New Tobacco Products

HL Deb 26 November 1986 vol 482 cc621-32

8.15 p.m.

Lord Hunter of Newington

rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will introduce legislation to ban the manufacture or sale of new tobacco products.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I rise to put the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. It is now well known that the avoidance of smoking tobacco products would reduce the mortality from all cancers by about one-third; particularly the avoidance of cancers of the mouth, throat and lungs but also other cancers, too.

One question is whether it is possible to mitigate the worst effects of smoking by using tobacco other than cigarettes. Lifelong pipe and cigar smokers have mortality rates which are close to those of non-smokers; in fact, the worst effect seems to be on their companions who may well find the smoke offensive.

The modern cigarette—the result of over 20 years of collaboration between successive governments and the tobacco industry—is also less liable to produce some diseases. In these cigarettes there is less than half the tar and nicotine than in the cigarettes of 20 years ago. The proof that this policy has been effective in some respects is that there has been a reduction of cancer of the lung in men and women, despite little change in the total consumption of cigarettes. This government policy has resulted in a situation where the tar and nicotine levels of tobacco in cigarettes is controlled. Not coffee only are these cigarettes less damaging to health but I suspect that they are less addictive because of the reduction of tar and nicotine. The combination of this, together with the effective campaign of the Health Education Council, has transformed the situation in the United Kingdom. One good example is travelling in the Underground; a situation quite impossible 10 years ago. This programme must continue—the control of the contents of cigarettes and the campaign against smoking.

It is against that background that attempts have recently been made to introduce tobacco products which consist of finely cut moist tobacco (or snuff) in small sachets intended to be held between the cheek and the gum. This practice, which is well established in the United States—and has been for years—and certain Scandinavian countries, is known as "snuff-dipping".

There is firm evidence that the oral use of smokeless tobacco of this type is carcinogenic to humans. This view has been endorsed by a number of expert bodies including the International Agency for Research on Cancer and, in this country, the Government's Advisory Committee on Carcinogenicity. The evidence is strongest for cancer of the mouth; the tumours often arising where the tobacco has been placed in the mouth. The excess risk of cancer may be nearly fiftyfold among long-term snuff users and there is a high morbidity and mortality rate. Treatment very often involves mutilating surgery. Most important of all, there are indications that among the young sucking tobacco in this way may create a dependence on nicotine and thus lead to the dangerous habit of cigarette smoking and possibly drug taking.

The Government have done two things because of the health risk. The first is a voluntary agreement controlling how the product can be advertised, promoted and sold. This agreement will run until the end of 1987. The Government have also actively supported the Protection of Children (Tobacco) Act 1986 making it illegal for any tobacco product, including Skoal Bandits, to be sold to children under 16 years of age.

One remarkable aspect of this story introducing, as the product does, a further risk from tobacco, is that the manufacturers are in receipt of a Government grant in respect of a factory set up in East Kilbride to manufacture the product. Apparently, the product automatically qualified for assistance under the Industrial Development Act 1982. Regional assistance totalling about £1 million could be paid out if the project is completed as planned.

We require to have some explanation from the Government about this matter. These products have been banned from sale in the Republic of Ireland, and other countries, notably Japan and New Zealand, are reported to be taking similar measures. In the United States legislation has been passed requiring smokeless tobacco products to carry health warnings. There must be great concern in this House about the opening up of a new market for tobacco products which is subsidised substantially by the Government. The whole of the marketing of this product has been slanted toward young people—and we know what happened in the United States, where there was the addition of flavourings and sweetness which led to the rapid spread of this habit among young people. The United States Surgeon General's report indicates that 16 per cent. of all males between the ages of 12 and 25 have used some form of oral tobacco. In this country the pharmacists have decided not to sell this product in their shops, and I am told that the Independent Broadcasting Authority will not advertise it.

I believe that this House should make its views on this matter very clear. The Government should have further discussions with the manufacturers, not to negotiate warnings but to prohibit the sale of oral tobacco products in this country. The burden of responsibility and guilt following on the permissive society is already great. Let us not add to it. My Lords, I now put the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

8.22 p.m.

