The 2007 shareholder meeting of
Philip
Morris/Altria
In this web page you
may find:
-- why do the activists
come to these meetings?
-- setting of the scene;
-- a summary of the meeting,
as well as a
description of demonstrations;
-- Quotable Quotes;
-- Excerpts from the Questions and Answers, aka
Questions and Comments, portion of the meeting,
-- Excerpts from the discussions surrounding the resolutions, and
the entire text printed in the shareholder resolution booklet of the
three health resolutions presented at the meeting,
along
with the
Philip Morris/Altria response opposing these resolutions:
Informing Children of their rights if
forced to incur
secondhand smoke
Stop all company sponsored
campaigns allegedly
oriented to prevent youth from smoking
Get
out of traditional tobacco business by 2010
-- Media articles
were extremely
few, due to the web cast most likely, and are excerpted later.
Reasons
why activists come to these shareholder
meetings:
Other
web pages in this web
site discuss past shareholder meetings.
And other web
sites on the internet about corporate
responsibility/irresponsibility.
Basically, in the opinion of
the editor of this web site, the reasons why activists come to these
shareholder meetings boils down to this:
Activists
come to the meetings, because they care about LIFE. Life is
important. Choice is important, and there is NO choice where
addiction is concerned.
The
tobacco industry is about DEATH and ADDICTION and the MONEY and POWER
tobacco brings them over LIVES and NATIONS.
The
money tobacco companies make can be used to infiltrate the economies
of all nations of the world and dominate and control the lives and
economies of the people within those countries. The motto of Philip
Morris, after all, is "We came, we saw, we conquered."
Is
it "evil" to continue to manufacture and market and promote
products which you admit will addict and sicken and ultimately kill
those who use these products, as well as their unborn, as well as
those around them, as well as the environment? The answer is YES, it
is evil -- it is immoral -- it is unethical -- it is wrong -- it is
anti-life.
This
is unhealthy, wrong, immoral, and destroys families, cultures, and
the environment. It eliminates land for
farming food and growing forests. Wildlife, the soil, rivers, and
ground water are all contaminated and destroyed by the runoff from
tobacco factories, and by the chemicals used in growing tobacco.
The field and factory workers may be damaged through their contact
with nicotine and the chemicals in the growing and the manufacturing
process, and the radioactivity in the tobacco leaves.
Responsible
companies in the past have withdrawn or canceled their products which
caused illness or death. But not the tobacco companies. Indeed,
when activists in 2007 asked in a resolution to Philip Morris/Altria
and in a question to Reynolds American that these tobacco companies
be responsible and stop the addiction and deaths by ceasing their
manufacture and marketing of tobacco products, this was refused
absolutely by both companies.
A
court of law (US Judge Gladys Kessler, August, 2006) has already
found them guilty of deceiving the public and their consumers, and of
violating racketeering laws. Philip Morris/Altria and Reynolds
American -- tobacco companies -- are adjudicated racketeers.
And
now the tobacco executives and their companies are seeking to rent
even more scientists to make it appear that they want to lessen the
destruction of the tobacco products.
They
also are renting former health spokespersons to help legislate a
rating of tobacco products as to which product will kill the consumer
more slowly.
Someday, in a court somewhere, tobacco
executives will be judged for all their crimes against people
including their own employees and their customers, against the
unborn, against the land that could have grown food for the hungry,
against the bees and other wildlife, and the environment. In
the meantime, the activists come to speak out against the immorality of
the tobacco industry, the evil, and to
work for justice, for life.
The scene is set.
The 2007
Altria meeting was held in smoke-free surroundings on April 26, 2007 at
the Kraft Foods
plant in East
Hanover, New Jersey. Louis Camilleri,
the CEO of Altria, announced it would be the last meeting of
Altria at this Kraft location, with the spin off of much of the Kraft
stock, and sending a percentage of Kraft stock to each of the Altria
shareholders.
As usual, the shareholders had to pass through a security tent, with
their persons and possessions subject to machine and sometimes personal
search. This has been the company procedure at least since the
early 1990's.
While most ordinary shareholders are allowed to
register and then
wander alone about the refreshments tent and then go to the auditorium
to select their seats, and even use the restroom alone, those
who are known activists, or health advocates, are treated
differently. Activists are joined immediately upon registration
by a guard who leads or follows you through the refreshment/meeting
materials tent, and escorts you to your seat in the auditorium. Each guard has a map
of the auditorium, with the
names of
those who are advocates, and their position in the auditorium.
Large "RESERVED" placards are placed in the seats. Groups
of advocates, no matter how small or large the group, are divided, so
that one person may be on one side of the auditorium, and the other on
the opposite side of the auditorium. If you should go to
the restroom, the guard may either follow you into the restroom, or
hang about outside the restroom waiting for your return sometimes with
a comment about wanting to help you find your reserved spot in the
auditorium.
In addition, there are guards with walkie talkie
type equipment at various checkpoints outside and inside the tents and
auditorium. All of this has the appearance of paranoia, and it
has been the company procedure at least since the early 1990's.
To further understand the
setting of the scene, it is important to
remember that formerly secret documents of the
tobacco industry, when required by the courts to be released, revealed
that the CEOs had been coached by others on many possible questions
that activists might direct to them.
Indeed, the entire meeting and its presentation
could appear to some people to
be geared towards
the image of the company and litigation against it.
For example, the fact that there has been an audio web cast of the entire
meeting in 2006 and 2007, available for one month on the company web
site, has two apparent major benefits for the company:
(1) it portrays them as open and unafraid of
criticism, "transparent" in
the 2006 words of Louis Camilleri,
and
(2) it effectively eliminates most
media
participation.
Fewer reporters are sent to the meetings = there are fewer articles on
any dissidence = less chance for the public in general to know
what is happening.
Thus, while the number of health
advocates attending these meetings has grown over the years
from one person, the Rev. Michael Crosby, to well over 100 people
(counting those inside and those demonstrating outside the meeting),
and while the advocates call into question many of the actions and
words of the company throughout the world, very little of this is
reported to the general public, including other shareholders, except on
web sites of health advocates.
Other Web Sites on corporate responsibility
include:
It is also important
to remember that each year, there
appears to be a theme from the management that recurs throughout
the meeting. For instance, in 2005, it appeared to be an
emphasis upon the
"kinder,
gentler," although misleading, image of the CEO, Louis
Camilleri, and the company, despite
their dedication to
producing and marketing products which addict and
kill when used as intended, rather an evil approach to consumers some
could say. That "kinder, gentler" image theme appeared again in 2006.
In 2007, it
appeared that there was a recurring
company theme of
a Louis Camilleri who was so very saddened
and hurt at being vastly misunderstood that he was driven to lash out
as though in righteous anger, but a Camilleri who
nonetheless proclaimed his anxious desire to work with activists on
what Camilleri called "our common
goals." This planned
or unplanned loss of temper by
Camilleri towards shareholders was encouraged by planned or unplanned
heckling
from two old white men in the audience who shouted at the advocates,
rudely and loudly counted out the minutes and seconds the person was
speaking (one
is allowed 2 minutes for a question), tried to take over the
microphone from activists, and both of whom waited in line to ask
questions about the company including why the
advocates were allowed to speak. This allowed Camilleri the
opportunity to shrug and make remarks about "a democracy."
There are
many Quotable Quotes, here are just a few, given in full context later
on this page, from the 2007 meeting:
1. After Mr. Camilleri's repeated references to "our
common goals," and to the "celebration"
of the "exciting times" of
spinning off Kraft and creating a new company, etc., and at least two
hecklers in the audience who angrily shouted about the "lunatic fringe"
at the meeting,
then the Rev. Michael Crosby
pointed out that the bottom line of the
company
is not the bottom line of those for whom morality is
uppermost.
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."
2. David
Trinnes, senior at Ohio University, Athens, Ohio:
"And
no
matter how hard you try to spin
it, there's nothing responsible about manufacturing a product that
kills when used as directed."
3. Ruth
Malone, nurse with the 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."
4. Louis Camilleri,
CEO, Altria, near the opening of the 2007 meeting
"This
is an exciting time for
Altria. Our tobacco operating companies have some of the world's
most valuable tobacco brands, led by Marlboro. Our financial
resources provide us with a significant competitive advantage, and
Altria enjoys a very strong balance sheet. Our ability to
generate cash flow remains undiminished.
... As I
said at the outset, our
overriding goal is to continue to deliver shareholder value over the
long term and to live up to our illustrious, historical record in that
regard."
5. Stephen Ross, student
"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.
And we won't go
away. We will
come back year after year after year until you are willing to put lives
ahead of your bank accounts."
6. Edward
Sweda, attorney and shareholder
In her
[US District Court Judge Gladys Kessler] ruling last August, she
determined
that the tobacco company defendants violated the federal Racketeer
Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO.
Therefore,
the tobacco company defendants, including Philip Morris, are now
adjudicated racketeers. Significantly, Judge Kessler found
that the company defendants, including Philip Morris, have not
transformed themselves since the Master Settlement Agreement was
signed in 1998.
Summary, and
Excerpts from the
2007 Altria shareholder meeting
Please note -- The
Resolutions.
Resolutions
presented at the meeting are given below, both the discussions at the
April 26, 2007 meeting, and the printed text of the resolutions and the
opposing statement from Altria, as printed in the shareholders'
resolution booklet. Resolutions
must go through a rigorous legal process in front of the federal SEC
before
they are allowed to be presented at a shareholder meeting.
In this web site,
certain points are emphasized with the use of bold face, italics, underlining, and colors.
Most of the votes are cast long before the meeting
is held.
The results of the
2007 voting, percentage in favor:
Informing
children of their rights if forced to incur secondhand smoke
3.7% in favor
Stop all company
sponsored campaigns allegedly oriented to prevent youth from smoking
3.3% in favor
Get out of
traditional tobacco business by 2010
1.1% in favor
SUMMARY:
The first part of the 2007 meeting was a look at the
past, present, and
future for Altria, including the separation of Kraft. No
discussion of the rumored split between PM USA (Philip Morris USA) and
PMI (Philip Morris
International) was given.
Louis Camilleri , the chief executive
officer, commented on Philip Morris USA, noting:
"To
enhance its growth profile, PM USA has embarked on an adjacency
strategy. It took the first step towards this goal in 2006
with a test market launch of Toboka,
a smoke-free, spit-free tobacco
product that provides a new way for adult smokers to enjoy tobacco in a
pouch. PM USA has learned much from this test. While I
cannot share our findings for obvious competitive reasons, I can state
with confidence that these learnings will be translated into further
action, and that a number of initiatives will be announced as the year
unfolds.
PM USA is making significant
investments in product development,
consumer research and other areas, including the construction of a $350
million Center for Research and Technology in Richmond, Virginia,
which
is scheduled for completion later this year. (Aerial photo
projected on screen at meeting.) The Center will be dedicated to
enhancing scientific research, developing new technologies and new
products that might help address the harm
caused by smoking.
PM
USA recognizes that its long-term success is dependent upon its ability
to respond to society's evolving expectations of a responsible tobacco
company. Its responsibility initiatives are
described in detail on its web site, which I urge you to visit.
You will find there, information on PM USA's youth smoking prevention
initiatives and on Quit Assist, a free resource that helps connect
smokers to a wealth of expert and independent smoking cessation
information.
PM USA continues to be the only major cigarette manufacturer supporting
regulation of the tobacco industry by the US Food and Drug
Administration. This February, legislation was introduced in the
US Congress that would grant the FDA comprehensive regulatory authority
over all tobacco products sold in the United States. We believe
that this proposed legislation offers the prospect of effectively
reducing harm and providing real solutions to the many complex issues
involving tobacco."
Louis Camilleri , the chief executive
officer, commented on Philip Morris International [PMI], noting:
"PMI continues to pursue several
business development opportunities. In 2006, for example,
PMI re-organized its investment in the Dominican Republic to focus
exclusively on tobacco. And in early 2007, PMI acquired control
and increased its share holding in Lakson Tobacco in Pakistan to more
than 97%.
PMI is making significant investments
in product innovation to drive growth. Recent examples include
Marlboro Wides, launched in Mexico and a number of European Union
markets, and Marlboro Filter Plus. This new, machine-tested, one
milligram product launched successfully in Korea late last year is a
real innovation in terms of cigarette and filter construction as well
as packaging.
PMI is vigorously pursuing numerous societal alignment initiatives.
It continues to advocate for effective regulation of all tobacco
products and to seek the adoption of excise tax policies that are fair
to all tobacco industry participants, and that meet government revenue
and health objectives. These important topics are covered in
depth on PMI's web site. I encourage you to visit it to learn
more about the company's commitment to responsibility.
PMI strongly supports meaningful
tobacco regulation in every country where its products are sold,
including measures that address health concern and most provisions of
the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
PMI continues to dedicate significant
resources to the important challenge of stamping out the trade in
contraband and counterfeit cigarettes and is working with numerous
governments and the other organizations to fight such trade.
In addition, PMI continues to
forcefully advocate laws that establish a minimum age to purchase
tobacco products in countries where none currently exist. And it
supports youth smoking
prevention programs. In some 60 countries, these programs focus
on preventing youth access
to tobacco. PMI does not
want children to smoke, and it does not want retailers to sell
its tobacco products to children.
To conclude on PMI, it has significant
opportunities for future growth with an estimated 15.4% share of the
international cigarette market. With a superb brand portfolio, a
pipeline of new products and numerous potential business development
opportunities combined with its commitment to responsibility. I
believe that PMI will continue to flourish in the years ahead.
This is an exciting time for
Altria. Our tobacco operating companies have some of the world's
most valuable tobacco brands, led by Marlboro. Our financial
resources provide us with a significant competitive advantage, and
Altria enjoys a very strong balance sheet. Our ability to
generate cash flow remains undiminished.
Over the four-year period from 2006
through 2009, we project that cash flow will reach a cumulative level
of some $41 billion, and we plan to continue using our strong cash flow
to reward you, our shareholders.
In closing, I would like to remind you
of a study by Professor Jeremy Siegel of the Wharton School, comparing
the total shareholder return of all original member companies of the S
& P 500. Since the S & P 500 Index was first created on
March 1, 1957, some 50 years ago, through the end of 2006, it has
delivered an average annual return of 10.83%. Over the same
period, Altria provided an annual return of 19.88% or nearly twice as
much as the average, and was, by far, the best performing company.
As
I said at the outset, our
overriding goal is to continue to deliver shareholder value over the
long term and to live up to our illustrious, historical record in that
regard. Thank you.
The meeting is now open for questions
and comments. This period will be followed by the presentation of
proposals for voting. As noted in the agenda, each speaker is
kindly asked to limit his or her comments to two minutes."
The
Questions and Comments session,
approximately 40 minutes long, included questions by activists from
around the nation, and indeed from other countries as well. Each
person was allotted two minutes to ask the question. There were
two aisles in the Kraft auditorium. and employees with hand-held
microphones stood up for the questioners. Mr. Camilleri
alternated between the aisles. In some past meetings, follow-up
questions were allowed, but in recent years the microphone has been
turned off once the questioner is finished, except for analysts or
others friendly to the company.
The first
question was asked by Anne Morrow
Donley of Virginia GASP, USA.
Louis Camilleri:
"Madame,
good morning."
Anne
Morrow Donley:
"Good
morning, Mr. Camilleri. My name
is Anne Morrow Donley. I am a shareholder from Virginia.
Some years ago, Philip Morris/Altria promised that they would no longer
intervene or lobby against restrictions on smoking in public
places. You have broken
that promise.
This year in Virginia, my home state,
you intervened more than once. A bill passed the [General]
Assembly, which would have taken the Virginia Clean Indoor Air Act
backwards. The Governor, Timothy Kaine, amended that bill to make
all restaurants no-smoking. Philip Morris lobbied to try to
get an exemption to the amendment to say that restaurants with ABC
licenses would be exempt, which would in effect have made very few
restaurants in Virginia smoke-free.
The Governor did not go with
that. Philip Morris then lobbied, saying that the Governor's
amendment would include little pushcarts on sidewalks and also the
catering of private affairs, which was untrue. However, the House
Majority Leader, whose bill it was, used that Philip Morris argument to
defeat the Governor's amendment.
So, in conversations with your staff,
the Reverend Michael Crosby has learned that you are no longer sticking
by your promise, which we've already learned, and that you will be
selective in the future about where you apply your lobbying and where
you don't, and where you keep this promise and where you don't.
So, my question to you is
two-part. First of all, what criteria will you use for this
selectivity? And, secondly, what are your plans for lobbying in
Virginia next year on restrictions on smoking in public and in the
years to come? Thank you."
Louis
Camilleri:
"Mrs.
