Louis Camilleri:
"Madame,
good morning."
Sherry Racine,
Corporate Accountability International (formerly INFACT):
"Good
morning. My name is Sherry Racine, and I'm an organizer with
Corporate Accountability International.
For nearly two decades,
we've watched as Kraft has provided cover for Philip Morris' behind the
scenes political maneuvering designed to weaken public health
regulations including the Global Tobacco Treaty.
The Kraft spin-off dramatically
reduces the financial and political clout of Philip
Morris/Altria. We are, however, all too aware that the Kraft
spin-off and presumed separation of Philip Morris USA and Philip Morris
International could pave the way for Philip Morris to pursue new
tobacco markets even more aggressively.
Of these markets, it is perhaps no
accident that Philip Morris International has targeted Columbia and
Indonesia as two of its major expansion areas in the two years since
the Global Tobacco Treaty has become international law. These two
countries are among a dwindling minority of those that have not yet
ratified the treaty.
Today, we have with us Corporate
Accountability advocates from both Columbia and Indonesia who bring
with them a clear message that Philip Morris is not welcome
there. This message is echoed around the world. As Philip
Morris International zeros in on the developing world to expand its
markets, more and more countries are demanding accountability from the
tobacco industry.
There is a growing movement for
effective and enforceable tobacco controls, as well as for continued
vigilance in exposing and challenging Philip Morris/Altria's attempts
to undermine these public health policies.
Mr. Camilleri, my question for you is
this, what steps will you take to ensure that Philip Morris
International heeds the call of people around the world to both stop
its aggressive expansion into countries that have not ratified the
Global Tobacco Treaty, and to stop undermining health policy in those
countries that have?"
Louis
Camilleri:
"Well, thank you for your question.
We have these exchanges, because I wouldn't call them debates, every
year. And I have to tell you, I try to listen hard to what you
say. But, I'm always distraught by the fact that your skepticism,
your mistrust, I'd go even as far as saying your hatred, just
completely blinds your judgment.
What you are saying has no reality in
fact. We support, and we've said it, and there is ample evidence
of our support of the major provisions of the FCTC. I think that
you, and many in your camp, just focus on what separates us. And
the list of what separates us is a lot shorter than the one that we
have in common.
And I think we're sort of losing an
historic opportunity to be able to join forces to actually achieve
things that will change. You sit there and say we're not welcome
in Colombia and Indonesia. I can tell you, we are very welcome in
Colombia and Indonesia, because we participate in the economy and the
vibrancy of the economy. And
we bring a lot of responsibility to
a very controversial industry.
There
are a lot of issues out there, and tobacco is a very complex
industry. For example, did you know that 50% of the countries of
the world, 50%, do not have a minimum age law requirement for
purchasing cigarettes. That's outrageous. And we're doing
everything we can to change that.
So,
instead of trying to attack us on
a little laundry list of certain things we disagree on, I think we
should join forces on those we do agree on, and move the needle.
So, thank you for coming.
Madame?"
Ruth Malone, Nightingales:
"I'm
Ruth Malone, and I'm here with a
group of nurses who want to call attention to the cost of the profits
that you've been discussing. And given your comments and some of
the earlier comments in the meeting, one would think that Altria was
the new public health tobacco company.
But company documents, which I have
reviewed personally, show that beginning in the mid-1990s in a long
term plan called Project Sunrise,
the company embarked on a plan to undermine public health efforts and
improve its image, which it certainly appears to have been successful
in doing.
This project included what were
called, and I'm quoting from a document, "carefully orchestrated
efforts to pit public health groups against one another," "to
create schisms," another quote, that would keep such groups from being
effective in reducing tobacco use and developing more effective tobacco
product regulation.
Clearly this project, if successful,
will lead to many more deaths, and much more suffering from tobacco
caused disease. Is this project or other efforts like it still
continuing? And if not, when did they stop? And if they are
continuing, how do you reconcile this with the company's plans to be
socially responsible and to achieve so-called societal alignment?"
Louis Camilleri:
"Well, thank you for your question.
I'm not familiar with [what] you call Project Sunshine. What is
very important is that for some time now, we have made a public pledge
to advocate strong regulation of the tobacco industry in every single
market in which we operate. That should give you certain
confidence.
Take this country, we are the only
tobacco company supporting the Food and Drug Administration's --
legislation for the Food and Drug Administration to assume regulatory
authority for the FDA. The tobacco industry is a very complex
industry. And one needs to have a comprehensive set of
regulations and to avoid inconsistencies. And regretfully, the
world is full of inconsistencies in terms of regulating tobacco.
For example, in the European Union,
they have banned descriptives. They have, nevertheless, continued
to mandate tar and nicotine and carbon monoxide numbers. So, if
you ban descriptives, and you retain numbers, there's a huge
inconsistency. Products are treated differently. Cigarettes
in Belgium have graphic health warnings. Roll-your-own-tobacco
does not have graphic health warnings. And I could go on for the
next hour.
But, the point here is to have a well
thought through comprehensive, consistent, regulatory scheme, and not
just a laundry list of items that potentially conflict with each
other. But, to address your question, we are very
committed. And I think if you went to our web site and saw the
examples there, we are extremely committed to having fair, strong
regulation of the entire tobacco industry.
And we are committed to do everything
in our power to ensure that children will not smoke and that we can do
everything in our power to come up with products that have the
potential to reduce the risk of harm caused by cigarettes. So,
thank you."
Ruth Malone:
"But,
you haven't answered my question."
Louis Camilleri:
"I
think I have.
Madame?"
Kathryn
Mulvey, Corporate
Accountability International:
"Does
the nurse have -- want to ask a question?"
Louis Camilleri:
"No.
I think it's your turn."
Kathryn Mulvey, Corporate Accountability
International:
"OK.
Good morning. My name is Kathryn Mulvey. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak on behalf of Corporate
Accountability
International, which is incidentally, working with NGOs and
governments
around the world.
We're more than willing to join forces
with those that are serious about public health protection, and are
really pleased with the advances that have been made through the World
Health Organization and the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
[FCTC] toward really consistent global standards in this area.
Mr. Camilleri, last year, you
ridiculed health advocates and dismissed us as people living in the
past. Yet, despite your attempts to position Philip Morris/Altria
as a new and reformed corporation, your actions speak otherwise.
For decades, tobacco corporations have
sought to generate doubt about the deadly effects of your
products. In the 1970s, your corporation began marketing "low
tar" and "light" cigarettes to appeal to health conscious customers,
even though you knew that these products offered no health benefits or
reduced risks.
In August, 2006, US District Court
Judge Gladys Kessler barred tobacco corporations from using these false
and misleading descriptors. And yet, a few weeks later, Philip
Morris/Altria asked Judge Kessler if you could continue to use the "low
tar" and "light" labels outside the US, despite her earlier ruling and
your knowledge about the falsehood of these descriptors.
Furthermore, the Global Tobacco Treaty
prohibits the use of misleading descriptors. The 146 countries
that have ratified want to leave this deception in the past. And
they're backed by international law.
In 2001, Philip Morris/Altria, British
American Tobacco, and Japan Tobacco signed the International Tobacco
Marketing Standards Agreement, which includes a commitment to halt
sponsorship of Formula 1 auto racing. While BAT and JT have
followed -- have ceased Formula 1 sponsorship -- your corporation
continues to sponsor these races.
You're violating an agreement you
signed six years ago and the Global Tobacco Treaty, which includes a
ban on advertising, promotion, and sponsorship. So, Mr.
Camilleri, it appears that you are the one living in the past.
And
when Philip Morris/Altria fails to live up to the times and defies
life-saving advances in international policy and standards, why should
the public or policy makers believe that you've changed your ways?"
Louis Camilleri:
"I'm
sorry that you may have felt that I ridiculed you last year, because
that wasn't my intention. I do listen to what you have to
say. However, when you throw documents at me that are 30 or 40
years old, I say you're -- it's stuck in the past. And I think,
as I said earlier, we're missing a sort of historic opportunity to work
on a number of things that we have in common.
I do want to address the Department of Justice lawsuit and what you
said about Judge Kessler. As you well know, that ruling is
stayed. And it is currently on appeal. Because of that, I
can't comment too much on it. But, everybody in this room should
be aware that a lot of the same documents and a lot of the same
witnesses appeared in different courts. And those courts arrived
at different conclusions.
And, we very respectfully disagree with Judge Kessler's conclusions,
both in terms of the facts in both -- and in terms of the law.
And we are cautiously optimistic that we will prevail on appeal.
With regards to Formula 1 -- I think it's important to note that BAT,
Japan Tobacco, and ourselves, are -- tried, to come up with a
code. And, the intention at the time was to get everybody in the
tobacco industry to sign that agreement, as you know full well.
