CMO promises more anti-smoking measures
Sunday, June 24, 2007 
Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson (left) today gives an interview to the Observer in which he pledges a "further sustained crackdown on smoking after the ban comes into force in England next Sunday".
Plans include removing cigarettes from public display, putting graphic picture warnings on cigarette packets, outlawing the sale of packets of 10 cigarettes, and reducing the number of cigarettes that we can bring into the country from inside the EU from 3,200 to 200. (That's a laugh. The Chancellor had to increase the number from 800 to 3,200, a few years ago, because high taxation in the UK had sparked a smuggling epidemic. Do you think the CMO spoke to Gordon Brown before he came up with this crackpot scheme?)
Donaldson also wants advertising campaigns to "educate" parents about the 'dangers' of smoking around children. How long before smoking in the presence of children is officially declared a form of child abuse? Full story, including a short quote from me, HERE.
Reader Comments (147)
Joyce,
The customs people are now getting very devious,and my own expierience has shown that when dealing with them you are very much guilty until you can prove yourself to be innocent,they tend to ask a series of questions to which they know the answers to, because its all on their database,they then sit back and wait for people to incriminate themselves!!.
They are also working with english immigration on the French side,so, they know who to look out for,and,when they will be coming through,like I said in my earlier post anyone travelling through Calais docks are getting their passport swiped,its probably going to get even worse now that the new biometric passports have been introduced.
Robert E: I'm guessing you don't come from East London then. Sounds awfully demure where you are. Not all of England is like that, believe me.
If this gets me banned than so be it. Robert your enjoying this, that's a bully, or a ....ing ....er. Sorry but he's taking the ..ss
Robert, if you don't think things are going to boil over on July 1st, watch Happy Scotts Bar, Rigby Road, Blackpool, The Swan, Churchgate, Bolton and The Dog Inn, Ewyas Harold, near Hereford, where there will be three major protets against the ban by people flouting it in large numbers. We know there will be more pubs than this but these three you can count on.
When talking about things "boiling over" it also depends on what you mean. People may express great anger and resolve without resorting to bloody riots.
'Nichts gibt's so sehr das Gefühl der Unendlichkeit als wie Dummheit' (Oden von Horwarth) - R Evans - translate this and attempt to provoke someone else. I'm bored.
Yesterday I went to the local junk yard to get rid of some goods. I was talking to one of the council guys who works there. Now he said when the ban comes in, no one can smoke within 25 yards of the site. If joe public drives in with a fag he will be told to extinguish it, if he does not they have been given guidelines to use force to evict that person. No I'm not making this up it's true. Remember the police can't use force in this day and age against criminals, but these guys can against smokers if required.
This will raise a smile or two!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=464540&in_page_id=1770
I still maintain that once the passive smoke argument becomes unfounded in the high court or the court of human rights, the government will have to amend this draconian law. This law is based on so called scientific research, but where is it. This will have to be produced in a court.
As far as Robert Evans is concerned, I will no longer waste my energy on him.
I think that after the 1st July everybody will be completely bored with the smoking debate. Pub and restaurant ash trays will have been sent to the museum and ardent pro smokers, still in complete denial about the health risks of smoking, will be in an ever shrinking minority. Roll on the 1st July, the highest percentage of the population welcome and celebrate their new freedom from passive smoking.
I wonder if Robert will echoe his sentiments above, when he is told how bad even a small amount of alcahol is. This is next, certain groups would love strong alcahol control. Mind you Robert if the government do this next it must be right, musn't it.
I wonder how these anti smokers will feel, when they are sneared at in the future for drinking alcahol. Robert will say this won't happen, my father now 70 gave up smoking 30 years ago, but admits he could never imagine the day when you couldn,t smoke in a pub. Enjoy the control Robert, your drinking will be next.
Robert, you are being deliberately inflamatory, though I admit you've had provocation, gloating about July 1st really isn't particularly useful.
One or two units of alcohol daily probably does more good than harm and it has been shown that when alcohol consumption is plotted against morbidity and mortality there is in fact a J curve effect. My usual daily alcohol intake includes a glass of red wine with my evening meal. I don't inflict it on anyone else and just don't see it as being an issue now or in the future. As for binge drinking which many younger people engage in at weekends, now that would merit some action.
I do agree with your father though in that, even 10 years ago, I could not have imagined all pubs becoming non smoking by law.
Robert
Your missing the point. If people can be convinced, which they easily can, that alcahol is evil, it won't matter how much you drink.
