We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Updated 7.38pm
TOBACCO COMPANIES ARE not happy with Minister James Reilly’s plans for plain packaging for cigarettes, but he insisted today they’ll be in the shops in just over two years’ time.
JTI Ireland, which owns Benson & Hedges and Silk Cut, is threatening the Irish government with legal action and has given the government until Friday to promise it won’t enact the draft law, or face legal action.
But speaking today, the Children’s Minister said: “The [EU] Tobacco Directive is quite clear, it won’t become operable until May 2016 and we’re going to allow a wash out period for the products that are already in place. So, it’s more likely to be May 2017.”
“You might ask why we want to do that. We’re very clear about the legal challenge. We want to be seen to be absolutely proportionate in what is a public health response to a really serious public health risk and we don’t want in anyway to be seen to not be completely fair in what we’re doing.”
Asked if he believed that plain packs will be in the shops by May 2017, he said: “Absolutely, absolutely I do.”
He said that despite objections from other European countries, including Poland which has some 60,000 people employed in the tobacco industry, he said:
“Obviously they are concerned about jobs but again I just think that it’s not the place to have an argument. Jobs over lives? I mean, no.”
https://vine.co/v/OxeUbBDXrjz
Reilly, who began the steps to bring in the legislation while Minister for Health and has been a passionate advocate of the policy, earlier told TheJournal.ie:
JTI – through its Irish lawyers – have threatened the Irish Government. They are insisting that we halt our move to implement plain packaging while a British case makes its way through the European courts.
He said that the government won’t be bowing to pressure:
The response from the Irish Government is clear. We are progressing our plain packaging legislation this very day.
“I will be in the Dail with the legislation at Committee Stage,” said Reilly. “This Government is very clear on the importance of this legislation which will result in tobacco packs with more graphic warnings about the deadly dangers to our health.”
TheJournal Politics / TwitterJames Reilly says he is absolutely confident that plain packs will be in the shops by May 2017 pic.twitter.com/mDTapDi9iL
— TheJournal Politics (@TJ_Politics) February 17, 2015
The bill is before the Oireachtas Health Committee today. Reilly added:
As Minister for Children and Youth Affairs I must drive forward legislation that can result in protecting our children from taking up this killer addiction in the first place.
The new packaging would see the front-of-pack warning doubled in size, and no logos.
Ireland committed to introducing standardised packaging for cigarettes back in 2013.
It is understood Minister Reilly anticipated legal threats from tobacco companies, but pressed on regardless due to his belief in the positive affects of plain packaging.
A study carried out by Universities of Exeter and Bristol found that plain packaging reduces the likelihood of smokers seeking to get cigarettes by almost 10%, compared to branded packs.
The price of cigarettes went up to €10 a pack in this year’s Budget.
JTI
JTI said in a statement that it has “informed the government that we stand ready to file legal proceedings should it continue pushing for a ‘cut and paste’ policy that has failed in Australia”.
It described plain packaging as putting “politics before evidence”.
It said that JTI and other Irish and international business groups, trade organisations and legal bodies, have highlighted to the government that banning brands “would have far-reaching consequences on the country’s economy, above and beyond the tobacco sector”.
It described the measure as “in complete contradiction with the Taoiseach’s intention of making Ireland the best small country in the world to do business”.
Also today, new figures revealed the largest annual drop in the number of people smoking since 2009.
Smoking prevalence among those aged 15 or older fell from 21.5% in 2013 to 19.5% last year.
This figure stood at 28% in 2003.
There was also a significant increase in the number of people using the HSE’s QUIT programme. The numbers using an online plan rose from 2000 to 3705, and the number using phone supports from 54 to 150.
“These changes are welcome, but there are still over 700,000 smokers in Ireland, and we see 5,200 tobacco related deaths annually – that’s 15 deaths every day, and 100 families bereaved every week,” Dave Molly, National Tobacco Lead for the HSE, said.
“Ireland has set a target of being effectively smoke-free – less than 5% prevalence – by 2025,” he explained.
To achieve this target the Tobacco Free Ireland policy includes a range of tobacco control initiatives to further denormalise smoking, stop our children starting to smoke and help smokers to quit.
- additional reporting from Hugh O’Connell and Nicky Ryan
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Interesting stats there. in my last lab I was one of 2 guys but there was 10 women
Happy days! :)
Are you working in a biology-related field? If not, that’s very unusual!
Would I be right in saying that a groundbreaking project could not receive funding because it is spearheaded by a man. This positive discrimination, gender quotas and the like are stopping the best person available person for a job, reserch grant etc from getting it.
Imagine the reaction if this was a male only grant.
couldnt agree more.
Any initiative of such importance would be supported
There are countless grants available for men. If a male scientist proposes a project of any merit, it will get funded.
All this talk of ‘best man for the job’ amuses me, as if that’s what happens right now.
You are totally right, this is the world we live in today…
Hi Philib,
The problem is that the best ‘man’ for the job does not always get the job as..he is a she. There are a number of studies confirming gender bias in performance review in STEM and, also, there is a smaller pool to choose. as you know yourself, no doubt, the social and emplowment set-up in Ireland is not the friendliest towards working mothers or fathers who want to spend the first few months raising their child. this leads to a winnowing of the remaining women as they approach 30 odd years of age.
