"This is an unprecedented intervention by big tobacco into an election campaign and I think Mr Abbott needs to come clean on whether he's made any commitments to his friends in big tobacco to convince them to take this unprecedented step," she said.

Professor Simon Chapman, from the school of public health at the University of Sydney, says Australia would be the first country to introduce plain packaging.

"The international tobacco industries are scared stiff about this," he said.

"The international industry have been pre-occupied about this since it was announced.

"They've had international conferences about it, they've had cover stories on their trade magazines, they've bunkered down they've worked out that they really have to try and get on top of this issue in Australia.

"Because it will domino all around the world."

from Stephen Mayne .....

Lovely to hear Julia Gillard ripping into the Liberals today for accepting big tobacco donations. This would be the same Julia Gillard who yesterday visited a distribution centre owned by Woolworths, Australia's biggest pokies operator with 12,000 machines. Woolies donated $20,000 to the ALP in 2008-09, but that was just the start of Labor's pokies industry donations.

Clubs NSW gave Labor $85,000 in 2008-09 and $203,000 in 2007-08. Then you have the Australian Hotels Association which gave more than $200,000 in 2008-09 alone, not to mention the party's own Canberra Labor Club which handed over more than $1 million in the first two years of the Rudd-Gillard government.

Given Australian has the lowest smoking rate in the world and the highest gambling rate in the world, it seems hard to fathom why Labor treats these two "sin industries" so differently when it comes to political donations -

Stephen Mayne, independent anti-pokies Senate candidate

Here is the evidence of Labor's unholy dependence on pokies donations, complete with links to the AEC donations data base:

Australian Hotels Association (NSW): 4 donations worth $130,000 to NSW Labor in 2008-09

Australian Hotels Association (SA): 19 donations worth $47,000 in 2007-08 to the South Australian Labor branch and a further 16 different donations worth about $70,000 in 2008-09.

Canberra Labor Club: operates 4 pokies venues for the ALP and donated $558,000 in 2007-08 and $502,000 in 2008-09.

Clubs NSW: 13 donations worth $203,000 to NSW ALP in 2007-08 and 9 donations worth $85,000 in 2008-09.

Tabcorp: pokies duopolist in Victoria made 7 donations worth $138,000 to various ALP branches in 2007-08 and 6 donations worth $150,000 to Labor in 2008-09.

Woolworths (ALH): $20,000 donation to Queensland Labor in 2008-09.

With Woolworths, Julia Gillard doesn't seem to know what she's dealing with and should read this this account of last year's Woolies AGM before heading to another Woolies venue for a campaign stunt like she did in Sydney yesterday.

There are plenty of other smaller donations which mean that Labor has harvested more than $2 million from gambling interests ever since Kevin Rudd made this famous declaration in 2007: "I hate poker machines and I know something of their impact on families. I have spoken at length with Tim Costello on this."

So, the Labor Party bag men clearly prevailed over Kevin Rudd as the donations kept flowing, but what does Julia Gillard think about the pokies and how can she defend taking industry donations when she's attempting to shame Tony Abbott for doing the same with the tobacco industry?

Stephen Mayne is obviously quoting the donation stats from State declarations and is misleading in that it does not include those made to the Liberals and Nationals in the same period.  These sort of donations occur for big businesses to try and stay "on side" with the incumbent government and, if not declared, can reach the "bribery" proportions of the infamous US lobbyists.

Has Stephen any idea about the amounts quoted?  State Labor would be influenced by a donation of $20,000 from the US giant Woolworths?  Fair dinkum.

So Stephen, if you have an ounce of sincerity in your expose' of Labor's "donations" then you will be prepared to expose the amounts donated to the Liberals and Nationals by the very same companies in the very same states and during the very same time frame? Which as a "holier than thou" posturer, you will either be shocked or perhaps embarrassed?

And further, since your suggestion that a donor to a political party automatically makes that party a captive of the source is just plain ludicrous.

However, if you are fair dinkum, try matching ANY donations to the Federal Labor Party with those of the Foreign owned mining companies.  Especially the grotesque billionaire Palmer.  Give it a try.  NE OUBLIE.

