I have just done an interview for BBC Radio Newcastle.
On Tuesday Gateshead councillors will be asked to "give their backing to a voluntary code to discourage parents from smoking in children’s play parks".
It's obviously a done deal because Gatehead Council has already issued a press release that reads:
The move has been suggested by evidence which shows that children can be influenced by adult smoking behaviours and this greatly increases the likelihood of them taking up smoking themselves in later life.
The voluntary code aims to limit this effect by limiting the opportunity for children to watch adults smoking.
It even includes a supporting quote from anti-tobacco campaigner Ailsa Rutter, director of Fresh, which suggests a very cosy partnership.
According to Rutter:
"Most parents and grandparents who smoke certainly don't want their children to start. Many also have nagging concerns about their children seeing them and other adults smoking.
bq. "We really welcome Gateshead Council's vision of children having their own play areas where they don't see adult role models smoking."
As the parent of two now teenage children I never had any concern that they might be encouraged to smoke by the sight of a stranger lighting up around them.
My son has often been 'exposed' to the sight of a football or rugby coach smoking on the touchline and to the best of my knowledge it has had no effect on him at all. (Will that be next - a ban on smoking on all outdoor sports fields?)
It is generally accepted that children who smoke are influenced by peer pressure and immediate family members - but strangers? Where's the evidence?
I challenged Rutter on this and she said there are "hundreds" of studies. I invited her to name one and she didn't, of course.
Meanwhile, according to Councillor Mary Foy, Gateshead’s Cabinet member for Health, this is not a smoking ban.
“This is simply a request for adults to voluntarily refrain from smoking in and around children’s play areas. We know that children copy adults, and we want to limit the opportunities for children to watch adults smoking.
"If we can discourage smoking in these areas, we can help to discourage children from becoming smokers in later lives – and help extend their lives.”
Two points. One, it may be voluntary but its aim - prohibition - is no different to the introduction of a by-law or legislation. This is a ban in all but name.
The only difference is that a voluntary code can't be enforced with fines or other penalties, but given all those signs that will suddenly spring up overnight it will take a remarkably thick-skinned person to flout it.
Two, a code - voluntary or not - promotes the absurd implication that smoking in the open air is a risk to other people, children especially. The more this nonsense continues the more people will begin to believe they are in mortal danger.
Finally, according to the council:
An opinion poll carried out last summer concluded that 91 per cent of the 141 local people asked supported a ban on smoking in outdoor children’s play areas in Gateshead.
Ignoring the ludicrously small sample (141 people!), this rather supports a point I made on the radio this morning.
In reality the number of adults who light up in children's play parks is very small. Just as most smokers no longer light up in a car carrying children, the overwhelming majority have decided - without state intervention - that it may not be appropriate to light up in a children's play area.
So why we need a code - voluntary or otherwise - I really don't know.
PS. Note the comment "We want to limit the opportunities for children to watch adults smoking" and ask yourself how many other activities - drinking alcohol, for example - that could be applied to.