WRITTEN QUESTION No. 860/98 by Ursula SCHLEICHER to the Council. Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising
C 323/86 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 21. 10. 98 (98/C 323/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998) Subject: Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising The directive prohibits the naming of new brands of cigarettes after other products or services once a transitional period has expired. Does this mean that, before any new brand of cigarettes is introduced in the future, a check must be made to determine whether the planned brand name is being used for some product (or service) somewhere in the world? Any free distribution that has the direct or indirect effect of advertising a tobacco product is also prohibited. Does this also apply to the commercial distribution of samples of non-tobacco products (e. g. such cosmetic 1. articles as Davidoff shaving lotion)? 2. May the Member States admit as evidence the contention that the free distribution of non-tobacco products does not result in the promotion of sales of tobacco products in individual cases? (98/C 323/117) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0858/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998) Subject: Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising The directive explicitly does not apply to advertising at sales outlets, presentation or the indication of prices. The Member States may therefore lay down their own rules on these aspects. Does this apply only to tobacco products themselves or › especially › to non-tobacco products with the same brand name? Similarly, the directive does not apply to tobacco advertising in third-country publications. Does this mean that the Member States are free to permit such advertising or to prohibit it and so to erect 1. new trade barriers? 2. Does this arrangement also apply to the advertising of non-tobacco products? How consistent with the provisions of Article 100a(4) of the EC Treaty is the right granted in the directive to the Member States to lay down stricter requirements? (98/C 323/118) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0859/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998) Subject: Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising It is generally acknowledged that the directive pursues an important health policy objective. 1. Why, then, is Article 129 of the EC Treaty not cited as the legal basis? 2. Why do the recitals of the version contained in the common position focus far less on health protection than the Commissionís proposal? (98/C 323/119) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0860/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998) Subject: Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising Given the considerable scope it leaves the Member States to lay down special rules, can the directive really be regarded as suitable for harmonizing the legal situation?