The Sunday Times reports, on its front page, 'Smoking to be banned in parks'.
There is no mention of smoking outside being a threat to the health of non-smokers, including children. Instead, a ban is justified for the following reasons:
1. "It is getting to a stage where people think it is socially unacceptable in parks" (Bill Wearing, head of Cumbria council's health and well-being [sic] committee, who adds: "Nobody wants to see anyone smoking near children's play areas." Nobody? I wouldn't encourage it but I don't see the big deal, and I certainly wouldn't ban it or fine someone for it.).
2. In parts of Britain one in three people still smoke. (Implication: we are going to make it as difficult as possible to light up so people are forced to quit whether they like it or not.)
3. "Siblings and parents are role models for children. If a child's parents smoke, they are three times more likely to smoke themselves." (Smokefree South West)
As it happens, Forest was contacted by the Sunday Times for a quote. I made a number of points, among them:
"No reason to ban smoking in parks ... no health risk to other people ... tobacco is a legal product ... if adults are role models what about parents who are obese or drink alcohol in front of their children – should that be banned too?
In the event my comments were distilled into this short sentence:
A spokesman for Forest, the smokers' lobby group, said: "It is a completely unnecessary intrusion into people's lives."
PS. Should you choose to respond by writing a letter for publication (strongly recommended), the email address is: letters@sunday-times.co.uk.
The more letters the better but keep them short and sharp, and remember – the Sunday Times is not the enemy so don't criticise the paper. Stick to the issues.