Top of this page

International Policy on Tobacco Advertising
A wave of new legislation now threatens the dependence of Formula One on tobacco. The 1997 Canadian Tobacco Act places heavy restrictions on the visibility of sponsors' names at events with youth appeal. South Africa, to have a Grand Prix in 1999, is expected to introduce legislation phasing out tobacco sponsorship.

The EU compromise law will ban tobacco sponsorship of all events except Formula One by 2003. Formula One has successfully lobbied for an extension until 2006, but is expected to impose voluntary world-wide restrictions on tobacco advertising and reduce its dependence on tobacco sponsorship.

Already, in fact, French legislation allows no explicit tobacco advertising beyond colours and logos, and restricts trackside advertising. In Britain and Germany voluntary agreements impose similar restrictions; there is no trackside advertising in Germany. Belgium will ban all tobacco advertising and sponsorship from 1999.

The strategy to shift the focus of Formula One racing to Asia in the face of threats of tighter restrictions on tobacco advertising in Europe and North America is in step with a shift in market interest. Since the 1980s the US tobacco industry has been lobbying to open up the Asian market to foreign cigarettes. It is no coincidence that Formula One should be actively pursuing a South Korean race in a market (then worth US$1.7 billion) which opened its doors to American brands in 1988 and became a new target for advertising (Guardian Weekly, 1/12/96).

Sponsorship is part of a strategy to penetrate the markets of developing countries which have become the major source of profits. 70% of the television audience is in Asia (Mosley cited in Motoring News, 29/10/97).

Top of this page

Australian and Victorian Government Policy
Under Section 18 of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992, which bans all tobacco advertising (other than point of sale) and sponsorship, the federal Minister for Health may exempt major international events from restrictions . The Australian Grand Prix Corporation has successfully sought exemption of the Grand Prix in 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999 on the grounds that the event would otherwise be lost.

Section 18 encourages promoters to sign contracts which will effectively lock the Commonwealth Government into granting an exemption and set yet another precedent. It exposes the Minister for Health to unnecessary pressure from individual promoters or State Governments whose inter-State rivalry for major events encouraging entering into agreements that are inconsistent with the objectives of Commonwealth and State legislation.

The importance of this exemption loophole is seen in an analysis of the 1989 Adelaide Grand Prix which showed that the Malboro name or logo gained exposure for up to 36% of the television broadcast (cited Tobacco in Australia: Facts and Issues 1995).

"The race has become a huge bill-board and TV commercial for tobacco." (John Cain, The Age, 18/6/97).

Both the independent panel set up to review Section 18 (Rassaby Report) and the Senate report on the costs of tobacco related illness recommended that exemptions of major events be phased out by 2001. The Federal Minister for Health, Dr Wooldridge, has rejected these recommendations, and unlike the EU has no policy to phase out tobacco sponsorship. The Victorian Government was the only State to clearly oppose the repeal of Section 18 in submissions to the Panel of Review.

While the Minister has tightened restrictions on off-track advertising, exemption of the Formula One Grand Prix allows tobacco advertising in a public park designed for healthy recreation.

Dr Wooldridge exempts the Formula One Grand Prix on the ground that it is of international significance despite:

• Clear evidence that it has little positive impact on the national economy and less than events not using tobacco funding.
• Opposition by 70% of Australians to tobacco sponsorship of events (Sweeney Sports survey).
• Widespread opposition by health and medical bodies.

Exemptions of the Formula One Grand Prix from restrictions on tobacco sponsorship have not removed the need for government subsidy. Australian taxpayers are subsidising a platform for tobacco advertising and at the same time expected to fund anti-smoking campaigns. Formula One patrons and television audience comprise precisely the groups which are targets of anti-smoking campaigns. Recent research has shown that young fans of motor racing are almost twice as likely to take up smoking as those who do not follow the sport (The Age, 22/11/97).

Top of this page

International Television Audience and Australia's International Health Obligations
The size of the international television audience and number of broadcasting countries becomes an argument for tougher regulation rather than exemption from normal restrictions.

Exemptions assists the tobacco industry's campaign to penetrate the markets of developing countries. As more countries impose restrictions, the claim that advertising in Australia is at least more restrained than it is in Asia begins to sound even more hollow.

Health warnings are no substitutes for bans on advertising.

"Warning labels are either non-existent on these items (i.e. racing cars, caps etc.) or are invisible to the television audience watching the sporting event. How effective would the Surgeon-General's message be at 200 miles per hour on a Marlboro Grand Prix racing car?" (Tobacco Control, 2, 1993: 284).

"Australia has banned local tobacco advertising to assist its own youth in not taking up smoking, but your government appears indifferent to the fact that this tobacco promotion will be broadcast to hundreds of millions of people in developing countries such as mine. This is a transparent case of double standards." (Delegate to 1st World Conference for Cancer Organisations, Melbourne, March 1996).

Australia should act to consolidate its international leadership in tobacco control rather than simply adopt the expedient excuse that an event "will just move somewhere else if it is banned here". The Commonwealth Government must force all events to seek more responsible sponsorship and so uphold the intent of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992.

Top of this page

  Search our site     Back to our Factsheets