CONSUMER CONCERNS…IMPLEMENTATION OF TOBACCO ACT SHOULD NOT BE DELAYED

Aug 27, 2017 News

---

By PAT DIAL

In the last week there arose two important consumer concerns which required us to revisit them. The first was the Tobacco Legislation and the other was the Parking Meters. In this offering, we will look again at the Tobacco Legislation.
We would again like to emphasize that the Tobacco Control Bill 2017 which Parliament recently passed is among the most important pieces of Legislation which the Guyana Parliament has passed in the last 30 years.
It offers protection to the Health of a sizable portion of the population; with a healthier population, economic productivity of the country would increase; it would save the Government billions of dollars which would have been expended on the care of thousands of victims of tobacco-related diseases; and it would place Guyana among the progressive and respected nations of the world which have effective tobacco control legislation.
At one of the Annual General Meetings of the Demerara Tobacco Company (DEMTOCO) chaired by the then Regional Director of British American Tobacco Co, (BAT) Madame Amanda Cavill de Zavaley, a shareholder asked how she would deal with the growing anti-tobacco sentiment in Guyana and the threat of strong tobacco control legislation. She confidently replied that DEMTOCO’s parent company, BAT operated in several countries where such problems had arisen and was well-prepared to meet such eventualities.
Now that the eventualities have indeed arisen, DEMTOCO’s effort at delaying the Act from coming into force by demanding that it be thrown over to a Joint Select Committee of Parliament, is probably an element of the preparation Madame de Zavaley spoke about
If that were to happen, the Bill would be likely to be subsumed by the other business of Parliament and die, as had happened to a similar Bill under the watch of Minister of Health Dr Leslie Ramsammy. And it would have to be tabled again and years would have passed by.
Another element in the armoury of DEMTOCO against the Legislation seems to be to virulently criticize influential personages who are advocating the Legislation such as the WHO/PAHO representative and even the Government of Guyana itself as being undemocratic.
DEMTOCO’s objection to the Act as Parliament passed it rests on seven grounds. From the consumer perspective, those grounds are neither cohesive nor cogent enough to warrant delay in enforcing the Legislation. And in any case, if rectification is necessary, this could be achieved by Regulations, Licensing procedures and Interpretation.
As an illustration, we will consider at random some of the seven objections made by DEMTOCO and their relation to Regulation, Licensing and Interpretation:
DEMTOCO objects to the requirement that anyone who may wish to apply for a Government job should disclose whether he/she was employed in the Tobacco Industry within the last five years of the application.
DEMTOCO thinks that such a requirement could apply to persons who may have worked at supermarkets and gas stations which sold cigarettes. The general tenor of the Act refers to those persons who are applying for senior or important Government jobs and not to messengers or gardeners. And further, supermarkets and gas stations could never be considered branches of the Tobacco Industry. In any case, the Act in no way indicates that persons who had been employed in the Tobacco Industry would have been debarred or precluded from Government employment.
DEMTOCO thinks that the term “workplace” in the Act could be interpreted to include private homes if such homes employ a gardener or housekeeper. We consider this rather far-fetched, since it is unthinkable that any administrator or Court would regard a private home as a “workplace” simply because of the employment of domestic help.
DEMTOCO is of the view that the ban on smoking in bars, hotels and restaurants gravely discriminates against smokers. DEMTOCO advocates that the Legislation be amended to make provision for the establishment of OUTDOOR smoking areas in such restaurants, hotels and bars. This objection could be addressed during the licensing of such establishments by using similar criteria to the requirement that all restaurants must have restrooms with toilets. In any case, competition would force those which do not have outdoor smoking facilities to provide them.
DEMTOCO seems to be of opinion that the majority of cigarettes sold in Guyana are in single sticks, but there is no country in the world where the majority of cigarettes sold are by single sticks. DEMTOCO’s assertion is therefore open to question. The confining of sales to packets of 20 would certainly help in the curtailment in the use of cigarettes and it would be quite easy to identify those who sell single sticks in contravention of the Law.
All of DEMTOCO’s objections could be taken on board and satisfied when the Act comes into force. There is thus no need to suspend or delay implementation. It is preferable to begin making Guyana a healthier country than to delay this process to solve six or seven considerations of comparatively minor importance.
DEMTOCO has written H.E. President David Granger asking him to delay the implementation of the Tobacco Control Act until its seven objections are addressed. The Guyana Consumers Association, on its part, would have written the Hon. Minister of Public Health expressing its support for the quick implementation of the Act.
Before we end this article, we think it apposite to say a word on the “Tobacco Industry”. The Demerara Tobacco Co. (DEMTOCO) has been generally termed the “Tobacco Industry”. DEMTOCO at one time produced its cigarettes in Guyana and was even beginning to cultivate its tobacco on a plantation basis at Laluni. Some years ago, it closed its factory and abandoned its tobacco cultivation and became a mere distributor agent for its parent company’s cigarettes.

---

---