I have no doubt in my mind that as legislators you will agree with me that what the Constitution of this country and the National Health Act demand is that we work without favour or prejudice to ensure that, indeed, we do our best to improve the quality of life of our people.
I have no doubt in my mind also that what we are doing today is precisely geared at enabling us to achieve that strategic objective. Allow me to point out that improving the quality of life of our people is not something that we can only achieve by building clinics and hospitals. Neither can it be achieved solely through the mere provision of drugs and other medicines.
The achievement of this goal requires all of to create and provide an environment that will minimise the chances of our people being exposed to diseases, both communicable and noncommunicable. What we are therefore doing today is aimed at reaching consensus on this critical matter within the context of our Healthy Lifestyles Campaign and thus giving effect to both the supreme law of this land, which is the Constitution, and the National Health Act.
As we debate this amending Bill, therefore, let us do so with the full conviction and with the full knowledge and understanding that tomorrow will indeed be better than today. What is equally important when debating this Bill, is for us to approach this debate with a fair understanding of the burden that tobacco-related diseases continue to place on the health status of our people and on our country's health system.
Therefore, it is my wish that this amending Bill gets similar attention to that which was given to the one passed by this Parliament in 2007, because it is the second part of the same Bill and the goal, which is to protect our people against the harmful effects of tobacco products, remains the same.
Perhaps it is appropriate that I deal with the accusation that as the Department of Health we did not consult enough in our quest to give life to this Bill and, indeed, in order to safe lives. The chairperson of the portfolio committee will surely agree with us based on the evidence, both oral and written - indeed, we complied with all the consultation requirements as far as this matter is concerned. This we did within the context of both the Constitution and the National Health Act, but we were also guided by that which we reasonably considered to be the common goal of all our people.
We are fully conscious not only of the sensitive nature of the work that we do and the Constitution which guides us, but also the human and individual liberties that allow people to conduct trade in a way that is permissible by the laws of our country. And, therefore, we could not have been driven by malice or hatred - contrary to what some seek to suggest.
The Tobacco Amendment Bill before us focuses on the trade and marketing of tobacco products. Hence, it proposes amendments that seek to improve further the operation of the Act and close any gaps and loopholes that have been used by the tobacco industry to circumvent the objects of the current Act.
The main provisions of this amending Bill are to strengthen the sections which prohibit advertising, promotion and sponsorship; set standards for packing and labelling of tobacco products including pictorial warnings on packages; remove misleading package descriptions such as "light" and "mild"; control the ingredients in and emissions from tobacco products; and to increase penalties for breaking the law.
The publication of this Bill was approved by Cabinet in 2003 and it was gazetted for public comment from 17 October 2003 to 17 November 2003. My department collated a substantive number of submissions received from individual members of the public, retailers, the tobacco industry, its associates and health organisations in line with what the laws of our country require as far as legislative consultation is required.
In general, the majority of the submissions supported the proposed amendment to the Bill, except some submissions which made alternative proposals that were not necessarily in line with the objectives of the Bill. The Bill has therefore been amended taking into consideration comments received.
Allow me to provide this House with a clause-by-clause analysis of the Bill in order to ensure fairness and balance in dealing with this matter.
Clause 1 seeks to amend some of the definitions in the present tobacco legislation to extend the application of the Tobacco Products Control Act and to close loopholes that exist in the present tobacco legislation.
Clause 2 seeks to prohibit the advertising, promotion and distribution of tobacco products as well as prescribing the information required in respect of the packaging and labelling of tobacco products. It seeks to prescribe conditions under which sponsorship by tobacco industry and associate industries will be allowed.
Clause 3 seeks to prescribe standards for manufacturing and importation of tobacco products in the Republic of South Africa. Clause 4 seeks to protect children by prohibiting the owner or a person in charge of a business to allow any person in his or her employment or under his or her control, who is under the age of 18 years, to sell or offer to sell any tobacco products on the business premises. Clause 5 seeks to prohibit any distribution which is free or at a reduced price, or reward to anyone with tobacco products. Clause 6 seeks to prohibit access to vending machines by persons under the age of 18.
Clause 7 seeks to prescribe signs in respect of tobacco products and information that must be displayed at the point of sale and on the vending machines. This section also seeks to prescribe the quantities of a specific tobacco product to be sold in a single package. Clause 8 seeks to increase the penalty for contravening provisions of the Act to increase its value as a deterrent.
In line with what I've said at the beginning, as the Department of Health and as government, we are all fully mindful of the fact that the tobacco industry is a leading business in this country and therefore it cannot be accurate that malice and hatred influenced us in approaching this Bill, as some would like to suggest.
What drives us is the consensus based on the submissions - including those from the tobacco industry - and the consultation process that tobacco products are indeed harmful, compromise the health of user and nonuser alike and therefore place a burden on our country's health system. In line with the International Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and guided by our own moral obligation as government, we cannot simply turn a blind eye to this matter.
Looking at the global picture, as far as tobacco use is concerned, it is recorded that most users of tobacco products start smoking before the age of 18, with almost a quarter of those beginning before the age of 10. The younger children are when they start experimenting with smoking, the more likely they are to become regular tobacco users and the less likely they are to quit.
The Tobacco industry has taken this opportunity to lure young people through sponsorship, advertising and glamorisation of tobacco products by falsely associating the use of tobacco product with success, adventure, appeal and glamour. This creates in the minds of our young ones the impression that tobacco products generally signify progress as far as life is concerned.
The message I wish to put across to our young people is that this projection of success is incorrect and dangerous. The use of tobacco products is harmful.
I know, or thought, that somewhere in the gallery of this House there are representatives of the tobacco industry - or they may be listening from somewhere else - who are keen to listen and hear which direction this debate is taking. I have no doubt in my mind that as responsible fathers, mothers, grandmothers and grandfathers, wherever they are listening to this debate, they surely will agree with us that trade and profiteering cannot be all that inform and guide our human existence. I am sure that as responsible members of our society, they will agree with us that what we do today is geared at improving the health and quality of life of our people. As responsible corporate citizens, they should agree with us that spending billions of dollars worldwide each year to spread the marketing net as widely as possible to attract more users and paralyse global health in the context of severe challenges, cannot be morally acceptable.
Concerning the proposed new ways of packaging and labelling of tobacco products globally, many people misunderstand, underestimate or are not fully aware of the risk of morbidity and premature mortality caused by tobacco use and exposure to tobacco smoke.
There is persuasive evidence that text plus picture-based health warnings on tobacco product packaging tend to provoke an increased emotional response, are more salient and potentially more effective than text-only warnings. Pictures may also be better able to provide information to those with low levels of literacy or low income, who may have little access to other health information. Using a range of messages increases the likelihood of impact across different population subgroups as different messages resonate with different people.
I have no doubt in my mind that having outlined the context and rationale for doing this work, we can count on your support in ensuring that as the sun rises tomorrow, our people will say with confidence that today is indeed better than yesterday.
Over the years, as a country, we have been a shining star insofar as tobacco control globally is concerned. Later this year, our country will be hosting the Third Conference of the Parties in Durban as part of the efforts of nations of the world to take stock of how much work we have done as individual countries as far as control of tobacco products and promoting primary health care is concerned.
For us, the fact that this conference will take place on our soil, is indicative of the appreciation that countries of the world have for us regarding tobacco control and compliance with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, of which we are a signatory. [Time expired.]