Proposition 51K1086

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 24 janvier 1977 relative à la protection de la santé des consommateurs en ce qui concerne les denrées alimentaires et autres produits.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

May 3, 2004

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

consumer protection young person infancy advertising tobacco public health

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Vooruit LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Abstained from voting

CD&V Ecolo FN VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Patrick Moriau (PS | SP) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

⚠️ Possible data error ⚠️

This proposition could possibly include unrelated discussions due to a heuristic extraction bug in propositions prior to 2007. As soon as I've got time to fix it, these will be removed when they're not supposed to be here.

Discussion ¶

June 10, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The draft law amending the law of 24 January 1977 on the protection of consumer health on the part of food and other products was discussed in the Committee on Public Health on 18 and 25 May 2004. To its discussion was initially added the discussion of the bill for banning the sale of tobacco to young people, transmitted by the Senate, that of 4 bills by Ms. Doyen-Fonck and that of Mr. Bultinck’s bill. At the request of Ms. Doyen-Fonck, the bills 607, 718 and 719 were disconnected during the discussion.

The Minister said in his introductory presentation that the bill includes a ban on the sale of tobacco products to 16-miners and indirect advertising of tobacco products. It also aims at adjusting the machines and combating the masking of health warnings. The measures of the draft law are part of a set of measures approved by the Council of Ministers of 23 January 2004 and intended to combat tobacco use. The draft and provisions aim to prevent tobacco use and protect the most vulnerable, namely young people. Prevention is one of the main pillars of the plan to control tobacco use, along with the protection of non-smokers and support in the event of withdrawal.

In the general discussion, 10 people took the floor. I will examine the main comments. Most people were positive about the bill, or at least about the fact that tobacco use among young people should be combated. A number of comments were about the fact that one found the design not generalized enough, not all-encompassing enough. A number of questions were asked during the implementation. A number of people also found that we would better work with a withdrawal policy and emphasize prevention. There was also a plea for the refund of smoking cessation funds.

Minister Demotte responded to this by clarifying a number of things. The Minister notes that we apparently all agree on the substance of the case, namely the fight against tobacco use, but not always on the method used. He states that this is only a step in a global plan that will be implemented in several stages. He ⁇ ins that there is a direct link between price increases and cigarette consumption and that he will also take this into account in the future.

In the article-by-article discussion, amendments are submitted by Mrs. Doyen-Fonck, by Mr. Goutry and by Mr. Mayeur, with reference to the written report for the content. For the article-by-article vote, I also refer to the written report. The entire, thus amended and improved bill is eventually adopted with ten votes against one and one abstinence. So far from my report, Mr. Speaker.

You can now keep your personal presentation, Mrs.

I will indeed make a brief explanation on behalf of the sp.a-spirit faction.

The bill proposed for discussion includes a ban on the sale of tobacco to young people under sixteen years of age, the possibility of adapting the automatic distribution devices, limiting the indirect advertising of tobacco products and the possibility of combating the masking of health warnings. The global plan for the control of tobacco use, which was discussed in the Public Health Committee in January, and the current draft law, which provides for its partial implementation, can all count on the approval of the sp.a-spirit group. There is no need to argue that the use of tobacco products is harmful to health. This has long been widely acknowledged scientifically. Health risks range from cardiovascular disease to cancer, tuberculosis to oral problems, reduced physical condition, osteoporosis, cataract, impotence, premature menopause and so on. I may forget a few more.

A second aspect that is very important in this problem is the finding that tobacco use is the first preventable cause of death and that this mortality rate is constantly rising.

A third very important aspect includes smoking behavior among young people. Research shows that the number of smoking young people is on the rise and that girls smoke more than boys. A very recent study by the World Health Organization conducted specifically in 15-year-olds shows that a quarter of them smoke. In Belgium, that is 23.3% for girls and 23.1% for boys. Personally, I find these numbers shocking.

That the tobacco industry is making every effort to keep its customer potential and then especially the youth segment, was revealed once again from a press article last week. The study was conducted by British American Tobacco, the manufacturer of Lucky Strike.