I’m a post-doc in the Netherlands in a STEM field. In a study here a few years ago, they also found that the amount of women in science was relatively poor. They instigated a number of funding initiatives to encourage women to enter, remain in or return to research post-family. It made economic sense-after all, what was the point of them being expensively educated by the state and system only to drive them out? It also prevevnts loss of talented candidates and onset of intellectual poverty. Google NUFFIC-it gives a good shake-down of the rationale forming policy here. It’s working-numbers are climbing.
I have yet to meet a male, Dutch scientist who complains that his chances for advancement are reduced by these initiatives or that less talented women are edging him out of funding. Perhaps they are not quite so insecure. Maybe they won’t say to me directly…who knows?
It’s not an initiative to shaft men, it’s meant to help women and add a bit of balance to the scene. To repeat-helping women to succeed in the face of bias does not mean preventing men from succeeding in a system already tilted in their favour.
Philib, here’s a couple of studies on gender bias in performance review-I can’t send a direct link, google the titles if you like.
Have wonderfull Wednesday All!
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Corinne A. Moss-Racusina,b, John F. Dovidiob, Victoria L. Brescollc, Mark J. Grahama,d, and Jo Handelsman
Study shows gender bias in science is real. Here’s why it matters. By Ilana Yurkiewicz
The Impact of Gender on the Review of Curricula Vitae of Job Appplicants and Tenure Candidates; An Empirical Study. R.E. Steinpreis et al
Unless that research is from Ireland Sarah, it has limited efficacy.
I’d hold out for a job in Rehab tbh. Miles more money, bigger pension and you dont even have to worry about turning over a profit.
Dont worry Bazalini, that €175k is not their salary. That’s for all research costs including salary (and possibly even the salary for any assistants needed on the project). Id be willing to that bet that successful applicants would be lucky to draw a salary even near to €50k….so yeah that rehab job would definitely be a better shout!
Also, its funding for a project that otherwise may not have gotten funded, possibly because it is not “in vogue”. Funding discrimination based on what fields of research are in fashion is unfortunately is a fairly big problem academia, and that is before even getting into any gender discrimination issues. Ideally science should be conducted for science’s sake and the progression of knowledge, rather than for profits. I think this scheme should be welcomed.
+1
Sad to see the taxpayer paying for government gender politics rather than just science.
Research should not be about the genital assignment of the researchers, just the work & its outcomes.
I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately though, that’s not how it works. A man is far more likely to receive funding and a greater salary. What’s that, if not gender discrimination?
Defenders of the status quo are generally ignorant to how it operates, I’ve found.
“A man is far more likely to receive funding and a greater salary. What’s that, if not gender discrimination?”
Just because their may be an imbalance doesn’t make it discrimination. Equality is about equal opportunity, not equal numbers.
Seems a little weird to be encouraging women with Ph.D’s to remain in STEM fields. Seems very much to be preaching to the choir, women who hold a Ph.D. in a STEM field, really shouldn’t need extra encouragement to get into STEM.
I’m all for promoting women in science, we always need more scientists, but this needs to be done at the secondary and even primary school levels, not at the Ph.D. levels.
John,
What we really need is positions and more funding, (a boost in wages wouldn’t hurt either with post docs now starting on 32k) to encourage people to actually stay in science. The vast majority leave academia right after the PhD or within 5 years because it provides zero financial security and low prospects. Without a significant commercial research sector in Ireland most also leave research.
I’m a scientist in medical research, I get ignored and talked over a lot. I would imagine this happens to a lot of women researchers. More money for women scientists is a very good thing!
All the teachers in my local primary school/creche/secondary school are female, can I get a grant, cos I really need a job, and this discrimination against men is terrible.
Good old leftist social engineering. Just pay people to make up the numbers even if they have no interest in the subject. I hear the next project is to fund women to become professional snooker players.
@agent, did you actually read the article? It clearly states that prospective candidates need a PHD or MD. So they’re hardly picking random women who have no interest in STEM research.
Totally skewed approach for aligning equal gender representation in STEM. Grants should be awarded based on the quality and strength of the applicant and their proposal, not on their gender. Will the government be rolling out a similar, positive discrimination scheme for areas in which men are unrepresented?
Would you ever make valid points
Men and women have the exact same opportunities to study science in this country, instead why not offer grants to the best regardless of gender? That would do a lot more for science
As a product of the Irish education system I can tell you that men and women don’t have the same opportunities to study science and engineering. In secondary school; I was actively discouraged from taking subjects like metal work, chemistry and physics – sure why wouldn’t I want to do home edc instead? I studied Microbiology and biochemistry in college and while it was much better for me then in secondary school, friends of mine who studied chemistry and physics told me that some TAs and Lectures almost expected them to drop out at some stage.
It is an uphill struggle for woman to get into certain fields of science; let alone get a PHD in a subject and once they get there they often find it difficult to get grants.
Surely a job/grant/etc should be given based on merit not gender. I know there are far less women in the lab sciences, but surely the answer is to see why as opposed to anything else.
Positive discrimination strikes again!!
Women in the workplace. Bad idea.
Just mention Gerbil Worming [aka climate change] and you get double :-)
have your say