OT: Also in Autosport -- smoke 'em if you got 'em

>> Fresh threat to tobacco advertising The World Health Organisation could implement a worldwide ban on tobacco advertising Tobacco advertising in Formula 1 could face a new threat from an international treaty that is set to ban all sponsorship and promotion of tobacco products, according to this week�s Autosport magazine. The World Health Organisation is set to finalise the treaty within the next three years. But unlike the various voluntary bans currently in place, the WHO�s treaty will be leagally-binding. A source at motor racing�s governing body, the FIA, described the treaty, known as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, as �a very serious development.� A European Union ban was due to come into force in 2006, but the German government and the tobacco industry were set to challenge this on legal grounds. The EU ban was expected to be thrown out when the case was heard, but the all-encompassing WHO treaty has now raised the fresh prospect of a ban � based on a significantly accelerated timescale.<< NASCAR, CART & IRL folk: note that the ban would be "worldwide"

"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >> Fresh threat to tobacco advertising > > The World Health Organisation could implement a worldwide ban on > tobacco advertising Tobacco advertising in Formula 1 could face a new > threat from an international treaty that is set to ban all sponsorship > and promotion of tobacco products, according to this week's Autosportmagazine.

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > The World Health Organisation is set to finalise the treaty within the > next three years. But unlike the various voluntary bans currently in > place, the WHO's treaty will be leagally-binding. > > A source at motor racing's governing body, the FIA, described the > treaty, known as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, as "a very > serious development." > > A European Union ban was due to come into force in 2006, but the German > government and the tobacco industry were set to challenge this on legal > grounds. The EU ban was expected to be thrown out when the case was > heard, but the all-encompassing WHO treaty has now raised the fresh > prospect of a ban - based on a significantly accelerated timescale.<< > > NASCAR, CART & IRL folk: note that the ban would be "worldwide"

I seriously doubt that the WHO has such authority (and certainly not in my country). I know that the EU is implementing such things, and that the recent tobacco settlements in the US also venture into this territory, but I don't think that national sovereignty has been delt away quite this easily.

<snip: WHO wants world-wide tobacco ban> > I seriously doubt that the WHO has such authority (and certainly not in my > country). I know that the EU is implementing such things, and that the > recent tobacco settlements in the US also venture into this territory, butI > don't think that national sovereignty has been delt away quite thiseasily. >I'm afraid it has. Most countries (I think all countries that are members of the UN) have signed treaties that all resolutions that are accepted by a meeting of the UN or one of its sub-organisations (which WHO is), must be turned into national legislation. I think that banning tobacco-advertising won't have any measurable effect on tobacco-consumption. I think most people start smoking when they are 14-16 yrs old and want to join their already smoking friends. A world wide tobacco-ad ban would be better for F1 than a EU-ban. I feel that the F1 WC is an essentially European championship. It's origin is the pre-war European Championship and until Bernie Big$$ took over, F1 consisted of an European 'core-championship' with three or four more or less classic races outside Europe added (Canada, Brazil, US, Australia). I think it should remain this way. Why Sepang? Zandvoort! I also think that if there won't be any tobacco-money anymore, F! has to scale down and might become an more affordable, maybe lowtec but certainly competative series, especially since mainly the big teams have tobacco sponsoring (McLaren, Ferrari, Jordan, Benetton, BAR and Prost). If these teams see their budget halfed, the other teams can catch up. Finally, I wonder if cars will be carrying "Morlbara dogbiscuits", "Henson and Bedges coffetables" or "East ballpoints" adds. grtngs, hgrm

"Han Monsees" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8ojtd5$ijt$[email hidden]... > <snip: WHO wants world-wide tobacco ban> > > > I seriously doubt that the WHO has such authority (and certainly not inmy > > country). I know that the EU is implementing such things, and that the > > recent tobacco settlements in the US also venture into this territory,but > I > > don't think that national sovereignty has been delt away quite this > easily. > > > I'm afraid it has. Most countries (I think all countries that are membersof > the UN) have signed treaties that all resolutions that are accepted by a > meeting of the UN or one of its sub-organisations (which WHO is), must be > turned into national legislation. I'm not sure about that. Chapter 1 Article 2 Section 7 of the UN Charter states: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll." (chp VII refers to "Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression" - hardly the stuff of tobacco ads) If advertising of tobacco is not "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state", then what is? Is there any limit to UN jurisdiction? The answer, of course, is "yes". It's one thing to encourage international education about the health effects of tobacco (acceptable under the charter), but another entirely for the WHO to step in and ban tobacco advertising at race tracks or anywhere other than the UN building itself. They have no such authority. But then again, few countries and organizations (or companies for that matter, including tobacco) seem to abide by things which they find too restrictive. If there is a treaty which allows this I'd be interested in seeing this.