Donley, thank you for your question.
I'm glad you raised this topic. You are correct. We have
said in the past, and in fact in 2005 and 2006, we refrained from
lobbying on smoking restrictions. However, we've revised that
policy. And I'll explain why we've revised that policy.
I'm glad you brought up the issue of
Virginia. Virginia's legislature proposed a number of smoking
restrictions and a bill that we, in fact, supported. And it
passed. It went to Governor Kaine, as you've said. And in
Virginia, the Governor is allowed to amend the law.
We felt his amendments were too
Draconian and extreme, because a complete reading of his amendments
would have banned smoking on outside patios, in private catered events,
outdoor festivals, and things of that nature. We felt that was
extreme. So we -- yes, we intervened.
So, in terms of
our criteria going
forward, as we've always said, we prefer accommodations to total
bans. In certain places, we will support smoking restrictions
where they do not exist. But, to the extent the bills being
proposed are, in our views, too extreme, where they impinge on
individuals' property, then I think we have a duty to adult smokers to
defend their own rights, because they do have rights.
So, thank you for your question.
[Turning to the other side of the room,] Sir?"
Anne
Morrow Donley:
[microphone
turned off at first] "To
clarify the record, the bill you supported would have removed the
requirement that restaurants must either be smoke-free or provide a
large No Smoking section, and
instead required that restaurants that permit smoking, no matter how
large they are, would just have to post a sign saying Smoking Permitted. And that
of course, would be going backwards. Thank you."
Louis
Camilleri:
"Well,
to correct that statement for the
benefit of everybody else in the room, the bill provided for a total
smoking ban in all restaurants unless the owner of that restaurant
posted a billboard outside his restaurant saying smoking was
permitted. That's the clear view of the bill. Thank you."
[Web Editor's note:
You may read the GASP discussion of
the legislative
history of the bills, including excerpts from media articles, in
this web site, which differs from
Mr. Camilleri's interpretation.
You may also see the current law and
what it covers in Virginia.
You may even read, on the Virginia state web
site, the language of the bill
which Philip Morris supported, noting the crossed out words which would
have eliminated parts of the current Virginia Indoor Clean Air Act,
noting the italicized words which would be the new language. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?071+ful+HB2422ER
You may also read excerpts
from The Richmond Times-Dispatch
on the Altria meeting.]
The second question was from a man
from Deutsche Bank, Mark Greenberg, who addressed Mr. Camilleri
as "Louis," and whose question related to the timing of the spin off of
PMI, which Mr. Camilleri did not divulge.
The third question was from a
woman from Indonesia.
Louis Camilleri:
"Madame,
good morning."
Dina Kania, from
Indonesia:
"Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. My
name is Dina Kania, youth advocate with the National Commission for
Child Protection. I am from Indonesia. And I am here
today
representing Indonesia's youth and children. While you celebrate
this 'phenomenal profits' this company has made, my heart is heavy
because I carry the big burden of what your celebration means for
me. Good news for you is actually very bad news for me in my
country.
You say you don't advertise to minors,
but Philip Morris advertises
everywhere in Indonesia: on billboards, in bus stops, television,
posters, and even near schools. In other words, minors see
your
advertisements every day. On March 30th, 2007, less than a
month ago, I went to the human beatbox concert sponsored by A Mild, a
product of Sampoerna. I saw children as young as five years old
attending the concert, and spotted some very young smokers.
The children were exposed to A Mild
logos printed on banners, T-shirts and basketball hoops, and they had
to witness sales, promotion girls offering discount cigarettes.
Because Indonesia's tobacco control laws are not -- have not caught up
with the rest of the world, and
when you say you're not breaking any
law, it really rings hollow.
But, you are blatantly violating your
own international marketing standards. You committed to stop
sponsorships of sporting events, advertising on television, celebrity
endorsements and advertising that appealed to youth by December 31,
2002. It is April, 2007 on my calendar, if that be so in yours as
well. Five years on, and your company shamelessly continues to
promote to my generation.
Your
company is not a responsible
corporation in my country. Why have you not shown your
responsibility and honor your own guidelines and stop advertising in
sponsorship activities in Indonesia? Thank you."
[Web Editor's Note:
Photos of A Mild promotions were displayed to meeting attendees as Dina
Kania spoke.]
Louis
Camilleri:
"Well,
thank you for your question. I think it's misleading to try to
simplify what are very complex issues. As you know, we entered
Indonesia through the acquisition of Sampoerna. And, as I
mentioned in my remarks, we have 28% of the market. And as you
know, the market is composed predominantly, some more than 95% of the
market, of tobacco products that are called Kreteks that include clove.
And they are particularly Indonesian
brands. You find them n a few other places, but not the way
they are found in Indonesia. And Indonesia historically has been
a very protected industry. Rather than trying to criticize us and
come up with various examples, some of which do not withstand scrutiny,
I think you should be applauding what we've done since we've been to
Indonesia, because we have taken a leadership role.
We have merged the Kretek and the
wide-filtered cigarette association, and we have persuaded them that it
is in the best interest of the industry to come up with various
restrictions on marketing, on youth access, and on regulation of the
tobacco industry generally. We are in discussions with the
government there. We have supported tax increases, as you are
aware. And you know that there's a lot of discussions within the
government and the legislature to come up with marketing
restrictions. So, we share the same goal.
The way we can influence events is to
be present in the market. And if we are a leader in that market,
we clearly have a lot more voice to be able to make changes. We
share a lot of common goals, and we will remain committed to trying to
get fair, reasonable but strong legislation in place to ensure that the
industry in totality will be viewed as a much more responsible industry
in Indonesia.
So, thank you very much for coming."
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.
And we won't go
away. We will
come back year after year after year until you are willing to put lives
ahead of your bank accounts."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you. It's ironic that you don't think public health has a role in
this. It's quite ironic.
We will now move on to the next
proposal. Is the proponent of the third shareholder proposal
present? Again, please identify yourself."
Anne Morrow
Donley:
[ Full text for and
company statement against stopping all company sponsored
campaigns allegedly
oriented to prevent youth from smoking]
"I'm
Anne Morrow Donley speaking on behalf of the Sisters of Mercy of St.
Louis, Missouri, and I move the adoption of this proposal.
On the one hand, we've heard you speak
several times this morning about laundry lists and litanies and so
forth in a disparaging way. One might note that Altria has been
giving a litany over the years of how you do not want youth to
smoke. You do not want youth, I assume, to use your smokeless
tobacco products either, though I haven't heard that yet.
But anyway, you say this, and you have
ad campaigns, which you say are to stop them using tobacco
products. But Philip Morris/Altria has admitted that their ad
campaigns may be having a bad effect on children. That's in your
proposal, your answer. You said that.
However, over the years, the
proponents have been coming and asking that you have test marketing as
you do of your products, test marketing of your ad campaigns by
independent researchers to see whether it will have a bad effect on
kids or not.
And we would note that in December of
this past year, the American Journal
of Public Health did publish a study that had been done of
100,000 of your ads from over a period of years, and discovered
amazingly enough, that eighth-graders, for example, were inspired to
smoke because of your ads.
Your ads did not approach youth, but
approached the parents and asked them to talk to kids about their
tobacco use. The only research data you have provided has been to
say, 'Did the parents see the ads or not? And, did the parents
talk with the kids or not?' And you have no other data, no track
record whatsoever.
So,
1.
There's a constant refusal on
the part of Philip Morris/Altria to have independent research on these
ads or test marketing, if you will, before the release to make sure it
doesn't impact kids negatively.
2. There is no track record that
you have in regard to youth smoking.
3. The data shows the ads are
encouraging youth to use tobacco products. And,
4. Philip Morris/Altria wants
the researchers of the December Journal
article to turn over the raw data to Philip Morris. And one has
to wonder why. That should send a chill through the entire
scientific community that you don't provide information, but you want
the basic names and addresses of everyone they talked to, etc.
So, it's past
time for us to realize
your moral commitment, if you have one, to trying to keep youth from
using tobacco products and to do the test marketing beforehand to make
sure that the ads are not having a negative impact on kids. And
if you're not going to do that, and if you're not going to actually
provide data and have a track record, you need to stop those ads, and
turn the money over to groups which do have a track record.
I hope everyone will support this
resolution. Thank you."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you, Madame.
Father?"
Michael Crosby:
"Mr.
Camilleri, I had a conversation with Mr. Holsenbeck and others at
Altria about this. And it became clear that I was confused as we
began our investigation of this, thinking that the campaign that
parents should tell their kids not to smoke, once they get kids not to
smoke.
