There have been multiple instances of lobbying by ambassadors and other diplomats from the UK, as well as Japan and Switzerland. Much of this lobbying activity has taken place in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).² These countries are important sources of new customers for tobacco companies as markets in higher income countries where consumption is generally falling.³⁴⁵

Diplomats are also involved in activities which help promote the tobacco industry via local media, such as visiting tobacco farms or factories. Other engagement supports tobacco companies’ product promotions, or corporate social responsibility strategy. These activities help to raise the profile of tobacco companies, enhance their reputations, and support the ‘normalisation’ of the industry.¹⁶⁷

Background

Parties to the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) have an obligation to protect public health policies from the “commercial and vested interests of the tobacco industry” and any contact with tobacco industry representatives, or others seeking to further their interests, must be “limited” and “transparent”.⁸ The implementation guidelines to Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC recommend that Parties limit interactions with the tobacco industry to those that are absolutely necessary to regulating the industry, and ensure the transparency of those interactions that do occur.⁸  The guidelines also recommend parties treat state-owned tobacco companies in the same way as any other tobacco company, including avoiding any “preferential treatment”.⁸

In addition, the guidelines state that “… Whenever possible, interactions should be conducted in public, for example through public hearings, public notice of interactions, disclosure of records of such interactions to the public”.⁸

However even in countries with a high level of compliance with the WHO FCTC requirements, diplomatic missions rarely achieve this level of transparency. Information on tobacco industry engagement has largely been found through media investigations and Freedom of Information requests (FOIs).

In October 2014, the 6^th Conference of the Parties (COP) decided to urge parties: “to raise awareness and adopt measures to implement Article 5.3 and its implementing Guidelines among all parts of government including diplomatic missions.”⁹ Another decision required governments to “take into account their public health objectives in their negotiation of trade and investment agreements”.¹⁰

Nevertheless, diplomats continue to lobby for tobacco companies around the world.¹

Countries whose diplomatic representatives have lobbied on behalf of tobacco companies overseas  include the UK, Germany and Japan, who are all Parties to the WHO FCTC,¹¹ as well as the United States and Switzerland. BAT, PMI and Japan Tobacco all have offices in Geneva, Switzerland, the location of the World Health Organization and other key international bodies.

UK

There are specific guidelines covering the engagement of British (UK) officials working overseas designed to limit contact with tobacco companies, and support compliance with Article 5.3. After the UK Ambassador to Panama lobbied on behalf of British American Tobacco (BAT),¹² the guidelines were revised in 2013.¹³ These guidelines state that “Posts must not…Engage with local foreign governments on behalf of the tobacco industry, except in cases where local policies could be considered protectionist or discriminatory”.¹³

Engagement and lobbying

Despite having guidelines in place to support compliance with the WHO FCTC, FOI requests and media investigations have revealed that British diplomats continue to interact with the tobacco industry more than is necessary. UK diplomats have lobbied for BAT in Bangladesh,¹⁴¹⁵ Hungary,¹⁶ and Pakistan.^1217181920

UK officials have also disclosed contact with tobacco companies in Panama and Venezuela,²¹²² Laos,²³ Cuba,²⁴ and Burundi.²⁵

In 2018, UK advocacy organisation Action on Smoking & Health (ASH) called this a “global pattern of engagement” by British officials to defend BAT’s interests.²⁶

• For more details see UK Diplomats Lobbying on Behalf of BAT.

Tobacco industry events

UK government guidelines state that staff must not:

“Attend or otherwise support receptions or high-profile events, especially those where a tobacco company is the sole or main sponsor and/or which are overtly to promote tobacco products or the tobacco industry (such as the official opening of a UK tobacco factory overseas)”.¹³

However, UK staff have attended such events, generating considerable local media coverage.

For example, in 2019 the British ambassador to Yemen opened a cigarette factory in a free trade zone in Jordan, celebrating the expansion of the tobacco company Kamaran which is part-owned by BAT.^1272829

In 2020, staff from the UK high commission in Pakistan attended a promotional event for a BAT product in Pakistan.³⁰

• See UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT for details.

