The weekly "Coffee Talk! Chit-Chat and All That" is a section of the blog designed by the Committee for aspiring young people like you to have discussions on current public policy issues from all sectors of society. The aim is to ignite your thought process and sharpen your critical thinking skills, both of which are invaluable traits of a policymaker. Participants are encouraged to comment on the post and perhaps even engage in constructive debate with others. We hope this section will benefit you well in preparation for MPPC 2012!
_____________________
This week, we will talk about smoking bans. Don't you just hate it when you're in a restaurant enjoying your food and then out of the blue, you catch a whiff of that pungent yet familiar smell of burnt tobacco? Or when you want to enjoy a night out at a cool club or bar but you end out coming smelling like you've just spent your night in a chimney? Alas, the bane of most Malaysians in public spaces.
Here is an article about this week's topic:
Click here for article.
One can see that the Californian legislature's raison d'etre for enacting this "stupid public policy" is primarily in the name of public health. But is it really an empirically-backed piece of legislation? One lesson to take away from the Californians is that public policies with disputable evidences may not really benefit the public and of course, it just shows your MPs/Councilmen are incompetent.
Having said that, every policy has it's supporter and naysayer. So, looking at smoking bans around the world, namely the UK and the States, is this ban logical in Malaysia? Fun fact: Malaysia has imposed the smoking ban in public spaces since the 1980s. In fact, offenders can be fined up to RM10, 000 for violation.
This humble writer did not know about this up until I started writing this post and I am sure there are some of you who don't either, or at least not absolutely sure about it. Why is this the case - even with the seemingly hefty fine? The lack of enforcement - the legislations Archilles heel.
This prompts one to think why in the UK, smoking ban is working so well while it isn't the case here. Are there cultural explanations to it? Does public education play a part? Would a heavier fine do the job? Or that you think that we should not even devote our energy and resources into this topic because it doesn't really bother us *that* much?
Let us know your solution to this pickle! Think about other factors too (eg. human rights?)
Sincerely,
Second-hand Smoker
I hope this is the right place to leave my thoughts ;)
ReplyDeleteWell, if you think about the smoking ban in terms of utilitarian economics, there may be an increase in society's overall welfare if the detriments of public smoking (health effects on second hand smokers, non-smokers dislike it, littering of used cigarretes, etc) outweigh the benefits of public smoking (mainly convenience and enjoyment of smokers). I think the detriments probably outweigh the benefits even with the disputable research mentioned. But this is just a utilitarian view on the issue.
Another way of thinking about the smoking ban is in terms of principles - human rights. Is it right to restrict the liberty of a public smoker? For this, I guess it depends on the social contract of each society. In every society, certain private liberties are given up for the public good (eg: banning murder). In San Francisco, perhaps they prioritise personal liberties more than in countries like say, Malaysia.
Another less direct intention of a smoking ban may be for the government to further discourage smoking because of how much it harms the smokers themselves, further justifying the public smoking ban.
Malaysians generally still smoke in public since the estimated benefits of smoking in public far outweigh the potential for them to get caught. It's convenient and they almost never get caught. It is obviously a problem of enforcement. In Malaysia, I get the sense that there are many good laws but relatively lax enforcement. Maybe people simply think that the smoking ban law is ridiculous and don't care about it, just as how many highway drivers go past the 110kmph speed limit because drivers think that the maximum speed limit is simply too low, especially for powerful, stable cars on smooth, wide highway roads. In this sense, a heavier fine may only have a limited impact since people still think the laws are unreasonable and will still break the laws.
Hence, we should have more widespread and critical debate on national policies. We have to convince as many people as possible about the necessity for the set policies, and of course, a prerequisite is that they are aware of the policies made. A cultural change is necesary.
I agree with second-hand smoker that the lack of enforcement has always been the Achilles heels of many public policies. In my humble opinion, in order to enforce a public policy successfully, we need all three parties, not only the government, but the user and the public must also play their part in making the policy a success.
ReplyDeleteThe government can set up laws; hire law enforcers to ensure that people follow the rules. But the cost of doing so is exorbitantly high. Furthermore, the probability of catching someone smoking illegally is so miniscule, that the ends just don’t justify the means. To me, this is very high opportunity cost. The money spent could actually be used in other more meaningful areas like education and so on.
Furthermore, I feel that it is the responsibility of the smokers to know that the smoking in public areas poses a threat to the health of others. Even though there is no causal relationship between second-hand smoking and any diseases, but we definitely can’t deny the correlation between these two variables. It would be good if we able to inculcate a sense of moral obligation on to the smokers, that they should avoid smoking in crowded areas.
In my experience, I often see smokers smoking in places that they shouldn’t be. Yet, I seldom see people having the moral courage to stand up and remind the smokers to stop smoking in those areas. I have to admit I have also been guilty of such acts. We need the public to take a more active stand against smoking, instead of waiting passively for the government to take action.