Plain packaging for cigarettes is a ‘danger to jobs’, says company boss.

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Mike Ridgway, director of the Consumer Packaging Manufacturers Alliance Mike Ridgway, director of the Consumer Packaging Manufacturers Alliance

RENEWED warnings about possible job losses - including in Bradford - have been issued by industry opponents of plain tobacco packaging as the Government announced new consultation and published draft regulations.

The Consumer Packaging Manufacturers Alliance , which includes local packaging firms Weidenhammer and Chesapeake, has warned Chancellor George Osborne that the measures could lead to a collapse in the value of a hi-tech packaging sector worth hundreds of millions of pounds to the UK economy

Mike Ridgway, Ilkley-based CPMA director, said: “Plain packaging would have a catastrophic effect on the packaging industry and its supply chain that currently employs over 60,000 people across the UK. .

"It would remove the need for a series of highly skilled printing and packaging techniques that currently support jobs and flourishing apprenticeship schemes. Plain packaging could result in the loss of jobs within the supply chain and so it is essential that the Treasury and BIS undertake their own thorough assessments as part of this review.

“Inward investment into the UK packaging industry has been substantial in recent years, but further investments are on hold pending the Government’s decision on plain packaging. If the measure was adopted it would inevitably lead to jobs and investment being redirected to other parts of Europe and the world. It is extraordinary that the Government has so far failed to take these concerns into account."

Mr Ridgway, a former senior executive of both Weidenhammer, which built a new factory at Buttershaw in 2010, and Chesapeake at Lidget Green, said the industry used a range of expensive techniques and specially formulated inks, together with an array of security features, that make it difficult and expensive to counterfeit cigarette packs.

He warned that standardised packs would remove many of the technical barriers to copying, leaving counterfeiters needing to copy only one pack design.

"Standard packs would also make it easier to deceive consumers, undermine trust in genuine merchandise and lead to a collapse in the value placed on legally marketed goods due to commoditisation of a whole product category., " he said."

Mr Ridgway also raised concerns that packaging regualtions could spread to other products such as alcohol and pharmaceuticals , leading to a 'devastating' collapse in the UK packaging industry's value.

The Smokefree Action Coalition of more than 250 medical and public health organisations wants new laws on plain tobacco packaging to be in place by the 2015 General Election.

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:06pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Albion. says...

It might be of interest to know what effect plain packaging has had in the countries where it already applies.
It might be of interest to know what effect plain packaging has had in the countries where it already applies. Albion.
  • Score: 8

12:30pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Bone_idle18 says...

I think the jury is out on the effect it has had in Australia!
I think the jury is out on the effect it has had in Australia! Bone_idle18
  • Score: 2

12:56pm Fri 4 Jul 14

EthelBurger says...

Like anyone was ever inspired to take up smoking because the packaging looks attractive - the legislators should get a grip. Even existing smokers won't give up just because their chosen brand is sold in plain packaging. I fail to see the point other than it will inevitably increase pricing a little because it will cost manufacturers money to make the required changes. It's as pointless as banning displays in larger supermarkets. Completely pointless.
Like anyone was ever inspired to take up smoking because the packaging looks attractive - the legislators should get a grip. Even existing smokers won't give up just because their chosen brand is sold in plain packaging. I fail to see the point other than it will inevitably increase pricing a little because it will cost manufacturers money to make the required changes. It's as pointless as banning displays in larger supermarkets. Completely pointless. EthelBurger
  • Score: 3

1:10pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Cityman23 says...

There are a number of issues here:
1) Will plain packaging contribute towards making cigarettes less attractive to the young before they start? (It's accepted it won't to those who've been smoking for a while.)

2) Will it mean large job losses or affect packaging firms' profits.

3) Will it mean an upsurge in illegal cigarettes?

1. Many believe it could make a substantial difference, and let's be honest, packaging does make a difference else why would firms spend so much time/ trouble in designing packaging to sell maximum amounts of product?

2. Unknown. Products come/ go and there are always new things needing packaging. Cigarettes of course are intrinsically 'bad' - healthwise and lead to maximum costs to the NHS for the damage they cause- but they MAKE some a LOT of money. So while for some the costs increase, for others costs will reduce. Businesses would likely find new
Replevemrnt products.
3. The point of increasing illegal product use is valid but sometimes society has ' to do the right thing because it is right without fear/ favour.'

