Plain packaging handy links

Welcome to The Australian readers.

As you will see we have been following the plain packaging debate for some time. Below you will find a series of handy links.

Evidence on evidence based policy.

Evidence on evidence based policy II.

Evidence on evidence based policy III.

Sin taxes and health care costs.

Evidence based policy: Plain packaging.

How’s that plain packaging policy working?

Are criminals dumb?

How’s that plain packaging policy working? II

Cherry picking tobacco data.

More tobacco data.

One bad policy begets another.

ABS revisions.

Tobacco excise.

Profit and sales.

Enjoy.

This entry was posted in Take Nanny down. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Plain packaging handy links

  1. Token

    This is a debate* which is ruled by emotive statements to enable governments to continue ratcheting up taxes. Enough of the evidence.

    * Debate, as in if you disagree with the prevailing opinion, you will be thrown out of the public sphere without a right to dialogue in the future.

  2. nerblnob

    “evidence-based” is one of the phrases that emotion-based policy activists have latched onto, quickly draining it of meaning.

    Like “peer reviewed” , “fact check”, “the science” etc etc.

    They don’t mean going where all the evidence leads. They mean only looking for evidence that supports their policy.

  3. gabrianga

    A bit of “ticker” required to make tobacco and its products illegal thus denying Governments of all revenues received from the sale of tobacco products.

    Why not the same concentration on relegating all alcohol products to the waste bin?

    Don’t remember cigarettes , a packet of Drum or the occasional cigar leading to wife beating, murders even rape but I suggest there is the occasional link to alcohol. (Just check St Vincent’s at the weekend)

    Perhaps our Parliamentarians could lead the way by declaring themselves (and Parliament House) to be “dry areas” ? Fat chance!

  4. Judith Sloan

    Sinc, you are doing a great job on this.

    But we should not forget that this is really an issue of principle rather than empirics.

    Cigarettes are a legal product. The trade marks and brands of companies should be legally protected. Plain packaging is an example of theft by government.

  5. Gab

    As if smokers won’t buy their cigarettes becuase the outer packaging has changed.
    Government has no idea about addiction. Plain packaging is a futile knee-jerk reaction that has accomplished nothing but is costing taxpayers a bucketload. What imbeciles.

    As if people wanting to try/take up smoking care about the colour of the packs.

  6. C.L.

    But we should not forget that this is really an issue of principle rather than empirics.

    Cigarettes are a legal product. The trade marks and brands of companies should be legally protected. Plain packaging is an example of theft by government.

    Bingo.

    Great reminder.

    Don’t be lured down the wowsers’ rabbit holes.

    Statistics are important but, politically, the anti-tobacco lunatics will always be able to best you deciminating theirs, courtesy of the gullible and innumerate media.

  7. Baldrick

    How long before we see the ‘plain packaging’ of fossil fuels or even the ‘plain packaging’ of motor vehicles? I mean, isn’t Gerbil wormening the biggest moral, economic and environmental challenge of our times?
    insert sarc thingy here

  8. .

    Many ALP MPs and candidates already “plain packaged” themselves in the last election.

    Gillard and Rudd are toxic and hazardous to your health and liberty!

  9. squawkbox

    Great links, but won’t make a difference. Anti-smoking is one of the new religions of our secular age, and as such is not susceptible to rational argument.

  10. Snoopy

    I wonder how much impact the reduction in the duty free allowance from 200 to 50 cigarettes has had on local sales. I assume it must have increased local sales. Even as a non-smoker, I used to bring in duty free smokes to give to relatives.

    I also notice that a lot of Asian tourists are smokers. Presumably they are now forced to buy local if they stay here for more than a few days.

  11. DaveA

    @TheKouk: I am looking forward to @ABCmediawatch deconstructing the consumption of tobacco issue tonight. A must watch as always

  12. Infidel Tiger

    @TheKouk: I am looking forward to @ABCmediawatch deconstructing the consumption of tobacco issue tonight. A must watch as always

    Hatchet job coming up.

  13. DaveA

    I haven’t read Judith’s.

    Craig Emerson replied: @TheKouk @ABCmediawatch Judith Sloan asserts the ABS figures are for the VALUE of cigarettes sold. Yet the ABS table heading is VOLUME.

    Would that be material to Judith’s analysis? If volume is steady or rising she still wins.

  14. DaveA

    Expecting Paul Barry to begin with “It’s not Media Watch’s job to make conclusions about tobacco consumption, we analyze the media reporting…” (i.e. we find errors which don’t affect the end conclusion which is not to our liking)

  15. .

    Craig Emerson replied: @TheKouk @ABCmediawatch Judith Sloan asserts the ABS figures are for the VALUE of cigarettes sold. Yet the ABS table heading is VOLUME.

    Ergo a minimum price won’t work.

  16. Percy

    Would that be material to Judith’s analysis? If volume is steady or rising she still wins

    That’s how I would read it too Dave. Emerson own goal?

  17. Louis Hissink

    Hah, whether tobacco, CO2 or “credit by Fiat”, it seems our progressive policymakers have a problem – none of the policies seem to be working.

    Their instinctive reaction is to ratchet up the policies by policing, etc but never ever will they ever even toy with the whisper of a thought that the policies might be teensie weensie problematical. Nope, they will conclude, as they have done since time immemorial that humans are the problem.

    Well we are, specifically those humans who formed these idiotic progressive policies in the first place, the progressives themselves with their plain packaged ideological stupidities.

  18. DaveA

    Judith never mentions ABS figures by name, but I reckon Emerson means this,

    “Third, while it is true expenditure on cigarettes fell in the first quarter of this year”

    Judith then cites excise rise as a downward pressure (not necessarily packaging laws).

    Substituting for volume doesn’t change the reasoning applied.

  19. DaveA

    Kouk again

    “A lot of kind comments today – to one and all, Thanks! (and watch Media Watch tonight on the great tobacco debate)”

    Sounds like he knows what’s coming – how?

    Has MW sought comment from all who have thrown their 2 cents in up to this point?

  20. Michael Potter

    Whoops…. Media Watch completely ignores Judith’s great article today.
    Wonder how long we’ll have to wait for a correction…

Comments are closed.