Knight in shining armour
Wednesday, February 24, 2010 
Conservative MP Greg Knight, a leading supporter of the Save Our Pubs and Clubs: AmendTheSmokingBan campaign (click on the image above), spoke briefly during yesterday's Private Members' Debate on "The future of the British pub" (see earlier post).
Greg was responding to opening remarks by Nigel Evans MP, who introduced the debate. According to Hansard:
Mr. Knight: There is another issue that my hon. Friend has not yet mentioned but which has been devastating for many pubs and clubs-the smoking ban. It is not the ban per se that is the problem, but the heavy-handed way in which it has been introduced in the United Kingdom. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is ludicrous that the only way in which a licensee can provide an indoor smoking room for his or her customers is if they happen to operate on a boat?
Mr. Evans: The way in which the smoking ban was introduced was far stricter than in almost any other country. There are 12 million smokers out there, and a lot of them used to go to pubs, but now that is clearly not the case. I know that my right hon. Friend and hon. Members from other parties are trying to get changes in the law, not to lift the smoking ban but to amend it sensibly so that smokers will at least be treated like human beings when they go to pubs and clubs, and be looked after as opposed to being treated like lepers.
Evans also quoted Antony Worrall Thompson (from a Save Our Pubs and Clubs press release): "The smoking ban has had an extraordinary detrimental effect on pubs and clubs. The legislation as it stands is excessive and I would like to see it amended."
He (Evans) then added:
"As I have noted, MPs from all parties have co-operated with my right hon. Friend in his campaign [to amend the smoking ban]. We are all familiar with seeing people standing outside pubs having a cigarette in sub-zero temperatures, in the rain and the snow with all the elements against them. Hypothermia has become a smoking-related disease under this Government."
Hansard also reports this exchange:
Mr. Knight: My hon. Friend is making a powerful case. Does he agree that his arguments in favour of the British pub apply equally to non-profit-making clubs in the UK, such as Labour clubs, Conservative clubs, working men's clubs and British Legion clubs?
Mr. Evans: Absolutely. I agree with my right hon. Friend that such clubs are very much at the heart of communities. The things that make pubs attractive places for people to visit are the same as the things that make people go regularly to clubs in this country.
Afterwards I spoke briefly to Nigel Evans, who is vice-chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Beer Group. He agreed to add his name to our campaign to amend the smoking ban, and also agreed to be interviewed for our next campaign video.
Watch this space.
Reader Comments (15)
WOW !
Come on, Cameron - start using your BRAIN, man...........
Blimey Dave .
Get some more like this and I will paint my front door blue !
Greg Knight is on the money here.
Lepers is the right word for how this government have treated us.
I feel really cornered by Labour on this issue.
It's not a good feeling either.
Being cornered by the full force of the law.
Woo-hoo - just great on a day when I read this depressing news curtesy of Dave Atherton
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/02/action-on-smoking-and-health-promotes.html
This is shocking and should be illegal - the blanket smoking ban laid the way open for this kind of incitement to hatred and that is why it is so wrong.
Smokers need to be back inside somewhere so that those who despise them get the message that Britain is a tolerant nation which valuies ALL of its people and it has no time for fanatics who preach hate in exactly the same way as radical preachers and other nutters preach hate in a religious, sexist, homophobic or racist way!
The Govt has taken the wrong side in this war when it should have taken none. Will the next govt show itself up to be favour of such unacceptable viewpoints or will it show itself to be just and fair...?
My goodness...I had to read this three times before it sunk in!
The unmentionable has finally been raised as a serious issue affecting lives and livelihoods.
I'm a "human being" not a "leper" - can it really be true that some of the people in power acknowledge this and are prepared to fight for my right to enjoy the company of friends over a drink and a cigarette in the warmth and protection of club or pub - just like it used to be?
This is the third winter I have had to endure without socializing with my friends because of this draconian law and after nearly four months of being more or less confined to the house, I impatiently await the stirring of the spring to release me from my prison.
That probably sounds a bit far fetched but it does reflect how I feel.
My grateful thanks go out to all of you who are working so hard to get this amendment.
May be I can look forward to a happy retirement going out with family and friends after all.
Thank you, again...
Pensioner Ellie
@Pat
F2C have been exchanging emails with ASH UK and they can't stop distancing themselves from ASH USA. Also they appear to accept that we make a conscious choice knowing the risks.
