Last night, police arrested a 44-year old man for possession of a bag of tobacco and rolling paper. The perpetrator was fined and sentenced to a month's community service.

This could be England's future.¹ This week the House of CommonsThe democratically elected house of the UK Parliament. It consists of 650 Members of Parliament.  voted to ban smoking. If it passes into law, the ban will make it illegal for anyone born in 2009 or later to buy tobacco products. 

It follows a plan to ban disposable vapes. Channel 4 News dubbed the new legislation "the toughest smoking laws in [the] world".²

This will be a massive change for many. In Britain today, 6.4 million people smoke: one in every eight.³ Cigarettes and tobacco can be easily purchased.

Youth smoking has a long history. Up to 90% of smokers worldwide begin as teenagers. For young people, smoking has often been seen as a way to show independence.

But soon, if you are 15 or younger, you will never be allowed to smoke. It is hoped that eventually, no-one will smoke at all. 

The law is supported by the leaders of both major parties. But a significant number of ConservativesA traditionally right-wing or centre right political party in the UK. Members are sometimes called Tories. voted against the bill or abstainedChose not to take part..⁴ Former prime minister Boris Johnson moaned: "The party of Winston ChurchillThe British prime minister during World War Two, and later from 1951 to 1955. wants to ban cigars? It's just mad."

It has sparked debate about the sort of country people want.

Almost everyone acknowledges that smoking is harmful. It causes cancerA disease in which some of the body's cells grow in an uncontrollable way. There are lots of different types of cancer. , heart disease, diabetesA medical condition causing there to be too much sugar in the blood. and many other ailments. Campaign group Action on Smoking and Health claims that smoking-related illness costs the NHSThe National Health Service, the publicly funded healthcare system in the UK. The NHS was founded in 1948. £17bn a year. Cigarettes also poison the atmosphere.⁵

The nicotineThe substance found in tobacco that people become addicted to. It can also be made artificially. in tobacco is highly addictive. Smokers spend 6% to 10% of their income on it. One 2015 research paper found that smoking parents were "plunging nearly half a million children into poverty".

But for critics of the law, this is less important than the threat to our freedom to smoke. They accuse Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of creating a "nanny state": a government that interferes too much in personal choice.

They worry that the ban could be a slippery slope. After smoking, what next? Could a government ban alcohol, driving, religious worship or wearing certain types of clothing?

Holly Thomas of CNN writes: "We reserve the right to glass in celebration, bake sugar-packed birthday cakes, drive a car, play extreme sports and do all manner of things that might ultimately harm us." The ban takes away people's freedom to make decisions.

The term nanny state was popularised by conservative commentators who believe that a government should play a minimal role in our daily lives.⁶ But many think firm state intervention is a good idea in cases like this.

We know smoking is bad for our bodies, those around us and the environment. But smokers find it hard to stop regardless. The government can stop future generations facing this dilemma.

Philosopher Sarah Conly writes: "Giving up a little liberty is something we agree to when we agree to live in a democratic society that is governed by laws." If a government does not intervene in our lives, what is it for?

Should we welcome a 'nanny state'?

Yes: We all have biases. We tend to favour the status quoA Latin phrase referring to the current or present situation. over change and the present over the future. A good government is able to work against these biases and act for our greater good. 

No: Governments should not force their own personal morality on others. They can campaign and inform. They can use taxes to make cigarettes more expensive. But an outright ban is too authoritarian.

Or... The new law is actually following public opinion, not leading it. Two thirds of people support a smoking ban. In this case at least, the state is not nannying the people but giving it what it wants.