Director of the Initiative for Public
Policy Analysis, a public policy think-tank promoting the institutions
of free society in Nigeria, Ayodele Thompson spoke to Eromosele Abiodun
on how Nigeria’s porous borders fuel illicit importation and trade in
tobacco in the country, as well as how the implementation of the Tobacco
Control Act will sanitise the industry and the role of IPPA in ensuring
that Nigeria is not short-changed. Excerpts:

The Nigerian tobacco industry has
been in the spotlight lately with many groups, including yours, holding
strongly to divergent views.
You have been accused by anti-tobacco
campaigners as a major promoter of the tobacco industry. Why do you
promote the tobacco industry so strongly?
The Initiative for Public Policy Analysis
(IPPA) mission is focused on promotion of free enterprise in Nigeria.
In this regard, IPPA supports and promotes policies that enhance
domesticating the production of everything the country consumes. Our
mission also propels us to promote policies and initiatives that are
geared towards growing Nigeria’s industrial capacity. IPPA sees this as
vital because the nation cannot rely on crude oil exploration forever in
the absence of developing the industrial base. The organisation’s
purview therefore encompasses Nigeria’s industrial growth and policies
aimed at accelerating the growth and jobs creation.
Tobacco consumption is generally
considered to be dangerous to health, which the anti-tobacco campaigners
have been highlighting. Are you not being paid by the tobacco companies
to focus on the economic benefits of tobacco production and not the
health consequences?
No one can deny the perceived health
consequences of tobacco consumption. This is a point of agreement with
the anti-tobacco groups. But what they fail to realise is that tobacco
consumption is a lifestyle choice, similar to alcohol and sugar
consumption. No legislation can completely eradicate lifestyle choices. A
nation that tries to legislate against individuals’ lifestyle choices
is trying to waste tax-payers resources. The greater challenge is
restricting youth access to tobacco products and illegal trade. Since
cigarette consumption can’t be banned, it is only proper for Nigeria to
implement and promote policies that will ensure that the tobacco
industry is well regulated so that the intended end-view is achieved
while at the same time the country benefits from localising production.
Since you agree that there are
health consequences associated with tobacco consumption, why don’t you
join people campaigning for the closure of tobacco production in Nigeria
in order to show that you truly care for Nigerians?
For us, tobacco is a legal product and
the focus should not be on prohibition as agitated for by some groups.
It should also be on ensuring regulation in place is enforced. Smokers
will still smoke. The absence of local, well regulated production
ultimately opens the door to the illicit importation of cigarettes such
as flavoured cigarettes that has been well communicated by the
regulator, Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) and others in that
category. These products have not been tested or approved locally and
smokers still need to be protected. Since local production adheres to
rules set locally, localising production makes it much easier to monitor
and regulate the activities of tobacco companies, which wholesale
importation will not allow. From public policy point of view, it makes
sense to localise production rather than import.
You raised an interesting issue
about the anti-tobacco campaigners being sponsored by foreign bodies
with special interest in Nigeria. Do you doubt that their campaign is
not altruistic?
IPPA does not doubt that anti-tobacco
campaigners love Nigeria and Nigerians. They simply do not get their
facts right. What surprises many about their operation is the source of
their funding. One tends to reason that Nigerian government is not
sponsoring them because government itself is cash-strapped. If they are
actually on the side of the public as they claim, their offices ought
not to be in highbrow areas.
How many campaigns against youth smoking
have they undertaken in the last five years? How much of public
campaigns have they carried out to sensitise Nigerians about the dangers
associated with tobacco consumption? It is high time Nigerians question
the true motives of the well-off sponsors of the so-called local
anti-tobacco groups. If tobacco companies are closed down in Nigeria,
cigarettes will be imported from the home countries of the sponsors of
the anti-tobacco groups, contributing to their economies while
depressing that of Nigeria.
The general perception in Nigeria
is that majority of NGOs and lobby groups like yours including the
anti-tobacco campaigners are simply profit-oriented fronts with a facade
of promoting the common good. Why should Nigerians trust any of you?
To be honest, we would leave this to
other non-profit organisations to answer for themselves. We are not
their mouthpiece. IPPA is a policy research advocacy group with the sole
purpose of promoting Nigeria’s interest. In the last decade, we have
engaged with policy-makers, regulators and government at different
levels in order to make Nigeria a country where investors flock to with
ease of doing business in Nigeria. The bulk of our income comes
primarily from advisory services and research that we provide to
interested parties, not from donations.
As a matter of fact, donation is a thing
of the past for a group such as ours. Because our operations are not
tied to any one group, we are not beholden to anyone and our research is
not directed or teleguided by anyone. We believe Nigerians should
assess the various advocacy groups based on their track records and
affiliations. One thing Nigerians must know is that these foreign
bodies’ have self-interest over Nigeria’s interests and we need to
question the motive for any support received.
Nigeria was praised for passing the Tobacco Control Act (TCA) last year. What is your assessment of its implementation thus far?
If there is anything that the National
Assembly achieved, it is the passage of the Tobacco Control Act. The Act
was passed after a long and rigorous process. As far as we have seen,
the Act is balanced and could serve as a springboard to regulate the
industry in such a way that Nigeria’s best interest is served. Although
full implementation has not commenced, there is more awareness of what
is expected of stakeholders in the industry. The Act also frowns on
engaging in illegal activities with such activities attracting severe
penalties. The onus is on the Ministry of Health and other concerned
agencies to implement the law to the letter while being on the lookout
for any infractions. At the end, the TCA should not be just another
textbook exercise with taxpayers’ money being used to run in circles. I
should be a regulation that is brought to life and not just gathering
dust in law libraries.
