Leading article: The birthday of the ban

Monday 30 June 2008 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The fall in the number of smokers one year since England and Wales banned smoking in public places is good news.

Years have passed since smoking was fashionable, but the habit has proved tenacious, so news that 400,000 have quit, while cigarette sales dropped by over two billion will be seen as proof that bans work.

They are certainly more popular. Ireland was on its own in Europe when it set the precedent in 2004. Since then, Norway, Scotland, England and Wales and, most recently, France, have followed suit. The Netherlands is to bring in a ban this week.

The rationale behind smoking bans is that denial of public space de-legitimises smoking, making it socially unacceptable and so contributing to its withering away.

But whether this logic holds water is not clear. It has not worked with hard drugs, the use of which has spread. Moreover, Ireland's experience raises questions. There, the number of smokers dropped after the ban was introduced only to climb back up a few years later.

The response of supporters of bans is to insist on further measures; bans, they say, need to be "built on". Doubters, meanwhile, say bans only segregate the non-smoking majority from a hard core who then prove indifferent to public pressure.

The lack of resistance to the ban in Britain has strengthened the case of those who advocated it. But we must watch trends carefully. If Britain follows Ireland's example, and cigarette sales recover, the use of illiberal measures such as bans should come under scrutiny and a discussion reopened over their use as aids in the battle to improve the nation's health.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in