Hi Ernest,

I think you're right but that doesn't alter the fact that both major parties are equally guilty of accepting filthy lucre from unacceptable sources.

Mayne's point remains that it is highly hypocritical for Labor to attack the Liberals for accepting campaign donations from big tobacco, whilst it accepts funds from the fleecing of ordinary awstraylens being fleeced by pokie joints.

Mayne has published plenty of detail in the past about how both sides of politics benefit from this organised crime.

The difference between the Labor Party & the Coalition is often the propensity of Labor to try & stake out the high moral ground, only to be found to have feet of clay. The Coalition simply doesn't bother trying & contents itself with heaping self-righteous indignation on Labor ... a much easier & more damaging stragety that, regrettably, works all too well, too often.

Cheers,

John.

I disagree with your analogy of Mayne's expose' John, due to the fact that he did not include the donations to the State Liberal Party as his comparison argument of Labor’s claims. 

Why? Is he trying to hide something by NOT revealing both sides of that argument?  Because he is then doing the neo-con trick of accusing your opposition of doing what you are doing yourself. Like Abbott lying about his economic credentials when he doesn’t have the guts to debate a woman on that issue.

One of the attractions of Your Democracy is the printing of two sides to any story, and I had hoped that Mr. Mayne may have the strength of his convictions to be genuinely up front and not just repeating the figures  declared by Labor itself State wise.

Perhaps he is not aware that this is a Federal election not a State one - which Howard always claimed were different – as well HE might.

He should also know that the arguments to limit the donations in both Federal and State spheres were made by Labor and opposed by the neo-cons.

Two wrongs don’t make a right but, let’s be fair dinkum and juxtapose a published piece of State Labor donations with, and for the purpose of, showing who can claim that moral ground if any of them.

Also John, I cannot agree with the Labor party always claiming the moral high ground.  It was always a policy of Menzies; Fraser; and certainly Howard to behave as the moral alternative to the Labor Union Thugs.  The latter even managed to use that claim while WorkChoices reduced the rights of workers to be represented at all with Abbott’s “Individual Contracts”.

People don’t realize that these unfair and unconstitutional contracts were forced upon the workers of Queensland in the 19th Century and thirteen of their peacefully protesting leaders were jailed by a Pommy Judge.  This is one of the reasons that the Australian Workers Union was formed and is still alive to this day, irrespective of the worst Howard and Abbott could do with that denial of natural justice.

The “done over and not answering questions” Abbott has already stated that he will bring back those individual contracts with the same jailing provisions of the 19th century.  I kid you not.

Cheers John. 

Ern.

Two new Galaxy polls reveal more people have been trying to quit smoking since the Government increased tobacco taxes in April.

The research found that in the two months after the 25 per cent tax hike, nearly 40 per cent of all smokers tried to quit.

That is 10 per cent more people than the three months before the increase.

Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon says it also found those who have continued smoking say they are smoking fewer cigarettes.

"We know that price can be a deterrent for people," she said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/23/3019779.htm?section=justin

see toon at top and story below it

Japan's government has imposed the biggest tax increase on cigarettes the country has ever seen.

The price of the most popular brands is rising on Friday by about 40%, from 300 yen ($3.60; £2.30) to 410 yen ($4.90; £3.70).

The aim is to encourage smokers to quit, in a country with a reputation as one of the most smoker-friendly places in the industrialised world.

But instead smokers have been busy stocking up on cigarettes.

Lighting up is still allowed in restaurants and bars in Japan, and many offices have smoking rooms.

More than one in three Japanese men smoke, although only 12% of women do.

But now the government has put up the tax on cigarettes by 40%.

The aim is to encourage smokers to give up, and surveys show that 60% are thinking of doing so.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11449516

-----------------

The power of the stick... see toon at top and article below it.

DESPITE intense opposition from the international tobacco industry, Australia's plan to introduce plain-wrap cigarettes is likely to be followed by other countries, the Health Minister, Nicola Roxon says.

