On paper, the concept of introducing a ban on cigarette sales to people born after a certain date seems like the best way to save thousands of lives and save the national healthcare system billions of euros.
Working towards a smoke-free generation should lead to a future where people can live healthier for longer and the health system can redirect the billions spent on illnesses caused by smoking – such as numerous types of cancer, heart attacks and strokes – towards other conditions.
Our marine environment would also applaud such a move as the World Health Organisation estimates that roughly 4.5 trillion cigarette filters pollute our seas, cities, parks, soil and beaches every year.
The WHO’s revelations on the tobacco industry’s destruction paint a dire picture – every year it costs the world more than eight million human lives, 600 million trees, 200,000 hectares of land, 22 billion tons of water and 84 million tons of CO2.
So, the vision to work towards phasing out tobacco smoking is the right one but there’s a gigantic leap between what’s on paper and reality. Furthermore, this altruistic idea has already encountered its first stumbling block.
New Zealand, the country that last year passed pioneering legislation to stop those born after January 2009 from ever being able to legally buy cigarettes, recently scrapped this law to help pay for tax cuts.
And this will not be the only challenge such a law will face if Malta, the UK, and the EU forge ahead with plans to implement such a measure.
The first is that human beings are hardwired with a desire to seek forbidden fruit. So, there is a real risk that banning the sale of cigarettes to a section of society will lead to a repeat of failed experiments in prohibition that only benefit the black market.
Let us for one second examine Malta’s decision to legalise the cultivation and personal use of cannabis; the first EU country to do so.
The scope behind this historic move was to stop small-time cannabis users from facing the criminal justice system and would supposedly curb drug trafficking by ensuring users have a safe and regularised way from where they can obtain weed.
According to the law, the consumption of cannabis in public spaces is “strictly prohibited” but, in reality, anybody with good olfactory senses knows there is a lax attitude towards this clause as the pungent smell of cannabis lingers along promenades, outdoor bars and beaches.
The Malta Medical Association president, Martin Balzan, has, in fact, already come out stating that banning cigarettes for people born after a certain year would only make sense if the government also planned to ban cannabis smoking. Another tricky aspect is not just proper enforcement but how to enforce an absurd situation where someone born before, say, 2009 buys cigarettes for a friend born after 2009. Education is crucial but this only goes so far and, in Malta, nowhere far enough as a 2021 EU-wide survey found that the island had the second-highest rate of people who smoked daily.
Before embarking on prohibition, which will likely benefit smuggling networks, it would be wise to focus on other aspects of legislation – such as banning smoking on beaches and outdoor dining areas; reducing the availability of cigarettes through a limited number of outlets; and even imposing higher taxes, among others.
Prohibition has a bad name for a reason. Smoking is a deadly habit and is addictive but some clearly want to smoke and, realistically, no generational ban is likely to stop them.