| Home | Terms and conditions of use | Sitemap |
|
|
|
![]() |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
ISSUESLOWER IGNITION PROPENSITY CIGARETTESWe have serious doubts that the introduction of LIP legislation will reduce the numbers of accidental fires, and are concerned that people smoking products modified with bands applied in order to pass the LIP tests could be discarded more carelessly because consumers think they are fire safe and could be smoked more intensely to keep them alight, resulting in higher exposure to tobacco smoke toxins. Burning cigarettes can cause fires if not properly extinguished. the key question is whether cigarettes can be modified to reduce the likelihood of fires. Canada, New York and some other US States have introduced laws requiring cigarettes to self-extinguish when placed on layers of laboratory filter paper. In our view this test is not good enough to predict whether or not a cigarette will set light to a piece of furniture or bedding. Our position on lower ignition propensity regulations that require cigarettes to self-extinguish under certain laboratory test conditions is that we do not believe that they are an effective way to reduce accidental fires. Other government actions, including legislation on the flammability of bedding and furniture (which protects people from all sources of ignition) and fire educational campaigns are likely to be far more effective. In addition we have concerns that the product modifications that are required in order for cigarettes to pass LIP legislation may result in some unintended consequences, including the possibility that smokers will smoke their cigarettes more intensely to ensure they stay alight and subsequently be exposed to more smoke toxins. We are also concerned that consumers might think that cigarettes that pass an LIP test are fire-safe and dispose of them more carelessly, and probably cause more fires. Our view is that existing LIP regulations may lead to unintended consequences that undermine the policy goal of reducing fires and are unsupported at this time by evidence of their real efficacy. We would like to see and understand the expectations of our EU stakeholders in this matter as well as discuss possible solutions that can be implemented at the EU level. |
||