Public health academics have compared some of the statements made by government ministers around the smokefree legislation with those made by tobacco companies. Photo: 123RF
Public health experts are calling on the government to be totally transparent on any past or present dealings its MPs have had with tobacco companies.
The coalition is set to repeal the previous government's smokefree legislation, which would have banned the sale of tobacco to anyone born from 1 January 2009, cut the number of retailers, and de-nicotinised cigarettes.
The government is vowing to still meet Smokefree 2025 targets, but reasons it gave for repealing the previous legislation included that it could lead to a rise in crime and a tobacco black market.
University of Otago academics Janet Hoek, Richard Edwards, and Andrew Waa compared some of the statements made by ministers, with submissions made by tobacco companies on smokefree policy.
Hoek said there were similarities in the rhetoric.
"We saw that some of those arguments are actually very similar. So their concerns, for example, about rising crime or that illicit trade," she said.
"Just how is it that some of the arguments that have been put forward by politicians have got these similarities with arguments that have been deduced by tobacco companies? I think a little bit of clarification would go a long way."
Hoek wants politicians to disclose whether they have had any dealings with the tobacco lobby, saying a full and complete register of interactions between MPs and staff of tobacco companies, or members of groups funded by tobacco companies, should be made public.
"I want to be really clear that we're not trying to accuse politicians. We're simply asking questions, and documenting what we see as being similarities in arguments, and asking them to clarify how those similarities have arisen," she said.
The government has come under increased pressure over the legislation, and whether Associate Health Minister Casey Costello sought advice on a three-year freeze on the inflation-adjusted excise tax on smoked tobacco products.
Costello told RNZ she had not, but a document showed she had. Her defence was that she was sent a document offering a range of advice on a range of different matters. She ticked yes to all, not just the advice on freezing the tax.
"When I received this delegation, I provided a range of information to officials, including things like Hansard records and previous policy positions around smoke-free and vaping to help guide conversations. The health paper came back setting out a number of areas on which I could be provided advice, and I marked that I wanted advice on all of them as I consider it is important to be broadly informed before making decisions," she told Parliament on Wednesday.
"That health briefing referred to proposals and notes. They were not my proposals, to be clear. They were not things that I had written. This was general information I had provided to officials, and I'm sure they can verify this. I haven't yet received any of that advice, and I certainly did not specifically request a proposal on excise freeze."
Labour leader Chris Hipkins also wanted transparency.
"Can [the Prime Minister] assure this House that no person affiliated with the tobacco industry was involved in developing or writing those party policy documents that were given to officials?" he asked on Wednesday.
The prime minister said he was not responsible for other parties' manifestos.
Christopher Luxon said New Zealand First's tobacco policy was not the government's tobacco policy, but it was right that officials should have the party policy documents.
"It's not unreasonable that officials should actually see party political manifestos in consideration as they think about dreaming up policy advice that actually lowers smoking," he said.
Luxon said he expected all ministers to comply with the Cabinet Manual, and declare any conflicts of interest.
He pointed out Cabinet agreed to increasing the excise tax late last year.