The makers of cigarette brands like Peter Styvesant and Horizon, Imperial Tobacco are taking the fight to the government on plain packaging. Good for them.
Its a No Nanny State campaign, a far superior effort to that produced last year on behalf of the big tobacco companies. I cant even remember what the campaign was called.
Imperial Tobacco's campaign has included a media blitz, including a couple of half decent ads aired during prime time. It may not have the clout of the mining tax campaign, but it is a pretty good start. Hopefully it can highlight the folly of wasting time on poorly designed policy.
The whole idea of a nanny state and intrusion into our lives is gaining traction in Australia. It occupies a terrible amount of time in the tabloid dailies as well as our favorite shows A Current Affair and Today Tonight. Unfortunately the latter seem to be consumed with one of the few nanny state ideas which actually is useful - speed cameras. But that's a whole other story.
Because we are so attuned to being nannied, Imperial Tobacco's advertising concept is on the money in my opinion.
The following is from the No Nanny State website, which calls on people to contact their MP to protest the changes.
"You may be a smoker. You may be a non-smoker. Either way, you'll be aware of the associated health risks. The current packaging makes that abundantly clear. The Government now wants to remove almost all branding and increase the graphic health warning to cover 75% of the front of the pack. It seems the Government doesn't believe you can make your own decisions. More and more, the Government is telling us what we should and shouldn't do. And while many rules are necessary in a modern society, there needs to be a limit. The proposed Plain Packaging Legislation is quite simply regulation gone too far."
Its a great name for an egg product - Happy Hens. Makes me think of smiling and content chickens. But are they really happy living in confined cages with no natural light? Make no mistake - Happy Hens is just a name. They aren't free range. They are no more than battery cage eggs with a snappy and friendly name.
Yesterday's post about the appalling treatment of caged hens in Australia highlighted what occurs at the operations of Pace Farms. Pace Farms are truly the experts of spin and marketing to sell a product produced through cruelty. But Happy Hens must be a close second for the defence of such a barbaric practice.
Happy Hens Egg Farms are a Victorian run operation. They have pride of place at Woolworths and Safeway supermarkets. While the Woolworths company has come a long way in promoting Free Range, they still are quite content to stock the cage egg variety at an obviously cheaper price to the humanely produced eggs. A buck is still a buck to them. Its a stark contrast to some supermarkets in the UK who no longer stock cage eggs.
In fact, the UK will soon ban the production of battery hen eggs moving to a slightly more humane treatment of the barn laid variety. Many other countries have done the same. Australia is yet to make any real moves to provide for the welfare of chooks.
But back to Happy Hens. Apparently the Happy Hens crew think that God is in favour of cage eggs. Doesn't say that on the package, but hey, who better than the almighty to endorse your product? This from their Facebook page.
"whether you believe in God or not, he is, and he condones that animals including chickens should be confined. All God's rules are in his book called the bible. Maybe people (which includes everyone) should use it as reference it really would solve lots of the worlds problems .......don't you think!!!........we DO!"
Happy Hens also claim that "There is no evidence to suggest that the well being of hens suffers in well-maintained cage systems." Really? How about this photo from their Facebook site? Are these happy hens? Take note of the cramped conditions, limited light and feather loss.
The worst thing about the Happy Hens company is that they are great defenders of the practice of intensive farming. They believe that they "...care for the welfare of our chickens" and cite apparent scientific evidence to assert that "cages systems provide many welfare benefits to hens...". They also claim that the method of Free Range farming is backward. Their words, not mine.
The only good thing that can be said for Happy Hens is that they claim they dont de beak. But that's about it.
This video, while not from the Happy Hens company is what really occurs in a Battery Hens cage egg farm. Its not just Indonesia that treats animals poorly. We do it in our own backyard thank you very much.
Australia is consumed at the moment with the issue of live cattle exports to Indonesia following an expose by Four Corners and animal welfare groups of the cruel and barbaric slaughter of the animals in traditional abattoirs. The footage was sickening.
However what seems to go almost unspoken is the absolutely disgusting practices which exist in our own backyard regarding the treatment of chickens, all for the production of the humble egg. Just like cattle, chickens are amongst the most harmless and peaceful creatures. But one of the key differences is that while cattle face a horrific death in Indonesia, at the very least they get to live a relatively comfortable life before hand.
Battery hens have an awful existence from the start. If you could actually see what occurs to these poor animals during their life and leading to their death you may never eat a cage egg again. A few years back i wrote about Pace Farms and their so called "environmental egg", Wattle Ridge. It was a con. Pace are not the only ones engaged in battery hen cage egg production. But they are probably one of more cunning marketers.
Thankfully, some good folk have done a similar expose on Pace Farms as occurred in Indonesia with cattle slaughtering. Remarkably similar. Yet while many countries around the world have moved to phase out battery egg farms, Australia remains mute.
Check out this video. While i don't want to sound preachy, have a good think about what we are doing just to enjoy our poached eggs on a Sunday morning. If the government can act to protect the welfare of cattle in Indonesia, surely they can do something about the welfare of chooks here.
If you must eat eggs, only buy free range and not just barn laid. But be careful. Because there is so little regulation of the industry, some of those that claim to be free range may not be.
I'm hesitant to use the phrase smoke and mirrors here, but the overall effect of plain packaging of cigarette packs will be little more than that. One of the great problems with modern age public policy is the need to do something. Anything. Hey, this is something, lets do it.
Will it have a drastic cut in current smoking habits? Unlikely. Will it reduce the uptake of smokers? At the margins, maybe. But nothing so drastic that requires this waste of so much time and energy on the policy. And potentially this could cost the public tens of millions if the tobacco companies take the Feds to court, even if they lose. Billions if they win.
What has been lost in this big debate is regular old common sense. The media have cottoned on to this notion that Big Tobacco as they call them (who is small tobacco?), are against the move because it will impact sales due to a reduction in smoking. No, I'm not sure that is their reason. They are against it because it will potentially affect their sales due to brand recognition.
That's not to say that people will actually stop smoking. The fear will be that smokers who were brand conscious, or conscious of being seen to smoke a particular brand may just smoke a cheaper brand cigarette. And those cheaper brand products are something that "Big Tobacco" usually don't control. Potentially too, they may be even more harmful than those offered by the majors.
There is often a reason for a cheaper price. While I'm a big fan of home brand products, there is no doubt that many of them are inferior in quality than the well known established labels. The same may be said for home brand style cigarettes. And since the tobacco tax increases in 2010, these cheaper labels have been booming. (So too has chop chop - under the counter, untaxed raw tobacco)
But seriously, do people who smoke do so because of the colorful packaging in their hands? Only the idiots on the margins. If people were going to be put off from smoking because of the packaging then they would have long since left the arena thanks to the disgusting health warning photos introduced many years ago.
An olive plain packet? People don't smoke the pack. They smoke the cigarettes. They don't really care whats on the outside. They have an addiction and they cant give up. Or they enjoy it too much to want to. In most cases thanks to restrictions everywhere they go, smokers are pariahs anyway. You think they will give a toss because the pack is a different color?
Anyway, it will be up to some clever individual to come up with a set of stickers for each brand which covers up the olive green pack. Although perhaps the government can ban them too.
If the government were serious about reducing smoking and not just being seen to be doing something, then they should commission a study into the potential benefits of electronic cigarettes versus regular tobacco. Oh i forgot, real tobacco which we know is harmful is a legal product. Taxed heavily but legal nevertheless. Nicotine based electronic cigarettes (with no passive smoking side effects) are banned for sale in Australia because we don't know if they are bad. Go figure.
About Just Grumpy
