stanton a. glantz, phd eric crosbie , ma university of california, san francisco

12
How the Tobacco Companies will use the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement to Block Sensible Public Health Policies Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric Crosbie, MA University of California, San Francisco 13 th Round of TPP Negotiations July 2, 2012

Upload: vachel

Post on 24-Feb-2016

29 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

How the Tobacco Companies will use the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement to Block Sensible Public Health Policies. Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco 13 th Round of TPP Negotiations July 2, 2012. Tobacco Companies. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

How the Tobacco Companies will use the

Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement to Block Sensible Public Health Policies

Stanton A. Glantz, PhDEric Crosbie, MA

University of California, San Francisco

13th Round of TPP NegotiationsJuly 2, 2012

Page 2: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Tobacco Companies• Sell 6 trillion cigarettes annually• Kill 5.4 million annually• By 2030 will kill 8 million annually • 1 billion deaths expected for 21st century• 80% of smokers now live in developing world

WHO Tobacco Facts: http://www.who.int/tobacco/mpower/tobacco_facts/en/index.html

Page 3: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Tobacco Control Policies Work

• Smokefree policies• Marketing bans• Increased taxes• Warning labels• Prevent smoking and encourage cessation• Improve health

– Rapid impacts on heart disease• Cost multinational tobacco companies billions

Page 4: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Tobacco Companies Bigger Than Most Countries

• British American Tobacco – $50 billion annual sales

• Philip Morris International– $66 billion annual sales – Larger than 139 countries’ GDP

-CIA World Factbook: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html?countryName=Australia&countryCode=as&regionCode=aus&rank=19#as-Global Tobacco Industry: http://seekingalpha.com/article/237020-global-tobacco-industry-cigarette-cos-go-their-separate-ways-in-battling-regulation

Page 5: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Preemption• Eliminate authority of governments to

implement sensible public health policies to protect their people

• Local clean indoor air• Companies routinely sue claiming preemption

– Even when not there– Raise cost of protecting the public– Deter action

• Bully governments-Nixon ML, Mahmoud L, Glantz SA. Tobacco industry litigation to deter local public health ordinances: the industry usually loses in court. Tob Control 2004;13(1):65-73. -Dearlove JV, Glantz SA. Boards of Health as venues for clean indoor air policy making. Am J Public Health 2002;92(2):257-265.

Page 6: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

The tobacco companies will argue that the TPP preempts all

tobacco regulation

Page 7: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Tobacco companies threaten governments even when their lawyers tell them

they don’t have a case

Tobacco Company Plain Pack Group July 1994tid/mjk78a99

Page 8: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Success in Bullying Governments

• In 1994 threatened governments with multi-billion lawsuits for damages

• Governments withdrew proposals for plain packaging out of fear of losing in court– Australia (Paris Convention, WTO, TRIPS)– Canada (Paris Convention, WTO, TRIPS, NAFTA)

• Delayed these innovations for decades

Page 9: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Current Attacks on Public Health• Domestic Tobacco Control

Policies– Uruguay-Graphic Health Warning

Labels covering 80% (2008) – Australia-Plain Packaging (2012)– Other governments seeking plain

packaging (ex. New Zealand)

• PMI Bilateral Investment Treaty Challenges– Uruguay-Switzerland BIT– Australia-Hong Kong BIT

-Porterfield MC. Philip Morris v. Uruguay: Will investor-State arbitration send restrictions up in smoke? http://www.iisd.org/itn/2011/07/12/philip-morris-v-uruguay-will-investor-state-arbitration-send-restrictions-on-tobacco-marketing-up-in-smoke/ -Nottage L. Investor-state Arbitration Policy and Practice after Philip Morris v Australia. http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/japaneselaw/2011/06/isa_claim.html

Page 10: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

PMI involvement during TPP negotiations

• PMI lobbying USTR– 2010-Submitted comments for ISDS mechanism

• PMI searching for new avenues to block public health policies

• PMI lobbying TPP member countries– 2012-Sponsored a closed meeting with trade

representatives from TPP member countries• Violates WHO FCTC Article 5.3

-Submission of Philip Morris International in Response to Proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement. 6 January 2010 Available at: http://donttradeourlivesaway.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/ustr-phillip-morris-submission.pdf. -United States Trade Representative. Free Trade Agreements: Trans-Pacific Partnership. 2012.

Page 11: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

TPP Investor Rights

• Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism

• Allows foreign companies to “directly” sue governments

• Will unleash tobacco companies

Page 12: Stanton A. Glantz, PhD Eric  Crosbie , MA University of California, San Francisco

Solution for Tobacco in TPPA

• Ambiguous language creates opportunities for the tobacco companies’ lawyers to exploit

• Simplest and best solution is complete carve out tobacco