Lord Pitt of Hampstead

My Lords, I am sure that we are all grateful to my noble friend Lord Hunter of Newington for asking this Question. I call him my noble friend, even though we do not take the same Whip, because we went through medical school together and qualified on the same day. It is very appropriate that we should be considering this Unstarred Question in this House tonight because the Government are drifting into a situation which will cause problems for the country. We have been trying to obtain a ban on the advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products, which the Government have opposed. They have insisted that the voluntary agreement which entails gradually reducing the levels of tar and nicotine, having health warnings more prominently displayed, and so on, will suffice.

As your Lordships know, I do not agree with that position, but that is the situation at present. However, now the Government are allowing a new tobacco product—smokeless tobacco—to be manufactured and sold in this country and are actually subsidising its manufacture. Allowing that we do not want to be too draconian in our dealings with present users and in view of the current situation in regard to cigarettes and other smoking tobacco, if we are to control this really dangerous drug we must not allow the market for it to expand further; and permitting smokeless tobacco in this way is doing just that.

The noble Lord, Lord Hunter, has already explained about Skoal Bandits and their dangerous consequences. Their attraction for children is also a point to be noted. Since we have been campaigning against cigarettes, it is being said to children that taking this sweet is not so harmful as smoking. It is not difficult to understand how easily they will accept such a suggestion that this form of tobacco is less harmful than cigarette smoking. However, not only is it more harmful in some immediate respects, such as causing cancer of the mouth, but because of the level of nicotine in this smokeless tobacco it is probably a way of leading them toward the other harmful drug of cigarettes. Therefore I hope that the Minister will take on board this request that the manufacture and sale of these new tobacco products should be banned.

When we talk about new tobacco products we are speaking about smokeless tobacco and in particular the new product that we now have in this country, which is called the Skoal Bandit. We are late off the mark in the sense that the Government have already given a grant and the product is already being manufactured, but the proper course for us to take now is to find a way of stopping its sale and of bringing manufacture to a halt. I hope that the Government will take this matter on board.

We are now in a new Session of Parliament. In the last Session, we passed a Bill which banned the sale of these products to children. We want to extend that measure to adults. I believe that that is what is required at this stage. There should not be an extension in this country of the use of such a dangerous substance as tobacco, in particular in a form which offers a temptation to children to start using the product. I hope that when the Minister replies she will be able to tell the House that the Government are aware of the difficulties and the worries felt by many of us, and that they will give serious consideration to banning the manufacture and sale of this product.

8.28 p.m.

Lord Winstanley

My Lords, I think that there was a time when the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, of Newington, had a professional duty, perhaps even a statutory duty, to advise government on matters such as this. At that time I sometimes regretted that the noble Lord's advice was not heeded as carefully as some of us thought it ought to be. It therefore follows that I very much hope that your Lordships will heed the advice of the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, on this occasion because I think it is very good advice indeed.

The noble Lord has focused rather narrowly on one particular product, and rightly so. I think that everything he said about that product is wholly right and I hope that the Government will follow the advice that he has given. However, I hope that the noble Lord will forgive me if I widen this discussion a little to look at implications within his Question which perhaps he did not wholly intend; and I should also like to look at some of the principles underlying this discussion.

When I say "implications which perhaps he did not wholly intend", I look at his Question and see that it says: "legislation to ban the manufacture or sale of new tobacco products". The noble Lord has made clear that he was referring to one particular product, and I agree with him wholly about that; but the noble Lord also reminded us of the immense benefits which have arisen from the introduction of lower tar cigarettes.

At the time that they were first introduced and there was a concerted effort to reduce the tar content in cigarette products, I remember very well that ASH and certain other people who pursue smokers with Cromwellian zeal objected very strongly because they felt that it was bad to make smoking safer. If you once made smoking safer you were somehow rather obliquely encouraging people to continue to smoke. The noble Lord, Lord Hunter, welcomed that trend, just as he welcomed certain other products which may assist people not to do with tobacco the more dangerous things that many of them do.

When I mentioned the principles underlining the matter I was referring to one principle: that we are all convinced that we should do what we can to eliminate the use of tobacco. We should, however, temper our enthusiasm with a little moderation lest, again with our Cromwellian zeal, we defeat our own ends. There is no doubt about the danger of smoking to those who smoke. However, I am not as convinced by the evidence of the danger of what is called passive smoking to those who do not smoke. I think that much of the research has been demonstrated not to have been soundly based, and some has been shown to be bogus. Let us not pursue such red herrings. I accept that to non-smokers smoking is offensive and that, where possible, they should be protected from the nuisance—and it is a nuisance—of other people smoking.

