Why I Won’t Vote Conservative

Ever since Theresa May called an early General Election, I’ve been wondering whether to vote Conservative for the first ever time in my life, in order to help give her the Conservative majority she wants to have behind her in her Brexit negotiations.

But a couple of news reports have ‘nudged’ me away from this idea. Firstly:

Six new smoking laws come into force this month – here’s what you need to know

The Government is increasing its efforts to strongly discourage smoking – particularly among young people – by making changes to smoking laws this month.

The changes are being introduced as the Government says: “There are still more than eight million smokers in England. We want to reduce smoking rates to 18.5% or less for adults (compared to 21.2% for April 2009 to March 2010) – meaning around 210,000 fewer smokers per year.

“Smoking causes more preventable deaths than anything else – nearly 80,000 in England during 2011. There’s also an impact on smokers’ families: each year, UK hospitals see around 9,500 admissions of children with illnesses caused by secondhand smoke.”

Sorry, but I don’t think it’s any more the business of the UK government to reduce smoking rates in the UK adult population than it’s their business to reduce the consumption of custard or Danish Blue cheese or kippers. To do so is to reduce adults to being children who need to be told what to eat and drink, and when to eat it and drink it.

I’m not even sure that treating children that way is the right thing to do. I’m more and more inclined to think that children ought to revolt against being treated as children.

And then secondly:

The stupidity of prison smoking bans

When you think of the principal threats to the health and welfare of prisoners in the UK, what comes to mind? Overcrowding? Severe staff shortages? Last year’s riots? The overwhelming consensus from those in the prison system is that there are simply not enough resources being dedicated to creating a safe and secure environment for prisoners and staff. Given these problems, I imagine that worrying about the effects of smoking tobacco on prisoners will be far down people’s list of concerns.

So it might come as a surprise to discover that England and Wales are beginning plans to make all long-term and high-security prisons completely smoke-free — a goal they want to complete by the end of August. Prisons already have non-smoking communal areas; the new legislation would push these regulations further and prevent prisoners from smoking even in their own cells and in open spaces.

Here’s the government treating prisoners like children as well. It’s not often that I feel sympathy for prisoners, but I hope they burn their damn prisons to the ground.

And since it’s Theresa May’s Conservative government that is introducing these stupid enchildefying (I made up that word, because I can’t think of the right one,… [which is infantilising]) laws, why should I vote for people who want to make adults into children, or who see adults as children?

So I’ll stick with UKIP, which is the only party that speaks up for smokers. Because obviously I’m not going to ever vote for the Labour party that imposed the smoking ban on the British people on 1 July 2007, and nor am I ever going to vote for the Lib Dems who so enthusiastically supported them. I’m sorry I ever voted for the Lib Dems. And if UKIP isn’t on the ballot, for the very first time in my life I’ll spoil it.

For, as I was writing just yesterday, it’s the smoking ban that has defined my politics for the past 10 years. It continues to do so. Perhaps it shouldn’t matter more than Brexit. but it does.

I’m not sure that Donald Trump is going to be any better than Theresa May for smokers. But James Delingpole reports that the EPA is beginning to be purged of its global warming zealots:

This new boldness coincides with a purge of warmist scientific advisers at both the EPA and the Interior Department.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has chosen to replace half of the members on one of its key scientific review boards, while Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is “reviewing the charter and charge” of more than 200 advisory boards, committees, and other entities both within and outside of his department. EPA and Interior officials began informing outside advisers of the move on Friday, and notifications continued over the weekend.

Pruitt’s move could significantly change the makeup of the 18-member Board of Scientific Counselors, which advises EPA’s key scientific arm on whether the research it does has sufficient rigor and integrity. All of the members being dismissed were at the end of serving at least one three-year term, although these terms are often renewed instead of terminated.

So that’s a start in doing something about another form of madness.

Last, and not least, I had a phone call this morning from Rose. Yes, that Rose. The Rose who’s been commenting for years and years under my blog. I’d sent her my phone number a week or so back, and she was phoning to tell me hers.

It was like getting a phone call from the Queen.

What with that, and talking for hours with Emily Wieja on Skype, and talking to Gary K last week on Skype as well, it’s reminded me how little I’ve actually talked to anyone for the past 10 years, since the smoking ban shattered my social life.

I’ve almost lost the use of my vocal chords and mouth. I’m surprised I don’t just emit grunts and barks.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Why I Won’t Vote Conservative

  1. The Blocked Dwarf says:

    If I lived in North Islington again and was registered to vote (neither of which things are ever likely to happen, I draw the hem of my robe sharply away from our elected representatives lest I be sullied by their evil and as long as the government send me a giro every month they already have my address ) then I would vote for Anna Raccoon.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4480714/Cancer-sufferer-standing-against-Jeremy-Corbyn.html
    (btw for her fans: her new blog is annaraccoon.blog ).

    • Frank Davis says:

      She’s quite remarkable, La Raccoon. I’m going to add her blog to my blogroll. She’s a smoker too. Or was one.

      • Clicky says:

      • The Blocked Dwarf says:

        now she’s a committed vaper, never goes anywhere without her vape thingy. She refused to go into a hospice because they told her that she wasn’t allowed to vape for health and safety reasons! Health? HEALTH??! You go to a hospice to D I E. No other reason. Even if one assumes that the merest whiff of fruit flavoured steam instantly popcorns lungs…

  2. The Blocked Dwarf says:

    PS. Frank, how’s the skype thing working out , technically? I’m sure I’m not the only one who be interested in an update. Does the ‘signal’ drop a lot? Do you see a lot of the Hourglass Of Doom? How is the sound quality? Which do you choose a hard or soft FPS option?

    • Frank Davis says:

      I’ll be writing about Skype very soon. For the past few weeks I’ve been finding out what software I need to record videos, and to edit it them. It’s a bit of a steep learning curve.

      And I’ve begun contacting the people who expressed an interest in chatting on Skype, and having videos posted up on YouTube. Apart from Emily, GaryK has been the first one I’ve approached, largely because he’s got a lot of experience with Skype. But I’ll get round to everyone else sooner or later. I have a question mark over whether you want to give it a whirl.

      Emily’s getting pretty fully involved too. She’s even bought herself a new computer. So she’ll be available for Skype (or Facebook or Google hangouts) video chats.

      how’s the skype thing working out , technically?

      It’s working out very well. It needed a bit of sorting when I added webcams and microphones and earphones to my tower PC. But with my little Asus netbook these were all built in, and worked first time.

      Does the ‘signal’ drop a lot?

      No. I’ve never had it drop once. And I’ve probably spent 10+ hours talking to Emily.

      Do you see a lot of the Hourglass Of Doom?

      I’ve never seen it. But then I have a pretty good broadband connection which hardly ever drops or slows. I can watch news streamed live from the USA.

      How is the sound quality?

      It’s very good. Although Skype tends to silence one person while the other is talking. You can’t both talk at the same time like in real life.

      Which do you choose a hard or soft FPS option?

      Frames per second? I’m not sure what Skype’s is. Whatever the default happens to be, I suppose. But for video recording I’m using 10 fps at the moment. It seems perfectly adequate.

      • The Blocked Dwarf says:

        I have a question mark over whether you want to give it a whirl.
        Story of my life Frank, story of my life. There’ll be a bit of a question mark engraved on my tombstone.
        But firstly my laptop is so old it’s multimedia components are a magic lantern and wax cylinder. Secondly, and more importantly, you’re actually a bit of a blogging ‘hero’ in my eyes (and in the eyes, I know, of some others here. Don’t go all ‘British’ on me now, it was a compliment, live with it.) I always find meeting ‘heroes’ a bit tricky, in online chat or iRL. First time I met Anna Raccoon I spent the entire hour ‘minding my Ps & Qs’ (as Granny Dwarf would say) and forgot to watch over my Rs, Ss, & Ts..or even say anything at all . I’m amazed she didn’t think me a total ‘tard (and how she came to the conclusion I was a brilliant witty conversationalist is beyond me, I can only assume it was due to her cancer drugs).