You say that the legislation is
balanced and well thought out but your counterparts on the other side
are calling for a review of the Act. Does that not lend credence to the
view that the tobacco companies brought undue influence to bear on the
public hearings and therefore had the bill tilted to their advantage?
The public hearings availed all
interested parties opportunities to present their views. The
anti-tobacco groups presented their views as well. No group was left out
during the public hearings. In fact the public hearing at the Senate
was overtly hostile to the tobacco companies; you can say the Act is
tilted slightly against the tobacco companies. What many failed to
realise is that the lawmakers were elected to protect the interests of
Nigeria and Nigerians and not a particular group. Moreover, the
law-makers realised that Nigeria stands to lose big time if the
legislation is not well balanced and thought out.
It is disingenuous for these so-called
anti-tobacco groups to be calling for a review of a law that has not
been implemented since they had virtually all their recommendations
adopted by the Senate Committee on Health. It is a waste of taxpayers’
money in this current economic state. Should we just keep churning out
laws without implementing them first? It can almost be perceived as an
abuse of the legislative process. The provisions of the law especially
the sections that deal with flavoured cigarettes and wanton importation
of cigarettes into Nigeria need to be tested for effectiveness before
calling for a review.
Illicit trade is reported to be a bigger challenge fuelling youth smoking. What can be done to curb youth access to cigarettes?
Illicit trade is a global concern, not
restricted to Nigeria. Curbing illicit trade in tobacco is almost
impossible because of Nigeria’s porous borders and weak law enforcement.
The first step is to ensure that only approved products are imported or
produced in Nigeria; stricter monitoring of leisure places to ensure
that the law is not breached; national campaign targeting primary and
secondary schools on the dangers of smoking; restricting access to
cigarettes to only people above 18 years and enforcement agencies rising
up to this national and global challenge, among other initiatives.
Why is it so difficult for
tobacco campaigners, whether pro or anti, and regulators, to come
together to fashion out ways young people’s access to tobacco products
can be drastically curtailed?
We have an open door policy and we are
always willing to engage anybody or group on policies and practices that
affect Nigerians and their businesses. What is clear from the tobacco
campaign over the years is the level of foreign influence; the interest
being shown in tobacco issues are mainly pecuniary. There is a lot of
donor money floating around globally. It serves the interest of a few
people to arrogate to themselves the sole preserve of championing
anti-tobacco issues so as to keep attracting flurry of funds while
ignoring the bigger issues such as youth access to cigarettes and
illicit trade, which they should ideally focus their energies more on.
You mentioned the impossibility
of legislating lifestyle choices out of existence and that people who
chose to smoke will do regardless. How can the industry be made more
responsible for their products?
The tobacco industry has a value chain,
from farmers to producers and distributors to traders. If tobacco
companies are made to account for how their products are distributed and
who gets what, they will invest a lot more resources to ensure that the
last mile of the value chain deals responsibly. It bears pointing out
that without a local tobacco industry, you cannot hold anybody liable
for how the tobacco products are distributed in Nigeria.
The Minister of Health recently
inaugurated the National Tobacco Control Committee which is seen as a
major step towards stricter regulation of the tobacco industry. Do you
see the committee as a game-changer?
It is appropriate to let the public know
that the committee is a creation of the Tobacco Control Act. If the
committee is made up of people who have the best interest of Nigeria at
heart, then its impact will be felt widely. However, from what we are
seeing, the foreign groups and their local appendages have infiltrated
the committee so much so that members of the committee take directives
from these foreign bodies and seem to rubber stamp what this group says.
This portends a dangerous trend. For example, why is it focused on
drafting new regulations and not the enforcement as directed in the Act?
The committee will likely go the way of some others before it, whose
members were more interested in sponsored trips to international
conferences and other such inanities.
If we can’t stop people from
smoking by fiat, how can Nigerians benefit from hosting tobacco
production companies, beyond the contribution of the companies to
government’s income?
One of the biggest benefits is that
localising production ensures that you can effectively monitor and
enforce rigorous standards. You can also make the producers to be more
responsible for how their products are dispensed. Without the local
producers, you simply can’t hold anybody responsible for selling
cigarettes to people who are under the legal age. Therefore, localising
production also creates thousands of jobs along the entire value chain.
Without these tobacco companies, the pressure on scarce foreign exchange
would have been greater.
Although Nigeria is not high up on the
number of cigarettes consumed per annum, rated 145 out of 185 countries,
don’t you think we are focusing too much energy on an issue that is not
even listed among the 10 biggest challenges the country currently
faces? The pro industry and anti-tobacco groups seem to be making a din
in order to feather their nest.
That is the point. As mentioned earlier,
our main interest is on policies that seek to strengthen Nigeria’s
industrial capacity and not policies that will whittle it down. Nigeria
is ranked very low on smoking prevalence, with South Africa, Egypt,
Cameroon and many other countries in Africa ranked far above Nigeria
because smoking is not very fashionable here.
There is a lot of money floating around
that is being used to constrain the production of tobacco in Nigeria
while the countries where these funds emanated from keep expanding their
tobacco production capacity. It is interesting to note also that these
foreign bodies have not been able to reduce smoking rates or tobacco
production in their home countries. Why Africa? Why Nigeria? This simply
reflects the thinking of anti-tobacco funders: we know what is good for
them.
No comments:
Post a Comment