Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Bill (Hansard, 29 April 2002)

§ Lord Skelmersdale
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have referred the Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Bill to the European Commission under Directive 98/34 EC as amended by Directive 98/48 EC.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath)
My Lords, we notified the Bill on 28th March. The notification is without prejudice to the Government's view that the Bill does not contain any technical regulations.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for confirming what was slipped out by Written Questions in both Houses of Parliament. Does the noble Lord agree that this is an extraordinary situation as the Government have made a complete U-turn, having resisted such a proposition on no less than five different occasions?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
No, my Lords. We have always taken the view that this is not notifiable. We have listened carefully to the arguments put forward by many noble Lords during the passage of the Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Bill through your Lordships House. As a result of the points that were raised, we decided, as a precaution, that it would be sensible to notify, as we have done. We remain of the view that it is not notifiable, but as a result of the discussions in your Lordships' House, I believe that we are justified in notifying as a precautionary measure.

§ Lord Clement-Jones
My Lords, I congratulate the Minister and his colleagues on adopting the Bill in the other place, where today it has its Second Reading. Will he join with me in deploring the decision of the Conservative Front Bench in the other place, which is in stark contrast to the decision of the Conservative Front Bench in this House, to oppose a Second Reading for the Bill on the spurious ground that there is a lack of evidence that the Bill will be effective and on the ground that the stand-still provisions under the technical services directive will apply?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I pay tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, for his initiative in bringing forward a Bill in this place. I pay tribute to the skills of his draftsmanship in so doing. On the position of the party opposite, I must express 456 my great disappointment that it does not seek to support the intent of the Bill. If the Bill passes in another place, I have no doubt whatever that it will have an enormous impact in terms of reducing smoking among the people of this country.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the two directives cited in the Question have little other than general relevance to the Question? At the moment the matter is in the hands of the Conciliation Committee of the European Parliament and the Council. Once the Council reveals its decision, it has to be laid before the Scrutiny Committee of both Houses before it can become effective.

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I doubt that anyone knows more than my noble friend of the intricacies of European legislation. I believe that he refers to the European advertising directive. In 1998 we supported a directive that provided for a comprehensive tobacco advertising ban in Europe. That was challenged in the courts and in October 2000 it was struck down by the European Court of Justice. As a result, the Government decided to deliver its commitment by way of UK legislation, which, if the current Bill passes in another place, we will have done. However, my noble friend is right. Since then the European Commission has brought forward further proposals for a directive on tobacco advertising and sponsorship. That is still subject to discussion within Europe.

§ Lord Naseby
My Lords, as the Minister has indicated that notification of the Bill was in response to the protestations made from noble Lords on this side of the House, will he tell the House whether in the interim he has also considered the situation of treating all sports equally, or is Formula 1 motor racing the only sport to be allowed a long period in which to comply whereas every other sport is to be treated on a short timeframe?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I had thought that the issue of notification had been raised by noble Lords from various parts of your Lordships' House, including the Cross Benches. On sponsorship, the noble Lord knows that our intent is that sponsorship events with a view to promoting tobacco advertisements need to stop, but we do not want the ban to harm sports. When the original Bill was debated, we made it clear that we believe that it is right, subject to consultation, to expect most tobacco sponsorship of sporting events to end as soon as possible, but that global sporting events which receive considerable income from tobacco interests should be given a certain period of time to phase out the use of tobacco sponsorship. That remains the position of the Government.

§ Lord Faulkner of Worcester
My Lords, is it the case that there are no European Union or WTO free trade rules that prevent governments from making 457 exemptions in order to protect health? As the Bill when enacted will have the effect of saving at least 3,000 lives a year, it falls into that category.

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, my noble friend puts the matter correctly. From the evidence that I have seen, both from the World Bank and from Clive Smee, the economist commissioned by the previous government to look at the impact of a ban on tobacco advertising, there is no doubt that the effects of the Bill, if passed by another place, will have a positive impact on our overall strategy to reduce smoking in this country.