Natasha Herrara (PAHO,Venezuela); Boubacar Diallo (WHO,
>Mali); Christina Perez (National Cancer Institute, Brazil); Derek Yach,
>Chitra Subramaniam, Doug Bettcher, Karen Lewis, Judith Mackay, Demetris
>Vryonides, Barbara Zolty, Therese Lethu, Emmanuel Guindone (TFI, WHO);
>Franklin Apfel, Peter Anderson, Patsy Harrington (WHO Europe); Katy Curran,
>Jeff McKenna (CDC).
>25 January 2000
>
>Dear Friends,
>
>Re: Framework Convention Alliance
>Please find attached the latest version of the plan for the formation of an
international alliance of NGOs to support the development of a strong
>Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).
>
>This will be familiar to some of you, and unfamiliar to others!
>
>For those of you who haven't seen an earlier draft, this plan represents the
>agreed output to date of a process initiated amongst a number of NGOs
>present at the first Working Group Meeting of the Framework Convention in
>Geneva last October, together with a number of other NGOs who have been
>active in pushing for the formation of such an alliance.
>These NGOs, including INFACT, INGCAT, IUATLD, UICC, ASH (London), Campaign
>for Tobacco Free Kids and others, felt that there was a need for more
coordination and communication amongst NGOs to increase our effectiveness as
>we work to support the development of the FCTC, and for more systematic and
>rapid outreach to NGOs not yet engaged in the process (especially in
>developing countries) who could both benefit from and contribute to the
>creation of a strong FCTC.
There is also a need for some basic,
>straightforward materials to increase awareness about the FCTC amongst
politicians, media, etc.
>The key elements of the plan are as follows:
>- Name: The Framework Convention Alliance (FCA)
>- Alliance website
>- Closed e-mail conference
>- Regional contact points
>- Small working groups and individuals to take on particular tasks at
>different times
2 of 3
3/23/00 10:14 AM
Frtsnework Convention Alliance
>We'd very much welcome any comments you may have on this plan - by 10
>February please if possible - and offers of skills or input you might wish
>to bring to the Alliance. Offers of people willing to take on the role of
>"Regional Contact Point" are particularly welcomed.
>1 will then recirculate the plan with any further changes, together with a
>brief set of Aims and Principles of the Alliance (which is among the
>materials a small group of us is working on at the moment), and an
>invitation for your organisation to become a founding member of the
>Alliance. A closed e-mail conference will be activated in late February
>linking those who wish to join. A basic Alliance website will be launched
>in early March - with initial briefing materials, links to resources on
>members' sites, and actions that NGOs can take.
(Please see the end of the
>attached plan for more details). Our task will then be to spread the word
>amongst the NGO community at large, and to encourage action to make the
>Convention as strong and useful as possible.
>
>Best wishes - and I hope to hear from you.
>Emma Must
^-International Campaign Manager
>ASH, London
>
>NB: For NGOs intending to make the trip to Geneva for the Second Working
>Group meeting from 27-29 March, plans are already being developed for an
>informal meeting of NGOs immediately beforehand.
This is likely to be on
>Sunday 26th March, so please keep this date free at this stage, and aim to
>arrive in Geneva on the Saturday if possible.
>Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\FCTC NGO Alliance Plan - 25 -jan99 - wider consultation .doc"
3 of 3
3/23/00 10:14 AM
Government To Extend Smoking Ban
Subject: New Zealand Government To Extend Smoking Ban
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:59:23 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.nz>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
New Zealand News from The Press - Thursday, February 10, 2000
from
National News Stories
THURSDAY, FEB 10, 2000:
Smoking ban may include casinos, bars
WELLINGTON — The Public Health Association is urging the Government to
extend a proposed smoking ban to bars and casinos as well as restaurants and
cafes.
"Banning smoking in public places is an occupational health, as well as a
public health, issue," PHA director Nancy Fithian said yesterday.
Prime Minister Helen Clark gave her backing on Monday to Health Minister
Annette King's plan to ban smoking in restaurants and cafes this year.
Research showed employees in bars and casinos were exposed to huge
concentrations of tobacco smoke, Ms Fithian said.
"Patrons can choose to leave or stay away from these places but employees
don't have the same option," she said.
Banning smoking in restaurants and bars did not affect profit margins and in
many cases profits went up.
"Because so many restaurants and cafes now have bars, it will be difficult
in practice to ban smoking in restaurants without extending it to the bars.
Therefore it makes sense to ban smoking in all of these venues."
Mrs King intends using an anti-smoking private member's bill, introduced in
Parliament last year by former MP Tukoroirangi Morgan, as a vehicle for
legislation to ban smoking in restaurants and cafes.
—NZPA
CAFCA
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa
PO Box 2258, Christchurch
email: cafcaSchch.planet.org.nz
Nz Government Considers Suing Tobacco TNCs
Subject: NZ Government Considers Suing Tobacco TNCs
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:54:57 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.nz>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
New Zealand News from The Press - Thursday, March 16, 2000
from
National News Stories
THURSDAY, MAR 16, 2000:
Govt looks at tobacco law change
by Nicholas Maling
in Wellington
The Government will consider changing the law so that it could sue tobacco
firms, Prime Minister Helen Clark says.
Tobacco companies may also be forced to label their products with the
additives they put in cigarettes as the Government steps up its attack on
smoking.
•
Ms Clark, Attorney-General Margaret Wilson, and Health Minister Annette King
met with anti-smoking group ASH yesterday to discuss the possibility of
suing tobacco companies for the health costs of smoking-related illnesses.
Ms Clark said Crown Law Office advice was that the Government's chances of
successfully suing cigarette companies were slim unless it legislated for
the move.
"On the present legal framework, it's tough. You might have to legislate to
enhance your chances. That has been done in other jurisdictions, so we'd
want to look at that," Ms Clark said.
She was seeking further legal advice on the issue. More information would
need to be gathered before a decision was reached, but litigation remained
under active consideration.
"Litigation is one of a range of tools you have when you're trying to
promote a smoke-free society," Ms Clark said. "We're basically wanting to do
quite a lot more work and see what's happening in other jurisdictions."
Ms Wilson would attend a conference of attorneys-general in Australia next
week, where the issue of tobacco litigation was on the agenda. The
Government would also take an interest in a seminar on the subject of
tobacco litigation being run by ASH next week.
CAFCA
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa
PO Box 2258, Christchurch
email: cafca@chch.planet.org.nz
3/20/00 10.09 AM
Re: Anti-Tobacco
Subject: Re: Anti-Tobacco
3>ate: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:25:33 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Avni B Patel <avnip@umich.edu>
Dear Avni,
Thanks for your message. It is really encouraging to hear of enthusiastic
groups of students who have a social commitment. Do send us more information
about your organization and perhaps some info about the group who may visit
Bangalore. We will be able to help you with contacts and could help arrange
sessions in some schools. I wonder if any of your friends speak Kannada.
Also what is the age group that you would like to relate to.
Perhaps you may
be interested in visiting community health and development projects working
with tribals in Mysore District and Chamrajnagar District. Let us know.
With good wishes to you and the SEVHA group.
Thelma Narayan
lofl
4/19/00 11:13 Ab
Subject: Anti-Tobacco
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:09:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Avni B Patel <avnip@umich.edu>
To: sochara@vsni.com
Dear Dr. Thelma Narayan,
Hello. My name is Avni Patel. I am a senior at the University of
Michigan in the USA. I am a member of a student group called SEVHA
(Students Educating and Volunteering for Health Awareness.)
I heard of
your anti-tobacco work from Dr. Beth Bowen from the Morehouse School of
Medicine. SEVHA has 15 members who plan to come to India this summer to
educate students about the harmful affects of tobacco use. Our main goal
is to help Indians help themselves. We plan to travel within Gujarat,
Bombay, and Bangalore to promore our message.
Tentatively, we will work in India for the month of July. Our
budget is $30,000 (which includes all expensives such as travel,
eduactional materials, lodging, etc.) We are wondering if you can assist
us in any way (through monetary donations, contact information, resources,
etc.) This is the third year SEVHA will be going to India and each year
we have grown significantly. Our work consists of daily presentations at
schools. They last approximately 1&1/2 hours and consist of lecture and
discussion. We play trivia games and give out anti-tobacco prozes to teh
students to keep their interest. The response to SEVHA has been great in
the past 2 years. I have plenty of information about our organization and
cause if you are interested.
Most of the members of SEVHA plan to pursue careers in Public
Health and/or Medicine. We, as Indian Americans, take pride in being able
to give back to India in the form of health care awareness. In the past
years, we have worked with the Tata Institute, American Cancer Society,
and the University of Michigan Public Health School, as well as many
other. I look forward to hearing back from you. You can contact me via
e-mail, postal mail, or telephone. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Avni Patel
1825 Hill St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
(734) 214-1380
4/17/00 2:08 PM
Re: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Subject: Re: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE - PLEASE JOIN
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 13:44:46 GMT+1
From: "Dr. Martina Poetschke-Langer" <M.Poetschke-Langer@DKFZ-Heidelberg.de>
Organization: DKFZ Heidelberg
To: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>,
"Simon Chapman" <simonc@pub.health.usyd.edu.au>, <tobaccokills@globalink.org>,
"BOB MECKLENBURG" <mecklenburg@lan2wan.com>, <karndorfer@advocacy.org>,
<wvi.gva@prolink.ch >, <tumbull@uicc.ch>, "Andrew Hayes" <hayes@globalink.org>,
"Luk Joossens" <joossens@globalink.org>, <afisynbo@form-net.com>
<susanht@igc.apc.org>, <mjsmith@igc.org>, <mike.waghorne@world-psi.org>,
<corinne.bretscher@bag.admin.ch>, <ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th>,
<nilsbillo@compuserve.com>, <KSlama@ingcat.org>,
<KarenBissell@compuserve.com>, <suren.infact@juno.com>,
<lucinda. infact@j uno. com>, <ds@iath. org>, <fleitmann@globalink. org>,
<rweissman@essential. org>, <assunta@cap. po. my>, <margross@igc. org>,
<mmyers@TobaccoFreeKids.org >, <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
<clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>, <JPatterl 8@aol.com>, <aerickson@mindspring.com>,
"Mike Pertschuk" <mpertschuk@advocacy.org>, <sjones@bma.org.uk>,
"Bill O'Neill" <boneill@bma.org.uk>, <amanda.sandford@dial.pipex.com>,
<karl.brookes@dial.pipex.com>, <Patti.White@hea.org.uk>,
<Ann.McNeill@hea.org.uk>, "Cassandra Welch" <cwelch@lungusa.org>,
<rhamburg@amhrt.org>, "Scott Bailin'' <sballin@TobaccoFreeKids.org>,
"Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>,
"COMMUNITY HEALTH CELL" <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in >,
<saloojee@globalink.org>, <tobacco-accountability@igc.org >,
"Anna White" <inbalance@newdream.org>,
"Judy Finn" <Judy.Finn@heartfoundation.com.au>,
"Eric LeGresley" <legres@magma.ca>, "Ruben J. Israel" <israel@globalink.org>
Dear Emma,
The German Cancer Research Center is delighted to join the alliance.
Especially in Germany we need international support in tobacco
control activities.
With best wishes
Martina
***************************************************
Dr. Martina Poetschke-Langer
Leiterin der
Stabsstelle Krebspraevention
Deutsches Krebsforschunaszentrum
Im Neuenheimer Feld 28(3*
69120 Heidelberg
Tel: 06221/ 42 30 07
Fax: 06221/ 42 30 20
***************************************************
3/13/00 8:26 PM
£ Proposed Smoking Ban In New Zealand Bars
Subject: Proposed Smoking Ban In New Zealand Bars
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 15:43:16-1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca:'rt chch.planet,org.nz>
To: "Framework Convention Alliance" <fctcall@globalink.org>
New Zealand News from The Press - Tuesday, May 09, 2000
5-9/00 2:18 PM
£ Proposed Smoking Ban In New Zealand Bai s
5 9/00 2.ISP
5.11/00 9:46 AM
5/11/00 9:46 AM
"Press" Editorial ou Smoking in New Zealand
w: IPS posting on the 2nd Working Group
Subject: Fw: IPS posting on the 2nd Working Group
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 19:32:14 -0400
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
To: fclcall@globalink.org
Hi everyone,
1 of 3
■ith Floor, Boston, MA 02115, USA
_
'; •* WHO Geneva IPS anicle.doc
Name: WHO Geneva IPS article.doc
Type: Winword File (application'insword):
Encoding: base64
5.11/00 9:45 AM
INTER PRESS SERVICE
HEALTH: U.S., BRITAIN AND JAPAN BLOCK
ANTI-TOBACCO CONVENTION
By Gustavo Capdevila
GENEVA. Mar. 30 (IPS) - The world
tobacco industry's three main home countries
— the United States. Britain and Japan — are
obstructing progress on a framework
convention for controlling smoking, charge
international organizations.
The three are home to the large transnationals
Phillip Morris. British American Tobacco and
Japan Tobacco, respectively, and "are
pressing for a general convention." one that
does not go into any detail, said Lucinda
Wykle-Rosenberg, director of INFACT, a
U.S. non-governmental organization (NGO).
The consequences of a weak global tobacco
policy will mean that countries without the
capacity or resources to establish their own
i sgul ati< ns t ill continue to lag behind moreadvanced nations, said Yussuf Salojee,
director of South Africa's National Council
against Smoking.
The disparities in equality and justice that
exist between industrialized and developing
countries in the health sphere will only grow
worse if the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control is diluted, predicted the
South African physician.
The initiative to draw up a convention on
tobacco was launched by the World Health
Organization (WHO) amid growing concern
about the number of smoking-related deaths
around the world each year, which reaches at
least one million.
Another independent group, the Network for
the Accountability of Tobacco Transnationals
(NATT). warned that in 2030. deaths related
to tobacco addiction will reach 10 million
annually, and most will be people in
developing countries.
NATT maintains that developing countries, a
market actively pursued by tobacco
transnationals, are some of the most
vehement critics of the cigarette
manufacturers.
WHO held a public hearing this week in
Geneva of its working group entrusted with
the Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control. Representatives from governments,
the tobacco industry' and civil society' made
their voices heard.
Gro Harlem Brundtland, director general of
WHO, which is fighting to set up the anti
smoking convention, declared, "let us see to it
that ours will be the last generation to face
this scourge."
Since the working group began deliberations
on the framework convention in October
1999, more than 1.7 million people have died
from diseases related to tobacco use, WykleRosenberg told a press conference.
The NGOs present at the healing back a solid
convention that gives priority to public health
and people's lives above the economic
interests of the tobacco industry, she stated.
"Unfortunately, protecting people's lives was
not the message we heard from several
government delegations" that spoke before
the WHO working group, said Masaid Ali
Sheikh, delegate from the Network
Association for the Rational Use of
Medicines in Pakistan.
"Public health, consumers ana human rights
organizations from around the world are
united in our commitment to keep the tobacco
industry out of this (framework convention)
process, in spite of suggestions by a few
countries that it has been opened to tobacco
companies," he said.
Salojee emphasized the need for the
convention to address advertising and
promotion issues and to limit the political
influence of the tobacco industry.
An international tobacco agreement such as
the one being debated by the WHO must also
offer consumer protections, demand full
disclosure of the dangers of tobacco products,
and shift the responsibility' and costs for tills
preventable epidemic to the tobacco industry,
said the South African official.
He stressed that tobacco farmers will not be
hurt by the framework convention. The WHO
predicts the number of smokers will expand
from the current 1.1 billion people worldwide
to 1.6 billion by the year 2025.
"Even if the convention were remarkably’
successful and managed to hold consumption
at current levels, there would be no decline in
demand for tobacco." Salojee said.
"Opposition to this convention is about
protecting tobacco industry’ profits, not the
livelihoods of tobacco farmers."
The real threat to the farmers comes from the
technological innovations by the cigarette
manufacturers. In the past decade, they have
spent hundreds of millions of dollars
developing cigarettes with little or even no
tobacco in them, he pointed out.
John Kapito, head of the Consumers
Association of Malawi, said "the fear that
fanners have under this convention should be
allayed because tobacco demand will remain
static and will not affect the economic
situation of tobacco growing countries."
The tobacco industry exaggerates potential
job losses from tobacco regulation, according
to Ross Hammond, delegate from the
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a U.S.
based NGO.
Research done for the World Bank report
shows that most countries will not see net job
loss if tobacco consumption declines, said
Hammond.
Protecting health and protection employment
are not mutually exclusive goals, stressed the
U.S. delegate.
For the first time in its 52-year history, the
WHO is promoting talks among its 191
member nations for an international public
health agreement.
The next meeting of the anti-smoking
working group will be in late September or
early October. The WHO expects the
convention's text to be ready for ratification
in 2003.
Subject: Re: Floor Comments from the Second Working Working Group Meeting on t he FCTC, March
27-29,2000
Date: Tue; 09 May 2000 08:43:46 +0000
From: elif dagli <edagli® superonline, com>
To: AJ Foreit <JForeit@tobaccofreekids.org>
CC: '"fctcall@globalink.org"' <fctcall@globalink.org>,
Judy Wilkenfeld <JWilkenfeld@tobaccofteekids.org >, Judith Glanz <jglanz@tobaccofreekids.org>
: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
Subject: Re: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 15:14:47 -0700
From: Mele J Smith <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: Robert Weissman <rob@essential.org>, Clive Bates <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
These are importants points. One other point is that the US tobacco
companies will use their political might to mold the FCTC to their
advantage both at the delegate and congressional levels.
It is clear from the written comments made by the Philip Morris, RJ
Reynolds, Brown Williamson, and the United States Council for International
Business (in response to the US Health and Human Services hearings in March
2000) that they will pressure the US delegation to negotiate the treaty on
their behalf. The companies and the council all brought up trade issues in
their comments (most saying there is no need to address trade issues in the
FCTC because the GATT agreements address trade and health and that the FCTC
potentially viloates already negotiated agreements) and question whether
the FCTC is necessary in the first place. While saying they support
"reasonable regulation and voluntary initiatives", Philip Morris states
that the US delegation "should pay particular attention to ensure that any
international regulatory initiative does not target or discriminate against
any US company." The other's comments echo the same sentiment. RJ Reynolds
states that the FCTC may "severly curtail international trade in tobacco"
and Brown Williamson states that "the tobacco treaty proposed by WHO
threatens countless potential conflicts with the work of international
bodies like the World Trade Organization and the World Customs Organization.
In light of the above, it is crucial for those of us in the United States
to be on the look out for such arguements coming from the US delegation and
to advocate strongly and loudly to the US delegation that governments are
getting together to address the number one preventable cause of death in
the entire world and should be reminded time and again that public health
should prevail over trade. At the same time, those of us in the United
States should be letting Congress know that we support a strong convention
and when it comes time for Congressional ratification, we should be ready
to advocate strongly once again.
At 12:19 PM 5/15/2000 -0400, Robert Weissman wrote:
>T think Clive makes a critically important point. The rest of the world
>should not let the United States or the U.S. Congress exercise a veto over
>the FCTC or any element of it. And lots of noise by governments and NGOs
>outside of the USA should be made about the idea of going ahead with the
Convention without U.S. support — simply doing that will tend to
>undermine U.S. negotiating leverage.
>Unfortunately, that doesn't let those of us in the United States off the
>hook, and its not a completely satisfactory approach for those outside of
>the United States, either.
>The obvious point is that we are home to Philip Morris and are the
>dominant force in the world economy.
>But more important from the negotiating point of view, I think, is this:
>The United States does not just walk away from negotiations because it is
>not going to sign the final document. It continues to involve itself in
>the negotiations, often with no let-up in its aggressive style of dealing.
• loC3
5/16/00 10:31 AM
4) Re: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
>To give one clear example, the US Congress has not ratified the
>Biodiversity Convention, but the United States was the single most
>important — and most reactionary — negotiator in the effort to hammer
>out a Biosafety Protocol. (Recently accomplished despite the best efforts
>of the United States.)
>
>This places a huge burden on those of in the United States to take action
>to stop a supposedly pro-tobacco control administration from subverting
>the FCTC negotiations.
>
>For those outside of the United States, it is important to understand the
>distinction between our Congress and executive branch. The fact that the
>Congress is unwilling to go along with an international convention or
>treaty affects the negotiating posture of the administration, but it does
>not determine it. Officials in the Clinton administration, like those in
>administrations before and after, understand the various ways that the
>United States can de facto oarticivate in a treatv without formallv
£ Re: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
Subject: Re: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 12:19:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Weissman <rob@essential.org>
To: Clive Bates <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com >
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
I think Clive makes a critically important point. The rest of the world
should not let the United States or the U.S. Congress exercise a veto over
the FCTC or any element of it. And lots of noise by governments and NGOs
outside of the USA should be made about the idea of going ahead with the
Convention without U.S. support — simply doing that will tend to
undermine U.S. negotiating leverage.
Unfortunately, that doesn't let those of us in the United States off the
hook, and its not a completely satisfactory approach for those outside of
the United States, either.
The obvious point is that we are home to Philip Morris and are the
dominant force in the world economy.
But more important from the negotiating point of view, I think, is this:
The United States does not just walk away from negotiations because it is
not going to sign the final document. It continues to involve itself in
the negotiations, often with no let-up in its aggressive style of dealing.
To give one clear example, the US Congress has not ratified the
Biodiversity Convention, but the United States was the single most
important — and most reactionary — negotiator in the effort to hammer
out a Biosafety Protocol. (Recently accomplished despite the best efforts
of the United States.)
This places a huge burden on those of in the United States to take action
to stop a supposedly pro-tobacco control administration from subverting
the FCTC negotiations.
For those outside of the United States, it is important to understand the
distinction between our Congress and executive branch. The fact that the
Congress is unwilling to go along with an international convention or
treaty affects the negotiating posture of the administration, but it does
not determine it. Officials in the Clinton administration, like those in
administrations before and after, understand the various ways that the
United States can de facto participate in a treaty without formally
ratifying it; and they know this rests to a considerable degree on
discretionary decisions by the executive branch. When they say, "But the
U.S. Congress will never approve that ..." and therefore demand a change
in proposed text, they are in some part reflecting the constraints under
which they operate (they can't totally escape accountability to Congress),
but even more they are trying to use the threat of Congressional
opposition to enhance their negotiating leverage.
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Clive Bates wrote:
> Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 08:30:30 +0100
> From: Clive Bates <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com >
> To: fctcall@globalink.org
> Subject: US involvement in the FCTC - does it matter?
Iof2
5/16/00 10:35 AM
Re: Your email of 27th March
Subject: Re: Your email of 27th March
Bate: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 07:28:18 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Thanks, Thelma.
This is useful to know.
I'm still trying to find out if there's a new factory going up at Kidderpore
near Calcutta - as we have to go to Calcutta anyway, it would be easier to
film a factory there. If you have any intelligence on this, I'd love to know.
Also if you happen to drive past the factory near Bangalore - have a look at
it for me and tell me what you see!!
I think if we do film bidi-rollers it may well be in Mumbai, so we may not
need your help on this. All we really need from Bangalore is the factory.
At the moment we plan to come somewhere between 17th - 24th April - I'll let
you know.
Regards
Sally
4/3/00 9:54 AM
3 of 3
5/18/00 6:50 PM
British Medical Association refutes Times... and calls on Governments to support FCTC
Subject: British Medical Association refutes Times Leader and calls on Governments to support FCTC
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:03:48 +0100
From: sjones@bma.org.uk
To: intemational@globalink.org, gt-uk@globalink.org
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
In a letter published in today's Times (London, May 18th) Dr Ian Bogle, Chairman
of the British Medical Association refutes criticisms WHO's plans for an
international treaty to combat tobacco, made in Monday's (May 15th) Times
Leader.
Pointing to the fact that within the next 20 years, seven in ten deaths from
tobacco will occur in poorer countries, Dr Bogle says: 'Your leader gives the
impression that tobacco is only an issue for
affluent people and affluent countries. The victims of the tobacco epidemic are
not rich - they are poor. '
Dr Bogle states that while tobacco is indiscriminate in causing suffering and
death, the Convention being developed by the World Health Organisation will go
some way to eliminating global double-standards that discriminate against the
poorest and most vulnerable.
The letter concludes by congratulating Dr Brundtland on this initiative and urg
ing the Government to facilitate its development and implementation.
Full text of the Times leader, of Dr Bogie's letter to the editor and of the
edited version published today can be found on the TCRC website:
http://www.tobacco-control.org/tcrc.nsf/htmlpagesvw/newsfrm
under the section: recent TCRC/BMA press work
Today's Times also publishes reponses to the Leader by Alan Dangour, University
of Cambridge and John Carlisle of the Tobacco Manufacturers Association. These
can also be found at the above link.
All the best
Sinead
Sinead Jones PHD MPH
Project Leader, Tobacco Control Resource Centre
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JP
UK
Tel: +44 20 7383 6380
Fax: +44 20 7554 6380
E-mail: sjones@bma.org.uk
http://www.tobacco-control.org
r\
5/18/00 6:53 PM
Bntish Medical Association refutes Times.. . and calls on Governments to support FCTC
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager (mailmaster@bma.org.uk)
Public Hearings on FCTC
Subject; Public Hearings on FCTC
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 12:10:55 +0100
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org >
> 30 June 2000
> PUBLIC HEARINGS ON
> FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL
> GENEVA, 12-13 OCTOBER 2000
>
> The World Health Organization (WHO) is organizing two days of public
hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) on 12 and 13
October in Geneva, Switzerland. The hearings come just two days before the
start of formal negotiations on the FCTC, the parameters of which were set
forth in Resolutions WHA52.18 and WHA53.16 which were adopted by consensus
by the World Health Assembly in 1999 and 2000 respectively.
>
> Registration is now open to attend these hearings, either as a journalist
or as a participant.
>
> WHERE: The two-day hearings, which will run from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. , will be
held at Geneva's International Conference Centre (CICG).
> WHEN: 12-13 October 2000
> HOW TO REGISTER AS A JOURNALIST: Send proof of journalist's credentials
to: Office of the Spokesperson (SPO)
> World Health Organization
> 20 Avenue Appia
> 1211 Geneva 27
> Switzerland
> e-mail: hartlg@who.int
> HOW TO PARTICIPATE AS AN INTERESTED PARTY:
>
> Pre-Hearing Submissions
> WHO will receive comments on the FCTC from all interested institutions in
any of the six official United Nations languages, fee., Arabic, Chinese,
English, French, Russian and Spanish. The deadline for receiving submissions
is the close of business (Geneva time) on 31 August 2000. Submissions should
be sent to fctchearings@who.int or posted to TFI, WHO, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211
Geneva 27, Switzerland.
>
> submissions must not exceed 5 pages (standard size paper and type),
including attachments.
> Private sector and non-governmental organizations and institutions may
submit these.
> Organizations and institutions will be limited to one submission.
> Each submission must clearly identify:
> The organisational or institutional submitter
> The scope of activities or mandate of the organization
> The organization's interest in the FCTC process Source of funding of the
commenting/submitting organization.
> WHO must receive all submissions by the deadline, which will not be
extendedunder any circumstances.
/!
)
> Testifying at the Hearings
> A panel comprising three members of TFI's Policy and Strategy Advisory
Committee (PSAC) will moderate the proceedings. PSAC was established by the
1 of2
7/5/00 3:37 PM
Public Hearings on FCTC
Director-General of WHO to provide advice; its members are international
tobacco control experts. Opportunities to speak are limited to institutions
or organizations that have made written submissions. Each speaker may speak
for up to a maximum of five minutes.
>
> Speakers may:
> Provide a synopsis of their written testimony
> Add to their written testimony
> Comment on other people's testimony
>
> For planning and organization purposes, please state clearly, at the time
of the original submission, if you wish to testify in person in the hearings
in Geneva. Speakers should hand a hard copy of their statement to the
Secretariat of the Hearings before they speak to facilitate interpretation
into other languages and for future reference.
>
> For those not able to attend in person, testimony may be videotaped and,
time permitting, these videos will be shown during the Hearings. If
possible, videos should, be submitted in PAL format and a transcript should
be provided.
>
> Subsequent Submissions by All Previous Submitters
>
> All submitters (i.e. all those organizations and institutions that have
made submissions by the close of business (Geneva time] 31 August 2000) may
file submissions in reply to presentations after the hearings. The
submissions must reach WHO by the close of business (Geneva time) 27 October
2000, and must not exceed 3 pages.
>
> For further information from WHO, journalists can contact Mr Gregory Hartl
WHO Spokesperson, WHO, Geneva, tel (+41 22) 791 4458 fax (+41 22) 791 4858.
E-mail: hartlg@who.int All WHO Press Releases, Fact Sheets and Features can
be obtained on Internet on the WHO home page http://www.who. int
2 of 2
7/5/00 3:37 PM
RE: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
Sufeject: RE: The WHA resotatiom om the FCTC
Sate: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:25:04 +0200
From: "Sibylle Fleitmann" <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: '"Suren Moodliar'" <suren.infact@juno.com>, <tobacco-accountability@igc.topica.com>
CC: <fctcall@globalink.org >
Thank you very much for this rapid information. It is very useful for those
who had not time to go there. Thanks for the teamwork.
Best regards,
Sibylle Fleitmann
ENSP, Brussels
---- Message d'origine---De: Suren Moodliar [mailto:suren.mfact@juno.com]
Date: samedi 20 mai 2000 1:10
A: tobacco-accountabilitySigc.topica.com
Cc: fctcall@globalink.org
Objet: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
The resolution was passed with language that amended the strength of the
NGO-participation elements originally proposed by Norway and Canada. The
text below is based on notes by INFACT's observer. The official
resolution will probably be up on the WHO website shortly
(http://www.who.int/governance).
The Fifty-third World Health Assembly,
Recalling and reaffirming resolution WHA52.18 which established both an
intergovernmental negotiating body to draft and negotiate the proposed
WHO framework convention on tobacco control and possible related
protocols and a working group to prepare proposed draft elements of the
framework convention and report on progress;
Having considered the report to the Health Assembly on the framework
convention on tobacco control,
1.
TAKES note of the significant progress made, as reported in documents
a53/12 and a53/12Corr.1, and expresses its appreciation for the work of
the working group, it Bureau and the Secretariat;
2.
RECOGNIZES that the report contained in documents A53/12 and A53/12
Corr.l, including the proposed draft elements for a framework convention,
establishes a sound basis for initiating the negotiations by the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB);
3.
RECOGNIZES that the success of the FCTC depends on broad participation
by WHO member states and organizations referred to in para 1.3 of
resolution WHA 52.18;
4.
CALLS ON the Negotiating Body:
(1)
to elect at its first session a chairman, three vice-chairmen and two
rapporteurs and to consider the possibility of an extended bureau;
(2)
to comments its negotiations with an initial focus on the framework
convention on tobacco control without prejudice to future discussions on
possible related protocols;
(3)
to report on the progress of its work to the Fifty-fourth World
Health Assembly;
(4)
to examine the question of an extended participation as observers of
nongovernmental organizations according to criteria to be established by
the negotiating body;
5.
REQUESTS the Director-General:
(1)
to convene the first session of the Negotiating Body in October 2000;
(2)
to draw up, for consideration by the Negotiating Body at its first
session, draft timetable for the process, with information on costs
7/5/00 3:29 PM
AiiSnvPH/tVHA resolution on the FCTC
related to the sessions of the Negotiating Body and the availability of
funds to cover them, giving special consideration to securing the
participation of delegates from developing countries.
###
It may be useful to compare the final language with the already modest
language of the proposed resolution.
4.
2 2f<£2
7/5/00 1:41 PM
7/5/00 3:29 PM
D.10FFlCEVMJFnNaS\Sl«JM»«a¥».da:
Commonwealth NGOs
Subject: Commonwealth NGOs
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:41:57 +0100
From: sjones@bma.org.uk
To: fctcall@globalink.org
Are you a member of the the Alliance representing an NGO in a Commonwealth
country? Would you be willing to act as a resource on the Convention for the
Health Minister and/or negotiating delegation in your country?
We are putting together a resource directory on the FCTC for the Commonwealth
secretariat. Please let me know if you are willing to be named and send me your
full contact details asap and by Firday 25 August at the latest.
Sorry for short notice - this is all happening rather quickly!
Best,
Sinead
PS directory of commonwealth countries can be found at:
http://www.thecommonwealth.org/indexl.htm
Sinead Jones, PhD MPH
Project Leader
Tobacco Control Resource Centre ''.
British Medical Association
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
United Kingdom
tel: +44 020 7383 6380
fax: +44 020 7554 6380
e-mail: sjones@bma.org.uk
http://www■tobacco-control■org/
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
ths system manager (postmaster@bma.org.uk)
www.bma.org.uk
Re; WHO conference
Subject: Re: WHO conference
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 06:26:07 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Dear Thelma
The Geneva conference is a WHO meeting of NGOs to discuss how to regulate the
tobacco industry.
PLENARY IV: Co-chaired by Ms Indira Jaisingth and Dr Srinath Reddy
Theme: Conference Recommendations and Chairs Summaries
16:30-17:30
Working Group Recommendation - Reports by Rapporteurs
17:30-17:50
Chairs’ Comments
17:50-18:00
Adoption of Declaration
18:00-18:20
Conference Synthesis and Closure
Dr Derek Yach, Project Manager Tobacco Free Initiative,
World Health Organisation
18:20- 18:40
Closure
Minister of External Relations
Subject: Fwd:
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:49:21 +0100
From: subramaniamc@who.ch
To: <sochara@vsnl.com>
dear thelma - here's the programme - a fomral letter is in the fax in a few
minutes - c
____________________Forward Header
Subject:
Author: bettcherd
Date:
21-Dec-1999 09:44
Dr Douglas Bettcher
Coordinator, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Team
Tobacco Free Initiative
World Health Organization
Tel: + 41 22 791 4253
Fax: + 41 22 791 4832
http:/Zwww.who.int/toh/
QProgramme.doc
Name: Programme.doc
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
Encoding: base64
12/29/99 8:12 PM
Sunday meeting
Subject: Sunday meeting
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:49:40 +0200
From: "ADIC-Ukraine" <adic@info.kiev.ua>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
I am planning to attend.
Konstantin Krasovsky
3/24/00 10:25 PM
For: Dr Christopher Nathan,CHAI-Secunderabad
Subject: For: Dr Christopher Nathami,CHAI-Se©umd)eral>a)dl
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:18:49 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: "CHAI, Hyderabad" <chai@hdl.vsnl.net.in>
CC: Ravi D'Souza <ravijohn@email.com>
Dear Christopher,
I met Dr Nergis Mistry and her team yesterday in Bombay.. The training
on TB Diagnostics for Health Centre has been agreed to.
It will be in
August 2000 in Bombay at the
Foundation for Research in Community Health(FRCH)
3-4 Trimiti Apts.,
85 Anand Park, Aund
Pune 411 007
Tel:
020-5887020
Fax:
020-5881308
Email:
frchpune@giaspn01.vsnl.net.in
It will be a 10 day programme with the prime focus on skill development
in daily sputum microscopy, from.proper collection of sample to disposal
of infected materials. There will be enough time for practicals. To
contextualise the training, there will be introductory sessions on TB
and the NTP and RNTCP. They will also very briefly be told about
culture and sensitivity testing, when it is required and where it can be
done. Dr Mistry is willing to take 10 persons from CHAI member
institutions. There may be a few additional participants from the
Narmada Bachao Andolan. The training will be in English, but Hindi can
also be used for explanations. CHAI will make arrangements for
accommodation.
Christopher will you please make initial contact with Dr
Mistry. Her email address is given above.
I guess you will get people from Bihar, M.P, Orissa and Varanasi
diocese. It may be better to select people who are committed to work on
TB for at least 3 years. Could you ensure this from the participants
and superiors.
Warm regards,
Thelma
cc: Dr Ravi D'Souza
1 of 1
4/19/00 11:14 AM
Re: Cyclone R&r wor
Subject: Re: CycHonie R&R work.
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 11:43:53 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Ravi D'Souza <ravijohn@email.com>
Dear Ravi,
Thanks for your message. Dr Christopher of CHAI was here this morning. At a meeting
CHAI-HQ they have agreed to provide some financial support, under the head of Capac
Building, for travel and accommodation costs for CHAI members attending the TB diagn
training in Bombay. They would choose State Units/ Diocese who have already TB care
priority i.e. M.P, Bihar, Orissa, Varanasi, and perhaps Maharashtra, as the training
Bombay.
Caritas Internationalis has asked me to join their AIDS Task Force, following a mee
TB and HIV/AIDS that I had attended last year. I am leaving tomorrow for a meeting
and will be back on the 17th. Will keep Ramani and you informed of what is happeni
The 180 sentinel sites of ICMR are reporting a fairly rapid increase in HIV positive
even among antenatal mothers. It may be worth stressing about HIV even in Orissa be
in situations of distress and poverty there is always a rise. Also health systems t
function poorly will not pick it up. Do you know Hospitals where HIV testing is don
different parts of Orissa. The NACO web site gives the official ones.
Best wishes.
OWi
trc City.
Thanks
Subject Thaiaks
©ate: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 10:51:43 -0400
From: Lynette Menezes <lmenezes@hsc.usf.edu>
To: "Dr. Thelma Narayan" <sochara@vsnl.com>
Hi Dr. Thelma
I can't thank you enough for allowing Lovie to copy your dissertation
conclusions. From what I have read it sounds great. You really did a
thorough critical analysis. It must have been a lot of work. Thanks once
again for all your help. Rita has been very helpful too.
Regards
Lynette
4/10/00 9:40 AM
Re: From: The>ma. CHC-Bangalore
1’5
Subject: Re: From: Tbetaa, CHC-BamgaDore
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 13:28:25 +0100
From: Jessica Ogden <Jessica.Ogden@lshtm.ac.uk>
To: sochara <sochara@vsnl.com>
Hi Thelma, how wonderful to hear from you.
And sorry for the delay in my reply - th
I hope it's ok if I copy this to John, for his information, as I'm sure he will also
Things are busy but, hopefully, productive.
I am currently working with Gill and Lo
We are also in the process of developing a new TB Programme proposal.
It isn't enti
I hope things at home are all ok, and that you are finding time in your busy life to
In the meantime, thanks so much for getting in touch.
Much love,
Jess
Take very good care of yourse
Dr. Jessica Ogden
Lecturer, Social Anthropology
Health Policy Unit
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicind
Keppel Street
London WC1E 7HT
tel. (020) 7612 - 7807
fax (020) 7637 - 5391
email jessica.ogden@lshtm.ac.uk
>» Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com > 04/04/00 10:28:51 »>
Dear Jess,
Its a long long time since we were in touch. How are you? Do write and
give me your news. I have had an extremely hectic time since my return
to India, particularly in the past year. I was probably trying to catch
up with all that I thought I had not done, during the PhD period, both
on the work and home front. I am now trying to reflect and get my
priorities reorganized and most importantly to catch up with old
friends.
One of the priorities of our group, the Community Health Cell (CHC) is
to re-start work on TB. Being an activist at heart, we had initiated a
meeting of a network of professionals committed to TB work, in December
last. Hope to strengthen this with support and action. After a 2 year
break I also plan to initiate a research project as well. Hope to be in
closer touch with you on this.
I have given your email address to a Ms Lynette Menezes who is doing a
doctorate at the College of Public Health at the University of South
Florida. She is doing a paper on TB in India, focussing on
soico-cultural aspects, and will be doing her main work on domestic
violence.
Love,
Thelma
■Q-j!
&
4/8/00 5:54 PM
Fran>: Thelma, CHC-Bangalore
Subject: From: TheSma, CHC-Bamgallore
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:58:51 +0530
From; Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
To: Jessica Ogden <jessica.ogden@lshtm.ac.uk>
Dear Jess,
Its a long long time since we were in touch. How are you? Do write and
give me your news. I have had an extremely hectic time since my return
to India, particularly in the past year. I was probably trying to catch
up with all that I thought I had not done, during the PhD period, both
on the work and home front. I am now trying to reflect and get my
priorities reorganized and most importantly to catch up with old
friends.
One of the priorities of our group, the Community Health Cell (CHC) is
to re-start work on TB. Being an activist at heart, we had initiated a
meeting of a network of professionals committed to TB work, in December
last. Hope to strengthen this with support and action. After a 2 year
break I also plan to initiate a research project as well. Hope to be in
closer touch with you on this.
I have given your email address to a Ms Lynette Menezes who is doing a
doctorate at the College of Public Health at the University of South
Florida. She is doing a paper on TB in India, focussing on
soico-cultural aspects, and will be doing her main work on domestic
violence.
Love,
Thelma
<\h
4/4/00 5:29 PM
Tobacco film
Subject: Tobacco fflm
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:04:43 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Dear Dr Narayan
Thanks for talking to me on the telephone about your work. I have tried
calling you and can't get through so am emailing.
If you could reply as soon
as possible (today or Wednesday) I would be infinitely grateful as I have a
very tight deadline.
Could you tell me more about your study of the bidi industry in Karnataka? I
think this would be good to film. What exactly would we see if we did some
filming, and if we did, would you be able to help us with our filming? Are
there any particularly interesting families we should film, eg a family where
the men are also involved with tobacco, eg have cancer/sell cigarettes? If
we came in April or May would we be able to film anything?
Also - can you tell me more about the Wills Cigarette factory in Bangalore,
and do you have any contact names/numbers for people I could speak to there?
Many thanks for your help.
Yours
Sally
I of 1
3/1/00 10:22 AM
tobacco film
Subject: tobacco film
©ate: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:40:31 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Dear Dr Narayan
Sorry to trouble you again - but do you have any names/contact numbers for:
Board for Cricket Control
The Tobacco Institute
Indian Society of Tobacco Science (c/o Central Tobacco Research Institute)
All India Pan Masala and Tobacco Manufacturers' Association
Thank you very much.
1 of 1
3/1/00 10:23 AM
8/3/00 3:22
FCA Exhibit Booth at 11th WCTH/web site information
Subject: FCA Exhibit Booth at 11th WCTH/web site information
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:02:18 -0400
From: Judith Glanz <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
To: "TCTCall@globalink.org"' <FCTCail@globalink.org>
We will be setting up a laptop computer and large monitor at our FCA exhibit
booth at the 11th WCTH. By setting up the display, we will be able to
feature our new FCA website and exhibit-goers can explore the resources on
our site.
Many of your organizations have websites. As FCA members, if you would like
us to list your website as a resource, please send your web address
immediately to Jenny Foreit at: ajforeit@tobaccofreekids.org .
So far, other sites that will also be available for viewing include:
ASH/UK, TFI-WHO and TFK. We are happy to add yours to the group. We will
need your web site information as soon as possible so that we can preprogram
the computer with the menu of sites available for viewing.
Thank you.
See you all soon.
Judy G.
Judith Glanz
Manager of International Programs
Campaign For Tobacco Free Kids
1707 L Street, N.W.
(Washington, D.C. USA 20003
jglanz@tobaccofreekids.org
9/9/00 1
FcT a
FCTC hearings submissions in Russian
Subject: FCTC hearings submissions in Russian
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 20:27:28 +0300
From: "ADIC-Ukraine" <adic@info.kiev.ua>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org >
CC: <tobaccokills@globalink.org >
Dear friends,
10 FCTC hearings submissions in Russian from organizations from Ukraine,
Russia and Kazakhstan
are published on http://www.adic.org.ua/nosmoking/top/news.htm
I hope we have more submissions in Russian as we publish only copies of
submissions of our network members.
Konstantin Krasovsky
<0^
V5fc>‘=-'
Re-’Hello!
Subject: Re:Hello!
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 11:26:21 +0100
From: subramaniamc@who.ch
To: <sochara@vsnl.com>
thanks thelma, for this heads-up - hope all's well with you and family, i have
asked zeba to send me a terms of ref. doc (she has several examples) so that i
can arrange to send the money.
great news about the karnataka thing . i have not forgotten our chat about doing
something when i am there next - would be good to meet all these people. many
thanks for carrying this is the state -
as for sally, i refered her to you because she was going to work in andhra etc.
she sounds genuine and i hope she will do a decent story - warm regards chitra
____________________Reply Separater
Subject:
Hello!
Author: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
Date:
24-Feb-2000 14:37
Dear Chitra,
Hi! Trust you'll had a good trip back home. The Delhi conference was
useful. Zeba is currently doing her placement with us. She has managed
to get various legal acts pertaining to tobacco and has also just
returned from a trip to Mangalore to look at a couple of dissertations
on bidi workers done by a school of social work. She could also visit
the homes of a few bidi rollers.
I have also been in touch with Dr.
Sharad Vaidya who has sent us the Goa Act.
Our State Govt, has set up a Karnataka Task Force on Health - I am a
member of this. We have had extensive rounds of consultations with
different officials from the health and other departments.
This has
kept me and CHC quite busy. However, during a meeting in January with
the Health Minister, who is a physician, and the Health Secretary, I
raised the issue of Tobacco Control. This was very coincidentally
followed some days later by a street march on Tobacco by a large group
of school children organised and led by a well known cardio-thoracic
surgeon from Manipal Hospital. They presented a memorandum to the
Health Minister. He made a public statement in support of tobacco
control and even said that there were many vested interests against it.
The 14 Task Force members are all very supportive of Tobacco Control.
We raised the issue when we had meetings with officials from the
Agriculture Department.
Incidentally, Sally Beare from London called up yesterday and had a long
discussion on Tobacco.
Will continue to keep in touch.
Bye,
Thelma.
1 of 1
2/25/00 12:33 PM
■1 ‘ I ] Philip Mortis may offer your organization a donation
Subject: Re: [NATT] Philip Morris may offer your organization a donation
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:49:28 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.nz>
To: <suren.infact@juno.com>
New Zealand News from The Press - Tuesday, April 25, 2000
from
National News Stories
TUESDAY, APR 25, 2000:'
Tobacco kit warning
by Nick Venter
in Wellington
Education Minister Trevor Mallard has advised schools against using a
^msource kit financed by tobacco company Philip Morris.
The I've Got the PowenJcit promotes healthy decision-making by pupils and is
targeted at intermediate schools.
But, in a notice published in yesterday's Education Gazette, Mr Mallard
strongly urged schools not to compromise themselves by accepting materials
from a prominent member of the tobacco industry.
The minister said he was not aware of any criticism of the kit's contents,
but the notion of a tobacco company promoting healthy decision-making was
bizarre.
"To me it's like a group of purveyors of death trying to cleanse their
hands."
He said boards of trustees, principals and teachers needed to consider the
ethical issues involved in accepting material sponsored by companies whose
products had been internationally proved to cause death and disease.
"I accept that the ultimate decision is that of each board.
Ct I would be failing in my duty in not drawing to the attention of each
board my views as minister on this matter," Mr Mallard wrote.
Melbourne education consultant Kevin Donnelly, the designer of the
programme, has said that Philip Morris did not have any control over the
content of the kits.
---- Original Message---From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
4/25/00 9:36.
GENEVA Meeting
Subject: GENEVA Meaning
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 18:03:38 +0200
From: "Council Against Smoking" <ysalooje@iafrica.com>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Thanks Emma. I intend to attend... Yussuf Saloojee (South Africa)
3/24/00 10:27 PM
The 26 March meeting!
Subject: The 26 March meeting!
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:21:57 +0100
From: Margaretha Haglund <Margaretha.Haglund@fhi.se >
To: fctcall@globalink.org
Dear all!
I am very sorry as I just can't attend the meeting on Sunday. As some of you
know I am having two hats and at the main meeting it will have my civil
servant hat. So please don't be confused. But my INWAT hat is on as usual
but perhaps more invisable!
Good Luck with the meeting!
Margaretha Haglund INWAT and Sweden
* fhi.se hr vAr nya domanadress
* fhinst.se kommer att tas ur bruk
fhi.se is our new domain address
* fhinst.se will not be used any more
3/24/00 10:26 PM
FCA Meeting in Geneva
Subject: FCA Meeting in Geneva
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:09:52 -0500
From: Allen Jones <allen.jones@apha.org>
T©: '"fctcall@globalink.org"' <fctcall@globalink.org>
I am planning to attend.
**************************
Allen K. Jones, Ph.D.
Executive Secretary,
World Federation of Public Health Associations (WFPHA) and
Director, International Health
American Public Health Association
800 Eye St., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
tel 202-777-2486 (IH)
tel 202-777-2487 (WFPHA)
fax 202-777-2534
email <allen.jonesSapha.org>
Internet (APHA) http://www.apha.org
Internet (WFPHA) http://www.apha.org/wfpha
3/24/00 10:26 PM
confirmation of receipt
Subject: Confirmation of receipt
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 03:00:52 -0400
From: Karen Bissell <KarenBissell@compiiserve.com>
To: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
Dear Thelma,
Lovely to hear from you. When you sent your email to me, I was up in the
Scottish mountains having some exercice and trying to recharge my
batteries. Mountains, lakes, just stunning. I came back and had two days to
turn around and get to the Europe region conference of the IUATLD
((International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease) held this year
^n Budapest. THe main topics were TB, asthma and smoking. Patsy Harrington
";rom WHO Europe and I gave a symposium on the FCTC; I spoke on the role of
NGOs in the FCTC. (and inhaled lots of the smoke from chest physicians from
Eastern Europe as they smoked in the break - very high rates of physician
smoking).
Have only just got to my outstanding letters now, sorry about that. Good to
hear your news. Will try to write a bit more in the next while to you and
it would indeed be good to keep in touch regularly.
Kind regards, Karen
Karen Bissell
Projects and Communication
INGCAT (International Non Governmental Coalition against Tobacco)
www.ingcat.org
and
Tobacco Prevention Division
^kjATLD (International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease)
, www. iuatld.org
notes from alliance meetings
Subject: Re: NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEETINGS
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:17:11 GMT-1
From: "Dr. Martina Poetschke-Langer" <M.Poetschke-Langer@DKFZ-Heidelberg.de>
Organization: DKFZ Heidelberg
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>, "Emma Must" <emma.musi''adial.pipex.com>
CC: "Chitra Subramaniam" <subramaniamc@who.ch>, "Karen Lewis" <klewis@advocacy.org>,
<lethut@who.ch>
For the timetable planning please give me an overview which meeting:
will be essential, to participate in this year.
Dr. Martina Poetschke-Langer
Leiterin der
Stabsstelle Krebspraevention
Deutsches Krebsfcrschungszentrum
Im Neuenheimer Feld 280
69120 Heidelberg
r.
SuUgeo^LLS. Action Allert
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:43:35 -0700
From: "CPA" <cpa@kirkham.ewind.com>
Organization: SF Chinese Progressive Association
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Chinese Progressive Association Action Allert 6/2/00
Free Tobacco Trade in China will Cost Millions of Lives!
The recently negotiated U.S. China trade agreement and the pending vote in Congress to grant China
permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) will open the Chinese cigarette and agricultural tobacco
markets to U.S. tobacco corporations like Phillip Morris. Given the immense size of the Chinese
market, even a small increase in smoking prevalence will mean millions of additional deaths over the
next decade. The United States government should not be assisting Big Tobacco to export disease and
death to China and other countries!
Please contact Senator Dianne Feinstein (202/224-3841, senator@feinstein.senate.gov), Senator
Barbara Boxer (202/224-3553, senator@boxer.senate.gov) and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
(202/225-4965, sf.nancy@mail.house.gov) or your federal representatives and tell them:
■) The United States government should exclude cigarettes and tobacco from all market opening trade
agreements with China and other countries.
2) If the China trade agreement is approved by Congress, the United States government should waive
enforcement of the tobacco related provisions.
3) The United States government should support the development of a strong Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control which includes a global ban on all forms of tobacco marketing.
For more information and/or to get involved in the Chinese Progressive Association's campaign to
Stop Tobacco Globalization, call (415) 391-6986 or email to cpa@mail.ewind.com.
Stop Tobacco GHoballizatioiiii! No Free Tobacco Trade im China!
While the Clinton-Gore administration and many Congressional leaders portray themselves as being
tough on Big Tobacco, they have been very eager to assist U.S. tobacco corporations to export
disease and death to other countries in the name of "free trade." The recently negotiated U.S. China
trade agreement and the pending vote in Congress to grant China permanent normal trade relations
(PNTR) will open the Chinese cigarette and agricultural tobacco markets to U.S. tobacco
corporations like Phillip Morris. Given the immense size of the Chinese market, even a small increase
in smoking prevalence will mean millions of additional deaths over the next decade.
Opening China's vast existing and potential market will create a huge economic incentive for domestic
and foreign companies to compete aggressively for new smokers which in China means targeting
traditionally nonsmoking women and children. Smoking rates in Japan, South Korea, Thailand and
Taiwan rose sharply following the massive inflow of American cigarettes after the U.S. government
forced these countries to open their markets to U.S. tobacco imports in the 1980's. In the case of
South Korea, after the entry of U.S. corporations, smoking rates among teenage boys went up from
18% to 28% in a single year, and the rate among girls more than quintupled.
As the U.S. tobacco control movement has reduced smoking rates and exposed the tobacco industiy
as corporate drug pushers here at home, Philip Morris and Big Tobacco have shifted their focus to
U.S. Action Alert
overseas markets in search of new "customers" and profits. Globally, 3.5 million to 4 million people
die every year from smoking related diseases. By 2030, this figure will increase to 10 million smoking
related deaths per year, with more than 70% of the deaths occurring in the developing world.
China’s huge market has made it the prime target of transnational tobacco corporations. Already,
China’s cigarette consumption is the highest in the world, and there are more smokers in China than
there are people in the U.S. Historically, China’s cigarette market has been highly protected, with
foreign tobacco corporations facing high tariffs and other restrictions. Breaking into the Chinese
market is a top priority for Philip Morris and Big Tobacco, and high tariffs on imported cigarettes are
a major obstacle to the U.S. companies gaining a substantial presence in China.
Chinese Progressive Association
660 Sacramento Street, Suite 202
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: 415-391-6986
Fax: 415-391-6987
email: CDa@mail.ewind.com
2 of 2
6/19/00 3:35 PM
C~'~,c- fc»-.~c£L.
/Z-£
cij’
X^-oe-cvecX . iJtz 'O'S-ei^n^o
/<?<2
&o£-tfp>n&
iCTTi-l
Scrn& p&p<2^>
y^e
rinfyi-^Cc
feyoe^CS C^»J2 h^
/yuiAkki- ph<-.<->ccty ez^A c*n <=»->
Ac
c
To:
From:
Subject:
Date sent:
sochara@vsnl.com
VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>
Geneva 11-18 October 2000
Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:42:59 +0530 (1ST)
>From: fitzpatricke@who.ch
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 17:11:55 +0200
>To: vgkk@vsnl.com
>Cc: prakashr@ccm.who.ch
>Subject: Geneva 11-18 October 2000
>Content-Type: text/piain; charset="US-ASCir
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
>DearDr Sudarshan,
>Please find attached the letter of ivitation for you to travel to
>Geneva from the 11-18 October as I have also copied the fax that I
>will be sending to the Swiss embassy in Bombay with a copy of your
>invitatign letter.
_
>For information concerning the Public Hearing on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control, please consult ourwepage at:
> http /Mww.who .int/genevahearings/
>lf you have any further questions, please do not hesitate in
contacting me.
>Emma Fitzpatrick
>Tobacco Free Initiative
>World Health Organization
>20 Avenue Appia
>1211 Geneva 27
> Switzerland
>Tel: +41-22 791 2151
>Fax: +41-22 791 4832
>Email: fitzpatricke@who.intContent-Type: application/msword;
>name="T empadv.doc"
Content-Description: MS Word document
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Tempadv.doc“
/
attachment Converted: C:\EUDORA\ATTACH\Tempadv.doc
x.
x.
'
\
Content-Type: application/msword; name-'india1.doc"
v
Content-Description: MS Word document
\
Content-Disposition: attachment;filename-'indial.doc"
\
attachment Converted: C:\EUDORA\ATTACH\india1.doc
Content-Type: application/msword; name-Visaindiasuda.doc"
\
J
'
\
/
>Content-Description: MS Word document
>Content-Disposition: attachment; fi!ename="\/isaindiasuda.doc"
attachment Converted: C:\EUDORA\ATTACH\Visaindi.doc
To:
From:
Subject:
Date sent:
sochara@vsnl.com
VGKK <vgkk@vsn!.com>
Re[2]: Geneva 11-18 October 2000
Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:43:00 +0530 (1ST)
>From: fitzpatricke@who.ch
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:16:54 +0200
>Subject: Re[2J: Geneva 11-18 October 2000
>To: VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>, khsdp@vsnl.com
>Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
>DearSudarshan,
>The mos important is the 2 meeting that you mentioned - on the 11 and
>the 14. If you prefer, please feel free to make you travel
arrangements to depart
Geneva
>on the 15.
>Please let me know if you would like me to fax a visa request to the
>Swiss Emabssy in Delhi (please provide the fax numbers as well)
>fhanksyou,
>Emma
>Reply Separator
>Subject: Re: Geneva 11-18 October 2000
> Author: VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>
>Date:
10/3/00 5:47 AM
>Dear Ms. Emma Fitzpatrick,
>Thank you for sending the Letter of invitation, letter addressed to
>to Swiss Embassy and the information on travel.
>Please let me know whether attending the "Intergovernmental
Negotiating Body" meeting on 16th & 17th is also very important. If
>not I would prefer lo return on 15th alter attending the 11th & 14th
>meetings.
>
>l will send you the details of my travel as soon as my ticket is
>ready.
>With regards
>Sudarshan
Note: Please send the reply to both my e-mail
>addresses:<khsdp@vsnl.com> (office) and <vgkk@vsnl.com> (Residence)
To:
From:
Subject:
Date sent:
sochara@vsnl.com
VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>
Meetings in Geneva
Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:43:01 +0530 (1ST)
>Return-Path: <Frances.Ab0u2eid@mdlf.0rfl>
>Delivered-To: vgkk@blr.vsnl.net.in
>From: Frances.Abouzeid@mdlf.org
>To: khsdp@vsnl.com, vgkk@vsnl.com
>Subject: Meetings in Geneva
>Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:03:51 +0200
>X-MIMETrack; Serialize by Router on netfinity-3/Mdlf(Release 5.0.2c
(lntl)|2 February
> 2000) at 10/05/2000 02:03:55 PM
><P> <BRxBRxFONT SIZE=2><B>Frances Abouzeid</B></FONT><BR><FONT
SIZE=2> 10/03/2000 11:06 AM</FONT><BR><BR> <FONT SIZE=2>To:</FONT>
<FONT SIZE=2>khsdp@vsnl.com, vgkk@vsnl.com.</FONT><BR> <FONT.
SIZE=2>cc:</FONT> <BR> <FONT SIZE=2>bcc:</FONT> <BR> ^FONT
SIZE=2>Subject:</FONT> <FONT SIZE=2>Meetings in Geneva</FONT><BR>
<BR><BRx/P><P>Dear Dr. Sudarshan,<BR><BR>l am following up on your
discussions with Chitra Subramaniam regarding your participation at
the public hearings in Geneva next week. As you know, the Don't Be
Duped media advocacy campaign of TFI is currently operating in 15
countries around the world and we will have a leadership workshop for
them on Saturday 14 October in Geneva.<BR><BR>Chitra said she would
like you to speak on the bidi issue so we would like to offer you a
slot to hold a press conference on this issue. Press conferences will
take place in the Congress Center parallel to the public hearings. Are
you planning to attend both days of the hearings? If so, I can get
back to you with a proposed time for the press conference and if you
can send me a proposed title for it, that would be helpful. Also, will
someone else join you for the press conference or will you speak
alone? We can only offer 20 minutes including Q&A from the press
so do keep that in mind.<BR><BR>During the Saturday workshop with
change agents, we have set aside 12-13:00 for the topic "Other
Tobacco Products: Bidis, Water Pipes, Chewing Tobacco" and would
like you to speak there as part of a three person panel. Our change
agent from Lebanon will speak as well as Greg Connolly from the
Massachusetts department of Health. This session should inspire change
agents to think about how to deal with other issues beyond the
cigarette and look to your campaigns and advocacy on bidis for new
ideas. <BR><BR>We expect approximately 25 people in the session which
includes our change agents from Brazil, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, South
Africa, Lebanon, Iran, Pakistan, Mali, Ukraine, Philippines, Thailand,
Germany, among others. We will give you a detailed list of
participants upon arrival. <BR><BR>Do let me know if you have any
j)
specific ideas on this session and its structure. Also, please let me
“t/
know where we can find you in Geneva so that we can provide you with
the final schedule of events.<BR><BR>Thanks and best
regards,<BR><BR>Frances Abouzeid<BR><BR><BRx/P> > >
x
To:
From:
Subject:
Date sent:
sochara@vsnl.com
VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>
Change agents agenda for hearings
Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:43:02 +0530 (iSTJ
>Return-Path: <prakashr@who.ch>
>Delivered-T o: vgkk@blr.vsnl .net .in
>Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 19:03:55 +0200
>From: prakashr@who.ch
>To: yrbassim@cyberia.net.lb, sanchitasharma@express2.indexp.co.in ,
>
pmd_Midlands@healthnet.zw, natasha@ven.ops-oms.org,
>
M.Poetschke-Langer@DKFZ-Heidelberg.de, Iena@del3.vsnt.net.in,
>
emma.must@dial.pipex.com, del_rosario@pacjfic..net.ph,
>
. costaesilva@inca.org, bsarwar@shoa.netnashthai@asiaacc^gsjp_gt?|h?^.
>
' adic@info.kiev.ua, aboutalebi@irib.com, suomelas@who’.org.ph,
>
selinhea@paho.org, salahia@who.sci.eg, PREETT@whosea.org,
>
PANDEYH@whosea.org, pan@who.dk, oseim@whosea.org, fap@who.dk,
>
babus@whosea.org, alawaf@who.sci.eg, Cmakombe@healthnet.zw,
>
conprev@inca.org.br, sambae@whoafr.org, gregconn@ix.netcom.com,
>
mariab@meropa.co.za, mcisse@afribone.net.ml, netcp@apollo.net.pk,
>
petermann@meropa.co.za, tamplins@who.org.ph, vgkk@vsnl.com,
>
ambikasrivastav@hotmail.com Subject: Change agents agenda for
>hearings
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset-'US-ASCII"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
>Dear All,
>Attached is the final draft of our change agent agenda for next week.
> We say draft because as always, things will change on the spot. But
>this gives you an idea of where you need to be and what the main
>issues for our discussion will be. Primarily, we want to focus Don’t
>Be Duped 2001 on two things : building a global communications
>strategy for monitoring tobacco industry tactics and the role of
>World No Tobacco Day 200Tin that.
>We had asked you to come prepared with ideas and to send that to us
>by today. Alas, the response rate is very very low. Please do come
>prepared with those issues you feel need to be addressed regarding
>our work together as well as ideas for moving forward.
>When you arrive, you will find the TFI team located at the Geneva
international Conference Centre, Rue de Varembe 15. We hope to have a
>room designated for change agents to work out of during the week but
>if all else fails, you can
find
>us in the press center in the CICG basement. The attached gives you
>the
location
>of all events and if you need to reach TFI urgently, you can call
ihese mobile numbers at 079 244 6071 and 079 244 6072.
>Looking forward to seeing you soon.
>Chitra and Franklin
>Reshma Prakash
information Officer
>Tobacco Free Initiative (TFI) • >World Health Organization
>20, Avenue Appia
>CH-1211 Geneva 27
> Switzerland
>Tel: +41 22 791 3443
>Fax: +41 22 791 4832
>Email: prakashr@who.intContent-Type: application/msword; name-'Change
>Agent
Workshop Agenda 6 Oct.doc"
............. ________________________________ ___
>Content-Description: MS Word document
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Change Agent Workshop
>Agenda 6
Oct.doc"
attachment Converted: C:\EUDORA\ATTACH\ChangeAg.doc
To:
From:
Subject:
Date sent:
sochara@vsnl.com
VGKK<vgkk@vsnl.com>
Re: Tobacco Public Hearings, Geneva, 12-13 0ctober2000
Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:43:03 +0530 (1ST)
>Return-Path: <fctchearings@who.ch>
”
>Delivered-To: vgkk@blr.vsnl.net.in
>Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:10:22 +0200
>From: fctchearings@who.ch
>Subject: Re: Tobacco Public Hearings, Geneva, 12-13 October 2000 To:
>vgkk@vsnl.com Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
>Re: Tobacco Public Hearings, Geneva, 12-13 October 2000
>Dear Dr Sudarshan,
>This is to inform that you are listed to speak on the public
>hearings on
behalf
>of the Soceity for Community Health Awarness, Research and Action on
>Friday13 October between 12hr00 and 15hr30. We recommend that
>you be present at the Geneva International Conference Centre (CICG)
>during the time slot assigned.
>Please note that this timing may.be subject to change without prior
notification
>due to unforeseen circumstances.
>
>Please confirm that you will be present and the name of the person
>speaking on behalf or your organization.
information on how to get the the CICG centre can be found at our
>website at http://www.who.int/genevahearings/logistics.html
>We thank you for your understanding .
> Tobacco Free Initiative
@001
Tel,: (+41 22) 791 21 11
U
22) 791 31 11
l>u.>nt
' 11 ORG
Direct Facsimile:
pages
From:
Originator:
Dal'.-:
07 September 2000
Our ref.-.
Just sorr
. r._\ l-F.’U
-.ji call you htjr- 1 just need your early comments on some of die issues
raise'5 - wd’) ring you later today - tks and regards chiira
°.S:M
00 jj;3£_Fa.X 4122 791 4832
HHO/TFI GENEVA
AI1_INDLV M.^UJ^ClIJRERSi,,pRGAJSIZAXI0Jl4KSJB)
S SOI - Manipal Centre, Dickenson Road, Bangalore - 560 042 INDIA
_JPhone : 5594135
"EXPORT
Fax ; 080 - 5597663
AND
FLOURISH"
T. Ramesh Pai
Chairman - AiMO (KSB)
Tobacco Free Initiative,
World Health Organisation,
2.1 Avenue Appia,
1211 Geneva 27.
Switzerland
24th August, 2000
Z IW I /
30.08.00
TFI
Dear Sirs,
Written Submission on FCTC f»r the Public Hearings
on 12“ and 13“* October. 2000
^BS^^SSSSSSSSSS^
We had intimated you our intention to make a written submission and to attend the public hearings to be
held in G eneva on 12* and 13th of October, 2000 throngh e-mail dated 23rd August, 2000, a copy of which
is enclosed for your ready reference.
Cur orgstnisation
(AIMO) is ar. apex body of manufoctiucrs in India.
It rias several beedi making
establishments as its members.
Beedi smoking is the most prevalent form of tobacco smoke in India. 6 million people are employed in
beedi roiling alone. Another 6 million workers are employed as tobacco growers, processors and traders.
Beedis ate mostly made by ‘home workers’ in ths unorganised sector and sold unbranded.
AIMO is therefore deeply concerned about the FCTC proposals of WHO and our written submissions in
four pages, are enclosed.
Kindly five us an opportunity to present our views , concerns and suggestions in the public hearings to be
held on 12* and 13“ of October. 2000 in Geneva,
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
G. HAMANAND
NationtJ Secretary - AIMO
@003
Submission by
India Manufacturers’ Organisation (KSB), S-501,
Manipai Centre., Dickenson Road, Bzngalpre-560 042, India
I
The
Organisation
AIMO is an apex organisation of manufacturers’ established in 1941
and founded by Bharat Raihaa Dr. Sir M. Visvesvaraya, father of
modem industrial planning. The organisation has completed 59 years
of useful existence and dedicated service to the cause of ‘prosperity
through industrialisation3. The organisation has about 1000 members
all over India, having 12 State/Regional Boards.
Activities
AIMO is recognised by the Government of India and represented on
over 100 Advisory' Committees and Councils set up by the Central and
State Governments and is consulted on all economic and policy
planning issues. It organises delegation to various international bodies
including WTO and ILO. The organisation is respected by the policy
makers due to the national perspective that has been adopted by the
AIMO since its inception.
Interest in
FCTC
Process
AIMO has several Beedi manufacturing organisations as its members
and would like to contribute and share its experience to the FCTC
process with a view to adopt a national and balanced approach in the
Indian context.
Funds
Generated by member organisations.
II
India and
the Beedi
Industry
Tobacco is extremely important and relevant in India as almost 30
million people depend on tobacco for their livelihood. Tobacco
harvesting and curing, beedi rolling and tendu leaf trade provide
employment and livelihood to the poorest of the poor. Tobacco is
grown on about 0.3% of arable land in India, mostly in rainfed areas
where returns io farmers from other crops are much lower. India is the
third largest producer of tobacco in the world. Tobacco Excise and
Cess are estimated to fetch collections of Rs.SOOQ crores (USD SSO
million) in 2000/01. An additional revenue of Rs. 400 crores is
collected by State Governments through local taxes. Tobacco export
earnings were worth Rs.300 crores in 1998/99. Tendu leaf, used for
rolling Beedis and grown on Government owned forest land, is
valued at Rs. 1500 crores - a major source of irreplaceable income for
lakhs of tribals in the two stales of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa.
These real benefits cannot be ignored, especially in a poor country like
Jt> fax 11;
"HO/TFI GENEVA
@004
India where unemployment levels are very high and the Governments,
both Central and State, are short of resources. According to one study.
cigarettes and Beedis generate a total impact of Rs. 56000 crores.
Tobacco contributes more than 10% of the Union Excise collections
and almost 4% of the value of the country's agri-exports. There is no
other crop which generates so much employment, income to farmers,
revenue to government and economic multiplier.
in
PaHe™
of Tobacco
COBSHtapfefi
in Ind ia
is uniting
IV
WHO's
Stand
V
Indian
Minstsris
caution
VI
Government’s
Approach
Beedi smoking is the most prevalent form of tobacco use among
smokers in India whereas cigarettes account for almost 90% of all
tobacco use worldwide. In India, Beedis account for S4% and
cigarettes, 19% only. The balance 27% is used by chewing tobacco
and Gutka.. Beedis are mostly made by '“home workers” in the
unorganised sector and sold unbranded extensively. Foi such
‘home workers', there are very few welfare facilities like proper
ventilation, lighting, toilets, pure drinking water, creche, etc. Large
Beedi manufacturers get their Beedis made through an intricate
network of sub-contractors who, in turn, depend upon household
labour for piece-rate based Beedi rolling.
