Stop Smoking

It is grimly appropriate that in the very week the High Court begins to hear arguments about the disclosure of medical records…

It is grimly appropriate that in the very week the High Court begins to hear arguments about the disclosure of medical records in a case taken by a number of Irish smokers against the tobacco industry, the world's largest tobacco company should shoot itself spectacularly in the foot. The cigarette brands owned by Philip Morris include Benson & Hedges and Marlboro, the latter promoted universally by advertising images of manly cowboys relaxing after a hard day in the saddle. Sadly, the original Marlboro cowboy was struck down by emphysema.

On Tuesday, it was disclosed that a research company, Arthur D. Little International, had written a paper on behalf of Philip Morris, which the company used in its discussions with the Czech government. The Czechs are under pressure to bring themselves into line with European Union norms on smoking and taxation, raising their take from 42 percent to 59 percent. Thus the cigarette manufacturers stand to lose money (which they will inevitably seek to recoup from smokers). Philip Morris controls 80 percent of the Czech market and the Little Report, in arguing the case against increased taxation, noted that the Czech authorities had benefited from the "indirect positive effects" of smoking. These included, said the report, savings of some $30 million on health care, pensions and housing for the elderly because the people on whom the money might otherwise have been spent had died - because of the effects of smoking.

It might have been thought that after several decades of lying and evasion by the tobacco industry, and the attendant public relations disaster, those who defend smoking might have become somewhat more adept at fighting their corner. There can hardly be a more cynical or disgraceful argument in defence of smoking than the one suggested in the Little Report. Philip Morris said in response that it did not want to enter a debate on smoking and healthcare. Indeed not. How could a tobacco company defend a product which has no known medical benefit?

Next week, the Minister for Health Mr Martin, brings to Cabinet anti-smoking legislative proposals. Government sources describe them as draconian. They can hardly be draconian enough.