The tobacco industry spent a reputed $4 million during the federal election to campaign against plain packaging, criticising the Labor plan as unprecedented.

But Ms Roxon said the positive reaction of ministers from other Western countries to the policy showed that the tobacco companies' campaign was based on a false premise.

She told the Herald she had encountered ''a lot of interest'' from health ministers at an Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development conference in Paris last week.

Representatives from Ireland, Norway, the European Union and the United States had expressed interest. ''From my perspective, the broader the interest there is, the better. ''The tobacco companies have made clear they will fight this tooth and nail because they think if it gets through here it will be a precedent.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/world-set-to-follow-australian-tobacco-policy-20101014-16lww.html?from=smh_sb

A former ambassador to the World Trade Organisation has been lobbying Malaysia to oppose the Federal Government's plain cigarette packaging laws.

ABC1's Lateline can reveal former US ambassador Peter Allgeier met with a Malaysian government minister as part of his efforts to derail the plain packaging legislation.

It has also been revealed that a powerful US congressman has joined the fight against Prime Minister Julia Gillard's latest controversial plan to cut Australia's smoking rate, which is due to come into effect this year.

If the law is enforced, advertising will be replaced with dull olive green packages and large health warnings.

Mr Allgeier is the private face of the tobacco industry's campaign against plain packaging.

For eight years he served as the Bush administration's deputy trade representative, but now works at the Washington-based consultancy firm C&M International.

C&M International has a history of working with the tobacco industry. In 2000 they offered their services to British American Tobacco when the framework convention on tobacco control was being negotiated in the US.

C&M's legal firm also has a long-term relationship with the largest American tobacco company, Philip Morris.

An email sent to a Malaysian official and obtained by Lateline shows Mr Allgeier has been lobbying Malaysia to put pressure on Australia over plain packaging, and refers to a meeting he had with Malaysia's trade minister.

"There are several opportunities forthcoming for Malaysia and other like-minded governments to persuade Australia not to proceed," he said.

"One option is to raise concerns in response to Australia's notification to the WTO TBT Committee, which meets on June 15-16. A second option is to address this issue at the next WTO TRIPs Council meeting on June 7-8.

"A third option is to respond to Australia's request for comment on its draft legislation, which is open for comment until June 6."

Tobacco-Free Kids Campaign president Matthew Myers, who has been working with Republicans and Democrats in Washington to reduce tobacco use, has hit out at the revelations.

"It's infuriating that the multi-national tobacco companies are trying to use their global political muscle to intimidate countries from protecting their citizens," said Mr Myers, who has been an anti-smoking campaigner for 30 years.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/26/3228286.htm?section=justin

Remember the Alliance of Australian Retailers (AAR) who brought us the first salvo of anti-plain packaging ads in 2010?

These were the doozies that featured storekeepers with advanced knowledge of effective tobacco control explaining that plain packs "won't work, so why do it" and then later on, "It just doesn't make sense".

It is no secret that the AAR is funded by big tobacco, who strangely have one or two concerns of their own about a policy "that won't work" – enough to be in blind panic mode, pouring millions into their campaign to stop it. Personally, I never bother worrying about changes to my life that won't make any difference.

This week the AAR released a Deloitte report with lots of shocking numbers and findings in it about an Armageddon that will descend on Australia's corner stores because of a policy that won't work. But now we have "research" to prove it. So let's take a look at how they conducted the research.

First, Deloitte tells us that "Roy Morgan Research was engaged by the AAR to conduct a consumer survey to verify the risk of channel shift following the introduction of plain packaging". Channel shift is industry jargon for your customers switching to buying their tobacco from bigger outlets like supermarkets, which of course have been attracting small business customers for decades because of their cheaper prices on everything.

Note importantly that the survey was not designed to examine whether there was a risk in channel shift arising from plain tobacco packaging, but to "verify" it. It's a foregone conclusion, apparently. Great science.

We read that those surveyed "were presented with an overview of the proposed regulation and asked whether they thought their shopping experience at a small retailer would be affected". So they were presented with an overview that would assist in "verifying" the risk of channel shift. No chance of any push polling there, I suppose?