Hence, the Beedi
manufacture is treated as a cottage industry.
The Beedi industry' provides employment to about 6 million workers
directly as growers, processors, traders, manufacturers, wholesalers
and retailers. There is an estimated 6 million workers employed in
Beedi rolling alone
The increasingly belligerent posture of the WHO is causing great
concern to developing countries, including India, whose economy
depends on tobacco heavily. It is unfortunate that WHO has declared
war against tobacco. Being a major tobacco growing country,
producing and consuming various tobacco products and employing
over 30 million people, AIMO is anxious that WHO does not press
hard with its Tobacco Free Initiatives.
It was keeping the economic importance of tobacco in the Indian
context that the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, in his inaugural
address at the WHO conference on Global Tobacco Control in New
Delhi on the 7* January, 2000 called for a comprehensive and
integrated strategy for tobacco control. He stated that it would be
unrealistic to view tobacco purely as a health problem and ignore the
economic and social fall-outs of tobacco control.
The Union Health Minister reported recently that the countrywide ban
on tobacco products will not be applicable to Beedis and Cigarettes
but only to ‘Gutka’, a chewing form of tobacco.
•09
(io 15:40 FAX 4122 791 4832
vn
ATMO’s
concern
BHO-TFI GENEVA
©005
Though termed a ‘developing country’,. India’s share of 1000 million
people living in abject poverty compounded with chronic malnutrition
stands at more than 350 million with average monthly income as low
as Rs. 600, equivalent to USS 13, constituting 35 per cent of the Indian
population. About seven million people live below the poverty line.
The latest report of the United Nations’ Development Programme on
human development indicates that 61.5 per cent of the Indian
population is falling under the category of multi-dimensional measure
of human deprivation known as ‘capability poverty’. India has to still
seriously address itself to the problems of health, education, social
security, agricultural labour and even land reforms. Clean drinking
water is a luxury to the rural poor in India. Adult 'literacy is 54 per
cent Primary Health Centres, not to speak of hospitals, run without.
doctors or medicines. Roads exist on paper. Infant mortality rate is 71
per 1000 live births. There are ,9 million blind persons in India. Indian
cities are being labeled as the most polluted cities in the world. The
world’s largest democracy is expected to become its most populous
country soon.
VIII
FC IC’s Specific Proposals
Unrrnonisaiiou
of Excise Taxes
with at least 70
per cent of the
package price
The WHO expects that this process will lead to a fall in
consumption and a rise in the revenue of the exchequer
simultaneously. If at all this step results in a fall in consumption, a
rise in revenue is unlikely to happen. There are several countries
where, consequent to a rise in taxes, the contraband trade has
increased. Howr such contraband trade would be controlled then is a
moot question.
Smuggling
There is no doubt that stricter controls should be in force.
Global Ran on
sponsorship
and
advertising
The act of smoking a cigarette or a beedi is an action of exercise of
adult choice as a consumer. What right does the State have to intrude
into this domain of adult consumer choice? Is not the State thereby
arrogating to itself the right of being the moral dictator of the society,
consequently ruining the means of livelihood of millions of people
whose sustenance depends on tobacco alone? The view expressed by
WHO that ‘smoking’ is a ‘communicated disease’ (since the desire to
smoke is spread allegedly by advertising) or describing tobacco as an
‘epidemic’ is quite distressing.
Packaging
measures Difficult to
Tire majority of sales of cigarettes in urban areas and of both
cigarettes and beedis in rural areas in India are in stick form and as
such, this measure to disclose all ingredients on the package is
09
I'HO 'TFI GENEVA
@006
enforce
meaningless. This step is most appropriate to be followed in
developed countries.
LX
Blowing Smoke
The
Economist
‘The Economist’ dated the 22nd July, 2000 reported, in its article titled
‘Blowing Smoke’: “Americans’ obsession with punishing tobacco
firms is wrong-headed, and an obstacle to rational debate about illegal
drugs”. It observed “
Yes, tobacco is addictive and damages
your health. Yet, every smoker for the past 34 years has known this,
because each packet of cigarettes sold in the United States has carried
a warning to that effect. Long before that, most people knew that
smoking was not the healthiest of pursuits. Neither is drinking lots of
alcohol, driving fast or eating junk food. Many of life’s pleasures,
unfortunately, are both unhealthy and habit-forming, but people do
have a choice about whether to take them up in the first place......... ”
Conclusion
Western
approach
cannot be
applied in
Indian
conditions
As the prevalence of tobacco consumption, the consumption pattern.
urban and rural divide, food habits, culture and traditions, nutritional
status, mix of religions and regional disparities are all very different
from the Western world, the Western thinking and approach to this
subject cannot be extrapolated to Indian conditions.
Tobacco has become an easy whipping boy. It draws away the focus
from the main health issues facing the world.
Protecting World Health is a question of priorities. Recently, WHO
has reported India having the maximum number of HIV positive
victims in the world. Viral malaria and tuberculosis are on the rise.
Should WHO not fight against more life-threatening diseases in a poor
country like India ?
'World Bank’s observations regarding alternatives for unemployment
are unrealistic and impracticable in the Indian context.
XI
Suggestion
WHO, industry
and the
Govei iinient to
evolve a
consensual
appre ach
Tobacco is a personal choice product for informed adults and,
therefore, minors should be discouraged from its use. The issue of
annoyance caused to the non-smokers due to the smoke emitted by
tobacco smokers needs to be resolved.
There must be strict
enforcement to counter the contraband, the inevitable, consequence of
raising excise taxes. These concerns could be effectively adddressed
through a self-regulated and consensual approach.
-——oo 15U£JEAji_ji22 791 -1832
WHO .'TFT GENEVA
©007
FARMERS FORUM
S14-370-9
219072
29.08.00
House No. 7/30/39
Main Road (Near L.I.C.)
Rajahmundry
Andhra Pradesh, India
Date
Tobacco Free: Initiative (TH)
World Health Organisation
20 Avenue Appia
1211 Geneva 27
Switzerland
^g^s^.SOOO
^S£mstSEB3S®^SS»
Dear Sir,
Andhra Fanners Forum is active in the State of Andhr a Pradesh, which is in the Southern
part of India. Andhra Pradesh is an important agricultural State in India. Andhra Fanners Forum
seeks to solve the problems of all farmers. The Forum represents periodically io the State arid
Central Governments on problems being faced by the fanning sector.
Andhra Farmers Forum is interested in the efforts of World Health Organisation to evolve
a “Framework Convention on Tobacco Control''.
This implies that the World Health
Organisation warns all sovereign governments to sign a treaty which will then follow the WHO's
views on tobacco. We are opposed to such an effort since we feel that our elected government
loses control over the welfare of its citizens and the people. We have a bad experience after
the World Trade Organisation. We prefer that the Indian Government controls our
signing
destiny and not a foreign agency. Hence our interest in the .FCTC Process.
Andhra Farmers Forum operates with funding from membership dues. Fanners'
organisations in India do not raise funds in the manner of other industry bodies or from any
industry.
2L 00
15:42_Fa.V 4122 791 4832
WHO/TFI GENEVA
©008
ANDHRA FARMERS FORUM
-2 -
Our main intention and objective is to enhance the economic and social welfare of the
farming sector in India. We trv- to project their interests and see that justice is done for them We
highlight problems of tobacco farmers, coconut fanners and in general, the farming community.
FC'IC and the Iad;;m Tobacco Farmer :
The main objections of farmers, policy makers And economists to the World Health
Organisation's plans to restrict or ban tobacco cultivation is that the FCTC is flawed. In a country
like India, a significant portion of the work force is involved in tobacco and allied industries. If
the WHO was fer sighted, then it would have sought to bring about a Voluntary Code of Conduct
in matters concerning tobacco. But to say that if the source is cut off, then demand win fall is
fallacious.
A similar argument is being touted in the USA. on the supply of drugs.
The US
Government blames the countries of South America for not curbing the growing of coca leaves.
The US Government does not blame its citizens who buy the drug. Trying to find upside down
solutions will fail. The US Government should have educated its citizens against use of drugs.
Instead, it blames the South American countries. Similarly, WHO feels that if tobacco cultivation
is banned, then the use of tobacco will fell. This again is erroneous. ■ The returns from sales of
illegal tobacco will increase manifold and the tobacco sector will thrive through dealings outside
the formal and legitimate economy.
We would like to know if the W.H.O.
has determined
whether tobacco is viewed as a problem created by supply and demand.
The WHO has also not clarified on who will fond the tobacco crop conversion programme
whose objective is to curb production of tobacco. Like the IMF, the WHO should raise funds
adequately to meet the needs of agricultural countries and sustain sus^.. an economic assistance
programme for some years. Without funds to back Up its policies, the WHO will only hurt the
poorer sections. Therefore, a review’ of the way the World Health Organisation is working on this
issue is essential.
-08-09
00 15:43 FAX 4122 791 4832
® 009
WHO-IFI GENEVA
ANDHRA FARMERS FORUM
-3The WHO should also examine the impact on the millions of agricultural labourers who
depend on tobacco for a high wage employment. Workers in the tobacco sector get better wages
than workers involved in other crops.
All these statistics are available with the Indian
Government and obviously, the WHO officials can obtain them, It would be an eye-opener for
the WHO to know the depth of dependence on tobacco cultivation in some States of .India.
Lastly, lhe World Health Organisation suggests subsidies for tobacco farmers who will
leave tobacco cultivation. This is against the policies of the W.T.O. In fact, already Indian
farmers are suffering due to the W.T.O and there are second thoughts on this system. So the
WHO wffl lave to find a vzay to avoid violating the W.T.O rules. For example, if the WHO in
collaboration with the Indian Government were to finance a cotton subsidy programme or a
groundnut subsidy programme for farmers leaving tobacco cultivation, then countries exporting
cotton
and groundnut oil aud other cooking oils would definitely object that their right to
free-trade is being violated. Obviously, these problems and issues have not been tacked by the
World Health Organisation.
In conclusion, we request a dialogue with the World Health Organisation and the
Government of India on this subject. We prefer a proper dialogue, so that we in India carve out a
policy and a solation which will be suitable to the Indian farmer, worker and tire population.
Historically, regulations and laws have not been known to control habits through force of
law. The problems of alcoholism, drugs, etc., have not been sorted out in the developed world.
In a country like India, where literacy is yet to catch up with the West, it would be necessary to
extend financial incentives to get the farming community to change to
other crops.
The
Government of India is aware of the importance of tobacco to the economy, both in terms of
taxes and also employment. It is difficult to change;such dependencies within a short time,
without alternate sources of income being indicated
Studies by the Indian Council of
Agricultural Research (Govt, of India) have shown that certain costs and investments have to be
incurred by the Government before farmers would start changing over to non-tobacco crops.
@ 010
ANDHRA. EARME RS FORUM
This only emphasises the need to back any such ideas with adequate funds for the fanners and the
Indian economy. The degree of dependence on agriculture and tobacco farming here is unlike
almost all other countries tn the World.
BiaUgS.eJVe cojne
As an organisation: which is working for the fanners welfare, it is good that we have a
chanee to participate in a dialogue. This is welcome and we hope that after receiving this iettef,
you would have some queries and doubts' and requests for further information and statistics,
which we will furnish.
There should be a hamtonicus path in consultation with all affected
sections, io arrive at a consensus-driven solution within each country.
Ail along we have been stressing that the way to tackle the tobacco issue is to create a
wide degree of agreement between the Government of India, formers, Bidi workers, the tobacco
industry and then try to implement it in good foith. There is room for such a model of process
and we hope tliat WHO will recommend such a course,
We ret uest you to send a team to India so that we can interact with them. Please give us
sufficient notice of such a visit, well in advance, so that we-can come fo Delhi to meet them.
We await to hear from you.
Thanki rg you,
Yours sincerely,
—
(PRESIDENT)
Workers Federation i
224, Choupati Karaiija |
x-M-370-fi
Ahmednagar-414 001 ;
Maharashtra
India
Phone:(0241)344692 |
Dated 16 August 2000
abacvP Control
&wtyreand y
inions io nearly every State in
gar and Tobacco Workers for
l.
• such workers ano have actively
of tobacco workers. Bidis are native to
smoked aS! over the ccysstry.
i« Government of India to various
aifare of Bidi and Cigar workers. The
1 schools for Bidi workers. There is a
/emment which oversees ai! welfare
iVdl workers.
We are supported by
' • We do y get any funding outside the
ALL INDIA MANUFACTURERS' QR,G,AN.LZATLQN_(K-SB-)
S 501 - Manipal Centre, Dickenson Road, Bangalore - 560 042 INDIA
_______________ Phone : 5594135
Fax:080 - 5597668_____________ _
"EXPORT
AND
FLOURISH"
T. Ramesh Pai
Chairman - AIMO (KSB)
Tobacco Free Initiative,
World Health Organisation,
21 Avenue Appia,
1211 Geneva 27,
Switzerland
24th August, 2000
S14-370-9
219157
30.08.00
TF1
Dear Sirs,
Written Submission on FCTC for the Public Hearings
on 12th and 13th October, 2000
We had intimated you our intention to make a written submission and to attend the public hearings to be
held in Geneva on 12lh and 13111 of October, 2000 through e-mail dated 23rd August, 2000, a copy of which
is enclosed for your ready reference.
Our organisation (AIMO) is an apex body of manufacturers in India.
establishments as its members.
It has several beedi making
Beedi smoking is the most prevalent form of tobacco smoke in India. 6 million people are employed in
beedi rolling alone. Another 6 million workers are employed as tobacco growers, processors and traders.
Beedis are mostly made by ‘home workers’ in the unorganised sector and sold unbranded.
AIMO is therefore deeply concerned about the FCTC proposals of WHO and our written submissions in
four pages, are enclosed.
Kindly give us an opportunity to present our views , concerns and suggestions in the public hearings to be
held on 12th and 13“ of October, 2000 in Geneva.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
G. RAMANAND
National Secretary - AIMO
Submission by ‘All India Manufacturers’ Organisation (KSB), S-501,
Manipal Centre, Dickenson Road, Bangalore-560 042, India
I
The
Organisation
AIMO is an apex organisation of manufacturers’ established in 1941
and founded by Bharat Rathna Dr. Sir M. Visvesvaraya, father of
modern industrial planning. The organisation has completed 59 years
of usefill existence and dedicated service to the cause of ‘prosperity
through industrialisation’. The organisation has about 1000 members
all over India, having 12 State/Regional Boards.
Activities
AIMO is recognised by the Government of India and represented on
over 100 Advisory Committees and Councils set up by the Central and
State Governments and is consulted on all economic and policy
planning issues. It organises delegation to various international bodies
including WTO and ILO. The organisation is respected by the policy
makers due to the national perspective that has been adopted by the
AIMO since its inception.
Interest in
FCTC
Process
AIMO has several Beedi manufacturing organisations as its members
and would like to contribute and share its experience to the FCTC
process with a view to adopt a national and balanced approach in the
Indian context.
Funds
Generated by member organisations.
II
India and
the Beedi
Industry
Tobacco is extremely important and relevant in India as almost 30
million people depend on tobacco for their livelihood. Tobacco
harvesting and curing, beedi rolling and tendu leaf trade provide
employment and livelihood to the poorest of the poor. Tobacco is
grown on about 0.3% of arable land in India, mostly in rainfed areas
where returns to farmers from other crops are much lower. India is the
third largest producer of tobacco in the world. Tobacco Excise and
Cess are estimated to fetch collections of Rs. 8000 crores (USD 880
million) in 2000/01. An additional revenue of Rs. 400 crores is
collected by State Governments through local taxes. Tobacco export
earnings were worth Rs.800 crores in 1998/99. Tendu leaf, used for
rolling Beedis and grown on Government owned forest land, is
valued at Rs. 1500 crores - a major source of irreplaceable income for
lakhs of tribals in the two states of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa.
These real benefits cannot be ignored, especially in a poor country like
India where unemployment levels are very high and the Governments,
both Central and State, are short of resources. According to one study,
cigarettes and Beedis generate a total impact of Rs. 56000 crores.
Tobacco contributes more than 10% of the Union Excise collections
and almost 4% of the value of the country’s agri-exports. There is no
other crop which generates so much employment, income to farmers,
revenue to government and economic multiplier.
Ill
Pattern
of Tobacco
consumption
in India
is unique
Beedi smoking is the most prevalent form of tobacco use among
smokers in India whereas cigarettes account for almost 90% of all
tobacco use worldwide. In India, Beedis account for 54% and
cigarettes, 19% only. The balance 27% is used by chewing tobacco
and Gutka.. Beedis are mostly made by “home workers” in the
unorganised sector and sold unbranded extensively. For such
‘home workers’, there are very few welfare facilities like proper
ventilation, lighting, toilets, pure drinking water, creche, etc. Large
Beedi manufacturers get their Beedis made through an intricate
network of sub-contractors who, in turn, depend upon household
labour for piece-rate based Beedi rolling.
Hence, the Beedi
manufacture is treated as a cottage industry.
The Beedi industry provides employment to about 6 million workers
directly as growers, processors, traders, manufacturers, wholesalers
and retailers. There is an estimated 6 million workers employed in
Beedi rolling alone
IV
The increasingly belligerent posture of the WHO is causing great
concern to developing countries, including India, whose economy
depends on tobacco heavily. It is unfortunate that WHO has declared
war against tobacco. Being a major tobacco growing country,
producing and consuming various tobacco products and employing
over 30 million people, AIMO is anxious that WHO does not press
hard with its Tobacco Free Initiatives.
WHO’s
Stand
V
Indian
Prime
Minster’s
caution
It was keeping the economic importance of tobacco in the Indian
context that the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, in his inaugural
address at the WHO conference on Global Tobacco Control in New
Delhi on the 7th January, 2000 called for a comprehensive and
integrated strategy for tobacco control. He stated that it would be
unrealistic to view tobacco purely as a health problem and ignore the
economic and social fall-outs of tobacco control.
VI
Government’s
Approach
The Union Health Minister reported recently that the countrywide ban
on tobacco products will not be applicable to Beedis and Cigarettes
but only to ‘Gutka’, a chewing form of tobacco.
VII
AIMO’s
concern
Though termed a ‘developing country’, India’s share of 1000 million
people living in abject poverty compounded with chronic malnutrition
stands at more than 350 million with average monthly income as low
as Rs.600, equivalent to US$ 13, constituting 35 per cent of the Indian
population. About seven million people live below the poverty line.
The latest report of the United Nations’ Development Programme on
human development indicates that 61,5 per cent of the Indian
population is falling under the category of multi-dimensional measure
of human deprivation known as ‘capability poverty’. India has to still
seriously address itself to the problems of health, education, social
security, agricultural labour and even land reforms. Clean drinking
water is a luxury to the rural poor in India. Adult literacy is 54 per
cent. Primaiy Health Centres, not to speak of hospitals, run without
doctors or medicines. Roads exist on paper. Infant mortality rate is 71
per 1000 live births. There are 9 million blind persons in India. Indian
cities are being labeled as the most polluted cities in the world. The
world’s largest democracy is expected to become its most populous
country soon.
VIII
FCTC’s Specific Proposals
Harmonisation
of Excise Taxes
with at least 70
per cent of the
package price
The WHO expects that this process will lead to a fall in
consumption and a rise in the revenue of the exchequer
simultaneously. If at all this step results in a fall in consumption, a
rise in revenue is unlikely to happen. There are several countries
where, consequent to a rise in taxes, the contraband trade has
increased. How such contraband trade would be controlled then is a
moot question.
Smuggling
There is no doubt that stricter controls should be in force.
Global Ban on
sponsorship
and
advertising
The act of smoking a cigarette or a beedi is an action of exercise of
adult choice as a consumer. What right does the State have to intrude
into this domain of adult consumer choice? Is not the State thereby
arrogating to itself the right of being the moral dictator of the society,
consequently ruining the means of livelihood of millions of people
whose sustenance depends on tobacco alone? The view expressed by
WHO that ‘smoking’ is a ‘communicated disease’ (since the desire to
smoke is spread allegedly by advertising) or describing tobacco as an
‘epidemic’ is quite distressing.
Packaging
measures Difficult to
The majority of sales of cigarettes in urban areas and of both
cigarettes and beedis in rural areas in India are in stick form and as
such, this measure to disclose all ingredients on the package is
enforce
IX
View
expressed by
The
Economist
X
Western
approach
cannot be
applied in
Indian
conditions
meaningless.
This step is most appropriate to be followed in
developed countries.
Blowing Smoke
‘The Economist’ dated the 22nd July, 2000 reported, in its article titled
‘Blowing Smoke’: “Americans’ obsession with punishing tobacco
firms is wrong-headed, and an obstacle to rational debate about illegal
drugs”. It observed “
Yes, tobacco is addictive and damages
your health. Yet, every smoker for the past 34 years has known this,
because each packet of cigarettes sold in the United States has carried
a warning to that effect. Long before that, most people knew that
smoking was not the healthiest of pursuits. Neither is drinking lots of
alcohol, driving fast or eating junk food. Many of life’s pleasures,
unfortunately, are both unhealthy and habit-forming, but people do
have a choice about whether to take them up in the first place......... ”
Conclusion
As the prevalence of tobacco consumption, the consumption pattern,
urban and rural divide, food habits, culture and traditions, nutritional
status, mix of religions and regional disparities are all very different
from the Western world, the Western thinking and approach to this
subject cannot be extrapolated to Indian conditions.
Tobacco has become an easy whipping boy. It draws away the focus
from the main health issues facing the world.
Protecting World Health is a question of priorities. Recently, WHO
has reported India having the maximum number of HIV positive
victims in the world. Viral malaria and tuberculosis are on the rise.
Should WHO not fight against more life-threatening diseases in a poor
country like India ?
World Bank’s observations regarding alternatives for unemployment
are unrealistic and impracticable in the Indian context.
XI
Suggestion
WHO, industry
and the
Government to
evolve a
consensual
approach
Tobacco is a personal choice product for informed adults and,
therefore, minors should be discouraged from its use. The issue of
annoyance caused to the non-smokers due to the smoke emitted by
tobacco smokers needs to be resolved.
There must be strict
enforcement to counter the contraband, the inevitable, consequence of
raising excise taxes. These concerns could be effectively adddressed
through a self-regulated and consensual approach.
TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO LOBBY YOUR GOVERNMENT ON THE FCTC!!
Subject: TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO LOBBY YOUR GOVERNMENT ON THE FCTC!!
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:35:16 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO LOBBY YOUR GOVERNMENT ON THE FCTC 1!
Dear Colleagues:
Over the next few weeks, governments will be firming up the positions that
they will be taking to Geneva for the first meeting of the Intergovernmental
Negotiating Body of the FCTC. If you are not already doing so, it is crucial
chat your organization start meeting with your government representatives
immediately, both in order to influence their positions and to find out your
government's thinking on the many substantive and procedural issues in the
FCTC. This note is intended to help you and NGOs in your region arrange and
prepare for these meetings.
1) Encourage and assist NGOs in your region to identify which ministries'in
their country will be primarily responsible for developing government
positions on the FCTC (in many countries, the ministry of health will be the
lead agency). They should then identify the key staff people in those
ministries and ask to meet with them. Your organization should do the same
in your country. A list of delegates to the first two working groups can be
found at:
http://www.who.int/wha-1998/Tobacco/PDF/fctc2.pdf (1st working group)
http://www.who.int/wha-1998/Tobacco/second/pdf/eaf2dlr2.pdf (2nd working
group)
2) Below is a list of suggested questions that Clive Bates (with input from
Luk Joossens) has very helpfully put together which should help advocates
get a better sense of where their governments are in the process, what
issues will be of particular concern to them, etc.
3) I have also included some talking points on the FCTC which Tobacco
Free-Kids put together for the public hearings which may also be useful.
)4. Following these meetings with government representatives, it would be
extremely helpful for groups to post notes and impressions to the Framework
Convention Alliance mailing list (fctcall@globalink.org). These reports will
be extremely helpful as we prepare lobbying strategies for October. If there
are things that you think the Alliance lobbying group should know but don't
wish to post to the entire list-serv you can send those items to me as the
acting Chair of the lobbying group (margross@igc.org).
5) At the bottom of this note you will find the names and contact
information of the regional contact points for the lobbying group. If you’d
like to become more active in this group, please let me know.
Thanks, and look forward to hearing from you.
Ross
QUESTIONS TO POSE TO YOUR COUNTRY'S DELEGATION TO THE FCTC
Glossary:
Convention - the Framework Convention, not including protocols
Protocols - commitments made in separate agreements to the Convention
FCTC - the whole process including Convention and Protocols
LOBBYING QUESTIONS
A. Process:
1. Find out who'will be on your country's delegation attending the
negotiations in Geneva
TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO LOBBY YOUR GOVERNMENT ON THE FCTC!!
and who will determine the negotiating brief.
2. Ask to meet informally during the negotiations and gain a commitment to
be kept involved during negotiations.
3. If not already obvious, establish who is the main contact in making views
known to the delegation (both at home and while they are in Geneva).
4. Find out as much as you can about how decisions will be made in
formulating the negotiating brief and at the negotiations (especially
important where this is complicated, such as within the EU].
5. Probe for any bilateral discussions with other delegations - and see if
the delegation plans to act as part of a grouping (obvious for EU, but may
also apply to the G-77 group of developing countries, and other holy or
unholy alliances] .
6. Find out where they stand on parallel negotiation of the Convention and
one or more Protocols, compared to doing the Convention first and protocols
later. What do you think of the idea that any state signing the Convention
should also have to sign at least one protocol? (this is an European
Commission view, by the way]
7. Find out what their views are on expanding NGO participation in the
negotiations. Would they support broadening WHA rules for the negotiations?
B. Negotiating positions:
Here it may be best to put positions to delegations and gauge their
response. It's more assertive that way, you are persuading as well as
asking, and it does not allow them to just spout generalities.
1. Assert that Convention will be regarded as hot air if there are no
specific commitments made in it - and then test the extent to which they
agree that the key challenge facing the negotiators is to ensure that some
credible specific commitments are included in the Convention (if not, why
not?) .
2. If the mood of the negotiations was to bring some specifics into the
Convention, what are the sort of things that they could accept or push for?
For example credible specifics that could be agreed in the Convention
include: [obviously you should make your own list here but here are some
suggestions]
- Insisting on national language health warning labels
- A ban on misleading 'low-tar' branding and the printing of misleading tar
yields on packs and a ban on terms like "light" or "mild".
- A ban on duty free sales and duty-free imports and exports of tobacco.
- A unique machine-readable marking indicating the origin, batch, date of
manufacture and final country of destination.
- A ban on tobacco sponsorship - or a ban on sponsorship of televised
events - by 2006. The aim of this should be to tackle tobacco sponsorship of
Formula One.
- Banning TV advertising - a measure which would be built on in a full
advertising ban in a protocol.
3. An important part of the FCTC will be North-South technical assistance
including financing. What sort of commitments does your government think is
possible here?
4. What sort of commitments in the Convention would they find it impossible
to agree to and where are the constraints? [it is important to know when
external factors rather than lack of political will genuinely block a
measure, and where the delegation has an entrenched view]. Likely candidates
for certain countries include:
- setting taxation levels
- Abolishing subsidies
- Total bans on advertising and promotion
Which of these issues does your government believe should be put in the
protocols and which does it think must be in the Convention itself?
2 of 5
TIME IS RUNNING OUT To LOBBY YOUR GOi'ERNMENT ON THE FCTC!!
Another way to conduct questions 2-4 would be to list the main headings that
could form the basis of the FCTC and have an exchange of views under each
heading: [your list here but here are some suggestions]
- Objective
- Taxation
-' Subsidies
- Youth access
- Packaging and warnings
- Product regulation
- Advertising
- Smuggling
- Cessation
- Passive smoking/clean air
- Liability/compensation
- Technical assistance, education
- North-South funding
- Research, surveillance
- Conflicts with trade agreements
- Agriculture
- Corporate accountability
- Enforcement
In each case you can state what you think ought to happen and whether it
should happen in the Convention or Protocols, and assessing whether the
delegation has support, no fixed position, in-principle objections or
external constraints.
Obviously you need to pick issues from the list that you know.
SOME SUGGESTED TALKING POINTS
— The protection and promotion of public health should provide the sole
basis for any and all provisions in the FCTC.
— The problems caused by tobacco use are not confined to developed
countries. Increasingly, the burden of tobacco-related death and disease is
being borne by developing countries.
— The world needs a strong, enforceable convention that holds tobacco .
companies accountable and supports governments in their effort to protect
and promote public health.
— The FCTC should, at a minimum, provide support and encouragement for
national policies and multilateral measures that would stem the disastrous
global public health epidemic occurring as a result of tobacco use.
— Nothing in the Framework Convention or related protocols should reduce,
relax or in any other way diminish existing tobacco control initiatives,
regulations, laws, or practices in any signatory country. The Convention
should set a floor, rather than a ceiling, for national efforts. The FCTC
should provide strong international measures to control problems that cannot
be handled on a national or local level, such as smuggling and advertising
that cannot be stopped at borders, e.g. internet and satellite television
advertising.
— Recognizing the important role of advertising in the spread of tobacco
use, the FCTC should provide for stringent restrictions on all direct or
indirect advertising.
— The FCTC should provide for international agreements and institutions to
provide solutions to issues that are amenable to international cooperation
and the transfer of information and technology, such as product regulation
and tobacco testing, collection of statistical data, and agricultural
diversification.
-- The FCTC should make certain that provisions are included to ensure
-strong national-tobacco control measures in areas that are traditionally
domestic, such as taxation, prevention and treatment, passive smoking, youth
access, health education and some areas of advertising.
-- Provisions of the Framework Convention and its related protocols should
be made legally binding on the tobacco companies and therefore be
implemented by legislation or regulation within member countries.
— Tobacco companies, their subsidiaries, agents or consultants do not have
public health concerns as their key priority, putting them directly in
conflict with the primary aim of the Framework Convention. Therefore, they
3 of 5
time is running out to lobby your government ON THE FCTCI!
should not serve in any official capacity in the process of negotiating or
--I:?:;?; the Convention.
— NGOs should be fully integrated into the Framework Convention process.
Rules for NGO participation should rely on the precedents set at other
recent UN Conferences. WHO should also work with governments and private
organizations to seek funds for ensuring strong representation from
developing country NGOs.
REGIONAL CONTACTS FOR THE LOBBYING GROUP:
Africa:
John Kapito
Consumers' Association of Malawi
Tel. 265-644-270
Fax. 265-644-639
e-mail: jonkapito@hotmail.com
Yussuf Saloojee
National Council Against Smoking
PO Box 23244
Joubart Park 2044
South Africa
Tel. 27-11-643-2958
Fax. 27-11-720-6177
e-mail: ysalooje@iafrica.com
Europe:
Clive Bates
ASH UK
102 Clifton street
London EC2A 4HW
United Kingdom
Tel. 44-171-739-5902
Fax. 44-17,1-224-0531
e-mail: clive.bates@dial.pipex.com
Sibylle Fleitmann
European Network for smoking Prevention
48, rue De Pascale
Brussels 1040
Belgium
Tel. 32-2-230-6515
Fax. 32-2-230-7507
e-mail: sibylle.fleitmann@ensp.org
Middle East:
Elif Dagli
Marmara University Hospital
Altonizade 81 190
Istanbul
Turkey
Tel: 90-216-326-6551
Fax. 90-216-411-9046
e-mail: edagli@superonline.com
North America:
Elinor Wilson S Manuel Arango
Heart S Stroke Foundation
222 Queen iffireet,.. Suite i^.p&......
Ottawa, ON KIP 5V9
Canada
Tel. 613-569-4361
Fax. 613-569-3278
e-mail: ewilson@hsf.ca or marango@hsf.ca
4 of 5
TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO LOBBY YOUR GOVERNMENT ON THE FCTCI!
Ross Hammond
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
965 Mission Street, Suite 218
San Francisco, CA 94103
USA
Tel. 415-695-7492
Fax. 415-369-9211
e-mail: margrossgigc.org
South Asia:
Debra Efroymson
PATH Canada
67 Laboratary Road, Dhanmondi
Dhaka-1205
Bangladesh
Tel. 880-2-966-9781
Fax. 880-2-966-0372
e-mail: pathCan@citecho.net
Southeast Asia
Belinda Hughes & Bung On Rittiphakdee
ASH Thailand
36/2 Pradipat Road, Soi 10
Samsen Nai, Phayathai 10400
Bangkok, Thailand
Tel. 66-2-278-1828/29
Fax. 66-2-278-1830
e-mail: ashthai@asiaaccess.net.th
Mary Assunta
Consumers Association of Penang
228 Macalister Road
10400 Penang
Malaysia
Tel. 60-4-229-3511
Fax. 60-4-229-8106
e-mail: assunta@cap.po.my
Latin America:
civic society.
c------
We recognize the need for a public health approach. We supporttelobal strategy to ensure
tobacco control, as multinationals with easier access to markets mrougli the process of
Globalisation are using questionable marketing methods. South Asian populations are particularly
vulnerable and at risk in the current context. We support the proactive efforts of the Tobacco
Free Initiative of the WHO to contain the tobacco industry through the FCTC. We also address
the local tobacco industry in India, particularly those producing and marketing bidis and chewed
tobacco. Recent studies in Mumbai found 74% of adult men and 60% of adult women chewing
tobacco, a habit that starts at 11-13 years of age and which accounts for 30% of tobacco use.
The hazards to which the unorganized workers are exposed and their working conditions need
attention. Thus a public health approach will also need to respond to the dynamics and
specificities of tobacco growth, production, sale and use in the country.
2.
Personal Health and Public Health Consequence of tobacco use
2.1
Over the past 50 years, studies conducted globally, including the outstanding work by Richard and Doll in
UK, have established the link between tobacco use and various forms of cancer, cardiovascular- disease,
gastrointestinal disease, diseases of the reproductive tract including pregnancy wastage and impotence Studies
India also bear this out.
The cause effect relationship between tobacco use in smoked or chewed form and several adverse ill health
consequences on an individual is thus well established.This needs to be kept in mind during the negotiations.
2.2
The WHO, the public health community and policy workers need to also take cognisance of chewed
tobacco(gutka, pan masala, zarda etc) accounting for 27-30%^tobacco use in India. Chewed tobacco is alscj
usedjin the Indian subcontinent, with potential for spread elsewhere) Habitual chewing of 4-5 packets per dayj
leads ^gingivitis, leukoplakia, erythroplakia and to the disabling oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF). Over 2-1
decade; a ten-fold increase in incidence of OSMF is noticed with a shift in age group from those above 40 yeaj
to younger persons between 25-35 years.
2.3
The effects of passive smokingZETS have been accepted by courts.
2.4
More recently the highly addictive nature of nicotine has entered the public knowledge domain, along wit
the fact that this critical information was kept secret and also used to manipulate the product by the tobacco
industry. Ute consequence and cost to public health and to individuals resulting from tliis act by the industry,
(which talks of free choice) is enormous.
2.5
The magnitude of tobacco related morbidity and mortalityplace,. it among the league of major public heal
problems, resulting in the following : much preventable human",suffering to affected persons and their families;'
premature death; to increased health care costs; to loss of productivity; to shift in household income from nutrit
and children’s education to spending on tobacco; and to an overall economic loss to national economies, which
economically poor countries can ill-afford. A recent report of a 6 year prospective study by the Indian Counci'
Medical Research substantiates the last point.
2.6
For the larger public good, there is need for urgent public policy interventions to mitigate the above. The
protection of public health and public good is the mandated role of governments (national and local); of
professional bodies who have access to knowledge; of international bodies such as WHO, particularly when th
are global dimensions to health problems and health risks; and of civil society itself, when action by other
mandated agencies is ineffective.
2.7
An objective review of tobacco control interventions especially in developing countries reveal that they
been weak and ineffective. Rates of tobacco use have infact increased, slatting at very young ages during
childhood, where again the free choice theory fails to hold. As a medical doctor specialised in epidemiology and
health policy analysis, it is evident that interventions focussed on cessation, counselling and group health
education / awareness concerning the health ill effects of tobacco, fail to address the determining cause of spread
of this behaviour or habit related problem, namely the dynamics and ingenuity of the tobacco industry which
act’veb' grows, manufacturers, promotes and sells the product in collaboration with governments. These major
- -steffeholders need to be held accountable and responsible for their decisions and actions, from a public health
ethics point of view.
-
Given the present global evidence, these stakeholders need to make informed choices, and based on currently
globally accepted human rights instruments to compensate individuals/families for the harm caused .
3.
We support a series of policy measures for tobacco control that include :
3.1
Crop diversification, alternative employment and protection of tobacco workers.
3.2
Reduction and elimination ofgovemment/public subsidy to tobacco growth, production, manufacture and sa
3.3
Banning sponsorship of sports & entertainment by the tobacco industry.
3.4
Banning of public advertisement of tobacco products.
3.5
Preventing and protecting children and young people from getting addicted.
3.6
Widespread education and awareness raising about consequences of tobacco use.
3.7
Tobacco cessation efforts - support to smokers/chewers.
3.8
Banning smoking in public places.
3.9
Support to the WHO in developing and implementing the Iramework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCT
3.10
Labelling and regulating nicotine, tar and carbon monoxide content of cigarettes.
3.11
Banning chewed tobacco.
3.12
Control of Summing.
3.13
Increasing taxes and using money thus collected for tobaco prevention education.
4.
Country' specifid's
4.1
Tn India it is reported that 20% of tobacco use comprises cigarettes, 27-30% chewed tobacco (gutka etc) an
50-53% beedies. We need more accurate elation the sale of unbranded beedies and of gutka which are
unaccounted for and totally unregulated. There is need for greater product regulation and safeguarding of health
and working conditions of workers in these sectors who are most often women, children and the poorest sections
of society.
Whi le on the one hand the industry talks of generation of employment and wealth, the latter is largely in the hands
of larger farmers and business owners. Field studies reveal that women in the home-based industry work 10-12
hours a day for a relatively small remuneration. Since it is homebased work, children often help out after school
hours. Undercutting and exploitation of women, who may often be uneducated is often being done.
3 of 4
Government, including agriculture, labour, commerce and trade, education and healtly greater involvement of
NGO’s, health professional bodies and educational institutions isrequired.
s> $4. o
From:
To.
Subject:
Date sent:
AJ Foreit <JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
"Tctcall@globalink.org"‘ <fctcall@globalink.org>
draft schedule of events for Geneva
Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:09:56 -0400
All:
Attached please find a calendar for the weeks 8 October - 21 October
containing the schedule of events as they now stand.
«geneva public calendar.doc»
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS FOR HEARINGS & 1st MEETING OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING BODY
GENEVA, OCTOBER 12-21,2000
MONDAY
SUNDAY
8
9
11
THURSDAY
12 HEARINGS
FRIDAY
13 HEARINGS
11:00-12:00 Debate:
PubH vs. Industry;
Geneva press club
10:55-11:15 Emma
rsvd press briefing
CNTC
10:00-11:00
Growers press
briefing CNTC
13:50-14:10 Vince
rsvd press briefing
CNTC
11:00-11:40 US
voluntaries press
briefing CNTC
10:55-11:15 Vince
rsvd press briefing
CNTC
15:00-16:00 Wigand
TUESDAY
10
WEDNESDAY
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg Globalink Cafe
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg Globalink Cafe
15
16 NEGOTIATION
17 NEGOTIATION
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg Hotel Cornavin
18 NEGOTIATION
19 NEGOTIATION
20 NEGOTIATION
16:00-19:00 FCA
mtg (CICG or
Cornavin)
9:30-10:00 US/WHO
briefing w/FCA
CICG
9:30-10:00 US/WHO
briefing w/FCA
CICG
9:30-10:00 US/WHO
briefing w/FCA
CICG
9:30-10:00 US/WHO
briefing w/FCA
CICG
9:30-10:00 US/WHO
briefing w/FCA
CICG
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg CICG
10:00-11:00 WHO
press briefing Palais
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg CICG
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg CICG
10:00-11:00 WHO
press briefing Palais
Hotel Cornavin
Gare de Cornavin
1201 Geneve
Tel: 41 (022)715-1212
Fax: 41 (022) 716-1200
11:00-12:00 FCA
press briefing Palais
11:00-12:00 FCA
press briefing Palais
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg CICG
19:00-20:00 FCA
mtg CICG
CICG
Rue de Varembe 15
1211 Geneve
Palais des Nations
Avenue de la Paix
1202 Geneve
SATURDAY
14
21 NEGOTIATION
Subject: Re: FCTC and trade position — a further comment
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 23:10:13 -0400
From: "Francis Thompson" <fthompson@nsra-adnf.ca>
To: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>. "Mele J Smith" <mjsmith@igc.org>
CC: <fctcall@:globalink.org>
If I may be so bold as to react to my own (earlier) proposal, Clive has a
point about item 7: if FCTC negotiations get bogged down in discussions
about tobacco farming and rural development in Malawi, etc., the industry
will have a field day.
The idea of aid to help farmers "transition" out of tobacco has four
possible goals:
1) To reduce tobacco consumption by reducing tobacco supply.
2 To protect a small number of vulnerable tobacco-growing countries from
the economic side-effects of a major downturn in world tobacco consumption.
3) To provide political cover, i.e. to attempt to shut the tobacco-growers'
lobby up.
4) To "redress redress some of the economic exploitation that small farmers
have experienced at the hands of the tobacco industry", as Mele puts it.
Gcal 1) looks tempting, but the World Bank is probably right about its
effectiveness. (It hasn't exactly been a roaring success with coca either.)
Goal 2) seems sensible enough (hence my earlier proposal), but we do need to
recognize that a major downturn in world tobacco consumption is (sadly)
rather unlikely, and that eliminating some of the more anachronistic First
world tobacco crops (EU, Canada) would be a more effective way of
approaching the issue.
Goal 3) was likely the prime reason for past "transition" programs in
Canada, and probably in other countries. It can work reasonably well, but is
very expensive. Internationally, the growers' association is run by the
tobacco industry, and will be hard to shut up.
Goal 4) is a topic I don't know enough to comment on. Are tobacco companies
more exploitative in their relationsship to developing world farmer than,
say, coffee companies? Is this appropriately dealt with in FCTC?
Perhaps we should delete item 7 in its present form, and ask for a general
declaration along the line of: "in the event of a major downturn in world
tobacco consumption, parties to the Convention will endeavour to minimize
the economic impact on low-income countries where tobacco is a significant
cash crop, including through provision of transitional aid, where
appropriate." The First World countries are almost certain to refuse an
obligatory funding mechanism anyway.
Let’s hope we hear more from Clive and others on the broader issue of WTO
and trade liberalization. No use kidding ourselves, the trade issue is
crucial but also, incorrectly handled, has the potential to marginalize the
NGOs completely at FCTC talks.
Easy for me to say: I won't be able to i.iake it to Geneva, at least this time
round.
Francis
hompson
@nsra-adnf.ca
Non-3mokers' Rights Association
Ottawa, ON
10/9
Re: FCTC and trade position — a further comment
anada
---- Original Message.---From: "Mele J Smith" <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: "Francis Thompson" <fthompson@nsra-adnf.ca>; "Clive Bates"
<clive.bates@dial.pipex .com>
Cc: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: FCTC and trade position
> First a note to say that the following groups/individulals have signed on
> to the trade brief as is:
> ASH Thailand, Physicians for a Smokefree Canada, Consumers Association of
> Penang, INFACT, Essential Action, San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition,
> Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, Canadian Non-Smokers' Rights Association,
> and Bobby del Rosario.
>
> Thanks to both Clive and Francis for their thoughtful contributions to the
> discussion.
> Francis did an excellent job of summarizing much of the thinking that went
> into the development of the trade brief. I agree with Francis that NGOs
> should be pushing for tobacco to be outside the realm of existing trade
> rules and agreements because trade liberalization leads to increased
> consumption. That being the case, NGOs should, on priniciple, hopefully be
> able to support the trade brief.
> The point made that to call for the removal of tobacco from trade
> agreements may lead to the failure of the FCTC is well taken. However, I
> don't think that is a strong enough reason to not bring up the issue. At
> this point, I think that NGOs want to push for their vision of a strong
> FCTC that addresses trade issues and the notion that public health takes
> precedence over trade issues.
>
> I hope that helps explain some of the reasoning behind the brief. As for
point ff /, tne primcpie mere is to recognize ana attempt to rearess some
> of the economic exploitation that small farmers have experienced at the
> hands of the tobacco industry.
Does anyone have any comments on Francis'
> suggested re-wording:
>
> "7. That the FCTC and its related protocols include a specific provision
> that government financial supports for farmers to transition out of
tobacco
> not be subject to trade challenges and that the FCTC establishes a
> financial mechanism whereby high-income countries are obligated to provide
> financial assistance to low and middle-income countries where tobacco is a
■> significant cash crop to deal with any economic dislocation caused by a
> decline in tobacco consumption."
> regards,
> mele smith
2 of 2
uid trade position
Subject: FCTC and trade position
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 18:10:34+0100
From: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com >
Organization: ASH
To: "Mele J Smith" <mjsmith@igc.org>
CC: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Mele
Thanks for doing this - very thought provoking! But at the risk of becoming even more unpopular, I don't think ASH will be able to si
up to the Key trade elements briefing - at least without understanding it a bit more.
I think there is an almost completely opposite point of view to the one articulated in the position statement. I think this should probat
be explained - so at least those endorsing this can see what they are rejecting. As I understand it (which is not that well) the opposite
view is:
a.
Given the political commitment to trade, any attempt to delist tobacco from trade agreements (see point 8, 9) wall almost certainl
and a requirement to do that under the FCTC will ensure the FCTC fails too. The purpose of guideline 4 is to show that the agreemer
will work within the established trade regime - this is to ensure high participation in the FCTC among govememnts that would tend to
give trade high political priority. The experience in the UK was that non-health departments would simply kill it if it was incompatiblwith the trade regime. Doug Bettcher of WHO had a very successful visit to the UK mostly because he persuaded sceptical non-heal
departments that tile agreement could exist WITHIN the trade framework - this helped to free up the UK negotiating position.
b.
The issue of the FCTC superiority over WTO (etc) should not be a problem among parties to the FCTC, but would be problem
between non-parties and parties to FCTC. This is why the aim should be to make the FCTC as far as possible compatible with trade
agreements - to stop NON-PARTIES to the FCTC wrecking it. If too many provisions related to over-ruling trade agreements were
included in the FCTC, then a number of govememnts would be certain not to ratify - and therefore could mount trade-related challen
from outside the agreement.
c.
The message on free-trade from 'Curbing the Epidemic' is very different to the conclusion drawn after citation of this report in th
position statement - while trade liberalisation stimulates tobacco consumption, the WB does advocate trade barriers to reduce deman
rather the introduction of non-discriminatory demand-reducing measures. The WB used the case study of Thailand to show that
demand-side measures could be introduced in a non-discriminatory way to reduce consumption in a way that is compatible with trad'
agreements (see p.63). The situation in Poland is similar - liberalisation of trade has coincided with an enlightened health policy and
consumption has fallen despite the trade barriers coming down. Poland and Thailand are two great success stories in tobacco control
but they have succeeded within a regime of trade liberalisation and non-discrimination.
d.
The alternative approach therefore:
i.
Try to make the FCTC non-discriminatory from a trade point of view.
ii.
accept that whatever you do there will be challneges under trade agreements (even if the FCTC does all you suggest, these woul
come from non-parties to the FCTC).
iii.
make use of exemptions in GATTAVTO (Art XX) that ensure that measures needed to protect human health are not prevented b
the requirement for free trade. Make use of the provisions with the trade agreements that allow trade constraints - if and when thesi
needed.
iv.
if and when (and only if) trade agreements are blocking an essential tobacco control measure and there is no way round it, then
should be in conflict with WTO - seeking exemptions etc. Until it is proven not to be working and there is a specific case study on
which to base the case for measures you are suggesting, then it will be difficult to reach agreement on the proposal. Trying to do th:
anticipation of concrete problems would amke it difficult to convince governments which are generally very committed to free trad:
With the above, I'm not really sure what is the best approach, but I certainly disagree on point 7. If there is North-South money in t
FCTC, I don’t think it should be spent on any part of the tobacco industry - including the black hole of tobacco farming even for
restructuring. This plays straight into the hands of the tobacco industry' - establishing impossible-to-meet and impossible-to-limit
demands for agricultural restructuring could easily place agriculture at the centre of tire FCTC negotiations, whereas in my view it r
needs to be marginalised. This is tire sort of tiring tire World Bank might assist with - under its sector reform initiatives - but it shou
be taking resources in a health treaty.
Regards
Clive Bates
FCTC and trade position
.ASH London
102 Clifton St
London EC2A 4HW
T: +44 20 7739 5902
F.-+44 20 7613 0531
M:+44 77 6879 1237
W: http://www.ash.org.uk
------Original Message------From: -’Mele J Smith” <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globa1ink.oro>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04,2000 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: Key trade elements briefing
> Below follows a trade brief developed by the FCA Trade Working Group
> including Cynthia Callard and Neil Collishaw of Physicians for a
Smoke-Free
> Canada,
> Bung-on Ritthiphakdee and Belinda Hughes of ASH Thailand, Rob Weissman of
> Essential Action, myself and my colleague Susana Hennessey.
>
> The Center for Tobacco Free Kids has offered to reproduce the brief and
> make it available for the October negotiations. There are two ways this
can
>happen:
>
> 1 If there is consensus amoung all Alliance members, the briefing can be
> distributed on behalf of the Alliance.
>
> 2. If there is not concensus amoung all Alliance members, the briefing can
> be distributed with only the names of those .Alliance members who support
>
> If you would like to sign on to the brief as is or have comments/changes
to
> it, please share with the full list by Friday, October 6th. I will send
> out a final version on Monday, October 9th for one last review and sign on
> by members of the Alliance.
>
> best regards,
> mele smith
> The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: Key Trade Elements
>
> Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the world today.
> Four million people die from tobacco related diseases every year. By the
> year 2030, if this trend continues, that number will climb to ten million
> deaths a year - with 70% of those deaths occurring in developing
countries.
>
> Multinational corporations dominate the tobacco business. Treaties that
> govern trade, investment and intellectual property protection have a
> profound effect on the practices of these companies and on the public
> health of the nations in which they ar e active. According to the World
Bank
> Report, Curbing the Epidemic: Governments and the Economics of Tobacco
> Control, increased trade liberalization contributed significantly to
> increases in cigarette consumption, particularly in the low and middle
> income countries. It is clear that tobacco should not be looked at in the
> same way as other traded consumer goods.
> The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control provides an historic
> opportunity to stem die tide of the global tobacco epidemic by ensuring
> tiiat die interests of public health prevail over trade niles. However
2TC and trade position- -
the
> current wording of Guiding Principle #4 in the proposed draft elements
for
> a WHO FCTC does just the opposite. Guiding Principle #4 subjects tobacco
> to the same trade agreements and rules as any other consumer product. As
> tobacco is the onlv consumer product that, when used as intended kills,
it
> should not be subject to the same trade agreements and rules and
> subsequently the language of Guiding Principle # 4 should be removed or
> re-written to ensure that the interests of public health prevail over the
> interests of trade.*
> In addition to removing or changing the language of Guiding Principal #4,
> the following are key elements to include in the FCTC with respect to
trade
> issues:
> 1. That the FCTC and its related protocols include specific provisions
that
> establishes the FCTC as taking precedence over trade, investment, and
> intellectual property rules and agreements.
> 2. That tire FCTC and its related protocols include specific provisions
that
> establishes the FCTC as tire mmimum standard for global tobacco policies
> and allows countries to adopt stronger and/or additional national
policies.
>
> 3. That the FCTC and its related protocols include provisions that
parties
> may enter into bilateral or multilateral agreements, including regional
or
> sub-regional agreements, and that these agreements could include more
> stringent measures than the FCTC and/or protocols.
> 4. That tlie FCTC and its related protocols include a specific provision
> that file FCTC takes precedence over file World Trade Organization
agreements
> and rules.
>
> 5. That the FCTC and its related protocols include a specific provision
> that, where tobacco control policies or rules implicating tobacco control
> policies, are at issue, the WTO request input fi'om file World Health
> Organization on whether any tobacco control law or policy promotes public
> health and that in such cases where the law or policy does promote public
> health, the WTO will not rule against it.
> 6. That the FCTC and its related protocols include a specific provision
> that signatory governments agree not to support the tobacco industry in
> attempts to achieve better access to markets through threats of trade
> sanctions or other retaliatory' trade measures.
>
> 7. That file FCTC and its related protocols include a specific provision
> that government financial supports for farmers to transition out of
tobacco
> not be subject to trade challenges and that the FCTC establishes a
> financial mechanism whereby high-income countries are obligated to
provide
> financial assistance to low and middle-income countries for farmers to
> transition out of tobacco.
>
> 8. That tiie FCTC includes a provision that supports the Global Tobacco
> Control Action passed unanimously by the 10th WCTOH calling for the
> exclusion and removal of tobacco and tobacco products from bilateral and
> multilateral trade and investment agreements and rules.
> 9. That the FCTC includes a specific provision calling on international
> trade bodies including the WTO to recognize that, given its deadly
nature,
FCTC and trade position
> tobacco should not be subject to normal trade rules and agreements and
> therefore should be excluded from bilateral and multilateral trade and
> investment agreements and rules.
>
>
••• ’ Tlie Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada brief to the FCTC public
hearings
> which deals exclusively with the subject of Guiding Principle 4 and how
> fix it can be found at:
>
> < http://www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/Submissions/F3800373.pdfi >
> San Francisco Tobacco Free Project
> 1540 Market Street, #250
> San Francisco, California 94102
>USA
4 of 4
10,
HO public hearing on tobacco control
Subject: WHO public hearing on tobacco control
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 01:29:36 +0530
From: "Bejon Misra" <consumeralert@id.eth.net>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
CC: <cvoice@vsnl.net>
You will be happy to know that 1 have finally managed to receive the travel grant from DFID to attend the public hearing in person. It
will give me an opportunity to meet you all and share the concerns of developing countries like India. The submission made by VOICI
is already in the WHO website.
I am reaching Geneva on October 11, 2000 and will be interested to meet all the NGOs working in the interest of the consumers. Haw
you all planned any meeting on 11 October to decide on the floor arrangement and the presentation and intervention strategy. I will bs
delighted to participate and share my views on our common strategy. Please let me know the time and venue.
With good wishes and warm regards
Bejon MISRA
Advisor, VOICE
New Delhi, INDIA.
Subject: tobacco fflm
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:13:51 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Dear Dr Narayan
It was good to speak to you on the telephone today. I hope our trip to India
will coincide with your being there too and that we can meet.
As we discussed here is the information I need from you:
tel. no. for President of Karnataka State IMA - Ntel. no for Kidwai Institute of Oncology — £)/-B
tel.no for the ITC factory in Bangalore \
tel. no for Ganesh Bidis in Mangalore?
tel. no for Dr Maalka Reddy
„l
'ico<ic'-3 Cc VI
also do you have any reports you could send on bidi-rolling communities?
you do and you send them as attachments, could you send them to
cath.hall@tve.org.uk as my computer can only cope with text email.
if
I need to find 4 or 5 possible bidi-rolling families to film by next week and I would need all the details on them, ie: where they live, the name and
occupation of each family member, background information on the family
history/story of the family, permission from the family to film them, etc.
Preferably they would all live near each other so we don't waste too much
time choosing which family amongst them to film - because ultimately we will
only want to film one family, ie, the best of 4 or 5 possibles.
Do you personally have records of the families you have studied, and have you
met them personally? Or would you be able to send someone to visit them? If
you have written details of families, we could arrange for someone to go and
visit them for us and check them out.
(Do you know anything about the bidi-rolling community in Sholapur?)
African Youth
Subject: BAT Targets African Youth
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:10:30 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid 933000/933430-stm
BBC News - Wednesday, 20 September, 2000
UK tobacco firm targets African youth
Exclusive by' the BBC’s health correspondent, James Westhead
A BBC investigation has found that a British tobacco company is actively
targeting young people and teenagers in Africa.
Cigarettes are being handed out free at youth events specially organised by
tobacco firms during school holidays.
The companies insist they only give the samples to adult smokers, but
there's evidence their own rules are not being followed.
Th^bnvestigation is a further blow to an industry already dogged by
ac^raations of dirty tricks and dubious marketing techniques, particularly
in developing countries.
The company involved, British American Tobacco (BAT), has pledged to
re-train its staff to stop the practice.
The World Health Organisation is backing a radical international tobacco
control treaty, which would include a global advertising ban.
At a beach volleyball tournament in the Gambia, the organisers told the BBC
it was laid on for young people during the school holidays.
Here in one of Africa's poorest countries though there was another more
sinister purpose; promoting cigarettes.
Yellow Benson and Hedges banners were everywhere and so were young women in
B&H t-shirts handing out free cigarettes in the crowd.
Tobacco companies say they don't give samples to under-eighteens. But as the
women helped youngsters light up many appeared under-age and no-one checked
tlAp age.
One of the cigarette reps said the age limit was only fifteen before quickly
correcting herself.
She said: "We only give free cigarettes to big boys."
'Encouraging people'
One eighteen year old told us, "Coming to the beach and handing out free
cigarettes - that is encouraging people to smoke."
The operation is run from London by BAT; who produce the main cigarette
brands in the Gambia, Piccadilly and Benson and Hedges.
The Gambia, a muslim country, used to be one of the few places where
cigarette advertising was banned.
After a military coup the ban was lifted three years ago and now tobacco
sponsorship is everywhere.
’
-——The result has been a doubling of cigarette sales almost overnight. The
World Health organisation believes it has also led to an increase in smoking
among children.
“gets African Youth
A recent survey it conducted across Africa found one in five under fifteen
year olds now smoke.
The WHO representative in the Gambia, Dr James Mwanzia, said:"It is the
height of hypocrisy because, how do you sponsor a health event like a volley
ball match and then give out cigarettes?,".
. .
....
. ._ .
Football tournaments, music concerts, even parties are also sponsored by
cigarette companies as a way of gathering young people together.
Youth football teams in the Gambia can't even afford footballs, so tobacco
companies hand out free cigarettes at soccer games.
Following our investigation BAT say they would re-brief their teams in the
Gambia as a precautionary measure to ensure their staff do not hand out free
cigarettes to children under eighteeen.
They insisted their own rules had not been broken.
itttTtttttttttX**************************
Ross Hammond
965 Mission Street, Suite 218
SaJfcrancisco, CA 94103
us“
tel. 1-415-695-7492
fax. 1-415-369-9211
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inetco.th >
"FCTC Listserve" <fctcall@globallnk.org>
New Member - Dr. Sharad Vaidya, National Organisation for Tobacco Eradication (India)
Mon, 2 Oct 2000 17:41:20 +0700
Dear All
Dr. Sharad Vaidya <sgvaidya@goatelecom.com> from the National
Organisation for Tobacco Eradication (NOTE India) would like to become
a member of the Framework Convention Alliance. Could those who can
vouch for Dr. Vaidya please email me at FCTCalliance@inet.co.th If
two nominators can be found and there are no objections from current
members over the next week (ending Tuesday 10th October) Dr. Vaidya
and NOTE will become members of FCA.
Regards,
Belinda Hughes
Framework Convention Alliance
Email: FCTCalliance@inet.co.th
Website: www.FCTC.org
Tel: (66-2) 278-1828 or (66-2) 278-1829 ext. 19
Fax: (66-2) 278-1830
The Framework Convention Alliance is an alliance of NGOs from around
the world committed to a strong global treaty to control tobacco for
the health of all people.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalllance@inet.co.th>
"FCTC Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org >
New Member - International Council of Women
Tue, 3 Oct 2000 11:47:52 +0700
Dear All
The international Council of Women (President Mrs Pnina Herzog)
<icw2000@netvision.net.il> would like to become a member of the
Framework Convention Alliance. Could those who can vouch for ICW
please email me at FCTCalliance@inet.co.th If two nominators can be
found and there are no objections from current members over the next
wook (ending Wodnoeday 11th October) ICW will bocoma members of FCA.
itegaras,
Belinda Hughes
Framework Convention Alliance
Email: FCTCalliance@inet.co.th
Website: www.FCTC.org
Tel: (66-2) 278-1828 or (66-2) 278-1829 ext. 19
Fax: (66-2) 278-1830
The Framework Convention Alliance is an alliance of NGOs from around
the world committed to a strong global treaty to control tobacco for
the health of all people.
atiuu for FCTC negotiations
Subject: Accrediatation for FCTC negotiations
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:38:24 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCa11iance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCTC Listserve” <fctcall ^global ink. org>
For those of you who requested I organise accreditation for you the 1
selow.
I have faxed statements from UICC and World Vision and will m
sure I have one from CMA and WPHA by the end of the week in case of a
admin confusion.
If you are not listed but require to be accredited
contact me ASAP as I may still be able to organise accreditation.
To those who will be entering the negotiations through an accredited
Organisation please note that most of the groups have a policy that a
statements you make must be cleared by the Organisation before they a
presented.
Please contact me or the contact listed if you need to cl
^iis policy.
World Federation of Public Health Associations
Contact: Allen K. Jones
Email: allen.jones@apha.org
Mrs Dr Ozen Asut (c/o edagli@superonline.com)
Mr Prof Murat Tuncar (c/o edagli@superonline.com)
Miss Hilal Akin (c/o edagli@superonline.com)
UICC
Contact: Ruben J. Israel
Email: israel@globalink.org
Clive Bates, Action on Smoking and Health UK
(clive.bates@dial.pipex.com)
John Kapito, Consumers Association of Malawi (cam@malawi.net)
Mahamane Cisse, SOS Tabagisme Mali (mcisse@afribone.net.ml)
Dr. Martina Poetschke-Langer
(M.Poetschke-LangerODKFZ-Haidelber
Belinda Hughes, Framework Convention Alliance (FCTCalliance@inet
florid Vision
Urntact: Eric Ram
Email: wvi.gva@iprolink.ch
INFACT delegation
Emma Must, ASH UK (emma.must@dial.pipex.com)
Friedrich Wiebel, German Medical Action Group Smoking or Health
iebel@gsf.de)
Bungon Ritthiphakdee, Action on Smoking and Health Foundation
(ashthaiSasiaaccess.net.th)
Commonwealth Medical Association (CMA)
Contact: Marianne Haslegrave
Emai1: matianne@commat.org
Tania Amir, BATA (amir@bdmail.net )
Regards.
Belinda
1
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
sunil kaul <scowl@satyam.net.in>
(Fwd) Meetings In Geneva
Fri, 6 Oct2000 10:14:22
--------- Forwarded message follows----------To:
sochara@vsnl.com
From:
VGKK <vgkk@vsnl.com>
Subject:
Meetings in Geneva
Date sent:
Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:20:44 +0530 (1ST)
>Return-Path: <Frances.Abouzeid@mdlf.org >
>Delivered-To: vgkk@blr.vsnl.net.in
>From: Frances.AbouzeTtf@mdlf.org
>To: khsdp@vsnl.com, vgkk@vsnl.com
>Subject: Meetings in Geneva
>Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:03:51 +0200
Subject Meetings in Geneva
Dear Dr.Sudarshan,
I am following up on your discussions with Chitra
Subramaniam regarding your participation at the public hearings in
Geneva next week. As you know, the Don't Be Duped media advocacy
campaign of TFI is currently operating in 15 countries around the
world and we will have a leadership workshop forthem on Saturday 14
October in Geneva.>Chitra said she would like you to speak on the bidi
issue so we would like to offer you a slot to hold a press conference
on this issue. Press conferences will take place in the Congress
Center parallel to the public hearings. Are you planning to attend
both days of the hearings? If so, I can get back to you with a
proposed time for the press conference and if you can send me a
proposed title for it, that would be helpful. Also, will someone else
join you for the press conference or will you speak alone? We can only
offer 20 minutes including Q&A from the press so do.keep that in
mind.During the Saturday workshop with change agents, we have set
aside 12-13:00 for the topic "Other Tobacco Products: Bidis,
Water Pipes, Chewing Tobacco": and would like you to speak there
as part of a three person panel. Our change agent from Lebanon will
speak as well as Greg Connolly from the Massachusetts department of
Health. This session should inspire change agents to think about how
to deal with other issues beyond the cigarette and look to your
campaigns and advocacy on bidis for new ideas. We expect approximately
25 people in the session which includes our change agents from Brazil,
Venezuela, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Lebanon, Iran, Pakistan, Mali,
Ukraine, Philippines, Thailand, Germany, among others. We will give
you a detailed list of participants upon arrival. Do let me know if
you have any specific ideas on this session and its structure. Also,
please let me know where we can find you in Geneva so that we can
provide you with the final schedule of events.Thanks and best regards,
Frances Abouzeid > >
End of forwarded message
URGENT MESSAGE FOR THELMA NARAYAN
FC.7< -
Subject: URGENT MESSAGE FOR THELMA NARAYAN
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 05:55:35 EST
From: SallyBeare@aol.com
To: sochara@vsnl.com
Dear Dr Narayan
I am sorry to bother you again as I know you are busy but I am anxious to
find out about some bidi-rolling families as soon as possible, as I must
arrange the shooting schedule next week and cannot do so without knowledge
which families we will visit. I greatly appreciate any help you can give
with finding some bidi-rolling families.
I think if we film families near Bangalore that would be best as we will be
visiting Bangalore anyway.
We will also need to interview someone about the bidi-rolling families - I
hope that you might be provisionally willing for us to film you. What do ;
think? If you are away on the dates when we are filming, can you recommend
anyone else who can talk about the subject as you would?
(preferably a
as we already have male interviewees) .
Can I also ask you, are you a medical doctor or a professor?
Many thanks for your help and I look forward to your reply.
Sally
1 of 1
3/3/00 5:14 PV
Dr. Koop's Testimony to the FCTC Hearing
Subject: Dr. Koop's Testimony to the FCTC Hearing
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:40:35 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org >, <tob-mail@globalink.org >
Tobacco Free Initiative
World Health Organization
22 Avenue Appia
1211 Geneva 27 Switzerland
My name is Dr. C. Everett Koop, and I am submitting this comment as Senior
Scholar of the C. Everett Koop Institute at Dartmouth College in the United
States. Although I am not able to attend the hearings, I would like to ask
that my comments be read by a member of the Framework Convention Alliance.
The mission of the C. Everett Koop Institute is to promote the health and
well-being of all people, by working to enhance our understanding of mental
and physical health and the prolongation of a high quality of life. Funding
for the Institute comes from private companies, governmental bodies and
private foundations. We accept no funds from tobacco companies or their
affiliates.
Between 1981 and 1989, I served as the U.S. Surgeon General under Presidents
Reagan and Bush. In that capacity I was dedicated to educating scientists
and the public about the hazards of tobacco use and doing what I could to
decrease the death and disease caused by tobacco use. I also served as
chief delegate to WHA (except when the secretary of HHS was present) from
1981-1989. In 1984 I announced that it should be our goal to create a
smoke-free society. During my tenure as Surgeon General, my office issued
eight reports on the death and diseases caused by smoking and smokeless
tobacco, including reports on cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic
obstructive lung disease, nicotine addiction and the health consequences of
environmental tobacco smoke. Among the many scientific findings established
by those reports were:
Cigarette smoking is the number one preventable cause of disease and
premature death in the United States
•
Cigarette smoking is the major cause of lung cancer and laryngeal cancer,
and a major cause of oral cancer and esophageal cancer in the United States
Cigarette smoking is a major cause of coronary heart disease in the United
States for men and women, and is the most important of the known modifiable
risk factors for CHD
Cigarette smoking is the major cause of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease
morbidity in the United States and 80 to 90 percent of the COLD in the US is
attributable to cigarette smoking
Cigarettes and other forms of tobacco are addictive and nicotine is the
drug in tobacco that causes addiction
Involuntary smoking is a cause of disease, including lung cancer, in
healthy nonsmokers
Snuff, a form of smokeless tobacco, can cause cancer, especially cancer of
the oral cavity, and smokeless tobacco can be addictive
Although these findings were made over a decade ago, each of these findings
is as true today as it was when these reports were issued. The unfortunate
truth is that we as a society, the Unites States as a nation, and the world
as a whole have done shockingly little to reduce the death toll from tobacco
use. We have also done far too little to rein in the activities of the
tobacco industry that have promoted the use of this product and hidden what
it knows about its products.
In my capacity as the Surgeon General of the" United states r
9/7/00
represenLea itie uuiLea States at tne world tiealun organization ana studied
the impact of tobacco use and the behavior of the tobacco companies around
the world. The scientific conclusions in the reports I issued as Surgeon
General know no boundaries and are as true outside the United States as they
are inside the United States. Every year tobacco robs millions of people in
every nation of their health. While the tobacco industry touts the economic
benefits of growing and manufacturing tobacco, the economic toll that
tobacco takes in terms of lost lives, lost productivity, health care costs,
1 of*
9/7/00
Dr. Koop's Testimony to the FCTC Hearing
and environmental destruction far outweighs any economic benefits.
Given the current death toll from tobacco and the predicted death toll from
tobacco worldwide, tobacco control deserves to be a top priority of the
World Health Organization and governments throughout the world. The tobacco
industry would like to divert attention away from the magnitude of the
problems caused by tobacco, but we should not be fooled. They are doing as
they have always have done: putting their profits over the health and safety
of the public.
Let me also dispel another myth that the tobacco industry is currently
trying to promote. In the United States, tobacco companies are claiming
that they have changed and they are claiming that they do not want kids to
smoke. Their rhetoric does not match their actions. While the tobacco
industry has agreed not to advertise in certain locations, it has continued
to promote its products as aggressively as ever before and has not curtailed
the use of the images that make its products appealing to our children. It
also continues to oppose the most reasonable government regulation and
distorts the scientific evidence about the health effects of its products.
Have the tobacco companies changed? The answer is no. We must not be
deceived again.