The campaign, if you look at the
company's response in the fourth paragraph, the campaign was successful
in reaching its intended audience. That was parents. It was
successful in having parents tell their kids not to smoke, according to
the company, although no independent research showed that.
But you see, the problem with me was
that I thought that the campaign was to get kids not to smoke.
The campaign was to have parents talk to their kids about not
smoking. And that worked. But, you know when parents told
you when you were a kid not to do something what you did. I
smoked when I was a kid. My parents didn't want me to.
And so, the
point is, the campaign is
in that way, to that degree, disingenuous, because you think it's to
get kids to stop smoking. But, it really is to get parents to
talk to their kids about not smoking. And on top of it all, none
of this is being submitted to independent testing, and that's what
we've been asking all these years."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you.
Madame?"
Donna Tassos,
nurse:
"I'm
Donna Tassos, and I'm a Nightingale's Nurse. This company has
developed a so-called youth non-smoking program that part of the
messages include parents talking to kids and emphasizing that smoking
is something for adults.
But, anyone who knows anything about
normal human growth and development, in fact, any one of you all who
have ever raised a child, knows that what adolescents most want is to
be adults, and to make adult choices. Your studies show your
messages are getting to parents, but you have not provided evidence
that these messages are actually effective in keeping kids from
smoking. I urge support of this proposal."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you."
Merritt
McLaughlin, Student:
"Hi.
My name is Merritt McLaughlin. I'm an eighth grader at Dover
Middle
School in Dover, New Hampshire, and I'm in favor of Proposal 3.
90% of all adult smokers became addicted to tobacco while in their
teens. Your older smokers are dying from tobacco related
diseases. So, in order to keep making a profit, you need to
replace them with new, younger smokers.
So, if you're
relying on younger
customers to keep your business, then it's not in your business
interests to prevent teens from smoking. If you want to do an
effective job, then you shouldn't do it at all. So, why won't you
let your prevention campaigns be independently tested? Why have I
never seen any data that proves the effectiveness of the ads?
The
American Journal of Public Health found eighth graders more
likely to smoke after seeing your prevention efforts targeting parents
about talking to their kids. The eighth graders were more likely
to believe that the effects of smoking were being exaggerated.
Your company did not challenge this article, making me believe that the
evidence you have is not strong enough to prove this wrong, and that
you're afraid to show this evidence because you know that it's not
sufficient.
As an eighth grader, your prevention
efforts that I have looked at are full of text, and they have some
pictures, but they're not cutting edge. They're not the same
quality as if an organization dedicated to prevention were making
prevention materials. Your prevention efforts and materials are
very wordy and bland.
On the other hand, when you advertise
tobacco, your ads are eye-catching and more appealing to my friends and
I. And I find it
hypocritical that a tobacco company is making
prevention materials. And that leads me to believe that this is a
half-hearted attempt. So, since it is just a half-hearted
attempt, you should leave it to the real prevention groups to
handle. This is why I support Proposal 3. Thank you."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank you."
Nicole Sutton,
Nurse:
"Mr.
Camilleri, my name is Nicole Sutton. And I've come all the way
from Hawaii today to be here. I work for the Cancer Research
Center at the University of Hawaii. And I have in my hand,
a
letter that was written to us on November 29th, 2006, asking that we
partner with Philip Morris Youth Smoking Prevention Program to
provide data about underage cigarette sales in Hawaii.
And it says that more than 17 or so
states are complying in providing this detailed information on what
stores are selling to minors, because Philip Morris wants to be able to
work with the retailers to educate them.
However, I
think it is absolutely
unethical for a tobacco company to have access to this detailed data
when there is absolutely no guarantee that this info and data will
actually be used for youth prevention efforts and not for the benefit
of the company's marketing development and product sales that may be
targeted at young people.
So,
it's my feeling that a tobacco
company cannot necessarily be trusted to do -- to have access to this
data, and that we really do need to have prevention in the hands of
public health professionals. Thank you for this
opportunity to
speak."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you."
Peter Rodido:
"Good
morning again, sir. Again, my name is Peter Rodido, and I'm a
little bit befuddled by the format of this meeting. I own shares
in a lot of companies, and I've been to a lot of annual meetings in the
past. And never before have I been to an annual meeting where the
Chairman allowed the proposals to be debated.
The proxy statements that we received
provided more than adequate print material on both sides of the
question. And anybody who was conscientious enough to read that
material and make an intelligent vote doesn't have to sit here and
listen to a debate. And I don't mean to criticize you personally,
but this is another example of you letting the lunatic fringe taking
over this meeting.
Now, one suggestion I would make is
that when people come up and speak at the microphone, they not only
introduce themselves, but they tell us how many shares they hold in
this company. Because if somebody holds 5,000 shares, well, their
opinion holds a little bit more weight than somebody who holds five
shares. And this is a way of discouraging the lunatic fringe."
[Web
Editor's note: Mr. Rodido did not divulge how many shares he and
his wife own.]
Louis Camilleri:
"We
live in a democracy. And one share is one vote."
David Trinnes:
"First
off, I disagree very much with the gentleman over there. I feel
it is important for us to be able to debate ... "
Louis Camilleri, interrupting:
"Could
you get to the comment, please?"
David Trinnes:
"OK.
I just want to say, thank you once again for having me up here, Mr.
Camilleri. Altria telling
you not to smoke is the ultimate
hypocrisy. You like facts, Mr. Camilleri, so let's go
straight to
the facts from this.
In 2003, in the FTC report, the
tobacco industry spent $15 billion on marketing and promotion in the US
in contrast with that same year, tobacco companies spent $72.9 million
that was directed to youth or their parents that are intended to reduce
youth smoking.
If we were to believe that you were
committed to reducing youth smoking while you spent only a fraction of
your youth prevention, we have heard your rhetoric about a supposed
concern for community and your alleged desire to prevent youth
smoking. However, these company sponsored campaigns seem to be
intentionally designed to be ineffective.
In essence, your programs seem to be
poorly veiled attempts at marketing your deadly products to youth and
young adults. After all, why would you want to persuade consumers
not to use your products?
Let's go with some more facts, Mr.
Camilleri. The Honorable Gladys Kessler -- you know that case
very well, don't you? In her ruling, she said the defendants
lied, misrepresented, and deceived the American public including
smokers, and the young people they thought of apparently as replacement
smokers about the devastating health effects of smoking, and
environmental tobacco smoke.
The suppressed research, destroyed
documents, and manipulated use of nicotine so as to increase the
perpetual addiction. You
were found in a court of law to have
conspired to deceive the public, and yet you expect us to believe you
honestly want to reduce youth smoking. Your so called youth
prevention campaign is just another way for you to promote your product
to youth under the guise of prevention.
Obviously, you will use any chance you
can to get your name onto the youth. Now, since Philip Morris
launched its first television campaign to persuade youths not to smoke,
shareholder resolutions have requested the ad campaign be submitted to
independent testing. And you released your own research about the
ad. You have refused, saying the ads are effective without
showing the evidence to justify your claim.
If your ads are effective, why are you
hiding the stats? You claim to be a responsible company, so do
the responsible thing. Stay away from youth altogether.
Leave the youth smoking prevention campaigns to groups like the
American Legacy Foundation, who actually care about preventing youth
from smoking."
Louis Camilleri:
[inaudible]
David Trinnes:
"And
are able to use ads that actually work. Respect the Master
Settlement Agreement. Stop targeting, selling, and promoting to
youth altogether."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you. I said I wouldn't comment. But, if you look at the one
side, you will find that we commissioned a study called the teenage
behavior study -- attitudes and behavior study. You can see that
over the last eight years, children of the age of 11 to 17, their
smoking incidence has decreased by 56%. And 11 to 14 year olds
has decreased by 65%.
Now, I think we have a lot more to do,
but there has been significant progress. And this is not about
who's getting credit for what. This is about trying to ensure
that youth will not smoke. And everybody has a role to
play. And I don't think anybody can try to get the monopoly of
what they're trying to achieve.
As regards our own programs, as we
have said, they are guided by an eminent advisory board that is
composed
of eminent, well respected, world wide recognized experts in child
behavior, youth development and their education. So, please try
to understand what the facts are before you let emotions take
over. Thank you.
We will now move on to the next
proposal. Is the proponent of the fourth shareholder proposal
present. Again, please identify yourself."