We are thinking about three groups of people. The groups I have in mind are, first, those who have never smoked tobacco. We should be primarily concerned with those people. Secondly, there are those people who are already addicted. Smoking is an addiction to nicotine. The noble Lord, Lord Hunter, may argue with me about whether it is a physiological addiction, but I believe it is. I am prepared to argue that point with him on another occasion. I do not think that we need to do so now. There are still people who smoke and intend to go on smoking until, sooner or later, they die—later, as they hope. There is nothing we can do about those people; nor is it right that we should try to do anything about them.

Those are the three groups. Let me return to them. First, there are those who have never started. That is where the real hope lies. Bearing in mind that this is an addiction, if we could stop people smoking we should have done a great deal to solve some of the problems with which we are faced.

We have not been outstandingly successful in our efforts. A great deal of money has been spent on propaganda, but there is evidence that it has not got through to young people. About four years ago, I carried out some research on young people which I have already reported to your Lordships' House. I found that only one in ten new entrants to universities smoked, or did at that time. My research showed that nine out of ten new entrants to shop floor jobs in industry were established smokers. That showed clearly that we were not getting through to certain groups. That is something we should try to do.

Let me turn for a moment to those who are addicted to smoking, but not to those who want to carry on and have decided that they are not going to listen. I say to people who have never experienced addiction that giving up is not as easy as some people think. Some of those people need assistance. I think that any assistance that can be given should be provided. There is a high relapse rate, as we have all found in our medical work helping people to stop smoking. One is never cured once addicted.

A noble Lord much respected in your Lordships' House, the late Lord Platt, a former professor of medicine at my university and a former president of the Royal College of Physicians, will be remembered as a passionate non-smoker. He had of course once been a smoker. By the time that he became professor of medicine at the University of Manchester he would not allow anyone on his wards whose pockets had ever been contaminated by any kind of smoking implement. He became a confirmed and proselytising non-smoker. Before his death his wife told me, "Robert wakes up every few weeks weeping inconsolably after a dreadful nightmare in which he has dreamt that he has been smoking". So deep does the guilt go! It is important to remember that it is a problem and that therefore people need help.

I remember an occasion when an effort was made to help some of those people by developing new smoking materials. One, NSM, was produced by ICI. Courtaulds manufactured another product. An enormous amount of money was spent. Some of those new preparations were found to be helpful. Doctor Charles Fletcher, a member of the Royal College of Physicians' committee on smoking, a passionate anti-smoker, stated publicly that he had found new smoking material helpful in assisting bronchitics in his hospital wards to stop smoking. The lobby opposed it because it was a new kind of smoking material.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

My Lords, I am obliged to the noble Lord for giving way. That is a most interesting point. Is it not also a fact that the Chancellor taxed that new smoking material at the same rate as tobacco, and therefore discouraged people from using the new smoking material, thus injuring the health lobby?

Lord Winstanley

My Lords, the noble Lord is correct. There were other obstacles, because the Independent Broadcasting Authority would not allow the companies to advertise it, nor would anyone else allow them to advertise it as a means of stopping smoking. There were many obstacles. I was merely making the point that smokers who want to give up sometimes need help. Some have found snuff helpful. I do not think that the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, wants snuff banned.

Let us remember that we have in our community established snuff takers who have been led to believe that snuff is safe. I notice that evidence is coming forward which suggests that it is not safe. I remember a distinguished physician in your Lordships' House years ago saying that he knew of no danger or damage caused by snuff save for a little unpleasant discolouring of the nostrils. It would be wrong to introduce legislation to ban established snuff takers from taking snuff. We should bear in mind that some of these new tobacco products have occasionally helped people who are genuinely anxious to stop smoking.

A nicotine impregnated chewing gum called Nicorette came onto the market. It was helpful to some people, but it has largely disappeared because we were unable to prescribe it under the National Health Service. I knew a young Swedish doctor who had never smoked in her life and who had done some research on that preparation. She became addicted to Nicorette. She woke in the morning and reached for her handbag, groping for her piece of nicotine impregnated chewing gum before she could get going. That underlines the point that all these products are addictive.