Engaging with industry allies

The links between diplomatic missions and tobacco companies can be more indirect, via funding third party allies of the industry. The UK guidelines state that diplomats should not “endorse projects which are funded directly or indirectly by the tobacco industry”.  However, a 2019 investigation by The Guardian found that the British high commission in Malaysia had given funding to a Kuala Lumpur based think tank (IDEAS) for several years. At the same time the think tank was also receiving money from tobacco companies and was lobbying against plain packaging regulation and tobacco taxes.³¹  While the UK had already implemented plain packaging regulations, tobacco control was being undermined overseas.

Attending meetings with the tobacco industry

Tobacco companies attend meetings and events organised directly by UK government departments, such as the FCO (now FCDO) or the DIT (now Department for Business and Trade).²¹  They also attend those held by regional, national or local business organisations such as chambers of commerce.

Responses to FOI requests show that when the attendance of UK government officials at such events is disclosed, there is little detail about the specific purpose or content of these meetings,¹⁴¹⁶ It may simply be described as relating to ‘doing business’ in the country.²²

Business vs public health interests?

The UK guidelines for overseas staff (last updated in 2013) allow for the communication of “basic trade, investment and political information”, although this is not defined.¹³ One of the activities used to justify interaction by UK diplomats is “resolving business problems that are potentially discriminatory”.^1214163233 This has been criticised as running counter to the WHO FCTC guidelines.¹³⁴

While transparency is required for tobacco industry interactions in 2018, the UK government told Parliament that it “does not catalogue the representations it makes on behalf of companies”.³⁵³⁶³⁷  Research by the Tobacco Control Research Group (TCRG) concluded that the stated WHO FCTC goal of “maximum transparency” is not being achieved in the UK.¹²⁹

Japan

In 2021, the Ambassador of Japan to Bangladesh lobbied the government of Bangladesh on behalf of Japan Tobacco International (JTI).  In a letter to the Bangladesh Finance Minister the Ambassador criticised 2019 taxation changes for their impact on JTI. It also complained about the activities of competitors, and licensing demands.³⁸

• For details, including the lobbying letter, see Japanese Diplomats Lobbying for JTI

The Japanese Ambassador to Ethiopia was present at the signing of a deal between the Ethiopian government and JTI in 2016,  when the Ministry of Public Enterprise sold 40% of its National Tobacco Enterprise to the Japanese company.³⁹ Japanese diplomats have also toured tobacco farms and JTI factories in Tanzania and Zambia.⁴⁰⁴¹

Japan Tobacco International is the overseas subsidiary of Japan Tobacco (JT), which is one third-owned by the Japanese government.⁴²

Germany

In May 2022, the German ambassador to Beirut visited the offices of Regie, the Lebanese Tobacco and Tobacco Inventory Administration.¹⁴³

Denmark

The Imani Centre for Policy and Education, a Ghana-based think tank,  received money from the Danish embassy while lobbying against tobacco control.³¹⁴⁴

Switzerland

Switzerland is not Party to the WHO FCTC.

In 2019, Swiss diplomats approached the government of the Republic of Moldova on behalf of Philip Morris International (PMI) seeking an opportunity to discuss new tobacco legislation.⁴⁵⁴⁶⁴⁷  The proposed legislation included significant tax increases on heated tobacco products, in which PMI has invested.⁴⁵⁴⁸

The same year, PMI helped fund an inaugural event for the new Swiss Embassy in Moscow.⁴⁹⁵⁰

• For more details see Swiss Diplomats Lobbying for PMI

USA

Although the US is not Party to the WHO FCTC, it has specific laws and guidance that prohibit its diplomats from promoting the sale or export of tobacco, or influencing non-discriminatory restrictions on tobacco marketing.^51525354 However, US diplomats have enabled meetings between tobacco companies and government representatives.

