Ministers are criticised after plans for plain pack cigarettes are put on hold

Cancer Research UK has said it is “bitterly disappointed” by the government’s decision to wait for more evidence on the effects of standardised plain packaging on cigarette and other tobacco products before deciding whether to adopt the policy.

The charity said that branding on cigarette packets made them more attractive to children, with around 40% of regular smokers saying they started smoking before the age of 16.

Harpal Kumar, the charity’s chief executive, said that lives would be lost as a result of the decision and accused the government of putting industry profits ahead of children’s health.

He added, “What’s shocking is that more than 200 000 children start smoking every year in the [United Kingdom]. They are lured into an addiction that is often lifelong but that kills half of all long term users. We can’t stand by and watch as these lives are lost. The government has stalled in the face of strong evidence and instead reacted to myths perpetuated by the tobacco industry, an industry well known for suppressing the truth about its lethal products.”

Vivienne Nathanson, director of professional activities at the BMA, agreed that the government had given in to pressure from the tobacco industry.

She said, “Evidence shows that packaging is a key marketing tool for the tobacco industry and an influence on younger people who start smoking. As doctors, we see at first hand the devastating effects of tobacco addiction, and therefore we urge the government to reconsider and introduce legislation forcing the industry to adopt standard packaging and help put an end to a lifelong addiction that kills and destroys health.”

Currently Australia is the only country that has introduced standardised packaging, although New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland have committed to introducing similar policies. The Scottish government has also confirmed its intention to adopt plain packaging and is planning when to introduce legislation.

Michael Matheson, Scotland’s public health minister, said, “The Scottish government remains committed to introducing standardised packaging, given the strong evidence to support the impact it will have on preventing young people from starting to smoke.”

The Department of Health for England and devolved administrations launched a consultation in April 2012 on whether tobacco products should be sold in standardised packaging. The consultation was due to end on 10 July 2012 but was extended for a month to allow all interested parties to respond.

There were 2444 detailed responses to the consultation and 665 989 responses from 24 separate campaigns.1 The lobby opposed to introducing standardised packaging was nearly twice as big as that in support of the policy, with 427 888 and 238 101 responses, respectively.

Of the detailed responses, 53% supported legislating for plain packaging and 43% favoured doing nothing. About half (54%) agreed that plain packaging would improve public health and reduce the appeal of tobacco products.

The first signs that the government was going to drop plans to legislate for standardised packing came in May, when there was no mention of the policy in the Queen’s speech.2

England’s health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, announced the decision, saying, “Obviously we take very seriously the potential for standardised packaging to reduce smoking rates, but in light of the differing views we have decided to wait until the emerging impact of the decision in Australia can be measured, and then we will make a decision in England.”

Meanwhile in a letter to the Guardian newspaper 41 senior doctors called for a free vote in parliament on what it called the “important child protection issue” of tobacco packaging.3 They said there was compelling evidence that “children’s perceptions of cigarettes are influenced by branding and that it detracts from the impact of health warnings on packs.”

Nathanson said that she was also concerned about reports that the government was expected to reverse its pledge to introduce a minimum unit price for alcohol, adding, “This is another example of a government which claims to have prioritised public health putting vested interests over those of the public.”

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint