Forest defends the interests of adult smokers, by which we mean people who are old enough to make a mature decision about whether or not they wish to smoke given the health risks and other factors such as cost. In our opinion children are not able to make that decision which is why we did not oppose the recent raising of the age at which retailers can sell tobacco.
The good news is that despite the general impression that underage smoking is increasing, statistics published last year by the Office for National Statistics (Social Focus in Brief: Children 2002) suggest that the number has decreased since 1996. In 2001, 10% of under-16s were regular smokers (defined as smoking at least one cigarette a week), compared with 13% five years earlier.
The bad news is the methods that are used to tackle underage smoking. The anti-smoking message that teenagers traditionally receive tends to be dominated by the notion that smokers will almost certainly contract, as a direct result of their habit, a 'smoking-related' disease at some time in their life. While we believe strongly in educating people about the health risks of smoking, there is a fine line between 'education' and 'propaganda' and the 'quit or die' message that children are frequently fed about smoking falls, all too often, into the latter camp.
The second method of tackling underage smoking is to hold retailers completely responsible for determining the age of the person to whom they sell tobacco products, having removed their right to raise - as a defence - the fact that the person looked and behaved as if old enough to make the purchase.
At no time have retailers been given government support to deal with children trying to buy tobacco. Instead, many local councils use agent provocateurs in order to uncover naive or unscrupulous retailers, despite the fact that this is a clear case of entrapment.
Absurdity of current legislation
The absurdity of current legislation lies in the fact that it is not illegal for a person under 16 to buy tobacco. A crime is only committed when a retailer, responding to a request from someone under 16, accepts the money and hands over the goods, even though it is the child who has initiated the sale.
Having been deserted by the authorities, retailers have taken two steps to deal with the problem. First, they launched a campaign to alert their fellow traders to the consequences of breaking the law. Second, their trade organisation called for the introduction of compulsory ID cards for those under 16 years of age.
Forest supported these initiatives and we are currently adding our weight to CitizenCard, a scheme that promotes a universal system of entitlement cards. None of these steps, however, deals with the fundamental problem that children are either unaware, or do not care, that they are asking someone to break the law when they attempt to buy tobacco.
Given that it has been suggested that children as young as 12 should pay on-the-spot fines for behaviour such as vandalism, spraying graffiti and being drunk and disorderly, it is not unreasonable to suggest that attempting to buy cigarettes could be added to the list.
The threat of immediate punishment would have a far greater effect on their behaviour, and do more to reduce underage smoking, than being told that at some time in the distant future they might contract some illness. Moreover, it would teach them to take responsibility for their own actions, which is surely the whole point of a good education.
Other initiatives
We welcome any initiative that discourages children from smoking, including (in February 2002) an interesting idea by Geoff Lawson, headteacher at Christleton High School in Chester, to introduce supervised smoking breaks for pupils who refuse to give up smoking.
The policy is designed to highlight the problem of underage smoking and persuade some children to stop on the grounds that few pupils would want to smoke under supervision. This seemed to us to be a responsible alternative to a complete ban which is hard to enforce and drives pupils outside the school gates and into areas where smoking can become a fire hazard.
We would however warn schools not portray children who smoke as 'addicts' because it could be counter-productive. It suggests that they are victims who have no control over their own lives and gives them an excuse to keep smoking. The message we must give children is that with a little bit of willpower anyone can give up if they really want to.
Reducing taxation
Of course, one of the major obstacles to curbing underage smoking is the increasing availability of tobacco on the black market sold by unscrupulous and unregulated traders. This is one of many reasons why Forest campaigns for a reduction in tobacco taxation. Reducing taxation will deplete the black market thus making tobacco less - not more - accessible to younger smokers.