Freedom and its (speed) limits

"Speeding is endemic in Britain with around half the country's motorists regularly flouting the limit, according to figures released by the Department for Transport yesterday" (Daily Telegraph, April 6th). Only half? That beggars belief. Drive on any motorway in Britain and most drivers exceed the limit on a regular basis. And why not? Many of our current speed limits were set in the 1960s when the average family saloon struggled to go much faster than 70mph. (Even in the 80s my first 'proper' car, a sky blue Mini Metro, felt as if it was about to take off if I put my foot down and went anywhere above 80.) Braking distances are much improved too.

Now, I don't condone speeding in built up areas. On motorways, however, the national speed limit (70mph) is frankly ridiculous. Speed limits should be set in accordance with road conditions. Just as I expect to reduce my speed significantly through contraflows and roadworks, or in driving rain and fog, why can't I drive my Porsche (just joking!) at 100mph or more through Cumbria on a dry, deserted M6 at two o'clock in the morning?

These days we are bombarded with all sorts of electronic messages on overhead gantries: 'Long delays ahead', 'Don't drink and drive' etc etc. Why can't the same message boards be used to advise us of changes to the speed limit? The London Orbital (aka the M25) does this. However their definition of flexible is always down, never up. Instead of using technology to liberate us, it is used to restrict our freedoms.

There was talk, before the last election, that the Tories would increase the speed limit on motorways to 80mph. At least one police force was said to be in favour. Sadly, in Dave Cameron's brave new world, the idea has disappeared without trace. Most people understand the need for restrictions in a small, crowded island, but there has to be a great deal more give and take. In their eagerness to legislate and dictate, politicians have forgotten the need to treat the majority of us in accordance with what we are - responsible adults.

Rome sweet Rome

Manchester United are in Rome tonight and, two weeks ago, so was I. The Italian government surprised many people when they banned smoking in all indoor public places, including cafes, bars and restaurants, in 2005. No-one was more surprised than the Italians themselves. "It happened so quick," I was told. "We didn't have time to protest."

Unlike the UK and Ireland there are exemptions for venues with sealed ventilated smoking rooms, but in practice few places can afford such a facility. It wouldn't be Italy however if someone didn't stretch the regulations. By great good fortune (or maybe not) we found ourselves in a restaurant where an hospitable  restaurateur had created a 'smoking room' by combining a gigantic ventilation shaft with a thick blue curtain that was pulled across the room to separate us from the non-smoking area. Thanks to his ingenuity, our group was able to light up, inside, in comfort. And no-one minded a bit.

Meanwhile in Wales this week it was reported that in order to get around the smoking ban, one man has come up with the brilliant idea of adding an extension to his house which, to all intents and purposes, offers a 90-seat bar for him and his mates. If stretching the rules was an Olympic sport, Kerry Morgan would win a medal; but I still think my Roman restaurateur would win gold.

Dinner date from heaven, or hell?

On the Forest website we play a little game. We list the people most often quoted by the media in the smoking debate and rate them according to whether we would want to invite them to dinner. Today we received the following email, written in response to our description of Ian Willmore, former spokesman for ASH (and before that Friends of the Earth) who now works for the London Fire Brigade:

When I read your comments I could scarcely believe that I was reading about the same man. Was this Ian Willmore, the [former] media coordinator at Friends of the Earth, who made a point of taking the voluntary press staff out for a decent lunch because they were giving their time to a charity who, frankly, did not much appreciate them; the man who played piano for the FOE staff dos purely to entertain; the guy who was quite prepared to be the subject of his own humour as well as making amusing comments about others; the person who was always larger than life and quite prepared to go his own way, despite the hostility of other more 'po-faced' individuals in the organisations that he joined?