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2783400.html

see toon at top and articles below it...

Five tobacco companies have sued the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over a new law that would force them to place graphic health warnings on their cigarette packets.

The firms argue the plan violates their constitutional right to free speech, as it requires firms to promote the government's anti-smoking message.

The FDA has not commented on the lawsuit.

The new warnings will be required on cigarette packs from September 2012.

RJ Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard Tobacco, Commonwealth Brands, Liggett Group and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco said they filed their suit against the FDA late on Tuesday in an effort to delay enforcement of the new law.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14553228

The demands from the tobacco company, made using the UK's Freedom of Information law, have coincided with an internet hate campaign targeted at university researchers involved in smoking studies.

One of the academics has received anonymous abusive phone calls at her home at night. She believes they are prompted by an organised campaign by the tobacco industry to discredit her work, although there is no evidence that the cigarette companies are directly responsible. Philip Morris says it has a "legitimate interest" in the information, but researchers at Stirling University say that handing over highly sensitive data would be a gross breach of confidence that could jeopardise future studies.

The researchers also believe that the requests are having a chilling effect on co-operation with other academics who fear that sharing their own unpublished data with Stirling will lead to it being handed over to the tobacco industry.

Philip Morris International made its first Freedom of Information (FOI) request anonymously through a London law firm in September 2009. However, the Information Commissioner rejected the request on the grounds that that law firm, Clifford Chance, had to name its client.

Philip Morris then put in two further FOI requests under its own name seeking all of the raw data on which Stirling's Institute for Social Marketing has based its many studies on smoking knowledge, attitudes and behaviour in children and adults.

"They wanted everything we had ever done on this," said Professor Gerard Hastings, the institute's director.

"These are confidential comments about how youngsters feel about tobacco marketing. This is the sort of research that would get a tobacco company into trouble if it did it itself." Professor Hastings added: "What is more, these kids have been reassured that only bona fide researchers will have access to their data. No way can Philip Morris fit into that definition."

The information is anonymised and cannot be traced back to the interviewees. Philip Morris told The Independent that it is not seeking private information on named individuals.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/exclusive-smoked-out-tobacco-giants-war-on-science-2347254.html

I could give here the name of one famous friend who died from lung cancer in his early forties about 25 years ago.... He was addicted to cigarettes and though he'd managed to shake alcoholism, he could not "live" without a ciggie for more more than one hour while awake. He did not sleep well... Without a smoke, he'd become restless, agitated, nasty, uncontrolable... He was an extreme case, I accept that. When the surgeons opened him up to "operate" (remove) his lung cancer, his chest was closed back with his lungs not being touched. He died on the slab. In the same year, three other friends, in their thirties, died from cancers attributed to smoking. Two from lung cancer, one from brain cancer. I could also name a large number of acquaintances affected by smoking (most dead, some still alive — just). Another great friend died just before her fiftieth birthday from throat cancer, a few year ago... Though some people die from other causes, such as falling under a bus, one cannot really blame the bus. Those getting cancer from cigarettes can blame the cigarettes and their addictive nature. Falling under a bus is rarely addictive.

THE Future Fund's stake in the tobacco industry has swelled by $78 million, an increase of more than 50 per cent, sparking criticism of the fund for investing in companies that are suing the government.

The taxpayer-owned fund, which also has shares in nuclear arms companies, yesterday disclosed tobacco shares worth $225 million in February, up from $147 million at the end of 2010.

Senate estimates also heard that the fund's new chairman, David Gonski, put his own name forward for the role in a controversial report last year before the government had even considered him.

The High Court has rejected big tobacco's constitutional challenge to the Federal Government's plain packaging laws, clearing the way for the new-look packets to hit Australian shelves.

The new laws will require cigarettes to be sold in olive green packs without trademarks and with graphic health warnings.

They were set to be introduced in December, but were put on hold after the challenge was mounted by major tobacco companies including British American tobacco, Philip Morris, Imperial Tobacco and Japan Tobacco.