Since then, nobody has signed it. And, as you know, in the
ensuing years, the industry has continued to consolidate, and a number
of formidable competitors have been formed.
Each company has chosen to decide what to do in terms of its own
ability to compete fairly in each market in which it does
business. Formula 1 is not a new thing to Philip Morris
International. Philip Morris International has been in Formula 1
for more than 40 years. BAT, JT have come in and out at least
five times. Imperial Tobacco was in Formula 1, and it pulled out
some time ago. And, I could go on.
The fact of the matter is, the vast majority of Formula 1 races today
are not branded. And you know that. So, we will continue to
sponsor Formula 1. And, I'll tell you why -- because Marlboro
today is under attack from very cheap brands worldwide, some of them
subsidized by discriminatory excise taxes, which you would think public
health would do something about.
Well, to ensure that Marlboro's
brand equity remains strong, we feel
that an association with Ferrari enhances its premium image, and that's
why we do it. So, thank you.
Sir?"
Yul Francisco
Dorado, Coordinator,
Latin America, Corporate Accountability International -- He read
his statement in Spanish; a woman read the English translation:
"I
work as the Latin America
Coordinator for Corporate Accountability
International, supporting the ratification and implementation of
the
FCTC. In Latin America, there's a great commitment to the public
health agenda, and a majority of countries have established regulations
controlling the marketing and sale of tobacco products.
In Latin America, Philip Morris/Altria
operates with a double standard. On one hand, your web site
informs of a commitment not to sell products to youth. But on the
other hand, all of the publicity and promotional strategies of Philip
Morris are focused on sending messages to youth -- adolescent boys and
girls -- in order to addict them to brands like Marlboro.
I have here several photos of Philip
Morris marketing from my country [someone held up the photos for the
audience to see]. In the photographs, you can observe a few
examples that use text and images attractive to youth to send messages
about the pleasure of smoking at parties, sports events, family events,
inviting them to participate in a raffle for high-speed motorcycles,
especially designed for adolescents.
I also have a picture of vending
machines in Colombia that dispense single cigarettes and are
strategically located next to freezers that sell ice cream, a favorite
treat of boys and girls.
Mr. Camilleri, my nation of Colombia
is widely regarded as a place of violence. But, it is the
violence of the marketing practices of Philip Morris and all the other
tobacco transnationals that have taken far more innocent lives than all
of the death from political violence over the last 50 years."
Louis
Camilleri:
"Could
I ask you to get to the point, please?"
Continuing -- Yul
Francisco Dorado, Coordinator,
Latin America, Corporate Accountability International:
"Thanks.
Cigarettes kill more people ... "
Louis Camilleri:
"And
then, we can try to get to everybody else."
Yul Francisco
Dorado (still speaking in his language, English
interpretation then read by someone else):
"...
than war, not just in Colombia, but throughout the world. In
Colombia, 30,000 people die each year from tobacco related
causes. Today's image of Philip Morris is of a business that uses
boys and girls to improve its profits, making them consumers of a
deadly product. Mr. Camilleri, when will you give instructions to
the managers of Philip Morris in Latin America and throughout the world
to end advertising and promotions that addict boys and girls to tobacco
from a young age? ...
[Heckling from two older white men in
audience, asking the man to sit down and saying that his time is up.]
Louis Camilleri, interrupting:
"OK.
So, I think your time is up, sir. Let me address what you're
trying to say, because I think I understand what you're trying to get
up to. One can ..."
[Someone calls out to let the man
continue.]
Louis Camilleri:
"I
know what his question is. He just asked for it.
Right? And we are --
Look at the queue. You can't
monopolize the Question and Answer session. I'm sorry, especially
when all there is, is a complete litany of drivel. I'm shocked
that you continue to say that we use kids in all these countries.
You have zero proof of it."
[Someone holds up the photographs
again.]
"I'll tell you one thing. I've
looked at your web site, specifically with -- concerning Latin
America. And you make all sorts of attacks there that are
unsubstantiated. In fact, I happen to have one here. You
have on your web site that we have back cover advertising. And
this is the magazine on your web site." [Mr. Camilleri held up a
magazine.]
"Look what's on the back cover."
[Mr. Camilleri turned the magazine to show the back cover to the
audience.]
"It's a shoe advertisement. Your
internet says that it's our brand which is in the magazine.