I am merely underlining the general point made by the noble Lord, Lord Hunter. We have a new product which provides an attraction to young people who are not smokers but who may become smokers through using it. They are also exposed to danger merely by using a product which has been demonstrated beyond all doubt to have clear dangers and which should therefore be removed from sale and banned from being manufactured. I wholly agree with the noble Lord in that, but let us temper our enthusiasm with a little caution, and let us occasionally remember that those smokers who want to stop smoking would like some help. Some of that help sometimes comes in the form of other tobacco products such as snuff. I hope that I am right in assuming that the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, does not wish us to ban all such things and was referring to the item which he particularised in his speech.

8.39 p.m.

Lady Kinloss

My Lords, my noble friend Lord Hunter of Newington should be thanked for asking this most important Question this evening. My research has led me from Mr. Cove, the oral surgeon of York District Hospital, who was most helpful but who so far had not come across the product in York. He was interested and suggested that I contact Professor Hume of the dental school and hospital of the University of Leeds. They of course both knew about the Skoal Bandit and were concerned about its sale, particularly to young people.

Professor Hume told me of Professor Kenneth Stephen, who is professor of the department of oral medicine and pathology at the University of Glasgow Dental School. I should like also to thank Mrs. Hillhouse of ASH Scotland for her interest and help.

Professor Stephen attended in January this year the United States national institutes of health consensus development conference on health implications of smokeless tobacco use. Summing up its conclusions in the British Dental Journal, he writes, among other things: The presence of lead in smokeless tobacco may pose a special risk for the developing foetus". That is only one of many troubles that can be caused, most of them to the mouth. Professor Stephen was worried about the possible increase in the sale of Skoal Bandits. As the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, has already mentioned, there is a factory in East Kilbride manufacturing Skoal Bandits. It is the company of US Tobacco International Incorporated. I understand that the Government have given a grant to the factory. Can the Minister say whether they are going to give further financial help?

The possible attraction of these things to young children is that they are not obvious to people; there is no smoke from them; and they are not subject to Customs and Excise duty, which raises the price of ordinary tobacco products. This means that they are more within the pocket of children and young people. There is also the "macho" image of their use by sportsmen. With cigarettes, there is normally a break at night while people are sleeping. However, in the United States—I believe in California—children and young people are known to go to bed with as many as four of these tobacco bags, as they are sometimes called, in their mouths at once. This means that there is little or no break in the intake of nicotine.

Skoal Bandits must be banned here. At the moment, I understand, they are not selling very well. I should like to ask the Minister whether the Government will bring in immediate legislation to ban the sale, production and promotion of these products. Not only are they a possible cause of cancer of the mouth, but nicotine is also a powerful drug, and snuff dipping, as the practice is known, represents a form of drug dependence. Is the Minister aware that other forms of smokeless tobacco are manufactured in the United States and, I believe, elsewhere, but not yet here? Some arc called Skoal Cogenhagen or Skoal Longcut, and there is a new one, Skoal Straight. Can the Minister say that if there was a request to manufacture them here the Government would refuse to grant a licence?

Various universities and colleges in the United Kingdom have been approached by promoters of Skoal Bandits. At Strathclyde University, there is what is known as the freshers' fair at the beginning of the academic year, at which student bodies have stalls to tell new students of clubs and societies of interest in the university. US Tobacco made an approach with a request for such a stall. The students checked with the local health education project and subsequently refused permission. I believe that this kind of advertising is not now being promoted. In Fife, a parents' group begged retailers not to stock Skoal Bandits. Most complied with the request. The more pressure that is put by the public upon retailers not to stock them, the better.

I understand that in Hong Kong all new tobacco products are now banned. I am told that of all deaths from cancer in India, the oral form represents the largest proportion. This is thought to be due to tobacco chewing and betel nut chewing, as some of the betel nuts have powdered tobacco in them.

In the Second Reading debate on the Protection of Children (Tobacco) Bill on 2nd June 1986, the noble Baroness, Lady Hooper, replying for the Government, said at col. 692 of Hansard: As part of the discussions, the manufacturers have agreed to the inclusion of health warnings on their packs and advertising material". Can the Minister say whether these warnings are now in use?

This is a very sad subject. I hope that the Government will do all they can to ban the sale of smokeless tobacco products immediately, even if legislation should be necessary.