The US ASEAN Business Council organises delegations of US businesses, including Philip Morris International (PMI), which meet high level officials in the ASEAN region.⁵¹  PMI was at the time a vice chair of its Customs & Trade Facilitation Committee and used this opportunity to meet with government officials from the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Vietnam.⁵¹⁵⁵

Why it matters

The examples above illustrate contraventions of the WHO FCTC, an international treaty, and in many cases breaches of national guidelines. As TCRG research points out, all of these activities also undermine the spirit of these laws, by apparently serving the commercial interests of transnational tobacco companies and helping to ‘normalise’ the industry in the eyes of policy makers and the public.¹

The implementation guidelines of Article 5.3 urge Parties to exclude the tobacco industry completely from the public health policy arena.  The guidelines also urge them not to participate in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities which are used by the tobacco industry and as an alternative means to access policy makers, as well as for public relations and product promotion.¹

In August 2019, in direct response to the exposure of lobbying by Swiss diplomats, the WHO released a statement urging governments to comply with Article 5.3 and to “proactively aspire to reduce the number of people starting and continuing smoking, to promote health and preserve future generations”.⁵⁶

TobaccoTactics Resources

• UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT
• UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT: Bangladesh
• UK Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco: Burundi
• Swiss Diplomats Lobbying for PMI
• Japanese Diplomats Lobbying for JTI
• Third Party Techniques

TCRG Research

A “willingness to be orchestrated”: Why are UK diplomats working with tobacco companies?, R. Alebshehy, K. Silver, P. Chamberlain, Frontiers in Public Health, 17 March 2023, Sec. Public Health Policy, Volume 11 – 2023, doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.977713

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including TCRG research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to the Bath TCRG’s list of publications.

References

The post Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco Companies appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

British health charity Action on Smoking & Health (ASH) described this as a “global pattern of engagement” by British officials to defend BAT’s interests.⁶¹ Much of this lobbying activity has taken place in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) which are important target markets for tobacco companies as those in higher income countries become increasingly regulated and less lucrative.⁶²⁶³

Background

Parties to the FCTC have an obligation to protect public health policies from the “commercial and vested interests of the tobacco industry” and any contact with tobacco industry representatives, or others seeking to further their interests, must be “limited” and “transparent”.⁶⁴⁶⁵

The UK government, a signatory to the FCTC, has had rules in place on the engagement of civil servants with the tobacco industry since 1999.⁶⁶ After the exposure of direct lobbying for BAT by a British diplomat in Panama in 2012, pressure from ASH helped lead to further strengthening of these guidelines to support compliance with the FCTC, to be “more prescriptive in relation to provision of support to the tobacco industry”, and to restate and clarify the term “maximum transparency” in the engagement between tobacco companies and government staff overseas.⁶⁷

UK Diplomats Lobbying for British American Tobacco

Despite guidelines being revised, in 2017 a senior UK diplomat lobbied the government of Bangladesh on behalf of BAT.¹⁵ There has also been repeated contact between officials of the UK Department of International Trade (DIT) and the tobacco industry in Panama and Venezuela since 2014;²¹²² direct lobbying by the UK Ambassador on behalf of BAT in Hungary in relation to taxation in 2014 and 2015;¹⁶ and the public association of a senior British diplomat with overt BAT lobbying of the Pakistani government over health warnings on cigarette packaging in 2015.⁶⁸⁶⁹⁷⁰

It was also reported that a UK government trade advisor had been seconded to work in BAT’s offices in Hungary in 2015.²¹

Bangladesh

In September 2017, it was revealed that the British High Commissioner in Bangladesh had lobbied on behalf of BAT Bangladesh (BATB) in a tax dispute with the Bangladesh Board of Revenue over £170 million in unpaid VAT for incorrectly categorised cigarettes.¹⁵⁷¹⁷²]¹⁴

DIT officials, including the Director and Deputy Director, were also involved in multiple meetings, e-mails and phone calls with BAT relating to this issue between 2015 and 2017.¹⁴

• For more details, go to UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT: Bangladesh.

