Newspapers, publishers and the advertising industry have been rallying in a last-ditch attempt to block the EU's likely ban on tobacco advertising. The ban, championed by the Irish Commissioner for Social Affairs, Mr Padraig Flynn, is expected to be approved tomorrow by health ministers after years in a decision-making deadlock.
The election of a Labour government in Britain broke the deadlock, although that government has put the cat among the pigeons by attempting to get an exemption for Formula One racing sponsorship.
A spokeswoman for the Commission, Ms Barbara Nolan, warned yesterday that there was still a danger that such attempts to water down a common position could jeopardise support from more hawkish Italy and France.
The National Newspapers of Ireland (NNI) has written to the Minister for Health, Mr Cowen, protesting at Irish support for the ban. The organisation's director, Mr Frank Cullen, argued that "although we would have no argument with the health issues involved, the principle of freedom of commercial speech must be considered. If a product is legal to sell it should be legal to advertise."
Responding to the criticism, Mr Flynn said yesterday that "we are attempting to ban the ad of a legal product because it kills half a million people in the EU every year. Just because it's legal does not mean we have to tolerate the advertising of a dangerous product.
"It is an accident of history that smoking is legal. If it were invented today it would probably not be authorised," Mr Flynn said. "Society . . . should not permit it to be encouraged or have its dangers downplayed by advertising."
Mr Cullen also warned that as the Irish media market is "the most exposed in the world . . . it is of the utmost importance that the Irish Government defend the economic freedom of the Irish media."
The European Publishers' Council echoed the argument, insisting that the ban will "jeopardise a pluralistic press".
The European Advertising Tripartite, the organisation of advertisers, claimed in a statement that the ban would violate the free speech provisions of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and said it is being introduced under an inappropriate and therefore illegal EU Treaty provision.