Edward Sweda,
shareholder:
[Full text for and
company statement against the resolution to Get
out of traditional tobacco business by 2010]
"Good
morning, Mr. Camilleri. I am Edward Sweda, a shareholder from
Massachusetts. I'm speaking on behalf of Proposal 4, which was
submitted by the Sinsinawa Dominicans. For this resolution, it's
important to view it in the context of this company's history, the
history that you said earlier this morning, you are proud of.
In 1954, Philip
Morris signed onto the
Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers
in which this company publicly and solemnly pledged that, 'We accept an
interest in people's health as a basic responsibility, paramount to
every other consideration in our business.' Philip Morris has
never disavowed this pledge.
More recently, Geoffrey Bible, the
former CEO of this company, testified under oath in 1998 that he would
not, 'Set money over public health." Philip Morris has never
disavowed that statement. Now,
while Philip Morris has in recent
years claimed that it is now a socially responsible company, a
comprehensive and scholarly opinion from US District Court Judge Gladys
Kessler has found otherwise. [Further information, at
http://www.tobacco.neu.edu]
And let me note that she, of course,
is not an anti-tobacco advocate. she's a federal judge who
presided over a lengthy trial with hundreds of witnesses, and the
company, of course, and all the tobacco companies represented by very
talented attorneys. In her ruling last August, she determined
that the tobacco company defendants violated the federal Racketeer
Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO.
Therefore,
the tobacco company defendants, including Philip Morris, are now
adjudicated racketeers. Significantly, Judge Kessler found
that the company defendants, including Philip Morris, have not
transformed themselves since the Master Settlement Agreement was
signed in 1998. She ruled that their assertion that they have
transformed themselves is, 'Simply not accurate.'
Moreover, she found that tobacco
company lawyers at every stage played an absolutely central role in the
creation and perpetuation of the racketeering enterprise and the
implementation of its fraudulent schemes. And she commented in
her opinion, 'What a sad and disquieting chapter in the history of an
honorable and often courageous profession.'
The racketeering enterprise consisted
of defrauding the American public regarding seven items:
1.
smoking's adverse health
consequences;
2. nicotine's addictive
properties;
3. nicotine manipulation;
4. "light" and "low tar"
cigarettes;
5. marketing to youth;
6. secondhand smoke; and
7. the suppression of research
along with document destruction.
And, I would note parenthetically,
that you commented earlier about the improving litigation
environment. Well, the
company did not have a very good day
yesterday [April 25, 2007],
as I was in Washington, D.C. to see the US Supreme Court
oral
argument in the Watson vs. Philip Morris case.
And while we
await the decision in a
couple of months on the defense using the Federal Officer Removal
Statute to get out of state court, tobacco friendly stock analyst David
Adelman is predicting that Philip Morris will lose that decision, and
that it may even be a unanimous decision against Philip Morris'
position. [June 11, 2007,
US Supreme Court indeed ruled unanimously against Philip Morris,
returning the Lights case
to state court.]
So, in closing, it's
because of Philip
Morris' long, sordid history of wrongdoing, apparently again, the one
that you are proud of, and its refusal to become socially responsible,
despite its words to the contrary, the shareholders sponsoring this
resolution have no choice but to submit Proposal Number 4.
And
because this company has engaged
and continues to engage in a long standing racketeering scheme,
I urge
the shareholders to approve this resolution. Thank you."
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you.
Madame?"
Ruth Malone:
"Ruth
Malone, and for the benefit of the gentleman here, I should
disclose that I do own one share. Even if I wished to own many
more shares, as a nurse, I will never make in my lifetime what Mr.
Camilleri makes in one year. So, I could never be a major
shareholder in this company. But, I do feel that it is important
to be here on behalf of others who have a stake in this company and
cannot share their voices.
And I know that it cannot be pleasant
for all of you on the Board of Directors and all of you who are the
executives of the company and all of you who are major shareholders to
go through these meetings and to know that your products are
responsible for the suffering and deaths of millions of people.
No matter how much money is being
made, there will come a time when the world will see what is being done
here, and will wonder how this corporate slaughter was tolerated for so
long. Peanut butter caused the illnesses of some 300 people a few
months ago, you may remember. And the company did the responsible
thing. It pulled those products from the shelf.
This company does not believe it
should act like other responsible companies, and I believe that that is
testimony to an ethical blind spot of colossal proportions. This
is a blindness for which millions will pay the price and have paid the
price. Other models for distribution of tobacco products to
addicted users have been proposed.
This company should pursue seriously
avenues to get out of the business and transition from an industry that
promotes suffering to an industry that reduces it. That would
truly be 'moving the needle forward.' "
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you.
Madame?"
Carol McGruder:
"Good
morning, Chairman Camilleri and Altria shareholders. My name is
Carol McGruder, and I'm from California. And I'm in support of
this proposal.
I am here to bear witness for the
45,000 African-American lives lost every year to tobacco related
illness. And I am here to be a voice for people of African
descent the world over.
In November of last year, Philip
Morris/Altria and other tobacco companies pumped over $70 million to
defeat California's Proposition 86. Proposition 86 would have
added an additional $2.65 tax to each pack of cigarettes sold in the
state of California. This proposition was endorsed by the
American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, and the
American Cancer Society.
While Philip Morris used many
strategies to defeat this proposition, a proposition which would have
saved hundreds of thousands of lives in California, the strategies that
our community found particularly reprehensible and disingenuous were
the co-application of our leadership organizations, particularly the
California State Conference of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, and the Youth of the Regressive Tax
argument.
This regressive tax argument pretends
to be a friend of poor and low-income smokers, arguing that excise
taxes are an unfair burden that will cause them to spend a relatively
higher proportion of their income on cigarettes than people who are
more affluent. I submit to you that cigarettes are not a
necessity like food or lodging or transportation, but they are highly
addictive and deadly substances.
And yes, low-income smokers are
sensitive to price, which research has proven that when the cost of
cigarettes goes up, smoking prevalence goes down, more so for poor and
low-income smokers. If you want to help low-income
African-American smokers, please stop marketing your deadly products to
them. If you want to help communities of color, stop co-opting
our leadership organizations and creating divisions in our communities.
And we are also morally opposed to the
construction of the Philip Morris plant currently underway in Senegal,
West Africa. We know that the lure of industry and jobs to
developing countries is a powerful Trojan horse --"
Louis Camilleri:
[inaudible]
Carol McGruder:
"And
we know from bitter experience that we'll never be able to compensate
for their man-made plague of death and illness that will surely
follow. It is criminal that as many African countries --"
Louis Camilleri:
[Inaudible]
Carol McGruder:
"--
deal with the elements of poverty, AIDS, political instability and war,
refugees. You will be there to profit and work with little
disruption. We lend our voice to the struggle of our brothers and
sisters in Africa as they work to protect their youth from your
aggressive marketing strategies.
And we know that American parents
don't want their children to smoke. We would say to you that the
lives of African youth have the same intrinsic value as those of our
children. Stop outsourcing death. Thank you."
Louis Camilleri:
[Inaudible]
Unidentified
Audience Member:
"I'm
---"
Louis Camilleri:
"I'm
going to have to cut the comments pretty soon, because in the interest
of time, I think we're just hearing recitation of everything. So,
I think we're going to have to move on to the next proposal. Is
the proponent of the fifth and final shareholder proposal present? ..."
[Shareholder proposal from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.]
Louis Camilleri:
"Thank
you, very much. I think it's important for all shareholders to
know two things. One is that we've never used Covance for animal
testing. So, that's the first point. The second point is
that PETA's a great example of a willingness to dialog to try to
advance the needle. So, I thank you for talking to us.
The matters to be voted on have now
been formally presented to the meeting. If you've not already
done so, please complete your proxy card. After you've done so,
raise your hand, and the ushers will collect all the proxy cards and
deliver them to the Inspectors of Election.
Since all shareholders have now had
time to vote, I declare the polls closed. The ushers should now
have collected all the proxies, and they are directed to deliver the
proxies to the Inspectors of Elections for counting.
I'm
exceedingly proud to lead the Altria family of companies. Altria
not only provides value for its shareholders, it adds value to the
communities in which we operate. Ours is a philanthropic
commitment that dates back over half a century. Last year alone,
Altria companies donated some $200 million to deserving organizations
around the world.
We have helped provide nutritious
meals so that fewer people go hungry. We have helped make shelter
and legal services available for survivors of domestic violence and
their families. We have helped --"
David Trinnes:
"Attention, ladies and gentlemen.