Panama

Latin America is a key market for BAT, which held 46% of the cigarette market in 2015.⁷³ As early as 2002, a report by the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) warned of the tobacco industry goal to “forestall any meaningful regulation of the industry’s practices or products” in the region.⁷⁴

The FCTC came into force in Panama in 2008, but in 2012, the Financial Times revealed that UK Ambassador Michael Holloway had lobbied the government of Panama on behalf of BAT over tax increases on tobacco, and the impact of the “alarming growth” in smuggled cigarettes on “one of the most important British Companies”.⁷⁵

At the time a Foreign Office spokesperson said that “our Ambassador was following our strict guidelines on lobbying, which allow us to offer assistance to firms operating overseas, including in resolving business problems that are potentially discriminatory”,⁶⁸ a defence which has been criticised as running counter to FCTC guidelines.⁷⁶ The same argument has been used to justify lobbying in Hungary in 2014/15 and Bangladesh in 2017.¹⁶¹⁴

Since the UK government guidelines were revised in 2013, stating “Posts must not …Attend or otherwise support receptions or high profile events, especially those where a tobacco company is the sole or main sponsor…”,⁶⁷ further contact between UK diplomats in Panama and BAT has been disclosed: “six meetings between BAT and embassy staff. Including two BAT ‘receptions’”.²¹

Venezuela

Venezuela became a party to the FCTC in 2006, but appears to have had limited success with compliance with WHO guidelines on article 5.3, including the requirement for transparency.⁷⁷⁷⁸

Following Freedom of Information (FOI) requests made by ASH, the DIT disclosed interaction with BAT (Bigott) Venezuela at 25 meetings between 2013 and 2017, mostly meetings of the Venezuelan and British Chambers of Commerce and “CEO Breakfast meetings”.²²

Little detail of the specific purpose or content of these meetings is given, and it is unclear which officials were present. In one instance, BAT and several other British companies met in 2016 with the Venezuelan Trade & Foreign Investment Minister at the British Embassy to “share the challenges and complexities they face when doing business in Venezuela aiming to obtain the Minister’s support with those issues and to arrange further bilateral meetings”.²²

Providing an opportunity to lobby the Venezuelan government appears beyond the “basic trade, investment and political information” allowed under the 2013 guidelines.⁶⁷

Issues of Concern

This global pattern of activity, of BAT enlisting UK diplomats to lobby on their behalf and promoting their economic interests above those of public health, is problematic for multiple reasons.

Breach of FCTC Article 5.3

The lobbying activity clearly breaches the spirit, and at times the letter, of Article 5.3 FCTC, which highlight the well documented tactics of the tobacco industry “to interfere with the setting and implementing of tobacco control measures”.⁶⁴⁶⁵

The FCTC is very specific on limiting contact with the industry: “Parties should interact with the tobacco industry only when and to the extent strictly necessary to enable them to effectively regulate the tobacco industry and tobacco products”.⁶⁴⁶⁵ The extended interaction in Panama and Bangladesh clearly falls outside this definition of necessary contact.

There are also specific recommendations regarding transparency: “… Whenever possible, interactions should be conducted in public, for example through public hearings, public notice of interactions, disclosure of records of such interactions to the public”.⁶⁴⁶⁵None of the transparency recommendations appear to have been followed by UK diplomats in Bangladesh prior to a Freedom of Information Request.