I have been to lunch with him. He is an amusing companion who can talk on a wide variety of subjects, a consumate individualist in a world full of conventionalists and has a wonderful, light sense of humour that [sic] manages to laugh at others while still poking fun at himself. Ian Willmore is a man of great passion and he throws himself into those causes for which he works with a zeal few could match; so do all people who are effectively fighting for a cause, and there are few causes so worth fighting as one that damages not only the health of those who participate in it but also those who are unfortunate enough to stand near them. Yet it is to be noted that he does not stoop to personal attacks and character assassination, and that, in itself, makes him a far more likeable person than the wretch who wrote this article.

Ian, if you read this, I think you've just got yourself another date.

Another little loss of liberty

An early start to my day in Cardiff. Smoking in enclosed public places was officially outlawed at 6.00am. Shortly after seven I'm on Radio Wales, broadcasting from the old Welsh Assembly building which is still used by the BBC. It's not a studio as such - just a spartan office with an ISDN machine on the desk. Apart from three security guards, the building seems to be empty. Mid morning (after a FULL Welsh breakfast) I'm back in Cardiff Bay for a live outside broadcast on News 24 plus a pre-record for the local lunchtime news. Channel 4 News want an interview this afternoon and I've been invited to appear on Wales Today in another live OB - this time from the Miskin Arms in Miskin, near Pontyclun, a few miles outside Cardiff.

The point I try to make - as reasonably as possible - is that we're not against smoke-free environments. In this day and age, when the majority of people are non-smokers, smoke-free should be the norm. But why does smoking have to be banned in EVERY pub, club and bar? What's wrong with smoking and non-smoking pubs, or separate, well-ventilated designated smoking rooms, or private smokers' clubs, all of which are now illegal.

Evidence from Ireland and Scotland suggests that most people will adapt and accept the ban (while continuing to smoke!!). But that doesn't make the law RIGHT. Legislation based on dubious research and inconclusive evidence (about passive smoking, for example), legislation that is out of all proportion to the actual (rather than the perceived) risk, is WRONG. Likewise, legislation designed to force people to give up a legal product is social engineering. Unjust laws weaken society because they bring the law in general into disrepute.

It's only smoking, some might say, it's no big deal. But they'd be wrong. Look at the bigger picture. After tobacco politicians and campaigners will target something else. They've already started. Little by little, bit by bit, the noose controlling our public and private behaviour will get tighter until we are all clones of Big Government. They can't help themselves. That's what they do. It has to stop.

We're all tobacco control officers now

From tomorrow smoking will be banned in all enclosed public places in Wales. In advance of the usual round of media interviews I have just arrived in Cardiff.

Hotel receptionist: "Good evening, sir. Are you here on business?"
Me: "Yes, I'm here for the smoking ban."

Pregnant pause.

Hotel receptionist: "Are you a tobacco control officer?"

You couldn't make it up. (And I haven't.)

Another day, another ban

Today sees the introduction of a ban on TV advertisements for so-called junk food during programmes aimed at young children. (Full story HERE.) As a parent myself, I believe the principal responsibility for what my child eats lies with me not the government, food manufacturer or television company. Needless to say, some people are still not happy. Dr David Haslam, from the National Obesity Forum, says: "If you go into a supermarket there are ... sweets and chocolates at eye-level for a child at the till. Well, that's something that should be stopped instantly. It's all very well banning advertising of the food to kids, but kids are still going to be eating the food because there's point-of-sales advertising and there's the pressure that's put on the parents to go out and get a fast food burger."

What is Dr Haslam suggesting? That we ban point-of-sales advertising as well? Or perhaps he wants to go the whole hog and ban the burger. Has he never come across the word 'No'? (Parents use it all the time.) Anyway, what's wrong with junk food? Everything in moderation, nothing in excess - that's what we were told as children. My children love 'fast food burgers'. A visit to McDonalds is still considered by them to be a treat. As with so many things, it's the dose that's the poison. By all means encourage people to eat healthily, but ban junk food advertising or the product itself? Over my dead body.

