Tobacco control pits health ministers against finance ministers in many countries where the former is 'unlikely' to win, Nurul Islam Hasib hears at a global meet in Sin As tobacco control pits health ministers against finance ministers in many countries where the former is 'unlikely' to win, public health experts at a global conference suggest innovative approaches to unite them to fight against the tobacco industries.
Social movement through strong civil society coalition has been seen instrumental in this regard, they observed on Wednesday, the second day of the 15th World Conference on Tobacco or Health in Singapore.
"It's (tobacco control) a political talk especially when it pits the health minister against the finance minister," said professor K Srinath Reddy, president of Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI).
He said economic arguments were important but again it was part of a political battle.
"But you cannot expect health minister's victory over finance minister. Finance minister is politically stronger and senior in the cabinet. Health minister too needs the goodwill of the finance minister for other health programmes.
"So what we can expect is concord between them to move the finance minister to a neutral position from active opposition," Prof Reddy, the leading public health expert in India, said in a paper presented on Wednesday.
Dr Monika Arora, head of tobacco control of the public-private initiative PHFI, presented the paper on his behalf. Prof Reddy could not come because of his last moment engagement in a state programme.
Earlier, representatives from a number of countries including India, Kenya, Mexico, Russia and Indonesia said tobacco control activities do not progress in their countries due to interference by tobacco companies through the finance ministry.
A bdnews24.com investigation also found the finance ministry had shot down a move (Tougher tobacco law plan botched) by the health ministry to draft a tobacco stricter control act in Bangladesh.
Prof Reddy in his paper said even in India, the finance ministry was presently not favouring strong tobacco control measures, although health ministry wanted it.
"But still then we can win over the finance minister if the economic argument, development, disease burden, vulnerability and right to life argument of non-smokers and children are made.
"And if we counter tobacco industry's misleading arguments convincingly. Tobacco control will not lead to unemployment, need not hurt farmers, will not result in revenue loss, will not discourage foreign investment. [We need to] mobilise civil society to vigorously campaign against tobacco industry's fear and smear tactics."
He said while the finance minister was the main decision maker on taxation, others will exert influence on the overall tobacco control policy.
"We have to remember that donations to political parties also influence government attitudes. Policies are not made in pure isolation in closed cabinet rooms.
"Economists are also divided. So to whom finance minister will listen to?" He added the civil society coalition needed to be expanded taking all relevant stakeholders on board.
Prof Reddy said in short terms raised taxes will raise revenues. "As consumption goes down, non or ex-smokers will spend their disposable incomes on other goods which are also taxable.
"Total economic tally of tobacco related health, environmental and social costs will amount to an economic and developmental cost that exceeds any loss of tobacco revenues," he argued
Bangladesh data shows that tobacco-related healthcare costs alone exceed tobacco revenues.
Even then, he said, if the finance minister listened to the industry, 'get the non-tobacco segments of the industry to understand why tobacco control was important for them too'.
"Tobacco related disease leads to productivity losses among their employees and workforce in general; tobacco related expenditure drains disposable incomes which can be used for buying other products which they make.
"Show that tobacco industry is a law breaker. It evades excise tax and encourages illicit trade.
"And finally give the argument that tobacco control is the integral part of sustainable development."
John R Seffrin, chief executive officer of American Cancer Society, appreciated the idea and said tobacco taxation was the 'best buy' for the economy and for saving lives.
He said tax can be a major threat of tobacco companies' existence in a country.
"Because of increased tobacco taxes, cancer survival rate has increased in US, decreasing mortality rate."
"Raising tobacco taxes saves lives by encouraging smokers to quit, reduce the number of cigarettes smoked and prevent potential users from ever starting," he said.
According to American Cancer Society, 10 percent increase in cigarette prices reduces demand by 2 to 6 percent in high-income countries and by 2 to 8 percent in low and middle-income countries.
Youth, minorities, and low-income smokers are two to three times more likely than other smokers to quit or go smokeless in response to price increases, it said.gapore.
"It's (tobacco control) a political talk especially when it pits the health minister against the finance minister," said professor K Srinath Reddy, president of Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI).
He said economic arguments were important but again it was part of a political battle.
"But you cannot expect health minister's victory over finance minister. Finance minister is politically stronger and senior in the cabinet. Health minister too needs the goodwill of the finance minister for other health programmes.
"So what we can expect is concord between them to move the finance minister to a neutral position from active opposition," Prof Reddy, the leading public health expert in India, said in a paper presented on Wednesday.
Dr Monika Arora, head of tobacco control of the public-private initiative PHFI, presented the paper on his behalf. Prof Reddy could not come because of his last moment engagement in a state programme.
Earlier, representatives from a number of countries including India, Kenya, Mexico, Russia and Indonesia said tobacco control activities do not progress in their countries due to interference by tobacco companies through the finance ministry.
A bdnews24.com investigation also found the finance ministry had shot down a move (Tougher tobacco law plan botched) by the health ministry to draft a tobacco stricter control act in Bangladesh.
Prof Reddy in his paper said even in India, the finance ministry was presently not favouring strong tobacco control measures, although health ministry wanted it.
"But still then we can win over the finance minister if the economic argument, development, disease burden, vulnerability and right to life argument of non-smokers and children are made.
"And if we counter tobacco industry's misleading arguments convincingly. Tobacco control will not lead to unemployment, need not hurt farmers, will not result in revenue loss, will not discourage foreign investment. [We need to] mobilise civil society to vigorously campaign against tobacco industry's fear and smear tactics."
He said while the finance minister was the main decision maker on taxation, others will exert influence on the overall tobacco control policy.
"We have to remember that donations to political parties also influence government attitudes. Policies are not made in pure isolation in closed cabinet rooms.
"Economists are also divided. So to whom finance minister will listen to?" He added the civil society coalition needed to be expanded taking all relevant stakeholders on board.
Prof Reddy said in short terms raised taxes will raise revenues. "As consumption goes down, non or ex-smokers will spend their disposable incomes on other goods which are also taxable.
"Total economic tally of tobacco related health, environmental and social costs will amount to an economic and developmental cost that exceeds any loss of tobacco revenues," he argued
Bangladesh data shows that tobacco-related healthcare costs alone exceed tobacco revenues.
Even then, he said, if the finance minister listened to the industry, 'get the non-tobacco segments of the industry to understand why tobacco control was important for them too'.
"Tobacco related disease leads to productivity losses among their employees and workforce in general; tobacco related expenditure drains disposable incomes which can be used for buying other products which they make.
"Show that tobacco industry is a law breaker. It evades excise tax and encourages illicit trade.
"And finally give the argument that tobacco control is the integral part of sustainable development."
John R Seffrin, chief executive officer of American Cancer Society, appreciated the idea and said tobacco taxation was the 'best buy' for the economy and for saving lives.
He said tax can be a major threat of tobacco companies' existence in a country.
"Because of increased tobacco taxes, cancer survival rate has increased in US, decreasing mortality rate."
"Raising tobacco taxes saves lives by encouraging smokers to quit, reduce the number of cigarettes smoked and prevent potential users from ever starting," he said.
According to American Cancer Society, 10 percent increase in cigarette prices reduces demand by 2 to 6 percent in high-income countries and by 2 to 8 percent in low and middle-income countries.
Youth, minorities, and low-income smokers are two to three times more likely than other smokers to quit or go smokeless in response to price increases, it said.gapore.
.jpg)