New Zealand First

Leader's Letter

June 2003

A Smoke-Free New Zealand

We have all heard the grim statistics about the adverse health effects of cigarette smoke ie that:

It is linked to numerous diseases, including cancer and heart disease, the two biggest killers in New Zealand;
It is linked to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome;
Maori are almost twice as likely as non- Maori to die from smoking related illnesses;
Passive smoking can be fatal;
Young people are continuing to take it up despite the well-publicised health risks and anti-smoking messages.

It can be argued that statistics can be manipulated to show almost anything, and that despite endless studies and research programmes, there is no proven conclusive evidence that smoking kills. Of course interest groups such as tobacco companies favour this argument.

OK, let’s for a minute remove the health aspect. Almost 75 percent of New Zealanders do not smoke. Many people don’t like the smell of smoke. They think it is an irritant in their eyes and throats. Exposure to smoke in the workplace is an Occupational Health and Safety issue, not to mention a health risk. Scientifically proven or not, it would be hard to convincingly argue that cigarette smoke is benign.

Smoking was once allowed almost anywhere - in the workplace and in public transport - and there were howls of protest in 1990, when the current legislation was passed restricting smoking to designated areas. But does anyone want to go back to those days?

The new legislation is extending the current designated smoke-free areas to include all enclosed areas. It aims to protect people from the effects of cigarette smoke.

Opponents of the Bill argue that this is yet another example of “nanny state” telling us what to do.

Do we really want the state to control us in this way? Where is the freedom of choice, given that tobacco is a legal substance and smokers are engaging in a legal activity?

Where will the state reach next?

Obesity is also linked to illness, so will our diets be the next thing to come under the state microscope?

Similarly with alcohol.

The issue of individual rights is a serious one, and should not be dismissed lightly.

Does the law reflect social attitudes, or does it cause social attitudes to change?

The New Zealand First caucus have determined that support or opposition for the Bill will be one of conscience.

I will be voting for the Bill, not because I want to restrict freedom of choice or because I believe people can’t make their own decisions but because I am voting for the health and wellbeing of my fellow citizens.

Pita Paraone MP
Health Spokesperson


Index	Previous	Next

New Zealand First
Parliament Buildings, Wellington
Phone: (04) 471 9292 Fax: (04) 472 8557
info@nzfirst.org.nz

Authorised by Doug Woolerton, 7 Chelsea Place, Chartwell, Hamilton