A true liberal

I frequently despair of Liberal Democrats who - in word and deed - abuse the right to call themselves 'liberal'. Thankfully there is at least one member of the party who is true to the name. Lembit Opik (left), Liberal Democrat MP for Montgomeryshire, has added his voice to those who oppose the introduction of smoking bans in all enclosed public places. Yesterday he gave the following quote to Forest for a press release about the forthcoming ban in Wales: "In a liberal society you have to be careful about what you ban. I don't smoke, and nor do I intend to, but I'm uneasy about a blanket ban because it sets a dangerous precedent about the reach of the state." Thanks, Lembit, for having the guts to stand up and be counted.

Update on Saturday, March 31, 2007 by Simon Clark

The artistic director of the Wales Theatre Company is allegedly miffed that the Welsh Assembly has banned actors from lighting up on stage. (In England, film and theatre stages are exempt if prohibition conflicts with the "artistic integrity" of the performance.) The South Wales Echo reports that, "Despite being a vociferous anti-smoking campaigner, Michael Bogdanov said he would rather his actors be able to smoke."

So, let me get this right. Bogdanov is a "vociferous anti-smoking campaigner" but he's less happy when the ban directly affects HIM. They just don't get it, do they? If you currently support a ban on smoking in ALL public places you are effectively supporting a ban everywhere else, including stage, car and home, because that's where this level of intolerance is leading us.

You also risk increasing restrictions on our eating and drinking habits, our ability to travel when and where we want and a host of other freedoms because, if we don't stop these assaults on our liberties now, we will all be steamrollered by an unstoppable bandwagon otherwise known as the nanny state. Are you listening, Michael Bogdanov?

Measured response to personal tragedy

How heart-warming it was to read, in today's Telegraph, that the parents of a 24-year-old man "unlawfully killed" by carbon monoxide poisoning have no plans to sue the hotel where he was staying or take further action over their son's death. According to Howard Tomlinson, father of Edward who died while on a gap year in Lebanon, "Clearly we are extremely saddened by Ed's death. But we are not angry and we have no personal vendettas. We hope that as a result of this verdict there will be a tightening of safety practices in hotels to stop this terrible tragedy happening again. We also hope that all travellers will be better warned, both by travel agents and hotel owners, about the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning."

I have no idea how I would react if my own son died in such circumstances, but in an era when people are actively encouraged to seek retribution (financial or otherwise), I admire Mr Tomlinson's measured response to such a personal tragedy. I am not defending those who are guilty of "gross neglect" or wilful criminal behaviour, but accidents happen and sometimes we have to accept what has occurred, learn from it and move on without playing the blame game and putting even more money into the hands of m'learned friends.

Game for a laugh

Last night I was a guest on 18 Doughty Street, the fledgling internet TV channel. This was my fourth appearance and - thank goodness - there was an item about smoking bans. On previous occasions I have been asked to discuss more than one subject I know little or nothing about.  (Child benefit and tax relief for married couples comes to mind.)  One of the weaknesses of Vox Politics, broadcast from 10.00pm, Monday-Friday, is that guests are booked sometimes weeks in advance. We are then asked to comment on the issues of the day, regardless of our 'expertise'. Last night, for example, Middle East politics raised its ugly head. Where was the informed academic when we needed him (or her!)? The End Of The Day show, which follows at 11.00pm, is even more relaxed. Take, for example, my appearance in January when THIS happened. Very unprofessional.

Cigarettes, whisky and all that jazz

I met Alan Plater last night. Plater is one of our most successful film and TV screenwriters. His credits include Z Cars, Softly Softly, The Beiderbecke Tapes, A Very British Coup, Fortunes of War and The Last of the Blonde Bombshells.  We met at Boisdale in Belgravia where the Boisdale Blue Rhythm Band - who performed at The Free Society's launch party last year - were recording the last of 17 tracks for an exclusive Boisdale/Forest CD to be called Don't Do That!. Tracks include 'Smoke, Smoke, Smoke That Cigarette',  'Cigarettes and Silhouettes', 'Cigarettes, Whisky and Wild Wild Women' and 'The Last Smoker'. 

