Lords vote for tobacco display ban
Wednesday, May 6, 2009 The House of Lords has voted to ban tobacco displays in shops. The decision has provoked fury among small shopkeepers. Ken Patel, a retailer from Leicester and spokesman for the Tobacco Retailers Alliance, said: “This is a hugely disappointing decision. Peers have been misled by the pro-health lobby as there is simply no international evidence that a ban on tobacco displays will have the government’s stated objective of reducing youth smoking.
“There is however international evidence that a ban on tobacco displays has a devastating effect on corner shops. Figures recently released by the Canadian Convenience Stores Association (CCSA) showed that since a tobacco display ban was implemented in the province of Ontario, 23 convenience stores have closed every week. In Quebec, following a display ban there, 12 stores closed every week."
Debbie Corris, a retailer in Whitstable, Kent commented: “It is ridiculous to state that young people take up smoking because tobacco is on display in the shops. They take up smoking because they want to look older, or because of peer pressure or because their friends or parents smoke. Underage people aren’t suddenly going to stop wanting to smoke and look older than their years just because tobacco’s not on display in their shops.
Solly Khonat, a retailer from Blackburn, commented: “This will be the nail in the coffin for many independent retailers. I hope that when the debate moves to the Commons that MPs, who know an election can’t be far off, realise that banning tobacco displays is going to cost them votes.”
Reader Comments (45)
who are they kidding ? ban ciggarette display? are they going to ban alcohol or alcohol displays ? 45 pubs closing per week due to the smoking ban !where are all the non-smokers now?
filling the pubs ? I don;t think so ! people are not going to stop smoking just because ciggarettes are not on display ! forbidden fruit comes to mind ! get your act together the powers that be and reverse the ban ! this is just taking the mickey
They will be voting for "Krystalnaught" next.
That means don't smoke near your window.
Oh so sorry "master non smoker" you are obviously my moral and genetic superior.
Dont be seen with a cigarette in public anymore .
Don't worry.
If they had brains, they would be dangerous.
Dummies like them pose only a threat to themselves.
Simply because if they think dumb things they do dumb things.
In short yes Annemarie.
This ammendment has opened the door for any government to dictate how buisinesses are run and on the flimsiest of alleged evidence.
Make no mistake that lives will be ruined as a direct result of this, just as they have in the leisure and ancillary industries.
No buisiness is safe from the interference from the state , not any more, no individual is safe either.
We may just as well be living pre Magna Carta, the Civil wars, the constitution the millions of lives sacrificed fighting Napoleon, Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler all thrown away for no good cause.
My Noble Lords has discarded their nobilty,the Honourable Members no longer have any honour. Both houses deserve nothing but contempt for the betrayal of the people that they hold responsibility for.
Only now is it apparent why Capital Punishment was lifted for High Treason, were it still in place these spineless creatures would never of attempted this travesty of law.
Yea and the saddest thing of all is the underprivileged mal nourished who live in poverty and have lower life expectances are created by the greedy grabbing b******s like them.
They look down on us.
Wrong we look down on them .
We do not want even to begin to understand the corrupt world they take for granted.
They are called , "SNOBS".
I wonder if they'll put their hands up when it comes to a vote on hiding single malt whisky under the counter?
Just goes to show how deaf politics is towards the people of this country, first they go all out to destroy equality,freedom of choice, pubs and clubs, now they wish to destroy small busnesses and human rights, on there quest to promote robotic dictatorship for all. What next have they got in plan for this once liberal country? and all this is being done in the name of protecting people from the so called effect of second hand smoke, built on lies. The Labour party will always be remembered for this and must pay the price for the destruction of equality and our free tolerant way of life.
Well this country has well and truly bit the dust.Look after number 1 now I say and to hell with the lot.
Now wheres that one way ticket to Rio....?
Lord Howe said selling cigarettes was crucial to create "footfall" in corner shops. "People who come in to buy cigarettes typically buy other things as well with a higher profit margin," he said.
"If those people cease to patronise small shops the effect on trade in these outlets could well be terminal."
He added: "In Iceland since the tobacco display ban came into force 30% of small shops have closed.
"In Canada where the display ban is in force almost everywhere, dozens are closing every week.
"In Ontario alone where a ban was introduced only in June 2008, 765 convenience stores have closed permanently, that is 8.6% of the total."
This link is worthy of a read:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6613/
it tells the truth but again the numpties ignore all.