        • Frank Davis says:

          I do seem to be becoming a tiny bit of a sleb, at least among smokers. I find it a bit perplexing, because I don’t think of myself that way. And I don’t think of other bloggers that way either. Perhaps bloggers don’t think that way about other bloggers because they’ve been there and done that. Maybe it’s the same with musicians, and when you can play a guitar, you’ve been there and done that, and you’re not full of admiration for them. Or something like that.

  3. Pat Nurse says:

    Ukip isn’t speaking for smokers. There has been silence since we got medical porn packs, silence on moves by antis to ban smoking in beer gardens and silence on the plan to ban smokers from smoking in their own council homes. This is not a party for smokers but one that is using smokers to help get Brexit. Since the EU vote, ukip has dumped us so I am dumping them. I will vote for my smoker friendly Tory MP who understands completely what this issue is about. He also hates most of what the smokerphobic labour council at district level does and it is here that we now face attacks on our right to enjoy smoking in public open places, not from govt. When I hear ukip shouting for smoker and consumer rights, while demanding that the money leeched by public health goes back into direct patient care, then I’ll consider voting ukip again. Meanwhile, smokers are being denied the same healthcare as others to save the money lavished on public health. Again, nothing said by ukip.

    The EU is not as bad as Britain in its smokerphobia hence the tpd did not impose plain packs. There is also more social choice for smokers in public places, no car ban, and no home ban in Europe. The spite is purely British. The myth is that the EU pushed it on us. Ukip was happy for us to believe it to get more support for Brexit and that is all that matters to ukip.

    If you wonder who to vote for, speak to all your candidates about this issue and reward the one who gets exactly what you are talking about and promises to represent your concerns in parlt.

    • Frank Davis says:

      I’ll have to read their manifesto. The only 2017 one I’ve found seems to have been for the local elections last week, and doesn’t mention their old policy of having smoking rooms in pubs (which was in their manifesto for the last General Election).

      I seem to remember Paul Nuttall saying that they were going to keep this pledge, although I know that some people in UKIP wanted it removed.

      Perhaps it was only because Nigel Farage was a smoker and drinker that it was ever in there in the first place. It was certainly the main reason why I voted for them.

      If they’ve dropped that pledge, they’ve lost my vote. And the votes of lots of other smokers as well.

      • The Blocked Dwarf says:

        If they’ve dropped that pledge
        And you’d be surprised? I’ve said it before and will say it again :”When a politician says ‘good morning’ he has lied twice already”.

      • Pat Nurse says:

        Imagine where we might be now if ukip has championed the anti nanny state issue as a flagship policy second to its view of Brexit at the time Cameron stole their thunder in announcing we would have an in out vote? Instead they went for immigration and even under Farage barely mentioned either the nanny state or amending the smoker bans.

        It was an opportunity lost and now ukip is still banging on about Brexit and immigration while staying silent on all the things we now face, including sugar tax and reformulation of our food, which to my mind are more important and effect our day to day lives causing mass inconvenience and discrimination for far more potential voters than those scared by a woman in a burka.

        In short, I believe ukip has gone back to being a fringe pressure group and it doesn’t know how to move forward as a proper political party so it makes no difference what is in its manifesto. None of those can be trusted. Remember Labour’s of 2005?

        • Frank Davis says:

          Remember Labour’s of 2005?

          The one that said they’d only ban smoking in pubs that sold food?

        • Rose says:

          CALLS for council tenants to be banned from smoking in their own homes have been dismissed by Oxford’s housing chief.
          9th May 2017

          “Mike Rowley, of Oxford City Council, said people were already stopped from smoking in communal areas, gardens and stairwells, adding: “What people do in the privacy of their home is their business.”
          His comments came after the Faculty of Public Health, a UK standards body for public health professionals, said people should be banned from smoking inside social housing to protect children and other residents from second-hand smoke.

          Professor John Middleton, president of the group, told the Sunday Times: “Housing associations and councils are looking at smoke-free housing buildings.
          “Where children are involved I think there is a real case for it.
          “You wouldn’t evict a load of tenants for smoking. Where you have got new premises, you could have smoke-free agreements from the start.”

          Speaking yesterday, however, Mr Rowley said none of these ideas were being considered in Oxford.
          He added: “I would not be in favour of stopping residents from smoking in their own homes, even if the home is owned by the council.

