Recently, the tobacco industry has been making a lot of hue and cry over a couple of proposed pieces of legislation in KP and the Senate that could have devastating ramifications, the latter including mass unemployment and even child labour. Considering that tobacco employs '75,000 farmers and millions of dependents' (as per a statement by KP Agriculture Chamber SVP earlier this month), and is the single largest source of excise revenues to the national exchequer, these bills warrant some attention. The "Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Prohibition of Tobacco and Protection of Non-Smokers Health Act, 2016" warrant a detailed look.
Recall that the 18th Amendment brought with it the devolution of health, so smoking and related laws became a provincial matter thereafter. However, all the provinces continued to follow the federal law, "The Prohibition of Smoking and Protection of Non-Smokers Health Ordinance, 2002." This is the law that has been followed everywhere up till now, and all the amendments - warning label requirements, ban on print and media advertising, ban on sheesha - came from this bill.
However, KP (the province where around 80 percent of Pakistan's tobacco is grown) is exercising its autonomy and amending the bill to make its own tobacco-related laws.
A copy of the proposed bill was made available to BR Research by one of the leading cigarette manufacturers, who were kind enough to share their thoughts about it as well. It turns out the bill is not as harmful as it appears; it's the one in the Senate that could be potentially deadly.
Firstly, the KP bill seeks to amend the definition of a "public place" to include even rooftops, playgrounds, parks, lawns, and lobbies, whereas the previous legislation did not include in its definition "any open space." So, by elimination, this means that smoking will now be restricted mainly to the individualâ??s own home. While this will have little effect on demand, it will likely result in lower cigarette consumption, simply owing to the fact that for the duration a smoker is outside of his domicile, he cannot smoke.
Secondly, the in-store branding and display is being disallowed. Cigarette manufacturers are being given no corner now, and that little rectangular board where the brand name could be displayed is also being taken away.
Thirdly, the distance between points of sale of tobacco and any 'college, school or educational institutions' is being doubled from 50 metres under the federal law to 100 metres in KP. Not only that, but the KP bill is adding to it the 'premises of health facilities and public parks.' In cases, where cigarette sellers are currently less than 100 metres away, some questions arise: who will be required to move, the school/park/hospital or the shop? Will they be compensated? What about the poor man's kiosk (khoka)?
Other laws regarding underage sale, smoking in vehicles, sponsorship, etc. are still the same. However, a couple of things should be kept in mind. Firstly, there is no implementation of existing laws as is, and the amendments made by KP only add to the difficulty. For instance, how will the 100-metre-distance law be implemented?
And for that matter, just look at the existing laws. We know for a fact that underage smoking is rampant in the country; according to the Pakistan Pediatrics Association, some 1000-1200 children aged six to sixteen take up smoking every day. No shop ever asks for identification when selling cigarettes. Also, try to recall when was the last time someone was fined for smoking in their car, or in a public place like a bus stop? Under the federal law, the fine can go from Rs1,000 to even Rs100,000! The existing laws are only in letter, so itâ??s pointless to up the ante without first implementing what is already there.
While we're talking about implementation of laws, let's not forget the growing illicit tobacco sector - an issue that we have dedicated entire columns to before and will not attempt to tackle here for paucity of space ("Deconstructing big tobacco," published November 24, 2015; "Tackling illicit tobacco trade," published May 29, 2015).
Secondly, having different laws under different provinces can prove to be fatal for cigarette manufacturers. For instance, a cigarette manufacturer - we're talking about a legal one that operates under the laws - cannot manufacture different packets with varying sizes of warning labels as per provincial requirements. What about inter-provincial movement of cigarettes?
The bill is yet to be passed and is being deliberated upon. However, this bill makes KP appear a safe haven for tobacco if the one in the Senate goes through. That will be discussed in this space tomorrow.