Baroness Thornton, for the Government, described the measure as "another important step to a tobacco-free world.
Let me remind the Baroness that my large family smoked and fought through WW2 for freedom for the uk citizens, including enjoying a cigarette.
Excuse me Baroness who gave you the right to go on a personal mission to eradicate a large percentage of the populations enjoyment, your personal statement is Nazi in nature.
Smokers must surely know by now that smoking bans had nothing to do with protecting non smokers from others smoke, but the ultimate goal is to eradicate smoking and tobacco.
Its up to you to make sure this does not happen.
All small shops should simply defy the ban. Make them enforce it. Make them pay to enforce it. Make them be seen by the public for the bullies that they are. Have lots of pictures of small shop keepers in the arms of the police, in the dock and when they refuse to pay the fines, in jail. Real defiance is the only thing you have left. Are you too English to do it?
MCO asks for shopkeepers to defy the new ban, and asks if they are too English to do this.
I said and thought exactly the same as you when the actual smoking ban came into force, I thought this couldn't happen, the law would be opposed, and then overturned, or at the very least, amended. I thought ordinary people would openly defy these Nazi-like dictats. What publican I asked myself, would stand by and see his business, which he had invested his money and his life in, go down the pan by obeying such a law? What brewery, what tobacco company, what old soldier, what man and woman on the street?
But here we are nearly two years down the line, and do you know what has happened? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
The sound of all these people, whom I had so much faith in, is deafening by its absence.
These people, MCO are not too English at all, just the opposite, they are not English enough. Think of all the battles over the centuries that England has fought and won. Now the vast majority sit back and take whatever is thrown at them, like wimps. God help us all if ever there was another world war, we would lose it from the comfort of our armchairs.
And before you ask, I have defied the smoking ban from day one. I have campaigned to fight back, I have paid for and ran my own pro-smoking website, and I do not intend to ever give up or back down to any of these bullies.
Re John's remark above about Noble Lords I'm pretty sure that if actual nobility, i.e a hereditary peerage, were still the main qualification for membership of the Upper House, the vote would not have gone the way it did. The nation is being overtaken by a caste of actual and superannuated social workers, jargon-spouting education 'professionals' plate glass university 'dons', Quangocrats, charity executives, media people (to their shame) and town hall dirigistes.
The various social and intellectual conformisms required by their caste are the rungs of the ladder to prestige, security, maybe temporary 'nobility' and a safe pension, all paid for by everyday producers of goods and profit.
One must beware, however, of regarding them with the indifference and contempt, veiled or open, which they seem to have for others. Self-righteousness is deadly, whatever the cause. If it were not we would not have this potential reign of puritan terror.
I had the same thought, that a greater proportion of appointed peers might have created this result.
I am in Scotland and can never decide whether I am better off without a House of Peers or not!
Pushing a petition through the Parliament regarding the consultation on smoke-free mental health services, I have yet to learn how effective the petitions committee is at taking a second look at law making procedures in Scotland. For now I am suspending judgment!
The house of commons infiltrated the lords a long time ago.
Most are Rubber stampers to put it in a nutshell, (some of them are smart and independently minded, obviously a minority).
Occasionally they pretend to defend liberty.
The reason for that is to ,again pretend that a semblance of free speech exists which it does not .
Instead they perpetrate the form of manipulated free speech.
Which is fed offered to us by the media, whom usually run with vested financial interests in a particular issue or other.
However all they have to do is to maintain the pretence of personal freedom.
The masess have no time to question because they are too busy trying to make ends meet.
After being worked to death for fifty years ,well ,now it may be more years than that.
They simply die from boredom listening to these twats.
But at least the majority die untainted by the label of ...
Fraudster.
Liar.
Charlatan.
Pervert.
Snob.
Prude.
Gullible.
Puritan.
Murderer
Incompetant.
Thug.
Oh and ...
Dumb ,(thick as two short planks),
If I was a religeous man I would inform the greedy, (and you know who I mean).
Why, what are you really gaining from this ?
Oh wait a minute your not like normal people are you.
Your a ,
Fraudster.
Liar.
Charlatan.
Pervert.
Snob.
Prude.
Gullible.
Puritan.
Murderer
Incompetant.
Thug.
ps
When it comes to fiddles the house of commons make the lords lot look like "begginers".
Politicians are choking the life out of this country.
