The vast majority of smokers regret starting or would like to quit but are too addicted. Their choice was taken away from them years ago, carefully manufactured as a sense of “freedom” by the global mass marketing of nicotine.

In July 2024, the new UK Labour Government announced its intention to reintroduce the Conservative ‘legacy policy’ of a smoking ban in order to create a ‘smokefree’ generation. The Tobacco and Vapes Bill made it through committee stage and won cross-party support in the previous Parliament, before being halted due to the announcement of an early election. It was reintroduced in the King’s Speech in July, setting out the Labour Government’s legislative priorities for the coming Parliament. Instead of completely eliminating cigarettes, the policy would prohibit anyone born after January 2009 from purchasing them. The government plans to extend the ban to include certain outdoor spaces, like beer gardens and restaurant terraces. This would be an important step, making the UK the first country in the world to implement a generational smoking ban.

“The consequences of smoking go beyond individual smokers”

As a Campaigns Ambassador for Cancer Research UK, I worked on the SmokeFree UK campaign launched in 2022, including helping to advocate for the bill to be supported locally. When I signed up as a volunteer, I naturally thought it was an important cause to champion. But I was always surprised, when discussing it with friends, to hear differing opinions, usually that they would like to be able to smoke if they wanted to. The debate on smoking then crystallised around the question of individual rights and public health.

Although I am a fervent defender of individual rights and freedom, the far-reaching consequences of smoking go beyond individual smokers. The ‘nanny state’ perspective places the emphasis on personal responsibility. It argues that the decision to smoke is up to the individual, but this overlooks the fact that the underlying causes of addiction are far more complex and deeply ingrained. From easier access to cigarettes, positive norms towards smoking, targeted marketing, lower support for quitting or lower adherence to health information, smoking can be caused by numerous factors. Yet, the individual is often seen as ‘responsible’ and cigarettes and smoking framed as an ‘individual right’.

“Like many others, I have lost a loved one to tobacco”

For decades, the tobacco industry has infiltrated every aspect of society through marketing tactics. Though it happened nearly a century ago, I often find myself reflecting on the ‘Torches of Freedom’ campaign and its lasting impact. In 1929, Edward Bernays skilfully linked smoking to women’s liberation, tapping into the feminist movement to sell cigarettes under the guise of empowerment. It’s unsettling to think how a product as harmful as tobacco was marketed as a symbol of freedom and progress. But should smoking be associated with individual rights and freedom when it is considered to be the leading preventable cause of cancer in the world? It’s a stark reminder of how deeply rooted the tobacco industry’s influence is in shaping social norms.

Like many others, I have lost a loved one to tobacco. My grandfather smoked for most of his life and grew up surrounded by smokers. He eventually developed lung cancer and died. The impact was felt in my family, but my story is no different from that of many households faced with the loss of a loved one to smoking. Having grown up in France in an environment where smoking was the norm rather than the exception, it was difficult for me to resist the temptation at the time. The aim of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill is to put an end to smoking for future generations and to spare them the same temptation that I faced in smoking environments and the pain of losing a loved one to it.

A smoking ban would not only protect individuals but also foster healthier, cleaner communities. Banning smoking in public spaces, workplaces, and even private environments like multi-family housing would significantly reduce the exposure to harmful toxins. It would also create a healthier environment for children and pregnant women, both of whom are particularly vulnerable to secondhand smoke. Clean air should be a universal right, and a smoking ban ensures that everyone, regardless of where they live or work, can enjoy it.

But while people born after 2009 will no longer be able to smoke, people born before that date will still be able to buy cigarettes. So it is also a question of providing today’s smokers with the help they need, because smoking is an addiction that needs to be treated and which often does not depend on the individual. Funding local smoking cessation services and giving people the help they need is as important as preventing future generations from experiencing the taste of a lifelong addiction. A world without tobacco would mean fewer avoidable deaths and less strain on our healthcare system and economy. It’s time we see through the smoke and reclaim what I consider our true freedom—the freedom to live healthy, free from the influence of the tobacco industry and nicotine addiction.