First track on the album is a new song, 'I'm Going Outside', with lyrics by - Alan Plater. In Orkney recently, he and his wife Shirley Rubinstein - both heavy smokers - found themselves out in the cold every time they wanted to light up. "I'm 71, it's minus four degrees, and I'm going outside!" He laughs at the absurdity of it all but has strong words for the government's anti-smoking crusade which he describes as "hypocritical", "puritannical" and "sanctimonious". Don't Do That! featuring 'I'm Going Outside' will be released in May. Watch this space.

Scotland: crying out for freedom

Yesterday I was in Edinburgh for the first anniversary of the Scottish smoking ban which has been hailed a “huge success”. This, despite the fact that many bingo halls are in freefall, a number of working men’s clubs are in trouble, publicans are having to sack bar staff, and – according to a recent Populus poll for Forest - a huge majority support exemptions to the ban. Oh, and the smoking rates have dropped by 1.5% (from 26% to 24.5%), largely in line with the existing year on year trend. Some success!

Early in the day I joined Brian Monteith MSP (pictured above left), Neil Rafferty (Forest’s Scottish spokesman) and others for a photocall outside the Scottish Parliament. For one shot the photographer asked us to stand in the middle of an ornamental pond, water lapping over our shoes. He then asked us to light up, inhale, count to three, and exhale in unison. (It’s a tough job but someone’s got to do it.)

Last night Brian and I met up again for dinner. We first met many years ago when we were students in Scotland, editing student magazines at our respective universities. Years later we shared an office in Edinburgh and it was Brian who was responsible for my applying for and being appointed director of Forest.

After an eventful year, Brian is not seeking re-election to the Scottish Parliament in May. In fact, this is his last full week as an MSP. So, after eight years as a member, how does he view today’s Parliament? “Self-indulgent, self-delusional, self-satisfied,” he tells me between mouthfuls of Albarino.

“Since devolution Scotland is a lot less free. It's exactly what Friedrich Hayek warned against in The Road To Serfdom. That is, social democracy: removing individual liberties one by one, democratically, in the name of the people rather than stormtroopers goose-stepping into your living-room. First they came for the fox hunters, and the urban public cheered. Then they came for the smokers, and the killjoys laughed. Soon they will be coming for the leisurely drinkers and after that the comfortably overweight.”

He will miss the cut and thrust of debate in the chamber but has no regrets and to kick start his new career outside Holyrood he has written his first book, Paying The Piper, which I shall review after it is published on April 1st.  He will also be playing a significant role in The Free Society. A former spokesman for Forest in Scotland, Brian’s political antenna remain firmly libertarian, a far cry from the paternalistic (or Presbyterian) tendencies of many Conservatives north and south of the border. We haven’t heard the last of him.

Welcome to Taking Liberties

Welcome to Taking Liberties, an oasis for those who believe in less not more government intrusion into our daily lives. Taking Liberties is sub-titled 'The Free Society blog'. For those who missed our launch party last year, The Free Society is an offshoot of Forest, the smokers' lobby group. Founded in 1979 by a former Battle of Britain fighter pilot, Forest defends those who choose to smoke tobacco and don't expect to be vilified for consuming a legal product that generates billions of pounds for the Treasury.

The Free Society will take that campaign one stage further. We will demonstrate that attempts to ostracise smokers are part of a much bigger picture in which politicians, campaigners and public officials are slowly eroding our civil liberties with laws and regulations that are out of all proportion to the problems they seek to tackle. Today tobacco, tomorrow food and drink. And motoring. Free speech, too, is under threat, with politicians and scientists telling us there is "no debate" about passive smoking or global warming when, clearly, there is.

There are two reasons for naming the blog Taking Liberties. First, I am genuinely concerned that freedoms we have taken for granted are slowly being taken from us without proper debate. Second, I want to make this blog as entertaining as possible and if that means taking liberties in a more colloquial sense, so be it. Feedback is positively encouraged so feel free to comment on anything that appears here. It's going to be an interesting journey so welcome aboard and enjoy the ride.