Rob, I apologise if my comments are coming across as inflammatory. Such a tone would not be particularly useful but then perhaps none of my views have ever been of any use.
If the format of this web log is 'debate' then a variety of opinions need to be expressed. If absolutely everybody agrees with one another about how bad the 1st July smoking laws are then this would just become a 'book of condolence'.
Robert,
I can tell you, without any fear of contradiction, that people will most certainly NOT "be completely bored" after July 1st. 15 months on, here in Scotland, the debate has escalated far beyond my imaginings. One noticeable difference is in the amount of crowing by the anti-smoker team. A little childish, but there you go. The debate, such as it is, goes on, unabated.
We were informed yesterday that we (Freedom to Choose, and the Fife Action Group) are to be referred to the Scottish Executive Health Committee with regard to our Petition. The Petitions Committee did not feel able to address our concerns, and, IMHO, have made a grave error. With the scientific evidence we have at hand, we will be able to show the Health Committee the mistakes they made, and this will pave the way for a Scottish Judicial Review.
It may be wishful thinking on your part, but no, people do not get bored. Particularly when so many really don't understand the ramifications of this New Apartheid. That goes equally for non smokers.
I have two words of advice for you, Robert:
Brace yourself.
You are absolutely right Robert, and that is exactly what I told my local pub landlord, who has now decided to ban all Welsh people from his pub after reading your comments.
Colin
Any idea why legal action hasn't yet happened in Scotland.
Sorry if I didn't make myself perfectly clear (above) I was referring to Robert's comments with regard to 'debate' where he states that a variety of opinions are needed to be expressed, or else we would end up with a one sided conversation where everybody agreed with each other, more or less a 'book of condolence'.
This is exactly what I told my pub landlord. Just because Robert is Welsh, he shouldn't ban all Welsh people, as I am sure quite a few of them must be quite reasonable people.
I'm all for debate, I'm just keen to avoid a flame war.
This ban highlights three things;
1. How gullible people are. The SHS is far from over and the most damning figures relate only to those who either work in a smoking environment or live with a smoker. There is no link between ocassional expsure and any long term health problems. Yet many people are convinced that visiting a premise where smoking is allowed represent some assault on their health.
2. The hold the media has and its blatant bias. The pro-choice movement really struggles to get coverage. The cost of a ban in terms of pubs lost is never mentioned in the press, and the largest, more comprehensive study, conducted by self professed anti-smokers, which found no link went by with only a whisper in the media.
3. How deeply self centred our society has become. Many people will cheerly watch other people have aspects of their lifestyle restricted and other still lose their job and livelihood if it benefits them in some way.
Those three things should make any thinking person quiver in their boots as they represent a template with which almost any reduction in freedom can be foisted upon people.
You don't think your drinking effects anyone else. Wrong! Alcohol has the annoying habit of not staying in the glass - it evaporates quite rapidly into the air where it is inhaled by other people. So what, you might think. Well if you're drinking in the presence of children then you are in the very same as passive smoking, literally jamming it down their throats.
Personally I think it's a non-issue, but I recall a comment from you where you would be happy to allow smoking inside if the ventilation ensure that no smoke whatsoever was inhaled inadvertantly by anyone else. Not even a minimum level - non WHATSOEVER.
Given that alcohol is poisonous which SHOULDN'T it get the same "zero tolerance" treatment as smoking?
Do this sound irrational? I would say so, but now you have an idea of how anti-smokers sound.
You are getting very angry with these bullies Rob, and I can't say that I blame you, but I think that in their perverted way, this is exactly what they want. They are revelling in causing misery to 25% of the adult population, they are the modern day equivalent of the Jew baiters of Nazi Germany.
Laugh at them, no one likes being laughed at or ridiculed. Our day will come, and we will see how smug and self assured they sound then.
Maybe Robert isn't familiar with the fact that alcohol, once it is open to the air, evaporates
and produces nuch higher rates of benzine than smoke does.With Benzine being the heaviest carcinogen in smoke, I think you would probably be safer in a smokers pub with an alcohol ban! Do you grill burgers? One burger 250 times more benzine than a cigarette.Howevr all these amounts are still tiny.So much for ETS.
Andrew,
The Scottish section of F2C decided early on to send our money southwards, where we thought it would have more of an impact. At the time we made the decision, there were several other legal challenges in the works, including a JR from Swallow Hotels. At the 11th hour, Swallow withdrew their application for a JR. We think that they were threatened by Wee Jack McConnell and his crew. With 50 odd hotels in Scotland there was rumour that their licenses were under threat if they continued with the JR. I personally do not have evidence to support that statement, but others close to Alan Bowes, do.
