Gemma Fraser: Is wider ban a pipe dream?

THE sight of discarded cigarettes is unfortunately a common one on British beaches, with the butts inevitably turning up like bad pennies as you run your hands through the sand or walk barefoot along the sea front.

Such a scene would not just be a rarity if you were to take a stroll along the beaches in Queensland, Australia, however – it would be illegal, as smoking in public places such as beaches and children's playgrounds, has been outlawed.

If doctors and anti-smoking campaigners have their way, lighting up in family-friendly environments in this country could also become a thing of the past.

So is there any evidence from Queensland and similar countries that such a ban can have any real effect? Or is the argument just a case of smoke and mirrors?

The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) brought forward the idea as it launched its battle plan to address the massive numbers of children being treated as a result of breathing second-hand smoke.

According to the latest figures, more than 300,000 GP consultations and 9,500 hospital admissions result from children breathing second-hand smoke each year, at an annual cost to the NHS of 23.3 million.

They are calling for the smoking ban introduced in enclosed public places such as pubs and restaurants in Scotland back in 2006, to be extended to cover areas where children are likely to frequent.

And while predominately campaigning for a ban on smoking in cars, the RCP's report, entitled Passive Smoking and Children, highlights arguments for the ban to include parks, beaches, hotels, open sports arenas and outdoor swimming pools.

It may sound Draconian, but it does actually appear to be working in other parts of the world.

Smokers in Queensland have been prohibited from lighting up on patrolled beaches since 2005. They are also banned from smoking within 10 metres of children's playgrounds, and within four metres of public building entrances. There are fines for breaching beach smoking bans – which were primarily introduced to combat litter from cigarette butts – although smokers are not hunted out and dragged down to the police station.

The idea is to encourage people to think about their smoking habits and health chiefs insist it is working.

Several Australian states have outlawed smoking in pubs, restaurants and clubs, and some authorities have banned it from cars in which children are travelling.

The penalties, similar to those issues when caught driving with a mobile phone, are the equivalent of around 70 – though the maximum fine would be almost 1,500 if it went to court.

However, it would appear not all Australians have come round to the idea of being prohibited from smoking in their own cars – even when carrying children.

Laws banning smoking in cars with children were introduced in Tasmania in April 2008 but since then there have been 111 offences, resulting in 46 fines, and there is no sign of let-up so far.

Certainly, showing people that passive smoking in an enclosed area can have health risks – such as being linked to more than 20,000 chest infections in youngsters – is a lot easier than convincing them that smoking in an open parkland or beach can damage people's health.

Martin Dockrell, one of the authors of the RCP's report, said the argument for banning smoking in places children are likely to be is more about sending the right message out to children than combating passive smoking health risks.

He said: "In enclosed public places like cars, it's like strapping small children into a metal box and filling it with cigarette smoke. The question of smoking in outdoor places like play areas is more an issue of role modelling.

"There's much less evidence of direct physical harm but we do know that children who are less exposed to adults smoking are less likely to smoke themselves."

Some American states have also embraced the idea of smoke-free communities, with city leaders in Belmont, California, voting to outlaw public smoking – including inside some residents' own homes.

Despite what's going on in other countries, legislation to outlaw smoking in cars and family-friendly places may seem unthinkable in this country.

But then again, so did removing the freedom to have a puff while drinking a pint of lager in your local pub when the idea was first mooted several years ago – so could the public be swayed?

Anti-smoking charity ASH Scotland believes it is as simple as extending the current laws, which have had great public support.

Since the ban was introduced in England in 2007, research has shown that nine out of ten people believe smoke-free legislation is "good for people's health".

The ban has also had an effect on smoking in people's homes, with the proportion saying smoking was not allowed in their homes having risen from 61 per cent to 78 per cent from 2006-9.

Almost half said they did not allow it outside in gardens either.

Philippa Bonella, director of policy and campaigns said: "When we started debating the smoke-free law a few years ago we found that the more the issues were raised and discussed, the greater the understanding and approval for legislation.

"Once it came into force, immediately there were high levels of compliance and support. You can track a difference in people's smoking behaviour from the beginning of the debates around the issue."

Those on the other side of the argument are not convinced however, and Simon Clark, director of pro-smoking group Forest, said: "In terms of banning smoking in parks and on beaches, we just think it's going to be a step too far and very difficult to enforce. It wouldn't just be in areas where children are congregating, it would be in parks generally."

With laws already in place around the world it may only be a matter of time before such legislation is brought in here.

The evidence from elsewhere however would suggest that unless it has the support of the public, it will not be enough to make people break the habit.