The companies argued the Government was trying to acquire their intellectual property, including trademarks, without proper compensation.

But the Government argued that it was only trying to regulate what appears on the boxes, and was not acquiring any trademarks.

The High Court has now ruled in the Government's favour, clearing the way for the plain packets to be on the shelves on December 1.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/high-court-rules-in-favour-of--plain-packaging-laws/4199768

An appeal court in Washington has ruled that the US Government cannot force tobacco companies to put large, graphic health warnings on packets of cigarettes.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) planned from September 22 to require images on cigarette packs, including a man smoking through a hole in this throat and a body with chest staples on an autopsy table.

It says the pictures of dead and diseased smokers it wants to be shown are a factual way to convey the dangers of smoking.

But tobacco firms filed suit against the federal agency, arguing the images go beyond factual information and into anti-smoking advocacy.

The Washington court of appeal has backed them, saying the planned warning are an unabashed attempt to evoke emotion and to get consumers to quit.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-25/an-us-court-rejects-graphic-cigarette-warnings/4222558

-------------------------------

Actually, from my experience, the cigarette packs should have pictures of cemeteries on the front... or pictures of a morgue and a coroner's operating tables... or pictures of the Northern Suburb Crematorium... with a casket surrounded by no friends and a few wilted flowers....

The Federal Government says cigarette makers are sinking to new depths in their attempts to keep smokers hooked after plain packaging laws come into force.

Imperial Tobacco has already moved some of its Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes into the new olive-coloured packets emblazoned with the slogan: "It's what's on the inside that counts."

The company says it has made the change to give customers advance warning about the Federal Government's plain packaging laws.

But the Government says it is a desperate move and has warned cigarette companies not to engage in what it has termed a dirty tricks campaign.

Health Minister Tanya Plibersek says the new slogan on the packets is a sick irony "given that what's on the inside is a product that, if used as the maker intends, will kill half of its regular users".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-12/imperial-preempts-plain-packaging-laws/4256128

The High Court has finally revealed its reasons for throwing out a challenge to new plain packaging laws for cigarettes by the big tobacco companies.

The High Court delivered its verdict, dismissing the tobacco company's cases in August, but has only just released its reasons for the decision.

The court found in a six-to-one decision there was no acquisition of intellectual property rights by the Government in its plan to impose plain olive packaging with graphic health warnings.

The tobacco companies had argued the property was being acquired on other than just terms and was at odds with the constitution.

But Chief Justice Robert French found the law only controls the way tobacco is marketed and does not involve an acquisition.

All the judges agreed except Justice Dyson Heydon, who declared the act should be ruled invalid, and bemoaned the arguments of the Commonwealth and states against acquisition on just terms.

The decision has reverberated around the world with tobacco companies starting a media campaign in New Zealand to ward off similar legislation there.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-06/high-court-explains-plain-packaging-decision/4299074

Blessed are the poor, the meek, the pure of heart and clogged of lungs and arteries, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
After years of being exorcised from every office, restaurant and hotel, smokers have finally found a group accepting them with open arms: the church.
Religious billboards outside many churches in Sydney now preach: "Smoking won't kill you in the next life. Sin will."
In a mock-up of graphic health warnings on cigarette packets, the billboard features an image of a bloodied heart and a "warning from the Bible" about spiritual dangers lurking beyond the grave for the sinful.

The light-hearted message, no pun intended, seems to be that smoking is bad but sin is worse.
"Better to be a smoker that goes to heaven than a person who doesn't smoke and falls under the judgment of God," the Reverend Andrew Bruce said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/blessed-are-the-smokers-for-they-are-welcome-in-heaven-20121015-27mqx.html#ixzz29MA8Qvxp

Quitting smoking by age 40 erases most of the risk of an early death

Smokers who quit by around age 40 can stave off an early death, according to a landmark study that fills key gaps in knowledge of smoking-related health ills.

While smokers who never stop lose about a decade of life expectancy, those who quit between ages 35 and 44 gained back nine of those years, the study found.

