RECENTLY, the Health and Education Ministries launched the “Generational End Game Anti-Rokok 18” or “Gegar-18” campaign to drum in the message among schoolchildren about the health hazards of smoking.
This is part of the Health Ministry’s proposal to ban the sale of tobacco products to those born from 2005 onwards, starting next year. The bold move has been met with mixed reactions by the public.
The proposal could be an inspiration from the Generational End Game policy introduced in New Zealand, which is following a phased approach that begun from 2011.
New Zealand aims to reduce its national smoking rate to below 5% by 2025, starting with the reduction of the number of cigarette retailers from 2024, reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes beginning in 2025, and gradually raising the legal age to purchase cigarette products, to create a “tobacco free generation”. This means those who are 14 years or younger will not be able to buy cigarettes come 2027.
There is no denying that the Malaysian version of this policy is good for public health, especially in managing health risks of future generations. But the road ahead is fraught with challenges, and if we are not careful, even the most well-intended policy can end up a failure if not well executed.
Firstly, the government needs to look into its implementation. Tobacco products are widely and easily available in the market. With the proposed policy, those born in 2005 and beyond will be barred from purchasing the products at retail outlets. This can be monitored if the purchases are made physically and in-store.
But there will be serious challenges monitoring things online, especially for non-cigarette tobacco products like vape and e-cigarettes. Even for in-store purchases, what are the assurances that the retailers will not put their profitability over public health? Putting in place punitive mechanisms may serve as a deterrent for retailers but it will still be a challenge to enforce this soon-to-be-law.
While enforcement is not an exclusive domain of the Health Ministry, as there are other ministries and agencies involved such as the Domestic Trade and Consumers Affairs Ministry, the practicality of this ban will be severely tested. Take for instance the smoking ban in eateries which have been violated time and again by restaurateurs and patrons.
Secondly, when the government stands firm in banning or restricting purchase of certain products, the illicit trade of these products will more often than not flourish. Consumers will find ways to circumvent the law to get their hands on these products.
The government is already in constant battle against illicit trade of cigarettes, costing the nation billions in lost tax revenue annually. The move to ban both cigarettes and non-cigarettes from reaching the younger generation will most likely boost the appeal for these products in the black market.
Thirdly, by banning not just cigarettes but also the alternatives to cigarettes such as vape, e-cigarettes and heated tobacco, the likelihood of these products surfacing in the black market without any form of quality control will be higher.
The younger generation, who mostly conduct online purchases, will find ways to get these untested, unregulated products, which given the electronic nature of the products, may not meet quality standards and can even be dangerous.
The intention to introduce this policy is indeed commendable. However, the rush to implement it may lead to a flop. A good intention must always be executed well to get the desired outcome.
In the case of New Zealand, for example, the country has put in place other measures to work towards the end game, including requiring plain packaging for cigarettes and raising the price of cigarettes steeply to US$20 (RM88) per pack now. Vaping products are currently also prohibited for sale to anyone under the age of 18.
There are steps that need to be taken to complement the ban, as the main goal is still to reduce smoking rates and protect future generations. Therefore, it would be wise for the Health Ministry to take a more cautious approach and to clearly define its target rather than push through targets, which may look good on paper but are not practical. This may, in the end, derail the main objective of cutting down smoking in Malaysia.
Consumer behaviours evolve constantly, and new trends and technology will emerge. What seems like a smart move today may be a new problem tomorrow.
Hopefully, the Health Ministry will not miss the woods for the trees with this ban, as well as the much-awaited new Tobacco Act.
While more regulation is better than no regulation, the enforcement mechanism must be there to ensure a smooth transition to a meaningful, smoke-free society for it to work.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
