BUTT OUT … THE TOBACCO POLICY IS NOT A FAILURE THE AIM OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY IS TO REDUCE SMOKING RATES, AND ON THAT MEASURE THERE HAS BEEN PROGRESS HELEN BURNET
The state government should be commended for expanding its nicotine replacement therapy program – one of the most effective tools to help people quit.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data shows that most people who smoke actively want to quit or have tried to do so recently, with at least two in three Australian smokers attempting to reduce or stop smoking altogether.
There has been a focus of late on the federal tobacco excise. I do not agree with Greg Barns who wrote recently that Australia’s high tobacco excise is a policy failure, arguing that the evidence is “beyond clear” that it is fuelling organised crime.
Before any policy can be judged a success or failure, we need to be clear about what the policy was designed to achieve. That is the fundamental question Mr Barns’ argument fails to address.
If the purpose of tobacco policy is to protect small businesses selling “death sticks”, reduce the cost of living for people who smoke, or maximise government revenue, Mr Barns would have a point. But the main aim of the National Tobacco Strategy is to improve the health of Australians “by reducing smoking rates”.
That is the measure against which tobacco policy should be assessed. On that measure, there has been substantial progress. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare’s latest national survey, published a few months ago, the proportion of Australians who smoke continues to fall. In 2025, it reached just 5.6 per cent, compared with close to 20 per cent in the early 2000s.
That matters because smoking remains one of Australia’s largest preventable causes of death and disease. Evidence indicates that up to two in three people who smoke over their lifetime will die from a smokingrelated condition. The consequences extend well beyond individual health. Estimates put government health expenditure attributable to tobacco at $5.7bn in 2023- 24.
When broader economic and social costs, such as lost productivity, informal care, premature death and the impact on families who lose an income earner are included, the cost exceeds $100bn. In Tasmania, where smoking rates remain among the highest in Australia, the state government estimates the social and economic cost of smoking at around $3bn. That is an extraordinary burden for a state of just over half a million people, and with a massive budget black hole.
The Tasmanian government’s own Tobacco Action Plan 2022-2026 identifies further increases in tobacco excise as an action that would contribute to reducing smoking in Tasmania. The excellent article by Gartner and Cho, cited by Mr Barns, notes that decades of research show higher tobacco prices are among the most effective measures for reducing smoking.
They also make the point that reducing tobacco taxes might provide temporary financial relief for some smokers, but would increase health and financial harms overall. They caution that dramatically reducing tobacco excise would reduce smoking cessation, increase consumption and increase smoking uptake among young people, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Of course governments should be very concerned. Organised crime and the harms associated with illegal tobacco are serious problems. That is why recent experience in Queensland is instructive. Following reforms introduced by the Queensland government last year, police were given greater powers to target the illicit tobacco trade.
Since then, Queensland authorities have issued more than 300 closure orders against illicit tobacco retailers and seized large amounts of illegal tobacco. Legal cigarette sales have subsequently increased, suggesting that enforcement action is pushing some consumers back towards the lawful, taxed market – much to the relief of small businesses.
Even more importantly, calls to the Quitline more than doubled in the 10 days following major enforcement operations. The lesson is straightforward: governments can maintain the price signal provided by tobacco taxation while aggressively disrupting illegal supply.
Tasmania has only recently introduced similar powers to target illicit tobacco. The question now is how effectively those powers are being used and what results they are producing. Instead of abandoning a measure that is achieving its aim, we should be looking for other ways to disrupt the black market tobacco trade.
Helping people quit smoking – by positive measures of subsidising nicotine replacement therapy as the state government has just expanded, and by reining in illegal tobacco – would not only improve health but also reduce household financial pressure during this cost-of-living crisis.
Helen Burnet MP is the independent member for Clark.