The Tobacco Free Initiative of the World Health Organization
For decades the World Health Organization did not focus enough attention on
the health problems caused by tobacco. I commend Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland'
s 1998 decision to establish the Tobacco Free Initiative as a Cabinet level
WHO project to elevate tobacco as a WHO priority and to coordinate a global
strategic response to tobacco as a major public health issue.
I also want to commend the WHO and its member states for starting the
process for developing a Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. I want to
raise my voice in favor of the strongest possible Framework Convention. The
May 1999 decision of the World Health Assembly unanimously endorsing the
start of negotiations for the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is
potentially one of the most important public health steps taken by the WHO
in its history. If done right, the Convention could provide a set of
standards and rules that could save tens of millions of lives and could
change the course of the history of the health of the world. I know that
these are grand words - but with current predictions that the number of
tobacco-caused deaths are expected to rise to ten million deaths a year by
2030, there is no more important public health mission.
There are many things that make me optimistic about the progress that is
being made in a number of nations that have taken strong steps in recent
years to reduce tobacco use. More nations than ever have begun to take
strong steps, but for every nation that has acted there are a dozen that are
watching the epidemic rise without taking strong countermeasures. As the
wealthier nations of the world act to reduce tobacco consumption, we are
seeing rising rates of tobacco use in poorer and less wealthy nations. And,
we are seeing the multinational tobacco companies increasingly focus their
marketing muscle and expertise in these poorer nations.
It is vita], that the nations of the world continue their individual actions
within their borders to combat the tobacco industry and the death and
disease caused by tobacco products. It has also never been more clear that
tobacco is an international problem that must be addressed with
international solutions. For example, tobacco marketing can no longer be
confined within one nation's borders. The World Wide Web and satellite
television ensure that advertising crosses borders, even into countries
where there are strict advertising bans in place. The tobacco industry uses
smuggling to circumvent individual nations' rules and tax policies. And the
tobacco industry uses the same arguments and political ploys to undermine
the world is an interconnected market, and we must be able to respond with
solutions that create uniform standards and treat tobacco control as an
international issue.
We must also be aware of the history of tobacco control efforts. All too
often the tobacco industry has succeeded in convincing governments to accept
2 of 4
9/7/00
Dr. Koop's Testimony to the FCTC Hearing
proposals that sound good on their face but do little to actually reduce
tobacco use. The negotiators of the Framework Convention must not fall into
the same trap. The Convention must contain meaningful specific restrictions
on the tobacco industry's marketing and manufacturing practices, require
governments to take strong concrete steps to reduce tobacco use, and must
not just be a "feel good" treaty that speaks in glowing, general language
but has no real force or effect.
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, I believe the United States has an important
role to play. Our multinational tobacco companies have played a leading
role in spreading the plague of tobacco throughout the world. President
Clinton has spoken out forcefully about the need for the establishment of
strong public policy changes to rein in the tobacco industry and to reduce
tobacco use. I urge the United States government to speak with the same
voice in Geneva that it does at home and to support a strong, specific and
effective FCTC - even if it includes policies that the tobacco industry has
successfully blocked in the United States.
The United States has a leadership role to play in promoting health around
the world. The positions of the U.S. delegation during the Framework
Convention negotiations should be based on the protection and promotion of
global public health, and nothing else. If the U.S. government fails to
actively support a strong FCTC or urges the adoption of a weak convention
because of political considerations back home, we will be doing the entire
world a disservice. The United States has an opportunity to use its
knowledge and its experience to assist in the creation of the strongest
possible treaty, one that can help the other nations of the world avoid a
tobacco epidemic of the magnitude faced by the United States. How the U.S.
responds during these negotiations will be the truest test of our
leadership.
Containing a Rogue Industry
We now recognize that tobacco is different from other plagues that have
faced the world because it is promoted by an unscrupulous industry that will
stop at nothing to promote its products and raise its profits. Other
diseases and conditions have various etiologies, but tobacco-related
diseases and conditions are the direct result of the work of a business
enterprise — Big Tobacco. Over the course of the 20th century, Big Tobacco
has secured special privileges that honest businesses do not have. In the
United States, tobacco companies and their foreign affiliates have gained
protection and avoided accountability from every consumer protection law
adopted during the last eight decades. Traditional public health measures
are critical to our success in reducing the harm caused by tobacco, but we
also must recognize that we must also be engaged in the noble task of
bringing the tobacco industry to justice if we are to succeed.
The evidence is irrefutable. The tobacco industry plunders communities and
nations. The industry's own internal documents prove that Big Tobacco knows
that what it has been doing is wrong. On a scale never before known to
commercial enterprises, Big Tobacco has engaged in the most devastating
cover-up of scientific evidence and consciously sought to deceive and
defraud the entire world about the health consequences of its products. It
has preyed on our children and lied to our governments. It has manipulated
nicotine and political systems. And it has created a public relations
apparatus designed to make the world think it was behaving responsibly even
while engaging in the most heinous behavior.
Big Tobacco seeks to control what people think, not only by nicotine
addiction, but through an unremitting assault on the public's senses by
using false and misleading images and statements. It knows that public
behavior follows public perceptions. It denies that tobacco is addictive and then claims that consumers have a choice. It claims an allegiance to
free speech so that it can promote its product in any way it pleases, but
its economic and nolitical muscle to silence its critics. And it pays
millions of dollars to advertising annexes uo'seiViCs xAage as a gooa
cgrporate citizen, even though its products kill millions of people every
year.
9/7/OC
3 of 4
Dr, Koop's Testimony to the FCTC Hearing
We must resolve never again to let Big Tobacco's false and misleading
statements go unanswered. Public policy makers need to know the truth about
tobacco products and the tobacco industry. Every child and adult needs to
know the truth. People of every race, of every culture, and indeed every
person in every walk of life needs to know the truth about an industry that
harms, knows that it harms, and has every intention to continue to harm.
And a strong Framework Convention is a critical weapon that is needed to
counteract the tobacco industry's wrongdoing.
Conclusion
The world needs a strong Framework Convention, so that no nation is forced
to fight the tobacco industry or the plague of tobacco use alone or unarmed.
The tobacco industry must be prevented from shifting its practices from
country to country as its advertising and promotional tactics are
increasingly scrutinized and regulated. The FCTC must unite the countries
of the world in order to contain the tobacco industry's wrongful practices.
The FCTC should seek to bring the tobacco industry under proper governmental
and international controls with concerted action on advertising, smuggling,
product regulation, treatment programs, environmental tobacco smoke and many
other areas. The Convention should guarantee that every person, no matter
where he or she lives, is effectively provided with information about the
health hazards of tobacco use and empower them to resist the tobacco
industry's messages.
The FCTC and its related protocols can fulfill these ambitious goals. Now
that WHO has seized the initiative at the global level we have the ability
to change the behavior of multinational tobacco corporations at every level.
We have the opportunity to stop the spread of disease and death transported
by tobacco companies across borders into new populations of non-users. I
strongly support the process that WHO has begun and encourage the countries
of the world to come together and enact a meaningful and effective FCTC.
.."'amaticnal Week of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationals
/ // ■ /
&:• eject: UPDATE: .^eraatioinial Week of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationais
Date; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:55:35 -0400
?rom; Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
To: hq@glcbalink.ORG, FCTCALL@globalink.ORG
INFACT, Essential Action and other members of the Network for Accountability of Tobacco
Transnationals (NATT), are organizing an International Week of Resistance to Tobacco
Transnationals, October 9th-13th. This coincides with public hearings sponsored by the World Health
Organization in Geneva on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The events (see
attached flyer) include demonstrations at Philip Morris or Kraft facilities, screenings of INFACT's new
de cumentary Making a Killing: Philip Morris, Kraft and Global Tobacco Addiction, and inviting
media and government officials including delegates to the FCTC negotiations. The purpose is to
demonstrate support for an effective FCTC, and provide a forum to discuss our positions with national
FCTC delegations. Events are coming up soon, so please let INFACT know about your own
participation as soon as possible.
So far the response has been terrific! We have International Week of Resistance to Tobacco
Transnationals events planned in the following countries:
k' oania, Algeria, Antigua, Barbuda WI, Canada, Congo (DRC), Croatia, Czech Republic, Ghana,
Honduras, Hungary, India, Iran, Japan,
Latvia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, New Zealand, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan,
Philippines, Romania, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda,
United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), and Zambia.
Fo • organizing kits and videos*, please contact Sangita Nayak (sangita.infact@iuno,com) or myself.
• .;
v:cscr have r. rsac.y been shipped to ths first rour.d o.’sig"
For a list of yonr country's
FCTC delegates, please see attached file (delegate list.pdf).
■ Suren Moodliar
International Organizer, INFACT
~g.ilto:suren. infact@iitEo.com http://www. infact, org
teiO 1-617-695-2525; fax 01-617-695-2626
M. Plympton Street, 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02118, USA
*We will ship the kits/videos by express mail. Activists in the United States, and others who are able,
are asked to provide a US$100 donation for their copies of the video so that to help cover the costs of
express shipping to the Global South.
i
Name: iwr.pdf
|
; Jiwr.pdfj
Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)i
.iEncodamg: base64
i
Name: delegate list.pdf
idelegate list, pdf!
Type: Acrobat (application/pdf):
i Extcdhg: base64
"Iyl
9/29/00 3 29 PM
Subject:
WHO Accredtation
Date:
Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:45:46 -K)700
From
'FCTC Alliance"<FCICalliance@inet.co.th>
To:
’FCTC Listserve”<fctcall(?^l obalink.org>
Dear All
Earlier Jenny asked everyone to let her know who needed to link up with
groups who are accredted with WHO. In case there are names missing canyon
please check over this list andlet me knowifyour name is missing andyou
woul d like me to find a group for you to work al ongside. If there are
other
NGOs you know of who will be sendng a representative to Geneva who may
need
this please let me know about them as well.
JohnKapito, Consumers Association of Malawi (cam@nalawi.net)
Mahamane Cisse, SOS Thbagisme Mali (mcisse@afiibone.net.ml )
Margaretha Haglund, INWAT (margaretliaha^l und@fhi.se)
Susana Hennessey Toure, San Francisco Tobacco-Free Project
(susanht@jgc.apc.org)
Riedich Webel, German Medcal Action Group Smoking or Health
(wiebel@gsf.de)
Bungon Kitthiphakctee, Action on Smoking and Health Foundation
(ashthai @asi aaccess.net.th)
Belinda
Meeting of US delegation to the FCTC and the tobacco industry
Subject: Meeting of US delegation to the FCTC and the tobacco industry
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:10:09 -0700
From: Mele J Smith <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: fctcall@globalink.org
Can anyone confirm a meeting in September between the US delegation to the
FCTC and the Tobacco 'Industry? I have heard that such a meeting is being
organized by the White House’s Domestic Policy Council that it is scheduled
for September 17tlil However, September 17th is a Sunday and I am not sure
if the date is correct.
It is disturbing to note that the full delegation will meet with the
tobacco industry yet only hold public hearings - that do not provide a
forum for dialogue - as a way to involve NGOs. NGOs need to have the same
access to the delegation as the tobacco industry.
Also, I understand that representatives from the US delegation met with the
republican .senators of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee a couple~of
weeks ago. The purpose of the meeting was to brief the corranitteeonthe
FCTC and the beginning of negotiations for the FCTC. The briefing included
a discussion on holding public hearings in tobacco growing regions and the
need for the FCTC to be responsive to tobacco interests. Can anyone give
any more information on that briefing?
San Francisco Tobacco Free Project
1540 Market Street, #250
San Francisco, California 94102
USA
9/12/00
Re.For: Chitra Subramaniam
Subject: Re:For: Chitra Subramaniam
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:39:26 +0200
From: subramaniamc@who.ch
To: <sochara@vsnl.com >
thanks thelma and hope you had a good easter too - we had a qiuet time with the
family and stayed in pyjamas for most of the time
would be good to have the report as soon as you can ready it - would may be a
possibility? please let me know i am planning to be in india later this year and we can talk about doing
something in bangalore - warm regards chitra
___________________ Reply Separator
Subject:
For: Chitra Subramaniam
Author: Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
Date:
20-Apr-2000 15:30
UPDATE: International Week of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationals
Subject: Re: UPDATE: International Week of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationals
Dale: Tint, 28 Sep 2000 18:32:39 -0400
From: "Cynthia Callard" <ccallard@smoke-free.ca>
To: <hq@globalink.ORG>, <FCTCALL@globalink.ORG>
Q
*
Dear all:
I just finished pre-viewing "Making a Killing". It is one FANTASTIC film, with great footage, a strong script and high impact.
I stroiiO^ e
wide an audience as possible.
Thank you INFACT, for providing such a valuable resource at such an important time.
Q
Cynthia Callard
Executive Director
Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
™
Phone: 613 233 4878
*
a
Fax: 613 233 7797
----- Original Message ?—
From Suren Moodli ar
To:hq@qlobalink.OR;GFCTCALL@qlobalink.ORG
SentThursday, September 28, 2000 10:55 AM
SubjectUPDATE: International Week of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationals
Dear Friends,
INFACT, Essential Action and other members of the Network for Accountability of Tobacco Transnationals (NATT), are org
Week ofResistance to Tobacco Transnationals, October 9th-13th. This coincides with public healings sponsored by the iBbr
in Geneva on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The events (see attached flyer) include demonstration;
Kraft facilities, screenings of INFACTs new documentary Making a Killing: Philip Morris, Kraft and Global Tobacco Ma
media and government officials including delegates to the FCTC negotiations. The purpose is to demonstrate support for imef
provide a forum to discuss our positions with national FCTC delegations. Events are coming up soon, so please let INFACT 1
participation as soon as possible.
*
So far the response has been terrific! We have International Week ofResistance to Tobacco Transnationals events planned in
•
Albania, Algeria, Antigua, Barbuda WI, Canada, Congo (DRC), Croatia, Czech Republic, Ghana, Honduras, Hungary, India,
Latvia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, New Zealand, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Romania, Se
Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yugoslavia (Serbia and M Wei
For organizing kits and videos*, please contact SangitaNayak (sangita.infact@iuno.com) or myself Kits and videos have^lr
first round of sign-ups. For a list of your country's FCTC delegates, please see attached file (delegate lisLpdf).
- Suren Moodliar
International Organizer, 1NFACT
mai Ito: suren. infact@juno.com http ://www,infact, org
tel:01-617-695-2525; fax 01-617-695-2626
46 Plympton Street, 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02118, USA
♦We will ship the kits/videos by express mail. Activists in the United States, and others who are able, are asked to provide a
their copies of the video so that to help cover the costs of express shipping to the Global South.
Sco Free Kids' Statement on Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
Subject: RE: Tobacco Free Kids' Statement on Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 18:18:40 +0200
From: "Sibylle Fleitmann" <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: <margross@igc.org>, <tob-mail@globalink.org>, <fctcall@globalink.org>
I cannot believe it.... and the US representatives at the FCTC negotiations
say they are interested to "ake a leading role in tobacco control world
wide"??? They must be kidding 11
Sibylle Fleitmann
European Network for Smoking Prevention
----- Message d'origine----De: Ross Hammond mfcilto :margross@igc .ojrg
Date: mercredi 13 septembre 2000 22:57
A: tob-mail0globalink.org; fctcall@globalink.org
Objet: Tobacco Free Kids’ Statement on Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco
Companies
For Immediate Release
September 13, 2000
Contact: Joel Spivak/Vince Hi.'
202-;
Statement by William V. Corr
Executive Vice President, CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS
Re: U.S. House Approval of Foreign Sales Corporation Bill
Providing $100 Million in Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
September 13, 2000
The CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS strongly opposes the tax breaks for the
export of manufactured tobacco products contained in. the Foreign ~ Sales
Corporation Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act (H.R. 4986) as
approved today by the U.S. House of Representatives.
It is especially
disappointing that the House Leadership brought up this legislation under
expedited procedures that blocked any amendments, such as that proposed by
Congressman Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) to exclude manufactured tobacco
products.
Once again, Big Tobacco is being rewarded for millions of dollars
in campaign contributions at the expense of American taxpayers and public
health around the globe.. We urge the Senate to put taxpayers and the public
health first and vote to deny Big Tobacco this special benefit.
In its current form, this legislation would provide a $100 million plus
annual tax benefit for U.S. tobacco companies.
The tobacco industry should
not receive any assistance from the U.S. government in their quest to addict
new generations of smokers overseas.
And they should certainly not be
rewarded with special tax benefits given their long history of deception and
misconduct concerning their deadly products.
The dangers of nicotine addiction to American children are well known: 3,000
kids become regular smokers each day in the U.S, and one third will die
prematurely of smoking-caused disease. Smoking is the leading preventable
cause of death in the United States. But these dangers do not stop at our
shores. Globally, the World Bank estimates that between 80,000 and 100,000
kids become addicted to cigarettes every day. Big Tobacco, with the
unwitting support of American taxpayers, is addicting countless new
generations of smokers overseas. Tobacco-related illnesses kill four million
people a year around the world. If current trends continue, by 2030, tobacco
will kill ten million people every year, 70 percent of them in developing
countries.
The United States government should not be a partner In the
export of death and disease by U.S. tobacco companies.
9/15/00
RE: Tobacco Free Kids' Statement on Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
— 30—
A****************************************
Ross Hammond
965 Mission Street, Suite 218
San Francisco, CA 94103
USA
tel. 1-415-695-7492
fax. 1-415-369-9211
2 of 2
0/1 WO 0'$« i M
10/2<
First Newsletter from FCTC Alliance
Subject: First Newsletter from FCTC Alliance
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:46:21 -0400
From: AJForeit <JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
To: "'fctcall@globaliQk.org'" <fctcall@globalink.org >
all:
the first Alliance Bulletin from the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body is
now posted at:
http://www.fete.org/OOlOnewslet.shtml
more issues will be posted as the negotiations progress.
LO
lofl
10/20.
2 of 2
10/2.
Membership and Recruitment Issues
Subject: Membership and Recruitment Issues
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 02:42:24 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCTC Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear All
Re: Membership of FCA
We need to decide in a few procedural issues for new members and I would
appreciate comments as to how we ought to solve the following issues.
1. Presently we have requested new members require two nominations. Should
these nominations come from different organisations or should two people
within one organisation be able to vouch for a new member?
2. If organisations are unknown to current members or are only able to
obtain one nomination, what actions should be taken?
Re: Recruitment
I would like to encourage ALL members and not just regional contact points
to make efforts to recruit new members, although taking into account that be
need to ensure that the groups joining the alliance are interested in
seriously working on the FCTC.
There are a number of other procedural and structural issues which we need
to decide on in the near future and I look forward to hearing your comments.
Regards,
Belinda
Framework Convention Alliance
ASH Thailand
www.fctc.org
♦
•
4
lofl
10/2
FCTC Negotiations - Update
Subject: FCTC Negotiations - Update
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 05:33:19 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCTC Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear All
To keep you up to date with the FCTC negotiations here in Geneva I have
summarised the main decisions / discussions which have been taken /
conducted over the past three days. It is only brief and more detailed
summaries will follow.
(1) Procedural decisions taken
- Brazilian delegate made chair of process;
- A Bureau was established with of one representative from each WHO region,
namely USA (from the Americas), Turkey (from EURO), Australia (from WPRO),
India (from SEARO), Iran (from EMRO) and South Africa (from AFRO). The
bureau's exact role has not been fully defined however the chair and the
secretariat have stated that the bureau will be "procedural" in nature and
have no decision-making powers;
- Negotiations will use the text produced by the working groups (ref.:
A/FCTC/INB1/2) as the basis for discussions.
(2) Procedural issues under discussion
- The exact nature of the involvement of NGOs in the FCTC process is under
discussion. During day 2 of negotiations some delegations made comments in
support of NGOs including Canada, Thailand, New Zealand, South Africa and
Bangladesh. Canada and Thailand have been conducting discussions on how to
incorporate NGOs into the process.
(3) Negotiations - General comments
- Delegations clearly stated their support for the FCTC in principle;
- While most delegations stated that they supported a "strong" convention
there were different interpretations of what this entailed;
- Many delegations' stated their support for a "broadly supported" FCTC and
called for "flexibility";
- Several delegations voiced concerns for effects on tobacco farmers;
- Smuggling was commented on by many delegations as an area which should be
dealt with under the FCTC.
•
(4) Negotiations - General comments, on objectives, guiding principles and
general obligations
- Many delegations suggested combinations of the four options in the working
group text and no consensus was reached as to which option was most
appropriate;
- Kenya stated their strong support for tax increases stating that they
agreed that tax hikes led to decreases in smoking and increases in
government revenue however this position was contrary to the overall feeling
that the FCTC should not include specific requirements regarding taxation;
- New Zealand suggested broadening the passive smoking clause to encompass
all workplaces and public places, a position supported by the chair;
(5) Framework Convention Alliance Activities during the Negotiations
The FCA has organised a number of programmes to support and publicise the
FCTC process including the following-:
(i) Press Club Debate
An excellent debate was held between tobacco industry representatives and
their supporters and tobacco control activists Yussuf Salooje and Clive
Bates on tobacco advertising. Many members of the press attended as well as
NGO representatives who testified at the hearings. Amongst the arguments
raised by Salooje and Clive were that:
- public heath advocates want to ban ads for the same reason the tobacco
industry advertises i.e. advertising leads to increased sales (and therefore
increased deaths);
■
- tobacco industry documents revealed industry objectives and tactics and
show the deceit of public statements;
FCTC Negotiations - Update
- advertising "glorifies a deadly product" and creates and reinforces 'peer
pressure'.
(ii) Briefings for Delegates
FCA conducted a briefing on smuggling today (Wednesday) and will run one on
advertising tomorrow and product regulation on Friday. Today's briefing was
well attended by delegates and provided an interesting addition to the
programme.
(iii) Women's Caucus
Headed by Soon Young, the FCA's 'Women's Caucus' has been holding daily
meetings between women from NGOs and delegations on a variety of topics.
They will produce a statement to be signed by their members.
Alliance
(iv)
Bulletin
FCA has been producing a daily bulletin which you can view at
http://www.fete.org/OOlOnewslet.shtml in order to keep delegates, the press
and the NGOs informed about the process.
(6) Other meetings
- A press conference was held with US Public Health groups, the American
Lung Association, American Medical Association, American Public Health
Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids..
- The Commonwealth Medical Association and the Commonwealth Secretariat held
meetings with Commonwealth NGOs and Commonwealth delegations. Delegations
from South Africa, Canada, UK, Australia and Zimbabwe voiced their support
for a strong FCTC.
- Belinda
Statement of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Edmund Mierzwinski, <ed@pirg.org> Consumer Program Director
COMMENTS FOR THE OCTOBER HEARING ON THE
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL (FCTC)
Thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the U.S. Public Interest
Research Group<http://www.uspirg.org>. We are the national lobbying office for
the state PIRGs, which are non-profit, non-partisan consumer and environmental
advocacy groups active around the United States. U.S. PIRG is funded by its
members and independent foundation grants. Of course, U.S. PIRG receives no
funding or support from the tobacco industry.
The state PIRGs and U.S. have been active on tobacco control issues for many
years, on issues including supporting smokefree indoor air ordinances and
tobacco tax increases to reduce the incidence of teen smoking. Most recently,
PIRGs were members of the "Save Lives, Not Tobacco Coalition” organized by the
American Lung Association, which successfully opposed the sweetheart tobacco
settlement legislation that would have immunized the U.S. tobacco industry
from
most future■lawsuit liability.
We would like to do the following. First, we would like to associate our views
with those of the distinguished commenters from groups including the American
Lung Association, and with those of the other tobacco control advocates who
have commented, for example, Professor Glantz of the University of California
at San Francisco School of Medicine.
I would like to briefly outline what we feel are some of the critical issues
for the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control:
The protection and promotion of public health should provide the sole basis
for
any and all provisions in the FCTC. The world needs a strong, enforceable
convention that holds tobacco companies accountable and supports
governments in
their effort to protect and promote public health. The FCTC should, at a
minimum, provide support and encouragement for national policies and
multilateral measures that would stem the disastrous global public health
epidemic occurring as a result of tobacco use.
The problems caused by tobacco use are not confined to developed countries.
Increasingly, the burden of tobacco-related death and
disease is being borne by developing countries. Although the U.S has enacted
relatively strong prohibitions on tobacco marketing domestically, there is a
great need for similar protection internationally, as our multinational
tobacco
companies aggressively target youth and children in Asia and Africa, even if
they do so less overtly here in the U.S. So, recognizing the important role of
advertising in the spread of tobacco use, the FCTC should provide for
stringent
restrictions on all direct or indirect advertising.
Nothing in the Framework Convention or related protocols should reduce, relax
or m any other way diminish existing tobacco control
Other countries, and indeed local jurisdictions, should be encouraged to go
further, as they do in the U.S.
The FCTC should provide strong international measures to control problems that
cannot be handled on a national or local level, such as smuggling and
advertising that cannot be stopped at borders, e.g. internet and satellite
television advertising.
The FCTC should make certain that provisions are included to ensure strong
national tobacco control measures in areas that are
traditionally domestic, such as taxation, prevention and treatment, passive
smoking, youth access, health education and some areas of advertising.
Provisions of the Framework Convention and its related protocols should be
made
legally binding on the tobacco companies and
therefore be implemented by legislation or regulation within member
countries.
Tobacco companies, their subsidiaries, agents or consultants do not have
public
health concerns as their key priority, putting them
directly in conflict with the primary aim of the Framework Convention.
Therefore, they should not serve in any official capacity in the process of
negotiating or implementing the Convention. The tobacco industry's influence
over U.S. trade policy over the years has been disappointingly strong and the
FCTC should be forewarned of the industry's sophisticated influence-peddling
machine. We are pleased that, on this matter, the Centers for Disease Control
(CDC), rather than the U.S. Office of Trade Representative (USTR), is
playing a
lead role for the U.S. You should do all that you can to ensure that the
tobacco industry's attempts to influence your actions are done solely as
outside parties with a vested contrary interest.
NGOs should be fully integrated into the Framework Convention process. Rules
•for NGO participation should rely on the
precedents set at other recent UN Conferences. WHO should also work with
governments and private organizations to seek funds for ensuring strong
representation from developing country NGOs.
We are pleased that you are have requested our comments. We look forward to
receiving notice of regular, periodic hearings and meetings on the Framework
Convention.
We encourage you to develop and implement continued outreach with a broad
range
of NGOs, not merely public health groups. U.S. PIRG, for example, is a
consumer
group active on tobacco control. Other consumer groups may also be interested.
Edmund Mierzwinski
Consumer Program Director
- -r.ch-stry Pushes to Influence FCTC Negotiations
. S^ed: Tctacc® ladratiry Pushes 4© IhhOueihic® FCTC Nsgottratioms
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:23:11 -0700
From:: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>, <tob-mail@globalink.org>
CCs "Star. Shatenstein" <shatensteins@sympatico.ca>, "Gene Bono" <geneb@tobacco.org>,
"TAC" <tac@smokescreen.org>, "Rob Weissman" <rob@essential.org>
Tobacco Lights Into WHO
Industry Pushes to Influence October Treaty Debate Over Global Curbs on
Cigarettes
By Sam Loewenberg
Legal Times
Monday, September 11, 2000
http://www5.law.com/dc-shl/display■cfm?id=3787
The world’s largest cigarette makers have embarked on a global lobbying
campaign to undermine a proposed international treaty that could place tight
restrictions on cigarette advertising and smuggling.
Negotiations over the treaty, which is being organized by the World Health
Organization, are set to begin next month in Geneva and are expected to take
at least two years. Like most treaties, it is crafted through a consensus
process, and individual countries ultimately decide whether they want to
sign or not.
Cigarette makers are largely excluded from the talks, so the three major
multinational tobacco companies - the Philip Morris Cos., British American
Tobacco P.L.C. (BAT), and Japan Tobacco - have taken their case against the
treaty directly to most of the 192 countries involved in drafting the
document.
"We are trying to make sure that the governments locally understand the full
scope of what the WHO is trying to sell to them to make sure that they
understand that this has the potential of far-reaching consequences," says
Axel Gietz of Japan Tobacco, which last year purchased all of the R.J.
Reynolds Tobacco Co.'s international operations.
."We are not asking WHO for voting status," says Philip Morris Vice President
for Corporate Affairs Don Harris. "We are asking for participation in the
thing and to [have them] consider our views."
>From country to country, the cigarette companies are making the case that
the treaty should be considered an economic, not just a public health,
issue. The companies are coordinating their activities in nations where more
than one company is present.
BAT and Japan Tobacco say they are explicitly lobbying to kill the treaty.
Philip Morris says it is not necessarily against an international tobacco
pact, but prefers regulation on a country-by-country basis.
The companies tailor their pitch in approaching individual governments. In
China, for example, the companies warn of massive tax losses if the treaty
succeeds in cutting down the rate of smoking. In Malawi, where tobacco is
the country’s main agricultural export, they make dire predictions about the
collapse of the local agricultural economy if the pact is adopted. In
Lebanon, they predict hundreds of millions-in advertising losses.
Harris of Philip Morris says that all of his lobbying on the treaty is being
done in the most open way possible. "We ate not going to dispute the process
” ' ‘ nd istry Pushes to Influence FCTC Negotiations
But public health officials expressed skepticism in the wake of an August
report from the WHO that brought to light how multinational tobacco
.companies had for decades secretly infiltrated the institution through the
use of front groups to systematically undermine anti-smoking efforts.
"For them to say that they have been excluded from this debate is
disingenuous in the extreme when you look at the activities they have
undertaken to infiltrate and suborn the processes of WHO,” says Judy
Wilkenfeld of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Wilkenfeld is the former
director of the tobacco advertising section of the Federal Trade Commission.
Doug Bettcher, treaty coordinator for the WHO, says the industry has been
presenting misleading information to countries about the organization for
years. He declines further comment, other than to say he is "quite confident
that the negotiations will continue."
The industry has already scored a major victory in China that could well
affect the outcome of the Geneva talks. While each country gets only one
vote in the negotiations, larger countries have significantly more
bargaining power. China, with one-third of the world’s smokers, will be
among the most powerful players.
The way in which the tobacco companies were able to influence the Chinese
government illustrates the often indirect nature of the lobbying effort in
each country.
BAT officials convinced the Chinese-owned tobacco company, with which it has
a joint venture, that the WHO treaty could present a severe economic threat,
given that cigarette taxes account for 10 percent of all tax revenue. In
order to protect its interests, BAT pressed state tobacco company
representatives to get themselves included m the Chinese delegation, which
originally was to include only health officials. BAT even brought in three
experts from London to lecture the Chinese on the possible economic effects
of the treaty.
"BAT persuaded the monopoly to look at it from a national economic
perspective," said BAT public affairs director Brenda Chow last May, as she
took a break from the briefing her company was giving to Chinese tobacco
officials in Beijing. "We are the bridge."
The Chinese tobacco company took BAT's advice, lobbied government officials
in charge of selecting delegates, and were added to the negotiating team.
Judith Mackay, a Hong Kong-based tobacco control expert who advises the WHO
and the Chinese government, fears that the addition of the state tobacco
company to the delegation could seriously skew the negotiation process
because the state tobacco industry's economic power gives it far more sway
than the health ministry has with top Chinese decision-makers.
Proxies, Pressure, Threats
In many cases, it appears that the tobacco companies have attempted to exert
their influence through proxies.
In Malawi, BAT was successful in getting tobacco growers appointed to the
country's WHO delegation, says John Kapito, himself a delegate and the head
of a nongovernmental public health group.
Nonetheless, Kapito thinks that the Malawian government will favor a strong
treaty, as youth smoking is on the rise. BAT currently advertises its
brands - called Life and Embassy - near schools, hospitals, and churches,
says Kapito.
In Lebanon, Philip Morris operated behind the scenes to fight the health
shesto nflucnce FCTC Negotiations
ministry's anti-smoking program, says Yousef Bassim, who runs a tobacco
control program in that country. "They are trying to put pressure on our
activities. But not directly," he says.
Bassim says that he was present when the head of a local advertising agency
that does work for Philip Morris threatened a television interviewer that he
would lose his job if he asked the health minister about tobacco issues.
Bassim also cites recent advertising industry warnings that banning tobacco
advertising could cost the country $500 million in lost revenue.
In Indonesia, BAT and Philip Morris approached a local nongovernmental
organization, the National Committee on Smoking Control, to ask for the
group's support in getting tobacco representatives on the WHO delegation.
The companies made their request in the midst of an offer to aid with youth
smoking programs, says Mia Hanafiah, an official with the anti-smoking
group. Her group turned the companies down, she says. As of today, the
tobacco companies are not on the delegation.
In Japan, little lobbying is necessary, as Japan Tobacco is owned by the
Ministry of Finance. Japan Tobacco purchased the international operations of
R.J. Reynolds last year and is now actively lobbying in all of the countries
where it has significant operations, says spokesman Axel Gietz. He says the
company has already successfully made its case against the WHO treaty in
Russia, Romania, and Turkey, although he declined to elaborate.
Tn Germany, it's still unclear what position the government will take on the
WHO treaty. But the tobacco industry's "influence is immense," says Dr.
Martina Poetschke-Langer, the head of the Cancer Prevention Unit of the
National Cancer Research Center. She cites internal company documents that
surfaced in the course of U.S. litigation that reveal that the industry has
contacts at the highest levels of the German government.
"They are lobbying day and night the members of our parliament," says
Poetschke-Langer.
The industry's work appears to have paid off in a related matter. The German
government is fighting in court the 1998 ban on cigarette advertising passed
by the European Parliament.
For its part, the negotiating team from the United States will include
representatives from an interagency task force that include the departments
of Agriculture, Treasury, and Commerce. The White House has consulted, and
will continue to consult with, tobacco companies, growers, and public health
groups, according to an administration spokeswoman who spoke on condition of
anonymity.
While WHO officials had expected the cigarette makers to take some action in
response to the treaty, says Mackay, the Hong Kong-based tobacco expert, it
was not clear how much the companies would impact the process.
"It worries me,” she says, "that they may be more successful than some
people, had bargained for."
Sam Loewenberg is a reporter at Legal Times. His e-mail address is
sloewenberg@legaltimes.com.
^ww,,********************************************************
Ross Hammond
965 Mission Street, Suite 218
San Francisco, CA 94103
USA
1-415-695-7492
tobacco: mining millions worldwide
Subject: dams or tobacco: ruining millions worldwide
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:23:59 +0530
From: Bobby Ramakant <ramakant@globalink.org>
Organization: INGCAT Task Force (South East Asia)
To: "Babu, Mr. Sharath" <BABUS@whosea.org>
CC: "'rcctvm@md2.vsnl.net.in'" <rcctvm@md2.vsnl.net.in>,
"'ili@nde.vsnl.net.in'" <ili@nde.vsnl.net.in >,
'"bharat@chitralekha.com"' <bharat@chitralekha.com>,
"'dipesh_satpathy@hotmail.com'" <dipesh_satpathy@hotmail.com>,
'"pcgupta@tifr.res.in"' <pcgupta@tifr.res.in>,
"'dinesh.agarwal@unfpa.org.in'" <dinesh.agarwal@unfpa.org.in>,
"’indiracal@hotmail.com"' <indiracal@hotmail.com>,
"'darlena.david@cmai.org'" <darlena.david@cmai.org>s
"'zebaysh@hotmail.com'" <zebaysh@hotmail.com >,
"'jenatrk@hotmail.com'" <jenatrk@hotmail.com>,
'"kabra@iipad.ren.nic.iri" <kabra@iipad.ren.nic.in>,
"'vrekhi@satyam.net.in'" <vrekhi@satyam.net.in>,
'"srkhanna@giasdl01 .vsnl.net.in"’ <srkhanna@giasdl01 .vsnl.net.in>,
"'ambikasrivastava@mccann.com'" <ambikasnvastava@mccann.com>,
'"ramakant@lwl .vsnl.net.in'" <ramakant@lwl.vsnl.net.in>,
'"ksri@medinst.emet.iri” <ksri@medinst.emet.in>,
'"ticu@del3 .vsnl.net.in'" <ticu@del3 .vsnl.net.in>,
'"warlaw@del3 .vsnl.net.in'" <warlaw@del3.vsnl.net.in>,
"'mirabaghi@hotmail.com'" <mirabaghi@hotmail.com>,
"'sochara@vsnl.com'" <sochara@vsnl.com>, "j.vaidya@ucl.ac.uk"' <j.vaidya@ucl.ac.uk>,
"'wbb@pradeshta.net'" <wbb@pradeshta.net>, '"iednaser@bangla.net"' <iednaser@bangla.nc
"'fhpsl@eureka.lk'" <fhpsl@eureka.lk>, '"kinnershah@icenet.net"' <kinnershah@icenet.net>,
'"drtarang@satyam.net.in"' <drtarang@satyam.net.in>,
'"epicnci@cal3.vsnl.net.iri" <epicnci@cal3.vsnl.net.in>
LARGE DAMS OR TOBACCO :
RUINING MILLIONS WORLDWIDE
by
Bobby Ramakant
How paradoxical it is to note that those who consider themselves as harbingers
of social justice, themselves throttle the basic rights of masses. And criminal
apathy which snows all over us, swallows all cries of those wronged.
In this age-old series of basic human rights being trampled mercilessly, one
more episode is about to be added which relates to lakhs of tribals, dalits,
landless farmers and land-holding farmers of Narmada valley who are about to be
ruined by those who are 'dedicated to work for human welfare' (paradoxical? No
- Ridiculous!).
Same has happened with tobacco epidemic too. No natural calamity, wars, or
manmade disasters have caused so much mortality and morbidity as tobacco causes
EVERY YEAR! And we remain silent. Rather a majority of our populace go on
smoking and chewing tobacco, posing a question over those who brandish to be
the vanguards of public health!
The Supreme Court decision of October 17th has crushed hopes of millions of
people of the Narmada valley whose survival is threatened by the big dams
planned on the river. These millions of people were living on the strand of
HOPE emerging from their association with NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN (NBA) . Supreme
Court judgement has AXED this hope. A prophetic once said “You should never
deprive someone of HOPE. May be it is all what he has.". And this is the most
apt verse, containing the significance of the HOPE which NBA sustained within
millions.
The court's decision has also undermined numerous people's movements all
around the world that are fighting for the basic rights to livelihood of
and poor communities who are threatened by the forces of modern
development paradigm. Very much like trie..tobacco.control lobby whidri..
dams or tobacco: ruining millions worldwide
is FIGHTING the governments that TOBACCO IS NOT A SOURCE OF REVENUE, PROFITS,
FOREIGN EXCHANGE," EMPLOYMENT, and SOCIAL SECURITY. Tobacco is the single
largest preventable cause of death, and despite of all studies, researches,
supporting documents and true testimonies, NO GOVERNMENT the world over, has
been able to TRULY ERADICATE tobacco. Tobacco is estimated to kill over 1
billion people by the turn of this century. 1 billion is the entire population
of India. Imagine a country as big as India, or the second most populated
country in the world being wiped away by a smoky cloud of death for ever. And
we remain mute spectators all throughout. Silent, poise, and calm. When are we
going to break the silence?
Our governments maintain and periodically upgrade the best possible military
arsenals and artillery to combat enemies. Nuclear bombs depriving millions of
our masses from basic amenities, is supposed to be another "LANDMARK" in this
effort to "SAVE" human lives. How many lives has any enemy country ever taken
in history of mankind? Has any war taken as many lives as tobacco takes every
year?
Another point-to-be-noted is that NO WAR has ever earned as much social
acceptability as these "DEVELOPMENT TANKS" crown themselves with. Tobacco is
for the economic development of the country - is a MYTH which is so acceptable,
honorable and socially convincing enough to make us immune to the fact that 4
million people are reportedly losing their lives because of tobacco. Each of
these 4 million deaths every year, IS PREVENTABLE. But then, "DEVELOPMENT" of a
country is foremost, say our wise politicians and power wielders.
Building huge dams over rivers and jeopardizing the lives of millions of poors
becomes a CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION in corridors of power when Supreme Court
judgement seeped in because "DEVELOPMENT" is vital for a nation. "DEVELOPMENT"
is foremost for a "PROGRESSIVE" country like ours. So what? If it ruins
millions of lives. So what, if it ravishes the basic human rights of millions
of people? So what, if the expected "BENEFITS" of larger dams are proven to be
MYTHS. So what if large dams will not serve any purpose at all even from
development perspective. After all, it is a multi-billion dollar sphere and
"DAMS ARE AN INDICATOR OF DEVELOPMENT" so do our reverend politicians believe.
The FACT SHEET on large dams stands out in contrast to "CLAIMS" banking on
traditional development argument. Just like, the FACT SHEET on tobacco hazards
stands out in stark contrast to tobacco promotion campaigns and "CLAIMS"
banking on development argument. The Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) and other
large .darns planned on the Narmada river will ultimately have a net high cost to
our society and economy is well established through studies by experts like
Peter MacCully, Sanjay Sanvoi, Shripad Dharmadhikari, K R Datye and Suhas
Paranjpe. On one hand, the claimed benefits of water reaching poor farmers of
Kuchch and Saurashtra is unlikely to materialize due to expected heavy
consumption of water by chemical industries that were not pre-planned but are
fast coming up along the route of the canal. As per the Government's own
documents, less than 2% of Kuchch and less than 9% of Saurashtra's drought
prone land will ultimately get the canal's water, and that too not before 2025
AD. However, even this scenario looks unlikely.
On the other hand, the direct cost of displacement of a million people due to
submergence in the valley is huge. Most of the displaced families will never
get the land promised to them for rehabilitation simply because there is not
enough cultivable land lying vacant in India. The Government of MP has
officially admitted that it does not have enough land to rehabilitate all the
displaced families. Recently the German Government did not give environmental
clearance to Siemens for supplying certain equipment for the Maheshwar Dam on
the grounds that the rehabilitation programme being implemented and planned by
the Central and concerned State Governments is highly inadequate. The cost of
Rs. 18,000 crore for SSP and similarly high figures for the canal network and
other 30 large dams on Narmada will make the supply of water and power from the
project economically non-viable. The entire Narmada valley project is a big
hoax and an insult to the poor farmers of drought prone areas of Gujarat on
whose name it is being justified and to the displaced millions of the valley
whose future looks uncertain and bleak.
Just like the recently concluded Public hearings on Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control in Geneva, tobacco industries and Governments all across the
globe continues to "BELIEVE" that tobacco is a big source of revenue, generates
employment and gets them huge foreign exchange. The unprecedented mortality.
caused by tobacco, FAILS to percolate at discussion tables. Even in countries
like India, where surveillance and research networks are inconsistent and
public health facilities highly inadequate, last year Rs.29, 500 crores were
spent on treatment and management of tobacco-related cancers (source: Indian
2 of 4
10/2:
dams or tobacco: mining millions worldwide
Council of Medical Research - ICMR annual report) whereas total turnover (not
the.revenue) was Rs.24,000 crores as per the ITC annual report. Clearly we are
losing money and revenue argument turns against the'tobacco industry worldwide.
Similarly tobacco industry's growth rate between 1978-1992 was 12% and the
employment instead of increasing, DECLINED. 49% of those employed by tobacco
industry, were rendered unemployed- courtesy : the machine age. Now, tobacco
industry has machines which churn out 14,000 cigarettes per minute, working
round-the-clock. Tobacco industry is not a source of employment anymore. Rather
it is itself shrinking in manpower but at the same time, growing in economic
terms.
Tobacco is also not a source of foreign exchange. Barring few solitary
examples, tobacco does not earn foreign exchange rather drains the money
because of import of heavy machines by multinationals.
Tobacco industry also repeatedly questions the validity of tobacco-related
health hazards ignoring that there is no consumer product in the ENTIRE history
OF MANKIND ON WHICH AS MUCH RESEARCH HAS BEEN DONE AS TOBACCO. Over 70,000
research publications in reputed journals of credibility, and established links
of constituents in tobacco with cancer and other life-threatening ailments, are
enough to state that 'doubts' on tobacco-related health hazards do not exist.
Moreover for those who have doubts, a personal testimony of someone near to
them who is a tobacco user over a period of time, or a visit to cancer ward and
a chat with patients struggling for each breath,- shall dispel all confusions.
And the truth will stand out in all it's starkness and clarity : TOBACCO KILLS!
DON'T BE DUPED.
But the power wielders and policy makers refuse to acknowledge these
fact-sheets and prefer to go on entertaining themselves with rhythmic lullaby
of " those dedicated to DEVELOPMENT and social welfare". Whether it is tobacco,
or building big dams, it is the basic human rights of the poorest of poors that
get crushed. And then, from where do we get the moral right and sanity to boast
that "WE WORK FOR THE MASSES and social justice". Where are those masses? Which
'masses' are we referring to? And to top it all, how senseless these projects
appear if we consider including "SOCIAL JUSTICE" in our jargon used to justify
our stand.
The dissenting note by Justice S P Bharucha, who wanted the construction of the
project to be stopped and outlined a series of measures to be taken by the
project authorities before the construction could be undertaken again, proves
that NBA's arguments and figures were put forth before the court. We are deeply
concerned by the way the Supreme Court and the Indian Government have
undermined interests of the poorest sections of India. This is an indication of
the increasing insensitivity of our policy makers, rich and upper middle class
sections towards the underprivileged majority of our country. Fundamental
rights of two-thirds majority are sacrificed by the vested interests of elite
minority in our country. And same holds true for the rest of the world. Tobacco
industry has survived for so long killing our masses slowly all around the
world without much protest .just because of this criminal apathy and
indifference. We have to break this silence. Tobacco is the enemy number one,
for each country on our planet emerging as the largest cause of death
worldwide. Similarly despite of substantial number of reports negating
'development' arguments of large dams, policy makers go on enjoying the sweet
slumber dreaming of large dams bringihg prosperity to our masses (and
themselves?) . The sweet dream has to be intervened, because millions of lives
are at stake. The silence has to be broken, because it is not only an issue
relating to large dams on Narmada, but an issue relating to criminal apathy and
social injustice transcending borders. The spirit of all social movements and
campaigns is under threat.
We express solidarity with the people of the Narmada valley, and urge the
President of India to urgently intervene in this matter for the sake of the
country's poor.
Bobby Ramakant
(The author is the Pilot Coordinator of INGCAT (South East Asia)
C-2211, C-Block Crossing, Indira Nagar, Lucknow-16. India.
Phone : 358230, 98380 86584, FAX: 358230, e_mail: ramakant@globalink.org
3 of 4
10/23/C’
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.plan
"Framework Convention Alliance” <fctcall@globalink.org>
"Philippine Daily Inquirer", 15/10/00
Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:03:16 +1300
"Philippine Daily Inquirer", 15/10/00
TOBACCO WARS
The final solution?
By Pennie Azarcon-Dela Cruz
See related story:
Clearing the air
IF THE World Health Organization and anti-smoking groups had their way,
that square-jawed cowboy in the cigarette commercial might as well be
riding off into the sunset and into the night, never to be heard from
again.
The WHO is preparing a Tobacco Control Framework Convention and will be
holding international talks on the issue starting tomorrow until Oct. 21 in
Geneva. The framework convention, which is expected to be ready by 2003,
has the tobacco industry fuming because it could be binding on all of the
WHO's 191 member-countries, including the Philippines.
Among the legislative actions being proposed by WHO are:
■A ban on all tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorships;
•A ban on cigarette sales to children and minors;
■Effective health warnings on all tobacco products;
•A detailed listing of the constituents of tobacco and tobacco smoke;
■The establishment of smoke-free public places and workplaces;
■Higher taxes on cigarettes and stricter implementation of anti-smuggling
laws; and
•An increase in the price of tobacco products, with part of the proceeds
going to tobacco control programs and to promoting economic alternatives to
tobacco growing and manufacturing.
Alarming statistics
The focus on tobacco control, according to WHO Director-General Gro Harlem
Brundtland, is being driven by increased awareness of tobacco-related
economic and health costs.
"[Tobacco] is the only product which when used as intended, will kill
one-half of its consumers," said Brundtland,
noting that half a billion people alive today will die from tobacco-related
illnesses.
Four million people die every year of such illnesses, but this figure will
rise to 10 million in the next 25 years, she added.
The alarm over such statistics was underscored recently when a US court
awarded $145 billion in damages to plaintiffs in a tobacco class suit after
it found evidence that the tobacco industry knew it was producing a deadly
product and had deceived the public about the dangers of cigarette smoking.
Easily the most contentious proposal is the suggested ban on advertising
and promotional activities. "Tobacco addiction is a communicated disease,"
Brundtland said.
"[It is] communicated through advertising, sports, marketing and
sponsorship...which equates a deadly product [with] the taste of freedom and
fashion. Between 80,000 and 99,000 children and adolescents in the world
take to tobacco everyday," she said.
So effective is advertising that, according to Advertising Age surveys in
Asia, Europe and the Middle East, tobacco companies are consistently listed
in the top 10 advertisers in 21 out of 50 countries.
Expected to dispute such figures is the tobacco industry, including world
leader Philip Morris, which is to make a presentation at a public hearing
during the conference. The WHO has encouraged active response from affected
sectors and has so far received more than 400 submissions from major
tobacco companies, the food and hotel industry, advertisers, consumer
groups, church groups, smokers' rights groups, sports organizations and
public health officials.
Constructive engagement
Philip Morris International, which says it favors a "constructive
engagement" with the WHO, has declared that it would oppose such measures
as:
•A total ban on cigarette marketing to adults;
•The use of shock images in health warnings;
•Encouraging signatory countries to forego their own legal systems and
adopt US-style litigation tactics;
■Public smoking bans that fail to allow business owners to provide smoking
areas for adult smokers; and
■Higher taxes that could encourage smuggling and would jack up cigarette
prices beyond the reach of ordinary consumers.
Tobacco companies are also leery of a proposed global treaty that would be
binding on most countries and contend that individual legislation would be
better suited to each country's specific conditions and political climate.
"National governments are better placed than the WHO to balance the
revenues and employment generated by tobacco, the rights of informed adults
to choose to smoke and the appropriate public health steps," averred
British American Tobacco chair Martin Broughton.
But freer global trade over the past 20 years has led to a rise in smoking
due to lower prices, countered the WHO and the World Bank in a report.
Analysis from 42 countries, the report said, "clearly demonstrates that
trade liberalization has led to increases in cigarette smoking, with the
most significant impact in low-income and middle-income countries."
Noted Brundtland: ’We need an international response to an international
problem."
Economic dislocations
In addition, cigarette companies decry the possible economic dislocations
for tobacco-producing countries should the WHO's proposals on restricted
sales and promotions push through. The tobacco industry is said to be a
$300 billion industry, with profits estimated at more than $30 billion a
year.
In the Philippines, according to the National Tobacco Administration, the
local tobacco industry generates an average annual revenue of P21.4 billion
in taxes, duties and other fees. It also provides income to an estimated
1.9 million Filipinos, including some 75,000 tobacco farmers and 300,000 of
their family members.
But health advocates dismiss such figures and contend that if health care
costs and productivity losses due to tobacco-related deaths and diseases
were tallied, the Philippines would in fact post net losses.
Dr. Lenora Fernandez, one of the researchers in a nationwide study on
smoking conducted by the University of the Philippines and the Philippine
General Hospital, said that the country lost an estimated P46 billion in
1999 because of tobacco consumption. Fernandez said that about P27 billion
was spent last year for the care of patients afflicted with lung cancer,
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease and
cerebro-vascular disease. These are the four leading tobacco-related
ailments in the country.
Some 20,000 Filipinos die of lung cancer every year, warned health official
Joseph Aricheta, a member of the government's Tobacco Control Secretariat.
Some P.98 billion was lost because of absenteeism at work among people with
tobacco-related diseases, plus another P18 billion lost because of the
early deaths of these patients.
Untallied as yet is the environmental cost when entire forests are leveled
and cleared to make room for increased farmland for tobacco crops and for
tobacco-curing plants.
In its 1999 report, "Curbing the Epidemic: Government and the Economics of
Tobacco Control", the World Bank answered point by point the issues often
raised by tobacco advocates.
Starting young
Addressing the oft-repeated contention that adult smokers are responsible
enough to decide for themselves, the report noted that "most smokers start
when they are children or adolescents - when they have incomplete
information about the risks of tobacco and its addictive nature".
Indeed, says the WHO, 20 percent of schoolchildren in the developing world
smoke regularly.
A study by the US Center for Disease Control also found that 25 percent of
young smokers in developing countries started the habit before age 10.
The World Bank report also supports another WHO proposal to increase taxes
and raise the price of cigarettes which, it said, "would deter adolescents
[more than adults] from buying cigarettes. People in developing countries
are more price-responsive than in high-income countries."
A worldwide price increase in cigarettes of only 10 percent would translate
to some 40 million people quitting smoking and almost 20 million deaths
averted, according to the report.
To deter smuggling that might result from higher cigarette taxes, the
report suggested that governments stop street sales of the product and use
warning labels and prominent tax stamps.
The loss of income and revenues from reduced tobacco consumption could be
recouped in other ways, the report said. "Money not spent on tobacco will
be spent on other goods, generating alternative employment."
Central-to the tobacco industry’s protest over restrictions on cigarette
sales and advertising is its contention that smoking is a matter of
individual freedom and that smokers choose to smoke. Using the same
argument, juries in past litigation often ruled in favor of the cigarette
companies in the belief that adult smokers should be held totally
responsible fortheir own choices and behavior.
Health hazards
But the WHO and other health groups have asserted that "smoking is not so
much a question of lifestyle choices, but literally a matter of life and
death". The concern is fueled by the fact that more women have joined the
smokers' league. Women now comprise 200 million out of 1.2 billion smokers.
Researchers have also noted an increase in smoking among poor, illiterate
and less-educated citizens in low- and middle-income countries who may not
have the resources needed to cope with the often fatal ailments associated
with smoking.
According to the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, Canada, children ■
are particularly vulnerable to secondhand smoke because they breathe faster
and therefore inhale more, and harmful chemicals from, the air. The likely
results of such exposure are coughs and wheezes; eye, nose, throat and lung
infections; asthma and pneumonia. Infants exposed to cigarette smoke are
also twice more likely to die of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
Women who smoke have an equal chance as men to die of emphysema, chronic
bronchitis, peripheral vascular diseases, heart disease, stroke, as well as
cancer of the mouth, larynx, bladder and cervix.
Smoking affects women in other ways, resulting in, among others, decreased
fertility; risk of miscarriage; heart disease; cervix cancer; menstrual
disorders; osteoporosis; slow fetal development; low birth weight; and risk
of stillbirths and perinatal death.
Smoking ailments
Tobacco also causes more than 40 diseases, many of them fatal or disabling,
according to a 1996 report by the American Council on Science and Health.
Among the ailments associated with smoking are: lung cancer, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease, angora pectoris, arrhythmia, aortic
aneurysm, early skin wrinkling, fingernail discoloration, osteoporosis,
cancers of the esophagus, mouth, larynx, bladder, kidney, stomach, the
pancreas and the cervix; miscarriage; enhanced transmission of the HIV
virus to the fetus, and worsened multiple sclerosis.
Because the stakes are so high, Brundtland anticipates furious debates,
overheated discussions and intense reactions from the tobacco industry.
"We are not interested in tobacco wars. We want tobacco solutions," says
Brundtland. Hopefully, the coming week's tobacco convention would provide
just that.
October 15, 2000
CAFCA
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa
PO Box 2258, Christchurch
email: cafca@chch.planet.org.nz
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
<fctcall@globalink.org >,
"GlobaLink International" <gt-intl@globalink.org>
Koop's FCTC Testimony
Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:20:58 -0700
Testimony of Dr. C. Everett Koop, C. Everett Koop Institute, WHO Public
Hearings, 12 October 2000
My name is Ross Hammond, and I am reading this on behalf of Dr. C. Everett
Koop, Senior Scholar of the C. Everett Koop Institute at Dartmouth College
in the United States.
Dr. Koop writes; "I would like to raise my voice in favor of the strongest
possible Framework Convention. Between 1981 and 1989,1 served as the U.S.
Surgeon General and chief delegate to the World Health Assembly under
Presidents Reagan and Bush. In that capacity I was dedicated to educating
scientists and the public about the hazards of tobacco use and doing what I
could to decrease the death and disease caused by tobacco use. During my
tenure as Surgeon General, my office issued eight reports on the death and
diseases caused by smoking and smokeless tobacco, including reports on
cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, nicotine
addiction and the health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke.
Yet despite the wealth of scientific evidence we have accumulated about the
harms of tobacco, the unfortunate truth is that the world has done
shockingly little to reduce the death toll from tobacco use.
Tobacco is different from other plagues that have faced the world because
it is promoted by an unscrupulous industry that will stop at nothing to
promote its products and raise its profits. The evidence is irrefutable. On
a scale never before known to commercial enterprises, Big Tobacco has
engaged in the most devastating cover-up of scientific evidence and
consciously sought to deceive and defraud the entire world about the health
consequences of its products. It has preyed on our children and lied to
our governments. It has manipulated nicotine and political systems. And
it has created a public relations apparatus designed to make the world
think it is behaving responsibly even while engaging in the most heinous
behavior. We must resolve to never again let Big Tobacco's false and
misleading statements go unanswered. We must also be aware of the history
of tobacco control efforts. All too often the tobacco industry has
succeeded in convincing governments to accept proposals that sound good on
their face but do little to actually reduce tobacco use. The negotiators
of the Framework Convention must not fall into the same trap. The
Convention must not just be a 'Teel good" treaty that speaks in glowing,
general language but has no real force or effect. It must contain
meaningful specific restrictions on the tobacco industry's marketing and
manufacturing practices and require governments to take strong and concrete
steps to reduce tobacco use.
(PAUSE)
AS
II ST-
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, I believe the United States government has an
important role to play in the FCTC negotiations. On the one hand, our
multinational companies have played a leading role in spreading the plague
of tobacco throughout the world. On the other hand, President Clinton has
spoken out forcefully about the need for the establishment of strong public
policy changes to rein in the tobacco industry and to reduce tobacco use.
I urge the United States government to speak with the same voice in Geneva
that it does at home and to support a strong, specific and effective FCTC even if it includes policies that the tobacco industry has successfully
blocked in the United States. The positions of the U.S. delegation during
the Framework Convention negotiations should be based on the protection and
promotion of global public health, and nothing else. If the U.S.
government fails to actively support a strong FCTC or urges the adoption of
a weak convention because of political considerations back home, we will be
doing the entire world a disservice. The United States has an opportunity
to use its knowledge and its experience to assist in the creation of the
strongest possible treaty, one that can help the other nations of the world
avoid a tobacco epidemic of the magnitude faced by the United States. How
the U.S. responds during these negotiations will be the truest test of our
leadership.
The world needs a strong Framework Convention, so that no nation is forced
to fight the tobacco industry or the plague of tobacco use alone or
unarmed. The FCTC should seek to bring the tobacco industry under proper
governmental and international controls with concerted action on
advertising, smuggling, product regulation, treatment programs,
environmental tobacco smoke and many other areas.
A strong Framework Convention is a critical weapon that is needed to
counteract the tobacco industry's wrongdoing. Now that WHO has seized the
initiative at the global level we have the ability to change the behavior
of multinational tobacco corporations at every level. We have the
opportunity to stop the spread of disease and death transported by tobacco
companies across borders into new populations of non-users. I strongly
support the process that WHO has begun and encourage the countries of the
world to come together and enact a meaningful and effective FCTC. Thank
you.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
<fctcall@globalink.org >,
"GlobaLink International" <gt-intl@>globalink.org>
Koop's FCTC Testimony
Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:20:58 -0700
Testimony of Dr. C. Everett Koop, C. Everett Koop Institute, WHO Public
Hearings, 12 October 2000
My name is Ross Hammond, and I am reading this on behalf of Dr. C. Everett
Koop, Senior Scholar of the C. Everett Koop Institute at Dartmouth College
in the United States.
Dr. Koop writes: 1 would like to raise my voice in favor of the strongest
possible Framework Convention. Between 1981 and 1989,1 served as the U.S.
Surgeon General and chief delegate to the World Health Assembly under
Presidents Reagan and Bush. In that capacity I was dedicated to educating
scientists and the public about the hazards of tobacco use and doing what I
could to decrease the death and disease caused by tobacco use. During my
tenure as Surgeon General, my office issued eight reports on the death and
diseases caused by smoking and smokeless tobacco, including reports on
cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, nicotine
addiction and the health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke.
Yet despite the wealth of scientific evidence we have accumulated about the
harms of tobacco, the unfortunate truth is that the world has done
shockingly little to reduce the death toll from tobacco use.
Tobacco is different from other plagues that have faced the world because
it is promoted by an unscrupulous industry that will stop at nothing to
promote its products and raise its profits. The evidence is irrefutable. On
a scale never before known to commercial enterprises, Big Tobacco has
engaged in the most devastating cover-up of scientific evidence and
consciously sought to deceive and defraud the entire world about the health
consequences of its products. It has preyed on our children and lied to
our governments. It has manipulated nicotine and political systems. And
it has created a public relations apparatus designed to make the world
think it is behaving responsibly even while engaging in the most heinous
behavior. We must resolve to never again let Big Tobacco's false and
misleading statements go unanswered. We must also be aware of the history
of tobacco control efforts. All too often the tobacco industry has
succeeded in convincing governments to accept proposals that sound good on
their face but do little to actually reduce tobacco use. The negotiators
of the Framework Convention must not fall into the same trap. The
Convention must not just be a "feel good" treaty that speaks in glowing,
general language but has no real force or effect. It must contain
meaningful specific restrictions on the tobacco industry's marketing and
manufacturing practices and require governments to take strong and concrete
steps to reduce tobacco use.
(PAUSE)
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, I believe the United States government has an
important role to play in the FCTC negotiations. On the one hand, our
multinational companies have played a leading role in spreading the plague
of tobacco throughout the world. On the other hand, President Clinton has
spoken out forcefully about the need for the establishment of strong public
policy changes to rein in the tobacco industry and to reduce tobacco use.
I urge the United States government to speak with the same voice in Geneva
that it does at home and to support a strong, specific and effective FCTC even if it includes policies that the tobacco industry has successfully
blocked in the United States. The positions of the U.S. delegation during
the Framework Convention negotiations should be based on the protection and
promotion of global public health, and nothing else. If the U.S.
government fails to actively support a strong FCTC or urges the adoption of
a weak convention because of political considerations back home, we will be
doing the entire world a disservice. The United States has an opportunity
to use its knowledge and its experience to assist in the creation of the
strongest possible treaty, one that can help the other nations of the world
avoid a tobacco epidemic of the magnitude faced by the United States. How
the U.S. responds during these negotiations will be the truest test of our
leadership.
The world needs a strong Framework Convention, so that no nation is forced
to fight the tobacco industry or the plague of tobacco use alone or
unarmed. The FCTC should seek to bring the tobacco industry under proper
governmental and international controls with concerted action on
advertising, smuggling, product regulation, treatment programs,
environmental tobacco smoke and many other areas.
A strong Framework Convention is a critical weapon that is needed to
counteract the tobacco industry's wrongdoing. Now that WHO has seized the
initiative at the global level we have the ability to change the behavior
of multinational tobacco corporations at every level. We have the
opportunity to stop the spread of disease and death transported by tobacco
companies across borders into new populations of non-users. I strongly
support the process that WHO has begun and encourage the countries of the
world to come together and enact a meaningful and effective FCTC. Thank
you.
Statement
| ^am
Forum on... Vision International) to 53rd WHA
£
Subject: Statement by Dr. Ram (NGO Forum on Health & World Vision International) to 53rd
WHA
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 07:01:06 -0400
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
To: tobacco-accountability@igc.topica.com
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
STATEMENT OF WORLD VISION INTERNATIONAL
ON THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL
53rd WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY - 19 MAY 2000
Dr. Eric Ram, Director of World Vision International and President NGO
Forum for Health.
Agenda Item 12.10
Mr. Chairman,
On behalf of World Vision International, the NGO Forum for Health,
INFACT, and the Network for Accountability of Tobacco Transnationals,
I
applaud the progress of the two Working Groups on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control and the recognition by the World Health
Assembly of the urgency of this issue. I also wish to extend our full
support for WHO's efforts for a strong and binding Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control which we believe will be good for both the North and
the South. The World Bank report has demonstrated that tobacco control is
not only good for health, but it is also good for the economy. A weak
resolution, on the other hand, will only benefit rich transnational
corporations based in the North, at the expense of the health and lives
of people in the South.
We have heard arguments that the treaty be broad and general in scope,
without binding obligations. Based on our experiences in the field, we
wish to caution that such vagueness and loopholes play into the hands of
the corporations that have demonstrated, that they will break and evade
the law. Weak legislation has proven worse than nothing at all.
We urge that the Framework Convention remain on course toward a strong
and binding treaty with specific obligations, and we hope the Assembly
will guide negotiators in this direction.
Mr. Chairman, we are calling for a Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control that will include the following (7) seven key elements:
1.
To eliminate tobacco advertising and promotion including that appeals
to children and young people;
2.
To keep tobacco corporations out of public health policy;
3.
To prioritize health protection measures over trade policy:
4.
To protect consumers from the tobacco transnationals' deceptive
practices;
5.
To involve NGOs at all levels of the negotiations;
6.
To include enforcement mechanisms that are binding on tobacco
corporations; and
7.
To commit to firm deadlines for treaty compliance.
The Convention should stop the Tobacco Transnationals from promoting and
dumping a deadly and addictive product to the consumers. In their
aggressive marketing, tobacco transnational corporations have actively
sought ways to circumvent national law, and have lobbied against
regulation of tobacco marketing and promotion that appeals to young
1 of 2
5/28/00 2:31 AM
Statement by Dr. Ram (NGO Forum on... Vision International) to 53rd WHA
people, women, and populations that have not traditionally smoked.
No single country can withstand the political influence of corporations
such as Philip Morris, for instance, whose annual revenues are greater
than the gross domestic products of many countries. The Convention should
ensure that the tobacco industry bears the global financial costs of
treating tobacco-related illnesses.
WHO has raised considerable expectations for coordinated global action to
end this devastating epidemic. Let us not let them down, but support them
in full measure.
The NGOs, particularly, the ones involved in public health, human rights,
equity and social justice, are an important resource and wish to partner
with you in drafting this Convention, and we want to work with you for
the strongest possible outcome. It is particularly important that the
NGOs from the South be included in this process, as developing countries
will bear the greatest burden from tobacco-related illnesses, as tobacco
corporations aggressively spread tobacco addiction in these countries.
The activities and visibility of NGOs can mobilize grassroots commitment
to public policies - and strengthen governments' resolve to protect
public health. NGOs have made critical contributions in the
pre-negotiation phase, and will be essential partners in the treaty's
implementation. In this spirit, it is important that NGOs be involved at
all levels and in every phase of negotiations on the Framework Convention
and its protocols. We, therefore, ask you to please ensure NGO's
participation as observers within the framework of ECOSOC.
Let me conclude by inviting all delegates to obtain a copy of INFACT's
new documentary video - Making a Killing; With stories and examples from
around the world, Making a Killing illustrates the toll taken by tobacco
on people and families around the world, as well as promotional tactics
and interference in public health policy by some of the largest and most
profitable tobacco transnationals.
Thank you.
2 of 2
5/28/00 2:31 AM
Message 36TO:
FROM:
fctcall@globalink.org
rob@essential.org
SUBJECT:
Alliance communications
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 16:02:28 -0400 (EDT)
MESSAGE:Dear Friends:
It was wonderful to meet so many of the Framework Convention Alliance
members at the World Conference in Chicago. For those of us who have not
been deeply involved in the FCTC negotiations, it was a tremendous
opportunity to learn about issues, country positions and evolving
strategies by various players in the FCTC negotiation process.
As someone who has not previously committed substantial energy to the
Framework Convention, it was exciting to see how many people have been
engaged to drive the agenda forward in productive ways, and to try to head
off backsliding from various retrogressive forces.
To make our efforts even more effective, I would like to make a plea:
Please use this listserve for substantive discussion and intelligence
sharing.
Especially for those of us who are not able to travel regularly to Geneva,
it is hard to track exactly what is going on with the FCTC process. Active
use of the listserve could help address this problem. It would be helpful
to have a discussion on the list of different components that people think
should be prioritized by NGOs, for example. Or if a group learns that the
United States is pursuing yet another strategem to undermine NGO
participation in the negotiation process, it should be posted right away.
I think real strategic discussion and constant, brief updates from various
sources as new developments emerge would help those of us less centrally
involved to be more effective in our work (and maybe also draw us in to do
more!).
Perhaps one useful way to begin the fuller use of this listserve would be
for someone or a few people who attended the briefings with government
representatives on Thursday to post notes. Some of us had conflicting
commitments at the time of the meeting; and, in any case, obviously not
all of the Alliance was in Chicago.
Best,
Robert Weissman
Essential Information I Internet: rob@essential.org
Message 22TO:
"'fctcall@globalink.org'" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Judy Wilkenfeld <JWilkenfeld@TobaccoFreeKids.org >
CC:
FROM:
JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids .org
SUBJECT:
NGO representation at WHO question
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:09:53 -0400
MESSAGE:A11:
We are trying to compile a list of the organizations who do and do not have
accreditation at WHO, in order to determine next steps for our October
activities in Geneva. Please take a moment to reply to me, answering the
following questions. A complete list of everyone's responses will be
circulated to the list when I have everyone's responses.
Thanks!
A. Jenny Foreit
Associate, Research & International Programs
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
tel: 202 296-5469 x3025
fax: 202 296-5427
1)
What organization are you affiliated with?
2)
Does your organization have accreditation at WHO? (IF YES: Is
accreditation through your organization or through an international parent
organization?)
3)
If your organization (or its international parent) has accreditation, is
it willing to allow members from other organizations to use its
accreditation to gain access at WHO? (IF YES: approximately how many other
individuals?)
4)
If your organization does NOT have accreditation and cannot get it
through an international parent organization, would you need to use another
organization’s privileges go to the October meetings in Geneva?