          “Although I am very much a supporter of reducing smoking levels, as well as the ban on smoking in public places, I do not think you could have total prohibition.
          “It did not work with alcohol in the United States and I would not work here with tobacco.”
          http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/news/15273396.Should_smoking_in_council_homes_be_banned__City_council_has_its_say/

          But he’s Labour and there’s an election coming up.

  4. Timothy Goodacre says:

    Yes the UK can do spite against smokers better than anyone except Australia. No other countries let opinionated doctors, silly pressure groups, and university anti smokers groups like that in Bath run the asylum. I won’t vote Labour because they introduced the smoking ban. It’s a pity Frank you can’t let Theresa May know our views directly on how UK smokers are being bullied and how angry we all are. Lots of votes to be had !

    • The Blocked Dwarf says:

      With a bit more time an enterprising smoking rights activist might have gotten a “spoil your paper with a ‘STOP PERSECUTING SMOKERS’ sticker campaign” or similar going. Always felt Leg iron’s ‘handled by a smoker’ bank note idea had merit. Of course i doubt it would work on the new £5.
      Another idea (brainfart?) I had was smokers getting nominated as a indie candidate and thus legally being allowed to put Pro-smoking pictures through every door (Have to check the law on that one). Can campaign posters publically display photos of glamorous smokers? Would a slogan ‘Government needs to fund smoking for teen girls to stop obesity crisis’ be illegal? Debbie would go nuts.

    • Frank Davis says:

      I’m thinking of writing to my Conservative MP to tell him why I won’t be voting for him. He’s actually not an antismoker (like most other Conservative MPs he voted against the smoking ban). But it seems that the antismokers are just as much in charge in the Conservative party as they are in all the other ones (including UKIP too, according to Pat Nurse above)

      • Pat Nurse says:

        I’m not saying ukip are anti smoker. I am saying they don’t see the issue as important enough to fight or be vocal about. I think there is a mixed bag between smoker supporting Mps and anti smoker MPs in the Tory party. Sadly the minister for smoker persecution in the public health department is smokerphobic. She dismisses my concerns and questions put to her by my MP and rattles out only junk science, children, and the elimination target number of smokers to force into quitting by tightening the screws further.

        We can only hope that May, who has never voted for smoker persecution, replaces her with someone more tolerant and fair minded but I doubt that because ASH runs public health and has a stranglehold in all decision making for smokers.

      • prog says:

        They never acknowledge the £11,000,000,000 pa, do they? Just the usual garbage that justifies further persecution including regular duty increases.

        I have to smile when the zealots pan smokers on benefits and label them a drain on resources – 80% of the retail price of baccy goes straight back to gov coffers! There may well be number-crunchers in gov who would like to see all claimants on cigs, indeed all adults. The national debt would paid off in less than 10 years.

        • Pat Nurse says:

          It is for this reason, plus the deliberate wrecking of a profitable industry, including putting out of work those in related industries over these last 10 years that has made me question the economic sanity of those behind it from pat Hewitt to Andrew lansley and Jeremy Hunt, and the treasury ministers who seem happy to have let the smokerphobics force mass unemployment on ordinary people whose business and jobs depended on smokers whether factory workers, vending machine suppliers, pub workers, packaging workers and retail workers, to name just some.

  5. Darryl says:

    ” It’s not often that I feel sympathy for prisoners, but I hope they burn their damn prisons to the ground.”
    The worst prison riots ever in Victoria were sparked by the smoking ban.

    • The Blocked Dwarf says:

      I await the Uturn from the Prison Warders Union when the first lag prescribed CHANTIX®……

  6. Rose says:

    Frank
    I enjoyed talking to you too!

    However, regarding your post, blame where blame is due.
    I think this is in part the EU Tobacco Directive coming into force and it was Anna Soubry that now notorious remainer and general loose cannon, then Health Minister, who signed us up to it after avoiding any parliamentary scrutiny.

    I think Dick puts it best.

    Anna Soubry: The Most Incompetent Minister Ever?
    22 July 2013

    “When I wrote, in April, that Anna Soubry is not fit for a ministerial post and an embarrassing liability to the Conservatives, it seems that I was vastly over-estimating her talents.

