posted 31st January 2024
The government has set out plans to ban, permanently, the sale of tobacco to anyone born from 2009 onwards; that is, anyone currently 14 or younger (and anyone still to be born) would never be able to buy tobacco. This would make the legal sale of tobacco slowly disappear from the UK.
Is this a good idea?
It is beyond debate that smoking is bad for you (so don't waste any time in a debate proving this - just assume everyone accepts it as a matter of fact). It is also beyond debate that the fewer people who smoke the better, both for their health and for the pressure on the NHS caused by smoking-related diseases. The question here is whether the proposed measure is the best way to achieve the desirable outcome of reducing the number of people who smoke, and whether any costs it entails outweigh the benefits.
As is often the case, the debate can be broken down into questions of pragmatism (what works) and principle (what's right).
Pragmatism
For the ban
It will achieve the desirable end result of making tobacco disappear from society, but it will do so much more effectively than an immediate ban, which would be extremely hard to enforce. The slow and gradual introduction of the ban will make it feel natural rather than dictatorial.
If a whole generation grows up not knowing legal smoking, they will never take it up. There may be some practical problems initially, but the end result is so desirable - a massive improvement in people's health and massive savings for the NHS - that the benefits far outweigh any costs.
Against the ban
People don't like being told what to do. They will find a way round the ban. The US tried to ban alcohol from similarly good intentions between 1920 and 1933; the ban was widely flouted and led to the rise of organised crime. We already have very stringent measures in place to discourage people from smoking (no advertising of tobacco, health warnings on cigarette packets, very high taxes on tobacco). Discouragement works better than enforcement.
Making something illegal doesn't stop it from happening. Dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine are illegal, but are still widely used. Because they are illegal, it is much harder to control their use, and to help people who want to give them up. If tobacco became illegal, its distribution and sale would end up being controlled by criminal gangs, who are often exploitative and violent. Better that cigarettes should be sold by newsagents than by violent psychopaths.
Principles
For the ban
It is simply wrong to allow the sale of a product that causes so much harm. It is immoral that tobacco companies make money out of a dangerous, addictive drug. It is an anachronism that other harmful drugs are illegal and tobacco is not.
Against the ban
The dangers of smoking are well known. It is right to ban children from buying tobacco, but adults should be allowed to make their own informed choices. Preventing them from doing so takes away their freedom, and treats us all like children.
If the measure does go to parliament, the government have promised a free vote. That is, MPs will be able to vote according to their personal beliefs, rather than doing what their political party tells them to. This should make for a very interesting debate, with all these arguments and more being aired.
