Big tobacco trying its best to sidetrack new law

Philip Morris's attempt to steer the forthcoming tobacco control legislation away from its principal goals is a masterpiece of deception. It delivers carefully crafted illusory messages pretending to support the government's action. They portray Philip Morris as a good corporate citizen, anxious to protect children from the lethal effects of its products.

Meanwhile, it expends huge resources to neutralise tobacco control legislation worldwide.

The company argues that retailers should be targeted for selling cigarettes to youth, saying nothing about its own efforts to glamourise its product. It does not say that its shareholders need young people to become nicotine addicts to replace those who quit, die, or are too sick to smoke. The function of its youth-smoking prevention programme is, in its words, to 'Maintain and proactively protect our ability to advertise, promote and market our products via a juvenile initiative'. The programme's success would be 'a reduction in legislation which restricts or bans our marketing activities' and 'passage of legislation favourable to the industry'.

Philip Morris will attempt to circumvent the new law by brand- stretching or trademark diversification, to market brands to young people, if our law drafting is weak. For example, it says: 'As for trademark diversification, the objectives are to capitalise on Marlboro trademark strengths through Marlboro Classics and the setting up of a new diversification property related to Marlboro's adventure/sports image. Our objective is to expand Marlboro Classic's presence on television, print, outdoor and radio through commercials.'

We may hope that Hong Kong law will prevent such enterprises, but the Health, Welfare and Food Bureau's brief to Legco on May 6 may be seriously flawed with respect to preventing brand diversification. Canadian courts have decreed that tobacco companies may use brand names on tobacco products, or other goods, but not both. The spectre of ground to rooftop hoardings, advertising non-tobacco products with tobacco brand names, may once again become reality if tobacco companies are allowed sufficient scope.

In a media conference on May 9, Philip Morris complained about the space to be occupied by new packet health warnings and short grace periods before implementation of legislation. Grace periods have value as important windows to intensify tobacco promotion in areas destined to be restricted. The Philip Morris media call is clear evidence that the proposed graphic and pictorial health warnings and other measures will help to slow the inexorable march of Marlboro Man.