From May to November last year, the Health Promotion Administration commissioned the non-profit Consumers’ Foundation to operate “undercover observations” of 854 vendors across the nation’s 22 administrative regions.
They found that 26.9 percent of vendors did not ask customers to verify their age when buying tobacco products.
Of those observed, betel nut stalls were the most egregious violators of the Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act (菸害防制法), with close to 40 percent of those observed not asking for identification.
More than 20 percent of chain convenience store respondents also contravened the law.
When asked what the legal age to use tobacco is, many people might respond doubtfully, asking: “Is it 18 years old?”
I am responsible for tobacco control on a university campus and I often point students, parents and people in neighboring communities off campus in the direction of the latest amendment to the act, which came into effect on March 22, 2023.
Despite the revisions being in place for two years, many remain unaware that smoking is not allowed on university campuses, that the legal age for smoking is 20 years old, and that vaping and electronic cigarettes are banned. Some even disbelievingly retorted: “When did the law change?”
Amendments to the act have been in effect for two years at this point, and there are still many who remain unclear on the letter of the law, including Article 16, which states that “persons under the age of 20 and pregnant women shall not smoke,” in particular.
The ministry ought to use the media to bolster its nonsmoking messaging and tack on penalties for retailers, convenience stores and betel nut stands through sting operations.
If vendors contravene the law, then the government should hit the responsible parties with fines of NT$10,000 to NT$250,000.
When we can prevent vendors from pretending that they were unaware and would do better next time when they “unwittingly” sell tobacco and betel nut products to minors, then we would have achieved our public awareness goal to decrease access.
Chen Hung-hui is a military instructor and university life resource officer.
Translated by Tim Smith
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS