“My restaurant is my castle,” proclaimed Miklós Sulyok, owner of a quaint, two-storey downtown eatery. “I find it quite unacceptable and extremely aggressive of the government to try to tell us what to do. The époque of prohibition in the United States proved that restrictions are not necessarily the most successful way to run things. And in this small place,” he continued, his arm in sweeping motion over the restaurant’s ground floor, “it would be impossible to differentiate between smoking and non-smoking sections.”

The customer’s choice

Speaking against a 1999 law, which in part required establishments serving warm food to provide a well-marked and properly ventilated non-smoking section, Sulyok refuses to follow suit. “If the majority of my guests want a smoke-free environment, then of course I would comply. People here, though, generally ask me if it’s okay to smoke, rather than where is the non-smoking section.”

Even though Sulyok quit smoking three years ago, he has decided not to deprive anyone from lighting up. A fear of losing business or simple stubbornness – it is hard to tell. His customers have not complained and so ANTSZ, the governing body overseeing application of the 1999 law, has not visited the restaurant nor fined Sulyok. His case is typical.

Attila Balogh, vice head of the Work Health and Chemical Safety Department at ANTSZ, admits his office’s strategy has changed. This year’s budget, he said, only permits for checks to be performed in reaction to complaints. Very different from a 2003 scenario when he visited health and educational institutions, businesses, trains and train stations with the purpose of checking that “No Smoking” signs were properly displayed, and if the provided smoking space followed guidelines.

Public needs to take a stand

“Civil organizations and NGOs are constantly writing letters of complaint, yet the public needs to take a bigger stand too,” Balogh said. When an establishment or workplace is visited, warnings are often given before fines, which range from HUF 50,000 to HUF 10 million, depending on the circumstances. “Our goal is not to distribute fines,” he said, “but rather to make sure that people smoke less and that the regulations are being observed.”

Hungarian public health is in a dire state, with national indulgences being cigarettes, coffee, alcohol and fatty foods. Considered an epidemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the national Central Statistics Office (CSO), smoking is the cause of some 28,000 deaths each year in Hungary. This means one in four - a ratio which, in the late 1990s, was nearly 2.5 times higher than the EU average. Although cigarette smoking has decreased in general, down by 6 billion units, or sticks, from 1998 to 2002, Hungary ranks badly even when compared to former communist states, with the mortality rate from tobacco-related causes twice as high as the average of all European countries.

Stricter tobacco laws

Recognizing the severity of these statistics, stricter tobacco control laws concerning smoke-free environments, advertising, sponsorship and taxation have been initiated. Hungary and Slovakia are the only two countries in the region to have so far confirmed participation in the WHO’s latest global health treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which promises an even tighter grip on this widespread killer. On the other hand, as Hungarians are known to be big social smokers, many are apprehensive about the government’s new progressive stance on the matter. Even in 1999, a survey by the Fact Institute in Pécs indicated that 82 percent of women and 65 percent of men saw separation of smoking and non-smoking sections as necessary in public establishments. It is a fact that fewer opportunities to smoke result in fewer cigarettes smoked, and while this is an effective measure in improving public health, Hungarian laws remain lax in comparison to Ireland’s, for instance, known as the most progressive European country to fight smoking in public places. Beginning in March, 2004, the Irish imposed a ban on smoking in public places and completely outlawed the habit in restaurants and bars. Norway followed suit in June and Britain is currently in the midst of implementing similar restrictions. Japan, one of the world’s top smoking countries, is also lobbying for bans while Bhutan is the first country in the world to prohibit smoking entirely.

When questioned, most Hungarians cannot imagine giving up their smokes in coffeehouses and bars. The average Hungarian smoker, whose habit has been tolerated almost everywhere for decades, is finding it hard even to adjust to the latest national restrictions. Smokers believe in their right to smoke, and although Hungary’s measures are not as drastic as total bans in place elsewhere, they seem reason enough for rebuttal.

