‘I choose not to smoke every single day – the ban is nanny-ish’
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Nearly half of Tory MPs, including five leadership hopefuls, failed to support Rishi Sunak’s flagship smoking ban policy – and Telegraph readers were quick to debate the legislation in the comments section.
The Tobacco and Vapes Bill passed its first stage in the House of Commons on Tuesday, with 383 MPs voting for the ban and 67 opposing it.
The majority of readers who voted in The Telegraph’s exclusive poll were against the ban, with many expressing their frustration that the ban would impose upon the public’s liberties.
However, some readers supported the policy, and shared their concerns that the worst health effects of smoking were straining the already overstretched NHS at great cost to the taxpayer, as well as damaging the lives of the smokers themselves.
Kemi Badenoch was among the Conservative leadership hopefuls to vote against the Bill. The Business Secretary wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that she could not support legislation where “people born a day apart will have permanently different rights”.
One reader, Tom Archer, agrees: “Kemi Badenoch is right”. He notices from his pub’s smoking shelter that “virtually no one under 35 smokes manufactured cigarettes now,” and argues: “This ban is unnecessary, and nanny-ish.”
Parsey M. was continually around family who smoked while growing up in the 1960s. “I taught myself to smoke by the age of 14 and by my mid 20s I was on 40 a day,” he shares.
Now, as a non-smoker for 30 years, married, and with an adult child of his own – he supports the ban. “I was compelled [to smoke], and as Professor Chris Whitty said, my choice was effectively removed. Now I choose not to smoke every single day.”
At the same time, Parsey M. values his freedom, and as a “lifelong conservative with a small c”, views the ban as an imposition by the “nanny state”. Moreover, he is perplexed as to how such a move would be policed and who would be responsible for the policing.
“In reality, [the ban] might be desirable – but it’s just not possible.”
In a similar vein, John D Barnett, who stopped smoking in 1977 – and wishes he had never started in the first place – believes the ban “is both mad and bad.”
“The fact that it appears to have so many supporters is depressing,” he says.
‘The Government’s big brother approach must be resisted’
Meanwhile, one reader points to the failed alcohol prohibition in America. “Remember how well that worked?” They added: “This is yet another sign of Rishi Sunak’s weakness – waste time with a minor issue because there are so many other critical ones.”
They are particularly confused by the ban as “smoking has been socially unacceptable for the last 40 years, which has resulted in much less smoking,” and fears banning smoking could make it popular again, “given the way young minds often work”.
Sharing a similar sentiment, Stephen Duke suggests “this shows how out of touch Rishi Sunak is”. He adds: “Of all the things to which he could have devoted Government support and parliamentary time, he chose a marginal issue.”
Another reader, T. L., who has “never been tempted to try smoking”, believes the ban sets a dangerous precedent.
“Alcohol, cakes, biscuits, burgers, and chocolate may all be considered bad for us – in large quantities – but they should not be banned.”
Should the Tobacco and Vapes Bill become law, “it will criminalise people, and the tobacco will still reach our shores”. They say the “criminal cartels will do well out of it” and add that “the ‘big brother’ approach by the Government must be resisted”.
‘Self-determination is by no means synonymous with liberty’
Health Secretary Victoria Atkins, who is a strong proponent of the smoking ban, told the House of Commons “there is no liberty in addiction”.
This sentiment is shared by reader Noah Brock: “Mere self-determination is by no means synonymous with liberty.”
He continues: “There are sins which we can commit which undermine our liberty and bring our souls into slavery. That’s what addiction is.”
Steven Young is a 68-year-old retired delivery driver who has witnessed first hand how his mother who “smoked all her life” contracted emphysema that ultimately caused her death.
He says: “To all those getting excited about the erosion of their civil liberties and the restriction of their freedom to choose, every part of the act of smoking and the effects of smoking cigarettes is extremely harmful to health.”
After smoking for 25 years and trying to give up for twenty, Mr Young was finally able to quit after waking up one morning and realising he “couldn’t face a cigarette” again, despite battling with a “brain which tells you that it’s enjoyable when you actually know it isn’t”.
‘Stop the free NHS treatment’
The wider financial impact on society is considered by one reader, H.S.P., who resents taxpayers having to fund treatment for unwell smokers: “Stop the free NHS treatment and make it paid by insurance. Tick the box as a smoker and see premiums jump tenfold. It is very easy to beat the drums of freedom when all the expenses are paid by someone else.”
Likewise, Ed Rust believes: “If you need medical treatment as a result of damage to your health due to smoking, the NHS [should] not treat you – you [should] go privately.”
“Smoking is disgusting. Glad to see the back of it,” says Simon Paulo. He weighs in on his right not to be a second-hand smoker: “I remember how truly awful it was to have to breathe in other people’s smoke fumes. Why should they have the right to inflict their ill health choices upon others? What about my right to breathe smoke free air?”