Moreover, the benefits of dropping the habit extend deep into middle age. Smokers who quit between 45 and 54 gained back six otherwise lost years, and those who quit between 55 and 64 gained four years.

Quitting young, before age 35, erased the entire decade of lost life expectancy.

The message: It’s never too late to quit, even for heavy smokers with decades of puffing behind them.

But younger smokers should not be lulled into thinking they can smoke until 40 and then stop without consequences, said Prabhat Jha, an epidemiologist at the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto. Jha led the new study, published online Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

That’s because the risks of lung cancer and other respiratory diseases linger for years after stubbing the last butt.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/quitting-smoking-by-age-40-erases-most-of-the-risk-of-an-early-death/2013/01/23/6446668e-6585-11e2-9e1b-07db1d2ccd5b_print.html

Sure,  may be, whatever... Too many of my friends and some family members — all heavy smokers— unfortunately died before reaching the cut-off point, forty... So the stats are a bit wonky, in sort of saying smoke early, stop and live longer?... I knew a few heavy smokers who lived in their nineties but on average, most smokers I have known have died younger, before 50 — of horrible stuff to the lungs and brains tumours.

A smoky haze greets customers walking into any of Yangon's tea shops as patrons light up hand-rolled cigarettes known locally as cheroots.

Elsewhere in Myanmar's main city, vendors sell cheap cigarettes smuggled from China to drivers stopped at traffic lights. The pavement is painted red with the spit of people chewing tobacco wrapped in betel leaves.

Tobacco is already a problem in this impoverished Southeast Asian country where anti-tobacco legislation is weak. But as Myanmar opens its doors to the world after half a century of military rule, it faces a new threat: Large multinational cigarette companies looking for new markets.

After years of isolation, many young people want to be as "cool" as their Western peers. "I wanted to imitate the people I saw in movies," said Kyaw Zin Lin, 42, who began smoking at age 12. He got his first packet of cigarettes from his parents' grocery shop. "It seemed cool then."

Some anti-tobacco activists say it's not just the nation's health that is at risk from the tobacco companies' new push, but also the rights of some of Myanmar's poorest people.

At the heart of the problem lies a conflict of interest within the government. The health ministry is trying to implement measures to curb smoking, but the trade ministry is keen to lure millions of dollars in potential foreign investment by multi-national companies, says Bungon Rithiphakdee, director of the Southeast Asian Tobacco Control Alliance.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/11/big-tobacco-eyes-myanmar-market-2013111881147974171.html

• THE AUSTRALIAN
• JUNE 06, 2014 12:00AM

Eighteen months after the previous government’s laws came into force, new data, obtained by The Australian, shows that tobacco sales volumes increased by 59 million “sticks”, or individual cigarettes or their roll-your-own equivalents last year...

--------------------------

Where else would you find such annoying drivel but at The Australian, one of the merde-och press large spread shit...

One knows that the Liberal (CONservative) party — 100 per cent supported by the merde-och outfit — is fond of Big Tobacco Companies and have accepted cash for election funding... But this slanted article is designed to tell us that the campaign to hide tobacco products from view "isn't working"...

Well, with Joe smoking Cuban cigars (communist made tobacco, yuk) in "secret" with his Brussels sprout mate, the anti-smoking campaign has taken a hit... Now the new federal campaign to "stop" smoking is to encourage the reduction say from 32 ciggies per day down to 29... Idiots. 

But figures and stats can be "selective"...

For example we need to know how many new smokers have taken the habit and we need to know if kids have been enticed to kill themselves before they reach 40 by taking the habit. We need to know the increase of the general population versus the increase of the smoking population. We need to know if only a handful of smokers have doubled or tripled their consumption to help the tax department... We need to know if hospitals have seen an increase or decrease in smoking related diseases.

To simply announce that a MODEST rise in cigarette sales means that the plain packaging is not working is completely ludicrous... At least I don't have to see these packets in my face, as a cough my lungs out due to past passive smoking. 

See toon at top...

An anti-smoking advocate has rejected claims that smoking has increased since the introduction of plain packaging.

