> 18 .~ Wednesda iY r

he Federal Government ‘has proposed:
Wonteban all Canadian tobitccw adver
ny, promotion and brand Sponsor ship by
January Ist. 1989. s

2) Notnatter how you feel abou U smoking. 7
you owe ILO ‘yourself ex amine: the tobacco:
vadsertising suc nore closely: You jiistamight:

Ott of view could chi inge

: consumption hats 1 nor eclined d Taind in some
insnanices it has ac tually ineres sed

tising, cons
i Kingdon

Wit aU

oT UAL RIUM ees
SARL TLUISINE DAN NGAGE ve

Cyvadlian Vad # Matutacte
“Evia itary © Bake

saath atic ‘e srt ssl be

__ CIGARETTE SALES VOLUME — FINLAND:

In the vonntnies noted alive,

* hanned for years went iar

of dda, with ey lunitary advertising whe. fare
huge declined. 17" fo sinee 1992 2

Ifthe F ederal Government's aim-is to.
“aduée cigarette: consumption in Canada; -

there is clear evidence that current Dolicies sare

_Dringing th; at about.

_agzines

will lose
up tt :

putes

basins

: “18 Prove frat it
ge people To Start

i Research Unit of the United Kingé m inukes ie
‘clear The survey shows that curiosity, peer

pressure and family ex: unple are the | primary,
influences. Advertising’s effect i is. devined to

he negligible. :

BANNING ADVE RT ISING.

| BANISHES JOBS. - eee

“ Currenvestimates suggest thata ban on,
advertising will cc Lupwards of 500 jobs in: oe

oe Me. Canadian adverti ng and media industri¢
“Burthe Government's hit ji
- goes far beyond that

opainare people | inthe followitig industrie

“Employees of tobacco companic
Workers in paper pfoducts industri

~ People in packaging companies:
Employees of freig ht Torw: arding ¢ companies:

’ Tobacco growers
Family wned retail buisinesses.
Peoplein'the printing industr

anufacturers of promotional materials:

rthat banning tobacco advertising
way ofa icking a perceived ©
find: une neal atrack « on:

abet the _Boposed ial
lontreal, Quieb