Preventing Tobacco Pack Advertising - The Australian Experience

1. Preventing tobacco pack advertising - the Australian experience Drab, brown-green and unseen Anne Jones, ASH Australia ASPIRE seminar, Wellington NZ 29/9/11

2. Overview • Context • Out of sight at point of sale (PoS) • Where are we at? • How did we get there? • TI opposition and counter actions • Plain packaging – brief update • Lessons learned • Challenges and opportunities • Next steps?

3. 1. Context Global 1. WHO FCTC has been ratified by Australia, NZ and Pacific region with legal obligations to – • comprehensively ban all TAPS (Article 13) • protect health policies from TI interference (Art 5.3) • implement large, effective health warnings (Art 11) 2. Political Declaration at UN Meeting this month on Non-Communicable Diseases commits governments to accelerate the FCTC 3. Expectations that we can lead the way

4. Context Australia • Federal + 8 states/territories with Tobacco Action Plans • Agreed national target of 10% or less smoking by 2018 • National Preventive Health Agency formed by Govt to prevent diseases, act on recommendations of roadmap report www.anpha.gov.au/internet/anpha/publishing.nsf/Content/home-1 • $50m pa combined investment in tobacco control • Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Health P’ship agreements include targets to reduce smoking • 16.6% (14+) smoke at least weekly, 15.1% daily (AIHW ‘10) • 7.3% (110,000) secondary school children smoke at least weekly (ASSAD ‘08)

5. 2. Out of sight at point of sale How did we get from this….. to this?

6. Where are we at? Out of sight laws as of 9/11 Best to worst: ACT General retailers 31 Dec 2009; specialist tobacconists 31 Dec 2010 NT All retailers 2 Jan 2011 Tas General retailers 1 Feb 2011; specialist exemptions to end 2012 NSW Large retailers from 1 Jan 2010; smaller 1 Jul 2010; specialists by 1 Jul 2013 WA General retailers 22 Sept 2010; specialists exempt with conditions (under review) SA General retailers 1 Jan 2012; specialist exemptions to end Dec 2014 Vic General retailers 1 Jan 2011; specialists exempt Qld Bill introduced, plan to cover all from Dec 2011? (under review)

7. How it looks now Behind the counter, above the counter, under the counter – and still front-of-shop

8. Out of sight duty free tobacco for both incoming and outgoing sales

9. Price tickets and price boards Source: Vicki Tumini, Legal Policy Adviser, QUIT Victoria

10. Pitfalls of price boards NSW legislation allows price tickets and boards www.health.nsw.gov.au/resources/publichealth/healthpromotion/tobacco/pdf/display_factsheet_5_final.pdf Price boards are very visible in public place - used as advert and to promote price discounting $17 (25), $30 (50) Best option: Price tickets only or with price list on demand with no multiple pack discounts listed

11. Health warnings at PoS • Prescribed for display (size, position) • Call the quit line message, health warning • Best option - full colour graphic warning or nothing including ban on industry age warnings • Paper by Ron Borland soon to be published

12. Tobacco retailer registration – along with dogs, cars and alcohol sellers • 35,000 retail outlets • Most registered for fee and can be deregistered for selling to children • Publicly accessible • Best option: registration scheme with large fee to cover full costs of compliance monitoring, responsible selling training

13. How did we get there? Developed united position on PoS, gaps, advocacy plan Tobacco Issues Committee developed joint position statement for policy makers, MPs, media, public • Recommended elimination of all forms of advertising in retail outlets – with limited display not an alternative • Collaborated on overall plan, advocacy tools • Partners engaged in advocacy with submissions, media, MP meetings • www.cancer.org.au/File/PolicyPublications/Position_statements/PS-Display_advertising-April2005.pdf

