Health Bill [HL]

The noble Earl and others have mentioned the legality of the product. Indeed, the noble Earl quoted Yvette Cooper saying that it is legal. But surely he is aware that if we had known of the damaging effects of smoking tobacco when it was first widely used, it almost certainly would not have been given a product licence. Now that we know about its lethal effects, is it justifiable to say that the profitability of small tobacconists is more important than reducing the take-up of smoking and the risk of becoming addicted to tobacco among young children? We have no evidence that the profits of tobacconists are going to go down, unless they sell only tobacco. However, most of them sell a lot of other products and they will have an opportunity to diversify. I want to make one other point. A couple of years ago, Geoff Good, the global brand director of the Imperial Tobacco Group, speaking at a conference, described the UK as a "dark market" since the tobacco advertising legislation of 2003. He went on to say that new methods of maintaining sales and attracting young people to tobacco smoking must be devised. I think that the noble Earl would agree that since the tobacco advertising ban, the size and gaudiness of tobacco displays in tobacconists has increased. These gantries are very unpleasant to look at because I know what they are selling. There is absolutely no doubt that the size and prominence of the area where tobacco is sold in tobacconists has increased. The cost of those large gantries is, of course, met by the tobacco companies.