Health Committee on June 20th, 2011

[John Clayton]

We would probably disagree with Mr. Cunningham's characterization of active participation or contribution. We have contributed a submission as part of the general regulatory process; however, as we stated here in our position today, there have been a number of issues that have not been addressed that are still of great concern to us, which is why we're raising them with the committee today.

[David Haslam]

We were asked to give input on the execution and timeline and management of this process. We gave our advice. It's not been heeded to date, but we gave our opinion, and that's why I'm here again today. As I say, our position is not about the efficacy of the warnings or anything to do with that; it's just how we can do it and maintain Canadian jobs.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Mr. Cunningham, would you comment?

[Rob Cunningham]

We did participate in terms of consultations, and I believe that our input, and that of other health organizations, was considered. It doesn't mean that everything was taken on board, but it was actively considered, and in many cases changes were made.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

I have a follow-up question. What is your impression on how increased warning sizes have affected the overall rates of smoking in Canada? Do you believe they're working? What potential exists for further reductions?

[Rob Cunningham]

I think the existing picture warnings have had an effect in reducing smoking among adults and youth. The picture warnings that we're going to see as part of these regulations reduce tobacco use, increase awareness of the health effects, and reduce package deception. The package as an advertisement is impacted. The companies tend to portray sophisticated lifestyle images, but they will not be able to do that as much when the truth is being told with a picture in a larger size.

The problem is that the existing pictures have been on packages for 10 years without being changed. That's why it's essential that they be updated, and these regulations are going to do that. The current images don't have the impact they initially had, and that's why it's great that these warnings are being refreshed and being improved at the same time. The 75% size is extremely important.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

When we've talked about this in the past, we talked about what different jurisdictions were doing around the world. In other jurisdictions where they've had more focus on the increased warning sizes, is there evidence that shows that smoking has decreased?

[Rob Cunningham]

In Australia there's very good evidence with respect to the success of their picture warnings. There is an international tobacco control study that measures the impact in different countries. Another example is Thailand. When they increased their size and used pictures in particular, compared to a neighbouring country, Malaysia, which did not, there was an increase in the impact of warnings. Just for those two comparator countries, there's lots of evidence that adding pictures--sometimes combined with size, sometimes not--increases the impact.

The evidence is overwhelming. That's why every year the number of countries that require picture warnings grows, and we see this trend growing.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Are there any comments?

[John Clayton]

I have a couple of comments.

I'm not here to debate with the committee the efficacy or the effectiveness of the health warnings. I believe that probably the question of my credibility, which has already been raised by Mr. Cunningham, is lingering in your minds regarding that point. I did state in my statement our position on that issue.

What we are asking for is simply a practical implementation period--one that is practical for the supplier who is here today, one that we are able to implement in a timely fashion, and one that does not disrupt the market, which already goes as high as 33% contraband in some areas. I would go to the point that I raised in the statement, which is that you have two implementation periods in the current regulations. We don't understand the rationale behind the one for the manufacturer. Simply have one for the consumer at the end at the point of sale. It doesn't affect the consumer at all. It enables manufacturers to be able to deal with their supply chain as best they can without having any impact on the consumer at the end of the day, and will cause less of a disruption in the total supply chain in the tobacco market in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Mr. Clayton.

We'll now go to Dr. Sellah.

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I want to thank all the witnesses here today.

My question is simple. John Clayton was talking about the implementation date for the packaging and everything else, but as a health care professional, I know that the nicotine found in cigarettes creates an addiction that makes it difficult to quit smoking. Many smokers experience unpleasant withdrawal symptoms when they try to quit smoking.

Is it easier to stop smoking when using light or mild tobacco products? Do you think that prohibiting the use of the terms “mild” and “light” would have an impact on tobacco users? If so, what kind of an impact do you anticipate?

Thank you.

[John Clayton]

I have a couple of points in response.

First of all, as I stated earlier, those terms have not been used on tobacco products in Canada for the last four or five years, so it's difficult for me to comment on that.

Second, we acknowledge the fact that tobacco is addictive, in the sense of the term, and that smoking is certainly hard to quit. I don't have any problem with acknowledging that. That seems to be common knowledge today.

I'm a non-smoker myself. As those products have not been used in Canada in the last four or five years, it's very difficult for me to comment. Consumers aren't smoking tobacco products in Canada today with those terms on them.

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

You have a little bit more time, Dr. Sellah. Would you like another question? Are you finished?

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I'm finished, since the gentleman has answered the question about light and mild product competition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Morin, do you want to take her extra two minutes to make up time?