Re: Alliance communications
Subjects Re: Alliance communications
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:36:27 -0700
From: Mele J Smith <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: Robert Weissman <rob@essential.org>, fctcall@globalink.org
I agree that the more we share information and engage in discussions, the
stronger our efforts will be. In that spirit, I offer the following
information/observations from the world Conference:
For those members of the Alliance who were unable to attend the World
Conference or missed the final day of the conference two strong resolutions
were passed by the delegation that impact the FCTC:
1. Be it Resolved that the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC)
be strong, driven by public health considerations, not preclude nations
from adopting stronger measures and fully integrate NGOs working for
tobacco control into the process.
2. Be it Resolved that the international tobacco control community work
vigorously to exclude and remove tobacco and tobacco products from
bilateral and multilateral trade agreements that would have negative public
health consequences.
There is opportunity to use both of these resolutions (also termed Global
Tobacco Control Actions) in our work.
There were three meetings of the Framework Convention Alliance during the
World Conference. In addition there was a question and answer opportunity
with three of US delegates, two of UK delegates, and one of Canadian
delegates to the FCTC. Unfortunately, my notes from the meeting have been
lost so I will have to work from memory about my impession of the meetings.
Anyone else who has different impressions/memories, please add to my comments:
US delegation: (note: I came in late to the QiA session with the US
delegates): Tom Novotny was the US delegate who appeared to be lead person
for answering any questions from the audience. When I arrived, he was
making a statement on how important it was for US tobacco control groups to
be involved in the moving the FCTC process forward. He said that the
delegation would be calling on US tobacco control groups to help in the
ratification process of the FCTC (in the US, any treaty that the US signs
onto must be ratified by Congress). In response to that statement, the
point was made that it was a little frustrating to be called on to help in
the ratification of the treaty without having had substantive involvement
in the actual negotiation of the treaty. His response was that the US
delegation would be sponsoring regular meetings with US NGOs during the
process to get input from them. The question then was whether or not the
US delegation would support NGO involvement during negotiations in Geneva
and if at the October negotiations would they be willing to look at
establishing rules that allowed for greater NGO participation. The US
response was that they felt that the current rules were working and they
were not sure if they could change the rules. One of the more
disappointing statements made by the delegation was after having send they
would "push" public health considerations in the negotiations, the
correction was,made. tjiat.they would, "represent" public,.health
considerations. Quite a bit weaker statement.
At the end of the q&a session with the us delegation, a group of youth from
Mission Housing Development Corporation in San Francisco, California
presented the delegates with a resolution that they had advocated for their
board to pass in support of a strong FCTC. It was clear that the US
delegation was impressed by the youth involvement and by the strong
interest NGOs have in supporting a strong FCTC.
UK delegation: The discussion with the UK delegation centered around the
the position of the European union (EU) given that their are a few
countries in the EU that may have differing opinions (Germany being one of
them). The point was made that any EU directive that currently exists with
1 of 3
8/16/00 2:04 PM
Re: Alliance communications
respect to tobacco would
be the position of the EU delegation whether or not some of the member
states agreed with it. The UK delegation appeared quite strong in support
of NGOs being involved in the process and agreed to take into consideration
a request for financial assistance to bring NGOs to Geneva.
Canadian delegation: The Canadian delegate was strong and supportive on
NGO involvment and committed to taking a lead role in the negotiations to
ensure a strong FCTC comes out of the process. It was quite impressive to
see the commitment on both the part of the UK and Canadian delegations and
certainly made the US delegation, by contrast, look quite weak.
Finally, during the FCA meetings, there was an opportunity for the
different working groups to meet. I participated in the Trade working
group. In the next few weeks there will a couple of papers around the
trade issue posted to the list. The trade group will also post to the list
a set of principles with respect to trade for discussion. If anyone is
interested in being involved in the trade working group, please contact me
at mjsmith@igc.org and I will add you to the list.
There was also a long discussion that centered around the ASH UK brief that
was circulated previous to the conference and can be found on their website
chttp://www.ash.orq■uk>. There was agreement that the document was quite
helpful and quite good and that most people could live with it. However
there was some discussion as to the purpose of the document. Whether it was
meant to be the "bottom line" and if that was indeed the case, was it
something to make public since you may not want to start negotiations with
your minimum, but rather your ideal and work to get as close to it as
possible. The discussion did not resolve this question.
I, too, enjoyed meeting many of you who I have only known via your email
address and look forward to meeting other members of the alliance in person
or via email.
best regards,
mele smith
At 04:02 PM 8/14/2000 -0400, Robert Weissman wrote:
>Dear Friends:
>It was wonderful to meet so many of the Framework Convention Alliance
>members at the World Conference in Chicago. For those of us who have not
>been deeply involved in the FCTC negotiations, it was a tremendous
Opportunity to learn about issues, country positions and evolving
strategies by various players in the FCTC negotiation process.
>
>As someone who has not previously committed substantial energy to the
>Framework Convention, it was exciting to see how many people have been
^engaged to drive the agenda forward in productive ways, and to try to head
>off backsliding from various retrogressive forces.
>To make our efforts even more effective, I would like to make a plea:
>Please use this listserve for substantive discussion and intelligence
>sharing.
Especially for those of us who are not able to travel regularly to Geneva,
>it is hard to track exactly what is going on with the FCTC process. Active
>use of the listserve could help address this problem. It would be helpful
>to have a discussion on the list of different components that people think
>should be prioritized by NGOs, for example. Or if a group learns that the
>United States is pursuing yet another strategem to undermine NGO
participation in the negotiation process, it should be posted right away.
>1 think real strategic discussion and constant, brief updates from various
sources as new developments emerge would help those of us less centrally
>involved to be more effective in our work (and maybe also draw us in to do
>more!).
8/16/00 2:04 PM
Re: Alliance communications
>Perhaps one useful way to begin the fuller use of this listserve would be
>for someone or a few people who attended the briefings with government
representatives on Thursday to post notes. Some of us had conflicting
commitments at the time of the meeting; and, in any case, obviously not
>all of the Alliance was in Chicago.
>Best,
>
^Robert Weissman
>Essential Information
San Francisco Tobacco Free Project
1540 Market Street, #250
San Francisco, California 94102
USA
I
Internet:
robgessential.org
2 of 2
8/18/00 10:00 AM
List ofNGOs in official relations with WHO
Subject: List of NGOs in official relations with WHO
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:44:56 +0100
From: sjones@bma.org.uk
To: fctcall@globalink.org
For your information, it may be useful to know exactly which NGOs are currently
in official relations. List can be found at:
http://www.who.int/ina-ngo/
Best,
Sinead
Sinead Jones, PhD MPH
Project Leader
Tobacco Control Resource Centre
British Medical Association
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
United Kingdom
tel: +44 20 7383 6380
fax: +44 20 7554 6380
e-mail: sjones@bma.org.uk
http://www.tobacco-control.org/
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager (postmaster@bma.org.uk)
www.bma.org.uk
•
•
RE: NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEETINGS
Subject: RE: NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEETINGS
bate: Fri, 5 May 2000 13:02:33 +0200
From: "Sibylle Fleitmann" <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: '"Emma Must"1 <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>-. <fctcall@globalmk.org>
CC: ’"Chitra Subramaniam'" <subramaniamc@who.ch>, ’"Karen Lewis'” <klewis@advocacy.org>,
<lethut@.who.ch>
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASM
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: -44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 (0)171 613 0531
E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
Web: http: //www.ash■org.uk
W1IA & Public Hearings Update
2 of2
Subject; W HA & Public Hearings Update
Date: Sun. 7 May 2000 16:36:36 -0400
From: "Nils E. Billo" <NilsBillo@compuserve.com>
To: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>, FCA <fctcall@globalink.org>
CC: Slama Karen <KSlama@iuatld.org>, Bissell Karen <KarenBissell@compuserve.com>,
Yach Derek <YachD@who.ch>
5/8/00 11:11 AV
Can you send me their e-mail addresses as soon as it has been decided whom
WHO wants to sponsor to the WHA. I will then inform them and WHO about
the accreditation. Is it sure that they will accept interventions from NGOs
5/8/00 11:14 AM
Re: WHA & Public Hearings Update
Subject: Re: WHA & Public Hearings Update
Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 09:40:28 +0000
From: elif dagli <edagli@superonline.com>
To: "Nils E. Billo" <NilsBillo@compuserve.com>
CC: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>, FCA <fctcall@globalink.org>,
Slama Karen <KSlama@iuatld.org>, Bissell Karen <KarenBissell@compuserve.coni>,
Yach Derek <YachD@who.ch>, ttb@ttb.org.tr
Thanks for the note. I think we all agree that NGOs have tc be proactive and
should not let the governments
of various countries to weaken the process. It will he much worse to Iave a
weak convention than
having none. Our governments will then come up with the excuse that FCTC does
not have the articles we
have in our local laws and win try to destroy the ones we already have. It
will then be a convention to support
the tobacco industry.
IUATLD has a unique power by representing all countries and I do believe that ,
as you suggested we work on
the NGOs of risky countries. We can even create a FCTC corner on the website
and uptodate the information.
For Turkey, unfortunately, I was informed at very late time that I could attend
the WHA by the FCTC alliance.
My work at the university this time will not allow me to be there making the
last minute arrangements. However,
Dr i Mrs; Ffisun Sayek, President of Turkish Medical Association will represent
us. I do hope she can be
accredited. She has been a great fighter and knows very well how to mobilize
NGOs and the government
delegation will be irritated by her appearence, to make obviously contrary
comments.
T/5
^delegations say will be disclosed.
I wish all the success and would like to encourage WHO as you did. Tobacco
industry related governments
do not represent their people.
Sincere regards,
Prof Elif Dagli
Nils E. Billo wrote:
> near Suren:
> Thank you for your update on the different activities around the FCTC. As I
> said in one of my previous e-mails, I don't think there will be a lot of
> opportunity to make statements at the forthcoming WHA. Too many agenda
> points to be discussed at the WHA. However, if WHO thinks it is important
> that NGOs are at the WHA, they should let us know. Also all NGOs, and not
> only a small circle, should be informed about the proposed format for the
> hearings in October 2000. The information flow from WHO to NGOs has not
> been very smooth so far, unfortunately. Only a concerted action and effort
> from NGO side will have an impact on the FCTC process. We need to support
> the WHO as much as we can, but as WHO/TFI is the Secretariat in the
FCTC public hearings, 12-13 October 2000, Geneva
•
Subject: FCTC public hearings, 12-13 October 2000, Geneva
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:07:09 +0530
#
From: "Babu, Mr. Sharath" <BABUS@whosea.org>
™
To: '"rcctvm@md2.vsnl.netin'” <rcctvm@md2.vsnl.netin>, "'ili@nde.vsnl.net.in'" <ili@nde.vsnl.net.in>,
"'bharat@chitraleklia.com'" <bharat@chitralekha.com>, "'dipesh_satpathy@hotmail.com'" <dipesh_satpathy@hotmai|pi
"’pcgupta@tifr.res.in'" <pcgupta@tifr.res.in>, '"dinesh.agarwal@unfpa.org.in’" <dinesh.agarwal@unfpa.org. in>,
'"indiracal@liotmail.com"' <indiracal@hotmail.com >, "'dai-lena.david@cmai.org'" <darlenadavid@cmai.org>,
'"zebaysh@hotmail.com"' <zebaysh@hotmail.com>, "'jenatrk@hotmail.com'" <jenatrk@hotmail.com>,
S
"'kabra@iipad.ren.nic.in'" <kabra@iipad.ren.nic.in>, "'vrekhi@satyam.netin'" <vrekhi@satyam.net.in>,
"'srkhamia@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in'" <srkhamia@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>, '"ambikasrivastava@mccann.coni’" <ambikasrim»
"'rainakaiit@lwl.vsnl.net.in'" <ramakant@lwl.vsnl.netin>, '"ksri@medinst.emet.in"' <ksri@medinstemet.in>,
»
"'srldianna@giasdL01.vsnl.net.in"' <srklianna@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>, '"ticu@del3.vsnl.net.in'" <ticu@del3.vsnl.net.in>,
"'warlaw@del3.vsnl.net.in'" <warlaw@del3.vsnl.net.in>, '"mirabaghi@hotmail.com"' <mirabaghi@hotmail.com>,
'"sochai-a@vsnl.com"’ <sochara@vsnl.com>, '"ramakant@globalink.org"' <ramakant@globalink.org>, "'j.vaidya@ucfiu
"'wbb@pradeshta.net'" <wbb@pradeshtanet>, '"iednaser@bangla.net"' <iednaser@bangla.net>, "'fhpsl@eurekaJk'" 'fl.
"'kinnershali@icenet.net'" <kinnershah@icenet.net>, "’drtarang@satyam.net. in'" <drtarang@satyam.net. in>,
0
'"epicnci@cal3.vsnl.net.in'" <epicnci@cal3.vsnl.net.in>
Hi all,
This is to inform you that the submissions for the public hearing have been
placed on the WHO website.
Please access these and comment on submissions
which support tobacco promotion. Mind you, the tobacco industry would be
commenting on your submissions with a view to debunking them.
Therefore,
it is important, their submissions are critically reviewed to defend your
submission .
Wish you all the best.
Martha R Osei
Regional Adviser - Health Promotion & Education
’’xfc
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Triers Development Trust
F2610255.doc
i
FDT submission to WHO's First Public
Hearing on Tobacco Control
English
Submission regarding the FCTC
English
F3660359.doc
F3660359.pdf
Federation des Associations
D'entraide pour ie Developpement
i conomique et Social (FADDES)
FADDES Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
French
F451.0444. pdf
I
deration Europeenne des
i ansformateurs de Tabac
Submission of FETRATAEJ to the WHO
on a FCTC
English
F2190215.doc
j
Tobacco Sponsorship in Fottball: the
position of the FIFA
English
Federation Nationale des Planteurs
de Tabac - UNITAB
UNITAB Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
French
Federation of Cuban Women
Submission! c/o Soon- Young Yoon on
behalf of the Federation of Cuban
Women to WHO Public Hearing On
FCTC
English
5 ederatipn of European Cancer
Societies
Submission by the Federation of
European Cancer Societies to the Public
Hearings on the WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
f ederation of Farmers
A‘ sociations, Andhra Pradesh
Federation of Farmers Associations
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
The Federation of Tobacco Workers’
Trade Union Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
Fighting Smoking Foundation and
■ r enting Smoking Association
Fighting Smoking Foundation and
Fighting Smoking Association
Submission to WHO on Public Hearing
on FCTC
English
F4040397.pdf
F4040397.rtf
j
• >■•■•.eland's ASH (Action on Smoking
■ a- d Health)
Finland's ASH Submission to WHO
Public Hearings on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F1320130.pdf
F1320130.rtf
i
1
WHO Public Hearings on the FCTC
English
F3610355.doc
[
F3610355.pdf
|
’
F2190215.pdf
F2180214.doc
|
F2.1.80214..pdf
1
I
b
■■
'
•
World Dental Federation
h
-
F2610256.pdf
■
deration of Tobacco Workers'
ade Union
f ~nish Centre for Health
F5810574.doc
F5810574.pdf
i
!
F3210314.rtf
I
F0880086.doc
F088Q086.pdf
'
F4680461.pdf
F4680461.txt
1
F532.052S.pdJ:
j
__________________ i
I Firdous Cold Store
Firdous Cold Store Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F5210514.pdf
■ ;e-Cured Tobacco Cooperative
’ \ abilization Corporation
Flue-Cured Tobacco Cooperative
Stabilization Corporation Statement to
the WHO concerning the FCTC
English
F2470243.doc
• >noation Luxembourgeoise Contre
' •; Cancer
Fondation Luxembourgeoise Centre Iw
Cancer Submission to WHO Publid
Hearing on FCTC
French
1 Forum for Women, Law and
! Development (FWLD)
Submission By FWLD to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
i f rundatlon for Health Promotion
The Foundation far Health Promotion
Statement to WHO Public Hearings on
the FCTC
I '-ench Center for Health
Education
French Center for Health Education
Submission to FCTC Public Hearing on
FCTC
’/www-nt.who int'whosia'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
1
F2470243.pdf
F5360529.doc
j
F6460639.rtf
1
English
F365O358.doc
:
French
F5590552.doc
F55.90552.pdf
1
i
9/29/00
■.ea-r.gs on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 1
' ‘ends Society ;n Social Service
Proposed Outline of Response to WHO
Framework Cinvention On Tobacco
Control
English
F0610058.doc
F0610058.pdf
Frontier Duty Free Association
Statement of the Fronteir Duty Free
Association For the Public Hearing On
FCTC
English
T'S/CT/U.nc':
' .ndacion AntitabSquica de
I
Convenio Marco para la Lucha
Antitabaquica
Spanish
F3630357.doc
F3630357.pdf
'
'
ndacion Antitabaquica de
Anti-Tobacco Foundation of Panama
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F5900583.doc
i
■ ndacion Brasilera del Corazon
Convenio Marco para la -ucha
Antitabaquica-Comentarios
Spanish
F2170213.doc
F2170213.pdf
'
1
Heart Foundation of Panama
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F592Q585.doc
I
Foundation of Argentine Federation of
Cardiology Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
Spanish
F4900483.doc
F4900483.pdf
j
Venezuelan Heart Foundation
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Spanish
F4920485.doc
1
F4920485.pdf
j
Submission by GAPPRI on the Proposed
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control of the WHO
English
F4690462.pdf
1
Statement of the GBCS to the WHO on
the Famework Convention on Tobacco
Controland Related Protocols
English
F3420334.wpd
neral Board of Church and
1 Society (GBCS)
Submission by GBCS to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F6450638.wod
■ Georgian Medical Association
Statement from Georgia Medical
Association
English
.ndacion Cardiologies de Panama
■ . ndacion de la Federation
Argentina de Cardiologia
j ndacion Venezoiana del Corazon
Gabungan Perserikatan Pabrik
Rokok Indonesia (GAPPRI)
: ; :CS (General Board of Church
'
d Society)
...................... 1
L
________ .
.
;
I
F2380234.pdf
|
F1300126.doc
'
1 r.crgian National Counter Tobacco
j Center
Georgian National Counter Tobacco
Center Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
' German Cancer Research Center
Submission of the German Cancer
Research Center to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
1 German Federation for Food Law
i a-d Food Science
Comments on the WHO’s FCTC
English
1 •' erman Medicai Action Group
j s-noking or Health
Submission to the WHO FCTC
English
uj u.
F2380234.doc
Opi lion ot he German Smokers’ Club
English
F1310127.doc
F1310127.pdf
'
j
English
F2680262.doc
F2680262.pdf
i
j
French
F5570550.doc
I
F1300126.pdf
F2830276.doc
F2.830276.Pdf
F3360329.pdf
f o
.
1
Q Q
Cd (o
o(- co')
co to
$ £
i
.rman Smokers1 Club
Regarding WHO’S Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
• Ccwerkschaft Nahrung Genuss
! Gaststatten (Food and Allied
' Workers Union)
Statement on FCTC
1 r SME (Centre D’aicoologie et de
GISME Submission to WHO Public
'
Hearing on FCTC
.bacologie)
1
!
hi <: ’'www-nt.vAo.iat/whosis/statistics/fctc/fcto.cfm
ra
n cn
o
CN C
7
.
English
iD io
Submission to the WHO FCTC tearings
■
!
, C-axo Welcome
-isanngs er. the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 13 of 26
F4220415.doc
Arabic
F5060499.pdf
Contribution du Groupement des
Industries Europ6ennes du Tabac
French
F4240417.doc
F4240417.pdf
C .jarat State Small Industries
Gujarat State Small Industries
Federation Submission to' WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
' /arat Superphosphate Industries
: } Limited
Submissions for Public Hearings of
FCTC
English
F6030596.pdf
'
Health2i Hungarian Foundation
Testimony for the WHO -ramework
Convention On Tobacco Control
English
F0650062.doc
'
n cart Foundation of Jamaica
The Heart Foundation of Jamaica Subm
ission to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F4820475.pdf
■ eartfile- The National Heart
rundation of Pakistan
Heartfile Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F2940287.doc
F2940287.pdf
■
1
|
English
The Godavari Tobacco Growers &
Farmers Association Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
1
The Global Health Council Submission
to WHO Public Hearing On FCTC
; rdavari Tobacco Growers &
'-mers Welfare Association
1
C oba- Health Council
.'J
-1
■
i
■
J
jjo
■
J
o X)
i' £
.
.
.
J
LU
n- o
P °
0
'.a;.h 2'. Hungarian Foundation
-•□fig Kong Counci! on Smoking
and Health
Pre-hearing submission
Imperial Cancer Research Fund
Imperial Cancer Research Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
imperial Tobacco Limited (ITL)
Submission on the FCTC
F6180611.pdf
J
F0650062.pdf
J English
English
English
F4450438.doc
F4720465.doc
E
|
F221O217.doc
J
F22A0217jldf
dependent Sobriety Association
i iridian Cancer Society
Indipendent Sobriety Association
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
Submission from Indian Cancer Society
1 Russian
English
F6430636.doc
F6430636.pdf
;
1
F2220218.pdf
j
F2220218.rtf
F1290125.doc
i
'
1 Iridian Farmers Federation
Indian Farmers Federation Request for
Representation for the Public Hearings
on Framework Convention on Tobacco
Controls
English
Indian National Trade Union
i Congress (INTUC)
INTUC Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F47604S9.pdf
■ Indian Public Health Association
1
,
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on
FCTC
English
F4620455.pdf
1 Ir dian Society on Tobacco and
Health
Submission
English
F2230219.doc
F2230219.pdf
Indonesian Association Against
Tuberculosis
English
F4790472.pdf
"LM 3" Submission to FCTC Public
Hearings On WHO Framework
Convention On Tobacco Control
English
F1710167.doc
F1710167.pdf
■
1
^English
F3050298.doc
!
•
aonesian Association Against
oerculosis
ir donesian Smoking Control
■ foundation ("LM 3")
c
• INGCAT Task Force & Indian
j Society Against Smoking
Comments by INFACT to WHO
Proposed Framework Convention On
Tobacco Control
FCTC Public Hearings
, www-nt who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F3050298.pdf
English
.
■
F2440240.doc
F2440240.pdf
’
.
9/29'00
Put ic Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 14 of 26
Institute of Allergy and Clinical
immunology of Bangladesh
Submission to the FCTC-Public hearings
at WHO
English
E225222J
. ■ stitute of Environmental Health,
department of Preventive
Medicine, University of Vienna
WHO Public Hearings on the FCTC
English
F224O22C.doc
F224O22O.pdf
institute of Pediatrics, Obstetrics
and Gynaecology
Ukraine
English
F4340427.doc
F4340427.rtf
Institute of Social Medicine
University of Vienna
We choose the following topics to make
statements on:
English
F4460439.pdf
F4460439.rtf
■
;
stitute Rotary Cancer Hospital,
n India Institute of Medical
‘ iences
Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All
India Institute of Medical Sciences
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F6320625.doc
F6320625.pdf
|
j
i‘ ternational Advertising
Association (IAA)
IAA Submission for the Public Hearings
on the proposed FCTC
English
F4730466.pdf
International Agency on Tobacco
and Health
International Agency on Tobacco and
Health Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on the FCTC
English
F4150408.doc
international Association of Airport
Duty Free Stores (IAADFS)
Statement of the IAADFS for the Public
Hearing on the FCTC
English
F4770470.pdf
|
international Council of Nurses
Statement form International Council of
Nurses to the WHO Publid Hearings on
the FCTC
English
F5070500.pdf
■
International Council Of Women
International Council of Women
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on
FCTC
English
F47404.67.pdf
I ii ternational Federation of Medical
S udents’ Association, Standing
i Committee on Public Health
1 !. MSA/ SCOPH)
IFMSA/ SCOPH Statement for the Public
Hearing on the Frame work Convention
On Tobacco Controls
English
i Internationa! Federation of Non1 Government Organisations for the
| Prevention of Drug and Substance
| Aouse
WHO Public Hearing on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F4440437.doc
IFUW endorsement of Statemnt from
INGCAT to the Public Hearings on the
FCTC
English
F1210118.doc
1
i University Women (IFUW)
1 endorsing INGCAT
F1210118.pdf
1
' International Independence
1 f omperance Association
1...
International Independent Temperance
Association Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F562.Q5.55.doc
F5620555.pdf
i
i
Internationa! Movement Promoting
Action Against Consumption of
bacco (IMPACT)
IMPACT Submission to WHO for the
Public Hearings On FCTC
English
F3070300.doc
F3070300.pdf
i
1 ' ternational Non Governmental
: ialition Against'I'obacco
Statement from INGCAT to the WHO
Public Hearings on the FCTC
English
[ International Federation of
.
j
!
F3160309.doc
1
F3160.309.pdf
;
_________________ ... ..
F0400037.doc
F0400037.pdf
i
.
international Society of Nurses in
| Cancer (ISNCC) endorsing INGCAT
Statement from ISNCC to the WHO
Public Hearings on the FCTC, endorsing
the Statement from the International
Non-Governmental Coalition Against
Tobacco
English
' International Travel Retail
infederation
Submission to the Public Hearing on the
FCTC
English
http//www-nt.who.:nt/whosis.'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F1130112.doc
E113.QL12.pdf
|
F2200216.doc
F2.200216.pdf
;
|
9/29 CO
>c Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 15 of26
International Union Against Cancer
(UICC), and Association of
European Cancer Leagues (ECL
Submission From UICC and ECL EU to
| English
the Public Hearings on WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
International Union Against
1 berculosis and Lung Dsease
Statement of the IULATLD for the Public
Hearings on Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control FCTC
International Union of Food,
Agricultural, Hotel, Restarant,
Catering, Tobacco and AHied
Workers'Associations (IUF)
IUF Submission to WHO Public Hearings
On FCTC
English
ii 'WAT ( International Network of
w omen Against Tobacco)
INWAT Submission to WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
Hearings
English
F0510048.pdf
F0510048.rtf
1
I
u'tB (Islamic Republic Of Iran
u-oadcasting)
In the name of God the Compassionate
the Merciful, IRIB's Testimony
Submitted to the WHO Public Hearing
on FCTC
English
F04800.45.dcc
F0480045.pdf
.
Isfahan Cardiovascular Research
Center, The National Program For
liibacco Control
Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Center
Submission to WHO Public Hearings On
FCTC
English
F2970290.doc
F2970290.pdf
i
1
Islamic Medical Association
Malaysia
FCTC Submission from Dr Jeffrey Abu
Hassan
English
F0390036.pdf
F0390036.rtf
'
Israel society for the prevention of
smoking
Suggested Ideas for the Smuggling of
Tobacco Products
English
Israeli Oncology Nursing Society
Statement of Support of the FCTC
English
. .
....
....
English 1
F1630159J10C
F1630159.pdf
:
.
F1080105,doc
i
F299Q2g2.doc
i
F2990292.pdf
F2490245.pdf
F3710364.doc
|
F3370330.doc
1
F3370330.odf
1
English
F1620158.doc
F1620x58.pdf
1
|
1 JAMRA
JAMRA Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
French
F5400533.pdf
j
i Japan Association Against Tobacco
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control Hearings
English
F2260222.pdf
F2260222.rtf
i
1
i Japan Dental Association Against
■ tobacco
FCTC
English
F3730366.rtf
;
I Japan Filter Technology uTD.
English
F1270123.doc
j
L__________________________________
Japan Filter Technology LTD. Opinion
on the Proposed Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control FCTC
F1270123.pdf
|
i Japan Medical- Dental Association
for Tobacco Control
Japanese Clinicians Request to WHO
Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F2820275.rtf
1
Comments by Japan Tobacco on the
Proposed Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
F3960388.doc
I
■ Lipan Tobacco and Allied Workers
j Union
Japan Tobacco and Allied Workers
Union Submitting a Statement on WHO
FCTC
English
F1100107.doc
F1100107.pdf
i
j
p
obacco Growers
i Association
Japan Tobacco Growers Association's
Opinion about WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F1240121.doc
F1240121.pdf
•
1
■ j.-pan Tobacconist Federation
Comments on the proposed FCTC
English
F2270223.doc
F227O223.pdf
|
j
P'
8
English
Submission From the International
Union of Toxicology
CT
ITGA Pre-Submission to WHO Public
Hearings
I
1 GA (International Tobacco
: •' owers Association)
' ■ • FOX (International Union of
I lexicology)
http7/www-nt,who.int/whosis'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
work Convention on Tobacco Control
ieet Assodation For Support To
1 Cancer Patients (JASCAP)
JASCAP Submission For Framework
Convention for Tobacco Control
English
F1280124.doc
F1280124.pdf
Documento de Posidon
Spanish
F3720365
F372O365.pdf
I
Kdsakhstan Association for the
Support of Youth, Kostanaj branch
Kasakhstan Association for the Support
of Youth Submssion to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5670560.doc
!
j Junta Agroempresiarial
Dominicans
■
!
■ Kaunas University of Medicine
Submission to Public Hearings
English
F263O258.doc
I
i Kazan State Medical Academy
Kazan State Medical Academy
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
F5560549.doc
F5560549.pdf
:
1
1 ' intucky ACTION
Statement of Kentucky ACTION Before
the WHO
English
F0860083.doc
F0860083.pdf
j
|
K intucky Hemp Growers
i Cooperative
Kentucky Hemp Growers Cooperative
Submission to WHO Public Hearings On
English
F3430335.rtf
j
Kerala Dinesh Beedi Workers' Coooerative Society Ltd.
Written Submission on FCTC to attend
the hearing on FCTC
English
F0380035.doc
F0380035.pdf
1
|
F5010494.doc
'
J Kck Butts Connecticut
Submssion by Congress Woman Rosa L.
DeLauro to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
Comments by Kimball Physics Inc. on
the WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
i Kemite Nasional Penanggulangan
! Masalah Merokok (national
1 C immittee an Smoking Control)
National Committee on Smoking
Control Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
i K irea Tobacco and Ginseng Corp.
i ( KT&G”)
Comments of the ("KT&G”) on the
Provisional Text of the Proposed Draft
Elements for the WHO F-amework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F1050103.pdf
F1050.iP3.wbk
■ Kostanaj Oblast Charity and Health
| Fund
Kostanaj Oblast Charity and Health
Fund Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5690562.doc
i K istanaj Oblast Children's Fund
Kostanaj Oblast Children's Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearing On
Russian 1 F5650558.doc
j
1 Kostanaj Oblast Temperance and
i Health Society
Kostanaj Oblast Temperance and
Health Society Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5660559.doc
1
' K-ajowy Zwiazek Plantatorow
! 1 ytoniu (National Tobacco Growers
:
-ion in Poland)
Krajowy Zwiazek Plantatorow Tytonui
Submission to WHO Public Hearing On
FCTC
English
F5110504.pdf
|
i Ugue Nationale Centre ie
• ( meet
La Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
French
F5370530.doc
1
■ , .tin American and Caribbean
1 Women’s Health Network
Response to WHO FCTC
English
F4350429.pdf
F4350429.rtf
j
1
F2770270.doc
;
; Kimball Physics Inc.
1 ’ atino Council on Alcoho! and
1 Tobacco
Submission
' ■
Tobacco Control
ague Against Cancer, Vague
htto //www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfoi
F503.0494.pdf
;
_________________ J
F1070104.doc
F1070104.pdf
_______ __________ J
F6440637.doc
|
English
]
English
1
E3Zfie36S^f
■
j
ion on Tobacco Control
Page 17 or 2
LIFE Drug Prevention Movement
Submission to WHO Public Hearings On
English
Submission to the WHO FCTC Public
Hearing
English
F1730169.pdf
Contribution de la Ligue Contre le
Cancer & la preparation d'une
convention cadre sur la iutte contre la
tabagisme
ancscans or Ms;
Schoo: of Hygiene &
edicin
F3870380.pdf
F3870380.rtf
Submissions for Public Hearings of
English
F6040567.od!
Frame Work Convention on Tobacco
English
F6140607,pdl
Lisakovska Municipal Youth Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearin
FCTC
Russian
Submission by the Little Franciscans of
Mary of the Francis Region on the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
Pre-Hearing Submissions
English
F1200116.doc
F120Q116.pdf
F2640259.doc
|
F264O259.odf
•
!
Submissior
English
F1010098.doc
F1010098.pdf
The Lung Association Montreal
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
French
F5160509.pd
surrussion
English
F1040101.doc
F1040101.odf
waavak Ba'Tabak Submissio nto WHO
Public Hearing On FCTC
English
Submission to the FCTC - Public
Hearings at WHO
English
sacnusetts Coalition -or Healthy
ires
Submissiom to WHO on the Global
Tobacco Control Committee
English
F6490642.doc
F6490642.pdf
:a! Research
MRC Submission
English
F2650260.doc
F2650260.pdf
Statement from Medical Women
International Association to the WHO
Public Hearings on the FCTC
English
F4090403.doc
Submission at FCTC Public Hearing
English
Meljol Submission to the WHO public
Hearings on FCTC
English
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F5870S80.doc
F5870580.pdf
Controlling the Tobacco Sarons In
South Africa. Why the Framework is
Neccesary
English
F0370034.doc
F0370034.odf
Comments on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
Fi090106.pdf
81090106,rtf
'edical Women ’niernat onal
F182Q178.pdf
Communications
Methodist Federation for Social
x'ww-nt.who.at/whosis/stafistics/fcte/fctc.cfm
JI__ L
F3770370.doc
F3770370.pdf
:2840277.odf
ivork Convention on Tobacco Control
Page i 8 o
Tobacco Control, FCTC
English
IO -1
rFllJO.lO8.p0f
*• 2tro Seniors in Action
AMEDEC Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Spanish
F4890482.doc
Minnesota Smoke-=ree Coalition
Identification of Organizations
Participating in Minnestoa Comments
on the WHO Framework Convention
English
F4400433.doc
F4400433.pdf
Mission Housing Development
Corporation
Mission Housing Development
Corporation WHO FCTC Hearings
Pre_hearing Submissiom
English
F2930286.pdf
r2930.286.rtf
’
j
v cuvement Antl-tabac du Senegal
Le marketing du tabac en Afrique
Subsaharienne
French
F4180411.doc
F4180411.pdf
j
" udang Interiors
Mrudang Interiors Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6160609.pdf
!
■ ;mt (Mrlgendra Samjhana
Nodical Trust)
MSMT Pre-Hearing Submission to WHO
Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F3440336.doc
_____ _________ J
National Association of African
Americans for Positive Imagery
(NAAAPI)
WHO Hearing Statements
English
F1490144.pdf
F1490144.rtf
1
English
F1140110.doc
i
F114Q110.pdf
i
3
;
|o |
i? .8
‘
« o
F1110108.rtf
o
1
s
If
I
Submission
i\?icionat Campaign for Action
Against Tobacco
Targets for Transnational Tobacco
Control
English
Fg7_60073.doc
F0760073.pdf
National Center of Public Health
Submission to WHO from the National
Center of Public Health and National
Coordinating Committee for Tobacco
Control
English
F3930386.doc
National Coalition Against Tobacco,
' ■ igium
Submission from the Belgian National
Coalition
English
F3790372.doc
F3790372.pdf
1
'
j ' itional Committee for Control of
i > ■ (bacco Consumption
The National Committee for Control of
Tobacco Connsumption Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F4100402.doc
'
i
j National Committee on Smoking
I Control (KNPMM)
Submissions on the FCTC
English
F3740367.doc
1
F3740.367.Bdf
|
: National Council Against Smoking
Submission to WHO's Hearings on the
FCTC
F4140407.wod
1
F1510147.doc
1
1
English
1 National Council of Women in
' 1 nalland
Pre-hearing submission
English
, National Council on Tobacco and
I Health, Norway
Joint response from the Norwegian
Cancer Society and the Council on
Tobacco and Health, Norway
French
' National Front Against Tobacco Use
;(NFATU)
NFATU Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F3450338.rtf
i
T.ibonal Heart Forum (NHF)
Submission from the National Heart
Forum (UK) to WHO Public Hearings On
FCTC
English
F3010294.doc
F3010294.pdf
1
: ' .jtional Jordanian Anti- Smoking
! Society
National Jordanian Anti-Smoking
Society Submissionto WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
Arabic
F4870480.pdf
■
■ National Medical Association
■ ■ -.bacco R.O.A.D. (Resources and
Cpitiond to Assist Doctors)
National Medical Association Tobacco
R.O.A.D. Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F3570350.doc
1
hfp /.'www-nt.who int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F5520545mdf
__________________ 1
Page 19 of 26
§
<2
English
F1610157.doc
F161D157.pdf
,
1
F3020295.doc
F302029Sg.tif
;
1
: F1120109.doc
FUzUIT) nr-
'
F3480341.doc
!
j F5080501.pdf
|
Naurzum Region Socail Environmental 1i| Russian i F578O571.doc
Organization Submission to WHO Public 1
Hearing on FCTC
I
Submission from Nations Organisation
for Tobacco Eradication to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
^English
i
H
fp
'
fetchearings
1
i
8 g
National Non-Smokers Forum
____
N ;tiona' Retai’ Association of
Russia
Russian Trade Association Position
Nations' Tobacco Control and other
R:sk Factor Program
National Tobacco Control and other Risk English
Factor Programs Submission to WHO
I
Public Hearings on FCTC
National Trade Union Centres in
India (AITUC, BMS, CITI;, HMS,
National Trade Union Centres in India
Submission to WHO Public hearing on
FCTC
n iurzum Region Social
i vironmentai Organization
______
..
.
.
.
1 English
| English
1
Nenuphar Association S£n£gafaise
d * Lutte Centre la Toxicomanie
F&menine
submission
French
! F4160410.doc
F4160410.pdf
i
|
New Jersey GASP (Group Against
Smoking Pollution)
Pre-hearing submissions
English
F1150111.pdf
F1150111.rtf
i
i
New Zealand Smoke-Free
The New Zealand Smoke-Free Coalition
Submission to Who Public Hearing On
FCTC
F3500343.doc
1
F1500145.rtf
|
tJ
n ihama-city Medical Association
: Information
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control Hearings
English
I No Smoking Day
Public Hearings on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
Fnc/sir
F1880184.doc
F1880184.pdf
'
|
j English
j F1890185.doc
i
i Norwegian Cancer Society
WHO Public Hearings on the Framework [ English
Convention
. n jrwegian Council or Tobacco and
i tialth
WHO Public Hearings on the Framework
Convention
: Novartis Consumer Health
Pre Hearing Submission For the WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control From Novartis Consumer
Health
I ('hyu Rehabilitation Hot Spring
Hospital
■ 3 neology Nursing Society
; Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco
; Growers' Marketing Board
■ Ontario Lung Association
at Health America
ganizatlon of Women's
1 Organizations of Macedonia
| Comments on WHO's FCTC
| FCTC Comments
1 WHO's proposed Global Framework
F07.50072.doc
F0750072.pdf
Eiaaoia^Edf
English
F6560642id0£
F6560649.pdf
English
F1160113.doc
F1160113.pdf
English
F2690253.doc
F2690263.pdf
English
F1170114.doc
j English
| F11801.15.pdf
FJJ 821i5Jif
| English
j
Convention on Tobacco Control
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
Oral Health America Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
Organizatio of Women's Organizations
of Macedonia Submission to WHO
| ’ubllc^feanngjor^FCTC
Pakistan Anti-Smoking Society
Submission to WHO Public Hearings On
:<C
vwvnntwho.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
"L S'
i
F5120505.pdf
J
F4270420.pdf
1
F427Q4.20-.rtf
,
F325Q318.pdf
F3250318.rtf
j
.
9/29/00
rework Convention on Tobacco Control
i-’ .cstac Medical Association
Submission of the Pakistan Medical
Association to the WHO public hearings
on the FCTC
English
F2670261,doc
F2670261.pdf
|
1
Pakistan Muskim League
Pakistan Muslim League Submission to
WHO Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F4610454.pdf
i
Pakistan Society for Cancer
"■ evention
The organization's interest in the FCTC
English
F0980095.doc
F0980095.pdf
|
,
Pc nos Institute
The Environmental Costs of Tobacco
Production
English
F0940092.doc
F0940092.pdf
F0940092.rtf
|
.
I
Partnership for Prevention
FCTC Hearing: Written Testimony
English
F0960093.pdf
F0960093.rtf
PATH Canada
FCTC Submiision PATH Canada
English
F0410038.pdf
F0410038.rtf
,
!
’ tang State Consultative Council
o Women's Affair
Pre-hearing Submission
English
F0620059.doc
•
Peruvian American Medical
Society , Californian Chapter
Pre- Hearing Submission to WHO on
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control from the Peruvian American
Society, Californian Chapter
English
F3220315.doc
i
Pharmacia Corporation
Pharmacia Corporation Submission to
WHO Public Hearings On FCTC
English
F3220315.pdf
F4020395.doc
1
F4020395.pdf
!
F2500246.doc
|
Philip Morris' Comments on the FCTC
i Pnilippine Tobacco Insitute
Position Paper on the Proposed FCTC
English
FQ990.097.doc
F0990097.pdf
; Pt ysicians for a Smoke-Free
A Submission to WHO
English
F3800373.doc
F3800.373.pdf
|
■ <•’ amukhswami Medical College
: ree Krishna Hospital &. Medical
; R 'search Centre
Pramukhswami Medical College
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
English
F6060599.pdf
j
Submission to the FCTC-Public Hearings
at WHO
English
. P.-mce Aly Khan Hospital
The Prince Aly Khan Hospital
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on
English
■ 1’oCOR- Global Electronic
■ C inference on Cardiovascular
) Health in Developing Countries
ProCOR Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
• P-ofessor Ruth E. Malone,
: University of California, San
1 r'ancisco
Support for Worldwide Treaty and
Arguments for Internet Regulation to
be Addressed as part of such an
Agreement
English
; Protocol Management UK Ltd.
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
I public Health Association of New
; z.’aland
Submission on the Proposed WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
: P oiic Health Institute
; R
English
F2500246,Ioq
'
i
........
f
-' iio Morris International and
Pniiip Morris USA
Reynolds Tobacco Company
1.... .... ........ -...................................................
F1900186.doc
1
F1900186.pdf
|
F42.6O419.odf
F4260419.rtf
i
F3950389.rtf
I
______________ 1
F6390632.doc
I
F39703.90.doc
]
F3970390.pdf
1
English
F3490342.doc
.
Submission for the Hearing from
Republika Srpska (BiH)
English
F1910187.doc
F1910187.pdf
,
i
R.3. Reynolds Tobacco Company's Pre
Hearing Submission to WHO Public
Hearing On FCTC
English
F3100303.doc
F3100303.pdf
1
|
hnc ■www-nt who mt/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfin
9/29/00
Hearings or. the r-aniework Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F6070600.pdf
!
Rad de Desenvoivirniento Humano
(REDEH/CEMINA)
REDEH Framework Convention on
Tobacco Hearing
English
F431O424.pdf
I
F431O424.rtf
j
R -jemtsma Csgarettenfabriken
GmbH
submission to WHO
English
F1190117.doc
!
F1190117.p df
i
'
submission for Public hearing on Frame
work Convention on Tobacco Control
(FCTC)_________________________________
F5990592.doc
|
F5990592.pdf
|
1
Auditions publiques sur la ConventionCadre pour la lutte anti-tabac
French
R xsfdrbundet VISIR
Pre-hearing Submission
English
Robert Wood Sonnson Foundation
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control Pre-Hearing
Submission
English
R >tary Gut Ahmedabad Metro
Rotary Club Ahmedabad Metro
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F6130606.pdf
Roy Castle tung Cancer
Foundation
Submission to WHO on the FCTC
English
F2390235.rtf
Royal Coliege of Nursing
Royal College of Nursing Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F513Q506.doc
F5130506.pdf
, Royal College of Physicians of
• London
Submission of the Royal College of
Physicians of London to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F292O285.doc
E2.920285.pdf
: Russian Advertising Council (RAC)
Position of the Russian Advertising
Council on WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F228 224xlPC
F2280224.pdf
j S. slvati CopH-
WHO Public Hearings on the FCTC
English
F3990392.doc
F3990392.pdf
■ S-sn Francisco African American
j ibacco Free Project (SFAATFP)
Letter in Support of FCTC
English
F2410237.doc
F2410237.pdf
; San Francisco Tobacco Free
j Coalition
The Organizations's Interest in the
FCTC
English
F0900087.pdf
F0900087.rtf
1 Sanskrut Intertex Limited
Snakrut Intertex Limited Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6090602.pdf
i Sanskrut Software Systems
Sanskrut Software Systems Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6080601.pdf
i Saudi Anti-smoking Society
Saudi Anti-Smoking Society Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
Arabic
F4860479.pdf
j S-.reeShree Maa Anantanand
1 :' stitute of Cancer
Shree Shree Maa Anantanand Institute
of Cancer Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F3090302.doc
F3090302.pdf
■ s siers of St Josepn of Peace
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
; S sters of the Blessed Sacrament
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
' SmithKline Beecham
Pre-Hearing Submission to the FCTC
Hearings
English
I
1
|P
#•• n n.
III
§ § °
!
L
=
3 2
S £
o
o in
ro m
I
| 8
« g>
o r
;
O 7> I! £ o O
qj
English
6 <o o 6
S 3 S
statement by Professor Thomas
Zeltner, chairman of Expert Committee
7; //www-nt who.irt-whosis'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F0630061.doc
F0630061.pdf
F1420138.pdf
F1420138.rtf
!
1
F6340627.doc
F6340627.pdf
1
F.1250122.pdf
j
F125O122.rtf
1
F2700264.doc
F2700264.pdf
i
|
F2740267.doc
'
F2740267.pdf
;
:c .-’sanr.gs c.' the -ran::-vcrk Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 22 of 26
'
j
Smoke Free Kids Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6500643.doc
F6500643.pdf
Smoke Free Marin Coalition Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F0910088.pdf
F0910088.rtf
1
Smoke Free Shropshire Alliance
Written submission to the Public
Hearings of the FCTC
English
F2310227.doc
[
F23J.0227.bdf
;
Smoking and Health Action
An International Instrument to Deal
with an International Problem
English
F0890085.doc
j
Submission to the WHO Public Hearings
on the FCTC
English
SMSP Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
Submission to the FCTC-Public Hearing
at WHO
English
Tobacco Growing in Kenya: Viable
Alternative Income Generating
Activities for the Farmers
English
F0780075.doc
F0780075.oc;f
;
contribution
French
F4280421.doc
F4280421.pdf
i
I
Society for Community 1 'ealth
Awareness, Research and Action
Submission for the Public Hearings on
the FCTC
English
F4080401.doc
F4080401.pdf
i
j
1
1
H
. noke Free Kids
Smoking or Hea’th Association
(SHA)
F0890085.pdf
f0
s
»
u <
co
S 3
.
fd
1
in in
j
F5850578.doc
F5850578.pdf
|
F2290225.doc
!
i
1
•
;
i
F2320228.rtf
1
Social Advancement and Solidarity
Centre (SASter)
..
_
i
3
ro
>
■
o 3
1
)
'
® S
3
J ra
>cialneeds Network
F2290225.pdf
Society fix Research on Nicotine
ar c Tobacco (SRNT)
SRNT Statement of Submission for the
FCTC Hearings
English
F3880381.doc
1
1
’ Sonarang
Submission of opinions
English
F0660063.doc
F0660063.pdf
1
j
j Soroptimist Internationa'
INGCAT Statement
English
F23CC22.6 rtf
1 SOS Tabigisme Mali
SOS Tabigisque Mali Submission to
WHO Public Hearing no FCTC
French
F5350528.doc
F5350528.pdf
1
1
.
:uthern California Ecumenical
!<!uncil
Strong Tobacco Control Treaty
English
F1220.119.doc
F1220119.pdf
i
j
' S sbthern Tohoku General Hospital
j Neurological Institute.
Southern Tohoku General Hospital
Neurological Institute Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC from
Soichi Katayama M.D.
English
F5190512.pdf
|
1 Spanish Oncology Nursing Society
1 SEEO
Statement from the Spanish Oncology
Society
English
F3980391.doc
F3980391.pdf
1
1
' S i Lanka Federation of Nonj Governmental Organisation Against
; O' ug Abuse
WHO Public Hearing on the Franwork
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F275026820C
F2750268.pdf
|
Star Scientific
Star Scientific Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
....
__________ 1
English
F5960589.doc
F5960589.pdf
'
1
|
1 Stivoro, Dutch Tobacco Control
Stivoro, Dutch Foundation on Smoking
or Health
English
F2710265.doc
F2710265.pdf
i S ;dbury & District Health Unit
Sudbury & District Health Unit
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F4700463.pdf
} S ihgu African Herbal Research
'• Centre
TOBACCO INDUSTRY THROUGH THEIR
CONTRACTED FARMERS IN KENYA ARE
POSSING A GRAVE THREAT TO THE
EXISTENCE OF INDIGENOUS
MEDICINAL PLANTS USED BY 80% OF
THE POOR COMMUNITY
English
F6300623.pdf
F6300623.rtf
;
9/29/OC
Heanngs on
Convention on Tobacco Control
S ipport Fund for Gifted O^sabled
'2 Blind Children, Astana and
k ostana]
SupportFund for Gifted Disabled and
Blind Children Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
Russian 1 F579O572.doc
F5790572,pdf~
Swedish Cancer Society
Swedish Cancer Society Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on CTC
English
F2430239.pdf
F2430239.rtf
Swedish Match AB
Tne Swedish Experience
English
F2450241.doc
F2450241.pdf
I
F6410634.doc
[
Swedish Nurses Against Tobacco
’
;
Swedish Nurses Against Tobacco
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
Swiss Association for Smoking
Prevention
Submission from Swiss Association for
Smoking Prevention
English
Tabac & Libert^
Tabac & Libertd Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
French
F5600553.doc
F5600553.pdf
■' oakprom Association cf Tobacco
Manufacturers
Position of Tabakprom Association of
Tobacco Manufacturers
English
F0680065.doc
F0680065.paf
‘ ota Energy Research Institute
TERI Submission to WHO Public Hearing
On FCTC
English
F31103.04.doc
F3110304.pdf
ta Institute for Fundamental
Research
Public Hearing on Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F0720069.doc
Tata Memona- Hospital,
Pre-hearing submission
English
F4000393.doc
F4Q00393.pdf
■ ; cachers Against Tobacco (TAT)
Pre-Hearing Submission from Teachers
Against Tobacco to WHO on FCTC
English
F2950288.doc
F2950288.pdf
1 Teachers Association of the
i Republic of Indonesia
Submission by the Teachers Association
of the Republic of Indonesia to the
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F4780471.pdf
1 Tf LCC (Tobacco Free Las Cruces
TFLCC and NMCAT Submission to WHO
English
F3670360.pdf
I
_C52.CL7.O27C; O 5____
i
aiiand Health Promotion
1 i stitute, The National health
(foundation
Pre-Hearing Submission To WHO on the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control By Hatai Chitanondh M.D.,
F.I.C.S., F.R,C,S.(T)
English
F0700066.doc
F0700.066.pdf
[ obacco Control Commission for
; Africa (TCCA)
Submission From TCCA to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F3820375.doc
F3820375.pdf
J I obaccq Control Resource Centre
Submission of the Tobacco Control
Resource Centre
English
F2600255.doc
F2600255.pdf
Consumer Association of Malawi
Submission for a strong and Binding
Framework Convention On Tobacco
Control by the WHO
English
F4300423.doc
F4300.423.pdf
The Tobacco Exporters' Association of
Malawi Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F4800473.pdf
bacco Farmers in Kenya
Submission to WHO from Tobacco
Farmers in Kenya
English
F0740071.pdf
|
j ‘ bacco Free Initiative Lebanon
Public Hearings Statement for the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control, Geneva
English
F6230616.pdf
F6230616.rtf
I
!
F6410634.pdf
F3330326.doc
1
F3330326.pdf
,
,
1
i
:
Oncology
■ Mexicans Concerned About
i “i < bacco)
’ ControlAdvocate,Consumer
• Association
i Tobacco Exporters' Association of
i Malawi
t
:"twhcsis'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
.
Pub ic Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
■ -baccc Growers Association of
' - awi, Growers Association of
Tobacco Growers Association of Malawi
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on'
FCTC
English
Tobacco Institute of Hong Kong
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
Submission by the ni Regarding WHO's
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F0690067.doc
F069Q067.pdf
oacco Institute of Southern
Africa
Submission with regard to the FCTC
English
F2340230.doc
F2340230.pdf
Tobacco Law Project
Identification of Organizations
Participating in Minnesota Comments
on ther WHO Framework Convention
English
F4370430.doc
F437Q430.pdf
Tobacco RSA
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
FP.800078.dOC
F0800078.odf
1 iacco Today
Tobacco Today views on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control for the
Publiq Hearings on FCTC
English
F317031Q.doc
F3170310.pdf
-_______________ -
!
1
; ■ bacco Institute of Hong Kong
1
F2980291.pdf
F4Q60399.pdf ~~j
STbacco Workers Alliance
Written Submission to the WHO on its
proposed FCTC
English
F2790272.doc
F279O272.pdf
‘1 uoacco-Free Philippines
Foundation
Tobacco-Free Philippines Testimony
English
F1560152.doc
F1560152.pdf
i oombak and Smoking Research
Centre (TSRC)
Submission for the FCTC
English
F2480244.doc
E2^8Q2^£df
English
F5170510.pdf
Turkish Association for Cancer Research
and Control Submisiion to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F481O474.pdf
! ’ rkish Medical Association
Organisation Submitting the Statement
English
F1340131.pdf
F1340131.rtf
trkish National Committee on
Smoking and Health
To the Chair of the Public Hearings
Session
English
F1330129.doc
F1330129.pdf
To the Chair of Public Hearings Session
English
F0850082.doc
F085C082.pdf
To the Chair of Public Hearings Session
English
F0870084.doc
F0870084.pdf
To the Chair of Public Hearings Session
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F082Q079.pdf
F0820079.rtf
English
F2420238.doc
F2420238.pdf
Submission by the Ukrainian Tobacco
Association
English
F1360133.doc
F1360133.pdf
Uni-Feeder Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F383O376.pdf
F3830376.rtf
UEN, Inscription aux auditions
publiques
French
F138O134.doc
F138O134.pdf
l|
UNITAB Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
French
F6270620.doc
F6270620.pdf
i
||
. jrkish Anti-Tobacco Association
' Turkish Association for Cancer
: Research and Control
:
rkish National Pediatric Society
■ Turkish Thoracic Society
I
. rkish Tuberculosis and Tioracic
; Society
i Uganda Medical Association
| WHO FCTC Hearings
o
-•
•O
1
3 o
I
eeder
1 Turkisk Anti-Tobacco Association
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
a
http 7www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
Page 25 of 26
the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
F0270027.doc
l|
F0270027.2Cf
i
United Trade Union Centre- Lenin
Sarani
English
; S ’rani
’ U liversal Chemical Industries
I
======
Submissions for Public Hearings of
FCTC
English
F6Q.5Q598.0df
I < ilversa: Health Care Action
J Network (UHCAN)
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F2730266.’doc
F2730266.pdf
• University Hospital Lausanne
Submission from Jacques Cornuz,
University Hospital Lausanne to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
French
F5580551.,doc
F5580551.pdf
: U diversity of California
Submission to World Health
Organization on the Global Tobacco
Control Convention
English
F1060102.doc
F1060102.pdf
I university of California San
! Frandsco
Submission to the WHO on the Global
Tobacco Control Convention by
Professor Stanton A. Glantz, PhD.
English
F0810077.wpd
■ University of California, Los
1 Angeles
Statement by Deepak Lal Dept, of
Economics University of California Los
Angeles on the WHO Framework
Conventior
English
F0330030.wpd
Statement of S. Hugh High
English
F0450042.pdf
F0450042.rtf
University of Hertfordshire Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F4830476.doc
F4830476.pdf
University of Hyderabad,
-.'derabad, Andhrs Prashed.
WHO Famework Convention on Tobacco
Control Hearings
English
F0350032.pdf
F0350032.rtf
: U ban Coalition
Identification of Organizatios
Participating in Minnesota on the WHO
Framework Convention
English
F4390432.doc
F4390432.pdf
| USPIRG (U.S. Public Interest
i Research Group)
USPIRG Statement to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F4210414.pdf
F4210414.rtf
V’oor
Vibor Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5970590.doc
F5970590.pdf
V cHealth Centre for Tobacco
Submission on the FCTC from the
VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control
English
F1540150.doc
F1540150.pdf
i v et Nam Standard and Consumers
i A isociation (VINASTAS)
Resolution of support of VINASTAS for
the WHO FCTC
English
; VOICE (Voluntary Organ,zation in
1 the Intererest of Consumer
Education)
Presentation on behalf of VOICE to
WHO Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F2870280.doc
F2870280.pdf
; w anita Indonesia Tanpa Tembakau
(WITT - Indonesian Women
: Against Tobacco)
WHO FCTC Hearings from tha
Indonesian Women Against Tobacco
English
F0340031.doc
F034003L^cf
1 welfare Association for Cancer
' Care(WACC)
WACC submission to WHO Public
Hearing On FCTC
English
F2960289.doc
F2960289.pdf
i Welfare Organization in Iran
submission
English
F1450141.pdf
F145014t.rtf
i women's Action on Smoking,
I < achers and Doctors Association
1 \ ■ Smo<e-free Education
Women's Action on Smoking
Submission to WHO Public Hearing On
FCTC
English
F3280321.pdf
F3280321.rtf
Testimony on Behalf of WEDO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Controls
English
|i envelopment Organisation
! F3840377 doc
F3840377.pdf
;!
-iversity of Cape Town
1 University of Hertfordshire (UH)
sntre for Research in Primary and
' Community Care
'
http '/www-nt wr.o.inVwhosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F2780271.pdf
l
1
;
igs on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 26 of 26
Women's Health Centre, Odessa
The Womens' Health Centre Submission
to WHO Public Hearing On FCTC
Russian
V ork fcr a Better Bangladesh
Submission to the WHO
English
v. arid Congress of Alternative
Medicine Practitioners
Smoking for Longer Life
English
F5550548.doc
F5550548.pdf
;
H
F0710068.doc
!j
F0710Q68.pdf
1
F0790076.pdf
'I
__________________
\a or d Federation of Public Health
Association
WFPHA Submission for WHO FCTC
Hearing
English
F2350231.doc
F2350231.pdf
world Heart Federation
Worid Heart Federation Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F5180511.doc
F518051i.pdf
World Medical Association
World Medical Association Submission
to WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
F2810274.pdf
F2810274.rtf
1 World Self-Medication Industry
Public Hearings on Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F0730070.doc
F0730070.pdf
|
1 World Vision International
World Vision International Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F4250418.pdf
F4250418.rtf
■ .’ontralverband der Deutschen
1 warbewirtschaft Zaw
Position Statement of the German
Advertising Federation
English
F1600156.doc
F1500156.pdf
| Z mbabwe Tobacco Association
Zimbabwe Tobacco Association
English
F2360232.doc
F2360232.pdf _
i Z no Davidoff SA.
Prof. Dr. Rolf WSgenbaur Comments on
the Likely Effects of the Framework
Convention on the Divesification of the
Firm (Zino Danidoff)
English
F5020495.pdf
I Zona Women's Operation Green,
1 A'filiated to WFUNA
Women and Tobacco, Why it Matters
English
F4420435.doc
F4420435.pdf
WHO Homepage I WHOSIS | WHQSIS Query Service
http 7www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
Public Hearings on the Frame’vo-k Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 1 of26
U-.
Statistics -> Framework Conv-^oE oe Tobacco Control
_iQbajco.Free.Snitatiye gages
Public Hearings on the
Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
Submissions
is web site contains submissions from interested parties for the public hearings
the rramework Convention on Tobacco Control, 12-13 October 2000. The
surpose of the pub ic Hearings is to provide an opportunity for interested parties
o make their views known before the start of the inter-governmentai
tegotiations on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The interested
parties that may provide submissions to the public hearings are private sector
i“< non-governmental organizations and institutions.
"he views mat are expressed in the submissions are solely the responsibility of
the authors ano do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the World
Health Organization.
this web site all eligible submissions as they were received. It
t the submissions have been listed alphabetically This list
I to the eventual order of testimony during the public
of testimony will be communicated to each submitter at a
3iease direct any questions on any of the submissions to fctchearinqs@wi
—
Submitted by
Title
Language
download...
“Dialog Teacher's Association
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
F5700563.doc
F5700563.pdf
i •'Ekozascita"("Environmentai
i Protection) Association
"Ekozascita"("Environmental
Protection") Association Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F573O566,doc
F5730566.pdf
■
or the Future of Kazakhstan"
■ Youth Association
"For the Future of Kazakhstan" Youth
Association Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5740567.doc
F5740567.pdf
“Istocnik" ("Source") Social Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
"Lastocka" ("Skylark") Social Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
j "Murager” Oblast Children's
1 Organization
"Murager" Oblast Childre's Oganizatlon
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
- ’ .■"omosc" ('’Help") Soda; Fund
"Pomosc" (“Help") Social Fund
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
Russian
' "Dialog’1 Teacher's Association
—
L____——...--------------- —..................
»
•;tocnik" ("Source”) Social Fund
I
=====================
i
astocks" (“Skylark") Social Fund
'whosis.' statistics.'fete/fete. cfm
||
F5710564.doc
|
F5710564.pdf
|
E5a0fi52Xdoc
F5800573.pdf
E568056X.doc
]
F568O561.pdf
F5640557_.doc
1
F5640557.£df
1
i'< ic Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 2 01'26
<adiga’! (Rainbow") Association
■ ■ Mothers and Invalid Children
*Radiga"("Rainbow") Association of
Mothers and Invalid Children
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
Russian
F5720565,.doc
F5720565.pdf
1 ’‘Sodejstvie" ("Cooperation") Social
’ Fund (in Rudnyj)
"Sodejstvie" ("Cooperation") Social
Fund Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5760569.doc
F5760569.pdf
( ' '/oung Leaders of Kostanaj"
1 Association
"Young Leaders of Kostanaj"
Association Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
Russian
F5750568.doc
F5750568.pdf
j Academy for Nursing Studies,
India
Academy for Nursing Studies; India
Submission to WHO for the Public
Hearings In FCTC
English
F2850278.pdf
F2850278.rtf
Submission from Action on Smoking
and Health Australia
English
F2460242.doc
F2460242.pdf
Pre-hearing Submission
English
F3290322.pdf
F3290322.rtf
L
■ Action and Smoking and Health
(Australia)
i
don Council Against Tobacco
i
tion on Smoking and Health
(ASH Wales)
ASH Wales Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on Framework Convention on
Tobacco Controls
English
F3410333.doc
F3410333.pdf
i Action on Smoking and Health
. (ASH) (Scotland)
Submission to WHO on the FCTC
English
F2540250.pdf
F2540250.rtf
i Action on Smoking and Health
: (ASH) (US)
FCTC Hearings
English
F2530249.pdf
F2530249.rtf
Action on Smoking and Health
i (London)
Submission from ASH London to WHO
Hearings on the Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control
English
F2890282.doc
F2890282.pdf
■ Action on Smoking and Health
i Canada (ASH Canada)
ASH Canada Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F6530646.doc
F6530646.pdf
' A'tion on Smoking and Health
; ■ undation (Tnailand)
Pre-Hearing Submission from Action on
Health and Smoking Foundation to
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control Hearings
English
! A rtions Against Tobacco (The
TEAN-AAT FCTC Submissions
English
F1860182.doc
F1860182.pdf
F1930189.doc
i
1
F1930189.pdf
' tnvironmentai Action Network
j^LTO) AAT-TEAN
I ADHUNIK (We Prevent Smoking)
Submission by ADHUNIK To WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F5300523.pdf
! Adorers of the Blood of Christ
j (ASC)
ASC Comments to the WHO on
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F1670163.doc
F1670163.pdf
■ Adsmith Communications
Adsmith Communications Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6150608.pdf
1 Advocacy Institute, Washington
The Advocacy Institute Submission to
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
F1590154.doc
F1590154.pdf
' >gean Tobacco Exporters' Union
Aegean Tobacco Exporters' Union
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F5150508.doc
F5150508.pdf
' A ReC ( Applied Fiscal Research
Centre University ofCape Town
1 South Africa). The Economics of
1 Tobacco Control in South Africa
Submission to the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control by The
Economics of Tobacco Control In South
Africa Project
English
F137013S.doc
F1370135.pdf
■
1
1 'Project.
http
A-ww-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
9/29/00
Pub it Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 3 of26
' '-can Centre for 'Empowerment
■ -ce- and Advocacy (AC-EGA)
Testimony for the Tobacco Control
Hearing
English
F0280028,doc
■ 0280028^
■ A U BRA (Tobacco Growers
. Association of Brazil)
Submission for Public Records as part
of the Public Hearings on the Framwork
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F0440041.pdf
■ Aga Khan University Community
; Health Sciences
Aga Khan University Submission
Communtiy Health Sciences to WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F1990195.pdf
F1990195.rtf
: Aga Khan University- Tobacco or
i PASS (Pakistan Anti Smoking
j Society)
Resolution of Support for the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (FCTC)
English
F1030100.doc
F1030100.pdf
i AiPMTMA (All India Pan Masala &
1 Tobacco Manufacturers
I Association)
AIPMTMA" s Written Submission in
Response to the FCTC Public Hearing's
To WHO Framework Convention To
Tobacco Control
English
F1720168.pdf
F1720168.rtf
Submission to the WHO of the Global
Tobacco Control Convention
English
F1740170.doc
F1740170.pdf
'
|
. A coho! and Drug Information
i Center
Alcohol and Drug Information Center
Submission to WHO Public Hearing no
FCTC
Russian
F6380631.pdf
|
; Alcohol and Drug Information
: Center (ADIC)
ADIC Submission to WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control FCTC
Public Hearings
English
F1870183.doc
F1870183.pdf
'A eppo School of Medicine
Aleppo School of Medicine Submission
to WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F6400633.doc
F6400633.pdf
' A India Bidi Cigar & Tobacco
i Workers Federation
| All India Bldi Cigar & Tobacco Workers
Federation Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F4560449.pdf
r
j A ■ Cured Tobacco Association of
■
-nbabwe
1 All India Bidi Industry Federation
All India Bidi Industry Federation
Submission to WHO Tobacco Free
Initiative on FCTC Framework
Convention On Tobacco Control
English
F2000196.doc
F2000196.pdf
; a . India Manufacturers’
•ganisation (KSB)
Submission
English
F1760172.doc
F1760172.pdf
i A .iance for Lung Cancer Advocacy,
I Support, and Education
Alliance for Lung Cancer Advocacy,
Support, and Education Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F5890582.doc
F5890582.pdf
i Alliance for Tobacco Control (ATC)
ATC Submission to Who For FCTC
English
F1980194.pdf
F1980194.rtf
i A, iance Frangaise pour la Sante: Coalition centre le Tabagisme
Contribution
French
F3240317.doc
F3240317.pdf
S merican Academy of Family
j Physicians (AAFP)
AAFP Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F3000293.doc
F3Q00293.pdf
I American Association For Health
I Education
American Association For Health
Education Submission to WHO for
Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F3400332.pdf
F3400332.rtf
- nerican Association for World
• ■ nalth
FCTC
English
F3260319.pdf
F3260319.rtf
, American Cancer Society (ACS)
Comments of the American Cancer
Society on the Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control
English
F3890382.doc
F3890382.pdf
■ ww'w-nt.who.mt/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
9/29/00
PubiiC Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 4 of
1
I
' nerican College of Occupational
<j c Environmental Medicine
comments of The American College of
Occupational and Environmental
Medicine To the World health
organization's Frameword Convention
on Tobacco Control
English
F5880581.doc
.£588058Lfidf
American College Of Chest
Physicians
Written Testimony Submitted By D.
Robert McCaffree, MD, FCCP Past
President of the American College of
Chest Physicians Before the WHO on
the Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
Fl680i.--Z
American Enterprise Institute
(AEI)
Comments to the WHO on the Proposed
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
Submission of The American Heart
Association for the WHO Framework
Cinvention on Tobacco Control Hearing
English
F4230416.doc
F4.230416.pdf
Comments by the American Lung
Assocaition
English
F0540051.doc
a-nerican Lung Association of Los
Angeles County
American Lung Association Of Los
Angeles County Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F411O4O4.pdf
F4110404.rtf
I
|
American Lung Association of
Metropolitan Chicago
Comments to the WHO Re: Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F1020Q99.doc
F1020099.pdf
j
American Lung Association of New
1 Mmpshire
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control Comments
English
F1780174.doc
F1780174.pdf
|
1 American Lung Association of New
Jersey
Statement
English
F6310624.pdf
i American Lung Association of New
I York State, INC
Comments to the WHO FCTC
English
F2520248.doc
F2520248.pdf
j American Lung Association Of
1 Queens(ALAQ)
American Lung Association Of Queens'
Comments to WHO Concerning the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F1650161.pdf
F1650161.rtf
|
1 ' nerican Lung Association of
: t;-;cramento- Emigrant 1 -ails
American Lung Association of
Sacramento- Emigrant Trails
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on
FCTC
English
F4590452.pdf
|
i American Lung Association of San
1 Francisco and San Mateo
1 Countries
comments
English
F6290622.pdf
j
F629O622.rtf
1
American Lung Association of
Santa Ciara-San Senito Counties
Support of a Strong and Enforeable
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F3130306.doc
F3130306.pdf
i
American Heart Association
nerican Lung Association
L
___
F.1000096.doc
F1000096.pdf
.
.
.
.
American Lung Association of
I South Dakota
Comments in support of the Framework
Convention
English
F1800176.pdf
F1800176.rtf
i American Medical Association
’ (AMA)
Comments From the AMA on the
Proposed WHO Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control
English
F1960192.doc
F1960192.pdf
nerican Society of Addiction
; Medicine
ASAM Statement for WHO on the
Framework Convention on TobaccoControl
English
i American Society of Clinical
• Cacology (ASCO)
Testimony on the WHO's FCTC
English
.www-nt.who.int/whosis'statistics/fctc/fctc.ofm
.
1
F053Q050.doc
I
F053Q0S0.pdf
'
F3270320.pdf
Public Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 5 of 26
American Thoracic Society Comments
on the FCTC
English
F4600453.pdf
j
To the Chair of the Public Hearings
Session Framework Convention on
Tobacco
English
F0830081.doc
F0830081.pdf
|
Andhr Farmers Forum Submission to
WHO Public Hearings on FCTC
English
F4580451.pdf
Andhra Tendu Leaves Workers
welfare Union
Public Hearings on Global Tobacco
Control Convention
English
F6010594.pdf
ANSH Clinic
ANSH Clinic Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F6200613.pdf
Aomori Association Against
Tobacco
We need FCTC at once. We said NO
TOBACCO ANY MORE!!
