Tuesday
Sep072010
Every little helps
Tuesday, September 7, 2010 Two days back from their summer holidays and a further four MPs have signed Brian Binley's Early Day Motion calling on the Government to review the smoking ban. The latest MPs to sign EDM 406 are Richard Ottaway (Conservative) and three Labour MPs - John Cryer, David Hamilton and former minister Tom Harris.
In addition I have today received a letter from another MP (Conservative) who writes:
I have the greatest possible sympathy with the views that you have expressed and indeed voted in favour of amendments to try to ameliorate the smoking ban at the time of the original legislation. I do not, however, as a matter of course sign Early Day Motions.
Little by little, bit by bit ...
Reader Comments (21)
I'm having a drawn out exchange with our local MP Kris Hopkins about EDM 406. He seems to live in a trance, and to belive that the ban was an "undoubted" success. His last reply to me was the most insulting and patronising brush off I've ever had from anyone. Read all about at at http://www.facebook.com /group.php?gid=122405704449762&v=photos
(you might even be able to read te letters in their right order :-)
It's definately a bigger vote loser for Labour mp's than Tory ones ,oddly enough the Labour mp's became the majority of turkeys who voted for christmas.
I guess it was because the Tories still have a stronger vein of Libertarianism and self choice, well slightly more ,some of them.
The major stumbling block to reform is ASH.
Divisive.
Illiberal.
Authoritarian,
Incompetent.
Expensive.
Manipulative.
Deceptive.
And so wrong.
Tom Harris always come across as a decent kind of person.
A special hat tip to John Cryer. I wrote to him a few weeks ago as he is my local constituency MP in Leytonstone and Wanstead. Let me quickly say my email to him asking him to sign it maybe completely co-incidental.
However I have met him and in my email did identify myself as a Tory council candidate and of course spent the last election doing my very best to see that he did not become MP.
If that is the case my public thanks.
"The major stumbling block to reform is ASH"
. . . or as I prefer to call them "the now-discredited ASH"
Sad to report that Paul Uppal (Wolverhampton South West, Conservative) responded to my request that he sign the EDM with a potted reply along the lines that 'the government has no plans to review smoking legislation' along with party-line guff about evidence that passive smoking is harmful, and a charming quotation from some bod on the Cancer Research Committee.
This is from memory as I immediately tore up his letter in disgust, and binned it.
Perhaps a little history may help.
Lucy Paige Gaston early 20th century tobacco prohibitionist.
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-2008/The-Smoking-Gun/
Carrie Nation was the original alchohol prohibitionist.
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/web/20061227-carry-nation-temperance-movement-prohibition-woman-suffrage-kansas-culture-wars.shtml
The modern versions of these strange people have large amounts of public funding and a lot of lobbying power.
Not to mention the image consultants,spin plus the ability to buy column inches in the MSM.
Still they havent changed a bit.
Barking mad.
In fact to add to my last post I am beginning to wonder if prohibitionist tendancies are linked to a type of mental illness.
Early this morning, I posted on this site an indication that I had left ‘an idea’ on the Your Freedom site suggesting that we should have a ‘public enquiry’ about the smoking ban. Earlier this evening, I checked the ‘idea’ and found two votes and zero comments. A few minutes ago, I checked again and found one comment – from someone who knows nothing at all about the survey about pub closures.
It has disappointed me that no one here can be bothered to support my proposition that there should be a public enquiry. A public enquiry into how the ban came to be enacted (parliamentary trickery, ‘useful idiot’ MPs with snouts in trough), along with the false statements by ASH and co and the medical establishment in general, could solve the problem of the injustice of publicans being forced to enforce a law which perforce destroys their own businesses.
But no one who is involved here – not a single one – seems to give a toss. I had hoped that my ‘idea’ about a public enquiry might gain some traction, but it seems that not so.
I do not suppose that it matters. I think that I will go back to looking after myself. Now that I have got out of the habit of going to my local as much as I used to, the smoking ban does not bother me that much.
I think that I will go back to my Einstein studies and my golf. At the age of 71, youthful though I may appear, time is not on my side. I picked up a 7 iron yesterday and hit a few chips in the garden............
What I find rich and amusing, Junican, is the comment by GethroDee, underneath. I wonder if he applied the same level of thought to all the 'Passive smoking kills' tripe? Somehow, I doubt it.