    For those who didn’t have the time to plough through last week’s hour long European Scrutiny Committee grilling of Soubry and DoH puppet-master Andrew Black, here’s a handy 3 minute summary of her astounding ignorance of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) concerning e-cigs.

    She went to the EU – behind the back of parliament and bypassing all proper scrutiny – to vote on a directive about which she knew virtually nothing. Yet she claims, and I quote:

    “I’m not going to pretend that I just did what my officials said because it wasn’t like that in any event.”

    So is she, instead, claiming that she subverted democracy by keeping a parliamentary committee in the dark, only to unilaterally vote on a set of measures without even knowing what was on the table? That would seem to be the only other conclusion to take since she was under the impression that e-cigs had been dropped from the TPD altogether.”
    http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/anna-soubry-most-incompetent-minister.html

    Anna Soubry sacked as Theresa May carries out evening reshuffle
    16 July 2016
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/anna-soubry-sacked-as-theresa-may-carries-out-evening-reshuffle/

  7. garyk30 says:

    Smoking kills is their big claim.
    Therefore, anyone that smokes is committing suicide.

    Life insurance will not pay out on a suicide death and life insurance companies employ legions of lawyers and math people to make certain that they do not pay out cash if they can possibly get away with not paying.

    But, life insurance companies do pay out when a smoker dies from one of the diseases ’caused’ by smoking.

    So, life insurance companies, the greedy bastards, feel that they can not prove that smoking kills and that smokers are committing suicide.

    If cig smoke does not kill the smoker, SHS definitely can not kill someone that is exposed to only a very small fraction of that same smoke.

    Besides; to my knowledge, no one has ever been charged, in a criminal case, with harming or killing with cig smoke.

    • nisakiman says:

      That’s an interesting point, Gary, and one that had never occurred to me. Yes, most definitely if the insurance companies thought that they could get away with it in a court of law, they would certainly try not to pay out on smoker’s deaths. Ergo, the legal beagles they employ don’t think they could prove conclusively that Mr X died as a result of smoking, even if he did die of one of the plethora of ‘smoking related’ diseases.

      Yes, interesting.

    • Rose says:

      Smoking Kills?

      It’s hard to know how, the Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines disappeared in 2001, because the tobacco companies wouldn’t buy high nitrosamine tobacco any more and the American growers had to retrofit their barns from direct firing to indirect firing again, as they did before WW2.
      http://web.archive.org/web/20070406121827/http://www.cpes.peachnet.edu/tobacco/retrofitinfo.htm
      Anti-tobacco are still using the percieved threat of tsnas though unsurprisingly.

      And the poly aromatic hydrocarbons they used to worry about apparently are outgunned by the anticarcinogens.

      2006
      RODGMAN A.; PERFETTI T.A.

      “Despite an 18-month study in the late 1950s, the search for a “supercarcinogen” in MSS and CSC to explain the observed biological effects was unsuccessful. In addition, the exceptional study on MSS PAHs by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) personnel in the 1970s indicated no “supercarcinogen” was present. Only recently has the concept of complex mixtures in relation to the understanding of the complexity of carcinogenesis taken hold. Perhaps the reason why MSS is less tumorigenic than expected in humans is because of the presence of other MSS components that inhibit or prevent tumorigenesis. For example, it is well known that MSS contains numerous anticarcinogens present in quantifies significantly greater than those of the PAHs of concern. When one reviews the history of these four PAHs in MSS or CSC it is clear that many unanswered questions remain.”
      https://www.coresta.org/abstracts/composition-cigarette-smoke-chronology-studies-four-polycyclic-aromatic-hydrocarbons-2245

      Even carbon monoxide turned out to be an anti inflammatory made by the body itself.

      Modern science, you see.

  8. beobrigitte says:

    The tories, too, don’t believe that smokers are voters?
    I intend to waste my (local) vote by adding another name/party and tick box at the bottom. Haven’t thought of a good name yet but it will be obvious that I am a smoker.
    Perhaps other smokers have better ideas?

    Six new smoking laws come into force this month – here’s what you need to know
    It’s good to know that we get to know early in the year.