English
ne.'icsn Thoracic Society
A latolian Respiratory Society
Andhra Farmers Forum
1
|
F3300323.pdf
F3300323.rtf
I
j
F4530446.pdf
i
Arthritis Society
The Arthritis Society Submission to
WHO Public Hearings on FCTC
English
ASH Ireland
ASH Ireland Submission to Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F6510644.doc
A .Ian Pacific Partners for
■ mpowerment and Leadership
(APPEAL)
Comments
English
F2510247.pdf
F2510247.rtf
1
I
Asociacidn de Exportadores de
Tabaco, Inc.
Convenio Marco Para La Lucha
Antitabaquica Documento De Posicidn
Spanish
F6250618.doc
F6250618.pdf
|
1
F6550648.doc
j
F6550648.pdf
'
j
i Asociaclon de Productores de
; Cigarros de la Republics
i cominicana
Convenio Marco Para La Lucha
Antitabaquica Documento De Posicidn
Spanish
i Asociacidn Dominicana de la
Industria del Cigarillo, Inc.
Convenio Marco Para La Lucha
Antitabdquica Documento De Posicidn
Spanish
F4940487.doc
F4940487.pdf
Convenio Marco para la Luch
Antitabaquica—Comentarios previos a
la reunidn de 12-13 de octubre de
2000
Spanish
F6280621.doc
F6280621.pdf
I
1 a ociacidn Mexicans para la
; i1 cvencidn de la Aterosderosis y
| >s Complicaciones (AMPAC)
Convenio Marco para la Luch
Antitabdquica—Comentarios previos a
la reunidn de 12-13 de octubre de
2000
| Spanish
F5910584.doc
F5910584.pdf
•
i
j Association Des Droits Des Non| Fumeurs (ADNF)
ADNF Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F3150308.doc
F3150308.pdf
1
|
i Association for Non-Smokers
Identification of Organizations
Participating in Minnesota Comments
on the WHO Frame work Convention
English
F4380431.doc
F4380431.pdf
:
j
, A-.sociation for Non-Smokers'
j Rights (ANSR)
Submission by ANSR to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F3140307.dcc
F3140307.pdf
! Association for the Prevention of
| Drug Abuse (MANAS)
MANAS Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F4710464.doc
F4710464.pdf
|
1
F0920089.doc
1
1 Asociacidn Guatemaiteca de
Aterosderosis
1 Association of European Cancer
' 1 eagues Members of the UICC)
. r .sociatlon of Maternal and Child
’ i r.alth Programs
Comment from ECL to the WHO Public
Hearings on the Global Tobacco Control
Convention
Assocaition of Maternal and Child
Health Submission to WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
http //www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
English
English
F0920089.pdf
'
F1770173.doc
1
F177Q.173.Bdf
I
■c Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Page 6 of26
Association of Tobacco Service
(.r-porations
Association of Tobacco Service
Corporations Comments on the WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F203.0197.doc
F2010197.pdf
'
!
.sociation of Uganda Women
Medicai Doctors
Submssion from the Association of
Uganda Women Medical Doctors to
WHO Public Hearings On FCTC
English
F3040297.pdf
!
Association Togolaise de Lutte
Contre L'Alcoolisme et les Autres
roxico manias
Association Togolaise de Lutte Contre
L'Alcooloisme et les Autres
Toxicomanies Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
“ -sociazione Italians Genitori
member of WFC
F3040297.rtf
'
French
F5610554.pdf
F5610554.rtf
1
1
Associazione Italians Gentori
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F4540447.pdf
;
Associazione Nazionale Pubbliche
Assistenze
Submission from A.N.P.A.S.
English
F3310324.doc
F3310324.pdf
|
Asthma Society and Respiratory
foundation of New Zealand
The Asthma Society and Respiratory
Foundation of New Zealand Submissio
to WHO Public Hearings On FCTC
English
F3560348.doc
F3560348.pdf
:
a .THO (The Association of State
ASTHO Policy Statement on Tobacco
Use, Prevention and Control
English
F5630556.doc
F5630556.pdf
1
;
A'-AK- Maori Smokefree Coalition
ATAK Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
F3510344.doc
'
F3230316.doc
F3230316.pdf
,
;
F5860579.doc
1
'
•i d Territorial Health Officials)
Australian Cancer Society
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
I Austrian Cancer Society
Austrian Cancer Society Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
English
A istrian Council on Smoking and
, Health
WHO Public Hearing on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control
| English
F1700166.doc
FJ.700166.odf
i Bakari Engineers & Industries
i Limited
Bakari Engineers & Industries Limited
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F6100603.pdf
| Bangladesh Free Trade Union
' Congress
Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress
Submission to the FCTC- Public
Hearings at WHO
English
F2020198.doc
F2020198.pdf
■ B iigian National Coalition against
i i-rbacco
submission to the WHO public hearings
English
F1840180.doc
F1840180.pdf
: Bnarat Pesticides Industries (P)
• Limited
Submissions for Public Hearings of
English
. ILuecoat Pvt. Ltd
Bluecoat Pvt. Ltd Submission to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
1
1
F6020595.pdf
j
F6210614.pdf
I
F0500Q47.doc
j
F050Q047.pdf
|
F0560053.doc
F0560053.pdf
j
F3390337.pdf
|
F3390337.rtf
1
! iody Against Destructive Social
I Activities
Submission to FCTC re: Public Hearings
at WHO
English
' Boston Women's Health Book
i Collective
FCTC- Hearings Final Notice
English
j Brazilian National Cancer Institute
WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control Hearings
English
; British American Tobacco
British American Tobacco's to the WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F0840Q80.doc
F0840080.pdf
■
|
1 • itish Thoracic Society (BTS)
BTS Submission to WHO Public Hearing
on FCTC
English
F5830576.rtf
:
httr 7www-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
Page 7 of 26
k Convention on Tobacco Control
Broadcast Worldwide
F6000593.pdf
!
:• .mdesvereinigung der Deutschen
i .nahrungsindustrfe e.V. (BE)
:ec.. at or of :ood and
0. ink Industries)
3VE Comments on the WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Controls
English
F2910284.doc
F2910284.pdf
|
|
C Everett Koop Institute At
carmouth College
Forwarding Comments From Dr. Koop
Regarding WHO Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
F2030199.doc
,
campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
Tobacco Free Initiative Campaign for
Tobacco Free kids Submission to WHO
Public Hearings On FCTC
English
F3860379.doc
|
CAN Dutch Nonsmokers
Association
CAN Dutch Nonsmokers Association
Mandate: Nonsmokers Rights
English
F1810177.pdf
F1810177.rtf
|
Canadian Cancer Society
Taking Global Action on Tobacco
English
F2550251.doc
F2550251.pdf
'
•
; inadian Diabetes Association
Canadian Diabeties Association
Submission to WHO Puiblic Hearings on
FCTC
English
C inadian Foundation for the Study
.■ Infant Deaths
SIDS and links to Tobacco
i Cancer Association in South Africa
L
_
J
English
3
World Health Organization, Tobacco
must be avoid — Mr. Kingsley Oduro
Gyenti
i
6CfiCy or-
o.
English
1
Broadcast Worldwide Submission to
WHO Public Hearing on FCTC
F4640457.doc
|
F4640457.pdf
I
English
F1460142.doc
F1460142.pdf
|
Submission for the WHO Public Hearing
on the FCTC
English
F3470340.doc
j
1 Cancer Institute (WIA)
Submission from Chennai, India
English
F2800273.pdf
F2800273.rtf
!
■ Cancer Nurses Society of Australia
Statement from the Cancer Nurses of
Australia to the WHO Public Hearings
on the FCTC
English
F1790175.pdf
|
■ Cancer Research Campaign
The Cancer Research Campaign
Submission to WHO Hearings on the
FCTC
English
F2060202.doc
F2060202.pdf
1 Cancer Society of New Zealand
Tne Cancer Society Of New Zealand
Submission to WHO Public Hearings on
FCTC
English
F3530346.doc
F3530346.pdf
:
1
I CirdioVision 2020
Cardiovision 2020 Submission to WHO
Public Hearing ob FCTC
English
F6350628.doc
j
F6350628.pdf
i
F0570054.doc
i
; Center For Chronical Fatigue
! Researches, Academy of Medical
Sciences of Ukraine
Pre-Hearing Submission from Centre
for Cronical Fatigue Researchers,
Academy of Medical Sciences of
Ukraine
English
j Centre for Environment Education
Centre for Environment Education
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F6190612.pdf
i Centre For Human Environment,
i institute for Development Studies
Pre-hearing Submission by Haddas
Wolde Giorgis, Deputy Director Centre
for Human Environment, Institute for
Development Studies
English
F0460043.doc
F0460043.pdf
■
1
F0460043.rtf
j
The Center For Research in Primary
Community Care Submission to WHO
for FCTC
English
F2040200.doc
F204020Q.pdf
'
1 Centre for Research in Primary and
1 C immunity Care Hertfordshire
iversty
http '/www-nt who.;nt'whos!s'statistics/fctc/fctc.cfm
F0570054.pdf
-
ic Hearings or. the rramework Convention on Tobacco Control
Centre for Tobacco Control
Research
The Need to Control Tobacco
Promotion
English
F2080204.doc
F2080204.odf
1
I
< *cTNA (Centre for Health
• ucation Training and Nutrition
Awareness)
CHETNA Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F4200413.doc
1
c "icago Chapter National Slack
\ -rses Association (NBNA CC)
NBNA CC Submission to WHO
Convention on Tobacco Control
English
F2050201.odf
I
F2050201.rtf
|
Chinese Academy of Preventive
>v ^dicine
Chinese Academy of Preventive
Medicine Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
English
F6420635.doc
1
C 'vnese Progressive Association
C assroots Organization
Comments on FCTC- Chjnese
Progressive Association
English
F1920188.doc
;
Cnittaranjan National Cancer
Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute
Dept, of Epidermology & Bio Statistics
Submission for FCTC
English
F2090205.pdf
|
Chuo Clinic
Submission by the Chuo Clinic to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F5280521.pdf
I
CMA Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
__________________ 1
F4650458.pdf
’
h
English
<a
Pre-Hearing Submission from Centre
for Social Resarch and Training to WHO
Public Hearings On FCTC
<
°
if<» c~o
Centre 'or Social Research and
Training
________ I
< 'JRET
CIPRET Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
French
C eanair Campaign for a Smokei r ee Environment
Smoking Affects Us All
English
CNTC (Chinese National Tobacco
: Corporation)
CNTC Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
: Coalition Against Cigarette
j Smoking and Drug Abuse
■ (CACSDA)
| Coalition Against Smoking
F5980591.pdf
F2100206.doc
F2100206.odf
j
|
Chinese
F6470640.doc
F6470640.pdf
»
i
CACSDA Submission to WHO Public
Hearings on FCTC
English
F3180311.pdf
F3180311.rtf
:
Submission from the German Coalition
Against Smoking
English
F3750368.doc
!
! Coalition on a Smoke-free
i ■■ vironment for kids in japan
Pre-hearing Submission on WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Controls By Hiroshi Nogami
English
F0640060.doc
~F0640060.pdf
1
i
■ ' /iege of Family Medicine
College of Family Medicine Submission
to WHO Public Hearing no FCTC
English
F6520645.doc
I
' C imision National Permanente de
1 :. cha Antitabaquica (Coiat- Peru)
Peru National Commission on Anti
Tobacco Fight Submssion to WHO
Public Hearing on FCTC
English
F5930S86.doc
I
■ Cumision para el Control del
-maquismo de la Asociacion
Medica National del Uraguay
i Tnoicato Medico del Uraguay")
Commission for Tobacco Control of the
Uraguay Medical Association
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F5940587.doc
1
1 Cometh Nacionai de Prevencidn del
:.-:oaquismo
Aportacidn del Comitd National de
Prevencidn del Tabaquismo
Spanish
F6330626.doc
F6330626.pdf
|
|
French
F5470540.bdf
|
F256O2S2.doc
English I
L_J F2560252.pdf.
1
Cdmite National Centre Le
\ Fabagisme (CNCT)
CNCT Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
j Commonwealth Medical
I Association
Submission of Evidence from the
Commonwealth Medical Association
hi-; ''v.iMv-nt.who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc.ctm
F3750368.pdf
i
Hearings on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
!i
SI g
b
u ff
i oa
i
!
1
CONACTA Pre Submission to WHO
Public Hearings on FCTC
English
onfdd4ration du Commsrce du
<»tail Aliemand (HDE)
Prise de Position du HDE sur ia
Convention-Cadre de I’Organisation
Mondiale de la Sante du tabac
French
^.'federation Panbeltenique des
ions de Cooperatives Agricoles
’ASEGES) - JNCAB
UNITAB Submission to WHO Public
Hearing on FCTC
French
F312C312J±f
F370036Xdgc
1
F3700363.pdf
|
F6260619.doc
F6260619.pdf
j
jnsumer Education anc Research
•ntre, Suraksha Schoo!
WHO- Hearings on FCTC
English
F2400236.pdf
F240Q236.rtf
>
•
□nsumers Association of
angiadesh (CAB)
Submissiom from CAB to WHO on the
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control FCTC
English
F1570153.doc
F1570153.pdf
;
1
.■rsumers Association of Penang
Support for the Framework Convention
Tobacco Control
English
FQ49Q046.doc
F049Q046.pdf
>
I
F6360629.doc
1
□operative Movement, Kenya
TFI submissions
English
F6360629.pdf
i
F2370233.doc
|
F2370233.pdf
’
F1520148.doc
F1520148.pdf
j
Your invitation to send submissions on
tobacco control from all interested
organisations
English
ouncil on Smoking and Health,
oanese Anti-Tuberculosis
- sedation
Submission from Japanese NGO Council
on Smoking and Health to WHO
Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control
English
/opTech Corporation
Public Hearing in Framework
Convention
English
F0290029.doc
F0290Q29.pdf
•
I
)
oromandai Farmers Forum
fjrrent Opinion and Future Trends
Current Opinion and Future Trends
(Pvt.) Ltd. Submission to WHO Public
Hearings On FCTC
English
£3640356^
F3640356.rtf
Cyprus Association of Cancer
■ -rents and Friends
Submission to the Public Hearings on
the WHO Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control
English
F058Q055.doc
F0580055.pdf
,
j
Jarpana Academy of Performing
Darpana Academy of Performing Arts
Submission to WHO Public Hearing on
FCTC
English
F6120605.pdf
j
iavidoff Zino Davidoff SA
Comment on the Likely Effects of the
Framework Convention on the
Diverslfacation Activites of the Firm
Zino Davidoff SA
English
F1430139.doc
|
F1430139.pdf
1
Monitoring and Remediation of
Aflatoxin and Myotoxin Levels on
Tobacco as a Harm Reduction Strategy
English
F3940387.doc
fentistry Against Tobacco
submission
English
F2580253.doc
Deutsche Bauernverband
Comments by the Deutsche
Bauernverband concerning the
framework agreement on tobacco
control
English
Jeutsche Krebshilfe (German
>:ncer Aid)
The Deutsche Krebshilfe Submission to
FCTC Public Hearings On Framework
Convention On Tobacco Controls
Joutscher Duty Free Verband E.V.
German Duty Free Association)
Submission to WHO concerning FCTC
>l--ay Medical Center, Florida
' r ‘www -nt who.int/whosis/statistics/fctc/fctc. cfm
F2580253.pdf
,
F212Q208 doc
F2120208.pdf
•
English
F1400136.doc
F14Q0136.pdf
i
1
English
F4050398.doc
F4050398_,gdf
'
j
Submission for the Public Hearings on the
Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control on 12th - 13th October 2000.
By
The Community Health Cell (CHC), Bangalore, India,
which is the functional unit of a registered Society for Community Health
Awareness, Research and Action (SOCHARA).
1.
CHC is a professional resource group working in the area of community
health and public health, in the voluntary sector in India, since sixteen years.
Major strategic approaches in\work include training, research, advocacy,
information dissemination, and networking on major health issues/problems
including tuberculosis, malaria and vector borne diseases, HIV/AIDS,
Tobacco control, women’s health, rational therapeutics, promotion of
indigenous systems of health care and addressing poverty ,,and health
relationships. In recent years there is increased interaction with government
and the Health University. The team comprises of 18 memberiincluding
health and social science professionals, supported by an informal network of
25 professionals.
CHC has recognised tobacco related health problems as a major public
health issue since long, but has become more actively involved since the
past 1% years. We support, and are supported by the direction and
enthusiasm of the Tobacco Free Initiative of WHO. We have participated
internationally with the NGO Forum for Health, INGAT and the Global
Alliance for tobacco control globally. Besides the FCTC, which addresses
MNCs, we are concerned about the local industry in India. Locally we
undertake awareness programmes/education and training programmes on
health effects of tobacco use and on tobacco cessation.
Our sources of funding include the Government of India, State government
of Karnataka, WHO-Geneva, Misereor - Germany, Cordaid - Netherlands
and for one year DFID - UK, besides local donations and payment for
services.
2.
Personal Health and Public Health Consequence of tobacco use
2.1
Over the past 50 years, studies conducted globally, including the
outstanding work by Richard and Doel in the UK, have established the
link between tobacco use and various forms of cancer, cardiovascular
disease, gastrointestinal disease, diseases of the reproductive tract
including pregnancy wastage and importance studies in India also beat
this act.
The cause effect relationship between tobacco use in
or chewed
V1'1 from and several adverse ill health consequences on individual is well
established ■
The WHO, the public health community tobacco(gutka, pan masala,
zarda etc) accounting for 27-30% of tobacco use in India and used in^the
Indian subcontinent, with potential for spread elsewhere.
Habitual
chewing of 4-5 packets per day leads to gingivitis, 'leukoplakia,
erythroplakia and to the disabling oral submnious febousis (OSMF).
Over 2-3 decade, a ten-fold increase in incidence of OSMF is noticed
with a shift in age group from those above 40 years to youngest persons
between 25-35 years.
2.3
The effects of passive Smoking/ETS have been accepted by courts.
2.4
More recently the highly addictive nature of nicotine has entered the
public knowledge domain, along with the fact that this critical information
was kept secret and also used to manipulate the product by the tobacco
industry. The consequence and cost to public health of this act by the
industry, which talks of free choice, is enormous.
2.5
The magnitude of tobacco related morbidity and mortality place it among
the league of major public health problems, resulting in much preventable
human suffering to affected persons and their families; to premature
death; to increased health care costs; to loss of productivity; to shift
household income from nutrition and children’s education to spending on
tobacco; and to an overall economic loss to the national economy which
economically poorest countries can ill-afford. A recent report of a 6 year
prospective study by the Indian council of Medical Research
substantiates the last point.
2.6
Or the larger public good, there is need for urgent public policy
“Interventions to mitigete the above. The protection of public health and
public food is the mandated role of governments (national and local); of
professional bodies who have access to knowledge; of international
bodies particularly when there are global! dimensions to the health
problems and the health risks; and of civil society itself when action by
other mandated agencies is ineffective.
2.7
An objective review of tobacco control interventions especially in
developing countries reveal that they have been weak and ineffective.
Rates of tobacco use have infact increased starting at very young ages
during childhood where again the free choice theory fails to hold. As a
medical doctor specialising epidemiology and health policy analysis it is
evident that interventions focussed on cessation counselling and group
health education I awareness concerning the health ill effects of tobacco,
fail to address the determining cause of spread if this behaviour or habit
related problem, namely the dynamics and ingenuity of the tobacco
industry which actively grows, manufacturers, promotes and sells the
product in collaboration with governments. These major shareholders
need to be held accountable and responsible for their policy decisions.
2.2
Given the present global evidence, they need to make informed choices and
based on currently gjqbally_ accepted human rights instruments based on ethical
principle to compensate individuals/families for the harm caused .
3.
We support a series of policy measures that include :
Crop diversification, alternative employment and protection of tobacco
workers.
3.2 Reduction and elimination of government/public subsidy to tobacco
growth, production, manufacture and sale.
3.3 Banning of sponsorship of sports & entertainment by the tobacco
industry.
3.4 Banning of public advertisement of tobacco products.
3.5 Preventing and protecting children and young people from getting
addicted.
3.6 Widespread education and awareness raising about consequences of
tobacco use.
3.7 Tobacco cessation efforts - support to smokers/chewers.
3.8 Banning smoking in public places.
3.9 Support to the WHO in developing and implementing the framework
convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC).
3.10Labeling, regulating nicotine, tar and carbon monoxide content of
cigarettes restricting smoking.
3.11 Banning”chewed tobacco.
3.1
4.
Converting specifics
4.1
In India it is reported that 20% of tobacco use comprised cigarettes, 2730% chewed tobacco (gutka etc) and 50-53% beedies. We need more
accurate date on the sale of unbranded beedies and gutka’s which are
unaccounted for and totally unregulated, as the magnitude of tobacco
use may be larger. There is need for greater product regulation and
safeguarding of health and working conditions of workers in these
sectors who are most often women, children and the poorest sections of
society.
While on the one hand the industry talks of generation of employment
and wealth, the latter is largely in the hands of larger farmers and
business owners. Field studies revved that women in the home-based
industry work 10-12 hours a day for a relatively small remuneration.
Since it is homebased work, children often help out after school hours.
Undercutting and exploitation of women, who may often be uneducated.
4.2. The manufacture and sale of chewed tobacco needs to be banned.
**************************************
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE
Notes from Strategic Hamming Meetmg, Getmeva, 26 March 20®®
Presemt
Clive Bates, ASH (London) - UK - (facilitator, morning)
Elif Dagli, IUATLD - Turkey
Mary Assunta, Consumers Association of Penang - Malaysia
Ruben Israel, UICC/Globalink - Switzerland
Greer van Zyl, Meropa Communications - South Africa
Archie Turnbull, European Respiratory Society - Switzerland
Tom Hudson, ASH Ireland/ENSP/UICC Codes Programme - Ireland
Robert Mecklenburg, FDI World Dental Federation/Intemational Association for Dental
Research - USA
Masood Shaikh, Network for the Rational Use of Medication - Pakistan
Karen Bissell, INGCAT - France
Mahamane Cisse, SOS Tabagisme - Mali
Karen Slama, INGCAT/IUATLD - France
Gonghuan Yang, Chinese Association of Smoking or Health - China
Corinne Bretscher, Medical Women’s International Association - Switzerland
Emma Must, ASH (London) - UK - (facilitator, afternoon)
Ross Hammond, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids - USA
Nancy Kaufman, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation - USA
Judy Wilkenfeld, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids - USA
Konstantin Krasovsky, Alcohol and Drug Information Center - Ukraine
Yussuf Saloojee, National Council Against Smoking - South Africa
Rich Hamburg, American Heart Association - USA
Oronto Douglas, Environmental Rights Action - Nigeria
Lucinda Wykie-Rosenburg, INFACT - USA
Suren Moodliar, INFACT - USA
Cassandra Welch, American Lung Association - USA
Dr Arturo Lomeli, AMEDEC (Consumers International) - Mexico
Juana Dadou, AMEDEC (Consumers International) - Mexico
Allen Jones, American Public Health Association/World Federation of Public Health
Associations
Observing
Therese Lethu - TFI
Karen Lewis - TFI
Chitra Subramaniam - TFI
Major outcomes from meeting
[developments since meeting in square brackets; people to take follow-up actions in bold]
Alliance materials
©
Suggestions for revising Aims and Principles were made; agreed amongst rest of
group present [now incorporated]
■=> NGO positions on FCTC ami protocol] elements
®
Thorough discussion of this. Differing views from different groups about best
approach, along the lines of discussion on e-mail conference and Globalink
(Issues debated included: Is a ‘strong’ FCTC the best thing to argue for? Can we
assert this at this stage? Distribution of measures between FCTC and protocols?
Should convention primarily focus on transboundary aspects of tobacco control etc.)
®
Agreed that the range of views made it impossible to come out with Alliance
position on this at this stage; individual groups will continue to take their own
positions; agreed to keep discussing this amongst the Alliance to see if agreement
can be reached in the future, as the process moves forward.
Activities dturing time week
®
Keeping a record of delegates statements:
-
-
Agreed to produce record sheets to keep a note of what was said by all
delegates during the official process [Nancy Kaufman and Ross Hammond
produced these]
Agreed to have at least one and preferably two note-takers in the conference
hall at any one time [this was done, esp by Nancy Kaufman]
Greer van Zyl offered to type up first draft [done];
[Judy Wilkenfeld/Jenny Forfeit at CTFK have produced final versions for
distribution via Alliance e-mail conference]
•
Liaison with TFI during week:
- Emma Must and Judy Wilkenfeld agreed to liaise with Chitra Subramaniam
and Karen Lewis at TFI during the week [done, especially over timing of
NGO interventions]
©
Lobbying:
- Alliance members were urged to make contact with delegates from their
own country and countries from their region where possible during the week
(to get to know the delegates; ascertain their positions; offer NGO positions
etc)
- Sheets to record conversations were suggested [done; limited success at
filling these in during the week; CTFK are incorporating this into analysis
of official delegate statements - see above]
®
Coordination of NGO interventions during official process of Second Working
Group:
- Most important issues needing rebuttal identified as: farmers/agriculture;
economics (backing up the World Bank report);
- Agreed to try to use all the slots offered for NGO interventions - and to try
to coordinate who would use which slots to make which points;
- Agreed to hold daily Alliance meeting at the end of each day to debrief and
coordinate work for following day [done] [Interventions made by different
NGOs were circulated via Alliance e-mail conference and Globalinkinternational list during the week of the Second Working Group meeting and
will also be made available via the Alliance website]
o
Alliance media briefing:
- Agreed to book a room for this for Tuesday morning in a room near UN
press corps, and to work on content and speakers at end of play Monday
[done].
Fundraising
o
Invitation extended to all members wishing to attend first meeting of Alliance
Fundraising Group (5pm Sunday 26th March), [see separate notes of this meeting]
Emma Must
ASH (London)
April 2000
For FCA
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE
Notes from daily Alliance meetings/debriefings during week of Second Framework
Convention Working Group Meeting, 26-29 March 2000
[developments since meeting's in square brackets; people to take follow-up actions in
bold]
Main points
Alliance press briefing
© Agreed to hold this at 11,30am on Tuesday 28th March, in Salle de Presse II at
Palais des Nations, Geneva, to catch media already attending the weekly UN press
briefing at 10.30am,
®
Agreed line-up of speakers: Yussuf Saloojee (National Council Against Smoking,
South Africa); Mahamane Cisse (SOS Tabagisme, Mali); Ross Hammond,
(Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, USA); Lucinda Wykle-Rosenburg (INFACT,
USA); Masood Shaikh (Network for the Rational Use of Medication. Pakistan);
John Kapito (Consumers Association of Malawi); Chair - Emma Must (ASH
London, UK).
*
Agreed to produce basic Alliance press release for use during press briefing and
to go to main wires
®
Agreed sub-group to catch press coming out of UN press briefing to bring them to
ours
[All done; 12 media representatives attended including Reuters, International Press
Service, and the Guardian, plus a number of regional wires.]
Suggested refinements for any future Alliance press briefing:
maximize agreement beforehand about messages beforehand between
different participants;
- where possible, check views to be expressed about standpoints of particular
countries with NGO reps from that country' in advance;
- have large name labels'for panel;
- have French translator available on the panel, not located in the audience;
- use names of supporting groups on press release;
include list of all Alliance members (present and not) who are prepared to be
interviewed;
- maximise number of southern groups on the panel, with a southern chair if
possible, to try' to counteract press tendency to quote northern groups
- systematically put media from different countries/regions in touch with NGOs
present by walking the corridors of the UN press corps in advance - offer
spokespeople in different languages to relevant media.
®
®
Daily reports from Geneva
®
Agreed to attempt daily reports to Alliance e-mail conference from Geneva, [done
informally by Nancy Kaufman]
4/27/00 9:56 AM
NGO participation in official process
•
Agreed to set up an NGO Participation Working Group to develop Alliance
policy on NGO participation in the official FCTC process. Ross Hammond
(Consultant to Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids) and Oronto Douglas,
Environmental Rights Action, Nigeria) to take the lead and produce
recommendations for Alliance policy on inclusion of NGOs within the official
process - and how we might lobby to achieve this. They also to consult with
Yussuf Saloojee. [For more details about this Working Group, please contact
Ross at margross@igc.org or Oronto at eluan@infoweb. abs. net ]
NGO reps on Government delegations included during Second Working Group
session: BELGIUM - Luk Joossens (UICC); UKRAINE - Konstantin Krasovsky
(ABIC); CANADA - Ken Kyle (Canadian Cancer Society); POLAND Witold
Zatonski; CZECH REPUBLIC - Hana Sovina; VENEZUELA - Manuel
Adrianza; PERU - Carlos Farias.
• Suggestions for October negotiations:
- Agreed to encourage as many Alliance members as possible to get on to their
government delegations for the October negotiations (Coordinating Group to
act).
- Agreed to maximise communication between Alliance and those NGOs on
government delegations during the negotiations.
- Agreed to encourage those NGO reps already on delegations but not yet active
within the Alliance to join us (Emma to contact them).
— Agreed to request a clear explanation of the detail of the rules concerning
NGO intervention (eg. can one named official NGO intervene more than once
during a particular session?) before negotiations start. (Ross or Emma to
request from TFI).
- Agreed that we need experienced Alliance members present in or near the
negotiating hall at all times (and not all involved in the parallel press briefing
for example!) - in case of unexpected developments and the need to agree
interventions quickly.
- Agreed to provisionally agree options for NGO interventions at the start of the
negotiations - to give ourselves a timetable to work to (whilst retaining
reactive flexibility)
- INGCAT offered to look at the list of NGOs in official relations and make
recommendations io the Alliance about how they might wish to divide
interventions up by topic according to expertise of different groups. (Karen
Bissell or Karen Slama to act)
•
Suggestions for additional Alliance activity during the negotiations in October
•
Produce overnight Alliance newsletter to put on delegates seats each morning
Informing NGOs in advance of FCTC meetings
e Suggested improvement for next time: Alliance (Coordinating Group) to spell
out as clearly as possible for those who will be attending what is likely to happen
during the negotiations, and what their involvement might be - eg making an
intervention in conference hall; speaking on a press briefing panel: lobbying their
country representative, etc.
WHO Public hearings, Geneva, early October 2000
• Karen Lewis from TFI gave us a short briefing
See WHO press release at http://www.whoJnt/in^r-M00/^^j2g00^2.hunl. for more
details
- TFI to provide more details in due course.
• Agreed Alliance would encourage NGO submissions - by post, plus some in
person (Coordinating Group to act in due course).
•
? Include fundraising for NGO participation in hearings within UNF proposal
(Alliance Development Working Group to act on).
<=> Alliance admin
©
Does the Alliance need a full-time secretarial? Could this be done crossregionally? - wouldn’t necessarily need to be located in one place. (Alliance
Development Working Group possibly to include this in their draft UNF
proposal).
==> Burson Marsteller being hired by WHO
• Great concern was expressed amongst Alliance members present about this PR
firm being hired by WHO given history of acting for tobacco industry, plus their
specialism in dealing with “crisis management'’ on controversial issues arousing
protest eg. Union Carbide, Exxon Valdiz, Three Mile Island etc. etc.
o
Lucinda/Emma to draft letter to WHO, and seek support from Alliance
members.
Emma Must
ASH (London)
April 2000
For FCA
FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE
Notes from Alliance Development (Fundraising) Working Group Meeting, Geneva,
26.3.00
Present
Suren Moodliar and Lucinda Wykle-Rosenburg, INFACT, USA;
Judy Glanz, Judy Wilkenfeld, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, USA:
Mary Assunta, Consumers Association of Penang, Malaysia;
Emma Must, ASH (London), UK;
Oronto Douglas, Environmental Rights Action, Nigeria;
Dr Arturo Lomeli, Juana Dadou, AMEDEC (Consumers International), Mexico;
Robert Mecklenburg. FDI World Dental Federation/International Association for Dental
Research, USA;
Masood Shaikh, Network for the Rational Use of Medication, Pakistan;
Allen Jones, American Public Health Association/World Federation of Public Health
Associations, USA;
Cassandra Welch, American Lung Association, USA;
Nancy Kaufman, Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, USA.
Apologies
Yussuf Saloojee, National Council Against Smoking, South Africa
Main outcomes/action points
[developments since meeting in square brackets; people to take follow-up actions in bold]
!=> Agreed to set up this Working Group.
Agreed that main task for this group is to pull together a funding proposal, to be
agreed by Alliance, to go to United Nations Foundation via TFI to fund further NGO
support of the FCTC. (We have been invited by TFI to do this). Lucinda, Mary and
Judy W offered to produce first draft of outline proposal then circulate round
Working Group for comment - during April. (Possible elements of proposal could
include: funding to bring more NGOs in to FCTC process, eg consumers,
environmental, ??farmers groups; funding for regional meetings of FCA; funding for
human resources per region; funding to enable access to e-mail where non exists from
member groups; ?full-time secretariat for Alliance, spread across regions, etc.).
■=> A steed to aim for Alliance to get initial outline proposal to UNF (via TFI) during
May.
Agreed to actively approach other Alliance members to increase regional
representation within the Working Group:
•
•
SE Asia: Mary to approach various people in the region; Bob Mecklenburg to
contact ‘Meera’
Africa: Lucinda to contact Pamphil Kweyuh
•
Western Pacific: Lucinda to contact NATT member from Philippines
•
CEE/FSU: Emma to contact Konstantin Krasovsky and Elif Dagli
Emma to copy these notes to Chitra at TFI. [done]
■=> [For more info about the Alliance Development (Fundraising) Working Group, or if
you would like to get actively involved in the Group, please contact Lucinda WykleRosenberg at INFACT kicinda.infact@iuno.com OR Judy Wilkenfeld at Campaign for
Tobacco-Free Kids JWiIkenfeld@.TobaccoFreeKids.org OR Mary Assunta al Consumers
Association of Penang mM.sunta@tm,netjny. ]
•=> [If you were present at the Alliance Development Working Group Meeting in Geneva
but do not wish to be actively involved in the Group, please also inform Lucinda,
Judy W or Mary as above].
Emma Must
ASH (London)
April 2000
For FCA
2 of2
4/27/00 9:54 AM
NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEFTTNOS
Subject: NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEETINGS
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:20:46 +0100
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org >
CC: "Chitra Subramaniam" <subramaniamc@who.ch>, "Karen Lewis" <klewis@.advocacy.org>,
<lethirt@who.ch>
.onal Campaign Manager
(0)171 739 5902
:@dia:
^FCA - Strategic Plaminig Meeting 26.3.00 - final-doe;
+1FCA - Daily dcbricfins.s_,nptes 26.3.00 - final.doc
1 of2
NOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEETINGS
Name: FCA - Strategic Planning Meeting 26.3.00 final.doc
Type: Winword File (applicationinsword)
Encoding: base64
Name: FCA - Daily debriefings notes 26.3.00 - final.doc
Type: Winword File (applicatiotv'msword)
Encoding: base64
Proposal for NGO Participation in the FCTC
Subject: Proposal for NGO Participation in the FCTC
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 13:38:14 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Proposal for NGO Paraci: 3:10-1 >-i f .0 /C f\_
ig would be to start a debate within the FCTC
iribute comments and feedback: on this proposal.
:he next step would be for the Alliance to appr
:s (e.g. Canada and the Philippines) and discus
2 of 2
5,9/00 9:34 AM
Floor Comments from the Second Wo; kins Wo. ..p Meeting on t he FCTC. March 27-29,2000
Subject: Floor Comments from the Second Working Working Group Meeting on t he FCTC, March 27-29,
2000
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 10:36:48 -0400
From: AJForeit <JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
To: 'Tctcall@globalink.org'" <fctcall@globalink.org >
CC: Judy Wilkenfeld <JWilkenfeld@TobaccoFreeKids.org>, Judith Glanz <jglanz@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
low Comments from the Secoi ■ Work; ig Wo p Meeting <m the FCTC. March 27-29,2000
Regort_bv Subject 4-12-00.pdf•
_
i^ReportbyCounttv 4-12-00.PDF
<rf2
Name: Report by Subject 4-12-00.pdf
Type: applicatioivpdf (application'pdf)
Encoding: base64
Name: ReportbyCountry 4-12-00.PDF :
Type: application'pdf (application/pdf);
Encoding: base64
5/9/00 10:
OVERNMENT DELEGATES LIST
Subject: GOVERNMENT DELEGATES LIST
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 12:21:48 -0100
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com >
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
; (00296) INFO: M. bovis, dmg resistant - Spain
Subject: tbnet (00296) INFO: M. bovis, drug resistant - Spain
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 15:08:45 EDT
From: ISmith3287@aol.com
To: tbnet@mos.com.np
tbnet (00296)
INFO: M. bovis,
drug resistant
Spain
From: ProMED-mail post <http://www.promedmail ■org>
^khe above was forwarded to Dr. Timothy Brewer for comment. - DS'l
^rom: Timothy Brewer <Timothy.Brewer@lshtm.ac.uk>
As a member of the _M. tuberculosis_ complex, _M. bovis_ can behave just like
_M. tuberculcsis_. It can cause predominately respiratory disease and be
spread by driolct nuclei. Th
in 1_;.1.:
tracked t. at least 1
hospitals. One patient died of the disease in the Netherlands.
The presence of a new case with the same strain does not imply chat the
original outbreak is continuing. Many people were likelv to have been
:ected with _M. bovis_ during the original outbreak. Since no treatment
given to prevent latent _M. bovis_ infections acquired during the tutbreai
from progressing to active disease, one would expect periodic cases to
continue to occur over the years. Most infections in HIV-infected persons
would progress to active h . ■ - rather quickly, especially as individual
!ib
5.10/00 4:35 PM
ei (00296) INFO: M. bovis, drug resistant - Spain
The history of recent hospitalizations among the new case suggest that this
' Government increases Tax On Cigaxei
Siihipn?: _\Z Government Increases Tax On Cigarettes
rate: Wed, 10 May 2000 09:41:41 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.nz>
To: "Framework Convention Alliance" <fctcall@globalink.org>
NB. SNZ1 = $US0.50c, approximately
Tobacco tax rise will net Govt $20m
Today’s 14 per cent tax rise on tobacco will net the Government $20 million
this financial year, with more substantial savings to follow, says Health
Legislation passed under urgency yesterday adds $1 to the price of a pack of
20 cigarettes, taking the average price from $7.20 to $8.20. The price of a
50g packet of roll-your-own tobacco will increase by $3.13 to between $15
and $20.
Mrs King said taxation was effective in discouraging smoking.
"There are almost 5000 smoking-related deaths in New Zealand each year, and
that doesn't count all those who live impaired lives after strokes, or heart
attacks, or other illnesses, including various cancers," she said.
The tax rise was expected to cut tobacco consumption this year by 7 per
:ent,
nd add $iOm to Government coffers this financial year, $110m next
year, $79m the
ill ving year, and $82m in the 2002-03 financial year.
"This is money we need to spend on health and other social initiatives," Mrs
King said.
The increase was welcomed by anti smoking groups, although many want the
vernment tc de
are tc help smokers q it.
Sr.o:<etree Coalition director Barbara Langford said less than 2 per cent of
the money collected from smokers was spent on preventing or reducing
smoking. The tax increase would reduce smoking and give the Government more
spending power.
“We call on the Government to allocate a substantial budget to encouraging
and support smokers tc give up," Ms Langford said.
"The Government has an obligation to spend much more of the money collected
from smokers cn helping them to quit."
The Quit Group, Which runs the Government-funded Quitline, also wants more
s ?nt
. ax 1 ore
r '
. :
:
- ctssat::. Sptkeswuman Helen Glasgow said the
11 per cent reduction in smoking.
She ex
Quitline would increase from today, and said "a whole
lot more" monev should be spent on media campaigns to highlight the dangers
of second-hand smoke and the addictiveness of tbbScco, and on helping
smokers quit.
Greens’ spokeswoman Sue Bradford supported any move to discourage smoking,
but feared the tax increase would hit poor people hard.
5/10/00 9:50 AM
Proposal for NGO Participatioii in die FCTC
Subject: Proposal for NGO Participation in the FCTC
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 17:40:30 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcaU@globalink.org>
Subject: Proposal for NGO Participation in the FCTC
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 17:40:30 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcail@giobalink.org>
Dear Colleagues: Last week I sent around this proposal for enhancing NGO
participation in the FCTC and have not yet gotten any comments or feedback
from Alliance members on it. We will need to decide relatively soon whether
we as an Allaince want to try to expand the rules for NGO access to the
process so it would be good to get people's opinions, even if just to say
that they think we're on the right track or, if not, offer some
alternatives.
Look forward to hearing from you!
Ross
NGOs Working on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Ross Hammond, Consultant, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
PiTopGScii for NGO Participation in eno PrauiGworjC Convention
on Tobacco Control
Date:
8 May 2000
To:
From:
Dear Colleagues:
Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed set of rules for
enhanced NGO participation in the FCTC, followed by some excerpts from the
report of the UN Secretary General on NGOs. Please note that there is ample
precedent for all of the provisions included in this proposal - in fact,
most of the language is drawn directly from previous UN Conventions and
Conferences. There are web links to many of these in the footnotes - I would
particularly recommend looking at resolution 1996/31 of the Economic and
Social Council (ECOSOC) on consultative relationships between the United
Nations and NGOs (gopher://gopher.un.org/00/esc/recs/1996/E-RES96.31 ) which
lays out a much broader role for NGOs in UN Conferences and negotiations.
My understanding is that World Health Assembly Rules of procedure will be
the default rules for the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee but that
governments may choose to modify those rules during the first negotiating
session in October. Any move to change the rules for NGO participation would
most likely be brought up at that time. The rules of procedure can be found
at: http://www.who.int/ina ngo/ngo/princ-e.htm. What is not clear to me at
this point is whether paragraph 1.2 of that section which reads "WHO should,
in relation to NGOs, act in conformity with any relevant resolutions of the
General Assembly or Economic and Social Council of the United Nations" would
apply to 1 9006/31. My gu»Rq ithat it would, especially since WHO is
considered a "specialized agency" of the United Nations.
In constructing this proposal, 1 have consulted with experts at the UN
Non-Governmental Liaison Service as well as with environmental activists who
have participated in past UN Conventions and Conferences. A couple of points
to keep in mind:
1)
There is no guarantee that the steps outlined in this
proposal will keep industry front groups out. Although there are specific
provisions requiring NGOs to submit documentation of non-profit status and
source of funds, there is no way to construct an accreditation process such
that all of the industry's allies are kept out. On the other hand, as we are
all aware, the industry is already well-represented on some country
delegations and has been lobbying governments back in national capitals. The
question before us then is whether we have more to gain by opening up the
process and allowing more national public health and consumer groups to
participate or whether we are better off with the current rules.
2)
So far in the process, NGOs in official relations have been
allowed to sign-up large numbers of people under their organizations.
However, there is no guarantee that this will be allowed to continue. If
even a few governments start to complain about this practice, WHO would be
forced to clamp down on it.
3)
Although there is emphasis in the formal accreditation
procedures on speaking rights, the most important interactions have and will
continue to occur in informal sessions, joint briefings with governments,
etc.
Probably the best thing would be to start a debate within the FCTC
list-serv. Please contribute comments and feedback on this proposal. After
incorporating these, the next step would be for the Alliance to approach
sympathetic governments (e.g. Canada and the Philippines) and discuss
introducing it into the FCTC process.
Thanks, and I look forward to the discussion.
Ross
Please note new address and fax number:
Ross Hammond
965 Mission Street, Suite 21 R
San Francisco, CA S41C3
tel. 1-415-695-7492
fax. 1-415-369-9211
winmaii.dat
Name: winmail.dat
Type: appiication/ms-tnef
Encoding: base64
NGO MEETINGS DURING WHA
Subject: NGO MEETINGS DURING WHA
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:10:42 +0100
From: "Emma Must" <emma.must@dial.pipex.com >
Organization: ASH
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
CC: "AJForeit" <JForeit@tobaccofreekids.org>, <NCollishaw@cctc.ca>
Dear Friends,
A quick reminder about a few NGO events/meetings for those members of the
Alliance making the trip to Geneva for the World Health Assembly next week:
Monday 15th May
10am - midday: Framework Convention Alliance meeting (to prepare for the
week) at Salle 22, Palais des Nations, Geneva
12.30-2.00pm: INFACT press conference and video, Palais des Nations, room
to be confirmed (more info from Suren Moodliar on mobile 079 221 7827 or at
10am Alliance meeting)
2.00pm - 4.00pm: Briefing by the UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service for
Alliance members - on how to get the most out of UN negotiations, tips for
approaching delegates, suggestions for effective NGO cooperation etc. etc.,
at Salle 22, Palais des Nations, Geneva.
=> Times for any other NGO debriefings etc. will be arranged during the
Monday 10am meeting, so please try to attend this if you can, or contact
Judy Wilkenfeld/Judy Glanz on mobile 4179 368 1258 or Emma Must on mobile
07712 038710 or Suren Moodliar on mobile 079 221 7827.
=> The main tobacco session within the official programme is now likely to
be on Weds 17th May. For the official WHA agenda and all background papers
please see WHO website at: http://www.who■int/wha-1998/WH00/newwha.html
=> Alliance members attending the WHA will endeavour to report back on
developments during the week via this e-mail conference.
Best wishes,
Emma
Emma Must
International Campaign Manager
ASH
102 - 108 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
Tel: +44 (0)171 739 5902
Fax: +44 40)171 613 0531 '^
E-mail: emma.must@dial.pipex.com
Web: http://www.ash.orq.uk
1
Please Write the WorldWatch Institute
Subject: FEease Write the WoridWateih Itastitate
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 12:24:24 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <tob-mail@globalink.org>, <fctcall@globalink.org >
Friends — Today the WorldWatch Institute put out a rather bizarre and
misleading statement on global tobacco issues (the text is below). It would
be helpful if they could get an earful from GlobaLinkers on this one,
particularly since they are a widely quoted source by the news media. Please
send correspondence to: worldwatch@worldwatch.org and send me a copy as
well.
Thanks,
Ross Hammond
World Watch - Tuesday, May 9, 2000
World Kicking the Cigarette Habit
Lester R. Brown
Chairman of the Board
After a century-long buildup in cigarette smoking, the world is turning away
from cigarettes, following the U.S. lead. In 1999 cigarettes smoked per
person in the United States fell by a staggering 8 percent and for the world
as a whole by more than 3 percent.
The U.S. trend is driven by a deepening awareness of the health-damaging
effects of smoking, rising cigarette prices, rising cigarette taxes,
aggressive antismoking campaigns in several states, and a decline in the
social acceptability of smoking. Ironically, the land that gave the world
tobacco is now leading it away from tobacco.
In the United States, the number of cigarettes smoked per person has been
falling for two decades, dropping from 2,810 in 1980 to 1,633 in 1999, a
decline of 42 percent. Worldwide, where the downturn lags that of the United
States by roughly a decade, usage has dropped from the historical high of
1,027 cigarettes smoked per person in 1990 to 915 in 1999, a fall of 11
percent.
Indeed, smoking is on the decline in nearly all the major cigarette
consuming countries, including such bastions of smoking as France, China,
and Japan. The number of cigarettes smoked per person has dropped 19 percent
in France since peaking in 1985, 8 percent in China since 1990, and 4
percent in Japan since 1992, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture
's world tobacco database.
Evidence of the damaging effects of cigarette smoking on human health
continues to accumulate. Today there are some 25 known tobacco-related
diseases, including heart disease, strokes, respiratory illnesses, several
forms of cancer, and male impotence.
Smoking takes a heavy human toll. The World Health Organization (WHO)
estimates that worldwide 4 million people die prematurely each year from
smoking cigarettes. The 400,000 lives claimed each year by smoking-related
illnesses in the United States matches the number of Americans who died in
World War II. In China, smoking takes an estimated 2,000 lives per day, the
equivalent of having five fully loaded jumbo jets crash each day with no
survivors.
5/12/00 10:23 AM
Please Write the WorldWatch Institute
The decline in smoking in the United States was initially triggered by the
Surgeon General's report on smoking and health, which was first issued in
1964. Published nearly every year since then, it has spawned thousands of
studies worldwide on the effect of smoking on health. These studies and the
media coverage of their findings have raised public awareness of the health
effects of smoking not only in the United States but throughout the world.
Over the years, mounting evidence of the effect of smoking on health
gradually undermined the tobacco industry's steadfast denial of such a link.
As it did so, the industry lost its credibility. Cigarette manufacturers
began to lose lawsuits as juries held them responsible for health damage to
smokers. By late November of 1998, the industry had agreed to pay the 50
state governments a total of $251 billion to cover past Medicare costs of
treating smoking-related illnesses—nearly $1,000 for every American.
To cover costs of this settlement, cigarette manufacturers raised prices.
Between January 1998 and January 2000, the average U.S. wholesale price of
cigarettes climbed from $1.31 per pack to $2.35, a 79 percent increase in
two years.
Even as the tobacco companies were raising the price of cigarettes, state
governments were raising cigarette taxes. By the end of 1999, cigarette
taxes ranged from 24 per pack in Virginia, a tobacco-growing state, to $1
per pack in Alaska and Hawaii. Higher cigarette prices appear to be
reversing the recent upturn in teenage smoking.
Not only did state governments raise cigarette taxes, they also insisted, as
part of the November 1998 settlement, that the Tobacco Institute, the
industry's powerful lobbying arm, be dismantled. On January 29, 1999, the
Institute, one of the best funded lobbies in Washington, with a full-time
staff of 60, closed its doors.
Restrictions on cigarette advertising, which began with a ban on television
and radio ads in the United States, are spreading. For example, the European
Union recently passed legislation prohibiting all advertising of cigarettes
by 2006.
Bans on smoking itself are also taking off. Initially smoking was restricted
on airplanes by segregating smokers and nonsmokers. But in the United States
this soon expanded into a total ban on smoking on planes, a measure that is
being adopted by airlines in other countries.
The same thing is happening in restaurants. In the United States, the
segregation of nonsmokers and smokers now has been replaced by an outright
ban on smoking in restaurants in five states-California, Nevada, Maryland,
Minnesota, and Vermont. Smoking bans on public transportation and in the
workplace are now found in many countries.
Until recently, U.S. cigarette manufacturers were not overly concerned that
Americans were smoking fewer cigarettes because they saw a huge market
opening up in the Third World, an unprecedented business opportunity. But
they failed to take into account the globalization of the antismoking
effort. Indeed, several developing country governments are suing U.S.
tobacco companies in U.S. courts, seeking to recover their costs of treating
smoking-related illnesses.
The antismoking campaign is being bolstered by research indicating that
cigarette smoking is a leading cause of male impotence. The constriction and
blockage of small blood vessels associated with smoking may first manifest
itself in the inability to achieve an erection, well before blockage of the
larger coronary arteries leads to heart disease.
One of the mainstays of California's highly successful antismoking campaign
is a TV commercial in which a man's flirtation with a woman fails when the
2 of 3
5/12/00 10:23 AM
Please Write the WorldWatch Institute
cigarette in his mouth begins to droop. Experience in California indicates
that while adolescent males may not be particularly worried about their
mortality, they are concerned about their sexuality. In Thailand, cigarette
packs carry in large type the warning "Cigarette smoking causes sexual
impotence."
T^s. the social costs of smoking become more visible, and as the number of
smoking-related deaths climbs, the global antismoking campaign is gathering
momentum. Governments that once saw cigarettes only as a source of revenue
are now also looking at the spiraling costs of treating smoking-related
illnesses. WHO has launched an ambitious worldwide campaign to discourage
smoking, one that it hopes will culminate in an international treaty, the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to regulate the use of tobacco.
Meanwhile, the challenge is to sustain the decline in smoking by expanding
further the worldwide educational effort on the health effects of this
costly habit, by further restricting advertising, by banning smoking in
public places and work places, and by raising taxes on cigarettes to a level
that more fully reflects their cost to society. The goal is to make smoking
as socially unacceptable as it is economically costly.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Reah Janise Kauffman
Special Assistant to the Chairman & Director of International Publications
Worldwatch Institute
1776 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20036
telephone: 202 452-1992 X514
email: rjkauffman@worldwatch.org
|%j| winmail.dat
3 of 3
Nami<s: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Emcodmg: base64
j
5/12/00 10.23 A1V
Subject: Please Write the WorldWatch Institute
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 12:24:24 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <tob-mail@globalink.org>, <fctcall@globalink.org >
Friends — Today the WorldWatch Institute put out a rather bizarre and
misleading statement on global tobacco issues (the text is below). It would
be helpful if they could get an earful from GlobaLinkers on this one,
particularly since they are a widely quoted source by the news media. Please
send correspondence to: worldwatch@worldwatch.org and send me a copy as
well.
Thanks,
Ross Hammond
World Watch - Tuesday, May 9, 2000
World Kicking the Cigarette Habit
Lester R. Brown
Chairman of the Board
After a century-long buildup in cigarette smoking, the world is turning away
from cigarettes, following the U.S. lead. In 1999 cigarettes smoked per
person in the United States fell by a staggering 8 percent and for the world
as a whole by more than 3 percent.
The U.S. trend is driven by a deepening awareness of the health-damaging
effects of smoking, rising cigarette prices, rising cigarette taxes,
aggressive antismoking campaigns in several states, and a decline in the
social acceptability of smoking. Ironically, the land that gave the world
tobacco is now leading it away from tobacco.
In the United States, the number of cigarettes smoked per person has been
falling for two decades, dropping from 2,810 in 1980 to 1,633 in 1999, a
decline of 42 percent. Worldwide, where the downturn lags that of the United
States by roughly a decade, usage has dropped from the historical high of
1,027 cigarettes smoked per person in 1990 to 915 in 1999, a fall of 11
percent.
Indeed, smoking is on the decline in nearly all the major cigarette
consuming countries, including such.bastions of smoking as France, China,
and Japan. The number of cigarettes smoked per person has dropped 19 percent
in France since peaking in 1985, 8 percent in China since 1990, and 4
percent in Japan since 1992, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture
's world tobacco database.
Evidence of the damaging effects of cigarette smoking on human health
continues to accumulate. Today there are some 25 known tobacco-related
diseases, including heart disease, strokes, respiratory illnesses, several
forms of cancer, and male impotence.
Smoking takes a heavy human toll. The World Health Organization (WHO)
estimates that worldwide 4 million people die prematurely each year from
smoking cigarettes. The 400,000 lives claimed each year by smoking-related
illnesses in the United States matches the number of Americans who died in
World War II. In China, smoking takes an estimated 2,000 lives per day, the
equivalent of having five fully loaded jumbo jets crash each day with no
survivors.
The decline in smoking in the United States was initially triggered by the
Surgeon General’s report on smoking and health, which was first issued in
1964. Published nearly every year since then, it has spawned thousands of
studies worldwide on the effect of smoking on health. These studies and the
media coverage of their findings have raised public awareness of the health
effects of smoking not only in the United States but throughout the world.
Over the years, mounting evidence of the effect of smoking on health
gradually undermined the tobacco industry's steadfast denial of such a link.
.As it did so, the industry lost its credibility. Cigarette manufacturers
began to lose lawsuits as juries held them responsible for health damage to
smokers. By late November of 1998, the industry had agreed to pay the 50
state governments a total of $251 billion to cover past Medicare costs of
treating smoking-related illnesses—nearly $1,000 for every American.
To cover costs of this settlement, cigarette manufacturers raised prices.
Between January 1998 and January 2000, the average U.S. wholesale price of
cigarettes climbed from $1.31 per pack to $2.35, a 79 percent increase in
two years.
Even as the tobacco companies were raising the price of cigarettes, state
governments were raising cigarette taxes. By the end of 1999, cigarette
taxes ranged from 24 per pack in Virginia, a tobacco-growing state, to $1
per pack in Alaska and Hawaii. Higher cigarette prices appear to be
reversing the recent upturn in teenage smoking.
Not only did state governments raise cigarette taxes, they also insisted, as
part of the November 1998 settlement, that the Tobacco Institute, the
industry's powerful lobbying arm, be dismantled. On January 29, 1999, the
Institute, one of the best funded lobbies in Washington, with a full-time
staff of 60, closed its doors.
Restrictions on cigarette advertising, which began with a ban on television
and radio ads in the United States, are spreading. For example, the European
Union recently passed legislation prohibiting all advertising of cigarettes
by 2006.
Bans on smoking itself are also taking off. Initially smoking was restricted
on airplanes by segregating smokers and nonsmokers. But in the United States
this soon expanded into a total ban on smoking on planes, a measure that is
being adopted by airlines in other countries.
The same thing is happening in restaurants. In the United States, the
segregation of nonsmokers and smokers now has been replaced by an outright
ban on smoking in restaurants in five states—California, Nevada, Maryland,
Minnesota, and Vermont. Smoking bans on public transportation and in the
workplace are now found in many countries.
Until recently, U.S. cigarette manufacturers were not overly concerned that
Americans were smoking fewer cigarettes because they saw a huge market
opening up in the Third World, an unprecedented business opportunity. But
they failed to take into account the globalization of the antismoking
effort. Indeed, several developing country governments are suing U.S.
tobacco companies in U.S. courts, seeking to recover their costs of treating
smoking-related illnesses.
The antismoking campaign is being bolstered by research indicating that
cigarette smoking is a leading cause of male impotence. The constriction and
blockage of small blood vessels associated with smoking may first manifest
itself in the inability to achieve an erection, well before blockage of the
larger coronary arteries leads to heart disease.
One of the mainstays of California's highly successful antismoking campaign
is a TV commercial in which a man's flirtation with a woman fails when the
cigarette in his mouth begins to droop. Experience in California indicates
that while adolescent males may not be particularly worried about their
mortality, they are concerned about their sexuality. In Thailand, cigarette
packs carry in large type the warning "Cigarette smoking causes sexual
impotence."
As the social costs of smoking become more visible, and as the number of
smoking-related deaths climbs, the global antismoking campaign is gathering
momentum. Governments that once saw cigarettes only as a source of revenue
are now also looking at the spiraling costs of treating smoking-related
illnesses. WHO has launched an ambitious worldwide campaign to discourage
smoking, one that it hopes will culminate in an international treaty, the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to regulate the use of tobacco.
Meanwhile, the challenge is to sustain the decline in smoking by expanding
further the worldwide educational effort on the health effects of this
costly habit, by further restricting advertising, by banning smoking in
public places and work places, and by raising taxes on cigarettes to a level
that more fully reflects their cost to society. The goal is to make smoking
as socially unacceptable as it is economically costly.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Reah Janise Kauffman
Special Assistant to the Chairman s Director of International Publications
Worldwatch Institute
1776 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20036
telephone: 202 45.2-1992 X514
email: rjkauffman@worldwatch.org
winmail.dat
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Encoding: base64
personal notes from FCTC working group meeting
Subject: personal notes from FCTC working group meeting
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 12:04:37 +0200
From: "Sibylle Fleitmann" <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Dear All,
Emma has asked me to circulate to you my brief notes on the meeting which I
made for ENSP members. Here they come....
Best regards,
Sibyll e
Sibylle Fleitmann
General Secretary
European Network for Smoking Prevention
48 rue de Pascale
B-1040 BRUXELLES
Belgium
Tel: + 32 2 230 65 15
Fax: + 32 2 230 75 07
web: www.ensp.org
;
!
Name: WHO.FCTC Working Group Geneva.doc!
;WHO.FCTC Working Group Geneva.doc:
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
j
^Encoding: base64
i
lofl
5/17/00 2:47 PM
Second Meeting of the Working Group on the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Geneva, 27-29 March 2000
Framework Convention Working Group meeting (*)- Genva March 27-29,2000
Brief overview of discussion on 27th & 28th March
115 countries were represented with additional representation from the Vatican, UN
agencies, specialised agencies such as the World Intellectual Property Organisation
and Non governmental organisations in official relation with WHO. The European
Commission represented and spoke on behalf of its member countries. Some EU
member countries made additional statements. The participants list can be obtained
upon request.
As an introduction to the conference, Dr Brundtland announced that WHO will
organise an official hearing, inviting all interested parties to submit comments on the
FCTC. The hearing is meant to give the public health community, farmers and the
tobacco industry an opportunity to make their case public. The two-day hearing is
planned to take place at the end of September/beginning of October this year in
Geneva. Submissions and testimony will be made available by WHO to the
negotiating parties. Dr Brundtland also announced the creation of a WHO scientific
advisory committee on tobacco product regulation.
The aim of the two day discussions was to indicate the level of support of
governments to the different elements of the body of the framework convention and
related protocols. Additional proposals could be presented by the delegates. A final
report will be presented by WHO to the World Health Assembly in May 2000.
A main concern coming out of the discussions was the necessity to address the
consequences of the FCTC on the tobacco farming communities world wide. The
involvement of the Economic and Social Committee of the UN, the International
Monetary Fund, the World Bank and of FAO was felt to be essential in the process.
Provision for financial and technical assistance should be included to allow
developing countries to adhere to the FCTC.
Discussions concentrated on the specific form the convention should take and its
relation to protocols. Several states such as the USA, Japan, China, Turkey,
Guatemala, Argentina and Germany called for a convention referring only to
principles, general objectives and guidelines to allow a maximum of member states to
sign the convention.
States such as Australia, Canada, Norway, Iceland, Singapore and the Philippines
insisted that the body of the convention in itself should already contain strong
provisions and obligations in order to express the will and the commitment of the
international community to fight tobacco consumption on all fronts.
The European Union repeatedly called for the need of a more balanced approach
between the proposed framework convention and related protocols.
The United States repeatedly called for a framework convention containing only
general principles and objectives in order to enable a maximum of States to sign.
Specific tobacco control issues should be addressed in protocols. They were severly
criticised by some US NGO’s, notably the American Cancer Society. The US
government delegates decided to use their right to respond. Their argument was that
the US strongly supported the convention, however tobacco control could take
different forms, each form not necessarily being acceptable to all countries.
Germany oriented its comments to the economic aspects of tobacco control, calling
for a special protocol on economic advantages and disadvantages.
The developing countries dependent on tobacco farming repeatedly called for
technical and financial assistance from the international community to deal with the
consequences of less demand of tobacco plants following the FCTC.
At the end of the two days, no general preference for specific options for a framework
convention seemed to emerge. The three options were still up:
1.
A framework convention clearly separated from protocols.
2.
A framework convention with 1 or more separate protocols.
3.
A framework convention including 1 or more protocols with the possibility
to make reservations on protocols or certain elements of the body of the
convention.
Support for protocols:
1.
Advertising protocol: there was clear support for a strong protocol
including a ban on sponsorship and promotion. Some countries (including
the US) are ready to support a ban but only targeted at children and
adolescents.
2.
Smuggling protocol: there was clear support from practically all countries.
Requests were voiced to cover all illicit trade of tobacco products
including counterfeit cigarettes and the creation of mechanisms for
effective international collaboration on all aspects including money
laundering.
3.
Tobacco dependence: there was a tendency from delegates to delay this
protocol to a later state or perhaps not to have one at all. If concerns were
voiced, they concerned mainly the high cost of NRT.
Specific NGO interventions in official relation with WHO had been allowed at the
discretion of the chairman during the official working group meeting. Interventions of
members of the Framework Convention Alliance (FCA)** were grouped in order to
reduce the number of interventions for increased impact. All organizations called for
a strong/meaningful convention.
0
UICC/IULTD/WHF made a statement recalling the impact of tobacco on
cancer, cardio-vascular and lung disease.
0
lUHPE/ENSP/INWAT/Medical
Women’s
Association
International,
Campaign for Tobacco free kids called for a total ban on advertising in the
light of rising smoking rates of women and the need for all groups to be
protected from tobacco industry’s marketing strategy (annex A).
•
•
A representative of a consumer organization from Malawi (tobacco growing
state in Africa) recalled that the tobacco industry will put farmers out of work
and not the FCTC.
NATT (Network for Accountability for Tobacco Trans nationals) criticized
the US attitude to weaken the Convention.
Further interventions were made by the World Dental Federation, the World
Federation of Public Health Associations/ American Public Health Association as
well as several interventions from NGO’s not member of FCA.
An FCA Press conference was organized on the 28th in order to address issues coming
up from the Working Group discussions (annex B) from an NGO point of view.
Following issues came up : the need for not involving the tobacco industry in the
discussions, the need for an advertising ban to protect public health, the need to
consider consumer interests, the need for financial and technical support of the
farming community and the need to respond to the alleged “job losses” put forward by
the tobacco industry.
*
**
The official report of the Working Group will be available on the WHO web
site: www.who.int/toh
For further information on the Framework Convention Alliance, please consult
their web site: www.fctc.org
ENSP/SF/17.4/2000
Intervention by the International Union For Health Promotion and Education,
the European Network for Smoking Prevention, the Medical Women’s
International Association, the International Network of Women Against
Tobacco, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
March 27,2000, Geneva
Tobacco consumption is one of the greatest threats to public health in the world; we
therefore thank the World Health Organisation and the World Health Assembly for
addressing tobacco control in their deliberations.
Following the statement of the Swedish delegation concerning the need for gender
specificity screening throughout the FCTC and related Protocols, we would like to
draw the attention of the working group to the fact that while smoking rates among
men may be declining in some countries, smoking rates among women are rising
world-wide. By the year 2025, the number of women smokers is expected to almost
triple. In Western Europe female deaths caused by smoking have doubled over the last
twenty years and the curve is rising. In the United States, rates of lung cancer now
surpass breast cancer as a cause of death among women.
Women who smoke have markedly increased risks of cancer, particularly lung
cancer, heart disease, stroke, emphysema and other fatal diseases. Women
experience gender-specific risks from tobacco and passive smoke such as the
negative impact on their reproductive health and complications during
pregnancy.
According to internal industry documents and several studies, industry marketing and
advertising strategies are particularly targeted to women and young girls. The
tobacco industry promotes the false association of tobacco with images of health,
liberation, slimness and modernity. Advertising and promotional campaigns
specifically in women’s magazines is one of the major tools in support of this
strategy.
We support the Kobe Declaration which demands a global ban on direct and indirect
advertising, promotion and sponsorship for tobacco products across all media and in
all forms of entertainment. We demand public funding for counter-advertising that
disconnects women’s liberation from tobacco use and that reaches women and girls in
all cultural contexts. We, therefore, support Canada, Iceland, Australia, Singapore and
India in their proposal and urge governments to provide for a total ban on tobacco
advertising, promotion and sponsorship in the FCTC and related Protocols in order to
protect not only children and young people, but also women and every group.
Speaker: Sibylle Fleitmann, ENSP
Annex B
PRESS STATEMENT BY THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ALLIANCE
(Geneva, 28 March 2000) — Members of the Framework Convention Alliance present
at the Second Working Group on the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (FCTC) support a strong Framework Convention that prioritizes public health
and peoples' lives above the economic interests of the tobacco industry. Since the
death clock started ticking in October when the first Working Group met, over 1.7
million people have died.
Unfortunately, protecting peoples' lives was not the message we heard from several
government delegations yesterday. Public health, consumers', and human rights
organizations from around the world are united in our commitment to keep the
tobacco industry out of this process, in spite of suggestions by a few countries that it
be opened up to tobacco companies. We commend the leadership and courage of
countries that are standing up to the tobacco industry. It is critical that this Convention
address advertising and promotion issues, limit the political influence of the tobacco
industry, provide consumer protections such as frill disclosure of the dangers of
tobacco products, and shifts the responsibility and the costs to the tobacco industry for
this preventable epidemic.
Producer countries have expressed concerns about the impact of the FCTC on their
tobacco growing communities. No tobacco farmer will go out of business because of
the FCTC. WHO forecasts an increase in the number of smokers worldwide from 1.1
billion today to 1.64 billion by 2025. Even if the FCTC were remarkably successful
and managed to hold consumption at current levels, there would be no decline in the
demand for tobacco. Rather, demand would remain static. There is simply no realistic
scenario under which anyone farming tobacco today will be put out of work.
Opposition to this convention is about protecting tobacco industry profits, not the
livelihoods of tobacco fanners.
A greater threat to the viability of the tobacco farming sector comes from
technological innovations by the cigarette manufacturers and the playing off of one
country against another. In the past decade the manufacturers have spent hundreds of
millions of dollars developing cigarettes with no or low tobacco. The Alliance
supports WHO initiatives to mobilize UN agencies like the FAO to provide
alternative livelihoods for tobacco growing communities.
The industry argues that there is no alternative to tobacco growing. But this is due to
the fact that there has been very little funding made available to examine the
possibilities for alternative crops. Small tobacco fanners require real prospects for the
future. This involves overcoming problems linked to growing other crops such as lack
of capital investment, irrigation and other issues. However, the fear that farmers have
under this Convention should be allayed because tobacco demand will remain static
and will not affect the economic situation of tobacco growing countries.
The tobacco industry continues to exaggerate potential job losses from tobacco
control. Research conducted for the World Bank report demonstrates that most
countries will see no net job loss if tobacco consumption falls. In fact, some countries
will even experience net gains, particularly those which import tobacco products and
where the tobacco industry is dominated by foreign companies. Simply put, protecting
public health and protecting jobs are not incompatible.
Since the Framework Convention process began in October 1999, over 1.7 million
people have died. Time is running out. The clock is ticking.
--###The Framework Convention Alliance is a heterogeneous alliance of non
governmental organizations from around the world who are working jointly and
separately to support the development of a strong Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control, and related protocols. The Alliance currently includes more than 40 NGOs or
existing coalitions of NGOs from at least 20 countries worldwide.