Our towns have been blitzed: loony business-rates deterring small business, punitive parking-charges and stupid stupid stupid traffic-calming induced jams encouraging people away to shop at the backhander-approved hypermarket, out where the watermeadow used to be. The vindictive smoking ban closing down pubs, the EU closing down our post-offices, and now... and now they even want the corner-shop.
Because we can.
Is there anything left for these psychos to ruin?
If ever a government has alienated it's voters, it is those who do not listen.
I have now lost all faith in the political process.
I will vote and it will not be for any of the major parties!
I cannot trust them to tell the truth, or listen to the truth either.
The blackmarket is back on the market, they learn absolutly nothing!
If this is what they do for the kids, I am glad they did not have charge of mine.
I have the same contempt for those that have done this as they have for the people of this Country.
mandyv
freedom2choose.info fighting for Choice and TRUTH
Dear Peter Thurgood,
Thank you for the courtesy of a reply. I have nothing but sympathy for your frustration. I have lived in Norway for the last ten years and have watched the progress of the ban culture in the UK with amazement. Norway has smoking bans, circumvented with smoking areas that are becoming more and more comfortable as time goes on. Norwegian winters do not encourage people to stand in the street so pub and bar owners have used every wrinkle they can think of to provide warmth and comfort for their smoking patrons. No one complains and the businesses survive. Up here in North Norway eating out is not a particularly common activity. There is enough trade in Tromso, with a population of 65,000 to keep about seven restaurants and maybe half a dozen takeaways in business.The smoking ban has, therefore had very little effect on the restaurant trade, such as it is. When the display ban idea was suggested here the supermarkets caved immediately and you now buy a slip of paper with a bar code on it that you insert into a big red machine in order to get your cigarettes, tobacco, snuff or oddly enough paracetamol and condoms. I have seen children staring in fascination at the big red machines, predictably enough, so much for protecting the chiiildren. Small shop keepers said NO. Norwegians are not notable for being defiant, but the small shop keepers said no, won't, go away. No more was said. I suspect no more will be done. The English have a reputation here for always being polite, not complaining, standing dutifully in line and always saying please and thankyou.Time to stop saying please and thankyou and start saying no.
However angry the situation makes you and others who have written above, the attitude of passive acceptance displayed by the British public and business is the greatest asset the vocal minority have in imposing their will on the majority. Open defiance is your only effective weapon.
Despite the minus 15 and 12 feet of snow winters I am really glad we decided to come here. I am increasingly grateful we decided to leave England. What a sorry mess the politicians have made of a beautiful and proud country.
My thoughts exactly Peter T & MCO. I will not give up the fight no worries on that score. I will not be dictated to whatsoever and i will do things in my own way for the good.
I wonder what will be banned next, when this little scam doesn't work either?
The more you hide these things from children, the more they will want to try them! That's as it has always been. Of course, the black market and probably counterfeit cigarette sales will soar, putting children and far greater risk than them buying a nomal pack of cigs from a normal shop!
Lets face it, many kids know better than many adults where and how to get of illegal drugs and they have never been on display in shops, so why should this ridiculous display ban work to stop children from smoking?
It is all a smoke screen, the smoking ban and everything else connected with it, just as the targetting of drinkers and the obese is a smoke ban. One day we will become aware of the real horrors they are trying to hide from us, as if we are not aware of enough already!
I am with mandyv, I will vote, but not for any of the main parties, no way, they have sold me and mine down the river several times too many and I don't want to have any part in allowing them to do it in the future.
Personally, as leaving this God forsaken country is not a realist option, financially, I think I would rather kill myself if any of the main 3 get in at the next election - I don't see any point in continuing to live in abject misery!
Thank you Peter James & NCO for your support. It is so rare these days to receive any real support for fighting back at the anti-smoking bullies.
One of the biggest problems we seem to have is there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians. "Facts" are bandied about on here and other websites, like there is no tomorrow. Brilliant, but as someone else said on here recently; what for, what is the point of them? That poster was castigated on here, for telling the truth, by saying we were wasting our time in repeating day after day, the same old "facts".
I agree with that poster, we all know these facts, and if you passed them onto the whole population of this country, it wouldn't make one iota of difference to the war on the anti-smoking bullies. There is only one thing that will ever make a difference, and that is action.
I wonder how far Joanna Lumley would have got if all she did was tell everyone the facts regarding the Gurkhas? There is a saying, "Actions speaks louder than words". Never before have these five words been so apt!