    How is the law changing on cigarettes and tobacco?

    – You will not be able to buy packets of 10 cigarettes
    – Smaller bags containing less than 30g of roll up tobacco will also be banned
    – By May 21, the cheapest packet of cigarettes will cost £8.82
    – Menthol cigarettes, which experts say have often been aimed at beginner smokers, are being gradually phased out
    – Cigarette packets are set to be plain, with graphic images which show people the impact that tobacco has on health
    – Some flavoured cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco, including fruit, spice, herbs, alcohol, candy or vanilla, will also be made illegal.

    Naturally, I do have a few questions:
    1. Packets of 10 are a rip-off, anyway.
    2. Packets of less than 30g roll up tobacco are a rip-off, anyway.
    3. The friendly person(s) will have an increasing amount of customers.
    4. Helmut Schmidt was a beginner smoker? That’s news to me. In any case, most smokers I know hate the menthol flavoured cigarettes.
    5. fear mongering no longer has an impact. It’s been overused.
    6. I don’t know anyone who does smoke any of the list of flavoured tobacco. I personally prefer normal tobacco. It has a wonderful, natural flavour.

    Looks like the “experts” haven’t got a clue. As per usual.

    That does remind me of something I watched on youtube last night. Every now and then I do search for NDEs (near death experiences) as one of videos did bring back a memory of when I was 5 or 6 years old.
    The lady talked about her final stage cancer and how she learned what caused it in her NDE.
    [I was waiting to hear that in the afterlife she was told that smoking caused her cancer]
    She didn’t say for a long time but what she talked about fitted in with that early childhood memory, so if she said that smoking/passive smoke was the cause for her cancer I’d have disregarded my childhood memory as nonsense – in any case I wish I didn’t have it!
    Eventually she did get to the point I was ready hear – and to turn off the video in anger!!! To my surprise she was trying to choose her words carefully as what she had to say is what is happening. Lobby group directed health fear mongering. I actually laughed loudly!

    The lady stated that fear (?of getting cancer) was the cause of her cancer.
    Our governments are in the hands of fear-mongers who believe (or pretend to believe) they do something for the “common good” by getting rid of something they don’t like and see as the cause of getting rich. Just like the Blair Rich Project that involved anything for as long as the money comes in.

    Sorry, but I don’t think it’s any more the business of the UK government to reduce smoking rates in the UK adult population than it’s their business to reduce the consumption of custard or Danish Blue cheese or kippers. To do so is to reduce adults to being children who need to be told what to eat and drink, and when to eat it and drink it.
    If the lady last night in the video was right, it’s a case of that we HAVE TO BE WHO WE ARE. With that comes the responsibility of being who we are without causing others to feel what we will not like to feel.

    I’m not even sure that treating children that way is the right thing to do. I’m more and more inclined to think that children ought to revolt against being treated as children.
    Adults need to revolt against being treated like children!! Children need to revolt against adults being treated like children.

    Talking about children….. We, too, were children quite some time ago. And we are still here, “living longer”; so much longer that the baby-boomers look at nearer to 70 years of age before being able to retire from work and get state pension.
    Would our government please be so kind and explain this situation?

    • Vlad says:

      Regarding banning menthol cigarettes and other types of flavored tobacco…this is just madness. There are so many flavored alcoholic drinks – using the same (lack of) judgement, won’t that get children hooked on hard liquor? I heard in a province in Canada they legalized marijuana while banning aromatic pipe tobacco. Lunatics running the asylum, that’s what this is.

  9. cherie79 says:

    Seems smoking is the only cause of death these days! I told my surgeon when he could tell me why, despite growing up with smokers, heavy industry and many of us being smokers for decades, we were the longest lived generation, I would consider giving up. Needless to say there was no answer. Still, not having bought any tobacco products in this country since the ban as have many others they must have lost a fortune in tax. I never could understand the economic logic, the loss of tax take, jobs and, if as they say we will live longer more pensions to pay? seems madness to me.

    • Rose says:

      Pharma could make life very difficult for a government that didn’t comply, especially if they have National health service.

