Death by nicotine

Recent statistics from the Department of Health Information show that 192 Maltese residents died from a smoking-attributed illness in the first six months of this year. Out of these 140 were males. Last year the same illness claimed the lives of 362 persons. In 2002 the death toll stood at 354.

The 2003 Smoking in Public Places Regulations (part of the Tobacco Act) came into force last April 5, with one exception - postponing the smoking ban in catering establishments and bars with an area in excess of 60 square metres to October 5 and to April 5 next year in the case of those smaller than 60 square metres.

For those with a deadline of October 5, designated enclosed smoking rooms had to be made available within six months according to recommendations listed in a report compiled by the Malta Standards Authority.

This report was drawn up upon the request of both the government and the Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprises, GRTU. It lists all technical specification guidelines. A few months ago, both parties agreed to commission the report and abide by its recommendations - we hope they will keep their "promise"... action speaks louder than words.

In view of the statistics on deaths caused by smoke-related illnesses, I question: How can anyone possibly argue against the enforcement of a legislation which protects our health, i.e. banning smoking in all public places - including restricting smoking in bars and restaurants? I wonder...

The Minister of Health, the Elderly and Community Care has been "accused" of being too understanding with "those" who believed their business would suffer as a result of the anti-smoking legislation.

One can debate forever whether the minister was too lenient with them but in reality this argument is now passé as we focus on facts - as of October 5 in addition to public places, no one can smoke in bars and restaurants in excess of 60 square metres in area, unless they have a smoking designated area/room.

The issue now is whether the public will choose to breach the law or adapt to change. With every "change" a reaction always follows. Either way people will react. Imagine another scenario: A law which legalises smoking anywhere and everywhere; what an uproar that would cause!

Let's call a spade a spade. Smoking is bad for our health. For those who smoke, it is never too late to quit and for those who do not smoke now is the time to look forward to savouring food at a restaurant without inhaling second-hand smoke from a next-door diner.

Last but not least, it is now up to us to enforce the anti-smoking law. What is certain is that such law enforcement benefits our health. Meanwhile, the government is determined to go ahead with its plans. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, speaking on Radio 101, made it very clear that in the interest of public health his government is and will continue supporting the anti-smoking legislation.

Early last year, the Health Promotion Department announced changes to the Tobacco Act (Chap. 315). The law lists a number of areas where smoking is prohibited in closed places.

According to article 3 (1) of the legislation, smoking is banned in:

¤ Establishments providing services to the public, whether it is paid for or free of charge including the sale of goods.

¤ Hospitals and any medical premises.

¤ Residences of the elderly.

¤ Schools and other premises where children are received.

¤ Buildings where higher education and vocational training are given.

¤ Places used to provide entertainment such as radio and television studios, exhibition areas, sports establishments, ports and airports.

The regulations also describe the employer's responsibility.

For many years, the Health Promotion Department has been working hard to address the problem of smoking. As a department it also participated in the formulation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) by the World Health Organisation.

The convention is an international legal instrument which will circumscribe the global spread of tobacco and tobacco products.

WHO's international agency for research into cancer has unequivocally declared that environmental tobacco smoke is carcinogenic to humans and includes more than 50 known carcinogens. Studies are also showing that smoke-free areas can lead to a reduction in consumption by smokers and assist them in quitting completely.

Over the decades European legislators have taken steps to curb public smoking. Italy passed its first laws banning smoking in public places in 1975; London Regional Transport banned smoking on buses, including the top of double-deckers, in February 1991 and in 2001 even the Russian government got in on the act, passing a host of laws that barred smoking in offices, public transport and prohibiting the sale of tobacco to people under 18.

The Russian laws also ban actors from smoking on TV, film and theatre productions unless it is an integral part of the artistic plot.

The latest country to introduce the anti-smoking legislation is Ireland. A survey of 1,000 people commissioned by the Department of Health and Children and conducted by Lansdowne Market Research showed that 82 per cent support the smoke-free at work measure; 90 per cent agreed that going smoke-free is of benefit to workers; 82 per cent agreed that it benefits everyone in public places and 95 per cent agreed that the legislation is a positive health measure.

The study reported a positive response in relation to socialising in smoke-free hospitality venues with a majority of people confirming that the new smoke-free legislation improved their experience in pubs (70 per cent) and restaurants (78 per cent). Over half of respondents (53 per cent) indicated they would be more inclined to eat in a pub since March 29.

Ms Xuereb is a staff member of the Parliamentary Secretariat at Ministry of Health, the Elderly and Community Care.