They are thankful that they eat their five a day, go jogging, have a BMI of 21, do not smoke, do not drink, do not snack chips and chocolate and only charge £249 for expenses when they could obtain £250 with a receipt. There's nothing new about all this.
This does not surprise me at all. Look, this is a shit government on its last legs and desperate to prove to itself that it can still do good. It can't, of course, as it's too far gone on the road of arrogance and outright stupidity. It never really listens to anything but the sound of its own fatuous voice prattling and purring on the road to Utopia. Evidence? This government doesn't work by evidence but a mixture of hippy and Marxist bullshit. Nor is it interested in science (just like our medical profession) but in mythology. Lastly, anyone whose judgment is still so poor they rely on ASH is really round the bend. ASH and their cronies make up one of the most mendacious lobby groups in the country. You can assess someone's character by the company they keep!
Very well said Blad.
Evidence, truth, doing good or just common honest decency - this government would not know or acknowledge any of it if it got up and slapped them in the face. Sadly, I am not sure either of the other 2 main parties would either!
Blad, I wish that what you say only applied to the Labour Party and then we might have some hope for the future of freedom in this country with an election. Sadly nothing will change at the ballot box. Whichever of the three main parties gets the majority vote at the next election, the Govt will still win, tobacco will still be banned, smokers will still be denormalised.
It truly breaks my heart to hear that fellow smokers are considering voting Tory or LibDem next year. Both parties have made it absolutely clear that they will not reverse any of the legistation imposed by the criminals who make up NuLabour. Why support them to put more nooses around your necks? They must be given a message that smokers will not support any party that does not support them!
It is time to put your usual voting habits to one side and vote with your conscience. If that means voting for a smaller party then so be it. The only one, that I am aware of, that is looking to ammend the ban, and work for it's ammendment, is UKIP. Perhaps the BNP would, but we really don't want to go down that road do we.We should all decide to vote the same way, and lobby ordinary smokers to follow suit. We can only win this battle if we unite under one party. Which is it to be? We have, perhaps, just a year to become organised and to win we must!
I have nothing but contempt and disgust for MPs and parliament its one big sham, democracy forget it. We now have a legal product from which the government collects 4/5th of the cost in tax, they ban the use of this legal product on privately owned property, (smoking in pubs) and now they ban it being on show in shops where it is purchased whilst porn magazines pepper the shelves. Absolutely disgusting these people that rob the taxpayer blind with their expenses and then try to tell the rest of us how to live. Whats the point in voting they are all the same, self, self self and none of them are in touch with the real world, we might as well live in a dictatorship
I cannot believe that I am hearing such rubbish, and from you Pat, of all people.
Do you honestly put smoking at the top of your agenda, when trying to figure out which party to vote for?
Do you think the subject of smoking is more important than kid's education? Or our NHS? to name just two.
Would you choose a book along those same lines, picking the one with the prettiest cover, no matter what the content was?
I suspect health zealotry may not be analogous with the cover of a book but rather with the spirit of its contents, in this case a version of tyranny. Maybe a party which fails openly to declare its opposition to that is indeed not worth supporting.
In that case Norman, there is only one person left to vote for, "yourself"
I do acknowledge,Peter, that our system works through political parties. I was told that in no uncertain terms, nearly 40 years ago by a Labour councillor, angered that I had dared to suggest that Independents stood for election to fight on a local issue. If a happy consequence of this debate were that the Conservatives nailed their colours firmly to the mast of freedom, I would be very happy about that. To change the metaphor, I think they are missing an open goal.It would be nice to believe that they were biding their time and will 'come out' when they judge the time to be right, in support of millions of decent people who happen to enjoy a cigarette and a chat in a living and happy pub or club, part of our ancient, conservative, way of life. Maybe they are. Maybe they are being too clever by half in sitting on the fence. Unless they do show some leadership I think UKIP will be my choice.
Peter. My biggest concern is freedom. Without it, you can never have the things you mention, like free, quality education, free, equal NHS care, etc... The smoking ban, for me, is not about smoking at all. It is about discrimination, totalitariansm, and facism, exclusion, denormalisation, inequality.
Do I wish that I could use my free time to fight more worthy subjects? Of course I do but I didn't make this particular subject an issue at all! Smoking is so trivial it doesn't deserve attention, but as a smoker who is being denormalised, marginalised, and excluded, then I feel I have a right to defend my way of life. If I cannot, then I am not free. I will support which ever party will see and treat me as a fellow human being and citizen not as an outcast serial killer who doesn't deserve to be among "polite" company!
