A discouraging government report released recently says that the number of daily smokers in Hong Kong has increased marginally, while the number of legitimate cigarette sales has gone down. This suggests that, regardless of the tax on tobacco, the government's current smoking policy isn't working.
Anti-smoking groups suggest that, if the government were to raise the tax, from 62 to 75 per cent, it would get people to stop smoking. The same argument has been used repeatedly for decades. Yet, with smokers still smoking, we hear that the tax 'is not high enough'. Are we fighting a self-defeating battle?
The hope of anti-smoking groups that people will quit with greater costs ignores the fact that people can turn to illicit cigarettes. It was clear that the 2009-10 tax increase didn't have the intended effect. During that period, heavy smokers cut the number of cigarettes they smoked, but the number of smokers didn't decrease overall.
Taxing away an addiction won't work, but education does. A classic anti-smoking commercial more than 20 years ago by actor Yul Brynner helped countless smokers around the world quit voluntarily.
So, why have anti-smoking groups abandoned the successful model of education, which aids smokers to quit voluntarily, and are instead lobbying the government to exercise its coercive power?
If the tobacco control policy continues in its current direction, one can anticipate ultimately a ban on the import of tobacco products, together with the indoor bans and limitations on smoking areas.
However, if the tobacco tax increases and smoking bans are borne out of public health concerns, it begs the question of whether, for example, the government would then be justified in also taxing our McDonald's order because of rising rates of obesity.
