Careful Foxy, empirical data is not what Shadow Minister wants to hear .... it interferes with his "beliefs" on the subject matter.

rehctub>> sonofgloin, In reply to your last post, just go back to page 14 and you will see that OUG has a very normal post for the first half, then reverts something like his/her norm for the rest.<<

I think that was a paste in, OUG's style and opinions have been consistent.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“The ABS like all statistical organisations decides on a particular statistical source and sticks with it preferring consistency over perfect accuracy”.

Well not quite. In the quote I furnished above the ABS changed the way they recorded tobacco volumes;

“Chain volume measures are considered to more accurately reflect volume changes over time and in 1998 replaced constant price estimates as the official Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) measure of volume change.”

They are definitely not preferring consistency over accuracy in this case.

You appear to have great faith in the fact checking propensity of the Australian newspaper for what is essentially an opinion piece quoting tobacco company research. I would appear these fact checkers did not go to the ABS data because if they did they might have had a question or two for Mr Kerr.

Be that as it may you have tempered your rhetoric and as you say time will tell. I do hope if the results show a decrease in younger people taking up this addictive habit you will give credit where it is due.

SteeleRedux, I guess we need to establish what government considers as 'young people' because if they are suggesting this includes people under the age of 18, they are forbidden from purchasing tabacco products anyway, so how would plain packaging deter them. Let's face it, many young smokers start the habit at school age and tend to bum their fags rather than buy them or have someone buy them for them, at least at the beginning.

This to me is the biggest failing in the scheme.

SR,

From what I know the ABS is reluctant to make changes to measuring techniques preferring to separately analyse anomalies. the change you are referring to was nearly 2 decades ago. The market has changed since then, and the difference between the ABS data and point of sales data referred to in the Australian includes inventory changes, which could easily make a significant difference, and is often raised as a reason for anomalies in other ABS retail figures.

There is no indication that the article is only an opinion piece, and yes I do put stock in the fact checkers, and I am confident that the ABS data is probably the first thing they checked.

It would be a brave man to bet his crown jewels on the ABS data 100% representing the point of sales information.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“There is no indication that the article is only an opinion piece.”

Are you serious? Good god man, just look at Kerr's opening paragraph;

“Labour's nanny state push to kill off the country’s addiction to cigarettes with plain packaging has backfired, with new sales figures showing tobacco consumption growing during the first full year of the new laws.”

“Labour's nanny state”? If you consider this unbiased reporting of facts unencumbered by opinion then I might have to throw you in as a lost cause.

I am really starting to get the same feeling I do when I debate my in-laws about evolution, whatever evidence I lay in front of them they will always find some small thing to cast enough doubt so they can hold on to their faith about creationism.

You sir are exhibiting just such a trait.

You try and pick imaginary anomalies in the ABS data while spruiking the virtues of a survey done by the tobacco industry.

Your bible “The Australia” is apparently the infallible authority while any other source should be viewed with deep superstition.

Their faith does keep them warm at nights and chases away the beasties. I can certainly understand the attraction but their black and white view of the world does turn out people like our runner.

I would counsel caution my friend.

Dear rehctub,

It has been a stable fact of the smoking statistics that across the age groups males are the more likely to be smokers than females but the has been a disturbing trend which has seen this figure turn around among our youth;

“In 2011-12, 5% of males and 9% of females aged 15-17 years were current smokers.”
ABS

I think it is fair enough to make the point that females of that age are more brand aware than their male counterparts. If plain packaging can remove any brand driven behaviour at this early age then I can only see positives. Saving children from a life time of harmful and addictive behaviour should be worth the effort.