"As mentioned we have no links or contacts with ASH USA and can therefore not be called to account or be asked to apologise for their activities.....
We are explicitly not an anti-smoker organisation. We campaign against the harm caused by tobacco. Some smokers have decided to keep on smoking despite having knowledge of the dangers just as some smokers would like
to quit but find it extremely difficult. We understand the former and are very supportive of the latter."
To be fair to ASH it does seem to be constructive reply and realise we smoke because we want to. The only bit I have a problem with is "no links or contacts with ASH USA."
Would ASH UK like to explain these 2 donations in their accounts 2008 £65,242 donation from ASH International and in 2009 £104,119. ASH International are of course Banzhaf's USA outfit.
It is on page 14.
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/re ... 31_e_c.pdf
We are explicitly not an anti-smoker organisation.
Says ASH.
Are you kidding ! !
Just to illustrate how far the Anti smoking lobby will sink here is an article published on Reuters stating that a study shows smokers are not as intelligent as non smokers.
As an I.T Proffesional who smokes I find this grossly offensive ,abusive and an attack on my human rites.
I suppose Albert Einstein probably would have done too !
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61M3UQ20100223
Dave - Perhaps ASH should distance itself so far away from its US cousin that should chnage its name. It is a despicable organation that does indeed work against smokers or it wouldn't be backing a blanket smoking ban that alienates, humiliates and excludes smokERS, and not the practice of smokING.
Specky, along the lines of what you found on Reuters, yesterday I was watching The Wright Stuff and Professor Robert Winston was guest of the day. I was very interested to hear him state that low weight babies, which certainly includes IVF babies, all tend to suffer from illnesses and diseases in their mid 40's onwards than babies of born at a greater weight.
Nothing about smoking.
And I do not accept the argument that smoking causes low birth weight! As I have said before, my mother smoked during pregnancy and both my brother and myself were 10 pound+ babies! I smoked whilst pregnant with my daughter and she was 8 pounds.
Sorry if a bit off topic, but I did think it interesting.
Their is an article on the forces international website about birth weights getting lower in the US.
Yet far less women smoke.
Funny how so much of the propoganda is being disproved by the antis own actions, isn't it?
Fewer smokers, greater number of cancer cases; greater number of low birth weights; higher numbers of youngsters with asthma and allergies.
When will the rest of the world open it eyes and see what is staring them in the face?
It's laudable that these MPs are actually speaking about the smoking ban - there must be an election approaching.(although more Conservatives voted against a blanket ban than MPs from other parties) However, I really will smell a rat when folks on the Nulab/LibDem benches start speaking in a similar way:)
Being a long term wheelchair user I needed help going into a pub, but once in there I could enjoy my evening having a few drinks and a smoke.
Now I would have to ask people to help me go outside to have a cigarette and would probably be in the way on the pavement.
I did not want this and decided not to go out any more.
Now in addition to being disabled physically I am clinically depressed and on medication due to social isolation.
The smoking ban is evil.
You are not the only one Shirley. I too have suffered social isolation because of the smoking ban, and I do not have the added problem of being in a wheelchair.
Like you, I suffer from depression and have now been on anti depressants for 3 years! Just the thought of the smoking ban being enacted was enough to depress me!
I wish you all the best and hope you are dealing with your depression, despite the totally inadequate help available - if you are lucky - on the NHS. Pity they can't spend some of the money they are wasting on propoganda on mental health care!
As I said in an earlier post, the really, really important aspect of the smoking ban is the prohibition of free, grown-up citizens of this country offering facilities, in the form of a bar, to other free, grown-up citizens of this country in order to meet and socialise, drink alcohol, enjoy tobacco, and have a game of darts, or whatever. The effect of the ban on each individual smoker is not the important thing.
It is pleasing to note that this thought seems to be gaining ground, albeit slowly.
As I said earlier, the Tories seem to be moving into a more libertarian stance. The Tories, as a group of individuals, voted against the draconian smoking ban, although I am not convinced that they knew what they were voting against. Suffice to say that they did.
All the Tories need to do to get 15 000 000 people on their side is to say that we are going to look again at ALL the prohibitions of this recent, arrogant, government. Also, we will look again at the funding by taxpayers of one issue propaganda organisations (fake charities).
The possibility for economies is enormous, but the process needs some care and attention. Do politicians have the intelligence and the spirit to undertake such a task? I am sure that they do, provided that their leaders allow them to do so and refuse to be deflected by short term considerations.