The right to smoke

Include more sales points?

05:55 AM Oct 08, 2009

by Alicia Wong

SINGAPORE - Supermarkets and places near schools and eateries are some outlets members of the public would like to see banned from selling cigarettes.

And, if most of the respondents to a public consultation had their way, the smoking ban should be extended to cover more public areas such as void decks, within vehicles and HDB homes.

The Health Promotion Board (HPB) and Health Sciences Authority (HSA) released a summary of public feedback to their proposed amendments to the Smoking (Control of Advertisement and Sale of Tobacco) (Cast) Act yesterday.

The four-week consultation drew a total of 171 responses, of which 92 per cent supported reviewing the criteria to prohibit certain premises from selling tobacco products and only 5 per cent objected to prohibiting the sale of such products at petrol stations.

HPB and HSA said they would review the application criteria for tobacco retailers and would "consider the feedback and suggestions from the public."

Nine in 10 of the respondents also suggested other measures to reduce smoking rates, including extending the smoking ban and increasing tobacco taxation.

However, smoker Wong Meiling, 26, felt "smokers are already marginalised enough ... If you sell cigarettes in fewer places, we are still going to smoke".

While six in 10 respondents wanted cigarillos, which are mini-cigars, to be sold in packs of at least 20 sticks, others felt keeping to packs of 10 sticks and raising prices would be more effective instead.

In response, HPB said requiring cigarillos to be sold in bigger packs will "effectively" raise their retail price.

The majority of respondents - 87 per cent - which included individuals and industry players, also supported controlling alternative forms of tobacco products, such as shisha.

Student Charmaine Tan, 19, supported greater regulations against smoking shisha. Said Ms Tan, who smokes shisha occasionally: "It attracts young people (and) they (businesses) don't care about age limit (now)."

Opinions were divided, however, when it came to increasing the minimum composition fine from $30 to $100 as four in 10 respondents felt underaged offenders may come from low-income families. But HPB said first-time underaged offenders would have their fines waived if they completed an online smoking cessation programme.

The majority of respondents also favoured banning misleading labelling such as "light" or "mild" cigarettes, and replacing tar and nicotine labels with a general health warning.

 

Copyright 2009 MediaCorp Pte Ltd | All Rights Reserved

I used to be a pretty heavy smoker, going through at least a pack of cigarettes per day. Happy to say that I had remained smoke-free for the last 10 months, and I do feel better overall I suppose, but that is my choice, to stop smoking. It wasn't forced on me, I don't think that it should be forced on anyone, by anyone.

Smokers are a marginalized bunch. Why are people not going after drinkers, that potentially is at a higher risk of hurting themselves or someone else when drunk. Why not the vehicles or factories that spew more smoke, carbon and pollutant than all smokers combined could? Yes, while I understand all the non-smokers health concerns about 2nd hand smoke etc which is why I think its fair that there are designated smoking areas where non-smokers can stay away from, especially at F&B establishments where kids and family congregate and have dinner and might poses health problems, especially to those with respiratory problems. Smoking is also rightly banned at bus stops, taxi stands, and other modes of public transports. Much as I hate and disagree with the ban on smoking at pubs and discos, I grudgingly accept the fact that non-smokers want an occasional drink without the smoke (although to be fair, I proposed at the time that why not have a smokers only pub/disco, which of course was duly shot down, but I still think its a very viable business idea :P)

But I think it really started to cross a line of absurdity when these people (the non-smokers I presumed) basically try to slap a "no smoking" label on anything and everything they can get their hands on. Might as well slap a label on their forehead and stigmatize them for life. I mean, I can understand, and even foresee a day (if it is not here already), that smokers will only be allowed to smoke in designated areas in public, but to extend it into their private spaces such as mentioned in the article above, within vehicles and HDB homes, I really feel its ridiculous to say the least. If they can't smoke in public places, can't smoke in void decks, can't smoke in their own cars, can't smoke in their own homes (especially given that 85% of Singaporeans live in HDB homes), where do you want them to go?!

Might as well ban tobacco like Bhuntan then. But somehow I doubt the government has the political will to push through that, given the high tax revenues they receive..

Blogged with the Flock Browser