Tobacco's days are numbered as those indulging continue to reduce and the hope should be that several generations from now it will be seen as much a strange pastime of the past as using snuff.
There are a number of issues here: 1) Will plain packaging contribute towards making cigarettes less attractive to the young before they start? (It's accepted it won't to those who've been smoking for a while.) 2) Will it mean large job losses or affect packaging firms' profits. 3) Will it mean an upsurge in illegal cigarettes? 1. Many believe it could make a substantial difference, and let's be honest, packaging does make a difference else why would firms spend so much time/ trouble in designing packaging to sell maximum amounts of product? 2. Unknown. Products come/ go and there are always new things needing packaging. Cigarettes of course are intrinsically 'bad' - healthwise and lead to maximum costs to the NHS for the damage they cause- but they MAKE some a LOT of money. So while for some the costs increase, for others costs will reduce. Businesses would likely find new Replevemrnt products. 3. The point of increasing illegal product use is valid but sometimes society has ' to do the right thing because it is right without fear/ favour.' Tobacco's days are numbered as those indulging continue to reduce and the hope should be that several generations from now it will be seen as much a strange pastime of the past as using snuff. Cityman23
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Bone_idle18 says...

Can't see how the packaging should affect jobs? they still require a box, and I think, in Australia, they boxes are printed with graphic images of smoking related disease, so they will still require printing.

I found an article where one company disputed the effect in Austrailia, but the survey was flawed as it only spanned a period of 3 month before and 3 months after the change. Even then, it did show a reduction in new smokes and a small drop in existing. the cig manufacturer claimed these were statistically irrelevant, but still drops no less.

A survey after 12 months will probably show a far greater decrease in new smokers.
Can't see how the packaging should affect jobs? they still require a box, and I think, in Australia, they boxes are printed with graphic images of smoking related disease, so they will still require printing. I found an article where one company disputed the effect in Austrailia, but the survey was flawed as it only spanned a period of 3 month before and 3 months after the change. Even then, it did show a reduction in new smokes and a small drop in existing. the cig manufacturer claimed these were statistically irrelevant, but still drops no less. A survey after 12 months will probably show a far greater decrease in new smokers. Bone_idle18
  • Score: -1

2:19pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Andy2010 says...

Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs.

Should the same then not apply to alcohol?

Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference?

Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation.

The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell.

I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do

For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation
Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs. Should the same then not apply to alcohol? Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference? Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation. The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell. I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation Andy2010
  • Score: 3

3:56pm Fri 4 Jul 14

OLDLAD says...

Question, when everyone has given up smoking and drinking where will the tax revenue come from? The government will never kill the goose that lays the golden egg. What will happen to the workers in these sectors?
Question, when everyone has given up smoking and drinking where will the tax revenue come from? The government will never kill the goose that lays the golden egg. What will happen to the workers in these sectors? OLDLAD
  • Score: 5

4:00pm Fri 4 Jul 14

collos25 says...

Anybody who has anything to do with tobacco is nothing more than a drug dealer and should be treated as such.
Anybody who has anything to do with tobacco is nothing more than a drug dealer and should be treated as such. collos25
  • Score: 4

4:42pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Cityman23 says...

Andy2010 wrote:
Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs.

Should the same then not apply to alcohol?

Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference?

Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation.

The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell.

I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do

For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation
You're right, the government should do something about alcohol, but AS WELL, not as an alternative. If alcohol was sold at a price of 50p per unit, it would have a positive effect on the problem drinkers and not inhibit those who drink responsibly.

Also, drink shouldn't be for sale in supermarkets but only specialist shops (same with tobacco).
[quote][p][bold]Andy2010[/bold] wrote: Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs. Should the same then not apply to alcohol? Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference? Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation. The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell. I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation[/p][/quote]You're right, the government should do something about alcohol, but AS WELL, not as an alternative. If alcohol was sold at a price of 50p per unit, it would have a positive effect on the problem drinkers and not inhibit those who drink responsibly. Also, drink shouldn't be for sale in supermarkets but only specialist shops (same with tobacco). Cityman23
  • Score: 8

4:51pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Cityman23 says...

PS: by 'problem drinkers,' I' m referring to young kids who buy masses of cheap booze at supermarkets to load up BEFORE going out for the evening, then are tanked up before they start drinking again. At clubs etc. They then go on to get involved in troubles eg vomiting/ collapsing in the street/ fights etc in city centres and end up blocking A&E.
PS: by 'problem drinkers,' I' m referring to young kids who buy masses of cheap booze at supermarkets to load up BEFORE going out for the evening, then are tanked up before they start drinking again. At clubs etc. They then go on to get involved in troubles eg vomiting/ collapsing in the street/ fights etc in city centres and end up blocking A&E. Cityman23
  • Score: 2

8:26pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Papa Smurfs Wig says...

