{"id":120764,"date":"2018-08-20T12:52:42","date_gmt":"2018-08-20T16:52:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/depquebec.com\/?p=120764"},"modified":"2018-08-20T15:13:59","modified_gmt":"2018-08-20T19:13:59","slug":"exclusive-canada-at-greater-risk-of-increased-contraband-after-plain-packaging-rcmp","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/depquebec.com\/en\/exclusive-canada-at-greater-risk-of-increased-contraband-after-plain-packaging-rcmp\/","title":{"rendered":"EXCLUSIVE: Canada At Greater Risk Of Increased Contraband After Plain Packaging \u2014 RCMP"},"content":{"rendered":"
As the final countdown to the introduction of plain packaging, scheduled for September 2019, begins a year from now, there is a growing concern that this measure will fuel contraband tobacco across Canada.<\/p>\n
Indeed, according to an official RCMP memo (see here<\/a>) never made public and obtained exclusively by DepQu\u00e9bec<\/strong> via the Access to information Act<\/a>, Canada will be more vulnerable than other countries to see a marked increase of the tobacco black market once plain packaging is implemented.<\/p>\n At a closed-door meeting held on September 23rd, 2016 as part of the Strategic Forum on Contraband Tobacco chaired by Michael Holmes, a Senior Advisor at the Department of Public Safety, RCMP representatives made their concerns clear to that extent by pointing out why we are in uncharted territory with this regulation.<\/p>\n “Of consideration to RCMP is that neither Australia nor the UK have a robust and domestic contraband tobacco manufacturing industry. Plain packaging laws may present opportunities for organized crime groups to further penetrate the legal tobacco market through counterfeiting. This concern was relayed to the Forum.”<\/em> – RCMP meeting briefing<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The two countries mentioned \u2014 Australia and the United Kingdom \u2014 are among the only three in the world, along with France, to have implemented plain packaging to date, a measure for which there is very little evidence, with Canada becoming only the 4th country to put this new regulation in place.<\/p>\n The undeniable fact that none of these countries has an industrial contraband infrastructure like here places Canada in a unique position as the first one to test it in such a context.<\/p>\n In other words, Canada is experimenting while retailers wait in the test tube!<\/p>\n The RCMP’s well-founded opinion clearly did not impressed or modified Health Canada officials’ determination to put in place the purest and most orthodox version of this regulation, of which we still know very little as to its effects.<\/p>\n This is quite apparent from the plain packaging draft regulation made public two months ago and which is currently subject to consultation until September 6th, following which the final version will be adopted and the legislation implemented (see the important dates to know at the bottom of this article).<\/p>\n In terms of increased contraband risks, the draft regulation agrees though that this may be a real possibility.<\/p>\n “Should there be a rise in counterfeiting, enforcement authorities would likely need to increase the frequency of retail and supply chain audits (…). It is difficult to predict the impact, if any, PSA (plain and standardized appearance) measures will have on counterfeiting” \u2014 Health Canada<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n It is interesting to note here that in such a case, Health Canada confines itself to seeing the problem under the sole angle of the sale of illegal tobacco by legal retailers when in reality, the issue is much larger since almost no one \u2014 including authorities \u2014 would become capable of easily distinguish between legal tobacco and counterfeiting.<\/p>\n In addition, Health Canada is dismissive of legitimate industry concerns about the possible impact of plain packaging on contraband:<\/p>\n “Such claims were also made in 2009, when Canada first introduced a schedule to restrict flavours in cigarettes (…), and again in 2011, when Canada increased the size of its HWs on cigarettes and little cigars to 75 % of the package. In both these cases, contraband tobacco levels did not increase after the new requirements came into force.” \u2014 Health Canada<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n What Health Canada forgets to mention, however, is that in the early 2000s, when the federal and provincial governments doubled and quadrupled tobacco taxes, the industry warned them of an increase of contraband tobacco, a warning that proved to be accurate, while health groups tore up their shirt pretending otherwise (see here<\/a>).<\/p>\n This huge policy mistake ended up in a public health disaster. It has generated an unprecedented wave of low-priced tobacco that has engulfed the country for many years and costed tens of billions of dollars in lost revenue, both to governments and retailers, only to benefit the organized crime to the detriment of communities’ safety.<\/p>\n However, if legal and illegal products become similar in all respects apart from price, we could very well experience such a nightmare again. Hence the RCMP’s serious concerns.<\/p>\n But far from considering the authorities’ wise opinion and rather than advancing with caution, Health Canada will in fact do everything possible to help the organized crime by making it extremely difficult and confusing to distinguish legal tobacco from contraband.<\/p>\nA\u00a0“robust domestic industry” of contraband<\/em><\/h5>\n
Facing the unknown<\/h5>\n
Making sure we can’t distinguish legal from illegal<\/h5>\n