Speakers:
Dr. Masood Ali Sheikh, National Association for the Rational Use of
Medicine in Pakistan
Mahamane Cisse, SOS Tabagisme (Mali)
Ross Hammond, Consultant, Campaign for Tobacco Kids (USA)
John Kapito, Executive Director, Consumers Association of Malawi
Emma Must, ASH-UK (United Kingdom)
Dr. Yussuf Saloojee, Executive Director, National Council Against Smoking
(South Africa)
Lucinda Wykle-Rosenberg, Research Director, INFACT (USA)
Contact: Judy Wilkenfeld (Mobile: 41-79-368-1258)
Emma Must/Clive Bates: (Mobile: 44-468-791-237)
tbnet (00310) PUB: JAMA drag resistant TB article
Subject: tbnet (00310) PUB: JAMA drug resistant TB article
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 11:29:58 +0200
From: smithi@who.ch
To: <tbnet@mos.com.np>
tbnet (00310) PUB: JAMA drug resistant TB article
From: CNN and New York Times
http://cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/Q5/16/tough.tb.ap/index.html or
http://www.nytimes.eom/aponline/a/AP-Tough-TB.html
May 16, 2000
CHICAGO (AP) — A small but alarming percentage of people worldwide have a form
of tuberculosis that is resistant to the usual treatments and must be fought
with stronger, more expensive drugs to prevent a health crisis comparable to
AIDS, World Health Organization researchers say. "If we don't encourage
countries to do a good treatment of TB, then we will have an epidemic on our
hands," said Dr. Marcos Espinal, who led a study published in Wednesday's
Journal of the American Medical Association.
TB is a contagious respiratory disease that kills an estimated 2 million people
a year. If treated correctly, most cases are curable. The study examined 6,402
TB cases at clinics in Russia, Peru, China, South Korea and the Dominican
Republic between 1994 and 1996 and found that about 5.5 percent did not respond
to so-called first-line drugs. Drugs that could effectively treat these
patients are much more expensive and have to be taken for up to two years —
potential barriers in some poor, developing countries.
But failing to treat these patients could have catastrophic results,
particularly since TB tends to mutate into even more resistant strains when
treated incorrectly, said Espinal, a doctor with WHO's communicable diseases
program in Switzerland. If more countries do not correctly treat TB, the
organization estimates that nearly 1 billion people will be newly infected —
and 35 million will die — in the next two decades.
In the United States from 1993 through 1998, 45 states and the District of
Columbia reported at least one case each of multi-drug-resistant TB, according
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
While TB more commonly afflicts people in poorer, developing countries, Espinal
warned that because it is an airborne disease, "TB can be in eight hours from
Russia to New York." Another researcher agreed with Espinal's prognosis and
called drug-resistant TB a "public health emergency." "The genie of
multi-drug-resistant TB is irreversibly out of the bottle," Dr. C. Robert
Horsburgh of Boston University's Schools of Public Health and Medicine wrote in
an accompanying editorial.
Espinal said 119 of the 212 WHO member countries, including the United States,
have implemented or agreed to implement the organization's TB-fighting plan,
which calls for treatment with the first-line drugs. Twenty-two countries
representing 85 percent of all TB cases — including China, India, Brazil and
Nigeria — have agreed to take part. WHO is also calling for an expansion of
the TB-fighting plan using treatments that are at least 350 more times more
expensive than first-line drugs such as isoniazid and rifampicin, which cost $20
to $30.
Already, India's health secretary has said that with an annual 2 million new
cases in India alone, his government cannot keep pace with the costs, estimated
at $55 million this year.
WHO estimates that 16 million people worldwide have tuberculosis, and rates of
infection are on the rise. WHO officials estimate there were 8 million new cases
1 of 2
tbnet (00310) PUB: JAMA drug resistant TB article
of TB in 1997 alone. The United States had 18,361 reported cases in 1998,
according to the CDC.
tb.net - the international TB network
This email discussion list is moderated. Send messages to: tbnet@mos.com.np
For more information about tb.net: tb@mos.com.np
Visit the tb.net website: http://www.south-asia■com/ngo-tb
for information about TB resources, organisations, conferences, training
programmes etc.
Tobacco TNC Sweeteners
Subject: Tobacco TNC Sweeteners
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 09:42:28 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.
To: "Framework Convention Alliance" <fctcall@globalink.org>
New Zealand News from The Press - Tuesday, May 16, 2000
from
National News Stories
TUESDAY, MAY 16, 2000:
Anti-smokers say extras sweeten teen appeal
AUCKLAND — Cigarette companies are sweetening the taste of tobacco with
increasing amounts of honey and sugar, a mixture anti-smoking groups believe
is designed to appeal to children.
In Health Ministry documents obtained under the Official Information Act,
tobacco companies said nearly 350 substances were added to cigarettes and
tobacco.
While the companies must supply the information to the Government, they did
not have to say which brands contained the additives.
The papers show the amount of sugar, honey, and menthol in New Zealand
tobacco sold last year had increased from the year before.
Other additives included fig juice, ethyl alcohol, nutmeg powder, licorice,
caramel, vanilla, apple juice, and cocoa.
"Tobacco companies add chemicals to cigarettes to hook new smokers in
quickly and to keep them hooked," Smokefree Coalition director Barbara
Langford said.
"The flavourings make them more palatable to children."
She said menthol was added to reduce the harshness of tobacco smoke on the
throat.
Heart Foundation medical director Boyd Swinburn said the additives were
designed to lure young smokers, and cigarettes were not as rough as they
were 20 or 30 years ago.
"They wouldn't do it if it didn't make the cigarette far more palatable," he
said.
"The cigarette now is a hugely sophisticated, manufactured nicotine-delivery
device.
"Many of the additives had pharmacological effects, such as cocoa, which
opened the airways to allow more smoke to enter the lungs.
'They can add whatever they want to tobacco. They desperately don't want 13
Tobacco TNC Sweeteners
and 14-year-olds trying their first cigarette behind the bike sheds and
coughing and spluttering and vomiting.
"They want something smooth that masks the acrid taste of tobacco."
Ms Langford said the idea of a company using chemicals to make a harmful
product more palatable was extremely disturbing.
"It is more than coincidence that teenage smoking is increasing."
British American Tobacco spokeswoman Vickie Curtis said that additives such
as honey and sugar were present in such small quantities that they made
little difference.
Such things had been added to tobacco since the 15th century and were simply
part of the product recipe, not a device to attract children.
Some made a slight difference to the taste, while others kept the tobacco
moist.
British American Tobacco sells most of the cigarettes in New Zea-land.
A recent survey of more than 30,000 students from 75 per cent of the
country's secondary schools showed nearly half of fourth-form girls and 39
per cent of boys were smokers.
Health Minister Annette King is trying to introduce legislation that would,
among other things, require the tobacco companies to say exactly what
additives were in each brand.
—NZPA
CAFCA
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa
PO Box 2258, Christchurch
email: cafca@chch.planet.org.nz
5/17/on ?
PM
NGOs Question Big Tobacco's Access tc IVHO
•
I
Subject: NGOs Question Big Tobacco's Access to WHO
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 14:50:42 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>, "Rob Weissman" <rob@essential.org>, <interaational@globalink.org>
Wednesday, May 17, 2000
Contact:
Judy Wilkenfeld, USA
Juan
Almendares, Honduras
Mahamane
Cisse, Mali
(cell) 41 79
368-1258
—For immediate release-
NGOs QUESTION BIG TOBACCO'S ACCESS TO W.H.O.
TREATY NEGOTIATIONS AND DEMAND OFFICIAL RECOGNITION
TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH
We, as members of the Framework Convention Alliance, strongly object to the
involvement of tobacco companies with member nations, as evidenced by
industry briefing documents on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
(FCTC).
[SEE’ATTACHED DOCUMENTS]
Recently in Africa, British American Tobacco (BAT) held its latest briefing
session with delegations to encourage "proactive support" for its interests.
BAT called on the delegations to "use British American Tobacco as a source
of information and data." Given the industry's record of outright lies and
misinformation campaigns, it is unacceptable that BAT be considered a
legitimate information resource.
Based on this industry intrusion, we support the inclusion of
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in the official FCTC negotiations
commencing in October 2000. Without broad NGO participation, the most vocal
non-governmental voices at the table will be those of the tobacco industry.
It is imperative that NGOs have official observer status in the negotiation
debates. While we recognise that NGOs do not and cannot have voting status,
NGOs bring first-hand experience with the epidemic and with tactical
manoeuvres by the tobacco companies to sabotage public health efforts. From
Austria to Zimbabwe, we bear witness to industry subversion of national
efforts to end their predatory practices.
We expect that the sovereign member states will strive to protect the
interests of civil society by including NGOs as members of their delegations
to the official FCTC negotiations. We applaud Malawi for choosing health
over death by including Mr. John Kapito of the Consumers' Association of
Malawi on their official delegation, and encourage other countries to follow
suit.
There is ample precedent for inclusion of NGOs in treaty negotiations. In
1996, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) issued a resolution
describing a broad role for NGOs in UN negotiations. As the Secretary
General of the UN stated in 1998, "NGOs have played a very significant and
helpful role by establishing bridges between the United Nations and the
civil society at large."
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, USA
SOS Tabagisme, Mali
5/20/00 4:01 PM
-fpj
NGOs Question Big Tobacco's Access to WHO
German Coalition Against Smoking
INFACT, USA
CONACTA, Honduras
Consumers' Association of Malawi
American Cancer Society
-- END—
FCTC - Report of the 2nd Working group
Subject: FCTC - Report of the 2nd Working group
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 14:08:48 +0100
From: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>
To: <intemational@globalink.org>
CC: <fctcall@globalink.org >, "Harrington, Patsy (LSH-ADT)" <PHA@who.dk>
Dear friends,
The report of the 2nd Working Group of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, held in March in Geneva,
is now available at the following page of the WHO site.
http://www.who.int/wha-1998/Tobacco/second/Sanglais.htm
The actual document is a pdf at:
http://www.who.int/wha-1998/Tobacco/second/pdfret25.pdf
Several people have been having difiulties finding it - perhaps because it is mysteriously listed as: "WHO framework
convention on tobacco control" rather than something more precise - like Final Report of the 2nd Working Group".
The report gives an excellent sense of where the various delegations are coming from and realistically describes the
meeting. The final document contains a number of important changes compared to the version circulated in draft at
the end of 2nd Working Group meeting - notably the removal of the inappropriately negative language regarding the
Treatment Protocol. The Secretariat has been careful to ensure that the report is a collection of views without
decisions - this is important because the WG meeting was not a negotiating session and it would not have been
correct to suggest that decisions had been made about which parts of the FCTC and protocols should proceed and
which should be de-emphasised.
Regards
Clive Bates
Action on Smoking and Health
102 Clifton Street
London EC2A4HW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44-(0)20-7739 5902
Fax: +44-(0)20-7613 0531
Mob: +44-(0)7786 791237
Web: http://www.ash.org.uk/
w
British Medical Association refutes Times... and calls on Governments to support FCTC
Subject: British Medical Association refutes Times Leader and calls on Governments to support FCTC
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:03:48 +0100
From: sjones@bma.org.uk
To: mtemational@globalink.org, gt-uk@globalink.org
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
I
In a letter published in today's Times (London, May 18th) Dr Ian Bogle, Chairman
of the British Medical Association refutes criticisms WHO's plans for an
international treaty to combat tobacco, made in Monday's (May 15th) Times
Leader.
Pointing to the fact that within the next 20 years, seven in ten deaths from
tobacco will occur in poorer countries. Dr Bogle says: 'Your leader gives the
impression that tobacco is only an issue for
affluent people and affluent countries. The victims of the tobacco epidemic are
not rich - they are poor. '
I
|
Dr Bogle states that while tobacco is indiscriminate in causing suffering and
death, the Convention being developed by the World Health Organisation will go
some way to eliminating global double-standards that discriminate against the
poorest and most vulnerable.
The letter concludes by congratulating Dr Brundtland on this initiative and urg
ing the Government to facilitate its development and implementation.
Full text of the Times leader, of Dr Bogie's letter to the editor and of the
edited version published today can be found on the TCRC website:
http://www.tobacco—control.org/tcrc.nsf/htmlpagesvw/newsfrm
under the section: recent TCRC/BMA press work
Today's Times also publishes reponses to the Leader by Alan Dangour, University
of Cambridge and John Carlisle of the Tobacco Manufacturers Association. These
can also be found at the above link.
All the best
Sinead
Sinead Jones PHD MPH
Project Leader, Tobacco Control Resource Centre
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JP
UK
Tel: +44 20 7383 6380
Fax: +44 20 7554 6380
E-mail: sjones@bma.org.uk
http://www.tobacco-control .org
1 of 2
5/19/00 11:20 AM
British Medical Association refutes Times... and calls on Governments to support FCTC
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager (mailmaster@bma.org.uk)
www.bma.org.uk
»Xt*t«t»t*«*tt«******tt****t**1tt**«*t***«***lt*»*t«***«**t*****t**»***t
2 of 2
viwii’-r mi—
5/20/00 4:27 PM
Looking for information person on tobacco use in FSU
Subject: Looking for information person on tobacco use in FSU
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:59:27 +0200
From: Mary Ellen Chatwin <Mary.ellen.ccf@cortex.ch>
To: wvi.gva@iprolink.ch
CC: Imartin@artso.uwc.ac.za, sochara@vsnl.com, ysalooje@iafrica.com, jtiongco@interasia.com.ph,
Yachd@who.ch, niclas.hallstrom@dhf.uu.se
Dear Dr. Ram, we are considering programs in the former Soviet Union and
gathering information on the health issues of small children there, and
according to B.A.Carlson in "The condition of children in the countries of
the former soviet union's statistical review that ppeared in the Journal of
Development Studies, 1994, the greatest cause of infant mortalilty in the
southern Caucasus is ARI, influenza and pneumonias in all 3 countries
(Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan). I wonder if you could direct me to any
information that might implicate the enormous tobacco use and secondary
effects in the family as linked to respiratory disease in children,
especially in those regions (or others for that matter)? Do you know of
programs to that end? I do have a copy of the tobacco symposium document.
Thank you in advance. Yours sincerely, Mary Ellen Chatwin, Director CCF,
Press release by NATT members on FCTC resolution before WHA
Subject: Press release by NATT members on FCTC resolution before WHA
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 10:44:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.mfact@juno.com>
To: fctcall@globalink.org
For Immediate Release:
18 May 2000
Contacts: Kathryn Mulvey in Geneva 18-20 May
Cell:+41-79-221-7827
NGOs Push for Substantive Progress on Tobacco Treaty:
Warn Against Industry Drive to Slow Process
GENEVA—Members of the Network for Accountability of Tobacco Transnationals
(NATT) are calling for the resolution to begin negotiations on the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) to take substantive steps. Following
two Working Group meetings where great strides were taken to develop
measures to restrict tobacco advertising and promotion, hold corporations
accountable for their complicity in illicit tobacco trade, and begin to
protect national legislation from industry interference, the 53rd World
Health Assembly is not being given the opportunity to raise the stakes.
"The reluctance to move forward decisively and aggressively at every phase
can only mean that Philip Morris and other tobacco transnationals are
throwing their weight around with national delegations and the World Health
Organization itself," says INFACT Executive Director Kathryn Mulvey. She
added that this backsliding is "surprising given the increasing pressure on
Philip Morris as indicated by the Tuesday resignation of Robert Eckert, CEO
of the company's Kraft Foods subsidiary." Canada and Norway, two countries
that have pioneered effective national tobacco control policies and lead the
way for international standards, have introduced a draft resolution that
reduces the work of the 53rd WHA on this issue to outlining procedural
details. And even this mild step faces objections from the U.S', and other
countries where Big Tobacco's influence is strongest.
"The tobacco transnationals are clearly threatened by the momentum toward
global standards that will curb their power, so they are trying to throw
water on the spark before it a sets a fire. But things are already ablaze,"
say Oronto Douglas. His organization, Environmental Rights Action (ERA), has
just launched a campaign challenging the tobacco industry in Nigeria-and has
already generated a dramatic response from British American Tobacco
(B.A.T.), #2 worldwide to Philip Morris. B.A.T. has hired a public relations
firm that is disputing the World Bank's conclusion that tobacco control
policies are a net economic benefit, and is attempting to intimidate
journalists reporting ERA'S campaign.
A provision in the draft resolution to extend NGO participation is now
meeting some resistance. The active involvement of INFACT, Environmental
Rights Action, National commission Against Tobacco-Honduras (CONACTA) and
other NGOs in Geneva demonstrates why the tobacco giants want to shut NGOs
out of the FCTC. "Grassroots resistance is chipping away at the tobacco
transnationals' hold over governments and policy health policy," says human
rights activist Dr. Juan Almendares of CONACTA. INFACT has brought this
message of escalating grassroots activity to delegates from dozens of
countries with a 9-minute preview of its soon-to-be released documentary
film, Making a Killing: Philip Morris, Kraft, and Global Tobacco Addiction.
The video will be screened today at 4:45 PM in Salle XXIII in Palais des
Nations, Geneva.
"More than one and half million people will die of tobacco-related illnesses
between now and the kickoff of negotiations in October," warned Dr.
(Almendares. "Decaying the process will only serve the interest of Philip
•
5/20/00 4:27 PM
1 of 4
5/20/00 4:30 PM
Press release by NATT members on FCTC resolution before WHA
Morris and other tobacco transnationals-at the expense of people like Wayne
Baker, profiled in Making a Killing. The transnational that addicted Mr.
Baker to tobacco did not have to have a laryngectomy-he did. Now, in the
expectation that the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control-process will
assist him, he is fighting back to prevent the next generation from falling
to the tobacco transnationals."
INFACT's Mulvey urged the 53rd WHA "to consolidate the gains made over the
past year by kicking off negotiations on the FCTC with firm guidance to
negotiators to eliminate tobacco advertising and promotion that appeals to
children, keep tobacco corporations out of public health policy, include
enforcement mechanisms that are binding on tobacco corporations and commit
to firm deadlines for compliance with treaty obligations."
ERA - Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth-Nigeria is Nigeria's
foremost environmental justice advocacy movement. The organization was
founded in January 1993 and its philosophy is based on the African Charter
of Human and People's Rights (Article 24). As a grassroots movement, the
organization continues to support local communities in
their democratic struggle to reclaim their human dignity and control their
resources.
CONACTA - National Commission Against Tobacco, Honduras works with
grassroots organizations, students, intellectuals and professionals since
1990. It also conducts research and education programs into tobacco control
and human rights issues. Dr. Juan Almendares Bonilla is available to do
interviews in Spanish.
Founded in 1977, INFACT is a non-governmental organization whose purpose is
to stop life-threatening abuses by transnational corporations and increase
their accountability to people around the world. INFACT is known for the
successful Nestl6 and GE boycotts. Its first documentary. Deadly Deception,
won the 1991 Academy Award. For more information about INFACT, visit
www.infact.org
###
Statement on behalf of the International Union against Tubercolosis and Lung
Disease
ON THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL
THE 53RD SESSION OF THE WHA in Geneva 19th May 2000.
Mr. Oronto Douglas, Deputy Director Environmental Rights Action/Friends of
the Earth Nigeria.
Thank you Mr./Madam Chairman,
Honourable Ministers,
Distinguished delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am Oronto Douglas It is a privilege to read this statement on behalf of
millions of our people who though not here are following your activities
particularly as it relates to the evolving framework convention that hopes
to arrest the most deadly killer of our time-Tobacco.
This assembly is gathered, we believe, to do what is honourable and right
for the youth of today so that the elders of tomorrow will not have to
repeat today's mistakes. A repeat of the mistakes will only encourage the
continuing enslavement of millions of our people through personal and
political tobacco addiction. This, distinguished delegates, will not be
progress in humanity's strive for health for all. It will also not fall
within the satisfying ambience of true civilisation which should bring good
for ALL, not a few or a section, and should protect our environment:
Civilisation does not encourage the sale of disease and death in the name of
choice and pleasure. Our gathering should not also be a waste of the worlds'
2 of 4
Press release by NATT members on FCTC resolution before WHA
5/20/00 4:30 PM
resources and time.
We are convinced that the assembly has the will, the way and the wherewithal
to carry through the noble initiatives, directed essentially in the defence
of our common humanity. We have a very high expectation of this Assembly
because it is made of people who have spent most of parts of their lives
'looking into health issues, working on health matters and speaking and
promoting the health of people around the world. Honourable Ministers,
distinguished delegates (of member countries here present) and members of
civil society, we are urging you to do what is right. We know that corporate
lobbyists descended on the Palais. We know who pays them. We know that the
objective is to make the Tobacco Treaty not worth the paper on which it is
written. Clearly, the stakes of profit are being hoisted over and above
environmental and livelihood considerations.
Matters of health need calm and quietness to resolve. The deafening din by
the Tobacco lobby, which has grip over many countries of power, may have
encouraged delegates from some countries to work for a meaningless Treaty—at
least that is what our reading of their comments and strategies since the
FCTC discussions began. This is not good for today, and we are convinced it
will not augur well for the survival of our tomorrow.
For us, from the targeted countries, we ask: what lessons does the Assembly
want us to take home? Should our report to the billions not now in Geneva be
a promise of a weak or meaningless Treaty? Must we be compelled to preach
that the discredited gospels of power is right and that health is for only
for the powerful and wealthy? And that a gathering of this nature is nothing
but a jamboree where some government representatives may take time off at
government expense and with possible support from transnationals? Should we
invite thousands with Drums, puppets and dance to the Palais? We are
encouraged by the commitment for action by a majority of the world's
nations. No one country can deal with the menace of the Tobacco
transnational whose advertising budget alone dwarfs many a country within
the continent of Africa. In the sacred duty of defending our common humanity
let it not be said that avoidable delays that now cause the deaths of eleven
thousand people to die of Tobacco every day, according to Madam Gro Harlem
Brutland, to increase to forty or more thousand a day in no distant time?
Distinguished ladies and gentlemen. Honourable Ministers and delegates, time
is running out. We urge you to:
1.
Work to produce a meaningful Treaty in name and indeed
2.
Unambiguously defend the young and the innocent.
3.
To be strong in the areas of advertising, promotions, sales and
smuggling.
4.
The Treaty will begin to take into consideration financial and other
support for victims of Tobacco and Tobacco related illnesses.
5.
The Treaty will protect the environmental rights of local people
especially those communities currently enslaved by Tobacco economics.
It is not too late for the treaty to consider the relationship between weak
and strong countries in the matter of trade and choice. Powerful countries
largely governed by corporations, hide under sovereignty and free trade as
they unleash poverty and destitution on the powerless.
THANK YOU.
Suren Moodliar, International Organizer
INFACT: 46 Plympton Street, Boston, MA 02118, USA
www.infact.org infact@igc.org
mailto:suren■infactsj uno.com
telephone: 01-617-695-2525
fax: 01-617-695-2626
Suren Moodliar, International Organizer
INFACT: 46 Plympton Street, Boston, MA 02118, USA
3 of 4
5/20/00 4:30 PM
Press release by NATT members on FCTC resolution before WHA
www.infact.org infact@igc.org
mailto:suren.infact@j uno.com
telephone: 01-617-695-2525
fax: 01-617-695-2626
5/20/00 4:30 PM
The WHA resolution on the FCTC
Subject: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 01:10:08 +0200
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
To: tobacco-accoimtability@igc.topica.com
CC: fctcall@globalink.org
The resolution was passed with language that amended the strength of the
NGO-participation elements originally proposed by Norway and Canada. The
text below is based on notes by INFACT's observer. The official
resolution will probably be up on the WHO website shortly
.(http: //www.who.int/qovernance) .
*
The Fifty-third World Health Assembly,
Recalling and reaffirming resolution WHA52.18 which established both an
intergovernmental negotiating body to draft and negotiate the proposed
WHO framework convention on tobacco control and possible related
protocols and a working group to prepare proposed draft elements of the
framework convention and report on progress;
Having considered the report to the Health Assembly on the framework
convention on tobacco control,
1.
TAKES note of the significant progress made, as reported in documents
a53/12 and a53/12Corr.1, and expresses its appreciation for the work of
the working group, it Bureau and the Secretariat;
2.
RECOGNIZES that the report contained in documents A53/12 and A53/12
Corr.l, including the proposed draft elements for a framework convention,
establishes a sound basis for initiating the negotiations by the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB);
3.
RECOGNIZES that the success of the FCTC depends on broad participation
by WHO member states and organizations referred to in para 1.3 of
resolution WHA 52.18;
4.
CALLS ON'the Negotiating Body:
(1)
to elect at its first session a chairman, three vice-chairmen and two
rapporteurs and to consider the possibility of an extended bureau;
(2)
to comments its negotiations with an initial focus on the framework
convention on tobacco control without prejudice to future discussions on
possible related protocols;
(3)
to report on the progress of its work to the Fifty-fourth World
Health Assembly;
(4)
to examine the question of an extended participation as observers of
nongovernmental organizations according to criteria to be established by
the negotiating body;
5.
REQUESTS the Director-General:
(1)
to convene the first session of the Negotiating Body in October 2000;
(2)
to draw up, for consideration by the Negotiating Body at its first
session, draft timetable for the process, with information on costs
related to the sessions of the Negotiating Body and the availability of
funds to cover them, giving special consideration to securing the
participation of delegates from developing countries.
###
It may be useful to compare the final language with the already modest
language of the proposed resolution.
lofl
5/20/00 4:32 PM
RE: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
Subject; RE: The WHA resoButieini ®m the FCTC
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:25:04 +0200
From: "Sibylle Fleitmann" <ensp@pophost.eunet.be>
To: '"Suren Moodliar'" <suren.infact@juno.com>, <tobacco-accountability@igc.topica.com>
CC: <fctcall@giobalink.org>
Thank you very much for this rapid information. It is very useful for those
who had not time to go there. Thanks for the teamwork.
Best regards,
Sibylle Fleitmann
ENSP, Brussels
---- Message d'origine---De: Suren Moodliar [mailto:suren.infact@juno.com]
Date: samedi 20 mai 2000 1:10
A: tobacco-accountability@igc.topica.com
Cc: fctcall@globalink.org
Objet: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
The resolution was passed with language that amended the strength of the
NGO-participation elements originally proposed by Norway and Canada. The
text below is based on notes by INFACT's observer. The official
resolution will probably be up on the WHO website shortly
(http://www.who .int/governance) .
The Fifty-third World Health Assembly,
Recalling and reaffirming resolution WHA52.18 which established both an
intergovernmental negotiating body to draft and negotiate the proposed
WHO framework convention on tobacco control and possible related
protocols and a working group to prepare proposed draft elements of the
framework convention and report on progress;
Having considered the report to the Health Assembly on the framework
convention on tobacco control,
1.
TAKES note of the significant progress made, as reported in documents
a53/12 and a53/12Corr.1, and expresses its appreciation for the work of
the working group, it Bureau and the Secretariat;
2.
RECOGNIZES that the report contained in documents A53/12 and A53/12
Corr.l, including the proposed draft elements for a framework convention,
establishes a sound basis for initiating the negotiations by the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB);
3.
RECOGNIZES that the success of the FCTC depends on broad participation
by WHO member states and organizations referred to in para 1.3 of
resolution WHA 52.18;
4.
CALLS ON the Negotiating Body:
(1)
to elect at its first session a chairman, three vice-chairmen and two
rapporteurs and to consider the possibility of an extended bureau;
(2)
to comments its negotiations with an initial focus on the framework
convention on tobacco control without prejudice to future discussions on
possible related protocols;
(3)
to report on the progress of its work to the Fifty-fourth World
Health Assembly;
(4)
to examine the question of an extended participation as observers of
nongovernmental organizations according to criteria to be established by
the negotiating body;
1 of2
5/22/00 7:24 PM
RE: The WHA resolution on the FCTC
5.
REQUESTS the Director-General:
(1)
to convene the first session of the Negotiating Body in October 2000;
(2)
to draw up, for consideration by the Negotiating Body at its first
session, draft timetable for the process, with information on costs
related to the sessions of the Negotiating Body and the availability of
funds to cover them, giving special consideration to securing the
participation of delegates from developing countries.
###
It may be useful to compare the final language with the already modest
language of the proposed resolution.
2 of 2
5/22/00 7:24 PM
FCA Member Websites
Subject: FCA Member Websites
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:44:41 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org >
Dear All - If your organisation has a website and it is not. listed below (or
is listed incorrectly) please send the details to me ASAP so I can link to
them on the FCA website. - Belinda
Action on Smoking and Health Australia www.ashaust.org.au
Action on Smoking and Health Thailand www.ash.or.th/
Action on Smoking and Health UK http://www.ash.org.uk/
Action on Smoking and Health USA http://ash.org
Advocacy Institute www.advocacy.org
Alcohol and Drug Information Centre (Ukraine) http://adic-co .info.kiev.ua/
American Cancer Society www.cancer.org
American Heart Association wivw.americanheart.org/
American Lung Association wwiv.lungusa.org
American Public Health Association www.apha.org/
British Medical Association www.bma.org.uk/
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (NZ)
http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (USA) mvw.tobaccofreekids.org
Canadian Cancer society www.cancer.ca/
Cancer Foundation of Western Australia http://www.cancerwa.asn.au/
Cancer Research Campaign (UK) www.crc.org.uk/
Chinese Progressive Association
http://volunteersolutions.org/harvard/volunteer/agency/one 156440.html
Consumer Association of Penang (Malaysia)
http://www.capside.org■sg/souths/south/cside.htm
European Medical Association on Smoking and Health
http://EMASH.globalink.org
European Network for Smoking Prevention www.ensp.org/
European Respiratory Society http://www.ersnet.org/frame whoiswho.htm
Heart and Stroke Foundation (Canada) www.na.heartandstroke.ca/
INFACT http://www.infact.org/
INGCAT www.ingcat.org/
INWAT http://www.inwat.org/
IUATLD http: //www. iuatld.org/
Japan Coalition on a Smokefree Environment)
http: //www’3. ocn. ne.jp/~muen/smokefree. htm
Japan Medical-Dental Association on Tobacco Contro
hctp://www.no-tobacco.or.jp/
Medical Women's International Association
http://members■ao1.com/mwia/index.htm
New South Wales Cancer Council (Australia) http://www.nswcc.org.au/
PATH Canada 5-nv5v.synapse.net/~path
Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada http://www.smoke-free.ca/
REDEH-CEMINA - The Network in Defense of Humankind www.CEHlNA.org.br
San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition (USA) http://sftfc.globalink. org/
Soul City www.soulcity.org.za
Tobacco Law Project www.wmitchell.edu
Transnational Resources and Action Centre (USA) www.corpwatch.org
UICC International Union Against Cancer www.uicc.org
Women's Environment and Development Organisation www.wedo.org/
World Dental Federation http://www.fdi.org.uk/
World Federation of Public Health Associations http://www.wfpha.org/
World Vision ivww.wvi.org/
to proceed
Subject: Re: How to proceed
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:00:54 -0500
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@juno.com>
To: sochara@vsnl.com
I am sorry that you had difficulty with the file. It was a reply to
Belinda's great workplan as FCA administrator with suggestions for
coordination with the NATT (http://www.infact.org/fctc.html).
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 10:27:58 +0530 Community Health Cell
<sochara@vsnl.com> writes:
> Unable to open this file — please re-send.
> Thanks
> CUC Bangalore
Dear Belinda,
Thank you for the workplan outline on FCA administration over the coming
months. I have some questions and suggestions which may assist in
furthering the plan and perhaps stimulate other FCA member comments. My
comments are made under the assumption that FCA administrative work will
be supervised by the FCA Coordinating Committee.
My questions and comments are interspersed in [brackets] through the text
of the original e-mail.
’■
Dear All
After discussion with various members of FCA I have drawn up a list of
activities which I wish to focus on in the coming months.
greatly
I would
value your feedback in regards to this.
Follow up from 1st Negotiations
1.
Summary of October meeting (uploaded on website and distributed via
listserve)
2.
Production of a database of delegates comments
[Both will be a great service to all of us! Since I for one will count on
it, can you provide some sense of the target dates?]
FCA Development
1. Clarify and agree on procedures
2. Agree on a common FCA statement (based on Geneva statement)
3.
Expand membership (focusing on developing countries)
[This is essential and I have the following suggestions:
<2^ 1 '
We should develop a priority list of countries to be targeted based on
the ongoing work around mapping countries' FCTC positions.
Within the priority list of countries we should also target NGOs in terms
of the expertise needed for the treaty, and FCA should organize and
mobilize tobacco control and public health organizations first in each of
those countries.
This should be planned and coordinated with the ongoing outreach work
done by (but limited to) the Network for Accountability of Tobacco
Transnationals to avoid duplication of effort (NATT' is not' .organizing
tobacco control and public- hpalth-organl zations).' We should ensure that
11/16/00 9:59 AM
Re: How to proceed
there is regular communication between NATT and FCA on outreach work.]
4. Discuss and agree to the role of working groups, how they should be
organised and what they should achieve. Set up and monitor progress.
[Please send around the list of work groups and their coordinators again.
I know that I had signed up for the political mapping group, but after
sending over our initial mapping, have not received new information]
5. Discuss and agree to the role of regional contact points, how they
should
be organised and what they could be responsible for (noting that this
will
probably be different in different regions).
Work closely with these
contacts to improve regional action (particularly in Africa, Eastern
Europe,
Asia, the Pacific and South America).
[This is crucial (can you re-circulate that list?); at the last Chicago
meeting of FCA the regional structure was put in place; we'-should also
prioritize funding for regional coordinators' activities; note: at the
last meeting I think three Africa regional coordinators for Africa were
proposed:
a.
Eastern & Southern Africa
b.
West Africa
c.
Francophone Africa]
FCTC
1. FCA discussion of FCTC text issues (this could be done within working
groups or with the whole listserve.)
The process would be aimed at
familiarising FCA members with the issues under discussion and finding
where
consensus can be found.
This outcome of this discussion could be a three
column summary with the present text,
text
’model' text and a 'compromise'
(based on what Clive Bates at ASH UK has been doing).
would
Hopefully this
suit those who feel the best practice model must be put forward as well
as
those who are concerned that if we claim the high moral ground that we
will
be excluding ourselves from the real debate.
Perhaps in offering both we
can achieve both ends.
[I fear that in publicly presenting a compromise text, especially as an
NGO text, we will present a de facto "model text" and that will be the
point away from which ground will be negotiated; the NGO role is to be
the civil society and public health conscience of the FCTC process. Each
of our groups may have different a "bottom line" however, that should be
an individual organization decision, and the alliance should push for a
best practice model. The text should not be a lowest common denominator,
but rather one supported by overwhelming majority (my preference would
Rc: How to proceed
Looking forward to comments,
Belinda
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:59:59 +0700 "FCTC Alliance"
<FCTCalliance8inet.co.th> writes:
> Dear All
>
> After discussion with various members of FCA I have drawn up a list
> of
> activities which I wish to focus on in the coming months.
I would
> greatly
> value your feedback in regards to this.
>
> Follow up from 1st Negotiations
> 1. Summary of October meeting (uploaded on website and distributed
> via
> listserve)
> 2. Production of a database of delegates comments
>
> FCA Development
> 1. Clarify and agree on procedures
> 2. Agree on a common FCA statement (based on Geneva statement)
> 3. Expand membership (focusing on developing countries)
> 4. Discuss and agree to the role of working groups, how they should
> be
> organised and what they should achieve. Set..up and monitor
> progress.
> 5. Discuss and agree to the role of regional contact points, how
> they should
> be organised and what they could be responsible for (noting that
> this will
> probably be different in different regions). Work closely with
> these
> contacts to improve regional action (particularly in Africa, Eastern
> Europe,
> Asia, the Pacific and South America).
> FCTC
> 1. FCA discussion of FCTC text issues (this could be done within
> working
> groups or with the whole listserve.) The process would be aimed at
> familiarising FCA members with the issues under discussion and
> finding where
> consensus can be found. This outcome of this discussion could be a
> three
> column summary with the present text, 'model' text and a
> 'compromise' text
> (based on what Clive Bates at ASH UK has been doing). Hopefully
> this would
> suit those who feel the best practice model must be put forward as
> well as
> those who are concerned that if we claim the high moral ground that
> we will
> be excluding ourselves from the real debate. Perhaps in offering
> both we
> can achieve both ends.
> 2. With the help of key experts develop concise explanatory papers
> on the
> major issues to be discussed during the FCTC. The papers would give
> readers
> understanding of the basis for certain policy options and the
> pitfalls
> for options. The papers would not necessarily come out with a
> formal
> position but provide information on policy options. Some could
> clearly
> favour certain options (such as advertising) but others (such as
4 of 5
11/16/00 9:59 AM
Re: How to proceed
> smuggling
> could explain what the problems are and what options there are and
>. what the
> possible implications of these measures could be). Topics could
> include > smuggling, farming, advertising, trade, labelling and packaging,
> product
> regulation.
> Website
> 1. Develop website including linking to major sources of FCTC
> information,
> uploading major FCA documents and providing clear summaries of the
> FCTC
> process to date
> Planning for April Negotiations
> 1. Ensure more representation from developing countries, all
> regions
> 2. Plan for daily luncheon briefings for delegates
> 3. Organise logistics
>
> Looking forward to comments,
> Belinda
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/taq-j.
Subject: Re: FYI
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 14:23:21 +0530
From: "Bobby Ramakant" <ramakant@lwl.vsnl.iiet.in>
Organization: INGCAT Task Force (South East Asia), Media Center for Lung Health
To: "Babu, Mr. Sharath" <BABUS@whosea.org>, <sangay@druknet.net.bt>,
<infopom@indo.net.id>, <hellis@mos.com.np>, <varabhom@dms.go.th>,
<sochara@vsnl.com>, <ramakant@globalink.org>, <mirabaghi@hotmail.com>,
<rcctvm@md2.vsnl.net.in>, <ili@nde.vsnl.net.in>, <bharat@chitralekha.com>,
<dipesh_satpathy@hotmail.com >, <pcgupta@tifr.res.in>, <imesh.agarwal@unfpa.org.in>,
<indiracal@hotmail.com>, <darlena.david@cmai.org>, <zebaysh@liotmail.com>,
<jenatrk@hotmail.com>, <kabra@iipad.ren.nic.in>, <vrekhi@satyam.net.in>,
<srkhanna@giasdl01 .vsnl.net.in>, <ksri@medinst.emet.in>, <ticu@del3.vsnl.net.in>,
<warlaw@del3.vsnl.net.in>, '"Kishore Chaudhry'" <chaudhry_k@hotmail.com >
CC: "Judith Mackay Dr" <jmackay@pacific.net.hk>, "derek yach" <yachd@who.ch>,
"Martha Osei Mrs" <preett@whosea.org>
In response to BBC Online- "Can South Asia Stub Out tobacco?"
YES, SOUTH ASIA SHALL STUB OUT TOBACCO!
POSITIVELY, CERTAINLY AND DOUBTLESSLY!
Is it realistic to say NO to money coffers of tobacco industry?
"Realistic?" Do we understand REALISM? REALISTIC is to understand that
tobacco industry has been DUPING millions and millions of our human race
since years and years, if not times immemorial.
Tobacco industry has been MISLEADING our children and youth and LURING
them to gory deadly land of tobacco related diseases, disabilities and
death. Tobacco industry has made a criminal breach of trust EVERY TIME a
tobacco product gets sold in any corner of the world, because tobacco
consumers NEVER get what tobacco industry had promised them in
advertisements and promotion campaigns.
THIS IS REALISM. Stark Reality. With a reported half-a-million mortality
every year in India alone, and millions of cases of sub mucus fibrosis and
other tobacco related hazards wreaking havoc in families, communities,
societies and economies all over the region and world, tobacco industry
cannot save face by throwing alms of millions of dollars.
This is more of a PURGATORY act on behalf of tobacco industry. An
attempt to emerge as a robinhood as their western counterparts have been
doing. But we REFUSE protection from those who prowl on our children and
make them addicts and sick, to kill them eventually a pitiful death. This is
REALISM.
We refuse MONEY and AID from those who have CRIPPLED ECONOMIES AND HUMAN
LIVES.
Our health infrastructure is already too lacking and over burdened
BECAUSE a MAJOR SHARE is of PREVENTABLE BURDEN OF TOBACCO RELATED GANGERS.
Each of the tobacco related cancer, is PREVENTABLE and had tobacco products
bean not there, a MAGICAL CUT DOWN WILL BE SEEN IN STATISTICS OF TOBACCO
RELATED CANCERS.
We REFUSE MONEY from those who have KILLED PEOPLE MERCILESSLY DEPRIVING
THEM OF MONEY ALL THEIR LIVES ( A SIGNIFICANT SHARE of family income goes
into tobacco usage in poor communities) which inturn has taken it's toll on
family health, education and general well-being, and made them orphans when
the sole bread earner DIES due to tobacco leaving behind a family at the
mercy of social VULTURES. Will TOBACCO COMPANY FOSTER millions of these
families? Will Tobacco Companies RE-IMBURSE hefty hospital bills and
treatment costs? 1
This is doubtless that accepting tobacco money is falling more into the
trap, and further CRIPPLING oneself. It is a CONVENIENT OPTION (where the
convenience is for short term only) , like remaining QUIET and a MUTE
spectator when someone smokes in your face at a public place and you cannot
say NO. (and suffer from deadly health hazards later on).
Regarding educating our masses, YES, that is where we really have to
l'cf2
12/5/00 11:19 AM
Re. FYI
work. We have to intensify this EYE-OPENER CAMPAIGN so that individuals,
families, communities, societies, and countries by and large, start BREAKING
THE SILENCE. We have to provide RIGHT KNOWLEDGE to the children before
tobacco industry can lure them away and empower them with RIGHT concepts of
manlihood and how tobacco giants try to DUPE them away! We have to
strengthen our TOBACCO CESSATION EFFORTS and succeed at larger level in
makina a significant intervention in. cases where tobacco' consumers WANT TO
QUIT but are unable to do so.
We have to work on policy makers in places where we still lack stringent
and compelling prohibitory orders. We really have a challenge in ENFORCING
these prohibitory orders and legislative bans, I agree but then nothing is
impossible, since the VERY WORD IMPOSSIBLE says I *M POSSIBLE.
Keep the faith, The GOOD shall win, eventually,
Bobby Ramakant
> > Can South Asia stub put tobacco?
> > SOUTH ASIA;
> > Source: BBC Online, Friday, 11/17/00
> >
> > Around half-a-million people die each year in India from illnesses
> > caused by
tobacco. Hundreds of millions of people in South Asia
> > are regular smokers.
> >
> > More and more teenagers across the region are taking up the habit,
> > and the laws that do exist to reduce the use of tobacco are
> > seldom enforced by underpaid and overworked authorities.
> >
> > Should more be done to educate people of the health risks of •
> > tobacco? Is it realistic to expect South Asian countries to turn
> > down the big bucks of the international tobacco giants? Tell us
> > what you think.
> >
> > A World Today debate on this ,subject will be broadcast on BBC World
> > Service Radio on Thursday 22nd November at 0045 and 0245 GMT. A
> > selection of your emails will be read out during the debate and
> > daily on the programme leading up to the debate at 0040GMT and
> > 0240 GMT.
Attach:
Subject:
0,1597,220936-412,OO.shtml
CBS News | WHO Slams Big Tobacco's Global Tactics
http://cbsnews.cbs.eom/now/stoiy/0,1597,220936-412,OO.shtml
i
L±J
The page cannot be displayed
The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site
WHO S'atns Bag Tobacco's Global! Tactics
c World Health Organization Says Its Efforts Were Broadly
Undermined
o Accuses Big Tobacco OfMassive, Worldwide Lobbying
o Says Industry Secretly Funded 'Independent' Experts And
Research
GENEVA
(AIP) The World Health
Organization on
Wednesday accused
tobacco companies of
plotting elaborate
strategies to undermine
its campaign to reduce
smoking around the world.
"The tobacco c
behind] a variety
sip
”Th@ toteaee© ©©mpamass" ©won «toaom@inias siiww
StaC
la ;•
vo®w@d) WK]©, aim 8rt®maft8©iriial) ©uM©
a®®BD©v, as ©mi® off their ffOremost
enemies," said the 248-page report by independent
experts.
The report accused the companies of putting their
own consultants into WHO positions, raising "®®ri@(uis
«rM<E§eii©tns alb©^ whete fche mtegrifcv ©f WIHI©
wim-maHmi) has to®@ira ©©mp>ir©mos@«l]„’"
The study charged that the companies used other
U.N. agencies to acquire information on WHO
activities and lobbied delegates from developing
countries to resist anti-tobacco resolutions.
The evidence for the inquiry came from 30 million
documents made public during Minnesota's case
against the tobacco industry, which resulted in
tobacco companies paying out $6.6 billion.
They concerned the activities of Philip Morris, British
public pc&y a
orgaiaazatiois w
industry fcndli
dlisctos
WHO mdepen
Page 2 of 3
They concerned the activities of Philip Morris, British
American Tobacco, RJ. Reynolds, Brown and
Williamson, American Tobacco Company, Loriliard
Tobacco Company, the Tobacco Institute and the
Council for Tobacco Research.
"We troaflOv feel ttOnatt rehashing ©Ogfl
is
going to get us nowhere," Sody Humble, a
spokeswoman for British American Tobacco, told The
Associated Press. "W® reaOOv don’t understand
what this report is hoping to achieve."
The company is "actively seeking to end this
r’:‘J aruuiKeirt:
cibto'uu"’”
■
characterized our relationship with WH© and
other regulators in th® past," she said.
Last October, WHO appointed Swiss scientist Dr.
Thomas Zeltner to lead a committee of four
independent experts to review the documents. The
panel included former Food and Drug Administration
Commissioner David Kessler.
"©n th® basis of the volume ©if attempted and
successful acts ©IF subversion identified on its
lomltod search, it os reasonable to believe that
the tobacco companies' subversion ©IF WHO’s
tobacco control activities has resuited in
significant harm," the report said.
WHO Director-General Gro Harlem Brundtland has
made the fight against smoking a top priority. The
WHO aims to conclude a sweeping global accord to
cut cigarette consumption anc stem the rising death
toll by May 2003.
The agency estimates that smoking kills more than 4
million people per year and warns the toll may rise to
10 million per year by 2030 because of increased use
in developing countries like China.
The experts urged WHO member countries to
investigate industry attempts to infiltrate their health
efforts. The WHO should monitor companies' conduct
and help members in determining remedies for past
misconduct, they added.
The report found tobacco companies often covered up
their role — for example, by secretly funding
"independent" experts to conduct research, appear
at conferences and lobby WHO scientists with the
intention of distorting, discrediting or influencing
tobacco studies.
They found that "the tobacco companies had
behind a variety of ostensibly independent
guasi-academic, public policy and business
organizations whose tobacco industry funding
was not disclosed."
The report also highlighted a meeting of Philip Morris
8/16/00
Page 3 of 3
The report also highlighted a meeting of Philip Morris
executives at Boca Raton, Fla., in November 1988.
The so-called Boca Raton plan, the report says, "’os a
master [plain
am©migi mamv S)©aOsf aftSacWmg
WHO's totes©© ©©mto©8 programs, Mwsmeom©
to® [puroornttoos ©ff WHO
Offffo©®®, ate
ftargefttag (the s£iriuicttiuiir®r mamag®m®mtt aired)
ir@s©yre®s ©fftth® WHO." The plan "ateraftffite 2®
gtoteO fthreate to to® tote©©© Bteystov ate
m&aWipte sSratogo®® ff©r ©©ymtorimg ®a©h."
"§©me ©©mpaw teeymemto (thaft refer to WHO,
gjolimg te©k nsan? ^©©aeSss, ed© m©fi irefRJoctt am
approach fthae tote^ w@ w©yll«fl adtoplt woto WHO/’
David Davies, a vice president of Philip Morris
International, said in a statement.
The company insisted it neither altered WHO public
health messages nor obstructed any WHO initiatives.
But it conceded the materia! in the documents was
"to® prostates off a p©8arSz®d) ate ymprotdtaeW®
@mvor©iriim@mft om whoeh few §©taH©ms w®r@
s©ygh(^ ate ©©mfficft prewaOOed) ©ver ©©msemsys.
PhiBip Morris r®gr@£s (Ws."
By Geir Moulson
Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Tobacco
A History
©2000, CBS Worldwide Inc., All Rights Reserved.
AdvertiseAVith Us | Copyright Inforniauon | Priyacjr'Siatement
8/16/00
CA Statement Translation
Subject: FCA Statement Translation
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:07:00 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Dear All
I would like to make the FCA Statement available in a number of different
languages. If you are able to translate the document could you please let
me know. I'd like co have at least Chinese, Spanish and French but am keen
to have as many different languages as we can get. I will upload the
different language versions on the FCA website for easy access.
Thanks.
Belinda
;
;
Name: Statement of the FCA.doc
i !’>] Statement of the FCA.doc!
Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword);
; Encoding: base64
i
Statement of the Framework Convention Alliance
Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the world today. At present, 4 million people a
year die from a tobacco-related disease. If current trends continue, 10 million people will die each year by
the year 2030, with the majority of these deaths occurring in developing countries. If swift action is not
taken, tobacco will soon become the leading cause of death worldwide, causing more deaths than
tuberculosis, pneumonia, diarrheal diseases, and the complications of childbirth for that year combined.
The negotiation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) represents an historic
opportunity for global action to curtail the tobacco epidemic. The Framework Convention Alliance1
would like to commend the Member States for their efforts so far and urges them to take bold actions to
advance the FCTC process.
Members of the Framework Convention Alliance offer the following recommendations for the
procedures, principles and substance of the FCTC:
On the procedures of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB), we would urge that:
o
•
there be full NGO participation in all meetings of the Negotiating Body, working groups, ad hoc
bodies and any other committees that are established by the INB for the purposes of negotiating or
implementing the FCTC; and that
tobacco companies and their affiliates should not be an official party to the negotiations and should
not be allowed to serve on any advisory, scientific, enforcement or implementation bodies of the
FCTC.
On the principles of the FCTC, we would argue that:
«
•
®
•
»
•
tobacco control policies must be evidence-based using methods of proven effectiveness and drawing
upon international best practice;
the principle aim of the FCTC must be to substantially and quickly reduce death, disease, and
disability;
the protection and promotion of public health must be the guiding principle for all the decisions and
actions of the negotiating parties;
the Convention itself should include specific obligations on, among other issues, advertising, duty
free sales, product regulation, smuggling, and warning labels, rather than reserving all obligations for
inclusion hi protocols;
the public health provisions of the FCTC should take precedence over other international agreements.
For example, measures to protect public health may conceivably conflict with trade liberalisation, but
the public health objectives aic legitimate and should take precedence over trade when fives are at
stake; and that,
nothing in the FCTC undermine existing tobacco control initiatives or regulations in any signatory
state nor prevent, preempt or discourage any party from taking stronger action than required by the
FCTC.
Finally, we would also like to make some recommendations on the substance of the FCTC, which should
include, among other measures:
1 The Framework Convention Alliance is an alliance of more than 10093 organisations and networks from over 4036
countries, working to support the development of a strong and effective FCTC. For more information, please visit
our website at rvww.fctc.org or contact FCTCalliance@inet.co.th.
•
•
•
a
®
o
•
o
a total ban on all forms of direct and indirect tobacco advertising, sponsorship, promotion and “brand
stretching';
strong measures to combat tobacco smuggling;
a ban on tax free sales and tax-free import allowances of tobacco;
comprehensive tobacco products regulation, including but not limited to minimum standards for
manufacturing, packaging, ingredient and smoke composition and disclosure, product content and
labeling;
prominent picture-based health warnings covering at least 50% of the package in the
main language of the country in which the tobacco product is to be sold (and
markings on every pack with its origin and the country of final destination);
a prohibition on tire use of misleading terms like “fight” or “mild” on tobacco products;
a mechanism for the transfer of technology, finance and knowledge to assist countries in their
tobacco control efforts; and
the use of tobacco tax policy as a public health tool to achieve continuous decreases in tobacco
consumption.
The FCTC should require all parties to establish and document an evidence-based, comprehensive
tobacco control program including local, national and international measures with the aim of reducing
harm caused to tobacco users and to those exposed to secondhand smoke. Finally, Member States should
not wait for the conclusion of the negotiations to implement these measures, including those called for in
World Health Assembly resolutions that have already been unanimously approved.
The Alliance pledges to work constructively with the members of the INB to ensure that a strong and
effective FCTC is developed that protects public health and reduces the death and disease caused by
tobacco.
December 2000
Tobacco and
developing
ntries
Millions Dying
Where is the
Outrage?
The Rich get Richer
and the Poor get Poorer
jCV
According to the World
|
Health Organisation,
tobacco use is set to cause an
epidemic of heart disease and
can
cer in developing countries.
Currently, 4 million people die each year
from tobacco us... but that number is set to
rise to 10 million a year by 2030. In
addition to premature death, smokers
suffer from an ongoing degradation of
their J^alth due to smoking. Yet few
counmes are taking concrete actions to
stem this epidemic. This is in part because
of the political and economic power of
multinational tobacco companies which
have tried to define tobacco control as
solely an issue for rich countries in order
to protect their enormous profits from the
developing world.
Currently, approximately 80% of the
world's smokers live in developing
countries where smoking rates have risen
dramatically in the past few decades. Yet
it is the poor who can least afford to waste
money on the purchase of tobacco
products. Much of the tobacco industry is
dominated by multinationals, so profits
flow from poor to rich countries. Since
mcsi ; ' ••couni.:
v net importers of
exchange is
poor countries
.’ . medical and
,
be
are
othci
' :e
wisattribufae' to tobacco use.
A Pa?
Industry
The aggressive marketing tactics of the
mu^national tobacco companies have
greWy contributed to the tremendous
The tobacco industry has become a pariah
industry. For decades it has denied the
truth about the harmful effects of tobacco
addiction in order to protect its profits.
However whilst it has come under attack
in the courts and the parliaments of some
countries, the majority of countries have
felt powerless to restrain the industry with
effective legislation and litigation. In fact,
many continue to offer the industry tax
breaks and other incentives.
increases in smoking in developing
countries, particularly amongst women.
These companies use their enormous
political and financial power to influence
governments and promote their products
in every comer of the globe.
The
expansion of these companies into the
developing world has meant that in the
near future it is developing countries
which will carry the majority of the
burden of disease due to tobacco use.
Whilst some jobs are created by the
tobacco industry those which are offered
to people in developing countries are
usually dangerous and badly paid.
Tobacco farm workers are often exposed
to dangerous pesticides and other
chemicals and small fanners are often
chained to a cycle of debt by a tobacco
industry system whereby loan schemes
are run to help farmers start fanning
Tobacco Transnationals Target
Developing Countries
Jobs—But at What Price?
tobacco, but then low prices are offered
for the tobacco. In a number of countries
the tobacco industry exploits the poor and
powerless, employing children and
paying starvation wages.
Framework Convention for
Tobacco Control
What is the FCTC?
The Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (FCTC) is a global treaty
currently being negotiated by
governments which will address
.ansnational and trans-border issues,
,uch as global advertising, smuggling and
trade. Yet the FCTC will also serve as an
important catalyst in strengthening
national tobacco legislation and control
programmes. The process of negotiating
and implementing the FCTC will also
help to mobilise technical and financial
support for tobacco control and raise
awareness among many government
ministries about tobacco issues.
What could the FCTC achieve?
If properly negotiated, the FCTC could
help turn the tide against the tobacco
industry by weakening its political power
and helping to end its reckless behavior
through regulation and legislation. But
this will only occur if the voices of the
people are heard.
What will happen next?
The next FCTC negotiation is scheduled
for April 30 to May 5 2001 in Geneva,
Switzerland. At this meeting, WHO
member states will debate the draft treaty.
It is paramount that NGOs from around
the world lobby their governments and
mobilise public support for a strong
FCTC.
How can NGOs get involved?
To ensure the success of the WHO FCTC
in combating the global tobacco epidemic,
non-governmental organizations must
play a key role in the development and
negotiation of the treaty.
Framework Convention
□
Join the
Alliance;
□
Educate yours : ' and your
constituencies about global tobacco
issues and the FCTC the Alliance
Website (www.fctc.org) has links to
many good resources;
□
Inform and get the support of the
media in your country;
□
Get resolutions passed in support of
the FCTC;
□
Find out what your country's
delegates to the FCTC have said so
far and meet with them in order to
influence their future positions.
Building Support for
Global Tobacco Control
What is the Framework Convention
Alliance?
The Framework Convention Alliance
(FCA), a coalition of over 90
organizations and networks from over 36
countries, serves as an umbrella for
networks and individual organizations
working on the FCTC. The Alliance
facilitates communication between NGOs
already engaged in the FCTC process and
reaches out to NGOs not yet engaged in
the process (especially those in
developing countries) who could both
benefit from and contribute to the creation
of a strong FCTC.
Framework Convention Alliance
Website: http://www.FCTC.org
E-mail: FCTCalliance@inet.co.th
36/2 Soi Pradipat 10,
Pradipat Rd., Samsen Nai,
Phayathai, 10400,
Bangkok, Thailand
Tel: (66-2)278-1828
Fax: (66-2)278-1830
delegate text proposals
Subject: delegate text proposals
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 10:06:26 -0500
From: AJ Foreit <JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
To: "'fctcall@globalink.org'" <fctcall@.globalink.org>
http: /'
. i .-.: ■
< 8? 3
/MenuINB ■ html ■ They are the long
list of "Conf. Papers" at the bottom, of the left-hand frame'.
It makes for some interesting reading, on advertising, for example, of the
28 countries that proposed text, 14 countries supported full bans on any
advertising/srrship/etc; 5 countries
t - i
-o "r-j’fnte or
prohibit;" 3 countries had variations on banning advertising directed at
appr:,;” ',
incomple-'o ■:•.:> ths other, want..
sa
s to cliiidri , adolescents, a«<l
ting two, one is
'
'
nen of child-bearing age.
Cheers,
?.. Jen” ' " iit
Assistant. Manager, Internation-i 1
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
1707 L St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036, USA
tel: 202 236-5469 x3025
fax: 202 296-5427
http://tobaccofreekids.org
‘
s
Subject: email ids AGAIN changed!!!
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:17:03 +0530
From: "Bobby Ramakant" <ramakant@GLOBALINK.org>
Reply-To: "Bobby Ramakant" <ingcat@sancharnet.in>
Organization: INGCAT Task Force (South East Asia), Media Center for Lung Health
To: <ramakant@GLOBALINK.org>
Dear friends,
I apologise for this nuisance, but email ids have again changed since 'ramakant' username/loginname
alloted to me this time, now our email. •>
RAMAKAM ;
1v'
= MOT
INK ORG
INGCA I @SANCHAR NET. IN
Kindly make the appropriate changes,
best wishes,
bobby
Bobby Ramakant
Coordinator INGCAT Task Force (South East Asia)
past dec, otary Indian Society Against Smoking
Key Correspondent: Health & Development Networks (www.hdnet.orqL-- '
Editor: Priyanka Features, Tambakoo Kills Monthly. Children & Youth News Bulletin WEEKLY (cir by GLOBALINK)
Editorial board (India-Pakistan): Sachchi Muchchi monthly magazine for children of India & Pakistan on social issues
•
Permanent Address : C-2211, C-Block Crossing, Indira Nagar, Lucknow-226 016. India
Phone:+91-98390 7 33 55
Fax:+91-522-358230
-x e_mail: RAMAKANT@GLOBALIMK.ORG
website: http://tambakookills.qlobalink.org, www.ingcat.org
Re. Visitof TFI Rqreseniativcs
2/28/01 1:37 PM
1 of 1
Comments on the FCTC Text
Subject: Comments on the FCTC Text
Date: Wed. 28 Feb 2001 11:35:24 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCaUiance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Dear FCA Members
Please find attached a submission prepared by Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada to Health
Canada on the draft Chair's text of the FCTC. These comments in addition to the ones Mele Smith
circulated earlier are very helpful in helping us to better analyse the FCTC text. Please do forward
your comments on the text and how it could be improved to the FCA Listserve and your impressiosn
on the documents which you have already received.
Belinda Hughes
Coordinator
Framework Convention Alliance
VAW.fctc.org
Tel: (66-2) 278 1828
Fax: (66-2) 278 1830
;
Name: HC-Consult-Feb2001-ietter.doc
; l nHC-Consult-Feb2001-letter.doc;
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
• Encoding: base64
Name: chairstext-pscsubmission-Feb26.doc>
: f chairstext-pscsubmission-Feb26.doc ■
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
j Encoding: base64
3g>#Snwte’IRr®® (Ca oDDfe
11226 A WeBOinglos? Streel ♦ Ottawa * Ontarso 4 :f.
TeO: 233 <6878 » Fax: 233-7707 ♦ www.smo&e
©mac!): cca?iard@smofce
Mr. Ed Alston
Director, international Affairs
Health Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
Dear Mr. Aiston:
Please accept this letter and the accompanying material as our submission during your
co.'s.
.'s ramcwcrk Ccnventor. c" obaccc GcTto ( C
a.sc refsyou to a letter sent to Dr. Gillian Lynch on January 20, 2001 from several health agencies,
which reflects a set of concerns common to the national agencies working on tobacco control
This letter should be considered part of our response to this consultation, as well as the
attached briefs submitted to the WHO during its consultation period.
in our view, the government should set the following priorities in preparation for the next
negotiating round on the FCTC.
A primary objective tor Canada should be agreement to specific obligations to
Implement effective transboundary tobacco control measures
These obligations should include:
o ban on transnationai advertising and promotion
o specific measures to effectively monitor, curb and penalize smuggling
o ban on duty free cigarettes
o global surveillance of tobacco use
<> protection for domestic tobacco control from challenge under trade, intellectual
property, investment and other international commercial agreements
o transfer of tobacco control knowledge and expertise to developing world and
other areas in need of support
As these measures can only be achieved through international collaboration, they should be
the main focus of the treaty negotiation process.
A primary ©bjedtiv® tor Canada sbouHd b® (th® protection ©If Canada’s abilofiy to
jmpfentsnfi domestic tobacco control! measures.
Tc achieve this, Canada should insist on:
o protection for tobacco control from challenge under other commercial trade
agreements.
o Protection from requirements to 'harmonize' standards downward.
o Flexibility for domestic control measures, to allow for programs and policies to be
tailored and adjusted to changing circumstances and population needs
■" secondary objective for Canada Should be the advancement of tobacco contro'
Canada's principal concerns in this area should include:
o Provision of sufficient funding to global tobacco control through the framework
convention
® Drafting which allows the greatest number of countries to commit themseives to
improving tobacco control in their countries (likely through flexible, general
obligations on domestic measures),
■> Drafting which ensures a sufficient number of countries undertake measures to
address the transboundary aspects of tobacco control
Secause the needs countries with respect to domestic tobacco control measures vary wideiy,
overiy-specific domestic obligations may serve to discourage some countries from signing,
thus losing the ability to implement more effective transboundary measures.
Canada's leadership in tobacco control has been significant, especially in the eariy stages of
developing the framework convention. We trust this convention will continue to receive
priority supper: of the Canadian government.
With best wishes,
Cynthia Caliard
Executive Director
Health Situation in the South-East Asia Region, 1994-1997
Though in the past alcohol-related problems have been perceived as predominantly a
concern of western countries, it is now being realized that alcohol causes significant public
health problems even in developing countries, including those in the South-East Asia Region.
Control measures are limited in all countries. The “open community” approach has been
adopted in some countries, some community-based programmes have been undertaken by
NGOs, and some health workers have been trained. Yet there is an urgent need for
comprehensive policies, intensive preventive education, and integrated treatment programmes
in all countries of the Region.
Tobacco
The last decade has witnessed a major increase in tobacco-related illnesses and deaths
worldwide. It is estimated that tobacco kills 3.5 million people every year. Based on current
consumption patterns, it is predicted that eventually over 500 million people now alive will
be killed by tobacco.
In the South-East Asia Region, tobacco is produced in commercial quantities in eight of
the ten Member States, with India and Indonesia ranked third and seventh respectively among
the 25 major producers in the world. Over 70% of the total tobacco production in the Region
is consumed locally in varied forms including bidis, kretek, pan, pan masala and gutka.
While there are intra and intercountry variations in consumption levels, it is estimated that the
overall prevalence of tobacco consumption ranges between 55% and 80% among adult men
and between 3% and 71% among adult women. Over the last 20 years, the Region has
consistently had the second highest annual growth rate (2-8%) in per capita cigarette
consumption among the six WHO Regions. Among 40 countries surveyed by WHO in 1989,
three countries of the Region (Nepal, Bangladesh and Thailand) were among the ten countries
having the highest adult female smoking rates, at 58%, 20% and 13% respectively.
Not only is adult per capita tobacco consumption increasing, but the last few years have
also seen a significant increase in tobacco consumption among children, youth, women and
poorer population groups. For example, it is estimated that as many as 55,000 children are
addicted to tobacco every year in India. A national survey in Thailand indicated a marked
increase in smoking among the 10-12 year age group, offsetting gains made in the reduction
of smoking among adult males and females by 6.9% and 3.4% respectively. Based on the
prevailing consumption patterns, it was projected in 1988 that about two million children in
Thailand would eventually be killed by tobacco.
A recent survey of 13,887 school students aged 10-16 years in two large cities in
Bangladesh revealed that 12.2% were current smokers while 2.9% were ex-smokers. Of those
smoking, 23.3% belonged to the 15-16 years age group. A survey in Myanmar in 1993-94
showed that 44.6% of students between 10 and 20 years of age smoked. Nepal has one of the
highest smoking prevalence rates in the world. Rates are as high as 84.7% for males and
71.7% for females in a mountainous region, while in urban Kathmandu 74.2% of women are
reported to use tobacco. Its use is also widespread among the poor, with over 80% of
rickshaw pullers smoking bidis.
Page 150
x iRscg-x^cw-oJ.
19^
Health Programmes
A major concern is the wide consumption of tobacco products such as bidis and kreteks
which have extremely high levels of tar, nicotine and other toxic agents. A bidi delivers as
much as 45-50 mg of tar as compared to 18-28 mg in Indian cigarettes, and 1.74-2.05 mg
nicotine as compared to 1.55-1.92 mg in cigarettes.
Chewing tobacco in its varied forms is also very popular in many countries of the
Region. In a study of betel chewers in Sri Lanka, it was reported that 46% of men and 63% of
women added tobacco to their betel quid. In India, the market for pan masala and gutka is
now worth several million US dollars, while combinations of tobacco, areca nut and slated
lime preparations are used in several regions in North India. A household survey of 99,598
people in Mumbai revealed a 57.5% tobacco use prevalence rate among women, almost
solely in the smokeless form.
Against this complex and challenging background, countries of the Region have
undertaken some significant control activities during the last five years. Intensive public
education has been an ongoing process in all countries, heightened on World No-Tobacco
Day each year, with special focuses on sponsorship by tobacco companies and target groups
such as schoolchildren, youth and hospital workers.
Advocacy for healthy public policies and for a ban on the advertisement of tobacco
products has been intensified in India, Indonesia, Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka and
Thailand. While Bangladesh continues to reap health and economic benefits from its crop
substitution programme initiated in 1990, Nepal introduced a special tax of one paise on
each cigarette in 1993 to support public health interventions. India, Indonesia and
Thailand instituted non-smoking flights on all domestic and international sectors. Sri
Lanka banned cigarette advertising over its mass media channels while Maldives
declared two ‘no smoking’ islands. In 1996 the National Capital Territory of Delhi
banned smoking and advertising in public places. The sale of cigarettes and bidis to
children below 18 years and within 100 metres of educational institutions was banned. In
some countries, including India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Thailand, research has been
conducted on various aspects of tobacco use, such as prevalence among specific W
population groups, direct and indirect costs of tobacco use, and tobacco-related health
problems. Community-based tobacco prevention programmes have also enjoyed
considerable support from NGOs in almost all countries.
The causal relationship between tobacco use and diseases such as cancers,
cardiovascular diseases, and chronic respiratory disorders is increasingly being studied in
most countries of the Region. In India the number of avoidable cases of chronic heart and
obstructive lung diseases has been estimated at 12 million per year. Cancer incidence data
reveal that almost 50% and 25% of cancers in men and women respectively are related to
tobacco use. The incidence of oral cancer caused by chewing tobacco is estimated to be one
of the world’s highest, at about one-third of all cancer cases. Annually, tobacco-related
conditions are reported to cause 635,000 deaths in India. Tobacco-related cancers account for
43.1% in Sri Lanka, while two-thirds of all cancers in men and nearly one-half of all cancers
in women in Thailand are attributed to tobacco use. Chronic obstructive lung diseases are
Page 151
Health Situation in the South-East Asia Region, 1994-1997________________________________
common among smokers in Bhutan and Nepal. Stillbirths, low-birth-weight babies, early
neonatal deaths and abortions have been associated with tobacco chewing among pregnant
women in India.
To support the control efforts being made by countries, a regional consultation on
tobacco and alcohol was organized in 1997. Participants recommended the development by
all countries of long term, comprehensive and multisectoral policies. Against the background
of strong tobacco lobbies in Member States, perceived interim economic interests by both
governments and the tobacco industry, and the virtual lack of comprehensive control policies,
the Region runs the formidable risk of becoming a dumping ground for multinational tobacco
industries.
By strengthening its advocacy role, the WHO Regional Office is facilitating the
development of a regional policy framework for tobacco and alcohol control to guide
country action. Member States will be further supported in their efforts to develop
national tobacco and alcohol policies and programmes, to conduct research, and to
evaluate their control activities. Continued support to World No-Tobacco Days will be
provided and a database on tobacco in the Region will be developed for advocacy and
planning purposes.
5.8
Prevention and Control of Nutritional Disorders
Providing adequate and appropriate food and nutrition to people is one of the most formidable
challenges in the Region. Despite efforts by countries as well as by international, bilateral and
UN agencies, the burden of malnutrition remains a serious public health problem. The major
nutritional disorders in the South-East Asia Region include protein-energy malnutrition and
deficiencies of micronutrients, such as iron, iodine and vitamin A.
Recognizing the magnitude of the problem, global goals for the year 2000 were set
following the World Summit for Children in 1990 and the International Conference on
Nutrition (ICN) in 1992. These goals are to (1) reduce severe and moderate malnutrition
among children under five years of age by half of the 1990 levels, (2) increase the
percentage of newborns having an adequate birth weight (2500 grams or more) to 90%, (3)
reduce to less than 10% and possibly eliminate iodine deficiency disorders, (4) eliminate
vitamin A deficiency and its consequences including blindness, and (5) reduce iron
deficiency anaemia.