The Australian newspaper has reported that sales figures show 59 million more cigarettes were bought since the introduction of world-first plain packaging in 2012.

Australasian Association of Convenience Stores chief executive Jeff Rogut told the newspaper the increase is part of a trend to buy cheaper cigarettes more often.

However, Australian Council on Smoking and Health president Professor Mike Daube told ABC NewsRadio he believes the article, based on a report by industry monitor InfoView, is wrong.

"This is the typical approach taken by the tobacco industry. They leak a report to a friendly journalist, with a history of opposing what he describes as the 'nanny state', and then they put it on the front page and it gets some legs," he said.

"There are industry figures that show falls in tobacco sales and the chief executive of one of the biggest companies, Imperial Tobacco, in the half-yearly report for 2013, said that the markets had declined by 2 to 3 per cent since plain packaging came in.

"So, I think what you are seeing is a good, old-fashioned tobacco industry beat-up."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-06/anti-smoking-advocate-rejects-cigarette-sales-increase-report/5505210

See article above and toon at top...

Prominent Australian professors have been caught out making false statements in the tobacco wars started by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. Alan Austin reports.

SEVERAL ACADEMICS used by the Murdoch-owned newspaper The Australian have been seriously singed in the last week. They include Professor Judith Sloan from Melbourne University, Wollongong University’s Professor Henry Ergas and Professor Sinclair Davidson from RMIT.

This saga shows, intriguingly, how The Australian is following the malicious Murdoch modus operandum in Britain.

The current saga began with The Australian’s front page ‘exclusive’ on June 6 by Christian Kerr announcing that cigarette plain packaging has caused an increase in sales.

That story quoted discredited industry sources, made several false claims and omitted significant vital information.

This went largely unremarked in Australia, presumably because The Australian is notorious for these failures. Only economist Stephen Koukoulas in his blog The Kouk publicly challenged the story. His blog provides an excellent blow by blow dismantling of The Australian’s mendacious campaign.

In Britain, however, where debate on plain packaging is raging, Murdoch’s newspapers and others gleefully regurgitated the story. This was a huge boost for the tobacco industry, which bitterly opposes the reform.

Then last Monday, two things happened.

The Australian fired back at Koukoulas with the heavy artillery of Judith Sloan, a professorial fellow at the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at Melbourne University:

As The Kouk showed convincingly on his blog almost immediately, all four points of rebuttal were actually untrue.

Reader comments following Sloan’s article in The Australian were suddenly closed and she has not been heard from on the matter since.

Then on Monday night the ABC’s Media Watch exposed the many falsehoods in Kerr’s story. It also highlighted Kerr’s association with the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) and its history of advocacy for big tobacco.

It quoted professor of health policy at Curtin University, Mike Daube:

In response to being exposed as truth deniers yet again, The Australian did what News Corp often does — it called in its storm troopers to ferociously attack Media Watch and Koukoulas.

It did this when Andrew Bolt was caught lying about Aboriginal people by the Federal Court. It did this when former Greens leader Bob Brown called them on their distortions. Not to mention its attacks on Stephen Conroy over media reform.

This is consistent with the findings of the Leveson Inquiry in the UK, which found

Leveson found that even when an apology was agreed, Murdoch continued with

On Wednesday, The Australian came out with all guns blazing.

Reporter Adam Creighton teamed up with Christian Kerr for another attack. Anthony Klan wrote about illegal tobacco. Legal affairs editor Chris Merritt penned a snarly piece accusing both Koukoulas and Daube of bias.

And there were two more professors — Henry Ergas and Sinclair Davidson.

Their ammunition included impressive charts and graphs, authoritative pronouncements from tobacco executives, snide asides, vicious frontal personal attacks and several bright crimson red herrings.

Thursday and Saturday continued the barrage with an arrogant editorial, plus Creighton and Ergas again.

Ergas made the extraordinary claim:

That is blatantly false.

Plain packaging began in December 2012.

