Ireland to introduce plain cigarette packets

[Redway]

An Irish government minister has revealed his father and brother died from smoking-related illness as the country becomes only the second to clamp down on tobacco marketing.

Ireland will force tobacco manufacturers to use plain boxes emblazoned with graphic images under tough new laws first enforced in Australia.

Dr James Reilly, the health minister and a GP, said the initiative will stop big cigarette companies from using marketing tactics like packet size, colour and style to attract young smokers, particularly girls.

Read the full article at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/28/ireland-plain-cigarette-packets#ixzz2UgUZm81T

[Smithy]

If someone's attracted to smoking because of the packet they're retarded

[Niamh.]

The Irish government don't really want cigarette sales to plummet though, not with all that revenue they make off them

[Niamh.]

If someone's attracted to smoking because of the packet they're retarded

Exactly. It's a stupid token gesture for something they don't even want to work imo

[Cherie]

Completely off topic, I hope you have registered for your property tax Niamh :D:

[Niamh.]

Completely off topic, I hope you have registered for your property tax Niamh :D:

:laugh: I did actually as much as it pains me, dirty bastards addressed that letter to me as well rather than Gav or both of us :suspect:

[Vicky.]

Stupid..people dont buy ciggies because of the pretty packets :rolleyes:

If they were actually serious about being bothered about peoples health, they would just stop selling tobacco tbh. But that will never happen because they make too much money.

[Cherie]

:laugh: I did actually as much as it pains me, dirty bastards addressed that letter to me as well rather than Gav or both of us :suspect:

There is no escape, I don't know why people have not registered as they are going to deduct it from pay or benefit so it seems pretty pointless not paying up. This type of tax should have been introduced when the country was booming, its a right kick in the teeth to introduce it now when there are no jobs.:nono:

[Redway]

If someone's attracted to smoking because of the packet they're retarded

Exactly. It's a stupid token gesture for something they don't even want to work imo

Absolutely. I tend to buy Windsor Blue and Lambert and Butler but that's not because of how the packet looks LOL. This and hiding them behind shutters are probably going to make smoking look more attractive in kids, wanting to know what's behind the 'mysterious shutters'. It's a poorly thought-out joke. :bored:

[Vicky.]

If the photos of people with tumours growing out of their necks and such havent put people off..how on earth will a plain packet do it? :joker:

[Redway]

If the photos of people with tumours growing out of their necks and such havent put people off..how on earth will a plain packet do it? :joker:

Most of those are vastly exaggerated anyway. I daresay smoking 3 a day won't cause that amount of damage. :p

[Niamh.]

There is no escape, I don't know why people have not registered as they are going to deduct it from pay or benefit so it seems pretty pointless not paying up. This type of tax should have been introduced when the country was booming, its a right kick in the teeth to introduce it now when there are no jobs.:nono:

Too right but it's typical of them, when the place was booming they wanted to look like the good guys, giving out money in that savings scheme etc etc instead of thinking ahead (and lets face it they were paying themselves more than enough for us to expect them to be planning for a rainy day) Then when the bottom falls out, they're taxing us on anything they possibly can to try and make it all back again.

[arista]

Scotland will be next.

[lostalex]

If the photos of people with tumours growing out of their necks and such havent put people off..how on earth will a plain packet do it? :joker:

There are people with those kind of tumors that have never smoked a single cigarette in their life. It was always a pack of lies using those pics to begin with.

It's like showing people pictures of Sexually transmitted diseases and thinking no one will ever have unprotected sex. The extremist language and imagery they use never works, because it's just seen as silly and unrealistic.

[joeysteele]

There are people with those kind of tumors that have never smoked a single cigarette in their life. It was always a pack of lies using those pics to begin with.

It's like showing people pictures of Sexually transmitted diseases and thinking no one will ever have unprotected sex. The extremist language and imagery they use never works, because it's just seen as silly and unrealistic.

Absolutely and well said.

[Kizzy]

What harm can it do to implement these changes? If it deters 1 or 2 it will be worth it, and there is nothing silly or unrealistic about it.
There will always be those who help and advise and there will be those who do what they want, that is their choice.

