<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Tobacco Articles: category federal</title>
<link>http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/federal.rss</link>
<description>Latest top tobacco news headlines</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title> Plain-pack case strong, says Roxon  </title>
<link>http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/plainpack-case-strong-says-roxon-20120208-1rf02.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333630.html</guid>
<description>
In its defence filed with the High Court, the government argues its plain packaging laws do not amount to an acquisition of the companies&#039; property, because they do not deliver to the Commonwealth or anyone else &#039;&#039;any identifiable and measurable benefits or advantages&#039;&#039;.


It argues that the rights of the companies as trademark owners have always been subject to other laws. It also argues the companies use the trademarks to maintain or increase the consumption of cigarettes, which was harmful to the public and the public interest.

High Court judges have previously held that &#039;&#039;just terms&#039;&#039; were not required for laws &#039;&#039;which provide for the creation, modification, extinguishment or transfer of rights&#039;&#039; in &#039;&#039;areas which need to be regulated in the common interest&#039;&#039;.</description>
<source url="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/">Brisbane  Times </source>
<dc:coverage>Australia</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Scottsville legislator goes to bat for burley :   Resolution aims to protect tobacco in U.S. trade agreements</title>
<link>http://www.bgdailynews.com/news/local/scottsville-legislator-goes-to-bat-for-burley/article_510ea84e-527e-11e1-9b48-0019bb2963f4.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333612.html</guid>
<description>
A southcentral Kentucky lawmaker hopes that Kentucky burley is given its due when future trade agreements are negotiated between the United States and foreign countries.

&quot;There is some discussion of excluding tobacco from the agreements,&quot; said state Rep. Wilson Stone, D-Scottsville.

On Tuesday, Stone filed a nonbinding House resolution that says Kentucky farmers need to have the same access to trade as other agriculture commodities. The measure is expected to be voted on soon. Sen. Paul Hornback, R-Shelbyville, filed the same resolution in the state Senate, signaling bipartisan support for the issue.

Stone said there have been rumors that President Barack Obama&#039;s administration wants to take tobacco out of the equation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, a regional trade agreement between the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Those negotiations are expected to finish this summer.

&quot;It&#039;s not so much a price issue, because world markets determine that, but one of access,&quot; Stone said.
&quot;If you take tobacco out of those agreements, it will dearly hurt Kentucky and Kentucky&#039;s farmers,&quot;</description>
<source url="http://www.bgdailynews.com/]">Bowling Green  Daily News</source>
<author>rminor@bgdailynews.com (ROBYN L. MINOR The Daily News)</author>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>No cigar: Embargo on Cuba turns 50</title>
<link>http://theadvocate.com/news/business/2009549-123/no-cigar-embargo-on-cuba.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333608.html</guid>
<description>The world is much changed since the early days of 1962, but one thing has remained constant: The U.S. economic embargo on communist-run Cuba, a near-total trade ban that turned 50 on Tuesday. . . .



In the White House, the first sign of the looming embargo came when President John F. Kennedy told his press secretary to go buy him as many H. Upmann Cuban cigars as he could find. The aide came back with 1,200 stogies.

Kennedy announced the embargo on Feb. 3, 1962, citing &#8220;the subversive offensive of Sino-Soviet communism with which the government of Cuba is publicly aligned.&#8221;</description>
<source url="http://hosted.ap.org/">Associated Press </source>
<dc:coverage>Cuba</dc:coverage>
<dc:coverage>USA</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Jolly Good Smoke: Old-fashioned tobacconists face an uncertain future as the world fights cigarettes and Swisher Sweets.</title>
<link>http://www.mndaily.com/2012/02/09/jolly-good-smoke</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333595.html</guid>
<description>Stogies on Grand (961 Grand Ave., St. Paul) and Lewis Pipes and Tobacco (527 Marquette Ave., Minneapolis) evoke completely different feelings upon entrance.

Stogies&#8217; quaint Grand Avenue storefront leads into a labyrinthine store filled with laughter and smoke, while Lewis&#8217; massive skyscraper hat sits over a clean one-room shop. The men who own these stores, on the other hand, look quite similar &#8212; tall, broad and worried around the eyes.

The wrinkles that crease their faces are in no small part due to the stress of working in an industry constantly teetering on the brink &#8212; &#8220;&#8230; really the only industry that could vanish, poof, at the whim of a Congress session,&#8221; as Lewis Tobaco owner Rich Lewis puts it. . . .


Many tobacco enthusiasts also malign the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which gives the president full regulatory power over the tobacco industry.

