Forest at the Lib Dem conference
Friday, September 18, 2009 
Our event in Bournemouth next week, which we are co-hosting with Liberal Vision, has reached the ears of The Publican. "Forest," it reports, "are joint-hosting a panel discussion and party at the Liberal Democrat conference next week as part of a bid to amend the smoking ban. The debate, under the banner ‘Politics and Prohibition’ – will discuss the issue of how liberals should fight back against the nanny state.
The paper adds:
Speakers will include Forest director Simon Clark, Liberal Vision director Mark Littlewood and Liberal Democrat blogger Charlotte Gore at the event, also being organised by LibDem supporter group Liberal Vision and The Free Society.
Smokers are “welcome” according to the invite for the event taking place at Bar-so-Dome, the Royal Exeter Hotel, Bournemouth, on September 22.
The Save our Pubs and Clubs campaign was launched in June, backed by TV chef Antony Worrall Thompson. It aims to get the smoking ban amended when it is reviewed next year.
Story HERE.
In the unlikely event that you're in Bournemouth on Tuesday do drop in. You'll find us in Bar-so-Dome at the Royal Exeter Hotel (opposite the conference centre but outside the security zone so no pass required) from 6.15pm.
After the speaker meeting we're also co-hosting a drinks party with our traditional live music - a three-piece jazz trio.
Simon Clark
Not everyone welcomes our participation, it seems. Frank Little, Lib Dem councillor for Cadoxton, Neath, blogs: "It's not so much the title ("How should we fight the nanny state?") as the indication of the direction the event is to be steered. Co-sponsors are Forest, the pressure group which wants to rescind the ban on smoking in public places."
Responding to our invitation another Lib Dem councillor (and prospective parliamentary candidate) wrote: "Sorry I won’t be attending as I fully support the smoking ban. Please delete my details from your mailing list."
Oh well, at least he replied!
Simon Clark
Another Lib Dem PPC has replied to our invitation:
I will be unable to attend this event as it clashes with other commitments.
As an asthmatic, the smoking ban came as a huge relief to me. I am one of those unfortunate people who is particularly sensitive to cigarette smoke. I have a hunch that this is due to the additives that cigarette manufacturers use - for example, I find smoke from cigars or high-quality rolling tobacco far less noxious than that from commercial cigarettes.
As a liberal, I believe in the basic principle that my freedom ends where it impinges on someone else's freedom. The freedom to smoke in enclosed public spaces impinges on other people's freedom to breathe clean air. Cigarette smoke is known to be harmful to health; refraining from smoking is not.
As a friend of mine wittily pointed out, "a smoking area in a restaurant is like a peeing area in a swimming pool." This is an issue on which I don't think we will ever agree.
"Smoking", it has been said, "is like voting Conservative. One can understand why our parents did it, but for people our age, there is no excuse." People are free to continue to vote Conservative in the privacy of the polling booth, and rightly so. Similarly, I don't mind if people continue to smoke - as long as they don't do it in front of me.
Reader Comments (12)
So two LibDem councillors (not MPs) announced their support for the Smoking Ban - utterly, totally and completely.
What does this say about their understanding of the situation as regards alcohol? Surely, in order to be consistent, they must be utterly, totally and completely against the consumption of alcohol.
And what about the consumption of beef burgers? On the grounds that beef burgers make people obese, should not they be banned?
The reality is that these people have 'CLOSED MINDS'. They have tunnel vision.
How can any sensible person vote for them?
It may be too late, but I seriously feel that Forest ought not to go to their conference.
Ask them why they are no longer liberal.
The reason you are fascists and not Liberals is that you support a blanket ban.
Seperate smoking areas or smoking non smoking venues are a simple answer.
Then nobody smokes in front of you do they you moron.
Sorry Illeberal fascists, blanket bans are fascist.
How thick politicians are the job just attracts the wrong kind of person.
Lib Dem PCC (if you're watching) -
"The freedom to smoke in enclosed public spaces impinges on other people's freedom to breathe clean air."
Agreed. Which is why WE are arguing for Freedom of Choice: lovely sterile atmospheres for Smoke-Haters, and less sterile ones for Smokers. YOUR insistence on the virtues of the Ban impinges on MY freedom, however.......
"As a friend of mine wittily pointed out, "a smoking area in a restaurant is like a peeing area in a swimming pool."