8.44 p.m.

Lord Prys-Davies

My Lords, we are indebted to the noble Lord, Lord Hunter of Newington, for focusing attention on new tobacco products and what should be the state's response thereto. Usually, we have to continue to live with long established habits shared by millions of people even though those habits are known to be pregnant with risk to the health of the individual. But that is, of course, no reason why a country should allow or encourage the growth of new habits which will create conditions for addiction to grow ever wider and wider and which will handicap the generation of tomorrow. It is against that setting and with particular reference to this remarkable new product, Skoal Bandits, that the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, argues the case for government action to prohibit the manufacture and sale of new tobacco products.

The noble Lord has described this product, Skoal Bandits. "Bandit" is a name almost calculated to have a strong appeal to the young. We are told that it is a product that people suck as an alternative way of getting the stimulating effect of nicotine. With the great authority that he commands in these matters, the noble Lord has warned that the clinical evidence demonstrates that this particular tobacco product significantly increases the risk of cancer of the mouth and possibly premature death for many of its dependents.

We have been reminded that government departments of health in Great Britain have warned against the health risks involved. I would remind your Lordships of the common sense of the people of East Kilbride, where this product is manufactured in a factory set up with assistance from the public purse. Those people, too, have called for the Government to ban the production and promotion of this product.

I should like to dwell for a moment or two on this amazing experience in East Kilbride. I understand that 1 million of public money has been committed to the East Kilbride factory. Surely, the public purse should be seen to serve the public interest. In the light of the East Kilbride experience, do the Government contemplate drawing a line somewhere to stop the grant being paid in similar circumstances in the future? Will there be closer collaboration between the Tobacco Research Council, the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Health and Social Security before financial assistance is given for the manufacture of a new tobacco product?

I return now to the question that the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, has addressed to the Government. Should new tobacco products be banned in Great Britain? In the specific situation presented by Skoal Bandits, it appears that we are in a unique position. On the one hand, there is clear evidence that the product creates significant health risks. On the other hand, there is no social justification of which I am aware for its continued manufacture and sale. Unless the contract between the Scottish Development Agency and the manufacturing company contains special provisions, there is no apparent financial or economic justification for its continued manufacture and sale.

There is therefore a powerful case for banning the manufacture and sale of this product in the United Kingdom. Like the noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, I do not believe that we can proceed from this specific situation to assert generally that the Government must ban the manufacture and sale of all new tobacco products. However, in fairness to the noble Lord, Lord Hunter, it appeared to me that he was concentrating his fire on Skoal Bandits and not on all new tobacco products. The question of whether a particular tobacco product must be banned must depend on the nicotine content of the product and the health risk involved. The noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, was putting this point. Would we, for example, wish to ban the manufacture and sale of a new product if its nicotine content had been drastically reduced and the health risk correspondingly reduced? It seems to me that we cannot prejudge a product which has not as yet been produced.

However, it would be complacency on our part to ignore the health risk which may be carried within any tobacco product. I suggest that we should no longer treat a new tobacco product as if it were just another domestic product. I am advised that nicotine is a drug. Therefore should not nicotine, like any other drug, have to be judged by the Safety of Medicines Committee under the Medicines Act? Whether a new tobacco product should be banned would therefore be the responsibility of the Safety of Medicines Committee. I am wondering whether the Government would be prepared to consider such a development.

8.52 p.m.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, I want your Lordships to know that I have a bad cold.

I should like to say immediately that I listened to the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Hunter of Newington, with the very greatest interest, and I am very grateful to him for initiating this short debate. During their speeches many of your Lordships made reference to the well-documented evidence of the harmful effects of smoking on health, and expressed concern that the habit is responsible for so much preventable disease and premature death. I can assure noble Lords that the Government share this concern and that we remain fully committed to pointing out all the dangers involved and to discouraging the habit.

However, tobacco has been available for literally hundreds of years, and as cigarette smoking became an established part of life for many people before the health risks were known, or were widely acknowledged, it is unrealistic to expect to eliminate the habit overnight. The noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, spoke about assistance to smokers to help them to stop. I should like to tell the noble Lord—he may already know—that the department gives an annual grant to the Maudsley Hospital to meet the costs of an experimental anti-smoking clinic. The project is being fully evaluated with a view to assessing whether their methods can be extended within the NHS.