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Yes, please.

Mr. Cunningham, I'm very glad you talked about statistics that indicate that smoking in all age groups has decreased. However, I think that the popularity of little cigars—or cigarillos—has increased, especially among young people, who believe that smoking cigarillos is sort of cool.

Could you give us the information you have on that specific product? Do you have any statistics, especially regarding young people?

[Rob Cunningham]

Bill C-32, which was studied by this committee and passed by Parliament, prohibits flavoured little cigars. Prior to the passing of the bill, we noticed a strong increase in the sales of cigarillos in chocolate, mint, peach, vanilla and raspberry flavours, which were very popular among young people. That's unbelievable considering that it's a harmful and addictive product.

That excellent bill, introduced by the Minister of Health, Ms. Aglukkaq, was supported by all the parties. Under the regulations, the new warnings will apply to little cigars, as set out in Bill C-32—and that is a good thing—even if they aren't flavoured.

In addition, I want to remind you that a Senate committee studied this bill and heard from witnesses who said that, if the bill were passed, the Rothmans, Benson & Hedges plant in Quebec would have to close. The bill was passed, and the plant is still open. So, the sky did not fall. We always hear about how the sky will fall.

Regarding the Shorr Packaging case Mr. Haslam just mentioned, it was well after 2000, when regulations on the new packaging were made.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Morin. I just want to tell you that following Mr. Gill, you are back on again.

Now we'll go to Mr. Gill for five minutes.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you, Chair. I'd also like to thank the witnesses for taking the time out and being here.

The first question is for Mr. Cunningham. Could please help us understand the impact these labels will have mainly on youth, teens, and preteens? Has there been a study done? Can you give us some details on that?

[Rob Cunningham]

There have been studies done by Health Canada on adults and youth and research by the Canadian Cancer Society on adults and youth, and the findings are that the bigger size is more effective than the smaller size.

We know that the cigarette package is a mini-billboard that walks around communities, schoolyards, and homes in the hands of youth. Often the package is what they want to convey as an image to their friends and their peers in their circles. When you have the truth about mouth cancer or other health effects right on that package, that package isn't so cool anymore.

It does discourage youth from smoking. It encourages discussions at school when the subject comes up in health class. It encourages informal discussion among smokers. There is also a toll-free quit line as part of this package, which is very important, because every Canadian, whether in a remote community or a rural community or a city, who finds it inconvenient to get to a smoking cessation program is going to have that number right on the package for the teachable moment when the person is motivated to quit and wants help. They can call for free and get help from a trained specialist. That's available to Canadians across the country.

For a series of reasons, many youth don't think it's going to happen to them. Smoking is going to happen to somebody else. Maybe it's in 50 years, and they are living for the present, but when you have that picture on the package, a picture says a thousand words. It's harder to avoid. Moreover, when it's something to do with image, like the mouth and something like that, it resonates, because image is so important to kids.

It is more difficult for the tobacco companies to convey femininity or masculinity or sophistication or status, which they try to do with all of their attractive packages, when that advertising stock is smaller. I mean, the size is sufficient to convey the brand name and so on. There's no problem there. Other countries, such as Uruguay and so on, have gone bigger, and Australia has required plain packaging in terms of draft legislation they've announced for comment, so other countries have gone further.

These are various mechanisms that help to reduce youth smoking, and that's been the experience in Canada so far. Youth themselves are supportive of these types of messages.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Are there any stats available from other countries that may have gone to the bigger version of the labels, especially stats on teenagers and pre-teens? What sort of reduction may there be from their being able to not get addicted to smoking?

[Rob Cunningham]

I don't have youth trend data from other countries at my fingertips, but I do know that there has been progress in other countries that have introduced these labels in terms of reduction in youth smoking. New Zealand is another example, apart from countries I've already mentioned. Tobacco companies oppose these for a reason. The companies know that these regulations work to reduce youth smoking. That's why we see more and more governments, health departments, and ministers of health analyzing the international evidence, seeing the experience of other countries, and adopting regulations of this nature.

The experience in other countries in essence is consistent. At the same time, in developing countries you have countervailing pressures, because you still might have advertising on billboards or on television. You may have growing incomes that allow people to afford cigarettes as developing countries improve. You may have much less awareness of the health effects than you have in Canada.

These other incentives contribute to upward pressures in smoking, and it may be that in such a country, warnings of this nature would reduce smoking to levels that otherwise would not be the case. They will slow the growth. Every country has particular circumstances.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you very much, Mr. Gill.

We will now go to Monsieur Morin.