[Ramsay]

I think keeping the pictures of dead babies and messed up lungs will stop more people than a plain packet would

[Kizzy]

I think keeping the pictures of dead babies and messed up lungs will stop more people than a plain packet would

''Ireland will force tobacco manufacturers to use plain boxes emblazoned with graphic images under tough new laws first enforced in Australia.''

[Ramsay]

Ohh right then, thought it was just gonna be a white plain box

[Marsh.]

If the photos of people with tumours growing out of their necks and such havent put people off..how on earth will a plain packet do it? :joker:

They're not plain packets, they have graphic images on them.

By plain, they mean no branding marks/logos or anything. People can talk about "I don't buy fags for the pretty packets" but those types of advertising do have an effect in some way so cutting it out is only a good thing.

[Vicky.]

As I said earlier, if they actually cared about peoples health, they would stop selling them all together. This is just a way to appear like they care while still grabbing onto the huge profits they make from tobacco products.

I dont see the point in plain packets(with images on them...) while all ciggies have to be covered up now anyway. They hardly catch your eye when you walk in a shop.

[Kizzy]

The fact that they are hugely addictive is probably as big a reason too, there would be carnage haha.

[Marsh.]

As I said earlier, if they actually cared about peoples health, they would stop selling them all together. This is just a way to appear like they care while still grabbing onto the huge profits they make from tobacco products.

I dont see the point in plain packets(with images on them...) while all ciggies have to be covered up now anyway. They hardly catch your eye when you walk in a shop.

:laugh: I don't think banning them is the answer. Can you imagine the riots, or the increase in "illegal" sales of them.

[ThisIsNickkk]

The government make far too much money on the back of cigarette sales, so as much as they seemingly want to do good... They'd be screwed if people just stopped smoking.

I don't know what the packets are currently like in Ireland, I'm presuming they will be the same as they are in the UK, in the way that they have small pictures on the back and front of a deceased lung or something to do with impotence.

I don't think the design of the box really will deter smokers. I think if "graphic images" were going to stop people, the smaller images would have done so by now.

The whole thing with some shops having cigarettes locked behind a shutter as well is ridiculous... If someone if going to smoke, they're going to smoke. Just because they can't see them in a shop doesn't mean it is going to deter them.

[Kizzy]

There must be some evidence to support this decision, A slight drop in sales?
Like you say this is big business and although it creates money it also costs money.

[Iceman]

The pictures we have now are so stupid, whenever i see them they have no effect on me, whether that's from desensitization in general or just once you've seen them once you dont pay attention, cant see this having any effect to be honest.

[Sam:)]

The only picture thats off-putting is the throat cancer one, the rest of them arent shocking at all. I mean look at this onehttp://www.businessandleadership.com/fs/img/news/201112/rs-426x288/smokingimage.jpg

Does this affect pouches of tobacco I wonder?

[Niamh.]

The only picture thats off-putting is the throat cancer one, the rest of them arent shocking at all. I mean look at this onehttp://www.businessandleadership.com/fs/img/news/201112/rs-426x288/smokingimage.jpg

Does this affect pouches of tobacco I wonder?

No worries, I'm not an apple http://i.imgur.com/DAW6dCh.gif

[Marc]

Will this even help people stop smoking?.... probably not!

[Iceman]

Can honestly say it wont stop me....i dont care what my cigarettes come in...

[arista]

Can honestly say it wont stop me....i dont care what my cigarettes come in...


It may not stop you
but it stops others.


That means good news

[Smithy]

it's gonna be so hard selling them cause i wont be able to tell them apart :bored:


(not that I live in ireland, but if it happens here soon then yah)

[Iceman]

It may not stop you
but it stops others.


That means good news

To be honest it really wont, when I was a kid I didnt care what the package was, I want the smokes inside not the cardboard it comes in...

[Withano]

I can't be bothered to debate about it, because I dont feel that strongly about it.. But I always thought they should just increase the legal age to buy cigarettes by a year every year. Problem solved, next generation aren't addicted.