I have always said that a smoking ban would be the first domino to push all others that relate to freedom of choice, freedom of thought and freedom of action, down in its wake.
There are also many, many people who laudably fight for better education, healthcare, etc.. including policitians from each of the three parties but how many are standing up for the right for smokers to live as they choose without being stigmatised?
If you do not see that the importance of this issue is not about smoking, then I sincerely fear for freedom. If we smokers, and people who smoke, do not unite and agree what we are fighting for and why, then the battle to be simply left alone will never be won!
Peter -
Sorry - but you were far too harsh on Pat: my Freedom to Smoke is AS important as The Education Of Children and - yes - the NHS and ALL the other Sacred Cows and Shibboleths of our age that our Political Class likes to trot out on 'Any Questions' and 'Question Time' - when it feels the need for some easy applause from the dummies in the audience.
Had the Third Reich conquered and survived, I've no doubt that it would now have one of the most advanced health systems in the world ('free at point of entry' - in accordance with its True Socialist Principles), and a first-rate Education System.
But would one wish to live there ? Just think of all the other 'trivial' freedoms that would have been smashed into oblivion by the All-Powerful State - in pursuit of ITS conception of Heaven On Earth.
No matter how apparently 'small' a Freedom is, if it MATTERS to just one person (and does no harm to others) then it is BIG enough to defend.
IT'S THAT SIMPLE !!
IMHO the State has no more moral right to ban smoking than it does to ban cocoa-drinking, tattoos, or Old Spice aftershave.
None of these is activities is important to ME -but I'd be loath to live in any country in which it was possible to see someone ARRESTED for indulging in them.
But THAT is precisely the kind of country we are in danger of inheriting before too long, unless............
Penny dropped yet, Mr Cameron ??
The last time I voted was in 2001. I voted for Paul Goggins (Labour), a fine MP, which is most likely why he is now a backbencher. I was also biased because his brother Mark was a fine musician who had worked for me in a show.
My personal protest for several years has been to refuse to be on the electoral register. This has recently changed.
Every party except the Tories has been a minority party, even the Liberal Party had a short burst under Lloyd George. I believe Churchill was a Liberal before he defected.
I have seen a political party grow very quickly. Yes, their views against the smoking obsession were what first caught my eye. It helps that their leader is a smoker. This however has become only part of what appeals to me, and has made me decide to go on the electoral role again.
I used to believe in a federal Europe, but I am changing my mind. I can see the possibility of a noticeable swing in the European elections, and any local elections before the 2010 general election.
This is why I am voting UKIP.
Smoking IS an extremely important issue. It's a litmus test for the mindset of a party/ Government. That is why it is as important as any other issue. Smoking bans have always been
associated with extreme authoritarian power or fundamentalist relious society. Do not underestimate the power that smoking bans instil in the outlook of authority, which we are now seeing in all areas of our lives.
I can see the points that you and other posters have made, Martin, and I do agree with the main point, which is the loss of our "freedom to smoke", rather than the actual act of smoking itself, which is at stake here, and more so, not just our freedom to smoke, but our freedom to live the type of life we want to, as long as we cause no harm to others whilst indulging in that life.
I am not the enemy of smokers, for I smoke myself, but in this political climate, as we all know, smoking and smokers are dirty words as far as the general public are concerned, and until we change the public's perception to smoking and smokers, we will not have a chance in hell of getting our points across, or getting the ban overturned or amended.
We all know the truth of how this all came about, I am not alone in seeing it gather momentum, and predicting what would happen next, and I am not alone in moaning about it. But as I have said a thousand times, moaning on its own will not get us anywhere, and moaning as "smokers" will impede us even more.
It is blindingly obvious that the anti-smoking lobby's campaign is 100% successful. It is so successful that no serious political party will dare to oppose it, for it has convinced the majority of the public that smoking kills, that second hand smoke will also kill, that smokers are dirty, that smokers stink, etc etc. (we all know the story).
So what are we, the people who smoke, the people whom these lies are being told about, doing about these slurs? You all know the answer to that question, because you wouldn't be on here if you didn't.
My points are that if propaganda works for "them", then it will work for "us". Of course we do not have the huge budgets that they have, but there are other, more subtle way of getting our points of view across, of re-humanising ourselves again.