Cityman23 wrote:
PS: by 'problem drinkers,' I' m referring to young kids who buy masses of cheap booze at supermarkets to load up BEFORE going out for the evening, then are tanked up before they start drinking again. At clubs etc. They then go on to get involved in troubles eg vomiting/ collapsing in the street/ fights etc in city centres and end up blocking A&E.
Maybe you saw the Despatches programme the other night and this info was in there but to me it should be 70p per unit. I'm involved in the booze game and supermarkets encourage big boozers and it costs £21 billion a year with alcohol related problems to their health.
Regarding the cigs, l used to smoke and if they were in a plain packet l wouldn't have given a monkeys. I got my enjoyment from cigs and the packets did not encourage me at all.

But smokers are classed as second class citizens. We had the stupid smoking ban. We should have had drdicated smoking loinges and pubs but good old Labour "stubbed" that out.

Without the revenue from smokers then the NHS would collapse. Then we'd be paying a grand for a broken arm and paying top whack for meds.
So do they want everyone to stop or just keep it ticking over?

You won't stop contraband cigs, l used to buy them and now they are £4.50 a pack in town and less for some.

Chesapeake, maybe not for too long sadly as the old part (Fields Printers) was demolished in favour of transferring a lot of the work to Newcastle. Soon it'll be houses on the old site and l drive past each day.
[quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: PS: by 'problem drinkers,' I' m referring to young kids who buy masses of cheap booze at supermarkets to load up BEFORE going out for the evening, then are tanked up before they start drinking again. At clubs etc. They then go on to get involved in troubles eg vomiting/ collapsing in the street/ fights etc in city centres and end up blocking A&E.[/p][/quote]Maybe you saw the Despatches programme the other night and this info was in there but to me it should be 70p per unit. I'm involved in the booze game and supermarkets encourage big boozers and it costs £21 billion a year with alcohol related problems to their health. Regarding the cigs, l used to smoke and if they were in a plain packet l wouldn't have given a monkeys. I got my enjoyment from cigs and the packets did not encourage me at all. But smokers are classed as second class citizens. We had the stupid smoking ban. We should have had drdicated smoking loinges and pubs but good old Labour "stubbed" that out. Without the revenue from smokers then the NHS would collapse. Then we'd be paying a grand for a broken arm and paying top whack for meds. So do they want everyone to stop or just keep it ticking over? You won't stop contraband cigs, l used to buy them and now they are £4.50 a pack in town and less for some. Chesapeake, maybe not for too long sadly as the old part (Fields Printers) was demolished in favour of transferring a lot of the work to Newcastle. Soon it'll be houses on the old site and l drive past each day. Papa Smurfs Wig
  • Score: 0

9:01pm Fri 4 Jul 14

linebacker2 says...

Cityman23 wrote:
Andy2010 wrote:
Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs.

Should the same then not apply to alcohol?

Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference?

Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation.

The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell.

I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do

For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation
You're right, the government should do something about alcohol, but AS WELL, not as an alternative. If alcohol was sold at a price of 50p per unit, it would have a positive effect on the problem drinkers and not inhibit those who drink responsibly.

Also, drink shouldn't be for sale in supermarkets but only specialist shops (same with tobacco).
I thought that type of nonsense thinking disappeared when nannying New Labour were kicked out..
[quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Andy2010[/bold] wrote: Completely and utterly pointless placing plain packaging on cigs. Should the same then not apply to alcohol? Should alcohol all be placed out of sight at shops and then sold in plain packaging? Whats the difference? Drinking costs the UK health service far far more than tobacco related illnesses do and yet smokers pay through the nose for their cigs through taxation. The very very simple answer is if the Government want to promote healthiness and get people to give up quite simply just ban the sale of tobacco entirely. Its all about the £ though so not a chance in hell. I'm far more concerned by the amount of air pollution and what is added to food rather than first or second hand cig smoke. These do far far more harm to your health than any cig will ever do For the record no i don't smoke. think its disgusting but changing the packaging is like putting a plaster on an amputation[/p][/quote]You're right, the government should do something about alcohol, but AS WELL, not as an alternative. If alcohol was sold at a price of 50p per unit, it would have a positive effect on the problem drinkers and not inhibit those who drink responsibly. Also, drink shouldn't be for sale in supermarkets but only specialist shops (same with tobacco).[/p][/quote]I thought that type of nonsense thinking disappeared when nannying New Labour were kicked out.. linebacker2
  • Score: -4

9:08pm Fri 4 Jul 14

MontyLeMar says...

Yes, there's a lot of jobs involved in manufacturing and distributing cigarettes which kill millions each year. To say nothing of the taxes they generate which the government welcomes with open arms. I say take up vaping and dump the weed.
Yes, there's a lot of jobs involved in manufacturing and distributing cigarettes which kill millions each year. To say nothing of the taxes they generate which the government welcomes with open arms. I say take up vaping and dump the weed. MontyLeMar
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree