Lees-Galloway Iain: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 25 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5587. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 The health impacts of tobacco smoking have been well rehearsed in this Parliament time and time again with a number of measures designed to reduce the impact of tobacco-related harm having passed through Parliament in recent years. But I think it is worth reminding ourselves just briefly why it is that we are doing this and why we continue to come back to this issue. 
It is estimated that half of long-term smokers still die of a smoking-related illness. That amounts to around 5000 deaths each year in New Zealand that are attributable either directly to smoking or to second-hand smoke. Tobacco smoking shows up in and is a cause of all of the big four health issues facing New Zealand: cancer respiratory disease cardiovascular disease and diabetes. It is for that reason that it is important that the Government and Parliament do everything they can to reduce the prevalence of tobacco use in New Zealand. Of course we have that goal that we have all adopted to make New Zealand smoke-free by 2025. It is as Chester Borrows said an ambitious and lofty goal but it is one that I think is achievable and one that we need to continue working towards. We need to continue coming back to this issue. 
It is in that sense that this particular bill the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill is an important shift in the way Parliament deals with the issue of tobacco excise tax. Whereas in the past we made one-off adjustments—increases—to tobacco excise tax this bill legislates for a series of four cumulative 10 percent increases on 1 January over each of the forthcoming 4 years. That is an important development because the research tells us that each time there is an increase in the price of cigarettes and other tobacco products we see a related response from smokers in engaging in quit attempts contacting people like Quitline and in fact successfully quitting. But what the research also tells us is that we see a spike in quitting activity immediately after that increase and then that activity tails off. So we need to keep coming back to this. As this bill allows for increases year after year as the research becomes more developed we may want to look at whether annually is often enough or whether we want to revisit this issue more regularly than that so that we keep capturing a new cohort of smokers because each time the price goes up we reach a new level. There is a certain price at which each cohort of smokers will engage in quit attempts and as the price goes up and up and up we capture a new group each time. I think it is important that this legislation allows for a 4-year period where that will continue to happen. 
I have to say that this legislation has been able to pass because of the benign environment we find ourselves in in Parliament with regard to issues of tobacco harm reduction and tobacco legislation. That has not always been the case which has been a barrier I have to say to measures like this occurring much sooner. We could have been doing this a decade ago but I think it is fair to say the Labour Government was not prepared to come back to this issue time after time and face the fight that was put up by the National Opposition. I am pleased that the National Party has come round on this— 
Michael Woodhouse 
: It’s outrageous! 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: It is not outrageous Mr Woodhouse. It is not outrageous because the National Party opposed Labour’s excise increase it opposed smoke-free environments legislation it opposed getting smoking out of pubs and bars and restaurants and it opposed every initiative that the Labour Party brought to Parliament to reduce the harm of tobacco smoking. I wanted to say Mr Woodhouse that I am pleased that we now have a truce. I think it is great that we now have a truce and that around Parliament we have agreement that this is the right thing to do and we will not fight each other over it. I wanted to just note that it is due to that environment that this piece of legislation has been able to progress as far as it has through Parliament. 
Much has been made of the fact that these increases will not be factored into the assessment of CPI increases especially when it comes to assessing how much people who are receiving a benefit should receive in relation to the overall increase in the cost of living. I can see from a health perspective that that is absolutely the right thing to do. We are trying to make tobacco products more expensive in real terms because the research—the evidence—tells us that that is one of the most powerful ways to reduce the incidence of tobacco smoking. But it is important to note I think that this is one more way in which life is becoming that much more expensive for people on the lowest incomes and people who receive a benefit and that is something that we have seen over the last 4 years under this Government—life becoming just that much more difficult for those on the lowest incomes. So it is important that we examine what other measures we might be engaging with that would reduce the incidence of smoking but would not have this financial impact on those people who are most vulnerable who have the least. 
One of the other things that the Government could and should be doing and that has a direct evidence base that supports our carrying out this initiative is much greater use of social marketing to discourage people from smoking and to encourage them to quit. The research tells us that there is a direct relationship between what is known as target audience rating points—in other words both the volume of social marketing and the accuracy of its targeting at its target audience—in getting people to quit. We see the same spike in quit attempts around those types of social marketing campaigns as we see around increases in excise tax which this legislation allows for. However unfortunately under the current Government we have seen a reduction in funding for those types of social marketing campaigns and a reduction in those target audience rating points. So overall the Government is doing less of that type of social marketing that encourages people to quit smoking and discourages them from taking up smoking. 
That I think is a real pity because it is something that has a strong evidence base but does not directly impact the people who are themselves smoking. And it would go very well hand in hand with this type of measure. In fact what would be ideal would be to have with each of these excise increases a very active social marketing campaign around those that also encourages people to quit. That would have a cumulative effect to really get the prevalence of smoking down and really advance New Zealand towards that goal of having the nation smoke-free by 2025. I would like to see the Government commit to more of that type of activity in addition to this taxation activity which we do know will decrease the prevalence of tobacco smoking. 
Labour is pleased to support this bill. We are pleased to be constructive as an Opposition on issues like this where it is important that we get consensus around the House and we look forward to further action taking New Zealand closer to that goal of becoming smoke-free.