In July the Commonwealth Games will be held in Glasgow and will be smoke-free.
The restriction will include e-cigarettes. Many other organisations have also taken steps to remove the use of e-cigarettes indoors.
I welcome this move. However, there will be some who, having used these devices to help them quit tobacco, will wonder why I see these restrictions as a cause for celebration.
The starting point has to be the vision outlined in the Scottish Government's 2013 tobacco control strategy, Creating a Tobacco Free Generation. It sets out our bold ambition to reduce smoking rates in Scotland to less than 5% by 2034. We should all be proud of this ambition to create a Scotland for our children largely devoid of tobacco use.
It is a stark and worrying fact that 13,000 Scots die each year from smoking. Our strategy aims to substantially reduce that figure by helping people quit and creating an environment that supports young people to choose not to take up this addictive and deadly product.
That is why we are unapologetic about measures to keep children protected from behaviours that may make smoking seem normal. E-cigarettes might potentially help many people smoke fewer cigarettes, or even stop altogether. While e-cigarettes aren't proven to be safe, evidence suggests they are almost certain to be less harmful than tobacco.
On the other hand, these devices could also re-normalise smoking. They are addictive because they contain nicotine. Promotional activity could increase their appeal to young people.
The tobacco industry is investing heavily in e-cigarette companies. I am suspicious of this. There is too much history to believe claims that such diversification is motivated by new-found philanthropy or a genuine belief in harm reduction.
It speaks volumes that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society says it does not support the sale or marketing of e-cigarettes in pharmacies. I agree we should stand against promotions, advertising and sponsorship deals that feed nicotine addiction, especially in contexts attractive to young people. This principle will guide our approach.
Protecting young people is at the core of our policies and will guide us as we consider our next steps. We need to ensure e-cigarettes are properly regulated to deliver potential benefits to smokers without promoting smoking behaviours among young people.
Our 2034 target means a young child today should grow up in a Scotland where smoking is not the norm. That is why a strategic approach is the right one, not the collection of compromises injected at short notice into the Children and Families Bill in the UK Parliament.
The case for restricting the sale of e-cigarettes to young people makes sense. We need to work through the practicalities before bringing forward specific plans. But a greater prize to support young people to choose not to smoke is plain packaging for tobacco products.
The bans on tobacco advertising and the display of tobacco products in shops have made huge inroads in tackling the marketing and promotion of this harmful product. But children still see glossy, attractive packs and that should concern us. I'm pleased Scotland has paved the way in the UK on this and am glad the UK Government has now followed our lead. We will work with Westminster on this but are committed to implement this on our own in Scotland if we have to.
The case for smoking in vehicles is another key issue. We will shortly be running a campaign to highlight the risks of second-hand smoke to children in both cars and homes.
We want to evaluate the impact of that campaign to inform any future action. We don't want to deny anyone the choice to smoke but we must minimise harm to children.
There's no single magic bullet, no single law or action that will get us there. But, since we lose 13,000 Scots a year to tobacco, we ought to do whatever we can to make sure fewer and fewer of our young people are pushed into line to take their place.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article