A smoking ban is pointless and illiberal

Why is Britain poised to ban cigarette smoking, when the habit is already dying out anyway? Smoking is seen by the young as disgusting and outdated. A generation ago, 50 per cent of school pupils said they had smoked at some point. By the time David Cameron came to power, this was down to 25 per cent. It has since halved again, to 12 per cent – of whom just 1 per cent smoke regularly. Vaping among the young presents its own challenges, but smoking cigarettes (at £15 a packet) is in terminal decline. So naturally the state has decided to intervene.

Politicians of all parties united this week to usher in the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which will create two categories of consumers. Those born before 2009 will be able to purchase whatever they please in shops. Those born later will be supervised consumers: banned from buying not just cigarettes but any tobacco products, including cigars and shisha. How will this be enforced? The task will obviously fall to shopkeepers, who will one day be breaking the law if they sell Silk Cut to a 35-year-old, thinking they looked 36. It’s patent nonsense, which is why the New Zealanders (whose idea it was originally and whom Rishi Sunak copied) abandoned it.

The most worrying aspect of this is that creating two tiers of consumers is a breach of the basic doctrine of equality before the law. Once this principle is created, what will follow? It won’t be long before the health lobby tries to extend the banned list of products to sugary food, perhaps introducing an age limit for buying Terry’s Chocolate Oranges and Frosties. The bill, as framed, will also ban vape flavours that ministers think are too tempting – rather reminiscent of the pandemic years, when they spent precious time debating whether a Scotch egg counted as a substantial meal.