14. Created a strong “Protecting Children from Tobacco coalition” Formed and co-ordinated by ASH, the coalition of 42 partners endorses: submissions to governments, media releases, letter campaigns, advocacy kits Action on Smoking and Health Australia; Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia; Association for the Wellbeing of Children in Healthcare; Association of Children's Welfare Agencies;Australian and New Zealand Head and Neck Cancer Society; Australian & New Zealand Society of Respiratory Science;Australian Childhood Foundation; Australian Council of Social Service; Australian Council of State School Organisations; Australian Council on Smoking and Health; Australian Education Union; Australian Foster Care Association; Australian General Practice Network; Australian Lions Drug Awareness Foundation; Australian Lung Foundation;   Australian Medical Association (NSW); Australian National Council on Drugs; Australian Parents' Council; Australian Youth Affairs Coalition; Baptist Union of NSW; Cancer Council Australia; Catholic Health Australia; Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Tobacco Control; Children’s Cancer Institute Australia for Medical Research; Cystic Fibrosis Australia; Early Childhood Australia; Families Australia; Heart Foundation; Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect; National Asthma Council Australia; NSW Council of Churches; Public Affairs Commission of the Anglican Church of Australia; Public Health Association of Australia; Royal Australasian College of Physicians; Royal Australian College of General Practitioners; Rural Doctors Association of Australia; Save the Children Australia; SIDS and Kids; Smarter than Smoking; Telethon Institute for Child Health Research; Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand

15. Presented and publicised research evidence • Retail displays predispose children towards smoking, make them more likely to begin and continue smoking • Tobacco display a powerful form of advertising – TI sees aim as to “stimulate trial purchase and re-purchase” (used ad experts’ analysis) • Shop display undermines attempts to quit smoking by tempting would-be quitters into “impulse buying” • Putting tobacco totally out of sight in shops a worldwide trend • Retail displays of tobacco may encourage break-and-enter theft; putting tobacco out of sight may discourage • Strong public support for out of sight policy • Most smokers don’t need displays to choose brand • Any loss of revenue from tobacco sales countered short-term by transfer of spending to other consumables; far outweighed long-term by health savings from reduced smoking www.ashaust.org.au/lv4/POSdisplay.doc

16. Monitored and countered retailer myths Myth #1Putting tobacco out of sight in shops will hurt retailers by costing “thousands” of dollars in new shelving - jobs will be lost Myth #2Ending display is unnecessary, no evidence to show tobacco displays increase youth smoking or sales Myth #3 Display is “not the same as advertising” Myth #4Tobacco is “legal” and retailers have right to sell legal products Myth #5Restricting display will interfere with brand choice Myth #6Tobacco is good for the economy – earning $9.3 b each year Myth #7Putting tobacco out of sight will endanger staff by making them turn or bend down in positions making them vulnerable to theft Myth #8Display bans would hide graphic packet health warnings Myth #9Display bans are “paternalistic”, would diminish liberty Myth #10Out of sight tobacco will increase illicit trade and smuggling These myths busted in ASH fact sheets and kits at www.ashaust.org.au/lv4/POSretailclaims.doc

17. Engaged with opinion leaders, policy and decision makers Advocacy tools • Framed our issue as protecting children • Collaborated with partners on key messages • Promoted the evidence • Mobilised coalition to endorse govt submissions, media releases • Lobbied MPs with letter campaigns, advocacy kits and e-campaign • Raised publicawareness with earned media releases • Developed retailer support by using shareholder activism with major retailers Woolworths and Coles • Promoted public opinion surveys supporting tougher controls • Exploited the domino effect starting with most winnable state • Countered the TI myths

18. 3. TI opposition and counter actions “There is a fundamental and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry’s interests and public health policy interests” WHO FCTC Article 5.3

19. TI tactics 1. Reinventing the industry’s image • Engaged in CSR programs • Cast tobacco control as ‘nanny state’, anti-business 2. Influencing friends in high places • Schmoozed political parties with donations • Used prominent people, recruited former political advisers, hid behind high profile lobbyists 3. “Astro-turfing” – using third parties • Retailer Alliance funded by TI opposed govt with $20m mass media campaign • Attacked health policies using think tanks and consultants (e.g. IPA, Patrick Basham)

20. TI tactics 4. Intimidation and harassment • Economic threats over job losses • Deloittes report commissioned by TI retailer front group claimed compliance costs of $10,000 /retailer • Legal threats, flooding Health Departments with FOIs 5. Claiming it “won’t work” • Ignored decades of research, argued that if it hadn’t been done elsewhere there was “no evidence” • Tried to argue policies wouldn’t reduce smoking, but would still have ruinous costs for to retailers 6. Claiming “failure” of TC policies in other countries • Lobbied MPs with false claims that out-of-sight had “failed” in Canada; then using out-of-sight to claim “no need” for plain packs

