NEWS that cigarettes could be sold in plain packaging next year is a good move.

If it stops people from smoking and staying healthier for longer then I’m all for it.

But it got me thinking about tobacco sponsorship in sport, which has been banned since 2005.

It was made unlawful for cigarette firms to associate their brands with sport in any way, ending long-standing relationships with the likes of Formula One, snooker and darts.

The aim was to save lives, and that cannot be argued with.

But I’m not sure what we have at the moment is much of an improvement.

Take snooker for example. Forced to look elsewhere for funding, just about every single event is now sponsored by a betting firm. It is the same with darts.

It is also impossible to watch a football match on television without being bombarded by the face of a well-known actor promoting the latest odds at half-time.

Similarly, alcohol is prevalent in sport sponsorship with plenty of firms having had their logos emblazoned on the front of football shirts.

My point is this. If tobacco firms aren’t allowed to promote their products alongside sport, why shouldn’t the same apply to drinking or betting firms?

I understand the health risks attached to smoking but there are plenty of harmful effects, both physical and mental, caused by alcohol and gambling addictions.

Who decides that it is wrong for someone to smoke but ok for them to drink and gamble?

Just last week the BBC ran a feature with former footballer John Hartson on how a gambling addiction nearly ruined his life.

Using the tobacco logic, they should all be banned.