[arista]

To be honest it really wont, when I was a kid I didnt care what the package was, I want the smokes inside not the cardboard it comes in...


But its worked Down Under


You are Wrong you Cocky Stinking Smoker

[GypsyGoth]

Some girls I knew started smoking pretty young, a good few years before it was legal for them to do so, so I feel there would still be loads getting addicted regardless of what age you're allowed to smoke.

And I guess the plain packaging might work on some, but I don't think kids get or desire smokes because of the packaging, I think they aspire to be like others they see smoke, from likes of celebs, to friends, to family members.

[arista]

Some girls I knew started smoking pretty young, a good few years before it was legal for them to do so, so I feel there would still be loads getting addicted regardless of what age you're allowed to smoke.

And I guess the plain packaging might work on some, but I don't think kids get or desire smokes because of the packaging, I think they aspire to be like others they see smoke, from likes of celebs, to friends, to family members.


Yes and for Them
its worth it.

[GypsyGoth]

Yes and for Them
its worth it.

Good point, even if it saves just one person, it's worth it.

[Iceman]

But its worked Down Under


You are Wrong you Cocky Stinking Smoker

Hows about stop insulting me, it's my opinion Arista no dont be telling me im wrong, great for Australia, big claps for them. Will make NO difference here, no go rest your hard drive, you ignorant whinging robot.

[arista]

Hows about stop insulting me, it's my opinion Arista no dont be telling me im wrong, great for Australia, big claps for them. Will make NO difference here, no go rest your hard drive, you ignorant whinging robot.


I hate buying 2nd hand CD's covered in Smoke Stinking smells

[Iceman]

You're living in the past, Itunes baby!

[arista]

You're living in the past, Itunes baby!


I use them
but rare CD Remixes
are not online


I have every connection.


Even a DAT player

[Redway]

It may not stop you
but it stops others.


That means good news

It won't though. As has been said countless times, you'd have to be pretty thick to buy cigarettes because of what the packets look like. If scaring people into quitting through the use of vastly exaggerated pictures was an effective deterrent then it would've worked by now. They just need to concede that people aren't buying it and drop it already.

I smoke for a mixture of reasons but one of them certainly isn't because the packets look 'pretty', not that they're not already permeated with warnings across half the packet.

[Marsh.]

I can't be bothered to debate about it, because I dont feel that strongly about it.. But I always thought they should just increase the legal age to buy cigarettes by a year every year. Problem solved, next generation aren't addicted.

That would be a wonderfully effective and simple idea if people who were underage didn't do something that they're legally not allowed to do.

But we all know that'll never happen, for as long as there is age restrictions, people below that age restriction will find ways of doing it.

[Marsh.]

It won't though. As has been said countless times, you'd have to be pretty thick to buy cigarettes because of what the packets look like. If scaring people into quitting through the use of vastly exaggerated pictures was an effective deterrent then it would've worked by now. They just need to concede that people aren't buying it and drop it already.

I smoke for a mixture of reasons but one of them certainly isn't because the packets look 'pretty', not that they're not already permeated with warnings across half the packet.

I don't think the point is about "pretty packaging" but more about cutting back on all forms of advertising them, to the point they're not on display in a lot of shops.

Whether we like to think so or not, advertising something has an effect.

[MTVN]

Tbh even if did have a minor impact (I can't see it making any more than that) I wouldn't support it, the whole thing is just quite patronising and a further way to demonise smokers. I know this comparison is often made but nobody would advocate such stringent measures as have been placed on smoking on such things as alcohol or fatty foods, despite the deaths and problems they cause every year, the tobacco industry has just been disproportionately targeted because it is more convenient to do so. There is also the issue that it will make it easier for smugglers to counterfeit cigarettes, and it will cost a lot of jobs and money.

People have been bombarbed with health scares, cancer stories, and ever increasing prices for years, as well as having the areas where you can legally smoke severely restricted, enforcing plain packaging is just another pointless addition to the anti-smoking legislation

[Redway]

I see what you're saying but I'm still sceptical re. how effective hiding them behind shutters will be (moving away from the plain packaging bit for a minute). People who are underage tend to do something they're not supposed to do so wouldn't that further encourage them to smoke? :shrug:

(For Marsh.)

