I made the following speech at the November 2012 States Meeting.
Firstly Sir I would like to declare my interest in this debate as Patron of GASP, the Guernsey Adolescent Smokefree Project.
As someone representing a charity whose principal aim is to reduce smoking in under 18s, you would expect me to be fully endorsing these recommendations. I’ve never smoked either, I must have been a born accountant as to me it never made sense seeing your money literally going up in smoke.
So, upfront I have to say that I totally support the implementation of a licencing scheme and for the Police to be able to confiscate cigarettes from under 18s. Government should know which outlets are selling a highly toxic and addictive substance and be able to control how it is sold bearing in mind the cost to the taxpayer of treating people with smoking related illnesses.
We must do all we can to stop under 18s from smoking. Those who start under 18 are the ones that find it hardest to give up and succumb to the worst illnesses. I also believe that it is wrong for Under 18s to sell tobacco. What message does it give out that it isn’t ok to buy cigarettes but it is ok to sell them? I do welcome HSSD listening to the retailers, however, and coming to a pragmatic solution with regards to delaying this aspect of the recommendations.
Despite all the above, I have real concerns that with the one hand HSSD are bringing in a new method of tackling smoking, whilst at the same time they are taking away proven existing methods with the other.
This report states that the express objective is to reduce the prevalence of smoking and other use of tobacco products and, I quote ‘especially amongst persons under the age of 18’.
But, at the same time the very same department is cutting the amount of tobacco education in schools.
Since GASP began its work, the numbers of young people who have taken up smoking has dropped significantly. However, under HSSD’s proposals for 2013, GASP’s funding has been reduced under the mistaken expectation that HSSD would take on the education programme in its entirety. HSSD now plans very limited provision in primary schools, only limited education in secondary schools andthere will be no community activities or special projects which are so effective at targeting support to those young people who are most vulnerable to smoking. Yes, they are bringing in the ASSIST programme for Year 8 pupils but it is costly and only one school has so far agreed to take it up.
Currently Guernsey’s tobacco control strategy is shared equally across three pillars – controlling access to tobacco, tax and education
If HSSD really wants to reduce the numbers of young people smoking they need to take action in all 3 of these areas and, in particular, a steep rise in tobacco excise duty, while reducing demand among the young, should also provide funds which could be used for education.
I appreciate HSSD are struggling to keep within budget and that savings have to be made. However, I am surprised that the Department, given the success of services provided to date, have chosen this as an area to cut costs and services.
The original Appendix 1 of this report stated that fees would take into account public education about the health risks of smoking, but it was not made clear what these were. The Main body of the report states that the previous Board agreed it would be used to fund the extension of the Quitline service. Under Revised Appendix 1– nothing is mentioned at all. So, if Quitline is not to be funded through the licence fee, can the Minister advise where is the money coming from for that? And perhaps he can also advise whether this extension also covers the provision of free nicotine patches to inmates at Guernsey Prison.
I will support the recommendations in this report.
The principles behind them hold good. All the evidence shows that a multi-faceted approach is essential to reducing the levels of smoking and the recommendations fit well with this.
However I do have serious concerns that there is no joined up thinking here. If HSSD were really signed up to its 2020 Vision which focusses on prevention rather than cure, surely it would be directing its resources on services that prevent young people from smoking in the first place. I would like the Minister to confirm that if it does not have those resources, his Department will think laterally as to how it could raise those funds, through either fees or duties, to ensure that we do not see a reversal of all the good work that has been done over recent years to reduce the prevalence of smoking in under 18s.