Do we need a national smoking day?
Sunday, February 8, 2009 A national smoking day would be glorious and liberating, thinks Nigel Farndale in the Sunday Telegraph (HERE). He's not alone. In 2007 there was an attempt to organise a National Smoking Day but, with respect to the organisers, 31 December was not the best date to choose and it fell rather flat.
That aside, is the basic premise a good one? After all, if you have a national smoking day, what does that make every other day - no-smoking?
I'm not saying it would never work but if you're going to have a national smoking day you've got to have a clear objective. In other words, what are you trying to achieve?
You've also got to do it properly. That means a series of well-publicised events up and down the country or, at the very least, one BIG event attended by hundreds or thousands of people. There has to be something for the media to report. Unsubstantiated claims of people lighting up across the UK in support of NSD are not enough.
Anyway, I was amused that Farndale invoked the name of Auberon Waugh and even suggested that NSD become Auberon Waugh Day "in the manner of Martin Luther King Day".
Bron was a loyal supporter of Forest and for a while we "sponsored" a monthly drinks party which he hosted at his Academy Club in Soho. (I wrote about it HERE in 2007.)
Auberon Waugh Day may never happen but Farndale has given me an idea for a Bron-inspired event to mark Forest's 30th anniversary later this year. Watch this space.
Reader Comments (14)
And would you smoke a cigar on National Smoking Day, Simon?
Cigar, cigarette ... I wouldn't be fussy, just as I'm not fussy what I smoke on No Smoking Day.
There was a national Smoking Day on 31st December 2007. It was well organised and had National support. Many independant traditional British pubs throughout the land joined in the protest. Authorities had been warned about it, and obviously so had the media. It passed with not one fine, and there was not one single news item anywhere about it. I wonder why.
Timbone, I remember that event on 31 Dec 2007. It was the first night out that many'd had in 6 months - and we all enjoyed it.
Can't wait for the next one. I'll be out again splashing my dosh. In the meantime, I'll sup at home like the millions of others.
Did I have the dubious distinction of lighting up a red Marlboro outside the Houses Of Parliament once?
Delete if you like.
You say, Simon, "if you have a national smoking day, what does that make every other day - no-smoking?"
Not really, Simon, no more than a "National No Smoking Day", makes every other day a smoking day, I only wish it did!
For a "National Smoking Day" to work, it would need high profile faces at its head, just having a huge group of ordinary folk, puffing away outside pubs in the rain, wouldn't do a damn thing. In fact it would probably have the complete opposite effect to what it would be meant to achieve. People who hate smoking, also love the idea of smokers being forced into a minority group, and having to endure pain in order to try to enjoy themselves. They absolutely revel in seeing groups outside pubs in the rain and bad weather. This is why I say that this type of protest, does not, and will not, work!
In your article, Simon, you mention "Martin Luther King Day", with a name like that at the helm, you could sell cocaine to school children, from mobile drug vans outside the school gates. Not so sure about Auberon Waugh, though. I doubt very much if the average adult knows much about Mr Waugh, let alone, school kids, and other impressionables.
To make this work, it needs, sport stars, pop stars, actors, doctors and nurses, people who are not afraid to stand up and be counted. It also need big publicity to accompany it, newspaper adverts, not so much asking for people to be allowed to smoke, but asking for people to be allowed to exercise their rights to freedom once again. It also needs strong contact with the media and TV coverage, for a period of at least a whole week, culminating in National Smoking Day.
The latest anti-wheeze, which I have heard, is for smokers to be branded as a load of middle aged and elderly, cranks. They can't say "old", as all smokers are supposed to be dead before they get that far.
You see what I am getting at, smokers need a new image, a youthful, healthy, image, that is why I say, we need to attract sports stars and those in the medical profession.
Have a think about it.
Glad to see your keeping the battle going. The pc brigade may scoff at you, but its that bull dog spirit and not the pc parasites that made britain great.
Oh, yes Peter. We're "cranks" alright, and there's a very short babystep from that to being labelled a "denier". One babystep from there and the EU have a law against it.
Now, this is gonna sound frightfully conceited... and it's true! I am! But I give this personal and somewhat self-serving anecdote as a smack in the mouth for peecee's infiltration of educashun.
So there I was, chatting with a group of school-age teenagers [in a work-capacity, I hasten to add], when one of them noticed the bacca-pouch in my top-pocket. He asked how long I'd been smoking. I replied to the tune of "about 25 years" and he thought I was having him on.
"But you hardly even look that old!"
There followed the embarrassment of a voxpop yoof-poll to determine my age. The spread of opinion had it at 25-33, with a median average of "about 30".
They were shocked to learn that I wouldn't see 40 again.
"And you smoke!"
Next time I saw the lad, he and his mate were studiously puffing away on Marlboros at the bus-stop.
Tut tut Basil corrupting the yoof of today! Bout time someone did!
Basil. I enjoy your comments. I also suffer from some of the same pleasures, not looking my age, being vain and smoking. You know something? pre-ban I did not have an attitude about youngsters smoking, I was neutral, I neither encouraged or discouraged. Having said that, I have to be honest and say that if a youngster had questioned me about whether they should smoke or not, I would most probably have said it was better for them not to start.
What about post-ban? Ah, things have changed. Whenever I see a youngster smoking now I get a warm feeling because what I see is a middle finger held up to the anti smokers.
You do surprise me Basil, I had you down for around 50ish...Please don't take that the wrong way, it's just that firstly, it seems to be mostly the middle aged, that complain, or moan the most, about the smoking ban, just as in the TV programme, "Grumpy old men" (and women).
I'm not saying that it is the middle aged or the elderly, that smoke the most, because from what I have seen, and know, smoking seems to be accepted more by the teen, to early 40s, age group, bearing in mind of course, that this group, can actually have a bit of fun whilst standing outside a pub, no matter if it's raining or not. It's a great way to chat up the opposite sex, or same sex, if you're that way inclined!
Let's face it, when you are young, who the hell wants to be "sensible"? Sensible is for your parents and teachers. The worst thing an adult can do, is to "ban" their children from doing something, because that is when the child (young person) will start wondering to themselves what the hell they are missing. There is a scene in an old Marlon Brando film, "The Wild Ones", where Marlon walks into a cafe, and the girl behind the counter, says to him, "What are you rebelling about?". Marlon answers her, by saying "What have you got?"
Our politicians would do well today, in remembering that saying. You cannot force people, especially young people, to think in a certain way. It's all right when they are young children, but when they get to their teens, whatever they are "ordered" to do, they want to do the opposite.
You, Basil, probably already know this, as someone, who works with young people. Our government ministers obviously do not!
In my opinion, it is these young people, whom we need to harness to our cause. Grumpy old men and women are entertaining to listen to (for a short while), but if we want to get government ministers listening, it needs to come from the mouths and wisdom of the young.
Same here, Tim. Before I became aware of the antismoking fraud, I'd say much the same. Now I find myself wanting to put the other side across. Oh, but there's LEA rules making "promotion of smoking" to their charges verboten.
So instead, the kids get rammed full of antismoking propaganda in school; this is reinforced by beeb-exposure and often parental-attitudes so the activity, as Peter says, then assumes a great aura of rebellion. And when the realities they see with their own eyes contradict the propagandised vision, they start questioning a lot else they've been told by Miss Primchurch.
Oh... and a few years on from 40 now Peter! I couldn't bring myself to admit the actual year-count figure... but suffice to say, they underestimated my age by at least 12 years. Chuffed with that. Not bad ferra 25 pack-years man.