OK? So, if we're going to have a
debate, let's have a debate based on facts, truths. And, let's be
transparent, and let's move the needle forward, rather than trying to
come here and continuing to attack us on stuff that has no basis of
fact. So, thank you.
Madame?"
Sharon Brown:
"Good
morning, Mr. Camilleri, Board, and other members of Altria.
My name is Sharon Brown. I'm a shareholder from Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. I would like to go straight to the facts and
truth. I'd also like to talk numbers. We are actually
talking a lot of numbers this morning. You mentioned that you
feel that we have a strong balance sheet as a company called Altria.
In preparation for this meeting, I was
reading an article about a
shareholder who was sitting at a bridge table saying she was really,
really thankful that all of the stupid people keep smoking, because her
profits just kept escalating. A number that I'd like to make sure
is ingrained in everyone's mind is 3-1-6-8-0-0-0-0, very quickly,
that's $31.68 million.
Let me give you some more facts and
truths. Deaths caused by lung
cancer every year, and these are only US fatalities, 124,000; death due
to heart disease related to tobacco use, 108,000; deaths related to
chronic lung disease from tobacco use, 90,000, for a total of 322,000
per year. Multiply that by 98.4, and you get the magic number of
$31.68 million.
The potential lives lost per year by
men, 3.3 million life years,
excuse me, that is total years, life years. The potential life
lost by women, 2.2 million."
[Heckling from a white male in the
audience.]
"Excuse me, sir, I have the
mike. Thank you. 40 times men,
14.4 for women, times those numbers, and you get the magic number
31.58. Let me give you another number ..."
Louis Camilleri, interrupting:
"Could
you come to your point, sometime?"
Sharon Brown:
"$19,806
per year, that is the federal poverty level for a family of
four, the income per year. The numbers are off. Do you agree with
this shareholder's statement, 'Thank goodness for all those stupid
people who keep smoking,"? And a second question, and probably
most importantly, how do you, your employees, and your Board sleep at
night? Thank you."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you. Well, I think all of us associated with Altria
are very proud of being associated
with a phenomenal company. And, we're very proud about our
history, and we're very proud of what it is we are doing today, and our
plans for the future. And, we recognize that tobacco creates
harm, disease, and death.
And, we are trying to do everything we
can in our power to come up with products that have the potential to
reduce harm, to advocate for regulation that will reduce harm. We
know what our responsibilities are. We think we have appropriate
strategies in place. And, as I said earlier, we have a lot of
objectives that are common to those who are anti-tobacco.
But, as I said last year, if your
objective is to destroy this company, then that's where we separate in
terms of the paths that we follow. If your objective is to reduce
harm caused by tobacco, then we can have a discussion. So, thank
you.
Madame?"
Anna White,
Coordinator, Essential Action's Global Partnerships for Tobacco Control
Programs:
"Good
morning, Mr. Camilleri. My name is Anna White. I'm the
Coordinator of Essential Action's
Global Partnerships for Tobacco
Control Programs. I'm
here
today with Dina Kania of Indonesia,
and over 100 youth from 15 different states around the US here inside
the meeting and outside.
Last year, more than 100 public health
groups around the world called on Altria and Philip Morris to adopt
steps to prevent the break-up of Philip Morris from worsening the
global tobacco epidemic. The company refused to agree to these
demands. This year, public health advocates are calling on
governments to effectively quarantine Altria/Philip Morris, the world's
largest multi-national tobacco company by passing legislation to stop
the spread of the global tobacco pandemic.
Our concern is
that the proposed
break-up of Philip Morris poses the risk that Philip Morris
International will become even more effective at spreading its toxic
products and independent, Philip Morris International, which is likely
to be based in Switzerland, will no longer feel constrained by public
opinion or the possibility of domestic regulation or litigation in its
home country and most important market, the United States.
The company says it supports
comprehensive tobacco control legislation in the US and overseas, but
its actions such as in Indonesia and elsewhere, make clear its true
commitments. And, you ask for evidence. And if any of you
-- if anybody wants to see evidence, go to
http://www.philipmorrisbreakup.org/worldtour
Earlier this year, [US] Judge Gladys
Kessler ruled that PMI should be prohibited from using misleading terms
like "light", "mild", and "low". Did the new, "new" Philip Morris
acknowledge how it used these terms to deceive smokers and agree to
abide by the ruling? No. It is challenging the
judge's order. This company must be stopped from spreading its
poison, especially in the developing world, where it hopes to expand
its deadly business.
