And the award goes to ....
Sunday, December 7, 2008 The current issue of Total Politics has an eight-page "advertisement feature" paid for (?) by Insight Public Affairs, "a leading lobbying and public relations agency".
IPA has invited 12 people, including a few D-list politicians, to write a series of articles highlighting "good" and "bad" examples of political lobbying. One of the contributors is that old booby, the Rt Hon Lord George Foulkes, once an MP and now a member of the Scottish parliament and the House of Lords.
As an example of "bad" lobbying, Foulkes writes:
Forest tried to convince me, against a growing avalanche of evidence to the contrary, that smoking was harmless. Since I was vice chair of the All Party Group on Smoking and Health and had tabled a Bill in 1982 to ban smoking in public places, they get my 'Runner-Up Award' for futility in lobbying.
Runner-up? How kind. To the best of my knowledge, however, Forest has never argued that smoking is harmless (although a great many smokers do live long and healthy lives, which raises some interesting questions that the anti-smoking lobby refuses to answer). We have always accepted that there are risks associated with smoking, but why let the facts get in the way of a cheap shot?
What interests me more is that Foulkes is basically admitting that he has long since made up his mind about smoking-related issues, and that's that. Nothing anyone says to him is going to change his mind. Nor is he prepared even to listen to a group whose views don't square with his own. Quite an admission for an elected politician, a so-called "servant of the people". (But not a surprise.)
I'm not naive enough to think that politicians with entrenched views are going to change their minds. (They're human, after all.) But it would be nice to think they could spare a moment to hear what we have to say. Given the alarming impact of anti-tobacco legislation - thousands of pub closures, social lives ruined etc - that's not too much to ask, is it?
It makes you wonder if there is any point to the political process. After all, why bother having all those parliamentary debates, select committee meetings, "public" consultations and private meetings if they have no intention of listening to all sides?
So Forest gets Lord Foulkes' 'Runner-Up Award' for "futile lobbying". I take comfort, however, that the winner of his 'Bad Lobbying Trophy' is (wait for it) the Countryside Alliance. It seems that Lord F is a rather sensitive soul who takes exception to what he sees as the CA's rough house tactics, especially an "angry, loud and abusive march which brought Bournemouth to a halt during the Labour party conference".
Now, if I'm not mistaken, the ban on fox hunting is going to be overturned by the next Conservative government, so I would hardly accuse the CA of "futile lobbying". In fact, the long-term success of their campaign (fingers crossed) gives Forest (and, I'm sure, other lobby groups) every encouragement to continue with our own activities.
Futile? We'll be the judge of that.
People
Reader Comments (9)
Surely as a member of the House of Lords and the highest court in the land, he should at least be subjective, and not biased toward the anti-smoking lobby. To me that just seems like he is abusing his power. To hell with his status!
I just hope that if the Tories do get in and repeal the hunting ban they don't try to do it quietly in order to avoid protest against the smoking ban.
Mind you, what would we do if they repealed one but not the other? Continue to mutter darkly online - or actually take to the streets?
From what I've read from the Tories, they have no intention to repeal the smoking ban. Although that could change nearer to the election. For now I am going with UKIP, but will NEVER vote Labour again.
There is nothing futile about Forest's lobbying when no other organisation has represented the views of our minority group in Britain during the 30 years before the ban - that I'm aware of anyway.
I would say it's more futile to attempt to talk to idiots with half a brain like Lord Foooks and I certainly wouldn't expect those heroic campaigners at Forest, or elsewhere post-ban, to waste their precious time.
I think all efforts should be concentrated on voting this govt out and persuading the party that wants in that it should ignore us at it's peril!
Pat, I believe you're right there. The main focus on the next election is defintitely to vote this complacent government out.
A set of new-comers (even though I'm not Tory) will hopefully at least listen and recognise the damage that has been caused.
Let's face it, what's wrong with catering for everybody?
The ban was about SHS which was a downright lie. The lords advised the government at the time, but they didn't listen. NuLabour made their bed (against the advice of the lords and the people of the land) and they can rot in it as far as I'm concerned
If the tory's hold to their word and repeal the hunting ban, Forest and all smokers should lobby hard for an indoor smoking area in pubs for smokers on the grounds of fair play.
If they do try and sneak in the repeal under the cover of weasel words by trying to play it down, it should be taken up and objected to voraciously by smokers on the grounds of unfairness if they refuse to repeal the smoking ban as well. Otherwise they could be accued of one law for the rich and one law for the prolatariat.
After all just because the tory's and their pals want to hold on to their british culture sport why not give fair play to the rest of the english people's favourite recreational and relaxing sport too.
And it will be the tory's we'll be looking to as labour is going to be kicked out on their ass and not before time.
Ann, the problem in my opinion is that the main parties do not feel the smoking ban is a vote winner/loser and I feel the ball has been kicked into the long grass. Simon has a better handle on this than me.
I recently wrote to a Tory MP/think tank on the basis of civil liberties (CCTV, 42 days, ID cards) and slipped smoking in their too. In his reply not one mention of the smoking ban but plenty on the others.
However it is intersting that Lord Mandelson has cited economic reasons for not advocating cigarette display legislation. So I am now going to contradict myself by saying all the lobbying from Forest and our good selves appears to of had some effect. One Labour MP was quoted as saying "not a week goes by in my post bag,without a constituent mentioning the smoking ban". I paraphrase slightly.
Also it will take a brave politician eg Lord Mandelson who has the backbone to stand up against the vested interests of ASH and the Department Of Health.
So Ann, start lobbying your MP or make an appointment on his/her Saturday surgery. If you live near London I am happy to join you.
Unfortunately Dave I am nowhere near London but never fear I'm busy cultivating my local ash rep's garden with cigarette butts.
Not being a previous fan of Mandelson I'm developing a new respect for him. He's a good person to have on our side because he can be tornacious and an ideal candidate to stand up the the vested interests.
An eu MP Charlie McCreevy said recently that the smoking ban was just a fad!
Shame that the news this morning says that the government are pushing ahead with tobacco display bans! Thought it was too good to be true that we would escape that one!