Acrobatics of smoking

by Robert Chesal, 28 November 2003

A new government report claims that second-hand smoke kills thousands of people in the Netherlands every year. The report seems perfectly timed to prepare the Dutch for tough new anti-smoking legislation taking effect on 1 January. From then on, employers are required to provide their workers with a smoke-free workplace or face heavy fines.
In a country where a third of the population smokes, the new tobacco law is sparking an emotional debate. Some non-smokers want a complete ban on cigarette and cigar smoke in public places. They say it decreases the quality of their life, or indeed puts their life itself in danger.
But with the recent tough legislation and the change in public sentiment, Dutch smokers' rights groups feel that basic freedoms are being restricted. They claim that non-smokers are exaggerating the health effects and the nuisance of smoke.
New assertiveness

Trudy Prins is the director of Stivoro, a government-subsidised foundation that informs the public on tobacco and health. She says the non-smoking majority is simply standing up for its rights:
"Our research shows that non-smokers have recently become far more assertive. Implementing the new law will meet their demands to a large extent."
The Dutch tobacco law has already made a big impact. In the past year and a half, all tobacco advertising has been banned, and those who buy tobacco products have to prove they´re over 16 years of age.
The lobbyists on both sides of the issue believe the battle will really heat up on 1 January, when the law on smoking in the workplace takes effect. It gives all employees the right to a smoke-free workplace, and says employers must provide it or face hefty fines.
Smokers' hideouts

With the new legislation only weeks away, many companies still haven't found an adequate solution to this problem. In the absence of a proper smoke room, people resort to lighting up in the hallway or outside.
Dick Engel of the smokers' rights foundation says employees themselves should be allowed to resolve the issue of smoking at work through informal agreements. He says the strict regulations being enforced now will lead employers to simply send their workers outside when they want to smoke. Trudy Prins of the Stivoro foundation disagrees.
"Obviously, it's much easier when you're housed in a huge office building with many rooms. But smokers don't have to go outside; special cabins can be rented and placed in the garden to accommodate them. People have been very inventive in establishing smoking policy."
Nanny culture

But Mr Engel complains that we're going towards a nanny culture in which the government is telling us what to do.
"They're going over the edge, really. Just look at trains: a prime example of a public area where things have been efficiently arranged for smokers and non-smokers. But as rail workers are entitled to a smoke free workplace under the new legislation, we see all ashtrays being removed from carriages."
It isn't only the train that will be affected by the tobacco law. The legislation applies to nearly all places of employment in the Netherlands. With a few notable exceptions: psychiatric institutions, where the rules are feared to affect treatment, and the hospitality sector.
For the time being, hotels, restaurants and cafes don't have to ensure their employees a smoke-free environment. But eventually they may have to. Trudy Prins of Stivoro dismisses suggestions that this will spell the end for thousands of tiny Dutch cafes.
"The experience in the United States, Canada and Australia shows us that the overall economic impact is negligible: bars didn't lose customers and in some cases, the effects were actual beneficial."
Tax hike

While the smokers' rights movement may have won the battle in the hospitality sector for now, they're clearly losing another one. Dutch Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm has announced a sharp increase in the tobacco tax. A pack of cigarettes already costs three euros and 80 cents here in the Netherlands, but that amount will rise to 4.35 euros next year.


The smoker is caught between the health ministry's anti-smoking drive and the Treasury's reflex to raise taxes, says smokers rights campaigner Dick Engel. His anti-smoking rival Trudy Prins agrees that budgetary considerations are at play, but says the huge hike is politically acceptable because of what she calls a proportional health effect.
Emotions run high

Dick Engel of the smokers rights foundation fears it will only encourage unethical behaviour, such as smuggling or resorting to cheap cigarettes from countries where controls on products are less strict.
He charges that anti-smoking groups have launched "an intifada", using any legal means at their disposal. Sponsored by the government, these groups have broad access to the media, which relays their emotional and perhaps even tasteless advertising appeals. Unfortunately, pro-smoking groups are doing the same.
According to Trudy Prins of the Stivoro foundation, smokers are reeling from the restrictions they now face. Not only are they lashing out, they're also having to do some soul-searching. She explains that people have to come to terms with the new strict rules and with the fact that they're putting other people's health at risk. And that, she says, requires some "psychological acrobatics."
"For smokers, it's very difficult to accept that their addiction and lifestyle is possibly lethal to the people around them. The new rules serve to reinforce that sense of guilt."

Copyright Radio Nederland Wereldomroep 2004

Freedom's Non-Debate Policy (Our Courtesies) - As usual, articles such as this are presented as motivational resources to help members appreciate that society's tolerance, toward breathing and wearing the chemicals and smells associated with feeding our addiction, is gradually waning. Member opinions on the merit or lack of merit in such social controls vary greatly and debating them would do nothing to further our mission here at Freedom of helping all members break nicotine's grip upon their lives. We learned early in Freedom's history that debate can tend to damage and even polarize a support group, thus actually being destructive of our core mission.

Still, we cannot put our heads in the sand and pretend that life as a nicotine smoker isn't radically changing. With fewer opportunities to smoke, the manner in which millions of our brother and sister smokers are sucking down those less frequent fixes is frightening. Sucking each puff deeper, harder, holding it longer, with more puffs per cigarette and tanking-up more than ever before, the long-term health implications of such altered smoking patterns are still years from being fully appreicated but it can't be good.

What we do know is that it doesn't need to be our concern so long as no more nicotine finds its way into our bloodstreams.