And, I don't really have a question,
because I've been here long
enough [to] these meetings to know that
this company's actions after the meetings speak much louder than your
words during it. Thank you very much."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you. I think that I've addressed a lot of what you've said.
If you looked at what you've said, intellectually, it doesn't make any
sense. We've tried to have a dialogue with you. Even
Hurwitz, who is Head of Corporate Affairs at Philip Morris
International, has written to you twice, has asked to meet with
you. And so far, you haven't really responded in terms of being
able to meet.
I think, also, you should get your
facts right before you start trying to alarm the world. And I
think your comment is a major insult to Switzerland.
So, Madame?"
AnneBerit
Petersen, nurse:
"Good
morning, sir. My name is AnneBerit Petersen, and I grew up in
Virginia, and am a nurse from Loma Linda University, California.
I'm here as
-- with a group of nurses from across the country who are here because
we see the suffering and pain caused by the normal use of the company's
cigarettes.
I have personally cared for many
smokers and former smokers dying from tobacco caused diseases who
switched to these so-called "light" cigarettes thinking they would be
less dangerous. And, I know that it's a topic that keeps coming
up, and I hope you can help me understand. But, the -- as I
understand it, the company's own documents showed that it knew that
they
were not less dangerous because smokers compensated by inhaling more
deeply.
In last year's federal court decision
finding the company guilty of fraud and racketeering, the court
specifically enjoined the company from continuing to use descriptors
like "light" and "natural" to describe its products, because customers
-- consumers erroneously perceived that they may not be as deadly as
regular cigarettes, which studies showed killed one out of two
long-term users.
So, please help me understand why the
company then asked to be able to continue to use these terms overseas
while appealing the decision? I've worked in many countries --
in Africa and Asia and China -- and continue to see the destruction in
countries that don't have the medical infrastructure to take care of
all of these people with the diseases that they're getting. So,
why would the company want to ... ?"
Louis Camilleri:
[Inaudible]
AnneBerit
Petersen:
"Pardon?
... Want to continue to use in other countries terms that a court in
this country has found to be deceptive? Was this request to keep
using deceptive terms reviewed by this so-called social responsible
committee? And if so, what way does the committee find the
continued use in developing countries of these fraudulent and deceptive
terms to be socially responsible?"
Louis Camilleri:
"Again,
you've got your facts wrong, OK? Go and look at what we asked
Judge Kessler, and you will see that what you're saying is not
true. OK? That's not what we asked for. So, thank
you. And by the way, she didn't clarify anything. Thank
you. We have time for one more question."
Unidentified
man, standing behind the
next questioner, and shouting:
"How
about getting someone in another area that's not just on the ...?"
David Trinnes:
"Excuse
me, sir, I believe I'm up next."
Unidentified
man continuing to try to
be recognized and to push ahead to the microphone.
David Trinnes:
"Excuse
me, sir. I was asking a question here."
Unidentified
man still pushing and
shouting.
David Trinnes:
"I
believe I have the microphone now, if you'd mind ignoring this fellow
behind me. Good morning, Mr. Camilleri. My name is David
Trinnes. I am a senior from Ohio University in Athens,
Ohio. I'm proud to stand before you today as one of 100 youths
from across the country. I'm a well respected student leader
here, representing the concerns of my peers and other members of the
Ohio University community.
Our message for you is this, we do not
want your recruitment in our school anymore, because we do not want our
school affiliated with the tobacco industry. I have heard a
recruiter say, 'We want to help adults make responsible choices.'
However, there's nothing responsible about smoking.
And
no matter how hard you try to spin
it, there's nothing responsible about manufacturing a product that
kills when used as directed. It's terrible you make so much
profit off the pain and suffering of smokers and even
non-smokers. Our community does not want to be a part of
this. I'm proud to say that Ohio went smoke-free this past
November, and my school's county of Athens, overwhelmingly passed
smoke-free Ohio with 61% of the vote.
Ohio University began to implement a
stringent smoking policy and provide smoking cessation services on
campus. Our community is determined to create a smoke-free
environment for our students, help smokers quit and prevent youth from
ever starting in the first place.
Please don't take this opportunity to
spew off your repetitive public relations lines. We are tired of
hearing your rhetoric about how you provide young adults with a great
career opportunity. Enough is enough. The facts speak for
themselves. Each day, 4,000 try cigarettes fro the first
time. 1,500 youths become daily smokers, and one third of them
will die from tobacco related disease.