Breach of UK Guidelines for Diplomats

Jointly issued by the UK Department of Health (DH) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) the 2013 guidelines state that “Posts must not…Engage with local foreign governments on behalf of the tobacco industry, except in cases where local policies could be considered protectionist or discriminatory”.⁶⁶ Senior officials and politicians have argued that the retrospective tax demand from the Bangladesh government is discriminatory.⁶⁷ Under the guidelines some assistance can be given in “resolving business problems, e.g. customs of port clearance, smuggling, trademark violations etc”⁶⁷ but national taxation policy would seem to fall better under the direction “to assist tobacco companies to comply with foreign government laws or regulations”.⁶⁷

The need for transparency is emphasised in the UK guidelines: “in the event that interactions with the tobacco industry are necessary, these should be conducted with the maximum of transparency to demonstrate our compliance with the FCTC”. Given the lack of detail and the use of blanket exemptions, the UK government’s FOI releases are far from ‘transparent’, notably the 2018 letter from the UK Ambassador in Bangladesh was omitted. British politicians have also publicly stated that the UK government “does not catalogue the representations it makes on behalf of companies”.⁷⁹⁸⁰⁸¹

“Business as Usual?”

FOI requests have revealed frequent contact with the tobacco industry at business meetings and events organised by the FCO/DIT, and local Chambers of Commerce.²¹ Since 2016 BATB has been involved in the “Tax working group of the EU Bangladesh Business Climate Dialogue” and taken part in discussions of government budgets, taxation and “market conditions” where the Director of DIT has been present.¹⁴ In addition to BATB, contact has been disclosed with the Imperial Tobacco controlled Lao Tobacco Company in Laos;²³ with Habanos/Brascuba,a joint venture with Imperial Tobacco in Cuba;⁸² and with a tobacco company “owned by a British national” in Burundi.⁸³

• For more information on the lobbying activity in Burundi, see UK Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco: Burundi

Services and assistance provided are described by the UK government as being the same as for any other UK businesses.¹⁴²²²³ The responses offered in defence of these lobbying activities suggests that, despite clear UK government guidelines for the conduct of overseas officials, elements of the UK Government still consider the tobacco industry to be an industry like any other, and are therefore conducting “business as usual” in conflict with the UK’s own tobacco control policies.⁸⁴ In the official dealings with the industry, it does not appear to be taken into account that the tobacco industry does not operate like other businesses.⁶⁴⁶⁵⁸⁵

From August 2017 to January 2021, BAT was under investigation by the UK Serious Fraud Office after allegations of corruption and bribery in Africa.⁸⁶⁸⁷⁸⁸ The investigation was concluded as the SFO said it did not “meet the evidential test for prosecution”.⁸⁸

Undermining Tobacco Control Programmes

A priority for the WHO in Bangladesh (as part of the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use)⁸⁹ has been to help the National Board of Revenue to build capacity on tobacco taxation”.⁹⁰ The UK Department of Health is also “supporting the implementation of tobacco control measures” in low and middle income countries with £15 million of Overseas Development Assistance funds allocated to 2030.⁸⁴

The intervention of UK diplomats on behalf of BAT in Bangladesh and elsewhere appears to be in direct conflict with the aims of these programmes.²¹

Relevant Link

• ASH briefing: How British diplomats have defended BAT’s overseas activities, Action on Smoking and Health, 26 April 2018

TobaccoTactics Resources

Influencing foreign tobacco legislation via diplomats is a known tobacco industry tactic. Also see:

• Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco Companies
• UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT: Bangladesh
• UK Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco: Burundi
• Third Party Techniques

Other instances where BAT tried to hinder regulations:

• BAT Funded Lobbying Against Plain Packaging
• Kenya- BAT’s Tactics to Undermine the Tobacco Control Regulations
• Kenya- BAT’s Tactics to Influence Track and Trace Tender
• BAT Involvement in Tobacco Smuggling

TCRG Papers

A “willingness to be orchestrated”: Why are UK diplomats working with tobacco companies?, R. Alebshehy, K. Silver, P. Chamberlain, Frontiers in Public Health, 17 March 2023, Sec. Public Health Policy, Volume 11 – 2023, doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.977713

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including TCRG research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to the Bath TCRG’s list of publications.

References

The post UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT appeared first on TobaccoTactics.