[Redway]

Tbh even if did have a minor impact (I can't see it making any more than that) I wouldn't support it, the whole thing is just quite patronising and a further way to demonise smokers. I know this comparison is often made but nobody would advocate such stringent measures as have been placed on smoking on such things as alcohol or fatty foods, despite the deaths and problems they cause every year, the tobacco industry has just been disproportionately targeted because it is more convenient to do so. There is also the issue that it will make it easier for smugglers to counterfeit cigarettes, and it will cost a lot of jobs and money.

People have been bombarded with health scares, cancer stories, and ever increasing prices for years, as well as having the areas where you can legally smoke severely restricted, enforcing plain packaging is just another pointless addition to the anti-smoking legislation
Funnily enough I'm very much in favour of the smoking ban actually. It's fair enough if others want to smoke but it makes perfect sense that others would rather not be victims of second-hand smoke.

I agree with the rest of your post.

[MTVN]

Funnily enough I'm very much in favour of the smoking ban actually. It's fair enough if others want to smoke but it makes perfect sense that others would rather not be victims of second-hand smoke.

I agree with the rest of your post.

I don't have any problem with restaurants, bars etc. banning smoking if they want to, but I do think that pubs should be allowed to have separate designated smoking rooms if they so choose, apart from anything else the smoking ban has been another nail in the coffin of the declining pub industry

[MTVN]

This is the sort of thing that brings out the old school tory side of me

[Niamh.]

I don't have any problem with restaurants, bars etc. banning smoking if they want to, but I do think that pubs should be allowed to have separate designated smoking rooms if they so choose, apart from anything else the smoking ban has been another nail in the coffin of the declining pub industry

Most pubs have pretty decent smoking areas here, they're kind of out door rooms mostly, they usually have seats, tables and heaters and are mainly enclosed

[Redway]

I don't have any problem with restaurants, bars etc. banning smoking if they want to, but I do think that pubs should be allowed to have separate designated smoking rooms if they so choose, apart from anything else the smoking ban has been another nail in the coffin of the declining pub industry
Yeah, I support that notion to an extent.
This is the sort of thing that brings out the old school tory side of me

:joker:

[Iceman]

Smoking areas are the best, its where all the cool kids hang out.

[Marsh.]

I see what you're saying but I'm still sceptical re. how effective hiding them behind shutters will be (moving away from the plain packaging bit for a minute). People who are underage tend to do something they're not supposed to do so wouldn't that further encourage them to smoke? :shrug:

(For Marsh.)

Well it can't do any harm can it?

Upcoming generations will grow up where fags aren't on display and being advertised which will make somewhat of a difference. Yes of course if they have smoking peers or parents or whatever they may end up getting into it/copying anyway but not making them so attractive isn't a bad thing.

It's not going to affect any current smokers really but future generations it just might make a difference.

[Sam:)]

I can't be bothered to debate about it, because I dont feel that strongly about it.. But I always thought they should just increase the legal age to buy cigarettes by a year every year. Problem solved, next generation aren't addicted.

I dont think it makes a difference if they change the legal age.. I've never heard of anyone starting smoking above the legal age. Sure its fairly easy to find a shop that serve smokes to Ireland. If not just fish?

These plain boxes wont make a difference either, if it really bothered you im sure you could get a tin or a box to keep them in.. presuming they dont do it to pouches id just keep the pouch and skins+filters if they were that bad.

[Patrick]

******ing retarded in the highest order.

If they think covering a packet of cigarettes in a white wrapper and having 'Mayfair' wrote on them in Comic Sans is going to stop people smoking then jog on.

[Sam:)]

hmmm I wonder will they mix up the brands sometimes.. Lazy shopkeepers giving golden virginia instead of amber leaf etc.

[Stu]

The perfect excuse to really bump up your street cred and get a cool cigarette case.

[Nedusa]

Well lets just see... A few uncomfortable images versus probably the most addictive drug in existance.... Hmmm which one will prevail

I think the nicotine will narrowly win through....!!!!