Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 30
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Health committee  That's exactly what we're doing. We are shifting our resources. We're massively shifting all of our activities over to these new products, but it takes a lot of money. It took a ton of money for these products to be developed, to do the research and development on them, and we ha

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  It's a combination. It would have no positive impact on public health if we were to just stop selling unilaterally. People would go to our competitors, or they would go to the black market. At the same time, we wouldn't have the infrastructure and the resources in order to commer

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I think vaping is a market we would certainly look at competing in if it were legalized. I don't think it's a question of its being a growth market per se. I believe that the more people we can switch from cigarettes to an alternative product, the better, whether it's heated toba

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  With combustible cigarettes, it has to do with what was discussed earlier about brand preference. Once people decide to smoke, you want them choose your brand rather than your competitor's. You want the products to be differentiated from a consumer standpoint so that people know

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I'm not the expert on their business strategy, but it seems pretty logical.

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I don't think this type of packaging is the reason that people smoke. I think making the decision to smoke is a much bigger decision than which brand you smoke. At the same time, the reason I did not speak about plain packaging in my remarks is that, frankly, while there are ne

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  Honestly, I wish I knew. We don't have an official position on it. Our perspective is that taxation should be based on risk, not just the history of why we are where we are today. I think whichever product you're looking at, you should look at taxation based on the risk to the co

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I'm the managing director—

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I can't speak on behalf of Philip Morris other than to say—

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  That is something that is publicly stated. Phillip Morris always adheres to the highest ethical standards when marketing and selling its products. The only thing that we are asking for here in Canada is to tell smokers factual information about the products they can choose betwee

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  We are trying to switch people who already smoke—who already, based on everything we know, are at high risk of disease—to go to potentially less risky alternatives.

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  I think there are a lot of things we could look at funding together. You could look at education. You could look at independently verified research on these new products, to address Mr. Eyolfson's concern. I think there are many things that can be done. Today the government does

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  Absolutely not. It's pretty clear that when you talk about the risks of nicotine, we've always said that nicotine is not risk-free, but you have to look at the continuum of risk. That's the whole point of—

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  Let's be very clear. Our goal is to stop selling cigarettes. I'm not going to speak to the committee about things that may or may not have happened in India—

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo

Health committee  Well, I think you need to differentiate between two things. Number one is whether they felt there was enough evidence to make certain recommendations on specific language, what that underlying evidence showed, and what the discussion of that committee showed. I think there was a

February 12th, 2018Committee meeting

Peter Luongo