You have a bizarre sense of what constitutes 'wit', then. Swimming pools were NEVER intended to be peed into. Pubs ARE intended to be sociable places, and smoking is PART of the social process. Again, CHOICE is the answer to your little problem.......
"Similarly, I don't mind if people continue to smoke - as long as they don't do it in front of me."
I appreciate you magnanimity. That is one restriction I CAN bear. Please feel free to step outside whenever I light up in my pub, my restaurant, or my home. I shall simply AVOID yours.......
"Cigarette smoke is known to be harmful to health."
Clearly, you've done absolutely NO research on the subject. Never mind, we all have to start somwehere - and this website is not a bad place to educate yourself on the matter.......
"As an asthmatic..."
Probably just an irrelevant bid for the Sympathy Vote. If you were NOT ashtmatic, would that make ANY difference to your antipathies ? Somehow, I doubt it. Oh, and many asthmatics SMOKE, by the way (their choice, you see).......
"As a liberal...."
Classic self-delusion. You are nothing of the sort - if you fail to see the LOGIC of the arguments I have put above........
I think you'll make a PERFECT Lib Dem MP, though.
I've been saying for ages that this lot are not worth wasting your vote on. What I simply can't understand is why any smoker would even consider supporting this useless excuse of an alternative party. Those that do, simply can't care whether there is a smoking ban or not!
A smoker voting libdem is like one shooting themselves in the foot. The libdems generally, hate smokers. It is as simple as that!
As a generalisation there is a gap at the Lib Dems between the membership which is genuinely Liberal and have a dislike of the nanny state and its politicians which are more patrician.
I am down on Monday morning and have been roped in to giving some leaflets promoting the event. I am sure it will be success.
I've got my question for the councillor ready too.
Good luck, Dave.....
But, if there's a 'gap' between Lib Dem Members and their Leadership, whose fault is that ?
How did such an intelligent nation produce such a troupe of gibbering, useless monkeys ?
Darwin MUST have got it wrong somewhere......
As a friend of mine wittily pointed out, "a smoking area in a restaurant is like a peeing area in a swimming pool."
So witty is he that he can't even think of his own inappropriate cliche, but instead trots out, for the millionth time, one dreamed up by ASH USA 15 years ago. For his next party piece he is going to claim the Parrot sketch as all his own inspired work.
As for the Lib Dim PPC "As a liberal, blah blah blah ...". Liberal? Yeah ok. Sounds more like the usual self-centred refusal to see an alternative viewpoint.
Lib Dems are, quite simply, not the answer.
"For his next party piece..............."
Well, it won't be from Bernard Manning's repertoire, that's for sure.
There's room in my heart for STUPID people.
There's room in my heart for BORING people.
But, as to people who are boring AND stupid.......
Martin V analysed the Libdem PPC's statement almost perfectly. Well done, Martin V.
If I might contribute.
If we pursue the logic of his/her statement to its conclusion it would go something like this:
"I am asthmatic. Particulates from car exhausts, especially, aggravate my condition. Therefore people have to stop issuing particulates from their car exhausts, therefore people have to stop driving cars in my vicinity"
This PPC said, "As a liberal, I believe in the basic principle that my freedom ends where it impinges on someone else's freedom". I must ask if it is true that this person actually said those words. In view of the length of the statement, it is reasonable to assume that the statement was in the form of a letter or an email, and is therefore precise.
In what way is this Libdem PPC's statement wrong?
It is simple but not obvious.
The fact is that NOT ALL FREEDOMS ARE THE SAME!
If I was a burglar, I might claim for myself the FREEDOM to burgle your house. I would therefore object to you having the FREEDOM to stop me. YOUR freedom impinges on MY freedom.
Do we accept that argument? Of course we don't!
I think that Simon should advise this Libdem PPC of the error of his/her thinking. I also think that he/she should be named and shamed.
I have never voted Lib Dim and I'm unlikely to ever do so. I have always found them to be the very essence of sanctimonious and your posting proves it. It also proves that they - and perhaps our politicians more generally - don't understand that they are our representatives. We are not the slightest bit interested in their opinions or their proclivities.
"Please feel free to step outside whenever I light up in my pub, my restaurant"
You lot are as bad as each other, all i see are both sides rabidly arguing ad homain about who should be allowed/banned etc.