They are investigating the effect of adding chocolate and fruit flavors to cigarettes. Anti-tobacco activists such as Action on Smoking and Health say there is a strategy behind it to encourage more young people to smoke. After all, such added sweet flavors attract children. If this is true, it is a disturbing and very unethical evolution.

Therefore, we are ⁇ pleased that the Government considers this issue a policy priority and is pushing forward a number of measures. We assume, Mr. Minister, that this bill is only the beginning of the implementation of your global plan and that we can expect shortly a number of further proposals in this regard.

I look forward to a debate on any increase in the excise duty on tobacco products with the aim of preventing smoking and also a debate on any reimbursement of smoking cessation funds seems to me evident in the near future. These are issues that we need to discuss in the near future.

I will return to the current bill.

Sp.a-spirit welcomes the fact that in this design work is made of protecting young people at an age when they – we all know that – are very susceptible to influence and that they often go to experiment. If we can prevent young people of that age from getting cigarettes free, we, in my opinion, dig into an important risk factor for later use. I regret that the discussion about whether the age limit should be 16 or 18 years has not been conducted more thoroughly. There are some arguments advocating for 16 years, while others advocate for 18 years. In some Scandinavian countries, the age limit is 18 years. I have understood that you are planning an evaluation of the age limit, Mr. Minister, and I hope that at that point we will continue the debate.

That in this draft the control and sanction process is not directed against the minors themselves, but against anyone who would in any way encourage these vulnerable young people to use tobacco, I also find a very good starting point.

The last aspect that I would like to point out is the enforcement of the legal provisions. Like other speakers in the committee, I have a few questions regarding the practical application. When one knows that there are in Belgium around and at the 70,000 points of sale of cigarettes plus a few thousand distribution machines, then I have indeed my questions in the control of the prohibition of sale. The way the machines will be adjusted also makes me a little worried. This is not yet quite clear. Will a waterproof system be found to prevent young people from pulling cigarettes out of the automate? I am very curious about it. I look forward to the text of the Royal Decree on this subject.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the sp.a. group would like to emphasize strongly its commitment to combat tobacco use among young people. Despite my previous remarks, Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the sp.a-spirit group will approve the bill with conviction. I think that the bill is an important step in the plan to control tobacco use and that the government here shows that it is really concerned with the protection of public health, of our population and especially of the youth.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, my dear colleagues, smoking is a real plague, we definitely all agree here. Tobacco is the cause of 5 million deaths per year worldwide. If current smoking habits do not differ by 2030, 10 million smokers will die annually. In Belgium, 60 people die every day from smoking during their lifetime. Our country occupies the first place in Europe in terms of mortality from lung cancer.

In the face of these ⁇ constructive figures — and it would be worth mentioning the two billion euros of health care costs incurred by tobacco-related diseases — it is ⁇ important and urgent to provide effective means in the fight against tobacco.

However, this must be considered in a comprehensive way. Only the combination of measures taken as part of a comprehensive tobacco control plan can produce significant results and reverse the trend. This is, in any case, the objective of the present project, since it is part of a set of measures approved by the Council of Ministers on 23 January last year, and intended to combat smoking. The bill intends, in the first place, to prohibit the sale of tobacco to young people under the age of 16, with the possibility for the King to prescribe that places where tobacco products are placed on the market must display warnings regarding the harmfulness of these products or advertisements reminding the prohibition of selling to children under the age of 16.

The project also intends to provide for the adaptation of the automatic distribution devices.

It also considers to prohibit the sale or joint offering of tobacco products, products which are intended to deprive any useful effect, directly or indirectly, of the health warnings placed on tobacco products.

Finally, the project aims to limit indirect advertising for tobacco products.

In short, this is a real arsenal that is part of the federal anti-smoking plan and that our group, along with others, has made a political and health priority for our country.

Already in a 2003 report, the World Bank identified six ways to reduce smoking-related diseases and deaths, namely higher taxes, a ban on public and work places, a ban on advertising, consumer information, health warnings on packages and help with withdrawal through therapies or nicotine substitutes.

These measures are generally effective only when implemented jointly, I repeat, and a small ranking based on these recommendations was made by the European Network for the Prevention of Smoking, the ENSP, to see how the fight against smoking was going in 28 European countries. Belgium, according to this study, is only 19th in the ENSP ranking with 37 points out of 100, mainly due to its non-investment in de-normalization and low price policy ratings and withdrawal aid.

