Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Public opinion about ending the sale of tobacco in Australia
  1. Linda Hayes,
  2. Melanie A Wakefield,
  3. Michelle M Scollo
  1. Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Melanie A Wakefield, Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, 1 Rathdowne Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia; melanie.wakefield{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The recent success of the Australian Government in defending its plain packaging law in the High Court1 has prompted speculation about what might be a logical next step in tobacco control and several options for limiting accessibility to tobacco products have been debated in the Australian media. These possibilities include the introduction of a smoker licensing scheme,2 restrictions to the types or locations of outlets from which tobacco can be sold3 ,4 and a proposal that any person born since 2000 should be banned from buying tobacco products.3

Limited public opinion data on the phasing out of tobacco sales exist. In 2003, 56% of adults in Ontario, Canada, agreed that ‘cigarettes are too dangerous to be sold at all’5 and in 2004, 57% of adults from New South Wales, Australia, supported a ban on tobacco sales within 10 years.6 Among New Zealand smokers in 2008 and 2009,7 46% agreed that ‘if effective nicotine substitutes that are not smoked become available, the government should then set a date to ban cigarette sales in 10 years’ time’. Fewer New Zealand smokers …

View Full Text


  • Contributors All authors (MS, LH, MW) of this research letter have directly participated in the planning, execution or analysis of the study and have read and approved this, the final version of the research letter.

  • Funding Quit Victoria.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Verbal consent was obtained from respondents at the start of telephone interviews.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Cancer Council Victoria (HREC 0018).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.