OUR VIEW: Smokefree beaches? | Bay of Plenty News | Local News in Bay of Plenty

Western Bay of Plenty District Council has gone a step beyond almost every local authority in New Zealand by banning smoking on beaches.

While 23 councils throughout the country have introduced "open air" smoking bans - usually around municipal playgrounds or outside public halls - only Gisborne and Opotiki have included council-owned beaches.

There's no argument that lowering the uptake rates and the number of deaths occurring due to smoking should be a global goal. In New Zealand, it is the major cause of preventable death.

New Zealanders are well accustomed to the fact that smoking is prohibited in workplaces, public buildings, restaurants and bars. And fair enough, as those are enclosed spaces we all share, meaning that if somebody wished to persist with smoking they would be inflicting their habit upon others.

The latest trend, though, is a move to take the ban beyond enclosed public spaces and include a range of outdoor areas as well.

In those cases, the target is not to reduce the passive smoking risk - after all, second-hand smoke is scarcely going to bother another person in a wide-open reserve.

No, the aim is to engineer a change in  behaviour by forcing smokers out of the public eye. And that's where a bid to influence public thinking clashes with an individual's freedom of choice.

In Rotorua, where the district council in 2008 banned smoking in children's playgrounds and the Redwoods forest park, the motivation is expressed in this way: "The policy aims to normalise non-smoking and encourage positive role modelling to young people."

An overseas website, in a similar vein, says "when tobacco use is less visible in the public landscape, children and teens are less likely to view it as a common part of adult behaviour to which they might aspire".

In the interests of role modelling, a smokefree playground or sportsfield might be appropriate - but Maketu Beach?

There's a risk of this being labelled not only draconian but also unenforceable, and the council itself indicates that enforcement is not the target. It is a public education campaign, the council says - and in that case, the "ban" might amount to not much more than an expensive set of anti-smoking signs.

- Laura Franklin, editor