On Wed 30 Aug 2000 10:13:12pm, Han Monsees wrote: <snip> >I also think that if there won't be any tobacco-money anymore, F! >has to scale down and might become an more affordable, maybe lowtec >but certainly competative series, especially since mainly the big >teams have tobacco sponsoring (McLaren, Ferrari, Jordan, Benetton, >BAR and Prost). If these teams see their budget halfed, the other >teams can catch up. I think the end of tobacco advertising would just mean other big companies coming in. Autosport has reported that Coca-Cola are interested, and McDonalds is another obvious choice. Some of these companies stay out because they don't want to be associated with tobacco. >Finally, I wonder if cars will be carrying "Morlbara dogbiscuits", >"Henson and Bedges coffetables" or "East ballpoints" adds. They wouldn't need to do that. Several fag[1] firms already have clothing lines (eg Marlboro Classics), and this is hardly a new trend - Dunhill were making motoring coats 90 years ago. [1] Used in the British sense! :-) -- David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.17) "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll, really." (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh) The GPL Scrapyard - mangled wrecks from http://www.hillclimbfan.f2s.com

Gault wrote: > but I don't think that national sovereignty has been delt [sic] away quite this easily. Apparently the FIA is not quite as sanguine. As a major arm of the United Nations, the WHO has the power to make and enforce treaties among its 191 member nations, which include all of the Americas (including Cuba), all of Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and all of the Western Pacific (including China, Japan, Malaysia, and Australia), to name just a few small markets. Cigarettes are big business, but largely big *American* business. I believe that in our lifetime we will see the end of cigarette advertising, period -- and I'll bet that within 5-8 years we'll see the end of tobacco advertising in *anything* that's televised. Major motorsports without television revenues? .... Ain't gonna happen. As usual, NASCAR's way ahead of the curve on this, and they're already talking about the next Cup series sponsor (Coca Cola, most likely). How many tobacco-sponsored Cup cars do you see in 2000? Again, I'll bet that within three years, there won't be a single mention of tobacco products in NASCAR, and beer ain't far behind. Marlboro, Winfield, Cabin, Mild Seven, BAR -- as F1 sponsors they're as extinct as the dodo. BB

what a joke. Barton Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >> Fresh threat to tobacco advertising > > The World Health Organisation could implement a worldwide ban on > tobacco advertising Tobacco advertising in Formula 1 could face a new > threat from an international treaty that is set to ban all sponsorship > and promotion of tobacco products, according to this week's Autosportmagazine.

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > The World Health Organisation is set to finalise the treaty within the > next three years. But unlike the various voluntary bans currently in > place, the WHO's treaty will be leagally-binding. > > A source at motor racing's governing body, the FIA, described the > treaty, known as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, as "a very > serious development." > > A European Union ban was due to come into force in 2006, but the German > government and the tobacco industry were set to challenge this on legal > grounds. The EU ban was expected to be thrown out when the case was > heard, but the all-encompassing WHO treaty has now raised the fresh > prospect of a ban - based on a significantly accelerated timescale.<< > > NASCAR, CART & IRL folk: note that the ban would be "worldwide"

Now theres a great substitute!! Mcdonalds and coke for tobacco, man those people are brilliant!! I guess they have decided tobacco takes too long to kill us, so they're gonna promote quicker methods! David Buttery <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> On Wed 30 Aug 2000 10:13:12pm, Han Monsees wrote: > > <snip> > >I also think that if there won't be any tobacco-money anymore, F! > >has to scale down and might become an more affordable, maybe lowtec > >but certainly competative series, especially since mainly the big > >teams have tobacco sponsoring (McLaren, Ferrari, Jordan, Benetton, > >BAR and Prost). If these teams see their budget halfed, the other > >teams can catch up. > > I think the end of tobacco advertising would just mean other big > companies coming in. Autosport has reported that Coca-Cola are > interested, and McDonalds is another obvious choice. Some of these > companies stay out because they don't want to be associated with > tobacco. > > >Finally, I wonder if cars will be carrying "Morlbara dogbiscuits", > >"Henson and Bedges coffetables" or "East ballpoints" adds. > > They wouldn't need to do that. Several fag[1] firms already have > clothing lines (eg Marlboro Classics), and this is hardly a new trend - > Dunhill were making motoring coats 90 years ago. > > [1] Used in the British sense! :-) > -- > David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.17) > "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll, > really." (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh) > The GPL Scrapyard - mangled wrecks from http://www.hillclimbfan.f2s.com

"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Gault wrote: > > but I don't think that national sovereignty has been delt [sic] awayquite this easily.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Apparently the FIA is not quite as sanguine. As a major arm of the > United Nations, the WHO has the power to make and enforce treaties among > its 191 member nations, which include all of the Americas (including > Cuba), all of Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and all of the > Western Pacific (including China, Japan, Malaysia, and Australia), to > name just a few small markets.