These are the quarterly figures on household expenditure on tobacco consumption for 2012 [from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) file 5206008, column AM]:

March 2012: 3593 
June 2012: 3579 
September 2012: 3595 
December 2012: 3483

Quarterly figures for 2013:

March 2013: 3467 
June 2013: 3521 
September 2013: 3567 
December 2013: 3571

The 2014 first quarter:

March 2014: 3298 

Any way those numbers are examined, there has been a fall in consumption.

The last quarter is the lowest on record, 8.2% lower than the equivalent quarter before plain packaging was introduced.

The last full year – June 2013 to March 2014 – shows consumption 1.2% below the previous year.

Calendar year 2013 consumption is 0.87% below 2012.

So where does Ergas get

Only by cherry picking one aberrant quarter – December 2013 – and comparing that with December 2012.

Shame.

Since the 6 June story, Professor Sinclair Davidson has maintained a commentary at his blog, applauding The Australian’s tawdry campaign.

Davidson is a senior fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs, which receives funding from British American Tobacco Australia and has long campaigned for the tobacco industry.

Delighted at another academic at hand, The Australian re-ran Davidson’s Tuesday blog on Wednesday.

It included this comment on the ABS consumption figures:

This is not true. It repeats one of Judith Sloan’s errors in her earlier attack.

In fact, the ABS chain volume measures reflect quantity only. The effect of price has been removed. This is clear from the ABS notes to the national accounts.

Just to be sure, Independent Australia wrote to the ABS and received this reply [IA emphasis]:

Hilariously, in all this, Kerr actually conceded on Wednesday that his first story was wrong, admitting amid the bluster, distractions, hypocrisy, insults and statistical trickery that

So what was this all about? To distract from the woes of the failing Abbott Government? To boost big tobacco’s campaign in Britain? To sink the slipper into the former Labor Government again? Or all three?

In an amusing aside, the online version of Henry Ergas’ second foray has a photo of one Murdoch target, captioned 'Health Minister Nicola Roxon'.

Memo to The Australian: Roxon retired as health minister in 2011. Get used to it.

We know Rupert Murdoch was a Phillip Morris board member for many years. We know several big tobacco executives have been on News Corp’s board. And we know many News Corp ‘journalists’ lie and distort routinely.

But why would academics join this offensive campaign and risk their reputations becoming smoking ruins?

You can follow Alan Austin on Twitter @AlanTheAmazing. Read also The Institute of Public Smokescreens by deputy editor Sandi Keane.

One has to realise that should plain packaging not be working in reducing smoking and be encouraging the sales of tobacco, "Big Tobacco" would not be fighting plain packaging with silly academics' tooth and with Murdoch's nails about it... Unless they are fighting for "your" freedom of killing yourself in smoke and the right of killing others passively for being close to you... Cough cough...

There’s been a lot of debate about standardized packaging of cigarettes – a policy being considered by the government that would force tobacco companies to remove all branding from their packaging.

Those against it claim that it is an infringement on the rights of companies to advertise their products, that it will increase counterfeit cigarettes, and that it won’t make any difference to use of cigarettes. But the evidence that such packaging could make smoking less appealing to teenagers is growing (including some conducted in my research groupat the University of Bristol using eye tracking and fMRI techniques, which has suggested that it makes health warnings more prominent).

Standardized packaging has already been introduced in Australia, so some of the predicted impacts of the implementation can now be examined. A new paper published in Tobacco Control journal has found that support for standardized packaging amongst Australian smokers has increased since the packaging was introduced.

The study assessed the beliefs of roughly 1000 Australian smokers at 5 time-points, from 2007 to 2013 via phone or web surveys. Standardized packaging was introduced in Australia in 2012, so the final time-point fell approximately six months after its introduction. Whist opposition before introduction was stable at approximately 50%, in the final survey it fell dramatically to 35%. Conversely, support amongst smokers rose from around 30% in the first 4 time-points to just under 50% in the final survey. Critically, there was net support for the packaging from smokers after introduction, whilst before introduction more smokers were opposed to it than in favour.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2014/nov/17/study-finds-cigarette-smokers-in-australia-now-support-plain-packaging