Academic context. Prepared as the major assessment for the Public Health Policy paper of the Postgraduate Diploma in Public Health at the University of Otago (2025). The submission is written in the voice of a research network (a framing required by the assignment brief).

About this project

In late 2023 the incoming Coalition Government announced its intention to repeal the three landmark tobacco control measures legislated in 2022: retail outlet reduction, denicotinisation, and the smokefree generation provision. The repeal passed in early 2024. New Zealand had been the first country in the world to legislate this combination of measures, and the repeal drew sustained criticism from public health researchers domestically and internationally.

This submission imagines a scenario where the Health Committee is considering legislation to bring those measures back. It argues the evidence case for restoration, and pays close attention to the political and operational conditions that would need to be in place to make the policy stick this time.

Approach

The submission opens with a problem overview and three concrete recommendations, then works through the evidence base for each. Citations are drawn from New Zealand modelling studies (Wilson, Hoek, van der Deen, and others), Ministry of Health regulatory impact statements, and the international tobacco control literature. Tobacco industry counter-arguments, particularly around illicit trade and retail crime, are addressed directly using empirical evidence.

Unlike many advocacy submissions, this piece focuses on both evidence and implementation. First, it looks at the policy from the Committee's side of the table, naming the points where reasonable people might disagree: expert authority versus democratic mandate, fast action versus incremental change, regulation versus behaviour change. Second, it sets out an implementation plan built to last. The plan includes a phased rollout, explicit cross-party engagement, and clear accountability mechanisms, all designed to prevent a future government from simply repealing the framework as the 2024 government did.

Key findings and recommendations

  • Restore retail outlet reduction (cutting tobacco retailers from approximately 6,000 to 600 nationwide), with restrictions prioritised near schools, marae, and high-deprivation communities. Supported by international evidence and by New Zealand-specific modelling showing the largest health gains accrue to Māori.
  • Restore mandatory denicotinisation (a 95% reduction in nicotine content). Modelling indicated this measure alone could reduce Māori daily smoking prevalence to approximately 7.7% by 2025, compared with 24.2% under business-as-usual.
  • Restore the smokefree generation provision (permanent prohibition of tobacco purchase for anyone born on or after 1 January 2009). Modelling indicated the combined three-measure framework would deliver an estimated 580,000 health-adjusted life years and NZ$5.25–5.88 billion in long-run system savings, relative to business-as-usual.
  • Document the immediate post-repeal evidence: daily smokers rose from 284,000 to 300,000 in the year following the repeal, the first increase in decades and a clear-enough signal of policy effect to be worth naming.
  • Implementation should be sequenced, starting with denicotinisation, and protected against future reversal through cross-party engagement, mandatory cost-benefit analyses for any future reversal, and explicit Treaty-of-Waitangi-grounded accountability.

What this project demonstrates

This is the kind of work I could do as a policy analyst on a public health or policy team. I can produce written submissions that are evidence-led, take opposing arguments seriously, include clear recommendations, and come with a realistic implementation plan attached. The skills behind it are regulatory impact analysis, structured policy writing, and the political awareness needed to write recommendations that have a realistic chance of being adopted.