&#8220;Too many kids have been grabbing cheap cigars, Swishers and Dutch Masters, scraping out the middle and filling them with marijuana. You might have heard of it &#8212; it&#8217;s called &#8216;blunting,&#8217;&#8221; Wolk said.

In an effort to stop the illegal activity, the newer bill would also effectively put stores like Stogies out business.

This year will mark the 40th anniversary of Lewis&#8217; tenure at his family&#8217;s tobacco shop, and he has seen business grind to a near halt as higher taxes are passed and stricter smoking restrictions are enacted. . . .

 Make sure to keep tamping the ash down as you smoke, and the bowl should puff all the way down without a problem.

Remember to keep it an occasional celebration, and enjoy!
</description>
<source url="http://www.daily.umn.edu/">Minnesota Daily </source>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Bid to filter out the glamour from cigs:   PACK-ET IN ... anti-smoking campaigner Ailsa Rutter is urging families to get behind the new packaging bid.</title>
<link>http://www.jarrowandhebburngazette.com/news/health/bid_to_filter_out_the_glamour_from_cigs_1_4232246</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333584.html</guid>
<description>

PARENTS in South Tyneside are being urged to help protect children from starting to smoke by backing a new campaign calling for plain tobacco packaging.

The Plain Packs Protect campaign is being launched by health campaigners Fresh, aimed at banning the kind of glitzy packaging which can attract youngsters.

Kids as young as nine in the region have been reported as starting smoking, and colourfully eye-catching and increasingly innovative packs of cigarettes can act as &#8216;silent salesmen&#8217;.

The campaign comes after the Gazette revealed last week that the overall cost of smoking-related hospital admissions in the borough has risen to &#163;3.9m annually.</description>
<source url="http://www.jarrowandhebburngazette.com/">Jarrow &amp; Hebburn Gazette </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Cigarette packaging campaign </title>
<link>http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/cigarette_packaging_campaign_1_4226760</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333540.html</guid>
<description>
ANTI-smoking campaigners are urging parents to back a new campaign calling for plain tobacco packaging.

The Plain Packs Protect campaign is being launched today in the North-East by health campaigners FRESH, aimed at reducing thousands of North-East child smokers who are attracted to glitzy brands.

The average age most smokers in the North-East start smoking is just 15, but some start at just nine years old.

FRESH believes eye-catching and increasingly innovative packs of cigarettes can act as &#8216;silent salesmen&#8217;.

Plain Packs Protect is supported by FRESH, Action for Smoking and Health (ASH), Cancer Research UK and the British Heart Foundation.</description>
<source url="http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/">Hartlepool Mail </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Australia Says It Has Right To Restrict Tobacco Packaging</title>
<link>http://www.nasdaq.com/article/australia-says-it-has-right-to-restrict-tobacco-packaging-20120208-00054</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333538.html</guid>
<description>Australia&#039;s government claims in court filings that it has the legal right to enforce plain packaging on the tobacco industry, setting up what&#039;s likely to be prolonged legal battle with the world&#039;s largest cigarette makers.

In a defense filing Tuesday with the High Court of Australia, the government argues it has the power to regulate the marketing and packaging of tobacco and also claims tobacco products are harmful to public health.

&quot;The Commonwealth will vigorously defend the validity of the plain packaging laws and does not accept there is any basis for big tobacco&#039;s claims that the measures are unconstitutional,&quot; said Attorney General Nicola Roxon in a release. . . .


Philip Morris is also seeking arbitration from a United Nations tribunal to challenge the Australian government&#039;s plan. The company claims that the plain packaging laws breach a trade agreement struck in 1993 between Australia and Hong Kong to protect their respective offshore investments.

Rivals Imperial Tobacco Group PLC (IMT.LN), British American Tobacco PLC ( BATS.LN) and Japan Tobacco Inc. (2914.TO) have also filed cases against the Australian government, claiming the laws are unconstitutional. The hearings will run concurrently and hearings are likely to begin in April.

</description>
<source url="http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/quotes_news.asp">NASDAQ</source>
<dc:coverage>Australia</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>BELLO: The Definition of Tort Reform Hypocrisy? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce</title>
<link>http://farmingtonhills.injuryboard.com/defective-and-dangerous-products/the-definition-of-tort-reform-hypocrisy-the-us-chamber-of-commerce.aspx?googleid=298148</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333376.html</guid>
<description>
The Chamber filed its brief in support of the tobacco industry (one of the industries that provides back-door funding of the Chamber&#039;s &quot;tort reform&quot; initiatives) and against the Food and Drug Administration (in other words, the Federal Government), arguing that the government has &quot;no legitimate authority to take space on a tobacco company&#039;s packaging or advertising to persuade consumers not to buy the product&quot;. . . .