When I read some of the comments on here, I see that they quite rightly referred to our huge loss of liberty, and if that is the case (which is most definitely is) then why aren't we fighting this battle from that standpoint, rather than the standpoint of the "smoker"?
This blog is called "Taking Liberties", it's not called "Taking our fags away", so why not utilise those words? We are more likely to find a sympathetic shoulder to lean on through this door, than we are by opening the old smoking room up again.
We have to make people see that it's not just smoking that has been banned, it is freedom and rights, and that means their rights as well as ours. When I write to any politicians now, I never even mention smoking, I talk about freedom and human rights, and I do not mean the EU version, I mean our real human rights.
Martin said I was a bit harsh in what I said to Pat. I admit I was angry, not at her, but angry at her use of the word "smoker". It doesn't work! Why make ourselves sound like some hated minority group? We must integrate ourselves back into society again, and the only way of doing that is to let everyone else know that we are all the same, and we are "all" having our liberties taken away from us.
Peter, I don't agree about the word "smoker" and as someone who has smoked all my life, I believe I am a smoker rather than just someone who smokes, but I take your point.
However, I also believe that we cannot win unless other people see that the health war is against people rather than an assault against a lifestyle. How many times have you heard : "Why are you moaning about the smoking ban? It's not as if you can't smoke. You just have to go outside."
Unless other people realise that it is not about still being able to smoke but being treated equally and humanely as a smoker, we will never win. That is why I use the word smoker and not smoking. I usually refer to the ban as a "smoker ban" because that will hopefully get the message across that people are being excluded and not just being prevented from indulging in something that they do.
I believe that to avoid the "hated stinky smoker" issue, we have to promote that we smoke and we are proud - but not arrogant. Smokers have given the antis a lot of ammunition over the years because of that arrogance. I used to despair in the very early days of TV anti-smoking campaigning that the message wasn't geared towards smokers employing tolerance and good manners when in the company of those who didn't like smoke.
Personally, I have always been a polite smoker, and I'm sure lots of people on here have been also, but we must acknowledge that some people didn't and still don't consider others and it does the cause no favour.
It is also vitally important that we give a strong message to obese PEOPLE and DRINKERS who cause no harm to others, that this has happened to us as a significant minority of people, and it can happen to them if they don't stand with us.
I'm sorry if you don't agree. It is the way I see it. Perhaps if I tell you that I have smoked all of my life - except for the 8 years I gave up after I was born - you can see that I am A SMOKER - I am most certainly NOT someone who smokes. Smoker bans exclude ME.
I will vote for UKIP because UKIP has shown me that they care about my inclusion as a person.
Pat and Peter -
Good points from both of you.
Time to get some Celebrity Smokers out of the closet, and - as Peter rightly suggests - get them to BROADEN the debate beyond the 'mere' issue of smoking itself.
Obviously, we need someone attractive, intelligent, articulate, not overtly 'party-political', someone with a well-defined sense of decency and humanity, someone with a sense of humour, and (most importantly) someone whom the public clearly ADORES.
I suggest Joanna Lumley !
seconded!
Timbone -
Churchill was a Tory first, then a Liberal, then a Tory again.
In his own words, he not only ratted - but 're-ratted'.
Oh yes - and he was a Sagittarian, too !
In Peter's attack upon Pat he said, "Do you honestly put smoking at the top of your agenda, when trying to figure out which party to vote for? Do you think the subject of smoking is more important than kid's education? Or our NHS? to name just two."
In doing this, he once again infers that UKIP do not have a comprehensive manifesto covering all vital issues. I wish he would take the trouble to actually read it.
As I have now put my money where my mouth is and am standing as UKIP councillor in the June 4th elections, I am privileged to know UKIP from within the party. They are well mannered likeable people who do not dish the dirt on the other parties. They are sure of themselves. Out on the streets, I find nothing but praise and admiration from the ordinary voter. Incidentally, the entire local UKIP committee are non-smokers apart from myself. They are as appalled as we are with the results of the smoking ban.
With ten MEPs already fighting for the UK within the EU parliament, two dedicated intelligent peers in our House of Lords and one MP in our parliament, UKIP can no longer be classed as a small fringe party. I hope all supporters here will encourage others to turn out and vote on 4th June.
I find it admirable Margot, that you are always defending UKIP (even when no one is attacking them). You certainly do exactly what is says on the tin, and put your money where your mouth is.
I am not anti UKIP, although I get the impression that you think I am. I am all for us getting out of Europe and I am obviously for the smoking ban to be overturned or amended, both policies which I believe UKIP stand for.