  10. Tony says:

    I can’t speak for UKIP but I suspect that it must be problematic campaigning on a defence of smokers ticket. When I stood for local election in 2014, the issue of smoking bans did not crop up on the doorstep. Or at least very rarely. I was always cautious about raising it myself as, from experience, many smokers just get very angry about it. The danger was that they ended up blaming me for ruining their day. Of course being local elections I couldn’t, even if elected, do anything about the smoking ban. In my leaflet I merely stated my objection to government interference in people’s lives and the imminent move of ‘public health’ into local councils.

    I also suspect that the multi billion dollar anti-smoking industry is not bound by electoral commission spending limits. So any party opposing them could be faced with a wall to wall campaign claiming they wanted to murder children and poison babies. The MSM and particularly the vile BBC would be in paroxysms of delight. They could run this stuff 24/7 with no concern about election rules.

    • waltc says:

      Yes. When the guy running against Bloomberg in –forget if it was his first or second term–went on record as wanting to lighten the smoking bans in the city, Bloomberg started calling him “the pro-cancer candidate.”

    • Frank Davis says:

      I was always cautious about raising it myself as, from experience, many smokers just get very angry about it.

      Angry about the smoking ban? Or angry that you raised the subject?

      Back in the early days of the smoking ban, I used to raise the matter of the smoking ban quite frequently with smoking acquaintances, and they’d get quite angry. But what they got angry about was my suggestion that the ban could be contested. They didn’t think that there was anything they could do about it. And they got angry at the suggestion that there was anything they could do about it. There was nothing they could do about it!

      It’s one reason why I seldom raise the matter during chance meetings with smokers. I know that they all hate the ban. But I also know that most of them think there’s absolutely nothing they can do about it. So they don’t want to talk about it.

      • Tony says:

        Both. Angry about the ban, angrier still that they felt there was nothing they or anyone else could do about it and therefore, angry that I raised the subject. A subject so painful that they tried to avoid thinking about it.

        • Pat Nurse says:

          The issue is not just about smoking or where you can smoke. It is about the dominoes that fall afterwards. No smoking ban, no sugar tax, no plain packs, no reformulation of food, no 15 millions pounds spent on stopping people smoking in Syria. The smoking issue is part of the bigger nanny state, overblown public health Quangos telling us all how to live whether smoker, drinker, foodie, fattie. All of our lives will be hit, picked off one group at a time, and our pockets too as we pay more and get less while public health rakes in our taxes to spend on researching the next lifestyle group they can hit. This about individual liberty, the right to own your own life, the right to freedom of action, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, consumer rights, private property rights. It is about so much more than smoking. Bring up the nanny state and not the smoking ban then people won’t be angry. They’ll see they will be next and the best way for us all to get along and agree to live and let live is if we have compromise, including on the smoking ban. People believe it has to be either or without seeing that both sides of any healthist debate, including the smoking ban, can be accommodated. Opposition to Plain packs should have been vocalised by ukip asking what next? Wine? Beer? McDonald’s? Even rabid antismokers wonder wtf at plain packs. What about the voice against the beer garden ban? Most people think it is a step too far. Ukip will lose votes because if just being vocal on brexit. If it wants to place itself as the working class party, how about defending those council tenants who smoke but may face eviction for doing so as councils ponder a home ban. Why should they be bullied because they can’t afford their own home? Council or not, it is still their home. What next? Food police checking there is no sugary drinks in a home with kids? Maybe a home drinking ban? How far will this go? The LibLabCon all agree on funding more interference in our private lives. Ukip claims to be different, claims to be anti elitist, claims to want to represent the working class and then says nothing and defends no one on those issues that are culturally working class – drinking, smoking, scoffing chips. When ukip begins to challenge every new stupid directive if suggestion from public health on lifestyle issues, it will get my vote back. Until then, it doesn’t seem to mind making people angry about racism.

        • Frank Davis says:

          angrier still that they felt there was nothing they or anyone else could do about it and therefore, angry that I raised the subject.

          That’s what I encountered back in 2007.

        • Tony says:

          @Pat, my election leaflet, in 2013, did clearly state my opposition to the state interfering in people’s lives.

  11. Pingback: Forward Together with Tobacco Control | Frank Davis

  12. Pingback: The Lawless World | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s