We won't stand by while [you] recruit
young people [to] Altria's products. It's already caused enough
damage. You don't even need to respond. So, I'm just
telling you, stay away from my school!"
Louis Camilleri:
"Madame,
do you have a question?"
Leanna Hane,
nurse:
"Yes,
I do. My name is Leanna Hane. I'm one of the Nightingale
Nurses, and I've taken care of lots of smokers dying in the hospital
over my 22 years of nursing. In fact, each year, more than
400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. Moreover, one in
every five deaths in the United States is smoking-related. On
average, adults who smoke cigarettes die 14 years earlier than
non-smokers.
Based on current cigarette smoking
patterns, an estimated 25 million Americans who are alive today will
die prematurely from smoking-related illnesses including five million
people younger than the age of 18. As a nurse, I have cared for
so many people who have suffered from tobacco. And I am here to
bear witness to that suffering.
I cannot believe that anyone would
want to cause suffering intentionally, even if they are being paid
huge, if they are being paid huge sums of money. Since you claim
that the company is socially responsible, I want to ask whether you
know of any other product on the market that addicts everyone who uses
it regularly and kills 50% of those who use it by causing slow,
agonizing, and premature death, like [that of] my father?"
Louis Camilleri:
"I
honestly don't think that that question merits a response. We
keep on having these perpetual attacks. And I'm not sure what it
is you're trying to achieve. Either you're going to try to
join
forces to try to advocate for regulation and try to join forces to
reduce the harm. Or, you can come in here, once a year, and try
to make noise. But, that doesn't move the needle, frankly.
I'm sorry. It doesn't.
Sir, you had a question?"
Barry Dean,
shareholder:
"Good
morning, Mr. Chairman and Directors. My promise is my
question's totally different. First of all, we're new
stockholders. My name is Barry Dean from Randolph, New
Jersey. My wife and I recently purchased stock. We are
satisfied. We are hopeful this company continues to follow and
grow in the future.
However, we have -- the reason I
waited in this line -- I have one
major concern. ..."
[He had been one of those pushing to
the microphone, and making remarks
off the microphone. His question related to the running of Kraft.]
Louis Camilleri commented to
the questions of Mr. Dean, more than one, and ended by saying,
"So,
thank you. Thank you, very much.
That concludes our question and
comment period. ...
The first order of business is the
election of eleven Directors. ...
If you would like to comment on the
nominations, please proceed to a microphone. Again, each speaker
is asked to limit his or her comments to two minutes. Please
identify yourself before you begin. The meeting is now open for
comments on the nominations.
Father?"
The Rev. Michael
Crosby:
"Yes,
Mr. Camilleri. My name is Michael Crosby. I'm a Capuchin
Franciscan from Milwaukee. And being a member of a religious
order, our bottom line is
morality. And, I think it would be very
good when you have your discussions back and forth to realize that the
reason why people like us who have our shares in a restricted fund so
that any money coming in is going to be able to challenge the bottom
line, because the bottom line of this company affects morality.
You are legal, but not everything that
is legal is moral. Every one
of the Board of Directors, every one
of the shareholders, is making money on an immoral product, which if
used as intended will kill, because it addicts. I think that as
we separate this company and celebrate -- as you say,
"celebrate," "it's an exciting time," -- it can't be an
exciting time if you have moral convictions.
This company is doing well within an
immoral industry. It is operating legally, but it is immoral in
terms of all of our faith traditions. If you any of you go to
mosque on Friday, synagogue on Saturday, or church on Sunday, you know
that your religion does not endorse tobacco use and smoking. We
can say what we want about it, but we're having a product that kills.
And every one
of us has it on our
conscience. And every one will be judged ultimately by our God as
to what -- how we're making profits. And so, as we create this
new company free of Kraft, I think it's important for us to begin by
realizing exactly what we're doing, legally yes. Within a legal
system, the company is trying to do the best with a bad product.
But, the bad product is killing, and we need to always remember that.
And I ask for
the members of the Board
and the shareholders to realize that, and to realize why people are
here, and why we'll always have a different bottom line."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you, Father."
Peter Rodido:
"Good
morning, sir.
Louis Camilleri:
"Good
morning."
Peter Rodido:
"My
name is Peter Rodido. I have two very quick questions.
First of all, regarding the Board of Directors, why is it that we have
someone on the Board who is a member of the Council on Foreign
Relations? That's question number one. And the second
question is to you. Why
have you allowed the lunatic fringe to
hi-jack this meeting?"