Disobeying the rules

It is not rare, for example, to see public bus drivers puffing away at the wheel while passengers await departure. Some elementary school teachers even smoke cigarettes while supervising children in the schoolyard. Sulyok accredits these misdemeanors to be a direct consequence of Communism. “We were under dictatorship for so long that this lead to a system that doesn’t work properly. If the rules are too strong,” he continued, “people will find loopholes to get around them. Nowadays, no-one even knows who is responsible for what.”

Society remains full of disparities. In the grand lobby of the Semmelweis University Hospital, for example, only a small A4 sheet of paper states that smoking is forbidden on the entire premises. Although the hospital’s security clerk can often be found smoking at his desk, behind glass to the left of the lobby, directly opposite the warning. A loose explanation to this contradiction is tacked to the wall of his office, which converts this room into a designated smoking area. A similar sign permits smoking on the first floor. While no signs appear in the second floor lobby, staff and visitors shamelessly puff away by one of the two full ashtrays. Smoke wafts up the staircase to the newborn and maternity wards, although here, several warnings prohibit the habit.

Guidelines differ

In this respect, the guidelines on paper differ greatly from those in practice. Determining where people can and cannot smoke is only one of the ways to reduce the harmful effects of cigarettes. Price increase and taxation are another. The World Bank stated that raising cigarette prices is possibly the most effective tool in getting financially-sensitive Hungarians to cut back. From 1998 to 2003, cigarette prices went up 114 percent, causing a decline in consumption of 30 percent.

National polls show Hungarians prefer to decrease their number of cigarettes rather than quit completely. Bigger warnings on boxes of cigarettes, with measurements and content regulated by the EU, aim to deter people from lighting up. Graphic pictures on boxes, revealing the disturbing realities of tobacco on lungs, teeth and so on, are a concept originating in Canada, and currently a hot topic in the region. The pictures are an EU recommendation, rather than obligation, and so far only Ireland and the Netherlands are planning to adopt such photos.

Education is another vital factor in dealing with the issue, especially in regard to local trends. Hungarian women are smoking more and more, and the tendencies in children, especially among girls, are frightening. Some 22 percent of 16-year-old Hungarians crave a cigarette first thing in the morning, and, according to the 2003 European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD), 36 percent of secondary school boys and 35 percent of girls smoke daily. The study also adds that teens under 18 have no problem purchasing cigarettes. Most 13-to-16-year-old girls who smoke are not interested in quitting, whereas those who don’t smoke regularly foresee taking up the habit within the next year.

Savvy tobacco marketing campaigns

Experts credit the savvy and successful marketing campaigns of international tobacco companies. With privatization after the fall of Communism, cigarettes shifted from a staterun commodity to a sophisticated consumer novelty, with glossy ads and a brand new appeal. National lobbying continues while the EU’s all-encompassing ban on tobacco advertising and sponsorship has in part crushed the efforts of cigarette manufacturers to launch more brands and influence consumers.

Tibor Szilágyi, a doctor and leading activist in the battle against smoking, recognizes that the tobacco industry has brought more to Hungary than adverse health effects. International cigarette manufacturers are significant employers and taxpayers, and tobacco money has also helped refurbish city streets, hospitals, and theaters. Public utilities like police and fire departments, along with social and cultural institutions, have also benefited from the industry’s generous community sponsorship.

MIKLÓS SULYOK said his restaurant is his business and thinks the government should stay out of it.

“These factors undoubtedly have an affect on public opinion when it comes time to oppose health measures against the tobacco industry,” Szilágyi said during his presentation at an anti-smoking conference last November. “The social costs of smoking, however, far outweigh these benefits. There will surely be conflict,” he continued, predicting tobacco companies’ struggle to remain influential, “yet we are expecting this. This is a battle we simply can not give up on!” The Ministry of Health places smoking at the top of its public agenda. Mass campaigns to quit have been instigated and flyers announcing cessation programs and clinics can be found in work and public places like on park benches and in bus stops. Efforts toward a healthier Hungary are evident, yet some attitudes leave one to wonder to what extent this nation of smokers really wants to quit. Sulyok, who dropped the habit, continues to promote it in his restaurant. “I am a pro-smoker, yes. But I am also a gourmet and I know that food tastes better without smoke. In this situation, however, I am sticking to my guns.”