India film smoking ban is lifted The High Court in Delhi has overturned a government ban on showing smoking scenes in films.

India film smoking ban is lifted


The High Court in Delhi has overturned a government ban on showing smoking scenes in films.

The court said that the ban violated the fundamental right of film-makers to freedom of speech and expression.

"The director of films should not have multifarious authorities breathing down their necks when indulging in creative art," Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul said.

Film-makers had condemned the ban when it was instigated in 2005 as an absurd infringement of artistic expression.

'Wrong target'

Mr Justice Kaul passed the order to revoke the ban as an "umpire judge" after a junior court had earlier given a split ruling on efforts by Bollywood director Mahesh Bhatt to challenge curbs on scenes of smoking in films and on television.

Mr Justice Kaul agreed that a blanket ban on films that showed smoking scenes was a direct encroachment on the creativity and free artistic expression of the film-maker.

Movie-makers said that films were the wrong target in the drive to curb smoking.

The government had argued that 800,000 Indians a year died from smoking-related diseases and that it was wrong for films or TV programmes to glamorise the habit.

It said that old films - whether Indian or foreign - must carry warnings if they showed smoking scenes. It said all logos of tobacco products must be masked or cut out.

Mr Bhatt condemned the move at the time, saying: "One would understand a ban on surrogate advertising, but to completely ban [smoking] is ridiculous, a joke taken too far."

He and other film makers argued that the government should go after the source - people who produced tobacco.

But the World Health Organisation said the move would help cut India's smoking-related deaths because the portrayal of "attractive people smoking" had an influence on young people as "some of them identify with those on the screens".

In 2004, smoking was banned in public places in India and a ban imposed on tobacco firms' advertising in and sponsoring of sporting events.

Another law in 2005 required manufacturers to list tar and nicotine content on packets.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/

Smoking ban fails to persuade more to give up

Smoking ban fails to persuade more to give up as number of successful quitters drops by a quarter


The number of smokers giving up has barely increased since the ban, despite a hike in the amount spent by the NHS on quitting services.
Figures show that nearly a quarter fewer smokers gave up the habit between April and September last year compared to 2007 - the year the ban on smoking in public places was brought in.
At the same time, the amount spent by the NHS on stop smoking services increased from £26million to £33million.


Critics of the ban said the figures showed that it has had only limited success and that, although many smokers quit soon after the laws were introduced in July 2007, the numbers trailed off.
However, ministers were quick to point out that the ban was designed principally to protect people from second hand smoke and not just to encourage smokers to give up.
The NHS counts someone as having successfully stopped smoking if they manage to stay off cigarettes for four weeks after first quitting.
The numbers doing so fell by 24 per cent from 176,277 in 2007 to 133,704 last year, according to figures for the NHS Information Centre.
It means that the amount the Health Service is paying for each successful quitter has risen by 65 per cent from £148 to £244.
In 2006, the year before the ban, 128,868 smokers managed to quit - 4,836 fewer than in 2008 - while the cost to the NHS per quitter was £181.
Mark Wallace, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: 'The nanny state is becoming more expensive and less effective by the day.
'The Government seems to love glossy advertising and expensive television adverts but these figures show they are very ineffective. If the authorities stop heckling people so much, they might get a better reception.'
Last month, the Daily Mail revealed that the proportion of men who smoke has actually risen since the ban, while there has been no change among women.
A survey of 7,000 Britons also found that the average smoker still smokes the same amount of cigarettes each day, while men aged 16 to 34 have actually increased their consumption by one and a half cigarettes.
Tim Straughton, chief executive of the NHS Information Centre, said: 'The NHS is spending more than ever to support people to quit through its Stop Smoking services.
'The numbers who kicked the habit in April to September 2008 were substantially lower than in 2007 when the smoking ban came in. However, they were still higher than the same period in 2006 which was a more typical year to compare them with.'
Public health minister Dawn Primarolo said: 'NHS Stop Smoking Services remain extremely costeffective.
'The Department of Health will continue to work hard to attract smokers to quit with NHS support. Smokers who use such support are four times more likely to succeed than those who try to quit by willpower alone.'


By Daniel Martin
http://www.dailymail.co.uk


Waveney pubs breach smoke ban


Fewer people giving up smoking

A fifth of pubs were found to be in breach of smoke-free legislation during a four-day blitz in the Waveney area.

The clampdown by Waveney District Council's licensing team and Suffolk Police saw 122 pubs, clubs, hotels and other alcohol-licensed premises visited to assess compliance with relevant legislation.

During the campaign more than 90pc of establishments open in Waveney on a Friday and Saturday were assessed, including all but a handful of the pubs.

But while there were a number of examples of excellent practice, the inspectors also discovered breaches.

They found around 40pc of premises with technical offences regarding licences, 25pc with breaches relating to designated premises supervisors, the person responsible for the operation of the premises and the contact for any concerns, 20pc breached smoke-free requirements and five were permitting smoking in prohibited areas.

Police focused on underage and excess alcohol sales at premises with officers giving advice to licensees, and this will be followed up via further checks, including test purchase operations with trading standards, at a later date.

The council said the campaign would result in a number of advisory and warning letters being issued to licensees and that one establishment was temporarily closed due to significant breaches.

There are also likely to be two prosecutions as a result of the inspections. At least two premises gave rise to concern regarding significant noise nuisance, which officers will continue to monitor.

Ken Sale, Waveney District Council portfolio holder for the environment said: “These inspections, carried out at a time when they were perhaps least expected, send out a clear message that licensing conditions must be observed and that both the council as licensing authority and the police, are prepared to work together to monitor levels of compliance, even on the busiest nights of the week.

“A licence is only granted on the understanding that that the applicant will abide by its conditions. We will not tolerate breaches, or indeed any activity likely to compromise the four licensing objectives of preventing crime and disorder, ensuring public safety, preventing public nuisance and the protection children from harm. Officers will take formal action where appropriate to deal with persistent or serious offenders.”

Inspector Nick Aitken from Suffolk Police said the campaign had been beneficial: “As a result, officers have more confidence around licensing legislation. We have adopted a friendly approach to licensees and continue to work to build our partnership with them through the ongoing Nightsafe initiative.”

Fewer people giving up smoking
EMILY DENNIS

http://new.edp24.co.uk

Smoking bans can kill pub workers

Smoking bans can kill pub workers


From Mr Michael J. McFadden.

Sir, Matthew Engel ("How our pubs have run out of puff", Outside Edge, January 2/3) did a beautiful job of describing what the smoking ban has done to pubs and the bizarre consequences of such bans, but he overlooked one of the most important consequences: the devastating effect on the lives and health of the thousands of workers who have lost their jobs on the holy altar of the anti-smokers.

Have some workers possibly been spared an extra chance in a thousand of getting lung cancer 40 years down the road? I actually don't believe so from my own research, but even if it were true, what is the trade-off? A loss of 50 or so pubs per week in the UK and Ireland translates into a five-year loss of roughly 100,000 jobs if we assume the average pub employs 10 people. The general impact on the economy of these people being forced to go on the dole or work at menial jobs has severe health consequences in and of itself.

A British Medical Journal study several years ago examined income inequality and its effect on mortality. It estimated that a 1 per cent difference in income translated into 21 deaths per 100,000 per year. If we assume that the estimated 100,000 workers who lose their jobs over five years had their income cut by 50 per cent, that would be over 1,000 extra deaths per year caused by the smoking bans. That's 1,000 per year, right now, as opposed to 100 claimed/theorised to happen 40 years from now without a ban. Sure, it is all statistics, and with some juggling things might not seem quite so dire, but it is clear that no amount of juggling could ever eliminate such a massive disparity.

The smoking bans in the UK and Ireland are killing people, not saving them. Those bans need to be reversed and the people who promoted them and the politicians who voted them in, knowing the consequences, need to be held responsible.

Michael J. McFadden,

Philadelphia, PA, US

Author of Dissecting Antismokers' Brains
http://www.ft.com