Starmer’s illiberal smoking restrictions are just the start
Freedom cannot be entirely indexed to smoking, but an administration’s approach to tackling it says a lot about how they plan to govern, says Joseph Dinnage
Imagine you and your colleagues have just finished a day of graft on the trading floor and you’re all looking to relax. What to do? You all rightly decide to stroll down to the Jamaica Wine House for a few well-earned flagons. After a couple, you stumble outside to enjoy a fag with your pint – this is God’s own combination after all. But then you remember that to do so would be a criminal offence.
Under Labour, this grim absurdity could soon become a reality. Keir Starmer has confirmed reports leaked to journalists at The Sun that he is indeed looking into tougher measures on outdoor smoking. In addition to banning smoking in pub gardens, it could also be prohibited outside of hospitals and at sports grounds.
While this news has the backing of Chris Whitty and has been met with glee by the joyless public health lobby, publicans across the country are terrified. Kate Nicholls, the Chief Executive of UKhospitality, told BBC Radio 4 that the Government must think “‘”very carefully before we damage business, economic growth and jobs’” Hear, hear.
Britain’s hospitality industry has taken quite the battering. The number of pubs in England and Wales dropped below 40,000 in 2022, a fall of more than 7,000 compared to a decade ago. Banning smokers from pub gardens will only repel even more customers from a sector in urgent need of an economic boost. Nigel Farage, the king of booze and fags himself, has promised to never visit a pub again if smoking is outlawed. Westminster ale houses may never recover.
The state doesn’t know best
The justification for such intrusion is, of course, to reduce the burden on the NHS – that famous means of legitimising any act of illiberalism. But the notion that banning things makes them disappear is for the birds. With tobacco, as with any addictive substance, the most effective way of weaning users off is by increasing the availability of less-harmful alternatives. Just as recovering heroin addicts shift to methadone, smokers need vapes and heated tobacco to help them kick the habit.
The NHS agrees! As their website on vaping states:
“Switching to vaping significantly reduces your exposure to toxins that can cause cancer, lung disease, and diseases of the heart and circulation like heart attack and stroke. These diseases are not caused by nicotine, which is relatively harmless to health.”
On one issue, Starmer is correct. Smoking is bad – very bad – for your health. You only need to buy a pack of cigarettes to be confronted with graphic images of cancerous lungs, necrotic feet and impotent young men, all of which can be caused by tobacco use. But bring me an adult, or even teenager, who doesn’t already know this. We should not use the NHS’ failure to lead us down a path where adults cannot freely make choices about their own health.
We should never expect charities and campaigners blinded by paternalism to prioritise the hospitality sector or free will above their ideological goals. However, hard evidence should be enough to persuade politicians. Sadly, for this Labour government and indeed for the previous Prime Minister and his unsuccessful attempt to ban smoking altogether, it seems it is not. While freedom cannot be entirely indexed on whether we can smoke or not, an administration’s approach to tackling it says a lot about how they plan to govern.
Rather than take the liberal approach that humans are fundamentally rational actors, Starmer’s Labour Party feels that the state knows best. Between this belief, and the idea that the NHS must be protected above all else, it isn’t inconceivable that we’ll soon see measures to further limit our ability to enjoy alcohol and so-called ‘junk food’.
People do not exist to pursue a risk-free life, certainly not if they want to have a good time. There is no reason that should be the goal of public policy.
Joseph Dinnage is deputy editor of CapX