Protein-energy malnutrition
The prevalence of protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) in South-East Asia is the highest in the
world. This high prevalence together with the large population of the Region explains why
more than half of all malnourished children in the world are found in this Region. For the
nine countries of the Region with available data, the prevalence of underweight (low weightfor-age) in children less than five years of age ranges from 1.8% in Thailand (using the Thai
Page 152
DRAFT
NEW STRATEGY ON SMOKING 4 HEALTH
smoking and health.
The paper actually makes a number of
discrete proposals for changing the merchandising and advertising
techniques of affiliated companies around the world.
The "Causation* Concession
The most significant recommendation from a legal standpoint is,
predictably, the author's proposal that BAT
"move our position on causation to one which
acknowledges the probability that smoking
is harmful to a small percentage of heavy
smokers."
The author amplifies this by observing that in our advertising in
the United States
"there seems to be no particular reason why
the industry should not indicate its apprehension
about people who smoke more than say 20 cigarettes
a day and its confidence about those who wish to
smoke less than this amount."
/
The legal disadvantages to this position could possibly be so
great as to effectively counter the author's objective which is
-
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
Prcx. .ad as required by the Court's March 7, 1998 Order in
The State of Minnesota, et al. v. Philip Morris, at al. C6urt File No. C1-94-8565. Its use is subject to the Protective Order in that case.
This memorandum deals with a confidential position paper
originating with BAT in London, proposing a "new strategy" on
"to become strong in tobacco."
The grave legal disadvantages are
set out below:
1.
To admit that smoking causes death and disease
consumers.
The admission goes beyond even the
imposition of a "strict liability" standard.
The "new strategy" proposal would go a long way
toward conceding causation, which is the only
remaining defense where strict liability applies
680051009
will most certainly enlarge BsW's liability to
c
(the doctrine of strict liability is used
in cases involving inherently dangerous
products and requires the plaintiff to prove
only causation; the manufacturer's due care,
or lack of negligence, is irrelevant.)
2.
The proposal creates an indirect assurance to
"light" smokers that they can enjoy their custom
without apprehension.
Btw would be warranting
that use of less than 20 cigarettes a day is not
dangerous.
That warranty would likely provoke
further government regulation and^ more seriously^
create a whole new basis for liability to customers.
3.
Does anyone have hard evidence that 20 cigarettes
is a boundary that can be relied on?
Will not the
proper location of that dividing line become a
question subject to argument and ultimately to
decision by a jury?
I do not see how anyone can
comfortably predict a given jury will not conclude
that, for a given smoker, 14 cigarettes a day, for
365 days a year, for 20 years, is not "heavy"
smoking.
And what plaintiff, will testify that the
consumer in question smoked 14 cigarettes per day
6 more^or 20 in all?
680051010
if liability depends on his having smoked only
c
4.
c
If we admit that smoking is harmful to "heavy*
smokers, do we not admit that BAT has killed a
.* *
significantly different from the evidence we had
five years ago, might it not be argued that we have
been "willfully" killing our customers for this
long period?
Aside from the catastrophic, civil
damage and governmental regulation which would
flow from such an admission, I foresee serious
criminal liability problems.
You are, of course,
aware of the recent effort by a local prosecutor
to convict the Ford Motor Company of a crime
arising out of the defendant's alleged "willfull"
misdesign of the gas tank on the Pinto car.
I
fear the adoption of the "new strategy" would give
a prosecutor a much stronger case against Brown &
Williamson.
And because virtually all 0;S.
prosecutors are elected officials, it is rumored
• that some have been known to consider the effect
upon the electorate of specific exercises.of
prosecutorial discretion (they like to go after
fat cats).
•5.
The admission of liability inherent in the "new
strategy" would likely encourage new and more
onerous legislation and regulation, not only with
680051011
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL,- Produced as required by the Court's March 7,1998 Order In
'
The State of Minnesota, el al. v. Philip Morris, et al. Court File No. C 1-94-8565. Its use Is subject to the Protective Order in that case.
lot of people each year for a very long time?
Moreover, if the evidence we have today is not
r
respect to the sale and advertising of
cigarettes, but also as to when and where they
may be consumed.
6.
We are not competent to judge the law of the
United Kingdom or in the Common Market. -What is
the effect of these new admissions in those
jurisdictions?
In looking over the "advantages" and "disadvantages" listed by
the author with respect to the new position on causation, I find
that the alleged- advantages are unpersuasive and the
disadvantages are materially understated.
There are, however, other aspects of the "new strategy" that have
no legal drawbacks and which it seems to me are worthy of serious
consideration.
The "Moderation* Theme
While I do not believe we can in any way suggest to our customers
that smoking in moderation will cause them no harm, I do believe
we can promote moderation in the use of our product.
I say that
not only from a "public relations" or "advertising" point of
view, but from a legal one as well.
We must face the possibility
the day may come when a combination of medical evidence’ and
juri/'^irudential shifts will expose the tobacco industry to every
greater liability.
I have a sense that being able then to point
to the fact that, starting way back in 1980, we were recommending
“moderation" to our customers, can only help us.
Perhaps the
moderation theme could gradually be introduced into current
-
It is undeniable, of course, that to
say “Enjoy our cigarettes in moderation" is to suggest that
immoderate use may be harmful; but the same suggestion exists in
every advertisement for low “tar" cigarettes.
Product Modifications
I see no reason why BAT should not proceed to reduce “deliveries"
in Third World countries as quickly as possible, so far as this
lies within its power.
Advertising Methods •
I assume the comments in the paper relate entirely to procedures
occurring outside the United States.
So far as I am aware we do
not aim our advertisements at anyone under the age of JZ, appeal
to nonsmokers to take up. the habit, induce people to smoke more,
or rely upon “glamour and sexual appeal".
Of course, U.S.
advertisements are inclined to show pretty girls and rugged
males but I hardly think that is what the author had in mind when
he spoke about “sexual appeal".
If that's “glamour" then I
simply disagree with the author.
We do expect some years down
the line for the FTC to try to prevent the tobacco industry from
using people in cigarette ads, but we see no reason why the
industry should not resist that development with all the
resources at its command.
680051013
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
Proou^d as required by the Court's March 7, 1990 Order In
nesola, et al. v. Philip Morris, et al. Court File No. C1-94-8565. Its use Is subject to the Protective Order in that case.
advertising-themes, most notably The Tobacco Institute's
Smoker/Antismoker campaign.
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - Prodi., ud as required by the Court's March 7, 1998 Order in
The State of Minnesota, el al. v. Philip Morris, et al. Court File No. C1-94-8565. Its use is subject to the Protective Order in that case.
Minnesota Tobacco Litigation: B&W Privileged/Protected/ln Camera Materials
1>T0TS0089
Sl.no:
date:
Sex:
Age:
Community Health Cell
Society for Community Health Awareness, Research and Action
367. Srinivasa Nilaya, I main I Block Koramangala, Bangalore - 560 034
1.
Do you smoke tobacco Yes/No
2.
If yes please tick
a. Cigarettes b.Bidis
c.Both
3.
If yes
a. Habitual/regularly b. occasionally
4.
If habitual, how many cigarettes/ bidis you smoke a day?
5.
If occasional when do you smoke and how many cigarettes a day you smoke
6.
What is your favourite brand of?
Cigarette
bidi
7.
How old were you when you first started smoking?
8.
Why did you to start smoking?
9.
Why did you continue smoking?
10.
Do any member of your household smoke
Yes / no
11.
If yes
Father/ mother, others specify
12.
Do you use any form of chewed tobacco like Gutka, pan masala with tobacco/ pan parag/
khaini etc?
a.
Yes
b. no
13.
If yes how often do.you chew?
a. Regular
b. occasional
14.
If regular, how many packets a day do you chew?
15.
What is you favourite brand?
16.
Do any member of your household use the above products?
Yes/no
date:
If yes
Father/ mother, others specify
17.
18.
How old were you when first started chewing tobacco?
19.
What made you to get into this habit? .
Do you want to quit smoking and chewing tobacco?
a. Yes b. no
20.
21.
Ifyes/no give reasons
22.
Did you ever attempt to quit smoking/ chewing tobacco and how?
23.
If the attempt was unsuccessful, reasons?.
How did you first try using the tobacco (chewing and smoking)
24.
a. All by yourself
b. in the company of friends
25.
Are you aware of any of the harmful effects of tobacco on health if so enumerate a few?
26.
If you tried smoking/chewing tobacco and have not continued to become either a habitual or
an occasional tobacco user what made you decide not to continue.
27.
How did you leam about the health hazards of using tobacco (please tick)?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
From reading magazine
From school
From college
From TV
From doctors/ health professionals
Friends
----------------------Cut here and retain for information-------------------------------------
If you would like further information please contact Community Health Cell at
5531518/5525372- Email: sochara@vsnl.com.
Visit us at :http://www.geocities.com/sochara2000/
From:
Subject:
To:
Date sent:
sjones@bma.org.uk
Commonwealth Medical Association invites applications from commonwealth
NGOs to join their FCTC delegation
fctcall@globallnk.org
Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:40:00 +0100
Dear Friends
The Commonwealth Medical Association is an organisation in official
relations with WHO, and with official standing at the framework
convention negotiations.
I have just heard from Marianne Haslegrave at the CMA that they are
willing to welcome Commonwealth NGOs as members of their official
delegation to the upcoming intergovernmental negotiating bodies in
Geneva. NGOs joining the CMA delegation will also have opportunity to
directly participate in a briefing meeting for Commonwealth
governmental delegations to the negotiations, being organised jointly
by the CMA and the Commonwealth Secretariat on Saturday October 14 in
Geneva.
Those interested in joining the CMA delegation are invited to e-mail
Marianne at marianne@commat.org as soon as possible, and by Monday 2nd
October at the latest.
I would appreciate it if you could copy me in on any requests made sjones@bma.org.uk- but this is entirely at your discretion!
All the best
Sinead
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager (postmaster@bma.org.uk)
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"Sharad Vaidya" <sgvaidya@goatelecom.com>
<sochara@vsni.com>
RE: [Fwd: what is the output?]
Thu, 28 Sep 2000 07:14:15 +0100
Dear Dr. Thelma,
Argument: Banning of advertisements will affect the farmers
COUNTER: I) farmers are affected more by mechanisation than by
diminution of consumption. Employment is function of mechanisation.
ii) During the last decade the acreage of tobacco has come down from
500^000 hectares under tobaccq^cultivation to 400,000 under tobac.CT—
cultivation. At the rate of 2.5 hectares holding pefTarmer, about
'
40,000 growers have already shifted to other crops without any
hardships. This is because yield per hectare has gone up and despite
reduction in acreage.
PI note that the total number of growers of tobacco in the country do
not exceed 1,20,000. The rest are labourers. The industry balloons up
these figures and say that 26 millions are employed, when accffo the
Labour Ministry only about 6 million are employed L But their
employment is only part time . The labourer's-are paid~same’daily
wSges whether they work inTotracco field or any other food crop.
Were there any representatives of tobacco industry or farmers in the
meeting. I would be interested to know the arguments the industry or
the farmers lobby put up in the meeting.
Dr. Sharad Vaidya
----- Original Message----From: Community Health Cell [mailto:sochara@blr.vsnl.net.ln]
Sent: 27 September 2000 09:45
To: Sharad Vaidya
Subject: [Fwd: what is the output?]
Community Health Cell
Community Health Cell
-2-
Tue, 3 Oct
11/14/00 2:26 PM
1 of 1
FCA Member Websites
Subject: FCA Member Websites
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:44:41 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalmk.org>
Dear All - If your organisation has a website and it is not listed below (or
is listed incorrectly) please send the details to me ASAP so I can link to
them on the FCA website. - Belinda
>
>
i
?
T
Action on Smoking and Health Australia www.ashaust.org.au
Action on Smoking and Health Thailand www.ash.or.th/
Action on Smoking and Health UK http://www.ash.org.uk/
Action on Smoking and Health USA http://ash.org
Advocacy Institute www.advocacy.org
Alcohol and Drug Information Centre (Ukraine) http://adic-co.info.klev.ua/
American Cancer Society www.cancer.org
American Heart Association www.americanheart.org/
American Lung Association www.lungusa.org
American Public Health Association www.apha.org/
British Medical Association www.bma.org.uk/
Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (NZ)
http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (USA) www.tobaccofreekids.org
Canadian Cancer Society www.cancer.ca/
Cancer Foundation of Western Australia http://www.cancerwa.asn.au/
Cancer Research Campaign (UK) www.crc.org.uk/
Chinese Progressive Association
http://volunteersolutions.org/harvard/volunteer/agency/one 156440.html
Consumer Association of Penang (Malaysia)
http://www.capside.org.sg/souths/south/cside.htm
European Medical Association on Smoking and Health
http://EMASH.globalink.org
European Network for Smoking Prevention www.ensp.org/
European Respiratory Society http://www.ersnet.org/frame whoiswho.htm
Heart and Stroke Foundation (Canada) www.na.heartandstroke.ca/
INFACT http://www.infact.org/
INGCAT www.ingcat.org/
INWAT http://www.inwat.org/
IUATLD http://www.iuatld.org/
Japan Coalition on a Smokefree Environment)
http://www3.ocn.ne.jp/~muen/smokefree.htm
Japan Medical-Dental Association on Tobacco Contro
http://www.no-tobacco.or.jp/
-Medical Women's International Association
http://members.aol.com/mwia/index.htm
New South Wales Cancer Council (Australia) http://www.nswcc.org.au/
PATH Canada www.synapse.net/~path
Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada http://www.smoke-free.ca/
REDEH-CEMINA - The Network in Defense of Humankind www.CEHINA.org.br
San Francisco Tobacco Free Coalition (USA) http://sftfc.globalink.org/
Soul City www.soulcity.org.za
Tobacco Law Project www.wmitchell.edu
.
Transnational Resources and Action Centre (USA) www.corpwatch.org
UICC International Union Against Cancer www.uicc.org
Women's Environment and Development Organisation www.wedo.org/
World Dental Federation http://www.fdi.org.uk/
World Federation of Public Health Associations http://www.wfpha.org/
World Vision www.wvi.org/
\
APT Alliance Briefing on Trade fccnes
Subject: DR.VFT Alliance Briefing on Trade issues
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 200i 09:54:49 -0700
From: Mele J Smith <mjsmith@igc.org>
To: FCA.all(^globulmlc.org
.a:
On behalf of the Alliance's Trade Working Group, I am attaching a draft
Alliance briefing paper for the 2nd meeting of the Intergovernmental
Negotiating Body (INB). This paper focuses trade related language and
provides suggested alternative language for the Guiding Principles #5 and
#9 as well as precautionary principle language. This document is meant to
complement the Alliance Briefing on the Chair's Text which highlights some
of the problems with the language of Guiding Prinicple #5.
Many thanks to members of the Trade Working Group who contributed to the
language of the brier, especially Neil Collishaw with Physicians for a
Smokefree Canada, Ross Hammond, consultant to Campaign for Tobacco Free
Kids, and Rob Weissman with Essential. Action.
seeKing approval on a "can you live with it" basis (i.e. unless you have
irreconcilable problems with the content, it's OK to send it out as an
ric i'tJiiiiZe elicit ufiio j.5 laU'iel SixOX u iiOCiCS ctHQ that Gei'iSVct IS Ollxy ct WceK
away. Gur apologies!
Thanks and Regards,
Mol o STT.i th
on behalf of the Trade Working Group
;
Name: Proposed FCA trade document- final.doc!
• M Proposed FCA trade document- final.doc;
Type: Winword File (application/msword)
/Encoding: base64
4/25/01 10:20 AM
Submission for the Public Hearings on the Framework Convention
Subject: Submission for the Public Hearings on the Framework Convention
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:25:15 +0530
From: Community Health Cell <sochara@blr.vsnl.net.in >
Reply-To: sochara@vsnl.com
To: FCTC Hearing <fctchearings@who.int>, Chitra Subramaniam-WHO <subramaniamc@who.ch>,
"Martha R. Osei WHO-SEARO" <oseim@whosea.org>
Greetings from Conununity Health Cell!
We are sending our submission to the Public Hearing on the FCTC as given below. Please acknowledge
receipt
Best wishes
Dr Thelma Narayan, MBBS, M.Sc(Epid.), Ph.D(London)
Submission for the Public Hearings regarding the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control on 12th - 13th October 2000, at WHO,
Geneva
By
The Community Health Cell (CHC), Bangalore, India,
which is the functional unit of a registered Society for Community Health Awareness.
Research and Action (SOCHARA).
1.
Introduction
1.1
CHC is a professional resource group working in the area of community health and public health,in the
voluntary sector in India, since sixteen years. Major strategic approaches in work include training, research,
advocacy, information dissemination, and networking on major health
jissues/problems including tuberculosis, malaria and vector borne diseases, HTV/AIDS, Tobacco
control, women’s health, rational therapeutics, promotion of indigenous systems of health care and
addressing poverty and health relationships, hi recent years there is increased interaction with
government and the Health University in Karnataka State. Die team comprises of 18 members including
health and
social science professionals, supported by an informal network of 25 professionals.
CHC has recognised tobacco related health problems as a major public health issue since long, but
has become more actively involved since the past l'/a years. As pail of our tobacco control work we
collaborate with the Indian Medical Association - Karnataka branch, with the National Organisation for
Tobacco Eradication and others. We have participated internationally with the NGO Forum for Health,
INGAT and the Global Alliance for tobacco control. Locally we also undertake awareness
programmes/education and training programmes in schools, colleges and withNGO's on health effects of
tobacco use and on tobacco cessation.
Our sources of funding include the Government of India, State government of Karnataka,
WHO-Geneva, Misereor - Germany. Cordaid - Netherlands and for one year DFID - UK,
besides local donations and payment for services.
1.2. Summary
Research and experience over 20 years in India indicates an alarmingly increasing trend in
tobacco use, both smoked and chewed. Adverse, serious, health and economic effects have
3 of 4
.
10/4/00 3:1
Submission for the Public Hearings on the Framework Convention
been documented by the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, the Indian Council of Medical
Research, the Kidwai Institute of Oncology and by academic and NGO studies. Given that 40%
of India’s population or approximately 400 million persons live below or around the poverty line,
spending on tobacco use and on meeting health care costs, which are substantially out of pocket
expenditures, result in worsening the poverty cycle and in denying positive spending on nutrition,
child care, education etc. This is unacceptable ethically to the public health community and to
civic society.
We recognize the need for a public health approach. We support the global strategy to ensure
tobacco control, as multinationals with easier access to markets through the process of
Globalisation are using questionable marketing methods. South Asian populations are particularly
vulnerable and at risk in the current context. We support the proactive efforts of the Tobacco
Free Initiative of the WHO to contain the tobacco industry through the FCTC. We also address
the local tobacco industry in India, particularly those producing and marketing bidis and chewed
tobacco. Recent studies in Mumbai found 74% of adult men and 60% of adult women chewing
tobacco, a habit that starts at 11-13 years of age and which accounts for 30% of tobacco use.
The hazards to which the unorganized workers are exposed and their working conditions need
9 attention. Thus a public health approach will also need to respond to tire dynamics and
specificities of tobacco growth, production, sale and use in the country.
2.
Personal Health and Public Health Consequence of tobacco use
2.1
Over the past 50 years, studies conducted globally, including the outstanding work by Richard and Doll in
the UK, have established the link between tobacco use and various forms of cancer, cardiovascular disease,
gastrointestinal disease, diseases of the reproductive tract including pregnancy wastage and impotence Studies
in India also bear this out.
The cause effect relationship between tobacco use in smoked or chewed form and several adverse ill health
consequences on an individual is thus well established. This needs to be kept in mind during the negotiations.
2.2
The WHO, the public health community and policy makers need to also take cognisance of chewed
tobaccofgutka, pan masala, zarda etc) accounting for 27-30% of tobacco use in India Chewed tobacco is also
used elsewhere in the Indian subcontinent, with potential for spread globally. Habitual chewing of 4-5
packets per day leads to gingivitis, leukoplakia, erythroplakia and to the disabling oral submucous fibrosis
(OSMF). Over 2-3 decades, a ten-fold increase in incidence of OSMF is noticed with a shift in age group
C om those above 40 years to younger persons between 25-35 years.
2.3
The effects of passive smoking/ETS have been accepted by courts.
2.4
More recently the highly addictive nature of nicotine has entered the public knowledge domain, along
with the fact that this critical information was kept secret and also used to manipulate the product by tire
tobacco industry'. The consequence and cost to public health and to individuals resulting from this act by the
industry, (which talks of free choice) is enormous.
2.5
Tire magnitude oftobacco related morbidity' and mortality', place it among the league of major public
health problems, resulting in the following : much preventable human suffering to affected persons and their
families; to premature death; to increased health care costs; to loss of productivity; to shift in household
income from nutrition and children’s education to spending on tobacco; and to an overall economic loss to
national economies, which economically' poor countries can ill-afford. A recent report of a 6 year prospective
study by the Indian Council of Medical Research substantiates the last point.
2.6
For the larger public good, there is need for urgent public policy interventions to mitigate the above. The
protection of public health and public good is the mandated role ofgovenunents (national and local); of
professional bodies who have access to knowledge; of international bodies such as WHO, particularly when
there are global dimensions to health problems and health risks; and of civil society itself, when action by
other mandated agencies is ineffective.
2.7
An objective review of tobacco control interventions especially in developing countries reveal that they
have been weak and ineffective. Rates of tobacco use have infact increased, stalling at very young ages during
childhood, where again the free choice theory fails to hold. As a medical doctor specialised in epidemiology
and health policy analysis, it is evident that interventions focussed on cessation, counselling and group health
education / awareness concerning the health ill effects of tobacco, fail to address the determining cause of
spread oftliis behaviour or habit related problem, namely the dynamics and ingenuity of the tobacco industiy
which actively grows, manufacturers, promotes and sells the product in collaboration with governments.
These major stakeholders need to be held accountable and responsible for their decisions and actions,.from a
public health ethics point of view.
Given the present global evidence, these stakeholders need to make informed choices, and based on currently
globally accepted human rights instruments to compensate individuals/families for the harm caused .
3.
We support a series of policy measures for tobacco control that include :
3.1 Crop diversification, alternative employment and protection of tobacco workers.
3.2 Reduction and elimination ofgovernment/public subsidy to tobacco growth, production, manufacture and
.sale.
3.3
Banning sponsorship of sports & entertainment by the tobacco industiy.
3.4
Baiuiing of public advertisement of tobacco products.
3.5
Preventing and protecting children and young people from getting addicted.
3.6
Widespread education and awareness raising about consequences oftobacco use.
3.7
Tobacco cessation efforts -■ support to smokers/chewers.
3.8
Baiuiing smoking in public places.
3.9
Support to the WHO in developing and implementing the Framework Convention H Tobacco Control
(FCTC).
3.10
Labelling and regulating nicotine, tar and carbon monoxide content of cigarettes.
3.11
Baiuiing chewed tobacco.
3.12
Control of Smuggling.
3. J 3 Increasing taxes and using money thus collected for tbbaco prevention education.
4.
Country specificis
4.1 In India it is reported that 20% oftobacco use comprises cigarettes, 27-30% chewed tobacco (gutka etc)
and 50-53% beedies. We need more accurate data on the sale of unbranded beedies and ofgulka which arc
unaccounted for and totally unregulated. There is need for greater product regulation and safeguarding of
health and working conditions of workers in these sectors who arc most often women, children and the poorest
sections of society'.
While on the one hand the industiy talks ofgeneralion of employment and wealth, the latter is largely in the
hands of larger fanners and business owners. Field studies reveal that women in the home-based industiy
work 10-12 hours a day for a relatively small remuneration. Since it is homebased work, chi Idren often help
out after school hours. Undercutting and exploitation of women, who may often be uneducated is often being
mission for the Public Hearings on the Framework Convention
done.
Support is required for research and for dialogue with the different departments and ministries of
Government, including agriculture, labour, commerce and trade, education and health, greater involvement of
NGO’s, health professional bodies and educational institutions is required.
*********** THE END ***********
i Community Health Cell <sochara@vsnl.com>
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
<fctcall@globalink.org>
Brundtland Statement on Hearings
Fri, 13 Oct 2000 22:52:11 -0700
Statement WHO/6 13 October 2000
WHO DIRECTOR-GENERAL'S RESPONSE TO THE TOBACCO HEARINGS
In response to my call for all parties interested in providing their views
about the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), WHO received
over 500 written submissions whichwere immediately made accessible for
public scrJfiny~bnJWHOts.web.sjle. Representatives of over-16CLorganisations
are currently providing oral testimony in Geneva. They represent most major
tobacco multinationals and state tobacco companies, as well as several
tobacco farming groups along with a diverse range of public health
agencies, women's groups, community based organisations and academic
institutions.
All groups with a commitment to public health expressed extreme concern
about the impact of tobacco use on the current and future health of
populations, especially in developing countries. They urge rapid and
decisive action. In contrast, most tobacco companies concentrated on what
they believe to be the boundaries of'reasonable' and 'appropriate'
actions. Some questioned the role of WHO and the FCTC process in promoting
action and making progress to reduce the public health impact of tobacco.
Further, several tobacco companies continued to deny that passive smoking
constitutes a threat to health.
In general, the tobacco companies have indicated support for policies and
measures that are known to have a very limited impact on youth and adult
consumption of tobacco. They appear to be against the interventions that
WHO, the World Bank and public health experts have identified as having' a
measurable and sustained impact on tobacco use.
These are a combination of
increased excise taxes,
bans on tobacco advertising, sponsorship and marketing,
controls on smoking in public places,
expanded access to effective means of quitting,
tough counter-advertising and
tight controls on smuggling.
I hope that Member States will focus jn these interventions as they
/
deliberate about the measures to be included both in the FCTC and in their /
national laws and policies.
__ J
In much of their testimony, companies that are part of the tobacco industry
focus on political, financial and human rights issues. They re-state well
known predictions that international action to reduce tobacco use will lead
to sudden and massive job losses, people driven further into poverty and
threats to the sovereignty of nations. As we heard from other groups, these
predictions do lead to genuine concern among decision makers: however,
careful research has also shown that in most cases the predictions have no
evidence base. It thus seems likely that the companies are trying to
confuse the negotiating process that will be taken forward by delegates
from WHOTTSTMember States. They seek to do this just before the FCTC r ’
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body which starts Monday the 16th of October.^
A diverse group of organisations from developing countries provided
different views of the impact of tobacco on farmers in rural communities.
Some groups described the fears of tobacco farmers about the certainty of
their future livelihood. While these fears are understandable, there is no
evidence to suggest that they are justified.
However there is a need for careful study of the way in which long-term
reductions in tobacco demand impacts on the supply of tobacco products in
the long term. This would help with the identification of communities and
countries that may have legitimate concerns about their vulnerability. It
would indicate the options that exist to minimise potential hardship over
the next few decades. Such work is underway - and being carried out in
collaboration between FAO, the World Bank, US Department of Agriculture,
Canada's IDRC, Sweden's SIDA and WHO.
During the hearings several tobacco companies have indicated that they are
shifting their marketing policies - towards a "middle ground”. Some spoke
of wanting a "reasonable dialogue", and desiring to work towards
"practical and realistic solutions". WHO takes the view that Governments
must be cautious about what this means in practice. There is one
underlying reality which we must all keep in mind - tobacco remains the
oTilylegalconsumer product that kills half of its regular users.
The WHO position, based on available evidence, is that there are four ways
to reduce the harm to health caused by tobacco. First, prevent youth an3
/
non-smokers from starting. Second, encourage and support smokers to quit, I
Third, stop non-smokers, including unborn babies, from being exposed to
/
tobacco smoke. And fourth, reduce the levels of harmful constituents in
tobacco products.
—1
WHO supports comprehensive effective policy measures to tackle all four
approaches. Action on the first three ways has already led to health gains
in many countries. Product modification and efforts to develop what tobacco
companies call "less harmful" products may take some time to have an
impact, and - as is publicly acknowledged by major tobacco companies there is still no safe cigarette.
Our analyses suggest that there is a stark contrast in positions of WHO and
most Member States on the one hand, and those of the tobacco companies. We
in WHO urge the immediate implementation of the measures that are known to
have a sustained impact on reducing tobacco use. We would wish that this
can be undertaken without interference by
tobacco companies. However, it appears that tobacco companies will
continue to oppose measures that effectively reduce the number of new
smokers and current smokers. Their actions suggest that they will - in the
long term - try to reduce the harm caused by their products.
Despite our concerns about these clear differences in position, we are
committed to hearing how the tobacco companies do propose to reduce the
harm that their products cause. Our Scientific Advisory Committee is
charged with proposing appropriate national and international tobacco
product regulatory frameworks. We have invited tobacco company scientists
to provide their views on product modification to this Committee later
today.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date sent:
"Ross Hammond" <margross@igc.org>
<fctcall@globalink.org>,
"GlobaLink International" <gt-intl@globalink.org>
Koop’s FCTC Testimony
Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:20:58 -0700
Testimony of Dr. C. Everett Koop, C. Everett Koop Institute, WHO Public
Hearings, 12 October 2000
My name is Ross Hammond, and I am reading this on behalf of Dr. C. Everett
Koop, Senior Scholar of the C. Everett Koop Institute at Dartmouth College
in the United States.
Dr. Koop writes: "I would like to raise my voice in favor of the strongest
possible Framework Convention. Between 1981 and 1989,1 served as the U.S.
Surgeon General and chief delegate to the World Health Assembly under
Presidents Reagan and Bush. In that capacity I was dedicated to educating
scientists and the public about the hazards of tobacco use and doing what I
could to decrease the death and disease caused by tobacco use. During my
tenure as Surgeon General, my office issued eight reports on the death and
diseases caused by smoking and smokeless tobacco, including reports on
cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, nicotine
addiction and the health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke.
Yet despite the wealth of scientific evidence we have accumulated about the
harms of tobacco, the unfortunate truth is that the world has done
shockingly little to reduce the death toll from tobacco use.
Tobacco is different from other plagues that have faced the world because
it is promoted by an unscrupulous industry that will stop at nothing to
promote its products and raise its profits. The evidence is irrefutable. On
a scale never before known to commercial enterprises, Big Tobacco has
engaged in the most devastating cover-up of scientific evidence and
consciously sought to deceive and defraud the entire world about the health
consequences of its products. It has preyed on our children and lied to
our governments. It has manipulated nicotine and political systems. And
it has created a public relations apparatus designed to make the world
think it is behaving responsibly even while engaging in the most heinous
behavior. We must resolve to never again let Big Tobacco's false and
misleading statements go unanswered. We must also be aware of the history
of tobacco control efforts. All too often the tobacco industry has
succeeded in convincing governments to accept proposals that sound good on
their face but do little to actually reduce tobacco use. The negotiators
of the Framework Convention must not fall into the same trap. The
Convention must not just be a "feel good” treaty that speaks in glowing,
general language but has no real force or effect. It must contain
meaningful specific restrictions on the tobacco industry's marketing and
manufacturing practices and require governments to take strong and concrete
steps to reduce tobacco use.
(PAUSE)
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, I believe the United States government has an
important role to play in the FCTC negotiations. On the one hand, our
multinational companies have played a leading role in spreading the plague
of tobacco throughout the world. On the other hand, President Clinton has
spoken out forcefully about the need for the establishment of strong public
policy changes to rein in the tobacco industry and to reduce tobacco use.
I urge the United States government to speak with the same voice in Geneva
that it does at home and to support a strong, specific and effective FCTC even if it includes policies that the tobacco industry has successfully
blocked in the United States. The positions of the U.S. delegation during
the Framework Convention negotiations should be based on the protection and
promotion of global public health, and nothing else. If the U.S.
government fails to actively support a strong FCTC or urges the adoption of
a weak convention because of political considerations back home, we will be
doing the entire world a disservice. The United States has an opportunity
to use its knowledge and its experience to assist in the creation of the
strongest possible treaty, one that can help the other nations of the world
avoid a tobacco epidemic of the magnitude faced by the United States. How
the U.S. responds during these negotiations will be the truest test of our
leadership.
The world needs a strong Framework Convention, so that no nation is forced
to fight the tobacco industry or the plague of tobacco use alone or
unarmed. The FCTC should seek to bring the tobacco industry under proper
governmental and international controls with concerted action on
advertising, smuggling, product regulation, treatment programs,
environmental tobacco smoke and many other areas.
A strong Framework Convention is a critical weapon that is needed to
counteract the tobacco industry's wrongdoing. Now that WHO has seized the
initiative at the global level we have the ability to change the behavior
of multinational tobacco corporations at every level. We have the
opportunity to stop the spread of disease and death transported by tobacco
companies across borders into new populations of non-users. I strongly
support the process that WHO has begun and encourage the countries of the
world to come together and enact a meaningful and effective FCTC. Thank
you.
Tobacco industry youth campaign .
Subject: Tobacco industry youth campaign...
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:54:25 +0100
From: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <fca.all@globalink.org >, <gt-intl@globalink.org>
CC: "Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>, "Sue Osborne" <sosbome@crc.org.uk>,
"Lesley Owen" <lesley.owen@hda-online.org.uk> ,•
Dear friends
Clearly BAT, Philip Morris and Japan Tobacco International are escalating their youth smoking initiatives. They announced a new
advertising campaign on MTV Europe this week, i have just received a nauseating letter from BAT today describing lire 'research' behind
the campaign and asking for advice on evaluating their campaign. Here's the jist of the research findings in BAT's words...
- "vovth does unfortunately believe that 'smoking is cool1 and that it is entirely socially acceptable in their world, it being seen as a rite of
passase."
+ "The only message that worked was that there are many different ways to be 'cool' and that you can be cool and not srnokc'."
- "the message cotmecled because it aligned itself with existing attitudes rather Ulan against litem and gave youilts 'permission' not to
smoke"
Not much discussion of how sponsoring Formula Ono teams may have helped to make smoking (unfortunately!) cool and a rite of
BAT also has a release on this
BAT release: httn://www.batcom/bat/bathonie.ns£/AllDocids/ECFB701354297BE680256A2C0054F550?onendocument
They've set up a web-site, which is far from complete, but could be potentially huge
htip://www. youthsniokingpreveiitiuii.net/
But they attracted some negative coverage in the Financial Times:
FT article:
httpy/news.ft.com/ft/gccgizftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT3LB64AOLC&live=true&tagid~ZZZB2FVYAOC&subheading=cons
ASH has "Danger! PR in the Playground" material on tobacco industry youth smoking programmes
http://www.ash-org.uk/html/advspo/html/prmenu.html
Tobacco Companies Under Fire on Youth Campaign
Financial Times; Apr 18,2001
By JIMMY BURNS
Anti-smoking groups last night criticised the latest involvement of tobacco companies in a youth smoking prevention programme as a
"clever public relations exercise" aimed at forestalling further regulation of the industry.
"The campaign is likely to make youth smoking more attractive by presenting cigarettes as an adult activity," said Clive Bates of Action on
Smoking and Health.
Tn the latest stage of a campaign adopting a public posture of opposition to teenage smoking. British American Tobacco, JT International
and Philip I- forris International announced they were jointly funding the extension of an advertising campaign on MTV Europe, the cable
and satellite music network that targets the youth market
The Dollars 3.6m (Pounds 2.51m) campaign, which will reach 38 countries in Europe, involves six different spots from existing
industry-supported youth smoking prevention advertising that has already run in Portugal and Russia.
According to the companies, research showed that in Portugal 53 per cent of 12 to 17-year-olds believed tire advertising was able to create
“an atmosphere where adolescents think they can be cool and not smoke". In Russia, the figure was 54 per cent
A new website set up by the companies says they take their responsibility in youth smoking prevention seriously and are "backing this up
with actions and programmes".
lOIz
4/25/01 2:57 PM
Tobacco industry youth campaign.
1 he spots show young people making various "lite style" choices ranging from buying clothes and CDs to surfing and skateboarding,
before a caption appears saying "doesn’t smoke1'.
Tobacco companies have faced increasing criticisms from anti-smoking campaigners for their marketing tactics since the 1960s.
In a report last October. Ash and the Cancer Research Campaign called on the tobacco industry to cancel all youth initiatives. "This simply
is not an area. . in which the tobacco industry should be trusted or welcome," they said.
CopyxigliL The Financial Times Lumied
Clive
4/25/01 2:57 PM
Tobacca industry youth initiatives + smuggling
Subject: Tobacco industry youth initiatives + smuggling
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 19:31:39 +0100
From: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com>
Organization: ASH
To: <gt-intl@globalink.org>, <fctcall@globalink.org>
CC: "Jean King" <jking@crc.org.uk>
Dear friends
tobacco industry youth initiatives
We now have the summary of the ASH and Cancer Research Campaign report
"DANGER! PR in the Playground" in French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic and
n
WHO
1Annuaces) . 'I’his report is an unsympathetic
critique of tobacco industry youth smoking initiatives. We hope that
activists around the world will be able to us© those translations•and th©
full report in their efforts to persuade governments to reject approaches by
the tobacco industry to assist with youth smoking prevention schemes.
I also hope that it will increase scepticism on the health side about
youth-orientated programmes.
While it is true that not every programme
targeted at. kids will be ineffective .or counter-productive just because this
is how the tobacco industry does it, this is an ever-present danger even
with programmes in which the industry is not involved. While some have
pulled it off, I think youth programmes are a risky place to invest scarce
tobacco control resources - assuming results matter more than the easy
appeal to politicians or funding agencies.
See: http://www.ash.orq.uk/7advertisinq
Smuggling
We have also published a short introductory brief on international tobacco
smuggling and what the-WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control could do
to tackle it. This was prepared for delegates at the meeting of the first
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body in Geneva last week.
Both may be accessed at the international area of our web site at:
http://www.ash.erg.uk/?inte rn a t i o n a 1
Clive Bates
Action on Smoking and Health
102 Clifton Street
London EC2A. 4HW
Mob
Web
nttp://www.ash. org.uk/
4/25/013:09 PM
Subject: Tobacco Free Kids' Statement on Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
Date: Wed. 13 Sep 2000 13:56:57 -0700
From: "Ross Hammond" <margro$s@igc.org>
To: *e.
global ink, org^j <x*ctcall\2^globaliiik. org>
Contact: Joel Spivak/Vince Willmore
202-2S6-5469
For Immediate Release
September 13, 2000
Statement by William V. Corr
Executive Vice President, CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS
Re: U.S. House Approval of Foreign Sales Corporation Bill
Providing $100 Million in Tax Breaks for U.S. Tobacco Companies
September 13, 2000
The CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS strongly opposes the tax breaks for the
export of manufactured tobacco products contained in the Foreign Sales
Corporation Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act (H.R. 4986) as
approved today by the U.S. House of Representatives. It is especially
disappointing that the House Leadership brought up this legislation under
expedited procedures that blocked any amendments, such as that proposed by
Congressman Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) to exclude manufactured tobacco.
products. Cnee again, Big Tobacco is being rewarded for millions of dollars
in campaign contributions ac tno oxpsnss or American taxpayers ana public
health•around che globe. We urge the Senate to put taxpayers and the public
health firsthand vote to deny Big Tobacco this special benefit.
Tn its current form, this legislation would provide a $100 million plus
annual tax benefit for n.S. tobacco companies. The tobacco industry should
”'c,“ receive any assistance from, the U.S. government in their guest to addict
no:; generations of smokers overseas. And they should certainly not be
rewarded wrtu speoiaa. tax benerits given their long history or deception and
misconduct concerning their deadly products.
The dangers of nicotine addiction to American children are well known: 3,000
kids become regular smokers each day in the U.S, and one third will die
nrematurely of smoking-caused disease. Smoking is the leading preventable
cause of death in the United States. But these dangers do not stop at our
shores. Globally, the World Bank estimates that between 90,000 and 100,000
kids become addicted to cigarettes every day. Big Tobacco, with the
unwitting support of American taxpayers, is addicting countless new
generations or smokers overseas. Tobacco-related illnesses kill four million
people a year around the world. If current trends continue, by 2030, tobacco
will kill ten million people every year, 70 percent of them in developing
countries. The United States government should not be a partner in the
export of death and disease by U.S. tobacco companies.
—30—
Ross Hammond
965 Mission Street, Suite 218
San Francisco, CA 94103
tol. 1-415-695-7492
fax. 1-415—369—9211
4/25/01 3:11 PM.
Ifs True - Cigarettes Bum A Hole In Your Pocket
Subject: It's True - Cigarettes Burn A Hole In Your Pocket
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:32:20 +1200
From: "CAFCA (Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa)" <cafca@chch.planet.org.nz>
To: "Framework Convention Alliance" <fctcall@globalink.org >
page
copy:
Christchurch "Press" (New Zealand)
30 AUGUST .7000
Pants burning issue in row with tobacco giant
30 AUGUST 200U
By SEAN SCANLON
This is a 'David and Goliath' story about a battle between a multi-national
cigarette company and a devout smoker over a pair of pants.
On May 5, feisty James Gaw, a media consultant from Australia, smoked a
Benson and Hedges cigarette he had bought at a dairy in Ashburton at the
Airport Plaza Hotel in Christchurch.
To his horror a 6mm section of the white part of the cigarette fell off,
burning a hole in his A$600 ($790) Nino Cerutti suit.
After his return to Australia, Mr Gaw called Lindsay Caire, the managing
director of Benson and Hedges in Australia, to complain.
Mr Caire said he would arrange for the New Zealand head of the company,
Oliver Caste, to contact Mr Gaw. No-one called for weeks and Mr Gaw again
contacted Mr Ca^re, who assured him that someone would call soon.
On June 27, Mr Gaw received a "rude” phene call from a "rather arrogant
young man ■ ucou oori5orx
a5Qg&5
customsz
sgzvico
who
xczussci
to give his name and said that due to company policy, the. suit could not be
replaced.
This enraged Mr Gaw, who immediately sent a letter to Martin Broughton, the
chairman of British American Tobacco (Benson and Hedges owner) in London.
Mr Broughton responded in his own handwriting expressing concern over-the
Consequently, Mr Gaw was visited by Lee Baston, the sales manager for Benson
and Hedges in Brisbane, who inspected the damaged pair of pants.
Mr Baston then passed the complaint on to the head of corporate and
regulatory affairs of British American Tobacco in New Zealand, John
Galligan.
Mr Gaw was told by Mr Galligan that the pair of pants would not be replaced
because of the company's regulations and principles.
This further infuriated Mr Gaw, who fired off another letter to Mr
Broughton, on A.ugust 3.
On August 16, after reaching the end of his tether, Mr Gaw sent a latter to
Mr Galligan billing British American Tobacco for the suit and advising he
had consulted his lawyer. As of yesterday, Mr Gaw had not received any
payment from the company.
Mr Gaw said he had received a carton of cigarettes from the company but that
4/25/01 3:16 PM
It's True - Cigarettes Bum A Hole In Your Pocket
was not going to buy him off. ■«,
Mr Galligan said the complaint was unusual because nothing like it had
happened before.
"We asked Mr Gaw for a sample of the product to test and he couldn't supply
this. We didn't have anything to compare it to so we did not compensate
CAECA
Campaign Aaainst Foreign Control of Aotearoa
Re-Pakistan anti-tobacco coalition launched
Subject: RetPakisfati anti-tobacco coalition launched
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 07:43:03 -0000
From: "DR. EHSAN LATIF" <ehsan_latif@hotmail.com>
To: FCA. alfiX.^lodaliult.or^
CC: sothita cirop.org
Dear aix
The tobacco industry in Pakistan has launched a campaign to offset the
attempts of the Govewment of Pakistan to introduce a legislation
n’-nnot’ or of tobacco products and the process of HFTs
Tobacco Free Initiative leading to the Framework Convention on Tobacco
This campaign is multifaceted and ranges from 'The [Tobacco] industry's
voluntary and sell regulatory code tor the marketing of cigarettes in
Pakistan' to sponsoring of national sporting events like the 'National
Snooker Championship, 2001. The tobacco industry is also very blatantly
putting up a face which is public friendly and is using tree plantation
drives in collaboration of the relevant government departments as a means to
achieve this objective. They have also mobilized the local farmers by
sending letters to all the relevant ministries signed by the tobacco growers
and are trying to force economic considerations into the whole picture.
Tobacco Free Initiative - Pakistan (TFI-Pak), a project of TheNetwork for
Consumer Protection and other organizations working in tobacco control
recognizing the need to counter these and other strategies being used by the
tobacco industry met on April 16, 2001 in Islamabad and consented to form a
coalition which could effectively counter the disinformation drives of the
uGDaCco Induscry.
Pakistan Anti-Tobacco Coalition (PATC) was launched on the same date with
the collaboration of 20 different organizations and activists working in
different aspects of tobacco control, including advocacy, research, legal
p<?r?ect:s and i
related to tobacco arowinc.
'rAiv" OoL'Ivcd CO xiicuvs r ci rC1 5 a 11 a COOciCCO El'66 COUZltiy Wiun 1U5 CltiZeHo
being protected from tobacco related disabling diseases and premature
deaths".
Aims and Objectives of PATC:
To build national support for evidence-based tobacco control measures.
To contribute towards development of comprehensive anti-tobacco
To undertake research to fill knowledge gaps for effective anti-tobacco
poxicy and action.
To build a national awareness campaign about the hazards of tobacco
through partnerships at ail levels.
■
To act against the exploitation of tobacco industry.
To work towards the development of the Framework Convention for Tobacco
Control at national and international levels
To phase out the tobacco crop by encouraging alternative crops.
The organizations are representative of a vast population of- Pakistan and
are based not only in major cities but remote areas as well. These
organizations bring with themselves a vast experience of working on tobacco
related issues arid the overall aim has been to decrease the consumption of
tobacco.
/
TFI-Pak volunteered to act as the secretariat of the coalition and was given
the responsibility of coordinating the different activities of the PATC.
me PATC partners ( in alphabetical order) include:
1.
An Integrated Movement for Self Sustainability, (AIMS) Pakistan
2.
Christian Social Welfare Association
3.
Citizen Action Committee. Lasbela
*
oC Comm’1.’''’4-’-’
9<”2»nceS/ The Agh?. Khan University,
4/26/01 11:29 AM
Pakistan anti-tobacco coalition launched
Heart file Islamabad
Lok Suiaa, Lahore
'Noor' Pakistan
Pakistan Anti-Smoking Society
Pakistan Anti-tobacco Association
Pakistan Chest Society
Pakistan Ex-Servicemen Society
Pakistan Medical Association Karachi Branch
Pakistan Society for Cancer Prevention
Rohe' Pakistan
Sanjh PPHC
SUNGI Development Foundation
SPADE Pakistan
Tobacco Control uegai Forum or rakistan.
Tobacco Free Initiative - Pakistan (TFI-Pak)
Committees
Given the different fields of expertise, of the PATC partners, four
roTr'r,7
■fo’T'od to
tsat* 1 ’ r’a t.hA acti.i viti ©s of PA^C.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
2 of 2
4/26/01 11:29 AM
EUROPEAN NETWORK FOR SMOKING PREVENTION
RESEAU EUROPEEN POUR LA PREVENTION DU TABAGISME aisbl
WHO Public Hearings on the Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control
12-13 October 2000 - Geneva, Switzerland
Submission from the European Network for Smoking Prevention
Identification
The European Network for Smoking Prevention (ENSP) is an international non profit
association registered in 1997 under Belgium law (identification number 16377/97)
ENSP is governed by a general assembly consisting of two representatives from each of the
national coalitions against tobacco of the 15 member States of the European Union and one
representative from each of the specialised European tobacco control networks (1NWAT
Europe, ENYPAT, European Network of Smoke free Hospitals). ENSP is administered by a
regularly elected executive board who delegates the daily management and co-ordination of
the network to a secretary general.
The mission of ENSP is to develop a strategy for co-ordinated action among tobacco control
organisations in Europe with the specific objective to promote and facilitate the activities of
national coalitions and specialised European networks. It promotes collaboration through the
exchange of information and experience. It stimulates and co-ordinates joint European
activities and projects. It establishes links with intergovernmental bodies and international
non-governmental organisations and any other groups concerned with smoking prevention. It
also encourages and supports tobacco control organisations in the countries of Central and
Eastern Europe.
ENSP is currently comprised of 342 member organisations operating in the framework of
national coalitions against tobacco or specialised European networks in the European Region.
Information is distributed to a network of 884 organisations and individuals interested in
tobacco control in Europe. ENSP is funded through annual membership fees and support from
the European Commission in the frame of the Europe Against Cancer program.
Interest in the Framework Convention process
The interest of ENSP to contribute to the public hearing is guided by the primary objective of
the association “smoking prevention” and its mission to develop a strategy for co-ordinated
action among tobacco control organisations in Europe.
48, rue de Pascale 1 0 40 Bruxelles - Belgium
Tel: (32) 2/230.65.15 Fax: (32) 2/230.75.07 e-mail: info@ensp.org
internet: http://www.ensp.org
’
-j
Engage in a common approach to curb smoking rates locally, nationally, regionally and
internationally
Approximately, 4 million people world wide, die annually from smoking related illness. The
share of smoking related mortality in the 51 countries of the WHO European Region is 1,2
million people representing 14% of all deaths1. In the 15 Member states of the European
Union 550.000 citizens die annually due to tobacco consumption. The situation is particularly
dramatic in Central Europe. A recent study by IARC shows that as a consequence, cancer
mortality rates are still expected to increase and particularly in Hungary2.
The increase of smoking related deaths among women is particularly alarming. The number
of deaths has increased more than 10 fold between 1955 and 1995 and smoking rates are still
rising3. Smoking among young people is also on the rise practically in every country, severely
jeopardising the health of the next generation4.
If current trends continue, smoking related deaths and diseases will continue to rise
dramatically within the 51 countries of the European Region, imposing an unacceptable
burden of suffering to their citizens. This will create a loss in productivity among the 35-69
year old workforce, deprive families of income, and generate additional financial cost to the
already heavy public health budget
Only through an international treaty binding the nations of the world, will we be able to curb
this rising epidemic.
Ban advertising, promotion and sponsorship on a global level
In order to guarantee a high protection of public health to European citizens, the European
Union has adopted 5 pieces of binding legislation since 1989. These cover television
broadcasting activities, the regulation of tar content, the labelling of cigarette packaging, a
ban on sale of moist snuff (with the exception of Sweden) and a ban on advertising and
sponsorship of tobacco products. The European Union is in the process of passing
comprehensive legislation to improve labelling of tobacco products, to further limit
nicotine/tar/carbon monoxide contents, to require the industry to disclose contents/additives
of tobacco products, to search for new testing mechanisms and to ban the branding of tobacco
products as “light, mild, ultra light” etc..
The European Union is an excellent example of the feasibility but also the difficulty of trans
national legislation. Twelve EU Member States out of 15 and a majority of the 626 regularly
elected members of the European Parliament voted in favour of the European advertising
directive which was consequently adopted as
binding EU legislation. Despite this
overwhelming show of support, the directive is currently being challenged in the European
1 WHO Europe leaflet, "Partnership to reduce tobacco dependence".
; "Projections of alcohol-and tobacco related cancer mortality in Central Europe", International Journal of
Cancer. 2000. Vol. 87:122-128.
3 Peto et all. "Update from 1995 of analyses of mortality from Smoking in 15 European Union countries". 1998..
'' Some Like it "Light": Women and smoking in the European Union. ENSP, 1999.
2
Court of Justice. Powerful economic interests and the German Government are requesting the
annulment of the directive.
It has been shown that voluntary codes regulating advertising do not work5. In the European
Union 6 countries have adopted advertising bans (France, Finland, Belgium, Sweden,
Portugal, Italy )and 4 countries (UK, Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark) already plan to put
in place their own national legislation.
Taking into account the transnational dimension of advertising, promotion and sponsorship
for tobacco products, only a binding international treaty will protect the next generation in the
European Region from the predatory marketing techniques of the tobacco industry.
Regulate the manufacture, labelling and sale of tobacco products
Six of the leading multinational tobacco companies of the world are implanted in the
countries of the European Union: (Philip Morris, BAT, RJ Reynolds, Rothmans, Reemtsma
and Seita (having recently merged with Tabacaleira)6. The EU tobacco industry exports 16%
of its total cigarette production out of the EU with Greece exporting 43%, the UK 36%,
Sweden 19% and Germany 15%. The German based company Reemtsma, who plays an
important role in Central and Eastern Europe, exported 57% of its production to Central and
Eastern Europe in 19967. British American Tobacco UK manages the multinational’s
international cigarette production in over 50 countries8*. By the end of 2000, Swedish Match
(tobacco company specialising in oral tobacco) plans to own 74% of the equity of Wimco Ltd
jnjmdia^.
/,
?
Future EU legislation aims to regulate EU export products in the same manner as local and
imported tobacco products. There is no way, however, to oblige European based companies to
adopt EU manufacturing, labelling and sales provisions for their overseas marketing or
production units or for industries under their control.
Unless there is an international convention regulating the production, labelling and sale of
tobacco products in the interest of public health world wide, the industry will always escape
regulations through relocation of production/marketing units to non-regulated countries.
Fight smuggling and illegal trade of tobacco products
It is estimated that 30% of cigarette sales world wide end up as smuggled merchandise. The
European Union is subject to large-scale smuggling activities using the “transit transport”
system. Goods with a destination outside the EU are exempt from import taxes while crossing
its borders. After having left the European Union legally, cigarettes are smuggled back into
5 Effect of tobacco advertising on the take-up of smoking by children. Study by ASH, August 1997.
" World Health report 1999. WHO.
Personal communication from Martina Pbtschke Langer.
s ASH Fact Sheet No. 18, October 1999. Action on Smoking and Health web site,
http://www.ash.org.uk/litml/factsheets/litml/factl8.html
’ "Swedish Match acquires additional 22% in Wimco Ltd in India", Business Wire. July 31,2000.
3
the countries and sold on the black market, thereby creating huge tax losses for the European
Union and its member states.
According to 1997 figures, all EU countries are subject to smuggling activities The
contraband market share in Austria, Spain, Italy and Germany is estimated to cover 10-15%
of their annual trade10. Andorra, a small principality of 63.000 inhabitants, imports 160
million packets of cigarettes a year with virtually no exports. The country has been identified
by the European Union as a turning point for contraband into the UK and Ireland11. In 1997,
the financial loss for the European Union in unpaid tax was estimated at 1,6 billion Euro12.
Several international investigations have indicated that the world's largest tobacco companies
are involved in illegal trade endeavouring to control the brands and seeking to manage
volume and price levels of smuggling markets13.
In July 2000, OLAF, the European Anti Fraud office, declared its intention to launch a civil
suit against the big tobacco companies established in the United States for loss of import tax
on smuggled cigarettes into the European Union as a consequence of their involvement in
smuggling operations. EU Member States are invited to join the court action.
Large-scale smuggling not only creates great financial losses for a country but also
undermines adoption by governments of a high tax policy for tobacco products. High tobacco
prices, however, discourage teenage smoking. Smuggling by its very nature can only be
tackled through co-ordinated multi-disciplinary international collaboration. The framework
convention on tobacco control is an essential tool to take co-ordinated measures on world
scale to curb the contraband of tobacco products.
Conclusion
Citizens of the world have an equal right to health. Given the international dimension of the
problem, there is a need for international action to identify global challenges to health and
mechanisms to regulate their causes.
The European’ Network for Smoking Prevention calls on WHO and the World Health
Assembly
• not to allow this first international treaty addressing the health of the world to be driven by
economic arguments.
• to provide for a strong and meaningful body of the convention establishing the basic
principles for the adoption of comprehensive tobacco control policies in all countries
signatory to the convention.
Joossens.Luk. "Cigarette trade and smuggling in Europe". Proceedings of the 10th world conference on
tobacco or health, 24-25 August 1997, Beijing, China.
" ”EU cigarette taxes going up in smoke", The Irish Times. 9 June 1998.
12 "Ostende plaqe toumante de la contrebande?", Le Soir, 23-24 May 2000.
15" How smuggling helps lure generations of new smokers", The Guardian, January 31. 2000.
4
to enable governments and intergovernmental bodies to use the framework convention as
a stepping stone to pass effective legislation on the regulation of tobacco product
advertising and sponsorship, the labelling of tobacco products, the regulation of
contents/additives, the ban of duty-free tobacco sales and the co-ordinated fight against
smuggling.
• to define a common policy for fading out subsidies paid to tobacco growers and find
meaningful ways to compensate for the loss of livelihood of tobacco farmers.
•
In order to provide a strong and meaningful treaty, a series of specific commitments relating
to measures affecting the transboundery nature of tobacco control should already be
mentioned in the body of the convention such as
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A ban on duty free sales and imports of tobacco.
Warning labels to be placed on all packs sold world wide in the national language of the
country in which it is to be sold. This is a risk-communication and anit-smuggling
measure.
A unique machine-readable marking indicating the origin, batch and date of manufacture
of the cigarette.
A ban on tobacco sponsorship - or a ban on sponsorship of televised events - by 2006.
The aim of this should be to tackle tobacco sponsorship of Formula One.
A ban on misleading “low-tar” branding and the printing of misleading tar yields on
packs.
A comprehensive disclosure regime- ingredients and smoke composition.
A funding mechanism for north-south assistance.14
Human rights were established in order to protect the individual from the arbitrary nature of
power In an increasingly global market place, governments of the world have the duty to
protect their citizens from the arbitrary nature of multinational economic power.
SF 24/8/2000
14 ASH policy paper on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Clive Bates, August 4, 2000
5
Survev on, Philip Morris' exercise of political influence
Subject: Survey on Philip Morris' exercise of political influence
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:28:48 -0500
From: Suren Moodliar <suren.infact@jimo.com >
To: fctcall@globalink.org
G
Dear Friends,
My colleague, Sangita Nayak (mailto:sangita.infact@juno.com) is conducting a survey on Philip Morris' exercise
of undue political influence. Please see the attached file for a copy of the survey. The responses are due back by
January 14,2001.
Best regards,
Suren Moodliar
International Organizer, INFACT
mailto:suren.infact@juno.com http://www.infact.org
tel:01-617-695-2525; fax 01-617-695-2626
46 Plympton Street, 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02118, USA
:
■
loft
Name: Survey.doc
Survev.doc:
Type: WinWord File (apphcation/msword) i
/Encoding: base64
1/4/01 9:46 AM
Survey on undue political influence of Philip Morris and other
tobacco transnationals
InfacL the U.S. based corporate accountability organization, is joining other efforts around the
world to:
•
•
Stop the tobacco industry from addicting new customers around the world, especially
children and young people
Stop the tobacco industry from manipulating public policy in the interest of tobacco
profits.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY
The political influence of Philip Moiris has enabled the tobacco industry to evade
meaningful regulatory action in the U.S and around the world. Without regulatory action,
Philip Morris and other tobacco transnationals are able to continue to use advertising
images, like the Marlboro Man to promote tobacco to youth internationally. In an effort
to support the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Infact is producing a report in
2001, exposing the manipulation of public policy by Philip Morris, etc. This survey is
intended to outline some specific examples of recent political influence-peddling by the
tobacco transnationals that could be revealed in Infact’s 2001 People’s Annual Report.
Infact has continued to pressure Philip Morris, as the largest tobacco transnational
and maker of Marlboro, the world’s leading cigarette brand, to stop tobacco promotion to
youth. The creators of the Marlboro Man image have called it “a perfect image to capture
the youth market’s fancy.” In addition to political influence-peddling we are also
requesting examples of continued use of the Marlboro Man image to help demand an end
to the use of this image.
We ask that you return this survey by January 14th. Thank you for taking the time
to complete this survey. Please feel free to call or email any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
SangitaNayak
International Organizer
617-695-2525
sangitainfact^juno.com
(please type or print)
Name:
Title:
Organization:
Address:
City/ State/ Province:
Postal Code:
Country:
_____ _______________________________________
Phone:Fax:
Internet:
Questions about the Tobacco Transnationals Political Influence-peddling
I-
A.
Is Philip Morris or Kraft currently lobbying on or against tobacco control or trade
legislation in your country or region?
Yes
No
If yes, were they successful in getting changes? please explain
Is Philip Morris lobbying on the FC’TC in your country?
B.
Yes
No
If yes,how?
C.
Does your country require Philip Morris, or other corporations to report or
disclose:
1.
Yes
2.
Yes
3.
Yes
4.
Yes
The names of their lobbyists or lobbying firms?
No
Political contributions?
No
Who they lobby for and on what issues?
No
Locations of facilities in your country?
No
II. Tracking the Marlboro Man
A.
Is the Marlboro man in use in your country? In your region?
(Ifno,not at all, please skip this section)
Yes, in my country
B.
Yes, but only in my region
No, not at all
How? (Billboards, TV, movies, T-shirts, hats, etc.?)
__ Billboards
_TV
__ T-shirts
_Hats
__ Other (please be specific)
C.
Yes
Is the Marlboro Man used in a way that gets around or violates existing
advertising restrictions?
No
If yes, please explain
D.
Yes
Can you provide copies or photos of current ads?
No
If yes, can you.scan them and email them?
Yes
No
Thank you. for taking the time to fill out this survey. Please email to
san£ita.infact(a)juno. com by January
Re'. Greetings
Press release on the Chairperson's draft FCTC
Subject: Press release on the Chairperson's draft FCTC
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:45:37 +0100
From: "Olufemi Akinbode" <bodufemi@hotmail.com>
To: FCTCall@globalink.org
Dear All,
Find below text of the NGO Press Confrence on the Chairperson's
Draft of the FCTC.The Press confrence was held on January 23,2001.
Regards,
Akinbode Oluwafemi
Amid Revelations of Ongoing Influence-Peddling by Tobacco Transnationals
NGOs Blast Draft Tobacco Control Treaty
GENEVA—Non-governmental organizations are voicing the first reactions to the
draft text for the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) issued
yesterday by the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) that
began its deliberations last October. Members of the Network for
Accountability of Tobacco Transnationals (NATT), in Geneva to attend the
World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board meeting, briefed the press
on the strengths—and glaring weaknesses—of the FCTC draft.
The treaty draft came forth as the WHO Executive Board failed to act on
recommendations from the Committee of Experts' report on "Tobacco Company
Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities at the World Health
Organization." The Executive Board passed on this opportunity to expand
transparency of tobacco industry activities and affiliations—despite
increasing support for such measures from member states including
Switzerland, and in the face of startling new revelations about the
continuing influence of tobacco transnationals like US-based Philip Morris
over WHO and other UN agencies. For example, WHO's Derek Yach reported
yesterday to Executive Board members on Philip Morris's strong ties to the
International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), an NGO in official relations
with WHO.
"For too long, giant corporations like Philip Morris and B.A.T have
strong-armed governments to derail policies that would stop this preventable
epidemic. The success of the FCTC depends on committed, coordinated global
action to overcome the transnationals' economic and political power. We are
dismayed that the Executive Board ignored the Expert Committee
recommendations, and alarmed that the draft text contains no measures to
curb tobacco industry influence over public policy," says Kathryn Mulvey of
the US-based corporate accountability organization Infact. "US opposition to
mild provisions for disclosure and monitoring of tobacco industry political
activities is also an ominous indication of the new administration's
direction on the FCTC-contradicting the January 18 executive order calling
for 'strong action to address the potential global epidemic of diseases
caused by tobacco use,'" Mulvey continues.
NATT members say the failure of the FCTC draft to address political
influence only exacerbates its other weaknesses. "The section of the treaty
draft on tobacco advertising and promotion is rubbish," notes Akinbode
Oluwafemi of Environmental Rights Action (Nigeria). "These watered-down
limits go against the experience and testimony of member states in favor of
ending all forms of tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship—and play
right into the hands of the tobacco transnationals and their aggressive
promotional schemes," Oluwafemi concludes.
Although the draft includes no specific text on tobacco industry liability
for harm to public health and the environment, a guiding principle provides
for each party to "determin[e] the scope of responsibility within its
jurisdiction." According to Bejon Misra of Volunteer Organization in the
Interest of Consumer Education (India), "The principle of 'polluter pays' is
a basic consumer right which must be enshrined in the FCTC. It makes no
sense for this matter to remain solely under national jurisdiction as
2/6/01 4:04 PM
Press release on the Chairperson's draft FCTC
corporations based in the North shift the burden of tobacco-related disease
and death to countries of the global South—many of whose GDPs are dwarfed by
these corporations' annual revenues."
"In the Philippines intensified demand for good governance, accountability
and transparency have led to the impeachment of the president. This demand
is driving our call for a treaty that protects public health by insulating
public policy from undue influence of the tobacco transnationals," says Jim
Sharman of the Center for Alternative Development Initiatives. "On trade
matters, the FCTC has the potential to prioritize the public interest over
corporate interests by excluding tobacco from normal trade practices, but
the current draft goes in the opposite direction," Sharman continues.
' Through the International Weeks of Resistance to Tobacco Transnationals
leading up to the next INB meeting in April, NGOs in NATT plan to send a
message to treaty negotiators to strengthen these provisions. Activities
around the world will urge government delegations to hold tobacco
transnationals accountable for their abuses, and reinforce the importance of
several strong provisions in the current draft. According to NATT, these
measures include the affirmation that the FCTC is a floor, not a ceiling,
for national action; the promotion of alternative economic activities for
tobacco workers and growers; and a provision for binding dispute resolution.
NATT includes over 50 consumer, human rights, environmental, faith-based,
public health and corporate accountability organizations in more than 30
countries.
Founded in 1977, Infact organizes grassroots campaigns to hold transnational
corporations accountable for life-threatening abuses. Through Infact's Kraft
Boycott, consumers are pressuring Philip Morris directly to end its abusive
tobacco promotion and influence-peddling. For more information about Infact,
visit www.infact.org.
ERA/Friends of the Earth—Nigeria promotes environmentally responsible
governmental, commercial, community and individual practice through the
empowerment of local people.
An affiliate of Consumers International, VOICE'S projects target a broad
range of constituencies from schoolchildren to civil servants to the aged.
CADI is a civil society organization advancing sustainable development,
including poverty eradication, in the Philippines.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com .
2 of!
2/6/01 4:04 PM
"’’J ■ ■
*
Subject: Comments on Chairman's Text
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:43:30 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCalliance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Dear All
I hope you have all had the chance to have a look over the Chairman's Text
of the FCTC which I am attaching in case some of you have had trouble
viewing it.
Clearly there are considerable problems with the text, and it is important
that we as FCA start developing text options on those areas where we can
form agreement, something which is made easier with the agreement to the FCA
statement.
If we can open up the floor for comments on the new draft we can begin the
process.
I hope that by March we could come up with alternative texts for at least
those areas of most importance to us which we can utilise as 'talking
points' when lobbying our national delegates.
Looking forward to your response.
Belinda Hughes
Coordinator
Framework Convention Alliance
www.fete.org
Tel: (66-2) 278 1828
Fax: (66-2) 278 1830
s
Name: Chairman's Text.pdf
■
■ rjChairman's Text.pdfj
Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
| Encoding: base64
2/6<0l 4:05 PM
Iglf WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING BODY
ON THE WHO FRAMEWORK CONVENTION
ON TOBACCO CONTROL
Second session
A/FCTC/INB2/2
9 January 2001
Chair’s text of a
framework convention on tobacco control
A.
Preamble
(to be formulated at a later session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body)
B.
Definitions
(to be formulated at a later session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body)
C.
Objective
The ultimate objective of this Convention and of the related protocols is to provide a framework
for integrated tobacco-control measures to be implemented through the engagement of the Parties in
order continually and substantially to reduce the prevalence of tobacco use and thus protect present
and future generations from the devastating health, social, environmental and economic consequences
of tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke.
D.
Guiding principles
In their actions to achieve the objective of this Convention and to implement its provisions, the
Parties shall be guided inter alia by the principles set out below:
1.
Reducing the current impact, and halting the growth, of tobacco consumption is crucial in
protecting the health of individuals, as well as national and global public health, and requires
comprehensive multisectoral national actions and coordinated international responses.
2.
Every person should be fully informed about the addictive and lethal nature of tobacco
consumption, and non-smokers should be adequately protected from exposure to tobacco smoke.
3.
The importance of technical cooperation in helping to establish and implement effective
tobacco-control programmes in Parties in which public health resources are limited should be
recognized.
4.
The importance of financial assistance to aid the economic transition of tobacco growers and
workers that may be displaced as a future consequence of successful tobacco-control programmes
should be recognized.
5.
Tobacco-control measures should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable
discrimination in international trade.
r\/FCTC/lNB2/2
6.
The tobacco industry should be held responsible for the harm its products cause to public health
and the environment, with each Party determining the scope of such responsibility within its
jurisdiction.1
7.
The participation of all elements of civil society is essential in achieving the objective of this
Convention.
8.
The provisions of this Convention should be recognized as minimum standards, and Parties are
encouraged to implement measures beyond those required by the Convention.
E.
General obligations
1.
Each Party shall develop, implement, periodically update and enforce, where appropriate,
comprehensive, multisectoral, national tobacco-control strategies, policies, legislation and other
measures, such as standards, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention and, as relevant, its
protocols.
2.
To this end each Party shall, to the extent possible within the means at its disposal and its
capabilities:
(a)
establish or, where it already exists, reinforce, and adequately finance a national
coordinating mechanism for tobacco control, with inputs from relevant government and civil
society sources;
(b)
adopt legislative, executive and administrative measures and cooperate with other Parties
in harmonizing appropriate policies;
(c)
reduce tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke in accordance with the
provisions of this Convention and, as relevant, its protocols.
3.
The Parties shall undertake to adopt legislative, executive and administrative measures to
regulate and to prohibit the export of tobacco products that do not conform to the exporting country’s
own domestic standards.
4.
The Parties shall cooperate in the formulation of agreed measures, procedures and standards for
the implementation of this Convention.
5.
The Parties shall cooperate with competent international bodies in order to implement
effectively this Convention and the protocols to which they are parties.
6.
The provisions of the Convention shall in no way affect the right of Parties to adopt domestic
measures in addition to those referred to above, nor shall they affect measures already taken by a
Party, provided that such measures are compatible with its obligations under this Convention and the
protocols to which it is a party.