In fact, if all the projects contained in the overall plan of Minister Demotte are properly implemented and controlled, the rating of Belgium could rise between 55 and 60 points and join the lead peloton. We are therefore on the right track, even if it is only part of a comprehensive plan to be implemented in steps.

Royal decrees will have to be taken on the basis of a consultation involving the sector and other levels of power to finalize all of these proposals. Other specific actions aimed at the most disadvantaged should, however, be carried out in parallel with these measures, in particular by providing them with free access, or at least at a lower cost, to tobacco cessation methods.

I was ⁇ struck, in fact, during the recent World No Tobacco Day dedicated to the theme "Tobacco and poverty", by a whole series of indicators that tend to demonstrate that people in precarious socio-economic situation are more likely to become dependent than others.

Although smoking has not spread in these populations, it has, however, incorporated it in ⁇ significant proportions. Several parameters allow to identify the problem, knowing that big money worries often run with inactivity and lower financial returns. These people, our fellow citizens, often live day by day. Daily worries require almost all of their attention, so healthy lifestyle habits and whose consequences are felt only in the long run are not felt as priority.

Thus, we can find that the number of smokers in our country is significantly higher among the disabled (47%) and the unemployed (40%) than among the active (30%). On another plane, it appears that owners smoke much less than tenants: 27% versus 40%. Clear differences also occur according to the level of education: 36% among non-graduates, 25% among academics.

In this order of ideas, a recent survey conducted by the Hainaut Health Observatory reveals hallucinating data. In this province, our province, Mr. Minister, 16-year-olds are 17% smoking in general education against 25% in the technical and 62% in the professional. In terms of income, 34% of smokers in the lowest segments went to 24% among the highest segments. Finally, another revealing indicator interpels me personally: 35% of women with low socio-economic status continue to smoke during pregnancy, while they are only 7% among the wealthiest.

Therefore, we advocate, in the Socialist Group, for actions targeted at people living in poverty.

It is possible to reverse the vicious circle of poverty and tobacco. Fighting tobacco consumption by the poorest populations means indirectly fighting poverty. Also, we strongly insist on the need to initiate new primary prevention programs before pre-adolescence to counter the positive social image of cigarettes.

For young people whose primary motivation lies in belonging to a group, prevention should continue by introducing rules prohibiting consumption in public places and allowing dissuasive increases in the price of cigarettes.

Finally, in the face of all these young people who seek the affirmation of a certain self-image through this dependence, we seem to have to intensify the denunciation of the mafia practices and manipulations of the tobacco industry.

In this regard, the PS is ⁇ concerned about the announcements made by certain manufacturers who would like to market cigarettes scented with chocolate and vanilla. If the addition of such aromatic substances is intended to encourage children to smoke or to make smoking more accessible, such practice should be stopped as soon as possible. We welcome in any case, since this must be regulated in the European context, that Minister Demotte has sent a note to the European Commission in order to implement a quick regulation to limit or prohibit certain ingredients in tobacco products.

Finally, we will never emphasize enough, Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, the preponderant role of education in this problem. Smoking should not be banned. It is education that should advocate a healthy lifestyle and ensure that young people do not start smoking. Strong cooperation with the communities is necessary. A comprehensive policy must include a preventive, a care and a detoxification component.

The fight remains long and difficult, but the challenge is exciting. Your proposal, Mr. Minister, is a bold step to respond to it.

Ms. Gerkens is the last registered in the general discussion. The last ones are often the first ones.

This project is obviously an interesting step. This government has been in place for almost a year. The Council of Ministers of 23 January agreed on a series of measures. And now, we finally have a project that only takes a few measures that are, in my opinion, relatively weak.

This irritates me even more because, for the project that is subject today to our vote on the ban on the sale of at least 16 years, in response to a WHO recommendation, practiced in some states – it is therefore a measure that can be supported, even though its effectiveness also depends on everything that is organized around it – the arrests are not taken and the consultation will take place now. I think it could have been done earlier, given the time that passed between January 23 and today.