Can you think of anything more hypocritical than this lawsuit and the U.S. Chamber&#039;s support of it? The goverment (you, the taxpayer) has to spend millions in taxpayer dollars defending it. What a waste of taxpayer money and government time, just to buy time to save a few years profits for a corporate polluter, perhaps the most serious health hazard on the planet. The Chamber is constantly railing against &quot;lawsuit abuse&quot; (a campaign funded, in part, by the tobacco industry), but this one is not &quot;frivolous&quot;? A producer of an acknowledged dangerous product files a lawsuit against the government for trying to graphically warn the public that the product is grossly unsafe and the Chamber backs this lawsuit but attacks those filed by citizens to address and punish corporate wrongdoing? This is the same Chamber that says when a citizen sues a corporate wrongdoer for the serious harm suffered by the citizen, that citizen is guilty of &quot;lawsuit abuse&quot;. This organization has zero credibility when it comes to this issue. The public should repudiate the Chamber and any candidate it supports, by its voice and its vote. As corporate lackey and tort reform hypocrite, John Stossel, would say: &quot;Give me a break&quot;!</description>
<source url="http://www.tobacco.org/media.php?mode=display&amp;media_id=17332">InjuryBoard.com</source>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Chris Snowdon: plain packs nothing to do with health: Even advocates don&#039;t expect it to deter smokers from smoking </title>
<link>http://www.handsoffourpacks.com/blog/plain-packs-nothing-to-do-with-health/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333256.html</guid>
<description>

THE LAW TO MANDATE plain cigarette packaging passed through the Australian parliament last year to the delight of tobacco control groups and the fury of the tobacco industry.

The general public can be forgiven for being apathetic about a policy which had become a pitched battle between anti-smoking extremists and the cigarette companies. Plain packaging does not obviously victimise smokers in the same way that smoking bans and regressive taxes do, and although plain packaging is another unwelcome step towards &#039;denormalisation&#039;, they--like everybody else--have bigger worries.

For the anti-smokers, industry indignation is tantamount to proof that the policy will succeed in lowering the smoking rate. They are willfully missing the point. The tobacco industry is not a monolithic entity but a group of companies engaged in fierce competition.</description>
<source url="http://www.handsoffourpacks.com/">Hands off our Packs </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Hands Off Our Packs off to a promising start: Several hundred supporters sign our petition on Day One </title>
<link>http://www.handsoffourpacks.com/blog/hands-off-our-packs-off-to-a-promising-start/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333255.html</guid>
<description>
The Hands Off Our Packs petition against plain packaging got off to a great start this week with several hundred people signing up.

The petition was mentioned in The Times business section. It was also reported by several trade publications including Off Licence News, Retail Times, Packaging Gazette and Tobacco Journal International and You can read about us on Talking Retail and Politics.co.uk.

Elsewhere Spectator columnist and Telegraph blogger James Delingpole retweeted our tweet about the petition and there have been supportive comments on both Twitter and Facebook where Hands Off Our Packs has its own page.


Bloggers too have come out in support.

They include historian Chris Snowdon (who also blogged here on Monday) and the ever passionate Pat Nurse.

Popular libertarian blogger Dick Puddlecote also spoke out. . . .


Finally, we&#039;re delighted to report that the opposition - Plain Packs Protect - are following us on Twitter. This could get interesting!</description>
<source url="http://www.handsoffourpacks.com/">Hands off our Packs </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Letters: HOCKNEY: The trouble with tobacco haters </title>
<link>http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/27/trouble-with-tobacco-haters</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333249.html</guid>
<description>
Why doesn&#039;t Mr Chapman debate with a good and satisfied customer of the tobacco companies (Plain packs will make smoking history, 25 January)? Someone who has seen what will replace it as a smoothing, calming contemplative helper. Someone whose friends died of alcohol consumption, not tobacco. Someone who has smoked for nearly as long as he has lived. Someone who knows about the fanatical attitude of haters of tobacco. Someone who is not so naive about advertising and packaging.

Someone who has almost outlived a fanatical anti-smoking father. Someone who is fed up to the teeth with people who think they really know what health is.  . . .


Someone who thinks laughter is good for you as it drains fear from the body. Someone who has something better to do than to try and control the quiet lives of others. Someone who knows we are all a bit different and is fed up with the growing regimentation of people. Someone who knows that smokers can live perfectly average-length lives but heavy drinkers rarely. Someone who is shocked by the growing conformity among people, and what that might mean for a reasonable free society. Someone who prefers the centre of Bohemia to Australian suburbia. Someone who knows we have to die. </description>
<source url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/">The Guardian </source>
<author>editor@societyguardian.co.uk (David Hockney Bridlington, East Yorkshire )</author>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Hockney hits back at &quot;haters of tobacco&quot;</title>
<link>http://www.forestonline.org/news/headlines/hockney-hits-back-at-tobacco-haters/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333248.html</guid>
<description>Artist David Hockney, a member of Forest&#039;s Supporters Council, has criticised a leading anti-smoking activist who wants tobacco sold in plain packaging.