Louis Camilleri:
"Yes.
Well, I think one of the biggest strengths of this company is the Board
of Directors. The Board has guided this company for many, many
years, and is one of the key reasons for its success. And I think
you should be proud of the Board and its members and the collective
wisdom that they bring to the company.
With regard to the hi-jacking of this
meeting, regretfully in this day and age, a lot of people can buy one
share and come and monopolize a meeting, or even not even buy one
share. The fact is that we
have a duty to listen to everybody,
including our most vehement critics. And we will continue to do
that.
And
it's regretful that sometimes they
monopolize these meetings. But, that has been somewhat
regretfully the tradition. And it's not a question of coming up
with rules to change who can come and who can't come,
regretfully. Thank you."
[The next business was the resolutions.
The full printed text of the resolutions and the opposing statement of
Altria is given later in this web page.
The first health resolution was
moved by the Rev. Michael Crosby.]
Louis Camilleri:
" ...
Is the proponent of the second shareholder proposal present?
Again, please identify yourself. Father?"
Rev. Michael
Crosby:
[ Full text for and
company statement against Informing Children of their rights if
forced to incur
secondhand smoke]
"Thanks,
Mr. Camilleri. Last year, I was at a meeting, and I read
an article in Children's Legal
Rights Journal. And it was, how do children who have to
put up with their parents smoking in their presence, especially in
closed situations, cars, or houses, have redress.
I'm pleased that the company has
stated that adults should not smoke in the presence of children and
also in their home and in their cars. However, the more and more
we look at the reality of the product that we're talking about, as one
of the speakers said before, you've got a product that ultimately, if
used over a period of time, becomes addictive.
Well, when you
deal with
addicts, you don't have real freedom going on in terms of all
their choices and informed choices, because they know they're doing
something that's killing them, but they keep doing it because they're
addicted. So, therefore, they're going to compromise if they're
adults, and there are children who then have to ingest that side-stream
smoke.
So, the article pointed out in -- if
you look at our fourth paragraph -- that children should have a legal
right to be able to get redress. And the only way that would be,
would be some kind of suing of the adults. When I read that, I
said, 'I don't know if that'll stop adults from smoking when they're
pregnant or in the house or in the car, but at least it's something
that could be done concretely.'
This
gets to the point of our concern
here with the company, it is that when you come up with something
really concrete, the company's against it. It says it's really
concerned. But then, when you come up with a way of concretely
implementing it, you [the company] don't support it. And
so, we
think this is a no-brainer resolution, and that it would get support.
So, I submit this resolution, and ask
the shareholders to support this redress that innocent children,
innocent people must have when adults around them are not acting
responsibly."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you, Father.
Madame?"
Leanna Hane,
nurse:
"My
name is Leanna Hane. I'm a nurse. In your rebuttal against
Proposal 2, ... you state, 'We do not believe it would be appropriate
for the company to communicate to children information or suggestions
about legal options regarding this issue.'
I'm wondering why you believe this
inappropriate since, as a child continuously exposed to secondhand
smoke in cars and at my house, I would have welcomed this
information. Being constantly exposed to secondhand smoke
exacerbated my asthma, was a factor in my getting severe pneumonia at
the age of five, and may be likely to cause me further health sequelae
later on.
So, why wouldn't you want to be
helpful to children who currently have no choice in their exposure to
secondhand smoke? Why would information or suggestions regarding
legal options be inappropriate?"
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you."
Kelly
Bittnerschmidt, nurse:
"Good
morning. My name is Kelly Bittnerschmidt. I'm a nurse from
North Dakota. I'm here to bear witness on behalf of the children
who are affected by tobacco use. I am going to tell you some
words from my friend, another nurse in North Dakota.
She states, 'My father, Golen
Weisenberger, was in World War II based in Okinawa. He began
smoking before the war, and he certainly was helped along in his
smoking by easy access to cigarettes during the war. When he came
[home] in 1946, he continued to smoke, and did so until he was about 68.
During that time, I and my two
siblings were born. Each one of us shows the effects of his
smoking on our lungs. All of us have problems with bronchitis and
easily contracted pneumonia. My brother easily gets bronchitis
each winter. I've had many bad bouts with pneumonia and
frequently have been asked if I smoked. I have never smoked, not
even one cigarette. Neither did my siblings.
We hated the stink of my dad's
cigarettes, hated the mess, hated the arguments my mom and he had over
his smoking. She was a nurse, and knew that it was bad for
him. I was very glad when he quit. But tragically, he did
not quit before it affected the entire family. My mother has also
had bouts with pneumonia.