1 Chair’s note: As announced during the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, WHO is
convening a panel of legal experts to make recommendations to the Negotiating Body on the nature and scope of potential
liability and compensation provisions.
2
AIFCTCHNB2I2
7.
The provisions of the Convention shall in no way affect the right of Parties to enter into bilateral
or multilateral agreements, including regional or subregional agreements, on issues relevant or
additional to this Convention, provided that such agreements are compatible therewith. Copies of such
agreements shall be communicated to the secretariat of the Convention by the Parties concerned.
F.
Price and tax measures to reduce the demand for tobacco
1.
The Parties recognize that price measures are an effective mechanism to reduce tobacco
consumption, and that progressive harmonization of tobacco product prices is an important means of
discouraging illicit traffic in tobacco products.
2.
Each Party shall, to the extent possible within the means at its disposal and its capabilities,
adopt legislative, executive and administrative measures, and cooperate with other Parties in
harmonizing appropriate tax policies, in order to reduce tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco
smoke. Such measures and policies shall include the following:
(a)
prohibition of tax-free and duty-free sales of tobacco products;
(b)
imposition of taxes on tobacco products so as to achieve a stable and continuous
reduction in tobacco consumption;
(c)
adoption of other price and tax measures that may be recommended by the Conference of
the Parties.
G.
Non-price measures to reduce the demandfor tobacco
1.
Each Party shall, to the extent possible within the means at its disposal and its capabilities,
adopt legislative, executive and administrative measures, and cooperate with other Parties in
harmonizing appropriate non-price policies, in order to reduce tobacco consumption and exposure to
tobacco smoke. Such measures and policies shall include the following:
(Passive smoking)
(a)
implementation of legislation and other effective measures at the appropriate
governmental level that provide for systematic protection from exposure to tobacco smoke in
indoor workplaces, enclosed public places, and public transport, with particular attention to
special risk groups such as children and pregnant women;
(Regulation of contents of tobacco products)
(b)
adoption of standards for the regulation of the contents of tobacco products, including
standards for testing and measuring, designing, manufacturing and processing such products,
and cooperation in the development and harmonization of such standards under the auspices of
the World Health Organization;
(Regulation of tobacco-product disclosures)
(c)
implementation and taking of necessary steps to enforce measures for tobacco-product
disclosures by all manufacturers, including all ingredients and additives, and major constituents
A./FCTC/INB2/2
of tobacco smoke, and promotion of availability of such information to the public. Each Party
shall apply these measures to all tobacco products manufactured or sold under its jurisdiction;
(Packaging and labelling)
(d)
adoption of appropriate measures to ensure that:
(i)
the terms “low tar”, “light”, “ultra light”, “mild” or any other similar term that has
the aim or the direct or indirect effect of conveying the impression that a particular
tobacco product is less harmful than others are not used on any unit packet or package of
tobacco products;
(ii)
tobacco packaging and labelling does not otherwise promote a tobacco product by
any means that are false, misleading or deceptive or that are likely to create an erroneous
impression about its characteristics, health effects, hazards or emissions;
(iii)
each unit packet or package of tobacco products carries the statement and product
information specified in Article [Measures Related to the Supply of Tobacco];
(iv)
each unit packet or package of tobacco products carries.a general health warning,
including a picture or pictogram illustrating the harmful consequences of tobacco
consumption, in accordance with Annex [INSERT]; these warnings shall:
(1)
clearly indicate the prohibition of sales of tobacco products to persons under
the age of 18;
(2)
provide clear information about the toxic contents of the tobacco product,
specifically tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide, including actual measurements of
smoke yields;
(3)
appear in the principal language or languages of the country in whose
territory the product is placed on the market.
(Education, training and public awareness)
(e)
facilitation and strengthening of education, training, and public awareness campaigns,
including counter-advertising. To this end, each Party shall, as appropriate;
(i)
develop and assure universal access to effective and comprehensive educational
and public awareness programmes on the health risks of tobacco consumption and
exposure to tobacco smoke, that include the use of various print and audiovisual media;
(ii)
ensure that the general public and, notably, children, young persons, and vulnerable
groups are fully informed about the health risks of tobacco consumption and exposure to
tobacco smoke, and about the benefits of smoking cessation and tobacco-free lifestyles;
(iii)
facilitate public access to information on the tobacco industry;
(iv)
develop and implement effective and appropriate training programmes on tobacco
control for health professionals, educators and other concerned persons;
AIFCTCHNB2I2
(v)
develop and implement effective and appropriate promotion and prevention
measures for tobacco control designed for students at various levels of education;
(vi)
endeavour to promote the participation of public agencies and nongovernmental
organizations in the development of strategies for tobacco control.
(Advertising, promotion and sponsorship)
In addition to obligations related to other non-price measures specified in Article [INSERT], all
Parties shall commit themselves specifically to:
2.
(a)
prohibiting all forms of direct and indirect tobacco advertising, promotion and
sponsorship targeted at persons under the age of 18;
(b)
imposing strict restrictions on all forms of direct and indirect tobacco advertising,
promotion and sponsorship targeted at persons 18 years of age and older, including incentives
such as gifts, coupons, rebates, competitions and frequent-purchaser programmes, with the aim
of reducing the appeal of tobacco products to all segments of society;
(c)
requiring that tobacco companies disclose all expenditures on advertising and promotion
and make those figures available to the public;
(d)
adopting national measures and imposing appropriate regulatory restrictions to ensure
that tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship does not promote a tobacco product by any
means that are false, misleading or deceptive or that are likely to create an erroneous impression
about its characteristics, health effects, hazards or emissions;
(e)
adopting measures and imposing appropriate regulatory restrictions in order progressively
to phase out tobacco sponsorship of sporting and cultural events;
(f)
adopting national measures and cooperating in order to phase out cross-border
advertising, promotion and sponsorship, including, inter alia, tobacco advertising, promotion
and sponsorship on cable and satellite television, the Internet, newspapers, magazines and other
printed media.
3.
The Conference of the Parties shall initiate the preparation of a protocol setting out appropriate
rules and procedures in the area of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship.1
4.
The Conference of the Parties shall initiate the preparation of a protocol setting out appropriate
rules and procedures in the areas of regulation of the contents of tobacco products, tobacco-product
disclosures, and packaging and labelling of tobacco products.1
H.
Demand reduction measures concerning tobacco dependence and cessation
1.
Each Party shall take all practical and effective measures to treat tobacco dependence and to
promote cessation of tobacco use.
1 This provision would be omitted if the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body prepares a protocol on this subject to
be adopted simultaneously with the Convention.
A/FCTC/INB2/2
-■
Taking into account national circumstances and priorities, each Party shall undertake the
following measures:
(a)
implementation of promotional and educational campaigns aimed at encouraging
cessation of tobacco use;
(b)
integration of treatment of tobacco dependence and routine advice on cessation of
tobacco use into all national health programmes, plans and strategies, including primary care
programmes, reproductive health programmes such as “safe motherhood”, and tuberculosis
control programmes. Support for such actions shall be provided by health professionals,
including physicians, health practitioners, nurses, pharmacists, community workers and social
workers, based on primary care in rural and urban areas;
(c)
establishment, as a priority in health centres, of programmes for diagnosis, medical
advice and treatment of tobacco dependence.
/.
Measures related to the supply of tobacco
(Illicit trade in tobacco products)
1.
The Parties recognize that the elimination of all forms of illicit trade in tobacco products,
including smuggling and counterfeiting, is an essential component of tobacco control.
2.
The Parties agree that measures to this end shall be transparent, non-discriminatory and
implemented in accordance with their international obligations.
3.
Each Party shall adopt appropriate measures to ensure that all unit packets or packages of
tobacco products and any outside packaging of tobacco products for retail or wholesale use that are
sold or manufactured under its jurisdiction:
(a)
carry a statement indicating the name of the manufacturer, the country of origin, and the
product batch-number, including the date of production and expiry;
(b)
carry the statement: “Sales only allowed in [the country where the product is to be placed
on the market].”
4.
Each Party shall adopt appropriate measures to ensure that the packaging information specified
in paragraph 3 above shall appear in the principal language or languages of the country in whose
territory the product is placed on the market.
5.
Each Party shall undertake the following legislative, executive, and administrative measures in
order to prevent and combat illicit trade in tobacco products:
(a)
monitoring and collection of data on cross-border trade in tobacco products, including
illicit trade;
(b)
enactment and/or strengthening of criminal legislation, with appropriate penalties, that
prohibits the production of, and trade in counterfeit and contraband cigarettes and other such
tobacco products, and taking of appropriate steps to enforce such prohibition;
6
MFCTCHNB2/2
(c)
appropriate steps to ensure that all confiscated counterfeit and contraband cigarettes and
other such tobacco products are destroyed.
6.
The Parties shall strengthen cooperation between different national and international agencies in
promoting investigations, judicial prosecutions and proceedings relating to illicit trade in tobacco
products. The Parties shall further cooperate to promote regular exchange of information to prevent
such trade pursuant to Annex [INSERT] to this Convention.
7.
The Conference of the Parties shall initiate the preparation of a protocol setting out appropriate
rules and procedures for the elimination of all forms of illicit trade in tobacco products.1
(Elimination of sales to and by young persons)
8.
Each Party shall prohibit tobacco sales to persons under the age of 18. To this end, each Party
shall:
(a)
require that all sellers of tobacco products request that each tobacco purchaser provide
appropriate evidence of having reached the age of 18;
(b)
18.
prohibit tobacco vending-machines in locations accessible to any person under the age of
9.
Each Party shall take appropriate measures to prohibit the sale of tobacco products by persons
under the age of 18.
10.
Each Party shall, to the extent possible within the means at its disposal and its capabilities,
prohibit the sale of cigarettes individually or in packets of fewer than 20 cigarettes.
11.
Each Party shall implement appropriate legal and other measures to verify compliance with
paragraphs 8 to 10 above. Such measures shall include appropriate penalties against sellers and
distributors for the violation of measures prohibiting sales of tobacco products to persons under the
age of 18.
12.
Each Party shall take appropriate legal and other measures to ensure that no criminal penalties
are imposed against persons under the age of 18 for buying and selling tobacco products.
(Licensing)
13.
The Parties recognize that an effective licensing system for retailers of tobacco products is an
important mechanism to curb illicit trade in tobacco products and to prevent sales of tobacco products
to children and young persons.
14.
Each Party shall, to the extent possible within the means at its disposal and its capabilities,
adopt legislative, executive and administrative measures to licence all tobacco-product retailers.
This provision would be omitted if the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body prepares a protocol on this subject to
be adopted simultaneously with the Convention.
7
,\/FCTC/INB2/2
(Government support for tobacco manufacturing and agriculture)
15.
Each Party shall gradually eliminate subsidies for tobacco growing and manufacturing of
tobacco products and, in accordance with the means at its disposal and its capabilities, promote
alternative economic activities for tobacco workers and growers.
J.
Compensation and liability
[Chair’s note: As announced during the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body,
WHO is convening a panel of legal experts to make recommendations to the Negotiating Body on the
nature and scope of potential liability and compensation provisions.]
K.
Surveillance, research and exchange of information
1.
The Parties shall establish joint or complementary programmes for national, regional and global
surveillance of the magnitude, patterns, determinants and consequences of tobacco consumption. To
the extent possible, the Parties shall integrate tobacco surveillance programmes into national, regional
and global health surveillance programmes. To this end, each Party shall, in accordance with the
means at its disposal and its capabilities:
(a)
establish, progressively and as appropriate, a national system for the epidemiological
surveillance of tobacco consumption, periodically updating economic and health indicators so as
to monitor the evolution of the problem and the impact of tobacco consumption control;
(b)
cooperate with international bodies, including the World Health Organization, in regional
and global tobacco surveillance and exchange of information on the indicators specified in
Annex [INSERT].
2.
The Parties undertake to develop, promote and coordinate as far as possible national, regional
and global research programmes for the purpose of this convention. To this end, each Party shall, in
accordance with the means at its disposal and its capabilities:
(a)
initiate and cooperate, directly or through competent international bodies, in the conduct
of research and of scientific assessments, as detailed in Annex [INSERT];
(b)
promote and encourage research that contributes to reducing tobacco consumption and
harm from tobacco use, particularly in developing countries, taking fully into account the
recommendations of the Conference of the Parties.
3.
The Parties shall facilitate the exchange of information, taking into account the special needs of
developing countries. To this end, the Parties, in accordance with their national legislation and without
prejudice to their obligations under other applicable international agreements, shall, within the
framework of the Conference of the Parties and bilaterally, promote and cooperate in the full, open
and prompt exchange of scientific, technical, socioeconomic, commercial and legal information, as
well as information regarding practices of the tobacco industry, relevant to this convention. Each Par ty
shall, in accordance with the means at its disposal and its capabilities:
(a)
compile and maintain a database of national and subnational laws and regulations on
tobacco control and enforcement, and cooperate in the development of complementary
programmes for national, regional and global tobacco control;
8
A/FCTCHNB2/2
(b)
compile and maintain a base of data from national surveillance programmes in
accordance with Article [INSERT] above.
4.
Information to be exchanged pursuant to Article [INSERT] above shall be provided to the
Conference of the Parties.
L.
Scientific, technical and legal cooperation
1.
Each Party shall cooperate, in accordance with its national laws, regulations, practices and
international obligations, and taking particular account of the needs of developing countries, in
promoting, directly or through the secretariat of the Convention or other competent international
bodies, the following:
(a)
facilitation of the development, transfer and acquisition of technology related to tobacco
control by other Parties;
(b)
provision of technical, scientific, legal and other expertise to establish and strengthen
national tobacco-control programmes, policies and measures aiming at, inter alia-.
(i)
building a strong legislative foundation as well as technical programmes, and
assisting in the treatment of tobacco dependence;
(ii)
assisting tobacco workers in the development of alternate livelihoods;
(iii)
assisting tobacco growers in shifting agricultural production to alternate crops in an
economically viable manner;
(iv)
carrying out other activities to achieve the objective of this convention and its
protocols;
(c)
support for the establishment and maintenance of training programmes for appropriate
personnel as provided in Article [INSERT];
(d)
supply of necessary equipment for tobacco-control programmes and activities.
2.
The Conference of the Parties shall determine how to establish a mechanism to promote and
facilitate scientific, technical and legal cooperation.
M.
Conference of the Parties
1.
A Conference of the Parties is hereby established. The first session of the Conference shall be
convened by the Director-General of the World Health Organization not later than one year after the
entry into force of this convention. Thereafter, ordinary sessions of the Conference shall be held every
year [and convened in conjunction with the World Health Assembly] unless otherwise decided by the
Conference.
2.
Extraordinary sessions of the Conference of the Parties shall be held at such other times as may
be deemed necessary by the Conference, or at the written request of any Party, provided that, within
six months of the request being communicated to them by the secretariat of the Convention, it is
supported by at least one-third of the Parties.
9
A/FCTC/INB2/2
3.
[The rules of procedure of the Conference of the Parties and of any subsidiary body shall be the
Rules of Procedure of the World Health Assembly.] The Conference shall agree upon and adopt by
[simple majority vote][two-thirds majority vote] [rules of procedure and] financial rules for itself and
for any subsidiary body it may establish.
4.
The Conference of the Parties shall keep under regular review the implementation of this
convention and its protocols and take the decisions necessary to promote the effective implementation
of these instruments [and may adopt protocols, annexes and amendments to the convention, its
protocols and annexes in accordance with Article [Development of the convention]]. To this end, it
shall:
(a)
periodically examine the obligations of the Parties and the institutional arrangements
under the convention, in the light of its objective, the experience gained in its implementation,
and the evolution of scientific and technological knowledge, as well as prevailing
socioeconomic conditions;
(b)
promote and facilitate the exchange of information pursuant to Article [Surveillance,
Research and Exchange of Information];
[(c) facilitate, at the request of two or more Parties, the coordination of measures adopted by
them relevant to the implementation of this Convention and any applicable protocols;]
(d)
promote and guide the development and periodic refinement of comparable
methodologies, in addition to those provided for in Article [Surveillance, Research and
Exchange of Information] and Annexes [INSERT], relevant to the implementation of the
Convention and its protocols;
[(e) promote, in accordance with Articles [INSERT] as appropriate, the harmonization of
appropriate strategies, plans, programmes, policies, legislation and other measures;]
(f)
promote programmes to assist Parties in implementing their obligations pursuant to
Articles [INSERT];
(g)
assess the implementation of the provisions of this Convention and its protocols by the
Parties, on the basis of information made available in accordance with Article [Reporting and
Implementation];
(h)
consider and adopt regular reports on the implementation of the Convention and its
protocols and arrange for their distribution;
(i)
make recommendations to the Parties, the World Health Organization, other United
Nations bodies and other international organizations and bodies on any matters necessary for the
implementation of the Convention and its protocols;
(j)
seek to mobilize financial resources to support secretariat services pursuant to
Article [Secretariat] and to support the implementation of the Convention and its protocols in
accordance with Articles [Financial Resources; Reporting and Implementation];
[(k) establish such subsidiary bodies as it deems necessary for the implementation of the
Convention, review their reports, and provide guidance to them;]
10
AIFCTCIINK2I2
(1)
seek and utilize, where appropriate, the services and cooperation of, and information
provided by, competent intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations and bodies as a
means of monitoring activities under the convention and its protocols;
(m) exercise such other functions as are required for achieving the objective of the
convention, as well as all other functions assigned to it thereunder.
[5.
The United Nations, specialized agencies of the United Nations, regional economic integration
organizations not parties to the convention, nongovernmental organizations qualified in matters
covered by the convention, as well as any State not party to this Convention, may be represented by
observers at meetings of the Conference of the Parties, subject to the relevant Rules of Procedure and
decisions of the Conference of the Parties.]
Secretariat
1.
The secretariat of this Convention shall be provided by the World Health Organization.
2.
The functions of the secretariat shall be:
(a)
to make arrangements for sessions of the Conference of the Parties and its subsidiary
bodies and to provide them with services as required;
(b)
to compile and transmit reports submitted to it pursuant to this Convention and any of its
protocols;
(c)
to facilitate support to the Parties, particularly developing-country Parties, on request, in
the compilation and communication of information required in accordance with the provisions
of this Convention;
(d)
to prepare reports on its activities under this Convention and any of its protocols and
submit them to the Conference of the Parties;
(e)
to ensure, under the overall guidance of the Conference of the Parties, the necessary
coordination with other relevant international bodies;
(f)
to enter, under the overall guidance of the Conference of the Parties, into such
administrative and contractual arrangements as may be required for the effective discharge of its
functions;
(g)
to perform the other secretariat functions specified in this Convention and in any of its
protocols and such other functions as may be determined by the Conference of the Parties.
O.
Support by the World Health Organization
1.
The Conference of the Parties may call upon the World Health Organization to provide
technical cooperation in achieving the objective of this Convention or in connection with questions
falling within its mandate arising out of the application of the Convention and its protocols. The
Organization shall accord such support in accordance with its programmes and within the limits of its
resources.
11
AJFCTC/INB2/2
2.
The World Health Organization may, on its own initiative, make proposals to the Conference of
the Parties.
P.
Reporting and implementation
1.
In accordance with guidelines agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties, each Party shall
submit to the Conference the following data:
(a)
information on tobacco control institutions, strategies, plans, programmes, policies,
legislation and other measures initiated or implemented in accordance with the provisions of
Articles [INSERT], together with information on enforcement, where appropriate;
(b)
information on steps to carry out actions taken in accordance with Article [Financial
Resources];
(c)
information on the economic, social and other consequences of various response
strategies adopted to implement this convention and its protocols;
(d)
information on measures, in addition to those described above, that the Party has taken to
implement the provisions of this convention and their effectiveness in meeting its objective;
(e)
description of measures planned by the Party to implement this convention.
2.
Each developed-country Party and each other Party included in Annex [INSERT] shall make its
initial report within six months of the entry into force for that Party of this Convention. Each Party not
so listed shall make its initial report within two years of the entry into force for that Party of the
Convention. The frequency of subsequent communications by all Parties shall be determined by the
Conference of the Parties, taking into account the differentiated timetable set by this paragraph.
3.
To assist the Conference of the Parties in the monitoring, assessment and review of the effective
implementation of this Convention, the Conference may establish a subsidiary body which shall report
regularly to the Conference. The guidelines for participation in this body, as well as its monitoring
functions, will be determined by the Conference.
4.
In order to provide timely advice in the implementation of this Convention, the Conference of
the Parties may, as it deems necessary, appoint, taking into account the rules and practices of the
World Health Organization, ad hoc panels to provide it with information and advice on specific issues
regarding the curnent state of fields of science and technology relevant to the objective of the
Convention. The members of these panels shall be appointed by the Conference on the
recommendation of the Director-General of the World Health Organization, and shall serve in their
personal capacity. The Conference shall decide on the terms of reference and the modalities of work of
these panels.
5.
Starting at its first session, the Conference of the Parties shall arrange for the provision to
developing-country Parties of technical support, on request, in compiling and communicating
information under this Article. Such support may be provided by other Parties, by competent
international organizations and by the secretariat, as appropriate.
12
AIFCTCIINB2I2
Q.
Financial resources
1.
Each Party undertakes to provide financial support and incentives in respect of its national
activities intended to achieve the objective of this Convention, in accordance with its national plans,
priorities and programmes.
2.
A voluntary mechanism for the provision of financial resources on a grant or concessional basis,
including the transfer of technology, is hereby established to function under the guidance of, and be
accountable to, the Conference of the Parties. Its operation shall be entrusted to the World Health
Organization. Pursuant to the objective of this Convention, the Conference shall determine the policy,
strategy and programme priorities, as well as detailed criteria and guidelines for eligibility for, access
to, and use of, the financial resources, including regular monitoring and evaluation of such use. The
Conference shall decide on the arrangements to give effect to this provision after consultation with the
World Health Organization.
3.
The Parties recognize the important role that bilateral, regional and other channels can play in
achieving the objective of this Convention. They shall consider providing, in accordance with their
capabilities and national law, voluntary funding through such channels for comprehensive tobacco
control programmes in support of this objective, taking into account the needs of developing countries.
[4.
The Parties recognize that developed-country Parties that export manufactured tobacco
products, or have branches of international tobacco companies exporting tobacco products from third
countries, have a special responsibility to provide technical support to developing-country Parties to
strengthen their national tobacco control programmes.]
R.
Settlement of disputes
1.
If a dispute arises between two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of
this Convention or any of its protocols, those Parties shall consult among themselves with a view to
resolving the dispute by negotiation.
2.
If the parties to the dispute cannot reach agreement by negotiation, they may jointly seek the
good offices of, or request mediation by, a third party.
3.
Failure to reach agreement by negotiation or mediation shall not absolve parties to the dispute
from the responsibility of continuing to seek to resolve it. When ratifying, accepting, approving or
acceding to this Convention, or at any time thereafter, a State or regional economic integration
organization may declare in writing to the Depository that, for a dispute not resolved in accordance
with paragraph 1 or 2 above, it accepts, as compulsory, arbitration in accordance with procedures to be
adopted by the Conference of the Parties.
4.
[If all the parties to the dispute have not, in accordance with paragraph 3 above, accepted
arbitration, the dispute shall, unless the parties otherwise agree, be submitted to conciliation. A
conciliation commission shall be established as set out in paragraph 5 below at the request of one or
more parties to the dispute.
5.
Unless the parties agree otherwise:
(a)
If the dispute is between two parties, each party shall appoint one member of the
commission, and the two members so appointed shall appoint a third, who shall serve as chair.
13
A/FCTC/INB2/2
If within three months of the appointment of the first member the second member has not been
appointed, or within three months of the appointment of the second member the third has not
been appointed, such appointment shall be made by [INSERT] at the request of either party.
(b)
If the dispute is between more than two parties, the parties shall agree on three members
of the commission and designate one of these as chair. If within three months of the first request
for the establishment of the commission no such agreement shall have been reached, the
members of the commission shall be appointed and the chair designated by [INSERT] at the
request of any party.
6.
Unless the parties agree otherwise, all matters concerning the conciliation shall be determined
by the commission, acting by simple majority. The commission shall render a recommendatory award,
which the parties shall consider in good faith.]
7.
The provisions of this Article shall apply with respect to any protocol, unless otherwise
provided therein.
S.
Development of the Convention
[To be formulated at a later session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body]
T.
Final Clauses
[To be formulated at a later session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body]
14
r
F-g.t-c... 'Ub
notes from public hearings and INB1
Subject: notes from public hearings and INB1
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:15:03 -0500
From: AJ Foreit <JForeit@TobaccoFreeKids.org>
To: '"fctcall@globalink.org"’ <fctcall@globalink.org>
Apologies for the delay in getting this information out.
These are the
direct transcripts of the notes taken by FCA members at INB1.
We are
currently putting the information into a searchable database, which we will
make available to the alliance.
Please note that there may be transcription errors and/or misspellings in
the documents, as some of the handwriting was difficult to decipher.
I will attach the documents in several sets.
Keep an eye out!
A. Jenny Foreit
Assistant Manager, International Programs
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
tel: 202 296-5469 x3025
fax: 202 296-5427
«Speaker and comments 4.doc» «Speaker and comments 2.doc» «Speaker
and comments 3.doc» <<Speaker and comments l.doc» «Speaker and comments
5.
doc»
!
Name: Speaker and comments 4.doc
Speaker and comments 4.doc ■
Type: Winword File (application/msword):
:Eucoding: base64
: mSpeaker and comments 2.doc;
Name: Speaker and comments 2.doc
Type: Winword File (application/msword) ■
Encoding: base64
Name: Speaker and comments 3.doc
; I;?]Speaker and comments 3.doc:
Type: Winword File (application/msword):
■ Encoding: base64
i FM Speaker and comments l.doc
Name: Speaker and comments l.doc
Type: Winword File (application/msword):
Encoding: base64
Speaker and comments 5.doc
Name: Speaker and comments 5.doc
Type: Winword File (application/msword);
Encoding: base64
WHO Suitunary of INB1 and Executive Decision onNGO Involvement in INB
Subject: WHO Summary of INB1 and Executive Decision on NGO Involvement in INB
Dale: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:33:59 +0700
From: "FCTC Alliance" <FCTCaUiance@inet.co.th>
To: "FCA Listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Attached are two WHO documents relating to the FCTC and NGO involvement in
the FCTC which you can find on the WHO website at
..:: c : / '.co-'.
. in :/ wla -: 7 S; /:: v ?+ Wc / i. n■; r. html.
The first is document (EB107/30; is the Report to the Secretariat regarding
the public hearings, INB1 and other FCTC related activities of the WHO.
The second document (EB107/19) is the Report of the Standing Committee on
Non-governmental organisations which look’s at the question of NGO
involvement in the FCTC at the INB.
The Executive Board has decided to
authorise the Chairman of the Executive Board, acting jointly with the
Chairman of the Standing Committee, to admit provisionally NGO's into
official relations.
Flease see the document attached for conditions and
requirements of this provisional status.
This seems to be a very good
outcome for us.
:
Name: WHO Executive Summary.pdfj
!’>1WHO Executive Summarv.pdf:
Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
■ Encoding: base64
;
(-^Report of Standing Committee on NGO.pdf.
5^
Name: Report of Standing Committee on NGO.pdf
Type: Acrobat (applicatioiVpdf)
Encoding: base64
Re: internet advertising and sales
Subject: Re: internet advertising and sales
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:56:02 -0000
From: "Clive Bates" <clive.bates@dial.pipex.com >
Organization: ASH
To: "Robert Weissman" <rob@milan.essential.org>
CC: "FCTC Alliance" <fctcall@globalink.org>
P.ob - good to see you in DC, albeit briefly.
Internet regulation - a very tricky problem this. We are trying to tackle
it here in UK in our legislation currently going through parliament - this
is how it stands at present - subject to amendment.
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk. /pa/cm200001/cmbills/041/2
001041.htm
/ '
2. (1) A person who in the course of a business publishes a tobacco
advertisement, or causes one to be published, in the United Kingdom is
guilty of an offence.
2.(5) It is not an offence under subsection (1) for a person who does not
carry on business in the United Kingdom to publish or cause to be published
a tobacco advertisement by means of a website which is accessed in the
United Kingdom; and, in that case, devising the advertisement or causing it
to be devised is not an offence under subsection (2).
7. The Secretary of State may by order amend any provision of this Act if he
considers it appropriate to do so in consequence of any developments in
technology relating to publishing or distributing by electronic means.
8.
(1) A person who in the course of a business displays tobacco products or
causes them to be displayed in a place or on a website where tobacco
products are offered for sale is guilty of an offence if the display does
not comply with such requirements (if any) as may be specified by the
appropriate Minister in regulations.
8. (2) It is not an offence under subsection (1) for a person who does not
carry on business in the United Kingdom to display or cause to be displayed
tobacco products or their prices by means of a website which is accessed in
the United Kingdom.
8. (3) The regulations may, in particular, provide for the meaning of
"place" in subsection (1).
8. (4) The regulations must make provision for a display which also amounts
to an advertisement to be treated for the purpose of offences under this
Actla) as an advertisement and not as a display, or
(b) as a display and not as an advertisement.
[It's not perfect and depends on what is said in the regulations and the
latter clauses are designed to be e-commerce friendly - hence the
distinction between display and advertising.] But I think it is based on
the following logic...
Regulating the ISPs, or states where servers are located, or trying to
firewall countries etc is, I think, a losing strategy - they will always
find some way to do it. However, even the virtual world has to touch down
on terra firma somewhere. What states can do is regulate the companies in
Al^^the countries where they are operating. When the UK wanted to keep out a
J"
Dutch hard-core porn satellite channel, it made it an offence to sell the
decoders and pay-per-view subscriptions in the UK.
In the tobacco case ,i
if someone sets up a web site in some lawless corner of Moldova promoting
[Mx
brands available in the UK, we could fine the companies operating in the UK
BAT' Gallaher, Imperial etc] for publishing or having others publish
“yM* adverts whose aim or effect is to promote a tobacco product in the UK - ever
V' I
if this was not the intention or sole intention. Ideally we should draft
legislatioi
I
.-in
pm
Re: internet advertising and sales
therefore running up against the internet freedom movement).
The same would
apply to pirate radio or satellite TV - which I think are conceptually
similar, though these are more readily addressed with technology (jamming).
Note that sub clause 2.5 and 8.2 provides the defence of not operating in
Britain, but still makes it illegal if a UK company 'to display/publish or
cause to be displayed/published'.
Admittedly this represents a degree of extra-territoriality which some would
find troubling, but I think this would be workable, especially if a big
enough bloc did it.
Of course, it turns the globally unmanageable monster
of the internet on its head - if one country objects to BAT's internet
advertising, then BAT either loses the global reach of the internet or it
loses that market.
The pervasive reach of the internet becomes a barrier
and disadvantage.
Also - the recent Yahoo! Nazi memorabilia case is one to watch.
http://www.cnn.com/2000/LAW/12/22/yahoo.naziauctions.tech.ap/
Finally, did I draw your attention to BAT's City Gorilla internet concept?
See www.citygorilla.com for their prototype Polish site and
www.citygorilla.org for our counter site (silly old multi-billion dollar BAT
forgot to register the citygorilla.org domain for $60, thus potentially
compromising the $4 million citygorilla.com internet venture,’.
Cheers
Clive Bates
Action on Smoking and Health
102 Clifton Street
London EC2A 4HW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44-(0)20-7739 5902
Fax: +44-(0)20-7613 0531
Mob: +44-(0)7786 791237
Web: http://www.ash.org.uk/
----- Original Message ----From: "Robert Weissman" <rob@milan.essential.org>
To: <fctcall@globalink.org>
Sent: 16 February 2001 5:06
Subject: internet advertising and sales
I
This is not narti r.nl srl v raised in relation to the delegate briefings.
!
<ny among us lookxug al tile J ■ ■ ■ o» <.ite.rr.ot dvr-*■' - ’ - g * d* sale;
) is WHO? Then: an.
■ <>>ely dirric.ilt issues here, with an absolute need
I for international regulation.
I
|
|
|
I
|
I
Robert Weissman <rob@essential.org>
Essential Information
P.O. Box 19405, Washington, DC 20036, USA
Tel: 1-202-387-8030
Fax: 1-202-234-5176
www.essential.org
Chair’s text - same thoughts on mechanisms to assist developing countries
Subject: Chair's text - some thoughts on mechanisms to assist developing countries
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:29:04 -0000
From: "Emma Must" <emma_must@.yahoo.co.uk>
To: "FCA’listserve" <fctcall@globalink.org>
Fz’i.onds,
Going through the Chair's text I am struck: that very often it is watered
down by making it optional for countries to introduce measures, using
language such as "to the extent possible in accordance with the means at its
disposal and its capabilities".
At; alternative •..•ould be co make many of the measures mandatory but to also
expl-LCiclv pxovi.de ucclmicax anti financial assistance co countries which
need it, through specified mechanisms.
The convention could spell this
out under each measure, using language such as "with technical assistance
provided by the Clearing House Mechanism and financial assistance provided
by the Financial Mechanism, where needed, each party shall....[introduce
The treaty should then also explicitly provide for the establishment
"technical assistance mechanism"
of a
(eg a Clearing House Mechanism) and a
"Financial Mechanism" within the text.
Other conventions and protocols do
this - there's no reason why the FCTC can't.
(Please see summary of how 4
other conventions address these issues at the end of this message).
This is not the same as removing national choice on certain issues eg
treatment of tobacco dependence, where it may be politically important to
retain language such as "taking into account national circumstances and ■
priorities."
I'd be interested in hearing views of others in FCA about this, especially
colleagues in developing countries, and also in hearing what delegates said
on this during INB1.
I'm also happy to work with others on developing
specific language on mechanisms, if anyone fancies it. (I can send you an
easier to read version of the note below if you like) I definitely think it
I is worth getting more on mechanisms to assist developing countries in the
text of the convention - including naming the mechanisms.
Especially for
the FCTC, I don't think we should leave this to be dealt within any
Protocols as they will deal with very specific narrow areas of tobacco
control (- eg we don't want financial mechanism to apply just to advertising
bans, but to all of tobacco control).
Here's the techy bit:
Other treaties and how they deal with 1) Financial Mechanism and 2) Exchange
of information; scientific, technical and legal cooperation
Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol (Ozone Depletion)
www.unep.org/ozone/vc-text .shtml
www.unep.org/ozone/montreal.shtml
I) Financial mechanism
some tnoughis on mechanisms to assist developing countries
Montreal Protocol - creates a Multilateral Fund and specifies other
multilateral, regional and bilateral cooperation. Explicitly requires
developed countries to contribute to the fund, which is for the benefit of
developing countries.
2) Exchange of info; scientific, technical and legal cooperation
- Is included in VC, but no body is specified
- In MP is specifically linked to the financial mechanism which is
explicitly "for the purposes of providing financial and technical
co-operation, including the transfer of technologies"
- London Amendment (1990) created the Financial Mechanism, which is
explicitly to assist developing countries and "meets the incremental costs
of developing countries (on a specified list) to implement the control
measures of the Protocols and finances all clearing house functions ie
country studies, technical assistance, information, training and costs of
the Fund Secretariat"
BEST BIT: PROTOCOL CREATES MULTILATERAL FUND FOR BENEFIT OF DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES TO FACILITATE VARIOUS FORMS OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCEBasel- Convention (Hazardous Wastes)
www.basel.int
' > Financial Mechanism and
leaal cooperation
2)Exchange of info; scientific, technical and
- Convention specifies that "regional or sub-regional centres for training
and technology transfers regarding the management of .hazardous
wastes
should be established. The Parties shall decide on the
establishment of appropriate funding mechanisms of a voluntary nature" Article 14.
- The Convention also specifies that the Secretariat receives and conveys
info to the parties about technical assistance, training etc. and offers
assistance to the parties. Further specifies cooperation between the
parties - Article 16
- Subsequently, Regional Centres for Training and Technology Transfer have
been set up "to help countries implement the Basel Convention ...including
providing guidance on technical and technological issues as well as
advice...and encourage the introduction of cleaner technologies and the use of
environmentally sound waste management practices" - Basel Basics at
www.basel.int/pub/basics .html
BEST BIT: REGIONAL CENTRES FOR TRAINING AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SPECIFIED IN
CONVENTION
Convention on Biological Diversity and Biosafety Protocol
1) Financial mechanism
- Article 21 of the Convention "provides for a mechanism for the provision
of financial resources to developing country Parties for purposes or this
convention on a grant or concessional basis" www.biodiv.org/financial/fm.asp
- A.t the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention it
was decided to use the Global Environment Facility as the institutional
structure to operate the financial mechanism.
- The Biosafety Protocol explicitly says it will use the same financial
mechanism as the Convention (Arcicle 28). "Establishing a framework for
capacity building to help developing countries participate fully in the
Protocol is also essential. An example of how this could be done is a
S39million project funded by the Global Environment Facility that the UNEP
will implement over the next 3 H years. This project will help 100
countries prepare their National Biosafety Frameworks and will facilitate
the exchange of experience and best practices amongst developing countries
2 of 5
Chair's text - some thoughts on mechanisms to assist developing countries
3/14/01 10:07 AM
and countries with economies in transition, including through a series of
global and regional workshops". UNEP press release 8 Dec 2000
2' Exchange of info; scientific, technical and legal cooperation
- Article 18.3 of CBD says - "The Conference of the Parties, at its first
meeting, shall determine how to establish a Clearing-house mechanism to
promote and facilitate technical and scientific cooperation".
Includes:
Scientific and Technical Cooperation; Technology Transfer; Information
Exchange; Research Cooperation
— The CHM was subsequently set un bv COP.
- OSD also established a Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
Technological Advice - (SBSTTA.) - under article 25 - to provide advice to
the COP on implementation cf .the convention, including how to make it work
for developing countries.
- Biosafety Protocol subsequently established a Biosafety Clearing House
under the overall CBD's CHM.
BEST BITS:
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF BOTH A CLEARING -HOUSE MECHANISM AND A
FINANCIAL MECHANISM ARE PROVIDED FOR WITHIN THE CONVENTION ITSELF - (WITH
DETAILS OF SETTING THEM UP BEING LEFT TO SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS OF THE
CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES)
Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol
dft www.unfccc.de/resource/conv/conv.html
1) Financial mechanism and
legal cooperation
2) Exchange of info; scientific, technical and
- Article 4 of the FCCC says "The developed country Parties and other
developed Parties included in Annex II shall provide new and additional
financial resources to meet the agreed full costs incurred by developing
country Parties in complying with their obligations under Article 12
paragraph 1. They shall also provide such financial resources" including for
the transfer of technology, needed by the developing country Parties to meet
the agreed full incremental costs of implementing measures etc.
- Also separate Financial Mechanism article in the Convention.
- Convention establishes a Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological
.Advice which provides advice to COP
- Article 12,4 "Developing country Parties may, on a voluntary basis,
propose projects for financing including specific technologies, materials,
equipment, techniques or practices that would be needed to implement such
projects..."
BEST BITS: DETAIL ON FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO FACILITATE TECHNICAL ASPECTS IS
A SPECIFIED WITHIN THE CONVENTION, AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ARE INVITED TO
” PROPOSE PROJECTS FOR FUNDING.
ANNEX
1) Montreal Protocol
Article 10: Financial mechanism
The Parties shall establish a mechanism for the purposes of providing
financial and technical co-operation, including the transfer of
technologies, to Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of this
Protocol to enable their compliance with the control measures set out in
Articles 2A to 2E, and any control measures in Articles 2F to 2H that are
decided pursuant to paragraph 1 bis of Article 5 of the Protocol. The
mechanism,
contributions to which shall be additional to other
financial transfers to Parties operating under that paragraph, shall meet
all agreed incremental costs of such Parties in order to enable their
comoliance with the control measures of the Protocol. An indicative list of
the categories of incremental costs shall be decided by the meeting of the
Parties.
The mechanism established under paragraph 1 shall include a
3/14/01 10:07 AM
Chair's text - some thoughts on mechanisms to assist developing countries
Mu J r
1
' FiYnd
Tt. maV'a
Trf-her. weans of nrn I t i 1 arpra 1
and bilateral co-operation.
The Multilateral Fund shall:
$a) Meet, on a grant or concessional basis as appropriate,
and according to criteria to be decided upon by the Parties,
the agreed incremental costs;
(b) Finance clearing-house functions to:
(i)
Assist Parties operating under paragraph 1 of
Article 5, through country specific studies and other
technical co-operation, to identify their needs for
co-operation;
(ii)
Facilitate technical co-operation to meet these
identified needs;
(iii)
Distribute, as provided for in Article 9,
information and relevant materials, and hold workshops,
training sessions, and ocher related activities, for the
benefit of Parties that are developing countries; and
(iv)
Facilitate and monitor other multilateral, regional
and bilateral co-operation available to Parties that are
c,' Finance the secretarial services of the Multilateral
Fund and related support costs.
rhe Multilateral Fund shall operate under the authority of the
Parties who shall decide on its overall policies.
The Parties shall establish an Executive Committee to develop and monitor
the implementation of specific operational policies, guidelines and
administrative arrangements, including the disbursement of resources, for
the purpose of achieving the objectives of the Multilateral Fund. The
Executive Committee shall discharge its tasks and responsibilities,
specified in its terms of reference as agreed by the Parties, with the
co-operation and assistance of the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (World Bank), the United Nations Environment Programme, the
United Nations Development Programme or other appropriate agencies depending
on their respective areas of expertise. The members of the Executive
Committee,
which shall be selected on the basis-of a balanced
representation of the Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 and
of the Parties not so operating, shall be endorsed by the Parties.
The Multilateral Fund shall be financed by contributions from Parties not
operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 in convertible currency or, in
certain circumstances, in kind and/or in national currency, on the basis of
the United Nations scale of assessments. Contributions by other Parties
shall be encouraged. Bilateral and, in particular cases agreed by a decision
of the Parties, regional co-operation may, up to a percentage and consistent
with any criteria to be specified by decision of the Parties, be considered
as a contribution to the
Multilateral Fund, provided that such
co-operation, as a minimum:
(a) Strictly relates to compliance with the provisions of
(b) Provides additional resources; and
(c) Meets agreed incremental costs.
this Protocol;
The Parties shall decide upon the programme budget of the Multilateral Fund
for each fiscal period and upon the percentage of contributions of the
individual Parties thereto. Resources under the Multilateral Fund shall be
disbursed with the concurrence of the beneficiary Party.
Decisions by the
Parties under this Article shall be taken by consensus whenever possible. If
all efforts at consensus have been exhausted and no agreement reached,
decisions shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority vote of the Parties
present and voting, representing a majority of the Parties operating under
paragraph 1 of Article 5 present and voting and a majority of the Parties
not so operating present and voting.
The financial mechanism set out in this Article is without prejudice to any
future arrangements that may be developed with respect to other
environmental issues.
Article IDA: Transfer of technology
3/14/01 10:07 AM
4 of 5
Chav’s text - some thoughts on mechanisms to assist developing countries
Eacn Party snail take every practicable step, consistent with the programmes
supported by the financial mechanism, to ensure:
transfers-referred to
ana most favourable conditions
Emma Must
Tobacco Control Advisor
PATH Canada
e-mail: emma_must8yahoo.co.uk
tel/fax (London, UK): +44 (0) 20 7738 6506
web: www.pathcanada.org
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free 6yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo■com
3/14/01 10:07 AM
Liability and compensation meeting + docs
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
EB107/30
6 December 2000
EXECUTIVE BOARD
107th Session
Provisional agenda item 9.7
WHO framework convention on tobacco control
Report by the Secretariat
BACKGROUND
1.
By resolution WHA52.18 the Fifty-second World Health Assembly established an
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, open to all Member States, to draft and negotiate the proposed
WHO framework convention on tobacco control and possible related protocols. The present report
outlines key outcomes of the first session of the Negotiating Body. It also provides information on
other WHO tobacco control activities in support of the framework convention process since the
Executive Board’s 106th session in May 2000.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION
2.
The first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body was preceded by two days of
public hearings. WHO received 514 written submissions. During the hearings, testimonies were given
by representatives of 144 private sector and nongovernmental organizations and institutions, covering
all regions of the world.
3.
The hearings highlighted the key differences between the position of tobacco companies and
related bodies and public health institutions and organizations on the role of taxes on tobacco
products; the risk of environmental tobacco smoke and passive smoking; and the contribution of
advertising to smoking, especially among youth. Most tobacco companies questioned whether the
convention could be a single global regulation, citing national sovereignty, the appropriateness of
regulation at the national level, and self-regulation. Representatives of public health institutions on the
other hand, strongly argued that a truly viable tobacco control had to be global in reach, while
respecting country and culture-specific solutions.
FIRST SESSION OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING BODY
4.
The first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on the WHO framework
convention on tobacco control (Geneva, 16 to 21 October 2000) was attended by representatives of
148 Member States, and observers from the European Community, nine other intergovernmental
organizations, and 25 nongovernmental organizations.
5.
The Negotiating Body elected Mr C.L. Nunes Amorim (Brazil) as Chairman. The
representatives of six Member States - one from each WHO region - were elected to serve as Vice-
EB107/30
Chairmen: Australia, India, the Islamic Republic of Iran, South Africa, Turkey and the United States
of America. The representatives of South Africa and Turkey were appointed to serve concurrently as
Rapporteurs.
6.
The Negotiating Body decided to begin its substantive work with a discussion on the proposed
draft elements for the framework convention, as prepared by the working group on the framework
convention (October 1999 and March 2000).' There was wide agreement that the final report of the
working group2 was a sound reference document for initiating negotiations.
7.
The review of core obligations and guiding principles helped the discussion of what should be
included in the framework convention itself and what might be included in protocols. It also provided
guidance for the future work of the three working groups established by the Negotiating Body on the
Chairman’s proposal. Each of the three working groups will have two co-chairmen. The six
co-chairmen will be chosen from each of WHO’s six regions.
8.
With regard to work between sessions, the Negotiating Body agreed that the Chairman should
prepare a draft text indicating possible compromises and a reduced number of options as compared to
the reference document,12as well as containing some reorganization of the draft elements, on the basis
of comments made during the first session. Member States also called for technical work to be
continued on such issues as trade, technical support to countries, compensation and liability,
monitoring and implementation, and financial mechanisms.
9.
Canada and Thailand co-chaired an informal working group on the question of extended
participation of nongovernmental organizations in the work of the Negotiating Body, in accordance
with resolution WHA53.16 and in response to demands for them to have a role in the negotiating
process. A number of Member States expressed a preference for such organizations to participate in
accordance with WHO’s existing rules. On the recommendation of the informal working group, the
Negotiating Body agreed to encourage the Executive Board to explore ways of expediting the review
of applications for official relations from organizations seeking the necessary standing during the
negotiations.
10.
A feature of the Negotiating Body’s work during the session was the vital role played by
regional groups and the regional coordinators in linking discussions in the groups with plenary
debates.
11.
The Negotiating Body decided to hold its second session from 30 April to 5 May 2001.
OTHER ACTIVITIES
PROCESS
RELATED
TO
THE
FRAMEWORK
CONVENTION
12.
Report of the Committee of experts on tobacco industry documents. An inquiry by a
committee of experts on tobacco industry documents, appointed by the Director-General, into whether
WHO’s global tobacco control policies had been adversely affected by tobacco industry practices
aimed at influencing its funding, policy and research priorities, concluded in August 2000 that tobacco
1 Document A/FCTC/INB1/2.
2 Documents A53/12 and A53/12 Corr. 1.
2
EB107/30
companies had planned and implemented global strategies to discredit and impede WHO’s efforts to
carry out its mission. In all, the Committee made 58 recommendations.
13.
One of the key recommendations was that WHO should formally vet prospective experts,
consultants and advisers for possible conflict of interest. WHO has accordingly introduced a
declaration of interest form to be signed before appointments are made.
14.
Among its recommendations, the Committee proposed that WHO should develop a
sophisticated communications campaign to support the proposed framework convention on tobacco
control and counter any campaign of opposition by tobacco companies. In the view of the Committee,
WHO should also monitor tobacco industry activities and make regular public reports on continuing
misconduct.
15.
The attention of the Board is drawn to two recommendations of the Committee that relate to the
World Health Assembly. Specifically, these recommendations are to submit to the Health Assembly,
for discussion by Member States, the questions of whether:
• Member States have in place adequate mechanisms to ensure the transparency of affiliations
between delegates to the Health Assembly and tobacco companies; Member States should be
encouraged to take any additional steps necessary to avoid inappropriate affiliations
(recommendation 22);
• current procedures for recognizing organizations as nongovernmental include adequate
mechanisms to make transparent any affiliations between a nongovernmental organization
and tobacco companies (recommendation 23).
16.
United Nations Ad Hoc Inter-Agency Task Force on Tobacco Control. WHO has made
substantial progress in working with other United Nations agencies in the formulation and promotion
of tobacco control initiatives. The United Nations Ad Hoc Inter-Agency Task Force on Tobacco
Control, set up in 1999 under WHO’s leadership, and comprising bodies and organizations of the
United Nations system, as well as WTO, has helped to initiate new interagency partnerships on the
economics of tobacco control and on supply, demand and trade issues. Negotiation of the proposed
framework convention on tobacco control will require increased collaboration within the United
Nations system to provide technical support for the development and eventual implementation of the
convention and its protocols.
17.
Expansion of country support. In working towards the negotiation and subsequent
implementation of the framework convention, WHO fully recognizes the close link between stronger
country action and complementary global action against tobacco. Both at headquarters and in the
regional offices, the Organization now has enhanced ability to respond to requests from countries,
particularly in relation to legislation, surveillance and media advocacy. With the World Bank and
IMF, it is also providing support in areas related to the economics of tobacco control.
18.
Regional activities. Activities to provide input or support to the framework convention process
have been prominent in all WHO regions. For example, an Inter-Country Meeting on Tobacco Control
Policy and Programming in the African Region (Nairobi, 23 to 28 October 2000) helped to organize
support in the Region for negotiation of the proposed framework convention. In the Americas, a
meeting of focal points of the WHO megacountry health promotion network (Mexico City,
3
and 4 June 2000), focused on mobilization of the world’s most populous countries to play a
leadership role in promoting the framework convention. Support for the framework convention was
also raised at Ministerial discussions held during the Fifth Global Conference on Health Promotion
3
EB107/30
(Mexico City, 5 to 9 June 2000). In the Eastern Mediterranean Region, WHO has encouraged the Arab
Councils of Ministers of Education, Information, Justice, Finance, Interior, Agriculture and Industry to
undertake concerted action to promote the framework convention in their respective areas.
19.
At its 53rd session in September 2000, following a substantial discussion, the Regional
Committee for South-East Asia adopted resolution SEA/RC53/R10 urging Member States to promote
the proposed framework convention, with technical support from the Regional Office. In the Western
Pacific, the recently issued document, Country profiles on tobacco or health 2000, includes a first
assessment of the receptiveness of countries in the Region to the framework convention.
20.
11th World Conference on Tobacco or Health. WHO helped to support the attendance of a
number of emerging leaders in tobacco control from developing countries at the 11th World
Conference on Tobacco or Health (Chicago, United States of America, 6 to 11 August 2000). At the
end of the Conference, a strong resolution was adopted in support of the proposed framework
convention.
21.
Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Product Regulation. The function of WHO’s
Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Product Regulation, composed of scientists and tobacco
control experts from around the world, is to advise WHO on the regulatory framework, policy
development, and dissemination of scientific information for tobacco products. Its work could have
particular relevance for the framework convention, including a possible protocol on tobacco product
regulation. As part of the Committee’s first meeting (Geneva, 12 and 13 October 2000), WHO invited
selected tobacco companies to provide information on their perspective on product modification and
their efforts to reduce the harm caused by tobacco products.
22.
World No-Tobacco Day 2001. World No-Tobacco Day 2001 will centre on a pivotal issue in
tobacco control, passive smoking. Recognizing that some of the most effective and sustainable clean
indoor air policies have occurred at the local level, WHO is urging mayors of cities around the world
to launch “Clear the Air” campaigns. Local actions taken by individuals and organizations to protect
people from passive smoking are seen as an essential complement to negotiation of the framework
convention.
4
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
EXECUTIVE BOARD
107th Session
Agenda item 8.1
EB107/19
20 January 2001
Collaboration with nongovernmental organizations
Report of the Standing Committee on
Nongovernmental Organizations
1.
In accordance with the Principles governing relations between the World Health Organization
and nongovernmental organizations,' the Standing Committee1
2 met on 16 January 2000 under the
chairmanship of Dr G. N’gaihdiro to consider the documents prepared under agenda item 8.1,
“Nongovernmental organizations”. In addition, the Committee’s attention was drawn to an outcome of
the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, which was established to draft and
negotiate the proposed WHO framework convention on tobacco control; the Committee was invited to
express its views on paragraph 9 of document EB107/30. A report on the discussions and
recommendations of the Standing Committee follows. The Board is invited to decide on the draft
resolution and draft decisions set out in Section IV below.
I.
APPLICATIONS OF NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS FOR
ADMISSION INTO OFFICIAL RELATIONS (Restricted documents EB 107/NGO/l
and EB107/NGO/2)
2.
The Committee examined applications from the International Association for the Study of
Obesity contained in document EB 107/NGO/l and the Global Forum for Health Research contained in
document EB107/NGO/2, both of which had been transmitted to the Members of the Board with
circular letter L/00.23 of 30 November 2000.
3.
Concerning the application from the International Association for the Study of Obesity, it was
noted that WHO had identified obesity as a public health problem and that the Association was
contributing to the development of global strategies for its prevention and control. As for the
application from the Global Forum for Health Research, its work was welcomed. However, it was
pointed out that it was not uncommon in developing countries for nongovernmental organizations to
undertake research which, while well-intentioned, duplicated that done by governments or, when
conducted on human populations, might pose ethical questions. The Forum was active in many
research fields and a clarification was requested as to how it identified experts and priorities. The
Committee was assured that the Forum undertook research with national researchers on the basis of
1 Basic Documents, forty-second edition, 1999, pp. 74-79.
2 Members of the Standing Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations are: Professor S.M. Ali (Bangladesh),
Dr G. N’gaihdiro (Central African Republic), Dr B. Sadrizadeh (Islamic Republic of Iran), Dr M. Di Gennaro (Italy).
Dr A. Abreu Cataid (alternate to Dr G. Rodriguez Ochoa) (Venezuela).
EB107/19
priorities identified at national level, and that, for research on human populations, the requisite
approvals from national ethical committees would be sought. WHO itself had such a committee which
reviewed protocols for research on human subjects. Concerning the identification of experts and
priorities, the collaboration between WHO and the Forum on cardiovascular diseases was cited as an
illustration. A scientific group composed of experts advised the Forum’s Steering Committee which
itself is composed of specialist partner organizations. The Committee noted the clarifications.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Executive Board that
the International Association for the Study of Obesity and the Global Forum for Health
Research should be admitted into official relations with WHO.
II.
REVIEW OF NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN
RELATIONS WITH WHO (Restricted document EB107/NGO/WP/1)
OFFICIAL
4.
The Standing Committee reviewed collaboration with one-third of the nongovernmental
organizations in official relations, and considered reports on the status of relations with bodies that
were the subject of decision EB 105(12).’ Altogether 82 nongovernmental organizations (as listed in
the Annex) were reviewed. It was clarified that the organizations were aware of the nature of the
review, and that the Board’s decisions were communicated to the nongovernmental organizations after
the Board had completed its session.
5.
In reviewing the reports of collaboration for the period 1998-2000 from the 54 nongovernmental
organizations referred to in the Annex to document EB107/NGO/WP/1, the Committee noted that
these organizations supported WHO’s work on health systems, health technology and
pharmaceuticals, and that further collaboration was either planned or expected to continue. The
Committee considered the joint activities to be valuable, and decided to recommend to the Board that
the organizations should be maintained in official relations.
International Association for Accident and Traffic Medicine
6.
The Committee noted that there had been no collaboration during the period under review and
that the Association had undergone major changes including a change of name to the International
Traffic Medicine Association. The new Association wished to revitalize relations with WHO and was
developing proposals for joint collaboration. In considering the information, the Committee took into
account the special expertise of the Association and the fact that traffic accidents, especially in
developing countries, are a major public health problem.
In view of this the Committee decided to recommend that the Executive Board should note
with concern the absence of collaboration during the period under review but, in
consideration of a mutual interest to re-establish planned collaboration, maintain the
Federation in official relations for one year to enable the development of a plan for
collaboration.
1 Document EB 105/2000/REC/l, pp. 23-24.
EB107/19
International Sociological Association
7.
The Committee noted that the Association reported collaboration in the field of informatics but
that WHO had no such record, and that the Association’s response to a request to provide details of the
collaboration referred instead to a major initiative of a third party urging WHO to establish an entity to
provide medical services in developing countries. As WHO did not envisage the resumption of
planned collaboration, the Committee concluded that effective contacts between the two organizations
had lapsed.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that official
relations be discontinued with the International Sociological Association.
International Association of Cancer Registries, International Commission on Radiation
Units and Measurements, International Electrotechnical Commission, International
Epidemiological Association, International Federation for Medical and Biological
Engineering, International Federation of Health Records Organizations, International
Hospital Federation, International Medical Informatics Association, Save the Children
Fund (UK), World Association of the Major Metropolises (Metropolis), and the World
Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists
8.
The Committee noted that in the absence of reports from the above-mentioned organization, it
was not possible to review their relations.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that the review of
relations with the above-mentioned nongovernmental organizations should be deferred
until its 109th session.
International Academy of Pathology, International Association of Hydatid Disease,
International League of Associations for Rheumatology, International Organization
against Trachoma, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War,
International Radiation Protection Association, Rotary International
9.
In accordance with decision EB105(12), the review of relations with the above-mentioned
nongovernmental organizations had been deferred pending receipt of their reports on collaboration
with WHO. The Committee reviewed the reports submitted by the organizations, and was pleased to
learn of the collaboration.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that WHO
should maintain official relations with the above-mentioned organizations.
International Federation for Housing and Planning
10.
The Committee noted that the Federation had yet to respond to invitations to provide a report on
joint acti vities for the period 1996-1999. Although as a result of changes in responsibilities in WHO
during the period under review it had not been possible to continue collaboration with the Federation,
there was a continuing interest in maintaining relations and exploring the possibility of the
development of a joint work plan. In this connection WHO had drawn attention to the relationship
between housing and planning and human health. The Committee was concerned by the apparent loss
of contact and considered that a review of relations with the Federation should include information
EBI07/19
from the Federation. Deferral of the review would provide time for WHO to pursue the development
of a work plan.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that the review of
relations with the International Federation for Housing and Planning should be deferred
until its 109th session.
International Alliance of Women, International Federation of Business and Professional
Women, International Society for Preventive Oncology, World Association of Girl
Guides and Girl Scouts
11.
hi accordance with decision EB 105(12), the above-mentioned nongovernmental organizations
were maintained in official relations in order to permit the development of plans for collaboration.
Such plans, summarized in document EB107/NGO/WP/1, have been developed for all except the
International Federation of Business and Professional Women. The Committee noted, however, the
results of a meeting in December 2000 between WHO and the Federation which resulted in a work
plan consisting of WHO technical support for the Federation’s activities in the areas of tobacco,
violence against women, mental health, and educational programmes in schools for HIV/AIDS
awareness and prevention. In reviewing the plans, the Committee was pleased to note that the various
activities during the coming years would serve to restore close and productive relations.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that WHO
should maintain official relations with the above-mentioned organizations.
International Council of Societies of Pathology
12.
The Committee noted that in accordance with decision EB 105(12) the Council had pursued
contact with WHO with a view to revitalizing relations based on its activities, in particular the
establishment of a telepathology programme for developing countries, and a mutual interest in the
classification of tumours. WHO appreciated the Council’s work in telepathology, but as the activities
were beyond the scope of current WHO priorities it was unable to consider collaboration at this time.
With regal'd to the classification of tumours, WHO advised that, although it had not been feasible to
develop a suitable work plan within the time period, it expected that in the future it would be able to
propose a structured plan for collaboration.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that official
relations with the International Council of Societies of Pathology should be suspended
until such time that a mutually agreed plan for collaboration has been submitted for
consideration by the Board.
International Medical Society of Paraplegia
13.
The Committee noted, inter alia, that in accordance with decision EB 103(2) the Society had
been maintained in official relations during 1999 to enable the development of a plan for
collaboration. At its 105th session, the Board was informed that, although it had been considered
possible to revitalize the relations in the area of prevention of injuries, WHO’s priorities had changed
and planned cooperation was not envisaged.
EB107/19
However, in view of a mutual interest in the field of rehabilitation it was agreed to explore
possibilities for collaboration and the Society had been maintained in official relations for
a further year.
14.
The Committee noted that the Society had been invited to suggest proposals for cooperation
relevant to WHO’s work in rehabilitation. However, as the ensuing exchanges appeared to indicate
that the focus of the Society’s efforts remained the prevention of spinal cord injuries, a work plan in
the field of rehabilitation did not materialize.
15.
In reviewing the information the Committee was of the view that the Board may wish to
indicate appreciation of the Society’s efforts to pursue planned collaboration with WHO, but it was
also mindfill that the basis of an official relationship was a plan for collaboration. From the
information available it was evident that this would not be forthcoming in the near future.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that official
relations with the International Medical Society of Paraplegia should be discontinued.
World Federation of United Nations Associations
16.
In accordance with decision EB103(2) the Federation had been maintained in official relations
during 1999 to enable the development of a plan for collaboration. In that period WHO had been
informed that the Federation was undergoing a major restructuring, and that previous approaches to
develop a joint work plan were “null and void”. In view of this, the Federation was invited to convey
its views on the feasibility of developing a plan for collaboration. A response had not been
forthcoming.
In view of the above, the Committee decided to recommend to the Board that, pending the
submission of a plan for collaboration, official relations with the World Federation of
United Nations Associations be suspended.
III.
WHO FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL, REPORT
BY THE SECRETARIAT (Document EB107/30)
17.
The Committee noted that the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body had, as requested by the
World Health Assembly in resolution WHA53.16, considered at its first session the question of
extended participation of nongovernmental organizations in the work of the Negotiating Body.
Specifically (document EB 107/30, paragraph 9), “a number of Member States expressed a preference
for such organizations to participate” in the work of the Negotiating Body in accordance with WHO’s
existing rules. In this connection the Negotiating Body had “agreed to encourage the Executive Board
to explore ways of expediting the review of applications for official relations from organizations
seeking the necessary standing during the negotiations”.
18.
The Committee agreed that under the circumstances the Executive Board may wish to seek
ways and means of responding to this request. In so doing, it would be important, in the view of the
Committee, to ensure respect for the criteria for admission as set out in the principles governing
relations between WHO and nongovernmental organizations. The Committee proposed that the
Executive Board may wish to agree to authorize its Chairman, acting jointly with the Chairman of the
Standing Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations, to consider requests from such organizations
that want to participate in the work of the Negotiating Body, on an ad hoc basis in between its January
EB107/19
sessions. If the nongovernmental organizations are already in working relations with WHO and they
appear to otherwise meet the criteria for admission into official relations, and if their mandates are
relevant to the work of the Negotiating Body, the Chairmen would provisionally admit them into
official relations. Such provisional official relations would then be confirmed or terminated at the
subsequent January session of the Executive Board. Unless otherwise decided by the Board, the
arrangement would be applicable until ±e adoption of the framework convention on tobacco control.
IV.
PROPOSED DRAFT RESOLUTION AND DECISIONS
Draft resolution on relations with nongovernmental organizations
The Executive Board,
Having examined the report of its Standing Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations,1
1.
DECIDES to establish official relations with the International Association for the Study of
Obesity and the Global Forum for Health Research;
2.
DECIDES to discontinue official relations with the International Sociological Association and
the International Medical Society of Paraplegia.
3.
DECIDES, pending the development of mutually agreed plans for collaboration, to suspend
official relations with the International Council of Societies of Pathology and the World Federation of
United Nations Associations.
Draft decision on review of nongovernmental organizations in official relations with
WHO
The Executive Board, having considered the report of its Standing Committee on
Nongovernmental Organizations concerning the review of one-third of the nongovernmental
organizations in official relations and following up to decision EB 105(12) reached the decisions set
out below.
On the basis of the reports of collaboration submitted by 61 nongovernmental organizations,
including those for whom a review had been deferred pending receipt of information, the Board
commended the efforts of the organizations to support WHO’s work in health systems, health
technology and pharmaceuticals, and decided to maintain official relations with them.
Concerning the International Traffic Medicine Association, previously known as the
International Association for Accident and Traffic Medicine, the Board was concerned that
collaboration had lapsed. Its review, however, took into account that traffic accidents were a major
public health problem and that both WHO and the newly reorganized Association had expressed
wishes to resume collaboration. In the light of this the Board decided to maintain official relations
with the Association for one year to enable the preparation of a plan for collaboration.
Document EB J 07/19.
6
EB107/19
In the absence of reports on collaboration from the International Association of Cancer
Registries, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, International
Electrotechnical Commission, International Epidemiological Association, International Federation for
Medical and Biological Engineering, International Federation of Health Records Organizations,
International Hospital Federation, International Medical Informatics Association, Save the Children
Fund (UK), World Association of the Major Metropolises (Metropolis), and the World Federation of
Societies of Anaesthesiologists, the Board decided to defer the review of relations until its 109th
session.
Concerning the International Alliance of Women, the International Federation of Business and
Professional Women, the International Society for Preventive Oncology, and the World Association of
Girl Guides and Girl Scouts, the Board was gratified that efforts to revitalize relations had resulted in
agreement for plans for collaboration and decided to maintain official relations.
Concerning the International Federation for Housing and Planning, in view of the absence of a
report on collaboration, and taking into consideration WHO’s interest in exploring possibilities for the
re-establishment of collaboration based on a mutually agreed plan of work, the Board decided to defer
the review of relations until its 109th session.
Draft decision on measures to be taken for facilitating the participation of
nongovernmental organizations in the work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body
on the WHO framework convention on tobacco control
The Executive Board, having considered the report of its Standing Committee on
Nongovernmental Organizations, authorized the Chairman of the Executive Board, acting jointly with
the Chairman of the Standing Committee, to admit provisionally nongovernmental organizations into
official relations. The facility established by the present decision will apply to nongovernmental
organizations that request official relations solely or also for the purpose of participating in the work
of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on the WHO framework convention on tobacco control,
subject to the following conditions and requirements.
(1)
nongovernmental organizations must be in working relations with WHO at the time of
submission of their application, so that approximately two years of working relations will have
elapsed by the time the Executive Board formally reviews their applications under point (3)
below, and must otherwise meet the criteria established in section 3 of the Principles governing
relations between the World Health Organization and Nongovernmental Organizations;
(2)
the mandates of the nongovernmental organizations concerned must be relevant to the
work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body; and
(3)
the Executive Board will review nongovernmental organizations in provisional official
relations at its January session subsequent to their admission into provisional official relations,
for the purpose of confirming or terminating such relations in accordance with normal
procedures.
This decision will remain applicable, unless terminated or revised by the Board, until the
adoption of the WHO framework convention on tobacco control.
EB107/19
ANNEX
LIST OF NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN OFFICIAL RELATIONS
REVIEWED BY
THE EXECUTIVE BOARD AT ITS 107TH SESSION
African Medical and Research Foundation International*
Aga Khan Foundation*
CMC - Churches’ Action for Health*
Commonwealth Medical Association*
Commonwealth Pharmaceutical Association*
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences*
Council on Health Research for Development*
Federation for International Cooperation of Health Services and Systems Research Centers*
Global Health Council**
1
International Academy of Pathology*
International Association of Biologists Technicians*
International Association of Cancer Registries
International Association of Hydatid Disease*
International Association of Medical Laboratory Technologists*
International Alliance of Women
International Catholic Committee of Nurses and Medico-social Assistants*
International College of Surgeons*
International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements
International Conference of Deans of French-Language Faculties of Medicine*
International Council for Science*
International Council for Standardization in Haematology*
International Council of Nurses*
International Council of Societies of Pathology
International Electrotechnical Commission
International Epidemiological Association
International Federation for Housing and Planning
International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering
International Federation of Business and Professional Women
International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine*2
International Federation of Health Records Organizations
International Federation of Hospital Engineering*
International Federation of Medical Students Associations*
International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations*
International Federation of Surgical Colleges*
International Hospital Federation
International League of Associations for Rheumatology*
International League of Dermatological Societies*
International Medical Informatics Association
* The Standing Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations proposed the maintenance of official relations; other
nongovernmental organizations are the subject of specific decisions.
1 Previously known as the National Council for International Health.
2 Previously known as the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry.
8
Annex
EB107/19
International Medical Parliamentarians Organization
International Medical Society of Paraplegia
International Organisation of Consumers Unions (Consumers International)*
International Organization against Trachoma*
International Organization for Standardization*
International Pharmaceutical Federation*
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War*
International Radiation Protection Association*
International Society for Burn Injuries*
International Society for Preventive Oncology
International Society of Blood Transfusion*
International Society of Chemotherapy*
International Society of Hematology*
International Society of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology*
International Society of Radiographers and Radiological Technologists*
International Society of Radiology*
International Society of Surgery*
biternational Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Inc.*
International Sociological Association
International Traffic Medicine Association
International Union of Architects*
hiternational Union of Microbiological Societies*
International Union of Pharmacology*
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry*
Inter-Parliamentary Union*
Medicus Mundi International*
OXFAM*
Rotary International*
Save the Children Fund (UK)
The Network Community Partnerships for Health through Innovative Education, Service and
Research**1
World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts
World Association of Societies of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine*
World Association of the Major Metropolises (Metropolis)
World Federation for Medical Education*
World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology*
World Federation of Acupuncture-Moxibustion Societies*
World Federation of Nuclear Medicine and Biology*
World Federation of Public Health Associations*
World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists
World Federation of United Nations Associations
World Medical Association*
World Organization of Family Doctors*
World Self-Medication Industry*
World Vision International*
* The Standing Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations proposed the maintenance of official relations; other
nongovernmental organizations are the subject of specific decisions.
1 Previously known as the Network of Community-oriented Educational Institutions for Health Sciences.
9
Not viewed