This company has refused to stop spreading poison around the
world! Millions are dying every year! We must take action
to quarantine this toxic pandemic!"
[20 young
people
around the auditorium rise up, fitting on plastic chemical hazard
suits, fitting on medical face masks, holding up signs, banners,
stringing out
yellow caution tape.]
Louis Camilleri:
"Can
you sit down please?"
[Shouts of Stop the toxic global
pandemic!]
Louis Camilleri:
"Out
of courtesy for all shareholders, can you sit down, please?
We have helped to exalt the human
spirit with art sponsorships that nurture innovation, creative
excellence and diversity. And when natural disasters have struck
--
Out of courtesy for
all shareholders here, you've done your piece! Can you please sit
down? I'm asking you to sit down! All of you, please?
If you want to do your things, you can go behind [the audience].
You're spoiling the view for other shareholders. Show some
courtesy!"
[Guards made the
young people move to the back of the auditorium.
Media coverage of the protests is below.]
"We have supported organizations that
help victims pick up the shattered pieces of their lives. Our
corporate philanthropy mirrors the individual giving of our
employees. In 2006, not-for-profit organizations received a total
of almost $7 million through matching gifts and employee funds.
From Richmond, Virginia to Japan, they
helped clean and beautify their communities. They mentored
children in their native Chinese culture on Long Island. From
Surabaya, Indonesia to Brooklyn, New York they provided emergency
services that not only touched lives, but actually helped save
them. And this is only a sampling of their efforts.
I'm extremely proud of the
extraordinary difference our employees make in their communities.
And I'm equally proud of the difference they make to your
company. A great company is defined by many things, but at the
heart of those things are the great people who work for the company.
..."
[There followed the summary of
voting results, and the adjournment of the meeting.
The results of the
2007 voting, percentage in favor:
Informing
children of their rights if forced to incur secondhand smoke
3.7% in favor
Stop all company
sponsored campaigns allegedly oriented to prevent youth from smoking
3.3% in favor
Get out of
traditional tobacco business by 2010
1.1% in favor
Shareholders had to file past the
demonstrating students to reach the outside.
And outside the buildings down on
the sloping lawns beside the highway, more students were demonstrating,
with huge signs, outfits of cigarettes, and enthusiasm. Photos at
http://www.takingontobacco.org/event/altria07
.]
TEXT OF THE RESOLUTIONS
Proposal 1 is about Cumulative Voting. Proposal 5 is about the
use of animals in tobacco industry research. Proposals 2, 3, and
4 are health resolutions, and the full text of the proposal, and of the
company opposition statement is given below.
Proposal
2 -- Informing Children of Their Rights if Forced to Incur Secondhand
Smoke
Province of Saint Joseph of the Capuchin
Order ... WI, claiming beneficial ownership of 300 shares of common
stock, together with four co-proponents, submitted the proposal set
forth below. ...
WHEREAS, in August, 2006 a federal judge ruled that
PM USA and other tobacco companies violated racketeering laws by
deceiving the public about the dangers of tobacco, including the fact
that "defendants continue to obscure the fact that ETS is hazardous to
Nonsmokers;"
PM USA has continued its
equivocation on the dangers of secondhand smoke (SHS) since the May, 2006 Report of the Surgeon General
stating it is now "indisputable"
SHS is an "alarming" public health hazard, responsible for tens of
thousands of premature deaths among nonsmokers annually (www.surgeongeneral.vov/library/secondhandsmoke/).
In releasing the findings, Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona
stated: "Children are
especially vulnerable to the poisons in secondhand smoke." He
urged smoking parents not only to quit, but to smoke outside while
trying to quit. "Make the home a smoke-free environment,"
he stated (NYT, 02.28.06).
Despite PM USA's response to the 2006 Report -- that "people could
choose whether to be around smokers" (TobaccoReporter
07.06, p.8), by smoking, a
parent/guardian "transforms his or her child into an involuntary
smoker" (Children's
Legal Rights Journal 25.4
[2005], 37). Such unwilling SHS exposure can be considered "a
form of child abuse that is highly detrimental to health, general
welfare, and safety. Every member of society must share the
responsibility of protecting our children from SHS" (25).
In Johnita M.D. v. David D.D.,
a New York family court provided relief to a thirteen-year-old child
who demanded the court prohibit his mother from smoking in his
presence. The court took
judicial notice of the scientific evidence regarding SHS, and banned
the parents from smoking or allowing others to smoke at any time in
their home or automobile (Johnita
M.D., 40 N.Y.S.2d at 812, 812-13).
In re. Julie Anne, an Ohio court contained forty statements
addressing linkages between SHS and disease. It concluded:
"children comprise the most abused segment of society in the world"
(24). The court, on its own initiative, issued a restraining
order against the smoking parents whose healthy child asserted
entitlement to breathe clean air, free of SHS (25, 27).
The court found that a "family court on its own initiative and
regardless of the health of the child ... in determining issues of
visitation and custody" (641). The court declared the
"involuntary nature of children's exposure to secondhand smoke
crystallizes the harm as egregious" (647-51).
Many times, it has been shown, legal redress is the only recourse in
response to some particularly egregious behavior. Contrary to PM
USA's assertion, many children have no choice "whether to be around
smokers." While it may seem extreme for a child to sue his/her
parents for smoking, any "right" parents have vis-a-vis smoking is
over-ridden by a child's right to health.
RESOLVED: the shareholders
request that Altria and its tobacco entities make available on their
websites and in all venues where they sell or promote their cigarettes,
their own clear statements as well as material detailing the health
hazards of SHS, including legal options available to minors to ensure
their environments will be smokefree.
[The Response
from Philip Morris,
Altria, on Proposal 2 is below.]
The Board
recommends a vote AGAINST
this proposal.
Philip Morris USA, Inc. ("PM USA") and
Philip Morris International Inc. ("PMI") believe that the public should
be guided by the conclusions of public health officials regarding the
health effects of secondhand smoke, also known as environmental tobacco
smoke ("ETS"), in deciding whether to be in places where ETS is
present, or if
they are smokers, when and
where to smoke around others. PM USA and PMI
both communicate on their websites the public health authorities'
conclusions that ETS causes diseases in non-smokers.
In particular, the websites of PM USA and PMI each state:
Public health
officials have concluded that secondhand smoke from cigarettes
causes disease, including lung cancer and heart disease, in non-smoking
adults, as well as causes conditions in children such as asthma,
respiratory infections, cough, wheeze, otitis media (middle ear
infection) and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. The companies'
websites communicate the dangers to children of ETS exposure and
emphasize that "[p]articular care should be exercised where children
are concerned, and adults should avoid smoking around them."
The websites also provide direct links to studies regarding ETS by the
U.S. Surgeon General (including the 2006 Report of the Surgeon
General, entitled "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to
Tobacco Smoke"), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the
International Agency for Research on Cancer, and other public health
authorities, all of which conclude that ETS exposure poses health risks
to non-smokers. More information on ETS can be found at PM USA's
website at www. pmusa. com and PMI's website at www. pmintl. com.
In addition, on each cigarette package PM USA provides a toll-free
number and website address where health information can be
obtained. PMI provides information on the health effects of
secondhand smoke to its consumers through various media, including in
package onserts.
Further, both companies have stated on their websites that "the
conclusions of public health authorities on secondhand smoke warrant
public health measures that regulate smoking in public places" and that
"outright bans
are appropriate in many places, such as schools." Also
both companies have stated that where smoking is
permitted in public places, "the government should require the posting
of warning notices that communicate public health officials'
conclusions that secondhand smoke causes disease in non-smokers."
PM USA supports a legislative framework in the U.S. that would
establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for tobacco products
that includes authorizing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to
revise the text of existing warning labels on cigarette packages and in
cigarette advertisements to include warnings about the health effects
of ETS. PMI supports and advocates strong and effective
comprehensive regulation of tobacco products around the world and has
communicated this view to regulators and public health authorities,
including the World Health Organization and the European Union.
Internationally, many countries, such as those in the European Union,
require warning labels that include messages on ETS.
In short, PM USA and PMI both communicate on their websites and
elsewhere the public health community's messages regarding ETS. However, we do not
believe it would be appropriate for the Company, PM USA, or PMI to
communicate to children information or suggestions about "legal
options" regarding this issue.
Therefore, the
Board urges stockholders to vote AGAINST this proposal, and proxies
received by the Company will be so voted unless stockholders specify a
contrary choice in their proxies.
