The crackdown continues. The Scottish Government yesterday announced new measures further to reduce the incidence of smoking. The ban on smoking in enclosed public places was one of the boldest, most imaginative and most effective pieces of legislation of the previous Holyrood administration. Fewer people are smoking as a result of the ban, which has also had a positive health impact on Scots. Hospital admissions for heart attacks are down since the ban was introduced, for instance.

The crackdown continues. The Scottish Government yesterday announced new measures further to reduce the incidence of smoking. The ban on smoking in enclosed public places was one of the boldest, most imaginative and most effective pieces of legislation of the previous Holyrood administration. Fewer people are smoking as a result of the ban, which has also had a positive health impact on Scots. Hospital admissions for heart attacks are down since the ban was introduced, for instance.

But smoking still accounts for nearly 30% of deaths. While there has been a marked decline in the number of smokers in better-off areas, progress in poorer parts has been less impressive. It is against a backdrop of a report showing there is still room for improvement that the new measures must be seen. An area where there is scope for action is the marketing of cigarettes. While there has been a ban on tobacco advertising since 2002, there is evidence of the industry hitting back through the prominent display of cigarettes and related products in stores and shops. The development is not surprising, given that such displays are one of the few remaining opportunities to market tobacco.

But it is totally at odds with the substance of government policy and the health messages accompanying it. The proposal to ban the open display of cigarettes in shops is therefore to be welcomed. A similar reaction must greet plans to introduce a tobacco licensing scheme, including fixed fines for law-breakers; clamp down on smuggled and counterfeit cigarettes; make cigarette packaging even less appealing; and increase awareness of the health risks in smoking. All of these measures will be worthwhile if they have an impact on combating smoking.

If there is a caveat to apply, it is that the measures in themselves will not bring about the changes envisaged. They need to be backed by resources of the cash and human kind. It will take staff on the ground to show whether restrictions on displaying tobacco are being flouted and cigarettes are still being sold to teenagers below the legal age limit. A criticism of raising that limit from 16 to 18 was that it would be very difficult to enforce. Figures produced by the Scottish LibDems last autumn suggested this was the case, with only 11 successful prosecutions.

It is reasonable to use the law to put down a marker about smoking if it results in health and social benefits. The law as it applies to the ban on smoking in public places has been highly effective. The government says it will help local authorities better enforce the law as applied to tobacco sales. Meaningful assistance will be essential if the impact on restricting displays is also to be effective. Little purpose will be served if the approach turns out to be tokenistic.