Writing to the Guardian in response to an interview with Simon Chapman, a professor of public health at the University of Sydney, Hockney asked:

Why doesn&#039;t Mr Chapman debate with a good and satisfied customer of the tobacco companies (Plain packs will make smoking history, 25 January)? Someone who has seen what will replace it as a smoothing, calming contemplative helper. Someone whose friends died of alcohol consumption, not tobacco. Someone who has smoked for nearly as long as he has lived. Someone who knows about the fanatical attitude of haters of tobacco. Someone who is not so naive about advertising and packaging.</description>
<source url="http://www.forest-on-smoking.org.uk/">FOREST </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title> Guidance on the display and pricing of tobacco products in England, for tobacco retailers and regulatory officers (PDF)</title>
<link>http://www.acs.org.uk/en/info/document_summary.cfm/docid/DF54B046-D6CE-45A1-A26F1E1785899FC2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333198.html</guid>
<description>

Introduction

1. The law on the display of all products containing tobacco and the display of tobacco prices in England is changing. 1

2. From 6 April 2012, new law will affect large shops selling tobacco products (other than specialist and bulk tobacconists). All other shops and businesses selling tobacco products (including bulk tobacconists and specialist tobacconists) will be affected from 6 April 2015.
 . . .


7. The aim of this guidance is to explain the requirements of the new law so that both businesses and regulatory officers are helped to implement it successfully. It also suggests practical steps that retailers can take to prepare for the start of the new law. This guidance has been written by the Local Government Regulatory Support Unit with the Department of Health; the British Retail Consortium and the Association of Convenience Stores also contributed to its development.
 . . .


While deliveries are often made &quot;behind the scenes&quot; with products being unloaded directly into storage areas that are not generally in public view, in many small shops deliveries have to be taken through the public area of the shop. Depending on the nature of the outer packaging, it is possible that a technical breach of the display law may be made if deliveries can be seen by customers while they are being taken through the public area of a shop. Retailers must take steps to keep any such display to a minimum. Tobacco products should be removed from sight as soon as possible and deliveries should not be left on open view for any longer than is necessary to move them to a storage area. . . .

 Staff members collecting goods to make up online orders should only display tobacco products for as long as is necessary to take the items out of the gantry and add them to the order. Tobacco products must not be visible to customers while being carried around the shop after being placed in a crate or trolley.</description>
<source url="http://www.acs.org.uk/">ACS  </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Are you ready for the Tobacco Display Ban?</title>
<link>http://www.acs.org.uk/en/Advice/advice_guides/responsible_retailing/tobacco-display-ban/index.cfm</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333197.html</guid>
<description>
The law on the display of all products containing tobacco and the display of tobacco prices in England is changing. From 6 April 2012, a new law will affect stores that are over 3000 sq ft selling tobacco products.

All other shops and businesses selling tobacco products will be affected from 6 April 2015

The following guidance is aimed at retailers and staff to help with compliance with the new regulations. More detailed guidance on the regulations published by the Department of Health can be found here.

You can download guidance in either poster or booklet format for your store using the links below.</description>
<source url="http://www.acs.org.uk/">ACS  </source>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>ACS publishes retailers&#039; guide to tobacco display ban</title>
<link>http://www.theretailbulletin.com/news/acs_publishes_retailers_guide_to_tobacco_display_ban_03-02-12/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tobacco.org/news/333196.html</guid>
<description>

The Association of Convenience Stores has published a guide for retailers on the upcoming tobacco display ban.

The new rules, which apply to stores in England with over 280 sq m of retail floor space, come into force on 6 April 2012. Smaller stores will need to comply by 6 April 2015.

The guidance is based on the more detailed advice produced by the Department of Health in collaboration with trading standards, ACS and the British Retail Consortium. It is designed to help retailers with the crucial task of training their staff.

The ACS claims the new rules are imposing a major burden on retailers and causing significant disruption and upheaval. It also points to continuing confusion about the rules that will apply in other parts of the United Kingdom.

ACS chief executive James Lowman said: &quot;At this point it is only possible to produce a guide for retailers in England. We still await confirmation of the final regulations and implementation dates in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.</description>
<source url="http://www.theretailbulletin.com/">Retail Bulletin </source>
<author>events@theretailbulletin.com</author>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