My father always insisted on smoking
everywhere he went, in the bathroom, in the living room, at the table,
and in the car. So when I am asked about smoker's rights, I get a
little testy. My father used his rights to smoke all around
us. He died ten years earlier than he would have had to due to
smoking. He died of a stroke. We, his adult children are
now the ones who continue to suffer from the effects of the exposure to
smoke.'
Mr. Camilleri, tell me, what choice
did these children of others have when they are exposed [to smoke] in
their home?"
Louis Camilleri:
"Are
there any other comments? Madame?"
AnneBerit Petersen,
nurse:
"Yes,
sir. I do want to respond to the gentleman earlier about
the lunatics. I do appreciate the opportunity to come and give
voice to children that I take care of who come in for repeated
admissions for asthma. Their parents come to visit, and they're
reeking of smoke. I can give all the education I can come up with
to encourage these parents to consider what the exposure is doing for
their children who have asthma.
And it is so frustrating to be in the
trenches and not be able to have
voice. So, I thank you that you have this open opportunity,
because it at least gives me some peace that somebody is -- maybe will
listen.
The suffering
-- these continued
admissions, repeated admissions that
keep them from school or keep them from being able to play sports,
other activities, have a normal childhood, and I just am gratified that
I can give voice to some of these victims, because they do not have any
recourse."
Louis Camilleri:
"Yes?"
Sharon Brown:
"I'd
like to give my support to this resolution, and I'd like to share
a personal experience in relationship to being exposed to secondhand
smoke. The example is myself as an eight year old child.
By that time, after being exposed to
household exposures [of smoke],
car exposures, multiple exposures by my father primarily, I had missed
almost one half of the school year [due to] secondary chronic
bronchitis, asthma, and repeated hospitalizations that kept me out of
the classroom. Today, I never would have been able to go on
without repeating a number of years [grades].
I'm also remembering the smoke circle,
the nicotine that was ingrained
in the ceiling when I closed down my father's house after he
died. There was a nasty brown color that would not cover up with
paint, a lasting memory of the smoking exposures, and what my father
had gone through.
And I end with another example of an
eight year old child and what she
had gone through. That was of my daughter, standing over the
casket of my father and refusing to leave her beloved Poppy's
graveside."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you. I think we have one last comment."
Stephen Ross:
Hello.
My name is Stephen Ross. Today, I'm representing
Dover Youth to Youth.
But more importantly, I am representing all
of
the kids across America and across the world who breathe in poisoned
air every day because their parents smoke, and they can't do anything
about it.
The second proposal on your agenda
regards secondhand smoke and preventative steps that can be taken by
Philip Morris to protect kids who are harmed by it. The Surgeon
General has said that it is indisputable that secondhand smoke is
harmful to people's health.
Kids are most endangered by secondhand
smoke. And if their parents smoke, they are being forced to
breathe in the poisoned air that can make them sick, and eventually
might take their lives. The proposal would make Philip Morris
provide information for kids about the dangers of secondhand smoke and
legal action they can take to protect themselves against secondhand
smoke if they are being exposed to it against their will.
The company would utilize all of their
media outlets they use to advertise their products to inform kids about
their products' dangers. The Committee has suggested that
stockholders vote against this, based on the belief that it is the
public health officials' responsibility to inform people about this.
I strongly disagree with this
thinking. The public health officials aren't making an obviously
deadly product. You are. It is your moral responsibility to
inform the public that being around people who use your cigarettes is
is dangerous for not only the smokers, but those around them when they
smoke.
And I repeat,
kids can't always choose
whether or not they are around adults who are smoking. The
responsible thing to do would be to tell kids that they are being
exposed to deadly chemicals in the air they breathe, chemicals that can
cause asthma on the short term and lung cancer on the long term.
Or, you can vote against this
proposal. You can vote against this proposal and allow kids to
get sick for no reason while you make a profit off of it. So
personally, I don't think it's right to get rich off of other people's
misery.
In closing, I ask you to please vote
for this proposal. Please think of those who can't protect
themselves. I would also like to give you a warning. If you
vote against this proposal, we won't go away. We are the kids who
have realized that you aim your deadly product at us to make money, who
are getting sick because of someone else's choice to smoke, who are
standing up and making a difference.
![[Virginia GASP]](iconvag.GIF){kind=small}