[Intl-tobacco] Canada: Sue big tobacco? Doer gov't takes hard look at following on B.C.'s heels

[Robert Weissman]

Sue big tobacco? Doer gov't takes hard look at following on B.C.'s heels
by TOM BRODBECK / LEGISLATURE REPORTER
Source: Winnipeg (Manitoba) Sun, Wednesday, 2/7/01

  Manitoba may be the latest province to line up behind British Columbia
in a bid to seek billions of dollars in legal damages from the country's
big-three tobacco companies, The Winnipeg Sun has learned.

 The Doer government has ordered a comprehensive review of Manitoba's
legal position to determine whether it should follow B.C's lead and sue
the tobacco industry, Justice Minister Gord Mackintosh has confirmed.

"We're involved in a careful analysis," said Mackintosh. "There may well
be a case."

 The news comes only two weeks after the NDP government in B.C. filed its
second lawsuit against the tobacco giants Jan. 24 to recoup what it says
are health-care costs related to tobacco use.

 Manitoba Health estimates it costs the province about $128 million per
year -- about 5% of its $2.4-billion health budget -- to treat ailments
caused by tobacco use.

 But the province gets almost all of that money back from tobacco taxes,
which were estimated at $125 million in 2000-2001.

 Newfoundland has also tabled legislation that would allow it to launch a
similar suit.

 "We've been monitoring the development of litigation elsewhere in Canada,
notably in B.C., and more recent decisions in Newfoundland," said
Mackintosh.  "It's important that we be very prudent and careful in
assessing the pros and cons of proceeding."

 LANDMARK SETTLEMENT

 The move comes just over two years after a landmark, $206-billion
settlement in the United States between 46 states and the tobacco
industry.

 B.C. was the first province in 1998 to launch a similar lawsuit in
Canada, but failed after the B.C. Supreme Court ruled the province's bid
to sue parent companies in the U.S. was not legal.

 The province is now targeting Canadian companies only.

 There are no estimates on how much B.C. or Manitoba could expect to win
if successful.

 But some anti-smoking lobby groups say it could be in the billions of
dollars per province.

 One analysts predicts governments in Canada could do better than their
American counterparts because provinces pay for universal health costs
that don't exist south of the border.

 "Potentially the amount per capita would be about double what it is in
the States," said Francis Thompson, policy analyst for the Non-Smokers'
Rights Association, one of Canada's chief anti-smoking lobby groups.

 "You'd have to be very foolish with the public purse not to sue, given
the record in the States."

 The state of Washington, for example, is expected to receive $4.5-billion
US over the next 25 years as part of its share of the $206-billion payout.

 'MASSIVE FRAUD'

 Governments have a good case against the tobacco industry because for
years companies have failed to inform society of the harmful effects of
tobacco use, said Thompson.

 "This is not simply a case of the tobacco industry having some
responsibility in a vague moral sense," said Thompson. "The allegation is
that the tobacco industry engaged in a massive fraud and a massive fraud
against both consumers and governments."

 Nothing could be farther from the truth, said Michel Descoteaux, director
of public affairs for Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd.

 He says Canadians have known the health effects of tobacco use for years.

 And by regulating and taxing tobacco products, Canadian governments have
essentially been partners with tobacco companies, he said.

 "Then to turn around and sue us for something they authorize us to do --
which is a perfectly legitimate and perfectly legal business -- to us
doesn't make sense," he said.

 Descoteaux predicts B.C.'s lawsuit will fail again.

 But if provinces are bent on going after tobacco companies, Imperial
Tobacco won't back down, he said.

 "If eventually there is to be a claim against the industry, certainly
Imperial Tobacco will devote all of its best resources to defend its
case," he said.  "Nobody should conclude prematurely that suing the
tobacco industry for zillions of dollars is a forgone conclusion."