Proposal 3 -- Stop All
Company-Sponsored "Campaigns" Allegedly Oriented
to Prevent Youth From Smoking
Sisters
of Mercy of the Americas ... St. Louis, MO ... claiming
beneficial ownership of 100 shares of common stock, submitted the
proposal set forth below.
WHEREAS, shareholder resolutions filed
for voting at this Company's
annual meetings in 1999, 2000 and 2001 asked that "before any
promotional, marketing, and/or advertising campaign presently running
is allowed to continue or is inaugurated in the future, it must be
submitted to independent and certifiable testing to ensure that it is
not equally or more appealing to the 14-to-18-age group than groups
over 18." The Board and Management urged shareholder to vote
against this, arguing that it did not market to youth.
In December, 1998, Philip Morris USA
launched a national $100 million
television campaign allegedly meant to persuade youth not to
smoke. In one form or another, it has continued this campaign
ever since. During this
time representatives of the proponents of
this resolution repeatedly asked the Company to submit its ad campaign
to independent testing to see how youth are being impacted to (not)
smoke our products. The Company's representatives refused,
arguing its data shows the ads are "effective." Furthermore it
has refused to release any data that might support its claims.
Meanwhile,
a comprehensive study of 100,000 such ads during the period
covered by most of the previous shareholder resolutions (1999-2002) has
shown that such ads may have done more harm than good. The
research covered the reach and frequency of tobacco company-sponsored
ads and whether they were seen by 12-year olds to 17-year olds in the
largest 75 U.S. media markets, covering close to 80 percent of all
households. They then examined surveys of 8th, 10th, and 12th
graders in 48 states collected in the same period for a study on
tobacco use and beliefs at the University of Michigan. The data
showed no correlation between the frequency of the industry's
anti-smoking ads and actual or intended smoking by the teens.
Melanie Wakefield of the Cancer
Council Victor, Melbourne, Australia, a
lead researcher on the project declared, "This research provides the
clearest evidence to date that tobacco-sponsored ads don't work."
A
key element of the study, published in the December, 2006 American Journal of
Public Health
stated that eighth-graders likely
to have seen the ads targeted at
parents were more likely to believe that the dangers of smoking had
been exaggerated and more likely to say they planned to smoke.
Older teens also expressed stronger approval of smoking and were more
likely to have smoked in the 30 days before the school survey.
The
Company has not challenged the findings of this study. Such
data about that period belies the Company's statements that its
campaign aimed at youth-prevention of smoking are "effective."
RESOLVED:
Shareholders request the Board to
stop within one week
of the 2007 annual meeting all Company-sponsored "campaigns" allegedly
oriented to prevent youth from smoking unless management can produce
facts refuting such findings as those above that show such campaigns do
not reduce teen smoking. Shareholders also request the Board to
grant annually the monies otherwise spent on these campaigns to those
campaigns that have been demonstrated to reduce teen smoking.
[The Response from Philip Morris,
Altria, on Proposal 3 is below.]
The Board
recommends a vote AGAINST
this proposal.
PM USA and PMI both understand that
youth smoking prevention is a complex issue for which there is no one
simple solution. Both companies firmly believe that kids should
not smoke and that preventing youth smoking should be a vital and
central component of comprehensive tobacco regulation. While the
issue of youth smoking must be addressed by governments, regulators,
parents, teachers and society in general, PM USA and PMI believe they
have a role to play in addressing the issue of youth smoking and that
their programs are appropriate and responsible.
In 1998, PM USA created a Youth Smoking Prevention ("YSP") department
with the goal of helping to prevent youth from smoking
cigarettes. PM USA firmly believes that kids should not smoke and
that PM USA can play an important role in addressing this issue.
PM USA's YSP department develops and disseminates youth smoking
prevention communications, makes grants to youth-development
organizations, produces tools and resources to help parents talk to
their kids about not smoking, and supports youth access prevention
initiatives to help keep cigarettes out of kids' hands. PM USA's
work in youth smoking prevention is guided by experts. PM USA has
a Parent Communications Advisory Board, consisting of experts in
relevant disciplines. The Parent Communications Advisory Board
supports a parent-directed media campaign to help prevent youth
smoking. PM USA's "Talk. They'll Listen," television
campaign is designed to encourage parents to stay involved in their
kids' lives and talk to their kids about not smoking. The
"Talk. They'll Listen," campaign is also intended to complement
our other parent-directed communications, including the online Parent
Resource Center and the Raising Kids Who Don't Smoke brochure series.
PM USA's research shows that the campaign is successful in reaching its
intended audience. Based on research as of June 2006, 61 percent
of parents of kids 10 to 17 years old reported being aware of at least
one ad from the campaign. Importantly, of those aware, 61 percent
reported having talked to their child about not smoking as a result of
seeing the ad.
While parents are the intended audience of the "Talk. They'll
Listen." campaign, PM USA recognizes that there is the potential for
adolescents to be exposed to the ads on TV. As part of the
research protocol and prior to the airing of the ads, PM USA also talks
with youth to identify and avoid unintended advertising message
take-aways. Nothing in PM USA's research raises the concerns
indicated by the study published in the American Journal of Public Health.
PM USA is
exploring various
ways to better understand the study and has asked the authors of the
study for
their underlying research data. PM USA will continue to
seek engagements with relevant experts to identify opportunities
to improve its youth smoking prevention efforts.
Similarly, since 1998, PMI has been taking and supporting measures to
prevent youth smoking. These measures focus on promoting the
establishment of laws to prevent minors from buying cigarettes,
educating retailers about their responsibility not to sell to minors
and teaching children to decide against smoking.
PMI's efforts are
focused on the
imposition of legal age limits and on retailer compliance with those
age limits. Many countries in the world today do
not have
minimum age laws and, where such laws exist, they are often not
adequately enforced. PMI wants to see those laws expanded around
the globe and, importantly, strictly enforced. PMI's
principal voluntary programs involve working with retailers and
educating them about preventing sales to minors. In addition to
these retail access initiatives, PMI also provides financial support to
the ongoing efforts of teachers, community groups, youth specialists
and health ministries for educational programs aimed at preventing
youth smoking.
For these reasons, the Company believes this proposal is not warranted.
Therefore, the
Board urges stockholders to vote AGAINST this proposal, and proxies
received by the Company will be so voted unless stockholders specify a
contrary choice in their proxies.
Proposal
4 --
Get Out of Traditional
Tobacco Business by 2010
The
Sinsinawa Dominicans ... WI ... claiming beneficial ownership of 75
shares of common stock, together with two co-proponents, submitted the
proposal set forth below. ...
WHEREAS, in 1973 a Philip Morris representative
stated: "We all know that once a consumer product has been proven
by the medical profession to be harmful to the human body, the product
will be banned from sales and whatever has been sold will be withdrawn
from the trade." He said, if cigarettes would be "undeniably
proven to be harmful and conducive to lung cancer, there will
definitely be a ban on cigarette sales worldwide." Later, in the
film, Death in the West, a Philip Morris Vice President declared that,
if it were shown cigarettes cause harm, "we would withdraw them."
PM USA has never disavowed
these statements.
Recently PM USA has promoted itself as
socially responsible. It says it shouldn't be judged by past
modes of operating. However,
as late as August, 2006, a Federal Judge overseeing the U.S.
Government's lawsuit against it and other tobacco companies ruled it
and the others have continually violated racketeering laws by deceiving
the public about tobacco dangers. It stated:
1. They
have falsely denied, distorted and minimized significant adverse health
consequences of smoking for decades.
2. They
have consistently manipulated nicotine levels in cigarettes, with
resulting addictive consequences.
3. Their
own documents and research reveal their continued recognition that
smoking causes serious adverse health effects, along with fears how
such knowledge might impact litigation.
Meanwhile,
other findings indicate that the company does regulate nicotine levels
in its cigarettes, corroborating what the Federal Judge alleged.
While acknowledging that a combination
of increased taxes on cigarettes and diminished public access to
smoking reduces smoking and, therefore, increases public health and,
despite its acknowledgment of smoking's health hazards, PM USA has
lobbied mightily to restrict increases in taxes in various states (BW
09.11.06). This makes the proponents of this resolution convinced
the company is not sincere in its state commitment to reduce smoking
among people in general, youth in particular and, especially those
addicted to its products.