Don't lose heart, Junican - people can't always respond straightaway to actions they want to pursue. Remember too, that it's difficult to identify people across sites.
Junican - due to work my time on the PC has been limited, I have just now, however, left a vote and comment on the Your Freedom site in relation to your 'Idea'.
Well done you.
OK, OK junican. Been there, done that :-)
Apologies from me as well, Junican - I must admit I gave up on YourFreedom after Clegg's dismissal of our views in that video.
I have now voted and commented.
Junican, have voted and commented .
Make it easy for people
Give a link where ever possible Junican...that way it makes it easy for people to go there.
Please keep up the good work Junican.
Sorry Junican, like Rick S (and I suspect many, many people) I have given up on the Your Freedom site. Even after Clegg said that the smoking ban wouldn't be revisited, I hoped there would be some semblance of sanity, some pretence at consultation. After all, surely they couldn't ignore the most commented upon topic on the whole site, could they? Then after this, I remember there was a flurry of reports indicating that not one of the suggestions was being considered which made me finally regard the thing as an expensive and cruel hoax.
I suspect the majority are with me which is why no-one has visited your suggestion. That said, perhaps we should. I'm sure the antis, as they are usually verging on mental illness, are dementedly voting on topic after topic, so we should really pop in occasionally to make sure they don't distort the results.
I am really grateful for the encouragement. Perhaps I was a bit depressed by the seemingly impossible task of refuting the scare stories. Does second hand smoke harm children? Are people who have smoked in the presence of their children guilty of ‘child abuse’? If that is true, then I am guilty, guilty and guilty again (having had three children). Odd, though, is it not, that all of my children are perfectly healthy, as are my grandchildren? And, is it not odd that the VAST, VAST majority of similar families are equally healthy? And so, how is it possible for a Professor of Physicianism (to coin a word) to get away with a statement that smoking in the presence of one’s children is ‘child abuse’? Think about it. It would only take one person to sue such a professor for defamation (or whatever) to persuade them to SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Sorry about that.
I would personally be prepared to do just that, but I have a wife suffering from MS. Also, I am terribly old. The people who should be suing, in order to test the law, are people who have the youth, the means and the courage. It amazes me that there are no such people. Correction – there is NOT ONE such person.
As regards the Your Freedom site, I still have some faith – though not a lot. If there is a situation where 1200 people ‘vote’ about a relaxation of the smoking ban, and some 65% vote for a relaxation, then it would be wrong for the powers-that-be to ignore such a vote. The reason is that those who vote for a relaxation are representative of the whole adult population – which is what pollsters claim, and, generally speaking, is correct.
The possibility that a ‘public enquiry’ re the smoking ban might occur is very remote. Members of Parliament, even if they are new MPs, do not want to know – apart from those MPs who have signed the ‘early day motion’. There are now 30 of them! Do not be put off by the fact that there are only 30 – 5% of MPs is a good number.
It is my opinion, however, that these 30 MPs would be better employed in calling for a ‘public enquiry’. What to me seems to be true is that the ‘smoking ban’, as it is, was presented to Parliament backed up by falsities. Only a public enquiry will reveal the truth.
PS. I notice tonight the Clegg has decided to change Your Freedom – and about time too! But we wait to see what he considers are matters sufficiently important for the Coalition to consider. Could an ‘idea’ such as this be thought worthy?: “That manifesto pledges should be considered to be sacrosanct and that such pledges should never be overturned except in the interests of National Security”?
EDM 406
My excnahges with MP Kris Hopkins are becoming less and less meaningful. He has even chosen to misunderstand the purpose of EDM 406, and believes it to be a motion for amendment of the ban. Of course it isn't, just to prompt the review which was part of the original legislation. I doubt if he has actually read it. I still need to know how he defines "success" of the ban - he seems unable to tell me. He absolutely refuses to engage on the issues surrounding the ban. I can only assume he is intellectually bankrupt and unable to argue any sort of case for or against. What on earth will he do in Parliament? Incredible that a moron can rise to a public position so easily.
excnahges?
Look it up, alternative spelling of "exchanges" :-)
"Incredible that a moron can rise to a public position so easily............"
Agreed, George.
But perhaps we're now at that sad point in our National Story (and WHAT a story it has been !) in which the REALLY Intelligent People have discovered that there's something better to do with their lives than re-arrange the deckchairs on a sinking vessel....................................