Tobacco advertising ban moves off back burner

Date: 31/07/1997

By Michael Mann

THE Luxembourg presidency is working on a compromise designed to pave the way for agreement on long-stalled plans to ban tobacco advertising throughout the EU.

But after inconclusive meetings during June and July, it is unlikely to table its plans before late September and it is not clear whether there will be sufficient leeway for a deal to be struck at the next meeting of EU health ministers on 4 December.

Many greeted the election of a Labour government in the UK on 1 May as the key to breaking the impasse over the 1992 draft directive, but there has been little movement since then, beyond words of support from British Health Minister Tessa Jowell.

Earlier this month, the UK hosted an 'anti-smoking summit' to gauge the views of a range of experts. It is supposed to base its final position on what was said at the meeting.

The last time health experts from the 15 EU governments met on 22 July, Luxembourg chose not to discuss the most burning issue on the health agenda, despite claiming it was the presidency's number one priority.

An earlier session had seen most governments repeating their well-known positions, preferring to hold fire until the presidency produced a new version of the Commission's original plans.

Most uncertainty surrounds the definition of 'indirect advertising' in the proposal, with several countries concerned not to damage sport by making it impossible to attract tobacco company sponsorship.

German officials have suggested that a distinction could be made between “sponsorship of, say, Formula One racing, which is synonymous with indirect advertising, and support for cultural events”. Other countries do not recognise any difference between the two.

Germany remains in the vanguard of those countries resisting Health Commissioner Pádraig Flynn's drive to introduce a ban and continues to stress that the industry is attempting to exercise a degree of self-regulation.

The Dutch remain opposed as well, and have repeatedly highlighted an opinion drawn up by Council of Ministers' lawyers suggesting there is no legal basis in European law to introduce the kind of ban Flynn envisages.

Denmark is not opposed to the proposal from a philosophical point of view, but would have a problem if the ban meant restrictions on newspapers and magazines imported from non-EU countries. Greece maintains its basic opposition to the plans.

Other countries support Flynn, although a lot of work will be needed to answer the individual concerns of each one.

As Luxembourg will be in the chair for December's meeting, it has a pivotal role to play, but it also has a particular problem of its own. While the Grand Duchy already has a ban in place, much of its population reads German daily newspapers which are not subject to such restrictions.

Speaking at the recent UK conference, Flynn suggested this made an EU-wide solution more crucial than ever. “The need for a European solution is clear from the increasing problems which individual member states are finding in applying restrictions at the national level. The abolition of border controls within the internal market means that it becomes almost impossible to police a national measure correctly,” he said.