The
findings of the Federal Judge and others show that our company has
consistently acted duplicitously in the dissemination of its
cigarettes. Despite this, it still has asked the same
Judge for permission to continue marketing its alleged "light" and
"ultralight" products abroad even though it knows millions of people
think they diminish health hazards but do not. This "boundless
rapaciousness" has led The Washington Post to opine of this Company's thinking:
"If we can't continue to defraud Americans into killing themselves ...
can we at least keep suggesting to billions of people abroad that some
cigarettes are safer than others?"
After years of trying to make this
Company more socially responsible, the shareholders filing this
resolution are left with no alternative but to submit the following:
RESOLVED, that since it
acknowledges the science showing its tobacco products create disease
and death, shareholders request the Board of Directors initiate steps
to sell or phase out all production, promotion and marketing of its
health-hazardous and addictive tobacco products by 2010.
[The Response from Philip Morris,
Altria, on Proposal 4, is below.]
The Board
recommends a vote AGAINST
this proposal.
The core business of both PM USA and
PMI is the marketing and sale of tobacco products. PM USA and PMI
believe that the right course is to continue
participating in the tobacco industry in the markets in which they
operate in a manner that is both effective and responsible.
And that is what they are doing -- by marketing and selling their
products responsibly, by supporting the public health community's
messages about the dangers of smoking, by advocating strong and
effective regulation of tobacco products and by working to develop
products that may have the potential to reduce the risks of
smoking. The
companies' actions demonstrate a commitment to working together with
their shareholders to address the serious public health issues
presented by tobacco products.
For years now, the companies have stated that they agree with the
public health community that smoking causes serious diseases and is
addictive, and they have communicated to their consumers that there is
no safe cigarette. In line with these views, the companies have
supported strong, comprehensive regulation. While the companies
do not believe that tobacco use should be prohibited, they have
supported and continue to support measures that would assist public
health efforts to reduce the harm caused by tobacco use.
For example, PM USA, alone among the major U.S. tobacco companies,
continues to support a legislative framework that would establish a
comprehensive regulatory framework for tobacco products, and which
would provide for comprehensive and effective regulation of tobacco
products by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Internationally, PMI supports strong and effective tobacco regulation,
and is the leading advocate among international companies for strong
and effective regulation of tobacco products. PMI believes that
such regulation should be comprehensive, addressing all aspects of the
manufacture, sale, marketing and use of tobacco products, and has
communicated its views on this subject to many governments and public
health officials around the world, including the European Union as well
as the World Health Organization.
PM USA and PMI engage in a range of other activities as part of their
efforts to responsibly manufacture, market and sell tobacco
products. Both companies support youth smoking prevention
programs designed to help prevent children from smoking. Both
companies engage in research that is intended to develop products that
might reduce the health effects of smoking. And both companies
work with government authorities to help combat the sale of contraband
and counterfeit cigarettes.
PM USA and PMI
compete in the tobacco industry in the countries in which they operate,
and they expect to do so effectively and responsibly for many years to
come.
Therefore, the
Board urges stockholders to vote AGAINST this proposal, and proxies
received by the Company will be so voted unless stockholders specify a
contrary choice in their proxies.
Media Coverage
EXCERPTS from
The
Richmond [VA] Times-Dispatch, April 27, 2007, headlined,
Altria defends lobbying effort;Executive
with Philip Morris parent explains opposition to Va. ban, writer
John Reid Blackwell with contributions from The Associated Press and
Bloomberg.
Altria
Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Louis C. Camilleri yesterday
defended the company's decision to fight a restaurant smoking ban in
Virginia, despite having previously said it would not lobby on the
issue.
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine
proposed the restaurant smoking ban as an
amendment to another bill passed by the General Assembly during its
recent legislative session. Camilleri told shareholders at Altria's
annual meeting in East Hanover, N.J., that the company fought the
proposed ban because it would have extended beyond restaurants to
include areas such as outdoor festivals.
"We felt [Kaine's]
amendments were too draconian and extreme," Camilleri said during the
meeting, which was webcast.
Supporters of the ban
interpreted Kaine's amendment differently,
saying it would have applied only to indoor areas of restaurants. The
House of Delegates rejected the smoking ban by a 59-40 vote April 4.
Camilleri's comments
came in response to questions by Anne Morrow
Donley, a tobacco-control activist from Richmond, who said the company
had gone back on a pledge not to lobby against indoor smoking laws.
"You have broken that
promise," Donley told Camilleri at the
meeting. "This year in Virginia, my home state, you intervened more
than once."
Camilleri said the
company did refrain from lobbying on smoking
restrictions in 2005 and 2006. "However, we have revised that policy,"
he said, adding that the company would get involved in cases where it
believes smoking bans would go too far in restricting property rights.
"Then, I think, we have a duty to adult smokers to defend their own
rights, because they do have rights," he said.
About 200 shareholders
attended the meeting, the first since Altria
spun off its stake in Kraft Foods Inc. last month. Camilleri said the
company is considering separating its international and U.S. tobacco
businesses. He said the company won't rush to spin off the
international tobacco unit as it studies options to increase the share
price.
Shareholders defeated
five shareholder proposals at the meeting,
including one to get out of the traditional tobacco business by 2010.
EXCERPTS from The
Daily Record, New Jersey, April 27, 2007, headlined, Altria protesters are fuming mad; At shareholder meeting, they demand some
responsibility; writer Vidya
Padmanabhan
EAST HANOVER --Rising international cigarette
sales generated the most buzz at Altria Group's shareholders meeting on
Thursday -- for investors and anti-smoking protesters alike.
First,
Chairman Louis C. Camilleri touted an increase in subsidiary Philip
Morris International's first- quarter income, which had risen by 9.5
percent over the same period last year.
Later, Yul Francisco
Dorado, a Colombian activist, said through a translator that the
marketing practices of multinational tobacco companies were claiming
more lives than political violence in his country and others.
Thursday's
meeting at Kraft Foods' technology center was packed with nearly 200
investors, who represented 86.7 percent of Altria's stock, company
officials said. This included a vocal contingent of protesters, who
also were shareholders --often of just one share, Camilleri said.
It
was the last time Altria would meet with shareholders at the Kraft
Foods compound --Kraft was spun off from the parent company last month.
The
Kraft spin-off and the rumored breakup of the high-performing Philip
Morris International from Philip Morris USA has been generating
significant interest among industry watchers.
When added to the
price of the Kraft shares received by Altria shareholders last month,
Altria's current share prices represented an all-time closing high,
when compared with the pre-spin-off Altria share value, Camilleri said.
Internationally, cigarette shipments rose 1.5 percent in the first
quarter, which Camilleri credited to the acquisition of a tobacco
company in Pakistan and gains in several countries, including Egypt,
Poland, Ukraine and Indonesia.
Following
Camilleri's speech, the comment session saw an Indonesian youth
activist, Dina Kania, step up to the microphone to accuse Altria of
advertising to youth. The company did this, she said, in spite of its
declaration of support for the World Health Organization's Global
Tobacco Treaty, signed by more than 150 countries, which restricts
tobacco promotion and sponsorship.
"My heart is heavy," Kania
said. Billboards advertising cigarettes to minors could be seen in
Indonesia, even near schools, she said. She had attended a human
beatbox concert on March 30, where she had seen children as young as 5,
and also had seen banners, T-shirts and promotional material printed
with Philip Morris brand logos being handed out, she said.
Camilleri
responded that instead of criticizing the company, Kania should be
applauding the health-promotion measures the company had taken since
entering Indonesia. Philip Morris had imposed marketing restrictions
and remained committed to getting strong legislation in place, he said.
As
for the advertising that existed, Camilleri said Philip Morris had
entered Indonesia through the acquisition of a local tobacco company,
implying that the advertising was the work of the local company.
"Your hatred completely blinds your judgment," Camilleri told
several
of the protesters. "We should join forces on what we do agree on."
Investment-minded
shareholders clucked in irritation at the long lines of activists who
stood at the microphones on both aisles, waiting to deliver critiques
of Philip Morris'social responsibility. One man questioned Altria for
allowing the meeting to "be hijacked by the lunatic fringe."
Near
the end of the meeting, the protesters stood en masse and, wearing
breath-masks, strung out police caution tape and held signs that said
"Stop the toxic epidemic" and "Quarantined for global health."
Part
of the group later met and continued the protest with compatriots who
had held a vigil outside the Kraft campus, wearing costumes designed to
resemble cigarette-cartons and chanting, "Stop, stop tobacco."
Added
27 April 2007, Updated 14 June 2007