Reading the most recent piece by Otago University’s Nick Wilson and Richard Edwards reminds of how Socrates wrote “when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”

They claim the industry-commissioned (KPMG) studies that estimate New Zealand’s illegal tobacco trade at 11.5% of total consumption are exaggerated and discredited.

Such claims, while good for a headline, are quite frankly mischievous and rely on ad-hominem arguments. The KPMG studies haven’t been discredited. Nor do they claim to be the sole arbiter of truth on the matter. What they do provide is some useful longitudinal information, using a consistent methodology, on an issue that isn’t all that well understood in New Zealand.

Over successive years, the report shows the illicit tobacco trade is growing.

It is not a perfect measure. As Customs NZ recently told the New Zealand Herald, the illegal tobacco trade is, by nature, very difficult to quantify. But it is some of the best data available to New Zealand right now.

In fact, the cited Otago University study’s number for imported illegal cigarettes via litter pack surveys (5.4%) is not far off the figure found from the same surveys in the KPMG reports (6.3%).

What the Otago study excludes, as Professors Wilson and Edwards correctly note, is sales of roll-your-own, homegrown tobacco.

They claim this would be very modest but offer no empirical basis for that claim. Their papers also don’t include illegally imported roll-your-own tobacco, which the KPMG report shows is growing over time, particularly from Pasifika nations.

The latest information from the KPMG reports is that 5.6% of smokers reported using both types of illegal roll-your-own tobacco. This is the highest level we have measured since we started these surveys.

Ultimately this isn’t a question about data, it’s about the evidential basis for making the claims Otago University has.

Claims must be challenged on the evidence they stand on and stand up to scientific scrutiny. Peer review is a very established way to test hypotheses and methodology and, when needed, correct claims.

Most recently, Professor Wilson and his colleagues had their own 2021 study on vaping peer-reviewed after it claimed users were exposed to 30% of the toxins from smoking combustible tobacco. The claim was wildly at odds with the international scientific consensus. Peer-review of this study found vaper participants included current smokers, methodology which contaminated the results.

Imperial has a vested interest to prevent growth in the illegal tobacco market and in proper enforcement actions to punish those that profit from it. It is also in New Zealand’s interest to avoid the problems a black market brings and keep New Zealand smokers operating inside a legal, regulated system for tobacco control.

That is why we commission the research from KPMG to determine the size of the illegal tobacco in countries like Australia, the European Union and New Zealand.

The KPMG report over many years should give cause for concern. The growing illegal tobacco trade in New Zealand is not about a few packs of cigarettes in the bottom of a suitcase. It is large-scale with increasingly sophisticated sales and distribution networks.

New Zealand Customs acknowledge there’s complexity behind importation by criminals who have honed their skills on harder drugs. Customs has been doing an excellent job with the limited resources it has. It has made notable seizures at the border in the past 12 months but acknowledges the trade is growing and getting harder to control.

So what can New Zealand do?

First, we need to acknowledge the problem exists and that it is worthwhile solving. It requires recognition that an unfortunate downside of a well-intentioned tobacco control policy has been the creation of a black market for tobacco.

And just like policies and laws for drugs, an effective policy response must deal both with both demand and enforcement.

Demand is important as Parliament considers the Government’s Smokefree Environments (and Regulated Products) Bill. In what amounts to de facto prohibition of tobacco, we have cautioned MPs about the likely growth in demand as smokers seek out more easily available illegal tobacco.

No one can accurately predict how much this could grow by. What we do have is close to a century’s worth of scientific studies on the behaviour of addicts from forced withdrawal. As ASH NZ has told MPs, the market will always find the consumer. Common sense tells us demand for illegal tobacco will increase.

The other side of the equation is tougher sentencing and enhanced surveillance and enforcement.

In New Zealand, illegal tobacco is a high-yield, low-risk enterprise for criminals. Customs NZ has said in news media interviews that they have anecdotal information that profit margins from tobacco are eight times that of cocaine. The maximum punishment in New Zealand for the importation of illicit tobacco is 5 years imprisonment. In contrast, the supply and manufacture of Class A drugs is punishable with a maximum life sentence.

New Zealand could learn from Australia. In 2018, they expanded enforcement and increased criminal penalties for all activity relating to the sale and supply of illicit tobacco. Since then, by treating illicit tobacco trade as a law-and-order matter, Australia has substantially curbed the flow of profits to organised crime syndicates.

Despite this, the illegal trade has continued to grow exponentially. Senior Australian Border Force figures describe the illegal tobacco trade as close to uncontrollable and that the Federal government was too late to act.

To their credit, the New Zealand Government is acknowledging there is a problem and has started to dedicate resources to combat the illicit trade. The worry is that it is likely too little.

It would be a mistake to assume New Zealand is different from Australia. New Zealand can avoid the same problems if it commits resources to combat the illicit tobacco trade now.

© Scoop Media