This Government have made good progress in reducing smoking, and I think that has been recognised. The system of voluntary agreements restricting the advertising and promotion of tobacco products has contributed to a consistent decrease in smoking since the 1970s. The latest figures available show that 36 per cent. of men and 32 per cent. of women now smoke, compared with 52 per cent. of men and 41 per cent. of women in 1972. We are therefore making considerable strides without having to resort to wielding the big stick and taking legislative action with regard to advertising.

The Government are particularly concerned, of course, to deter children and young people from taking up smoking, and judging not only from the speeches to which we have listened this evening but to the voices of many people outside this Chamber, that concern is widely shared. Much of this debate has naturally centred on Skoal Bandits, a product which many people fear may be especially attractive to the young, possibly creating a dangerous dependence on nicotine and thus leading on to cigarettes. The noble Lord, Lord Hunter, mentioned that Skoal Bandits were banned in Japan. I would merely say that in Japan the trading company involved has voluntarily decided not to import Skoal Bandits as a result of public pressure; there is no legislative ban.

I appreciate the reasoning of those noble Lords who have argued that, as there is a known health risk associated with this new product, it should have been banned before it was launched on the UK market. However, I must point out to your Lordships that the truth of the matter is that the only thing new about Skoal Bandits is their form of presentation. Skoal Bandits—already graphically described by the noble Lord, Lord Hunter—are merely a new presentation of a form of tobacco that has been with us since the 16th century. The noble Lord, Lord Pitt, will appreciate that I am talking about snuff or chewing tobacco. When Skoal Bandits were introduced there were already a number of brands of chewing and plug tobaccos on sale in the UK, although they have not traditionally been widely used or promoted. What was different about this product was the forceful way in which the company intended to promote and advertise it. Accordingly, the Government were determined to safeguard young people and to counter any possible appeal this product might have for them. That is why we concentrated our efforts on restricting the marketing of the product.

What did we do? The Government ensured that sufficient controls were imposed to ensure that young people in particular were protected before the product was launched on to the UK market. We succeeded in negotiating a voluntary agreement with the manufacturers which placed considerable restrictions on the way in which the product could be advertised, promoted and marketed. Your Lordships will recall that at the same time the Government offered full assistance to a Private Member's Bill introduced in another place, but I think brought forward in this House by the noble Lord, Lord Pitt, which sought to make it illegal for this type of product to be sold to young people. That Bill came into force last month as the Protection of Children (Tobacco) Act and it makes it illegal to sell any tobacco product to someone under the age of 16, irrespective of the person for whose use the product is intended.

Last month the Department of Health and Social Security issued a circular which draws attention to the changes in the law. Copies were issued to bodies responsible for the enforcement of the law and the education and social well-being of young people. A copy of the circular has been placed in the Library. Your Lordships may also be aware that the Independent Broadcasting Authority, following representations made to it, banned the advertising of Skoal Bandits on television and commercial radio.

The noble Lords, Lord Hunter and Lord Pitt, and the noble Lady, Lady Kinloss, will understand that the Government were placed in a very difficult position when US Tobacco made its application for a grant. The manufacture of tobacco products is a qualifying activity in terms of the Industry Act, and the Government could not withhold regional development grant without being open to challenge in the courts. In acting only against Skoal Bandits or any other firm manufacturing tobacco products, the Government might have been held to have exercised their powers improperly. Like any other company setting up in a development area, US Tobacco has had an entitlement under existing legislation to government financial assistance.

I have of course noted the remarks regarding immediate legislation to ban the Skoal Bandits made by various noble Lords and the noble Lady, Lady Kinloss, during the course of this short debate, and I shall ensure that my honourable and right honourable friends are made aware of them. I can assure your Lordships that the Government are not complacent about the availability of this particular product, or indeed about the whole smoking issue.

We shall continue to keep the situation under review and will take any additional steps in the interests of public health should that appear necessary. That applies both to Skoal Bandits and to any other new tobacco products which may appear on the market. The use of tobacco in any form is a matter of great concern to the Government, and we shall continue to discourage its use in whatever form. Our record in this country in reducing cigarette smoking stands comparison with that achieved anywhere in the world, and we believe that we can continue to build on the progress achieved so far.