Australia: When a former MP takes up the industry's rhetoric

The ban on the sale of e-cigarettes without a prescription, scheduled for summer 2021 in Australia, has prompted a reaction from a former MP. Rhetorical analysis.

A news published by Generation Without Tobacco September 24, 2020 reported the new classification of nicotine as “ medicine available only on prescription » by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). This decision marks a major regulatory shift for e-cigarettes in this country. Indeed, with this classification, nicotine intended for e-cigarettes is now considered by Australia as a substance that can be used as a medically assisted smoking cessation aid, and not as a product for recreational consumption.

An argument to be deconstructed

Former Australian Liberal MP Fiona Scott said the restriction went too far. In an interview[1], this one ironizes: " Maybe we should also close all the fast food restaurants and get prescriptions, because last time the cheeseburger and fries weren't good either […]. How far do you want to go? We're in a nanny state " We can see two central arguments in this quote.

First, the idea of a " slippery slope »: this regulation would mark the beginning of a series of arbitrary restrictions on a number of products, beyond tobacco. This argument is regularly used to discredit a public health measure. For example, in France, similar reactions were observed at the time of the introduction of plain packaging, predicting the generalization of plain packaging to a whole other range of products (wine, cheese, etc.). In reality, these predictions are generally gratuitous and unfounded.

The second point of the argument is to challenge the paternalistic dimension of such a measure. According to advocates of this point of view, health regulations are an obstacle to individual freedom. However, the consumption of nicotine, a hard drug, leads to powerful addictive mechanisms. The almost compulsive need for nicotine greatly reduces the user's autonomy, which constitutes the real obstacle to their individual freedom.

Well-identified rhetorical devices

These argumentative processes are largely those disseminated by the tobacco industry and its allies, and long identified by research.[2]However, the reuse of this rhetorical strategy on the issue of electronic cigarettes raises the question of the takeover of the nicotine industry – and in particular that of electronic cigarettes – by the tobacco industry.

Keywords: Australia, Rhetoric

©Generation Without Tobacco

[1] Restricting sale of tobacco to prescription only, the move of 'a robotic nanny state', Sky News, 13/10/2020, (accessed 14/10/2020)

[2] Ulucanlar S, Fooks GJ, Gilmore AB. The Policy Dystopia Model: An Interpretive Analysis of Tobacco Industry Political Activity. PLoS Med. 2016 Sep 20;13(9):e1002125. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002125. PMID: 27649386; PMCID: PMC5029800. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002125

National Committee Against Smoking |