Third-hand smoking: indoor measurements of concentration and sizes of cigarette smoke particles after resuspension

requestors with the tobacco industry. There were 129 requests in total. Charges totalled over $NZ13 000. They were in accordance with official guidelines. They included staff time for searching for information, and photocopying. Figure 1 shows that most (84%) of the requests were from tobacco industry related sources. They were a public relations company whose managing director was previously director of public relations, Communications and Corporate and Regulatory Affairs for British American Tobacco (BAT) New Zealand; law firms who have represented tobacco companies ; and tobacco companies. Topic areas included the 2006 review of the tobacco packaging, labelling and display provisions of the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Act (59% of requests); a review of point-of-sale tobacco product displays (11%); provisions of the existing act (10%); tobacco control spending (8%); tobacco control research (5%); the industry (4%); reduced harm products (2%); and personal rights (2%). Two requests solicited information about more than one topic. Tobacco industry related sources asked for copies of presentations, tobacco control service purchase agreements, contracts and information ‘including, but not limited to papers, minutes, reports, briefings, memoranda and correspondence (including emails) caught by the wording’. They included the legal obligation to provide information within 20 working days (n1⁄4107). Requests increased from three in 2005 to 79 in 2006 when the review of the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Act was under way. During this time, the lawyers, Philips Fox, sent one person 67 letters which differed only in the name of the organisation they sought information about. They also sent identical requests to six different people. With regard to tobacco control spending, 10 of 13 requests were from industry-related sources. Two asked for details about government funded delegates to international tobacco control conferences. The majority of public requests for information about tobacco control and tobacco control expenditure were from the industry. The work of public health officials was disrupted at a critical juncture in tobacco control action by an influx of repetitive and time consuming OIA requests from the tobacco industry. Each required assessment to determine if the information existed; if the request was frivolous or vexatious; if the information could be released; and to provide quotes for services since only a limited amount of photocopying and time for searching is free. 3 Tobacco companies portray themselves as socially responsible corporate citizens. 8 Yet they abuse legal avenues designed to protect the public’s right to access to official information. This should be included in a campaign exposing the activities of the tobacco industry to support achieving the New Zealand tobacco control workforce’s vision of a tobacco free society by 2020.