Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 19th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Quarter of shopkeepers ignore new ban on selling cigarettes to under-18s



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 January 2008
A QUARTER of shops in Scotland are selling cigarettes to 16-year-olds despite the ban on sales to under-18s.
The new age limit was introduced just over 100 days ago but new figures show that many supermarkets, garages and newsagents are still failing to abide by the rules.

Sixteen-year-olds accompanied by undercover trading standards officers have made
204 random visits to shops in the central belt of Scotland since October. In 51 of those cases, they were able to buy cigarettes. So far, however, only three shop owners have been reported to the procurator fiscal.

The high number of breaches is set to lead to a licensing system under which retailers would be stripped of the right to sell tobacco if they were found to have sold to underage children.

The new 18-year age limit was imposed on October 1 last year in the latest battle being waged by ministers against Scotland's addiction to cigarettes.

The figures were compiled by the Society of Chief Officers of Trading Standards in Scotland and reflect the total number of so-called 'test purchases' carried out since October.

David Thompson, the chairman of the Society of Chief Officers of Trading Standards in Scotland, said: "Retailers need to be more vigilant to make sure that their staff are fully trained. Our advice to them is to always err on the side of caution. Even if someone looks 21, they should still ask for the persons' ID."

He added: "It shouldn't be a problem for retailers to ask young people for either their entitlement card or their proof of age. It should be a normal process rather than something confrontational."

The ease with which under-18s can buy cigarettes was reflected in a recent report from the anti-smoking pressure group Ash Scotland which showed that 82% of 15-year-olds and 47% of 13-year-olds in Glasgow buy their own cigarettes from a shop.

A spokeswoman for Ash Scotland said: "There needs to be more money put into enforcement of this law. Too many shops are still flouting the law and selling to under-18s. These shops aren't being caught and don't feel under threat."

The figures come as ministers put the finishing touches to a new smoking prevention action plan, adding to the historic smoking ban in 2006.

Among the measures being considered are a crackdown on younger smokers and a plan, backed by the British Medical Association, to remove cigarettes from display and instead have them for sale under the counter.

Ministers are also poised to back a private members' bill, being sponsored by SNP MSP Christine Grahame, which would force all shops selling tobacco to apply for a licence. This move is also backed by the BMA.

Thompson said last night that he too supported the scheme.

"We hope it will be a move forward to make retailers more responsible. Positive licensing puts the onus on retailers and, having gone to the trouble of getting a licence, it becomes something they don't want to lose."

Minister for Public Health Shona Robison said: "The Scottish Government is committed to tackling underage sales of tobacco and is considering a range of possible options in this respect."

On the licensing scheme, Christine Grahame said: "There is no effective deterrent for retailers who consistently sell cigarettes to those underage. I don't want to stop smokers getting cigarettes, but I do want the law properly upheld and enforced."

Chris Ogden, director of the Tobacco Manufacturers' Association, said they would increase the regulatory burden on retailers and added: "Retailers don't want a positive licensing system. We believe most retailers in Scotland and throughout the UK are committed to upholding the law on age-related sales."

But it is thought Grahame's plan is now likely to be adopted, if she can prove to SNP ministers that the red tape of a licensing scheme can be minimised.



The full article contains 665 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 January 2008 8:00 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Tobacco
 
1

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 20/01/2008 02:40:52
Great, I am pleased that youth not worth much because they cannot understand that ciggies are bad for them are getting the wherwithall to end their lives nice and early
2

Belinda-2,

Edinburgh 20/01/2008 09:12:53
This issue is still open for consultation:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/bills/MembersBills/pdfs/TobaccoSalesConsultation.pdf
(till mid February)
3

Euan,

Edinburgh 20/01/2008 11:01:47
It's always the same promises of more enforcement and stiffer penalities for retailers selling ciggies and alcohol to youngsters, yet hardly any of them are ever prosecuted - why not?

If these promises were acutally adhered to, I think there really would be a gradual change in underage smoking and drinking rates in this country.

I just can't see it happening..

4

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 20/01/2008 11:16:29
Prosecute these greedy shopkeepers to the fullest extent of Scottish laws. They are flouting the law of the land and almost seem to be flaunting their ability to get away with it.

It seems the almighty pound is the only thing that counts for these pervayors of death and lingering illnesses caused by smoking.
5

D Thomson,

Ayr 20/01/2008 12:47:26
Just to clear up the comment attributed to me in the story. As was clearly stated to the journalist, the Society of Chief TS Officers has not yet responded to the Consultation (which as someone else says is still open) so we have not said we "support postive licensing" as stated. Either postive or negative licensing would be a step forward but both have drawbacks and advantages. Cost to local auhtorities and greater burdens on business have to weighed against the positives. Whatever scheme is accepted though will be an improvement on the current position.
6

Belinda-2,

Edinburgh 20/01/2008 12:59:56
D Thomson

Can you explain the difference between negative licensing and the situation as it stands currently?
7

DaveA,

Forfarshire 20/01/2008 15:23:37
This is the least odious piece of legislation that the anti smoking lobby has come up with, even I can see, just about, some of the merits of rasing the age to 18. However is this just not another excuse to bash hard working business people who work damn long hours for often very little reward? It just seems a vicious cycle of more laws, leading to more fines, leading to more useless local government officials, leading to more laws leading to more fines....... NuLabour and the SNP will not be happy until all tax paying, law abiding decent citizens have been criminalised, leaving the violent scum to get aware in some cases, literally murder and carry on their vilent anti social lives with impunity.
8

english charlie,

suffolk 20/01/2008 16:47:49
I wonder if ANY thought has gone into changing the age limit. The smoking ban in pubs caused all kinds of trouble, including noise and fag ends outside pubs, but worst of all causing regular pub customers to drink at home. Thereby causing people to buy drinks from large companies (super-markets) and small businesses (local pubs) to go bust. By increasing the age limit for buying cigarettes, small businesses will lose trade and 16 to 18 year olds will get their fags from criminal gangs selling on the black market.
9

Kenn,

Swindon 20/01/2008 20:25:20
Another improper use of statistics.

There is a big difference between random visits to shops and visits to random shops. You have to identify the shop, so presumably these must be random visits and not random shops. To then multiply that up to a national scale shows how little these people understand about uncertainty.

Still, the licence money should come in handy for the government and it should help ameliorate ASH's hysteria for a while.

I like the bit about hiding all the cigarettes from view. It would have made an ideal Monty Python sketch. In fact it sounds uncomfortably close to the Cheese Shop sketch (try Googling it)!
10

grafiger,

20/01/2008 22:48:15
In the Good Old US of A, there is a law, I believe, that prohibits "Entrapment". I thought it also existed in the UK. Perhaps I'm wrong!!!
11

D Thomson,

Ayr 21/01/2008 08:27:41
Negative licensing means you don't have to apply or hold a licence to sell, so costs are less for both Councils (in admin) and business. However if you commit, for example, 2 sales to underage young people then your right to sell can be withdrawn - in effect you are banned. We can't do this at present.
One the other point from grafiger there is no entrapment involved. Purchases are conducted under a National code and no coercion is used. If the young person is asked their age they reply truthfully - the system is fair (some say over fair!)

12

Islanddude,

UK 21/01/2008 19:59:30
There is still a little bit of confusion about all of this. By my understanding, it is illegal to sell cigarettes to someone under 18 although it is not illegal to smoke them. How does that work? And I know of 17 year olds that are in the military. Could they possibly lay their lifes on the line and prior to 1 Oct 2006 they could buy cigarettes but now they cannot? It seems as though HMG is doublespeaking. Allow them the decision to die but not to have a cigarette? Someone please explain this to me. This is probably why you see so much complacency in the retail sector.
13

Kenn,

Swindon 21/01/2008 21:34:48
It is a matter of where you live whether it is entrapment or not. In Scots law, entrapment is illegal but it is only entrapment if the accused has been 'coerced' into committing a crime. In English Law, it probably is entrapment, but that is not a legal defence. In the US, it probably is entrapment and it could be used as a legal defence. Entrapment is used in other cases (in England at least), such as police officers masquerading as street walkers and bogus passengers stopping private hire vehicles in the street (which is not allowed). In the case of the under-age purchasing of cigarettes, there is no law (as far I am aware) to say that the test purchaser must look under-age.

Of course, the under-age purchasing of cigarettes raises huge ethical considerations anyway and these are conveniently over-looked. Notably, this is the exploitation of minors and there is the potential to expose them to physical or psychological repercussions.

Anyone might think justifiably that the zealousness with which this law is enforced is an indication that we live in an otherwise crime free society. They might think justifiably also that the role of Trading Standards should be to protect the consumer against defraud rather than upholding government legislation against the public.

As for the confusion about the minimum age of buying and smoking cigarettes, it is perhaps even more confusing that there is a debate about reducing the voting age to 16. Too young to decide whether to smoke or not, but old enough to understand government policies!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.