Create a free account, or log in

What are they smoking?

This week’s announcement that a group of small retail lobby groups would side with Big Tobacco and campaign against the Government’s decision to introduce plain packaging for cigarettes has raised some serious questions about how involved business lobby groups should become in political campaigns. The Alliance of Australian Retailers, which yesterday published full page advertisements […]
James Thomson
James Thomson

This week’s announcement that a group of small retail lobby groups would side with Big Tobacco and campaign against the Government’s decision to introduce plain packaging for cigarettes has raised some serious questions about how involved business lobby groups should become in political campaigns.

The Alliance of Australian Retailers, which yesterday published full page advertisements in major newspapers attacking the plain packaging move, is made up of four well-known business groups: the Australian Association of Convenience Stores, the Service Station Association, Australian Newsagents’ Federation and National Independent Retailers Association.

The campaign, which reportedly cost $5 million, has been funded by the kings of Big Tobacco: British American Tobacco Australia Limited, Philip Morris Limited and Imperial Tobacco Australia Limited.

The Alliance, fronted by Sheryle Moon, the executive director of the Australian Association of Convenience Stores and Director, cites research which claims that 80% of retailers believe the plain packaging policy would hurt their business.

That may be so – cigarettes are a high value item in any small retail outlet, and would therefore represent a good chunk of a store’s turnover.

But there is a huge difference between being unhappy with a policy and launching a $5 million political campaign funded by Big Tobacco.

There are a few big risks for the lobby groups involved in the way this campaign is perceived.

The first risk is that the customers of these small retailers will feel that the retailers are putting their own profits before the health of consumers.

The second is that the small business community – including the members of these groups – could see the members of this alliance as having been co-opted by Big Tobacco.

The organisations have of course rejected this argument, but the problem is perception.

This campaign is so contrary to community opinion that cigarettes have terrible health implications that it may threaten the credibility of these organisations long after the election is decided.