That was the long answer.
The short answer is: money. We don't have enough to bring Judicial Reviews in both countries.
Colin
Thanks for your reply. What do you think will happen if there is a JR.
Depends on the judge hearing the evidence. If the McTear case is anything to go by, the law will be struck down as we leave the court-room.
I stay upbeat because we have some solid gold evidence. It will blow them away.
What stuns me,is that if we have the data, so does the tobacco companies.
Begs several questions, does it not?
Do we really think the tobacco companies care? There's no evidence to suggest a ban will actually cut smoking and there's some minor evidence to suggest it actually *slows* the decline in smoking prevalence.
I'm hoping this terrible weather persists, won't be what the government wants on Sunday.
Colin,
Are you suggesting there might be some skulduggery going on in the corridors of power involving big tobacco??
Carl,
I am not "suggesting" anything. I am saying it is an outright fact.
Before too much time passes, I will be posting an explosive article in another place that will have Big Tobacco, Big Pharma and Big Government defecating instantaneously and involuntarily.
Because of the nature of the article, I need to check, double check, and triple check my sources, and because of the legal aspects, the material has to stay sensitive. For now.
Colin
Are you able to tell us the possible outcome of your article.
Colin,
Thanks for that,I read your "time to recap" piece on the f2c site and thought it was superb,I certainly hope this next one has the desired effect!!
Thanks Carl. The article you read will be like a child's bedtime story in comparison to the new story.
Andrew, if I told you the outcome it would give them time to mount a defence. Not that it will matter, but I would rather not say anymore for now. You will understand why when you see the piece.
Colin
Will you let us know on this site, when you release this info.
Certainly.
Colin
Whatever this is, the public seem to only believe whatever the government tells them.
Colin, I look forward to reading your scoop.
This terrible weather will persist, Andrew - more storms predicted for the coming weekend. What really annoys me is that this government have reacted so nastily and spent so much money on anti-smoking campaigns, and now that parts of Yorkshire are under water they are not pledging money or aid for the poor victims of what is a terrible disaster. I don't believe any politician has come to survey the devastation in the county this week. Workers are still working round the clock to save a dam near Rotherham to stop a valley (with hospital, power station and villages) being flooded and this could happen this weekend if the rains come again and impede rescue work. They are so concerned with fining people for dropping tab ends, yet look (on news pictures etc.) at the absolute mess people are having to clear up in and around their homes in many areas of this large county and other parts of the country! (I realise other parts of the country have suffered terribly too.) I am cheered by what Colin has written, however, and hope he is successful.
Colin
Is everything still on track.
Yes sir. I will post my article later tonight. It is called "The Murdering Bastards".
I diluted it somewhat, for legal reasons. It is all 100% true, but I have used generic terms for the suspects. I think when you read the piece you will understand my caution. I also suspect that this will be my last visit here.
I can guarantee you that the evidence is securely stored for when it is needed in court.
Colin
Where are you posting it.
Colin
I look forward to your report, will you be sending a copy to the media.
On F2C.
Its a very long article and is not media friendly.
But we will have to publicise it. Somehow.
Then again, it might just happen spontaneously.....
Okay. It is done.
Colin
I waited for it, and it's damning. Well done Colin, what follows.
Colin
It's now been taken off the site, why??
We are filing our JR at the High Court tomorrow. My article will distract, we want to focus on the landmark JR tomorrow, so we decided to remove it. We will be on the radio at 6:45, CH4 at 1 and BBC1 4 pm.
Once the furore dies down a little I will reinstate the article.
Sorry.
Colin
Can I ask, why did you put the article up only to remove it.
My post above explains Andrew. We need all eyes on the JR.
Not my article.
Colin, I've just been reading your preview 'State Sponsored Addiction', and it did remind me about a story concerning a hospital patient on a particular antipsychotic drug. At the dose prescribed it didn't 'appear' to be doing much good. In fact the patient had become quite agitated, jabbing his finger at medical staff and telling them to "f.... off!" The patient announced that he'd had enough and was leaving. Needless to say he was restrained before forcefully being administered an even higher dose of the same drug. With hindsight and what had been completely overlooked was that one of the principal side effects of that antipsychotic drug was 'severe agitation'. You can guess what happened next at the higher dose.
So medical staff do make mistakes, their knowledge is sometimes less than perfect but overall they do have patients' best interests at heart. I do wonder though if you've got anything good at all to say about this profession.