This worries me even more because in Belgium, we actually have a large number of points of sale, and these are ⁇ diversified, since it ranges from large surfaces to bookstores through specialized stores, cafes, hotels, stations - in the form of counters or distributors. The implementation will therefore be ⁇ difficult to develop. It was therefore all the more necessary that this consultation and its implementation be taken into account before this project reaches Parliament.

Another measure that could also be interesting concerns the limitation of indirect advertising. It is true that this project includes some advances. But, at the same time, in some articles, we immediately see how cigarette companies will be able to divert the items. It will be enough for them to establish subsidiaries, to play on turnover, to escape the restrictions contained in the bill. We have been bearded by the Rodin Foundation – you will tell me I am making a fixation on this foundation – with its current application for recognition as a public utility organization. It was originally constituted in asbl, but financed directly by cigarette manufacturers, which is contrary to the WHO Framework Convention. In order to be recognized as a public utility organization, it creates a new asbl which will be subsidized by the first asbl. In some way, it protects itself from the requirements of the Framework Convention. by

Cigarette smokers are ready for everything. Their goal is more smokers, as young as possible, as new customers are needed and those will smoke longer than older people.

This bill, in fact, does not allow to prohibit the use of indirect advertising, which is obviously the most dangerous advertising. I had communicated this comment to the minister during the discussions, but his response was that according to some, he went too far or not far enough and that since then his position was therefore the best since he is in the center, without other arguments.

There is also no answer in relation to one element that should have been included in the bill, namely the taking into account of the photos that appear on all the sports pages of magazines through the advertising permitted in the international Grand Prix of Formula 1, in particular, since the public watching those photos is essentially composed of young people, the same ones that we want to protect. This means that over the length of pages, they see the cigarette brands on the shirt of their favorite driver.

If this is not a beautiful indirect advertising, then I don’t know what it is!

Following these different findings, we can obviously only abstain from this bill, really regretting that the opportunity was not seized, on the one hand, to concrete the set of provisions that could have been taken and on which the Council of Ministers had agreed, and, on the other hand, to take provisions against cigarette companies.

I add, to the attention of Ms. Burgeon and Jiroflée, that there is indeed a risk in terms of fragrance substances. Remember, under the previous government, it was necessary to intervene to prevent chocolate from being added to cigarettes because it was a way to make the taste pleasant and add addiction to chocolate to that of tobacco. This reminds us that there needs to be a much greater vigilance than that which could be realised by this bill.

We started this discussion yesterday. I answered Mrs. Jiroflée on the basis of the questions she asked and I will refer her to the questions of the same nature asked last night by Mrs. Dierickx.

As for today’s speakers, I would say that it is hardly acceptable for me to hear an argument consisting of saying that we would only have a too modest and too late approach in the fight against tobacco. I have taken as a principle in life to never moralize others because I think it is worth looking ahead of their footsteps. I will therefore not make allusion, as I could have done if I were a politician who uses vile and low arguments, to the inaction of those who preceded me to say that today everything is not good to take.

I will not say it: I think that some and others have always wanted, in terms of health care, and especially public health, to make the right gestures at the right times, but that it is sometimes difficult to find the exact ways to ⁇ our goals.

In the prevention of tobacco, we need the help of the Communities. In terms of prevention to prevent starting to smoke, we also need a set of federal arrangements that we act by this law; I think in particular of the prohibition of the sale of tobacco to under 16 years of age. The question of age is a complicated question and I don’t have enough scientific evidence to tell you that 16 or 18 years is a definitive choice today.

However, I can tell you that, morally speaking, it is unacceptable that we have never before been able to have any tool to prohibit these young people from accessing tobacco through purchase. It remains that it is true that a number of teenagers, a little older, could very well buy this tobacco and then give it to these young people. I was already talking about moral responsibility: there, she is clearly committed.

As for the other issues: the application or implementation of the various decrees, the negotiations with the sector, I also find it hardly acceptable to hear that we have not made progress in these different fields: this is inaccurate. We have been talking with the industry since January. Obviously, we haven’t found all the answers to the complex questions that arise to us, especially in the area of distributors – as I recalled last night – but our will is ⁇ not taken into default.