We've said many times and I'll say it again, smokers are voters too.
The problem is, relatively few people vote for a candidate on the basis of a single issue, especially in a general election. That's why single issue candidates (including former directors of Forest!) invariably lose their deposits.
Anti-smoking policies may annoy and even anger millions of people but they don't affect the outcome of elections. That appears to be the view of strategists like Lynton Crosby and it's hard to disagree with their analysis.
There are several reasons for this. One, smokers are a minority of the population. Two, even smokers (the majority of them anyway) have other priorities – the economy, the NHS, immigration, all the usual issues.
Nevertheless it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to think that smokers (and tolerant non-smokers like myself) could make a difference in a handful of seats up and down the country.
Beginning tomorrow therefore I'm going to feature a series of target seats where the candidate standing for re-election is either an avowed anti-smoking campaigner or has voted consistently in favour of the more extreme tobacco control policies (smoking ban, display ban, plain packaging).
After the election we'll see how many of these anti-smoking candidates have retained their seats.
Sadly the few that do lose their seats will probably be replaced by candidates who are equally anti-smoking, but let's give it a go.