21. TI tactics 7. TAPS – to hook and hide • Exemptions used to “push to the pushers” with incentives • New media exploited • “Our silent salesman” gets frequent makeovers…. ASH “PackWatch” at www.ashaust.org.au/lv4/MarketingPloys.htm

22. Systematic monitoringof TI tactics Monthly ASH online TI tactics charts - from Aug 2010 RH “Counter-actions” column deleted or edited for online

23. TI tactics guide ASH Australia online guide (2010) A guide to identifying, monitoring and preventing tobacco industry interference in public health www.ashaust.org.au/pdfs/TItacticsGuide.pdf

24. 4. Plain packaging – a brief update • Two bills introduced in May 2011 after long public consultation, three inquires • Passed Lower House Aug 2011, Senate expected to pass after 11th October when resumes • Law due to take effect January 1 – July 1, 2012 • Trans-Tasman agreement exemption for 12 months

25. Developed united position on plain packs, gaps and advocacy plan National Tobacco Issues Committee developed public position statement including Key messages What plain pack laws must cover Background – • Limited regulation of pack design • Brand image and personality communicated through pack • Packs target market segments, new smokers and brand switching • Deceptive use of colour, imagery and undermining of warnings • Trademarks and trade agreements Expert review of evidence launched with “Plain facts” websitewww.cancervic.org.au/plainfacts/default.asp

26. Celebrated champion Health Minister’s reform agenda vs chronic diseases • National Preventative Health Taskforce formed by Minister - in 2009 recommended plain packs as one of 11 key tobacco action areas • April 2010: Government leaders announced plain packs plus immediate 25% tax increase • 31 May 2011: Minister Roxon receives WHO, Nigel Grey awards; National TC Scoreboard • Minister commits $700,000 to WHO for global tobacco fight

27. Countered the TI’s “plain pack attack” Front groups: Alliance of Australian Retailers media campaign in election period(“It won’t work, so why do it?”) – funded by big 3 “Nanny State”:Imperial’s $20m carpet-bombing media campaign New micro websites: www.ideservetobeheard.com.au(PML), www.nonannystate.com.au(Imperial),www.plainpack.com (BATA) Smoker mobilisation: with pack inserts (PML) Legal challenges: - FOI appeals to try to get old govt legal advice (PML, BATA) - PML vsGovt claiming plain packs would infringe obscure Aust-Hong Kong bilateral trade treaty – - Threatening “billions of $” legal cost to taxpayer Economic “bull and bullying”: Deloitte reports exaggerate illicit trade, seeking delays - timeframe “unrealistic”, threatening price war

28. 5. Lessons learned • Collaborating with partners creates united front on policies, messages • Selling the evidence plays big part in winning policy/political support • Mobilising and supporting Champions helps promote the messages - in media, and inside and outside government • Exposing weak links with “Tobacco Control Scoreboard” on WNT Day - creates a competitive environment to improve • Monitor and counter TI tactics – strategically, publicly and frequently with Tobacco Watch, Pack Watch and monthly reports • Building stronger coalitions beyond health strengthens the case • Polling public opinion is worth the investment as ahead of govt • Avoid exemptions and incremental phases - harmful, messy, confusing, and not a level playing field

29. 6. Challenges and opportunities 1. Exemptions, long phase out, no end • Avoid at all costs as harmful, messy, and unfair 2. Winning political support • Preventive Health strategy? Situational analysis comparing NZ lagging behind Australia? Role of Trans-Tasman Agreement? 3. Preventing TI interference • Need for engagement to be limited, transparent • Scoping paper on FCTC Article 5.3 and action plan

30. Challenges and opportunities 4. Countering the “no evidence” claim • Collaborating on research agenda i.e. OCEANIA, WCTOH, tobacco-free futures • CINSW Tobacco Promotion Working Group (re impact of out-of-sight, plain packs) 5. Tobacco price discounting – the latest tactic • Price tickets without public price boards best option or boards on demand to limit price promotions and discounts.

31. 7. Next steps? Comprehensive TC plan needs to: • Prevent TI interference • Best practice (no exemptions) • Strengthen capacity, coalitions • Build in tobacco-free future goals • Evaluate what we have done to improve what we do next • More ANZAC spirit!

32. Acknowledgments Anne Jones OAM Chief Executive, ASH Australia Stafford Sanders Communications Officer, ASH AustraliaCo-ordinator, Protecting Children from Tobacco coalition Thanks to ASH interns and volunteers www.ashaust.org.au