The WHO has no ability to make or enforce treaties. It can make policy recommendations to other arms of the UN for action, but has no legislative ability as you describe. It certainly has no authority over domestic advertising decisions, although it could critique such practices. If there is an international treaty which agrees to this then I'd like to read it, even if it's still in the planning stages (such a treaty would have to come from the General Assembly). Personally, I believe that you're correct about the future of tobacco advertising. F1 will have to look elsewhere for advertising, but I suspect it will have little trouble picking up other sponsors.

On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 23:13:12 +0200, "Han Monsees" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I think that banning tobacco-advertising won't have any measurable effect on >tobacco-consumption. I think most people start smoking when they are 14-16 >yrs old and want to join their already smoking friends. Agreed. The sponship is not to get new smokers, but to make those who are already smoking to buy their particular brand.

Check their website -- they say they do. BB Gault wrote: >The WHO has no ability to make or enforce treaties.

I'm surprised the WHO hasn't found a way to just steal the money made from the advertising. Seems more in line with the way they like to do things. -- Slot Tweaks & Reviews www.slottweak.com "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >> Fresh threat to tobacco advertising > > The World Health Organisation could implement a worldwide ban on > tobacco advertising Tobacco advertising in Formula 1 could face a new > threat from an international treaty that is set to ban all sponsorship > and promotion of tobacco products, according to this week's Autosport magazine. > > The World Health Organisation is set to finalise the treaty within the > next three years. But unlike the various voluntary bans currently in > place, the WHO's treaty will be leagally-binding. > > A source at motor racing's governing body, the FIA, described the > treaty, known as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, as "a very > serious development." > > A European Union ban was due to come into force in 2006, but the German > government and the tobacco industry were set to challenge this on legal > grounds. The EU ban was expected to be thrown out when the case was > heard, but the all-encompassing WHO treaty has now raised the fresh > prospect of a ban - based on a significantly accelerated timescale.<< > > NASCAR, CART & IRL folk: note that the ban would be "worldwide"

"Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Check their website -- they say they do. Any treaty, convention, protocol, etc which they may propose has to be ratified by the member states of the UN. The WHO (and its website) doesn't claim otherwise.

In article <[email hidden]>, Barton Brown <[email hidden]> writes: >NASCAR, CART & IRL folk: note that the ban would be "worldwide" I couldn't possibly care less. I don't smoke... Actually, I take that back. If it slows down other people smoking, I'm all for it...<g> Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +50.77 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

On Thu 31 Aug 2000 06:29:02am, [email hidden] wrote: <snip> >The sponship is not to get new smokers, but to make those >who are already smoking to buy their particular brand. Which of course explains all the advertising using characters like Joe Camel, which appeal to 12-16 year olds... -- David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.17) "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll, really." (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh) The GPL Scrapyard - mangled wrecks from http://www.hillclimbfan.f2s.com

On Thu 31 Aug 2000 05:50:28pm, GTX_SlotCar wrote: >I'm surprised the WHO hasn't found a way to just steal the money >made from the advertising. Seems more in line with the way they like >to do things. Oh, no. Please don't let this set off all the rabid rasf1-ers to come here and start raving about how the New World Order is going to rule the world with its sinister UN-backed International Court (which court is a bloody good idea IMO, but there you go). -- David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.17) "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll, really." (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh) The GPL Scrapyard - mangled wrecks from http://www.hillclimbfan.f2s.com

Gault wrote: > Any treaty, convention, protocol, etc which they may propose has to be > ratified by the member states of the UN. The WHO (and its website) doesn't > claim otherwise. Given that the EU and the US (and Canada? Australia?) have already committed to such a ban, that leaves the Pacific rim, Latin America, and Africa. Japan has talked seriously about it. That really leaves Malaysia (the reason there's an F1 race there in the first place AFAIK). Give it 5 years, and we'll see who's more perspicacious... BB