Governments new smoking policy.

Never smoked myself nor have I ever wanted to

I'd be curious to see how the Government will stop people smoking in their homes... I guess shops will just stop selling the product but whats to stop others from getting duty free when coming back from holidays or how do we stop tourists who bring their own over?

SoundAsa£ said:

They have announced the plan to eradicate smoking in The UK by 2030.
Going to be hard to implement wouldn’t you say......but nevertheless, IMHO, a worthwhile project.

It's interesting that the headline seems to be that they're trying to eliminate smoking by 2030.  But, buried in the detail is that they have effectively given up their previous plan to achieve this by 2025.  

Stopped on 17th Jan this year.

Only jacking up four times a day now as well.

I'm a tax paying adult, why should the government be telling me what I can and can't do? Spend tax money on different schemes 

I'd ban that and vaping in public if I could.

When I started work - everybody seemed to smoke. Breathing in their smoke was the norm and I recall coming home from work with a smoke induced sore throat quite often. Then smoking rooms came into being, which meant people couldn't force their smoke on you. I recall going in one to fetch somebody and you literally couldn't see who was in it for smoke!. Going to the pub, you just had to accept your clothes and hair would stink of smoke at the end of the evening, even if you didn't smoke.

What has happened in a relatively short space of time is incredible, and I wouldn't be surprised if smoking was eradicated. I think a major element in achieving this would be a greater acceptance of vapes. More research needs to be done of the effects of them. But if they can be shown to be a safe alternative, fewer and fewer people will smoke. So maybe we shouldn't ban vaping, just make sure it is safe - at least to those that don't vape. Which I suspect, it probably is.

palarsehater said:

be interesting to know how many smokers on here, i have cut back a lot used to be on 20 a day which i'm more of less on 2/3 cigs a day now and when i drink can be anything from 10-20 in a day. 

sounds silly but im planning on stopping completely on my 30th which is next year 

i understand the reason for cutting back smoking is obviously a massive drain on the nhs BUT in my opinion for every pack of cigs i buy at least £6 of that is tax so i have in a way paid for it, a bigger drain on the nhs is overweight people who a lot of the time have not contributed to society due to not being able to work ( i mean obese people ) not your average male who has a beer belly and the odd kebab ( me )

Good to know how knowledgeable you are about public health and it's finances.

se9addick said:

I’ve often wondered - does the revenue raised by tax on cigarettes outweigh the cost to the NHS for treating smoker related health problems? 

This is about 4 years old but seems a reasonable guide:

https://fullfact.org/economy/does-smoking-cost-much-it-makes-treasury/

I once spoke in the early 90s to a senior accountant in a NHS teaching hospital, who then said the NHS would be "fucked" if everyone gave up smoking today.

iainment said:

palarsehater said:

be interesting to know how many smokers on here, i have cut back a lot used to be on 20 a day which i'm more of less on 2/3 cigs a day now and when i drink can be anything from 10-20 in a day. 

sounds silly but im planning on stopping completely on my 30th which is next year 

i understand the reason for cutting back smoking is obviously a massive drain on the nhs BUT in my opinion for every pack of cigs i buy at least £6 of that is tax so i have in a way paid for it, a bigger drain on the nhs is overweight people who a lot of the time have not contributed to society due to not being able to work ( i mean obese people ) not your average male who has a beer belly and the odd kebab ( me )

Good to know how knowledgeable you are about public health and it's finances.

It's an organic point he's made but it's one a lot of people believe. I don't know any different, I assume tobacco is taxed so highly to prevent people from smoking and to contribute to the cost of the NHS treating people with lung and cardiovascular problems from smoking. Tell us how it works differently, I know governments love tax from things like this.

For what its worth I believe the vaping industry is on the precipice of a massive taxation mountain, once the balance tips in favour of vaping over smoking or even comes close the products which attract a lot of people trying to jack in smoking by being cost effective will be hammered. 

I'd also look at pubs getting behind a tobacco embargo, say the ones where they have no smoking area or garden where you can buy a disposable vape for a nominal amount to prevent people dropping fag butts on the street and creating the antisocial cig clouds on the pavement. The condition would be you used it only in a certain area of the pub if food is being served and it got recycled 

I'm a smoker, but here in Dubai it's about 4-5 quid a pack and you can smoke in bars/pubs. This doesn't make it at all easy to give up.

kentaddick said:

Saw an interesting, but radical idea - increase the smoking age one year every year until 2030. Effectively cutting out a generation of possible smokers.

I have been saying that for years, every first of April put it up 1 year.  No ID no fags. 

SoundAsa£ said:

They have announced the plan to eradicate smoking in The UK by 2030.
Going to be hard to implement wouldn’t you say......but nevertheless, IMHO, a worthwhile project.

So the government is going to forego the revenue generated by smoking, and of course the tobacco companies will stand idly by while this happens. Yeah, right. By the way I don't smoke - never have.

It's quite obvious that the costs of smoking outweigh the tax revenue generated, if they didn't then the government wouldn't bother spending money on quit smoking schemes. 

Think about it for a moment, the majority of smoking deaths happen post retirement age, if the revenue generated from tax, plus the savings in pension was greater than the additional NHS costs, then the government would be stupid to pick that fight, it's hardly a vote winner. So if it's not a vote winner, and it was making a profit overall then there would be next to no reason for a government to try to stop it. 

I personally hate smoking, but a government is a machine to a certain extent, it shouldn't have a personal preference as such, and plenty of MPs smoke. If the government is looking to phase smoking out then the benefits (from a governmental point of view) must outweigh the costs.

I hate smoking with an absolute passion, both of my parents smoked 40 fags a day (each).

I get why people smoke, they enjoy it, it helps them relax and deal with life, and its highly addictive.

But, seeing your dad in hospital, as a kid, and as an adult because of it, missing out on him coming to school plays / sports day because he was in hospital , spending Christmas time in hospital because of it is pretty darn crap, watching my sister and her husband die of lung cancer at 56 and seeing the carnage left behind in the family, and being absolutely helpless to do anything about it, and thats before you get onto the poverty it creates, anything that reduces it is ok in my book, but do we really know the long term effects of vaping, or is it just another way round smoking?

Algarveaddick said:

I am an ex-smoker, but I defend the right of others to smoke if they wish. Pubs with two bars should have a smoking bar and a non-smoking bar if they want to. Clubs should have the right to vote on whether they allow smoking or not (that was in the manifesto that the Labour government who banned smoking in pubs and clubs was elected on). People who complain about smokers outside, when they are the ones who have driven the smokers outside, should be given a right royal shoeing. 

Anyone who goes on about the cost to the NHS should think about the logical conclusion. You do something out of choice that can be detrimental to your health? So anyone thrown from a horse because they choose to go horse riding should pay? Anyone who breaks a leg playing Sunday morning football should pay? Anyone who smashes their thumb with a hammer doing DIY should pay?

Making it illegal? Brilliant - another thing for your overworked and undermanned police force to worry about... 

I wont even start on civil liberties.            

I think it's to protect the staff as much as inconvenience smoking punters. But I reckon that public houses should be able to allow smoking if they can keep the air quality within limits and to certain standards, with the use of extractor fans etc. The legislation should dictate legal limits as opposed to an outright ban imo

Never smoked in my life btw