In the year 2010, the research showed that in Singapore, 14. 3% of the adults smoked. Since smoking was unhealthy to people’s health and may even lead to severe diseases, the Singapore government set up a goal that reducing the smokers proportion to 10% until the end of 2020.
However, people’s efforts in fighting with smoking were threatened by the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TIP) of the multi-lateral free trade agreement (FAT). In the TIP, the members include Australia, Singapore, the United States and other 9 countries.While other countries were sparing no efforts in fighting with smoking and ratified the 2005 Framework Convention in Tobacco Control, the U. S.
However, was the only exception. Different from other countries, as for the tariffs of tobacco, the U. S. Did not need to show too much concerns. Actually, the duties charged on the tobacco are relatively low because Of the bilateral Fats the U. S. Has with other countries in the TIP.
In that case, what the IS. S. Should take into consideration was to use the FAT to help its tobacco companies reform stably in the non-tariff anti-smoking situation in the TIP.Therefore, the U. S. Settled three-pronged strategy. Firstly, the U. S.
Tried to make the ‘health exception’ lose effectiveness in the affair of tobacco. The ‘health exception’ means that the measure which was justified for health reasons, even if it violated the WTFO law, it could be regarded as an accepted exception. For example, the plain packaging was effective in advertising the harm of tobacco to health. Thus, it was used as a way of hamper the tobacco firms.In this case, the U. S.
To unhappy because this measure would prevent its tobacco companies from selling more. So it put up with a proposal that only the anti-smoking measures that had science basis could be used. Therefore, many of the measures used before would lose effectiveness.
Secondly, the U. S. Proposed that tobacco firms would not have a place in anti-smoking policy formulation by a state agency. In this case, the tobacco firms would be regarded as foreign investors requiring ‘stable and predictable regulatory environment legitimate expectations’ of profits.In addition, in 2009, the tobacco giant Philip Morris International (IMP) announced that the Singapore policy that ‘ban any and all tobacco products, based on the levels of harm, rather than evidence-based analysis’ has violated the ‘fair and equitable treatment’.
These comments have greatly influenced the anti- smoking fight. Thirdly, the U. S. Proposed that the T UP countries should provide assessments of the impact of their own regulatory policies and also engage the affected firms in these assessments.This means that the tobacco rims would be able to take part in the regulatory processes in which their interests were engaged. In addition, every country in the T UP was required to establish coordination across ministries to make balance between old anti- smoking policies and new ones. In the practical use, this means ‘market- centric’ and ‘light-handed’. For example, in the U.
S. , the plain packaging would not need to pass the muster because that was not allowed in the U. S. Lastly, a special committee would be established at the T UP level.In addition, it was required that the member countries in the TIP notify and disclose their relevant analysis, data and documents to the public.
In that case, not only the anti-smoking activists but also the tobacco firms were empowered to collect and release the information.