Thursday, 6 February 2014

Smoking In Cars

Last week a Labour amendment to the Children and Families Bill aimed at reducing the exposure of children to second-hand smoke was put to the House of Lords. The intention of the amendment is to make smoking in cars when children are present a criminal offence and The House of Lords have decreed that Members of Parliament will have a free vote on the matter when the amendments to the bill are debated in the near future. 

The Lords have offered MPs a free vote.
Predictably the discussion about smoking in cars when children are present has polarised opinions; although the majority agree that it is not to be recommended, there are opposing views on whether it should be the subject of legislation or left to the individual's common sense. The health lobby are in favour of a ban; opposition comes in the form of those whose view is that government should not be able to dictate what people do in private spaces. For instance, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said it (smoking) was "a stupid thing to do when a child is in the back of a car" but that he did not want to "sub-contract" parenthood. While smoking is already banned in vehicles used for work under a law introduced in England in 2007 following similar legislation in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Simon Clark, director of pro-smoking group Forest, has said of a potential ban on smoking in private cars that " Legislation is completely unnecessary. Most adult smokers accept that smoking in a car with children present is inconsiderate and the overwhelming majority choose not to. Education, not legislation, is the way forward." Forest also make the point that such a ban would be difficult to enforce.


Some US states have a ban on smoking in cars when children are being carried, although I understand that drivers cannot normally be stopped for this reason alone and are only ticketed after being stopped for some other driving violation. The introduction of such a law in this country may come with similar restrictions and yes, it may be difficult to enforce but just because something is difficult is no reason not to attempt it. I do not see why a ban on smoking in cars should be any more unenforceable than the ban on the use of handheld mobile phones, or the requirement to wear seatbelts, and there have been prosecutions for both of these offenses.


Now I recognise all of the arguments about civil liberties, about the intrusion of the state into people's lives and the government's case that this is a matter best dealt with through education rather than legislation, however I would entirely agree with the principle that smoking should be banned in cars, but not necessarily for the purpose of protecting children (although I agree with that too). My view is that smoking should be banned in cars whether children are present or not, indeed that it should be banned regardless of whether there are passengers of any age or if the driver is alone.

You may consider that to be a draconian point of view, but consider this. Drivers are banned from using mobile phones;  drivers have been stopped for eating or drinking while driving (I am referring to non-alcoholic drinks, alcohol is a completely separate matter), and while in some of these instances the offence has been rather petty, the grounds for doing so are sound. Eating, drinking and smoking while driving are not illegal in the UK but drivers can be charged with careless driving if police believe they are not in control of their vehicle as a result.

Consider the mechanics of driving and smoking. The driver has first to locate their packet of cigarettes and extract one. Then they have to find their lighter. Having done so they light their cigarette. All of these are distractions causing the driver to take their eyes off the road. If, as studies by the University of Leeds have shown, a driver's reaction times may be up to 44% slower if they are eating, I would argue that a similar reduction in their reaction time could be caused by them smoking. Similarly, research by RoSPA (Royal Society for Prevention of Accidents) found that drivers’ reaction times were 50% slower when using a hand-held mobile phone than under normal driving conditions; the similar degradation in reaction time when eating (and smoking is likely to have a similar effect), make a good case for a ban on smoking.

Apart from the fact that lighting up is a distraction, the act of smoking  can be itself be hazardous. Anecdotally, and this is a true story, I have heard of a driver who attempted to flick their cigarette end out of the car window only to find that it deposited itself on the back seat where it ignited some papers. Equally dangerous is the possibility of a driver dropping their cigarette in their lap or in the foot well (and I have been in cars when the driver has done both), resulting in undignified scrambling with no attention paid to the road as the driver attempts to prevent his crotch catching fire.

To return to the matter that prompted the debate, the risks to the health of second hand smoke being inhaled by children if someone is smoking in the car. Research by the British Lung Foundation has shown that a single cigarette smoked in a moving car with a window half open "exposes a child in the centre of a backseat to around two-thirds as much second-hand smoke as in an average smoke-filled pub of days gone by." Now I am somewhat mistrustful of such statistics or factoids and I am by no means a proponent of the philosophy that people's freedom of choice or their civil liberties be abrogated  on the basis "if it saves just one life," but I think that the case for banning smoking in cars is unassailable.

There will be some who see this proposal as another step on the road to outlawing smoking altogether. "What next?" people will ask, "A ban on smoking at home?" Well, one exists already of sorts, because many local authorities will not place children, certainly not children of pre-school age,  with prospective adopters or foster carers who smoke. It would be unrealistic to suggest that a smoking ban be extended to private properties (although you could argue that it should banned if the home is used as a workplace, and many more people work from home these days), and the pro-smoking lobby would be apoplectic, but it is possible to believe that that day could come eventually.




That's my colours nailed to the mast and I await with interest the result of the vote in the Commons. Even though a vote in favour of a ban would not go as far as I would like, it would be a step in the right direction.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Readers Warned: Do This Now!

The remit of a local newspaper is quite simple, to report on news and sport and other stories relevant to the paper’s catchment area. In rec...