But, Margot, I do not get the impression that UKIP stand for other things besides these. If they do, they certainly do not publicise them very much. It is all very well you saying that you know these people from the inside, and that they are "well mannered likeable people", but being well mannered and likeable doesn't necessarily qualify them to run the country.
Of course we can all look up on their website what they stand for, but does the average man or woman on the street really want to spend time looking up what a party stands for? I doubt it very much. From what I see and hear of Mr and Mrs Average, they cannot be bothered to even learn who our home secretary or minister for defence is, let alone look up their policies. All we ever hear from Mr and Mrs Average is "Oh well, they're all the same aint they".
You know as well as I do that they are not all the same, if they were, you would not be gunning for UKIP and I wouldn't be gunning for the Tories. We stand up for our respective parties because we believe in them, and because we want to see this present corrupt government defeated and thrown out of office.
The only reason I wouldn't vote for UKIP is because I see it as vote that just might keep this unholy bunch in office a bit longer. At today's ratings, UKIP have just 7% of the vote, which certainly won't win them power, but come the general election, there might possibly be just 7% in it, between the two major parties, and if UKIP managed to swing that 7% away from the Tories, it could lead to a further 5 years of rottenness with Labour.
That, and that alone Margot, is why I would not consider voting for any minority party.
Oh, Peter, here we go again with the sad old selective percentages. Where does that 7% stem from. Don't bother to answer. It's yesterday's news and a Tory argument. Let's see the results after June 4th.
Regarding UKIP having only a two-point agenda -you can cut your list down to one point. Overturning the smoking ban does not figure large in the UKIP manifesto, it simply comes under the section returning freedom of choice to proprietors as to how they run their businesses. Similarly dissolution of Quango's like ASH would come under their intended decrease in unnecessary government expenditure.
For those who don't have access to, or interest in,the internet, all aspects of the comprehensive UKIP manifesto are there in the door to door leafleting taking place at present.
You may feel more secure if the coming elections were only two party affairs so that lost Labour votes would automatically go to the Tories. However, democracy is not like that.
You'd fight your cause better if you stopped attacking UKIP and put forward why the Tories are better than any other party. It really is not sufficient to say that the main objective is to get rid of Labour - no matter what the Tories do or don't stand for as an alternative.
Labour are dead in the water anyway and very few people can see much difference between their basic policies and those of the Tories and the Lib.Dems. All we get are vague promises that certain things will be "looked at".
I would add, Peter, that the Tories have been the Opposition party for a very long time now. They have achieved nothing. This is because both they and the LibDems, together with Labour, are under direct orders from their masters the EU. Do you really think that any intelligent person would want such a regime to continue?
Peter, I agree about the minority issue and that a vote for a small party could lead to NULab getting in again. It is what made me think long and hard before deciding where to put my support. However, I also feel that a vote for Conservative or Liberal will result in exactly the same. Nothing will change. I know that because they are knee-jerk parties, who act on what they percieve to be popular issues at the expense of social exclusion of minorities.
I therefore decided to put my money where my mouth is, and vote for the only party that is offering fairness for all and respect for those of us curently shunned, avoided and belittled by the three main parties.
I really doubt that NuLab will be voted in again. They haven't just lost the smokers'vote. They've lost credibility and alienated people from all walks of life with passion for all sorts of issues.
I honestly believe that the only way to make the three parties realise that we do matter is by showing our anger at the ballot box. That anger will not be displayed if we vote for a party that dismisses us.
I must vote with my conscience as an individual, As a group, I believe we must unite and show some sort of strength and a united vote for UKIP would be one way of doing that.
If you are serious about standing for any political party Margot, then may I suggest that you listen and read carefully what other people say before turning on them time and time again.
Nowhere have I attacked your precious UKIP, just the opposite in fact. I gave you the reasons why "I" wouldn't vote for them, or any other minority party. I did not say it was just UKIP or any other party come to that, the words I used was "minority party".
I am not standing for any political party, I am not trying to sell any political party. Out of all the parties I prefer the Tories, that is my prerogative, just as preferring UKIP is yours.
I told you that the reason I would not vote for any minority party is because it could help Labour get back in again. That is my belief and I am entitled to it, so please stop asking me questions about Tory policy. If you wish to know those answers then ask Conservative Central Office, not me.
7% by the way, is the figure stated in today's Sunday Times.