Five years on, ten reasons why the smoking ban is still a big mistake

Friday March 25, 2011

Tom Miers argues that Scotland’s smoking ban sets precedents that we will repent at leisure

Five years is too short a time to feel the full effects of the smoking ban in Scotland. Hundreds of pubs and clubs have gone bust, and countless parties ruined, but the real tragedy of the smoking ban will not be felt in full for a generation or more.

This insidious, illiberal law sets all sorts of precedents that bode ill for the way our society is structured. For anyone who appreciates that our civilisation has at the root of its success the freedom of the individual, the smoking ban was a major blow. Here are ten ways in which the ban will change society for the worse:

1. It’s bad for pubs and clubs. 700 pubs have closed in Scotland since the ban, and a big reason why is that smokers now drink at home. Pubs are an important social glue in our society that encourage friendships, neighbourliness and responsible adult drinking. It’s a tragedy that this wonderful feature of British life is under such attack from government.

2. The smoking ban encourages drinking at home. Not only is this less sociable, but it may well lead to greater consumption of alcohol because off licence sales are cheaper that pub and restaurant sales.

3. The smoking ban sends out the message ‘government knows better than you do how to look after your body.’ It reduces individual responsibility and encourages the idea that there is no need to make hard choices in life because the government is there for you. Society is infantilised by bans such as this, and people will become less self-reliant in the long run.

4. The ban is often justified by those who say that smoking imposes costs on the health service. The answer should be to move to an insurance system where people pay a higher premium according to their lifestyle choices. Instead we are further down the cul-de-sac of centralised provision of healthcare backed up by state regulation of lifestyle. The two go hand in hand.

5. The ban reduces respect for the rule of law. Meddlesome, in-your-face rules that micro-manage people’s lives cause resentment and make the law commonplace and ridiculous. Breaking the law becomes a habit.

6. The ban undermines property rights, one of the pillars of a free society. The idea that government can invade private property to police the behaviour of adults opens up a can of worms. The ban has coincided with an increase in surveillance by the state and greater regulation of what we can and can’t do in our home.

7. The smoking ban increases intolerance in our society. It panders to the idea that if we don’t like the behaviour of our fellow man, we seek to lobby the government to ban it. The smoking ban is one of a kind with restrictions on free speech, freedom of conscience can freedom of association, all of which are on the rise.

8. The ban stigmatises a group of people. It has been introduced alongside government adverts claiming that smokers should be avoided because they stink. For government to stigmatise any law abiding section of society is deeply worrying. It shows that the state is prepared to resort to bullying to achieve its social objectives.

9. The ban reinforces the idea that the government’s business is to worry about individual lifestyle choices. It makes it more likely that government will seek to ban eating certain foods, drinking alcohol, or flying on holiday.

10. Overall the smoking ban represents a big expansion of the remit of government. Previously it was understood that so long as we did no harm to others, we should be allowed to pursue our lives in peace without the state regulating our activities. It is not enough to claim that pubs are public places where the danger of passive smoking merited government intervention. Despite their name, pubs are private premises, and nobody was forced to go into a smoky pub if they didn’t want to. The argument in favour of a smoking ban is akin to banning trains on the grounds that those who choose to go inside them might be involved in a crash.

It may seem that smoking is a marginal activity in the scheme of things, and that government intervention is a special case that should hold no fears for us. But once you give politicians an inch they take a mile. The smoking ban was a landmark in the advance of state power. We will repent it at our leisure.

Tom Miers is editor of the Free Society

See also: Scotland: time to rethink smoking ban