Getting ready to party

Just spent the afternoon sorting out the details of next week's boat party on the Thames. With the help of Ranald Macdonald (MD of Boisdale) I have been choosing the wine, the food, and confirming the band.

I have also been in a bit of a panic because we are VERY close to capacity. So far 210 people have registered to attend. Any more and we're going to have to put them on a reserve list.

Exceeding capacity is a problem because on a boat there are strict rules concerning maximum numbers. It reminds me of the party we hosted in Bournemouth at the 2006 Conservative conference. There must have been 400 people squeezed into the ballroom when hotel staff began to refuse people admission, citing 'elf and safety.

How ironic if Forest and The Free Society have to turn people away (again) for the same reason.

Hearing voices

Having been away since the last of the Voices of Freedom debates on Tuesday I haven't had a chance to reflect on the series. However Dick Puddlecote, who attended four of the five debates, has done it for me with an article that has been published on both DP's blog and The Free Society website. Click HERE.

Update on Monday, July 5, 2010 by Simon Clark

I suggested to last week's audience that we would be back with more debates in November. I'm already regretting having said that! Truth is, the series took three months to organise (the original concept goes back to before Christmas) and there were times when we were struggling to get speakers. Eventually I had to call in a few favours from people I know personally and I can't do that too often. On reflection, a series of debates held annually is probably quite enough, although it won't stop us doing some one-off events.

Postcard from Ireland

Just back from Ireland - a fleeting visit to Cork and a couple of days in and around Dublin. Here are some observations:

Unlike the UK, where people continue to voice their disapproval, no-one is talking about the smoking ban. And that includes smokers, unless visitors like me ask them for their opinions.

In Cork I met one of the country's few smokers' rights campaigners and he admitted as much. A few hours later the cabbie who drove me from Heuston station to Delgany in Co Wicklow told me that being forced to smoke outside doesn't bother him and I believed him because I've met others who feel the same way. It doesn't mean he wouldn't support a choice of smoking and non-smoking facilities indoors, if it was offered to him, but he don't feel strongly enough to campaign for change.

My driver did however draw the line at further restrictions and I know this because as we were driving south through the Dublin traffic a news item came on the radio. Health officials, it was reported, want to ban smoking in the grounds of a hospital in Cork.

The programme then interviewed a woman who supports the idea. Unchallenged, she claimed that a friend of hers had lost a leg "because of passive smoking". I almost choked on my extra strong mint and I was tempted to call the station myself. Instead, I had a long discussion with my driver who agreed that banning smoking outside is pointless and pathetic.

Interestingly, it does seem that the authorities are enforcing the law less rigorously than when it was first introduced in 2004, and people are finding ways round it.

For example, the taxi driver told me that he has no problem if passengers want to smoke in his cab - which is illegal - as long as they keep their cigarette out of sight of the police.

My friend in Cork told me that when he visits one particular pub in the afternoon the publican will close and lock the doors and produce an ashtray and together they will sit and smoke inside.

In Dublin meanwhile I was taken to lunch and the four of us were given a table on an outside balcony where people could smoke. Every other table on the balcony was taken and although it was sunny it was also a little breezy. I wasn't aware of it at the time but someone must have flicked a switch because a canvas canopy suddenly appeared over our heads creating a rather snug environment. Technically it may have been illegal (customers allowed to eat and smoke in comfort and under cover shock!) but I can't imagine anyone apart from the most fanatical anti-smoker complaining.

Later in the afternoon we popped into a pub that had - wait for it - a separate smoking room! It wasn't very big but it looked and felt as if it was an integral part of the pub. It was separated from the main bar by a floor to ceiling glass wall. It felt, I have to say, like part of the pub. All it lacked was a flatscreen TV to watch the football (Brazil-Holland, since you ask).

At first I thought it was an indoor smoking room. In fact it was like a very large vertical chimney. The brick walls went up and up and up and 40 or 50 feet above our heads you could see the sky. True, we felt some spots of rain on our heads at one point, but generally it felt pretty sheltered.

And consider this. The last time I went through Dublin airport there were stern notices everywhere telling people not to smoke or face the consequences. This time, apart from the usual 'No Smoking' signs, I didn't see anything like that. What I did find was a smoker-friendly Garden Terrace Bar with great big banners that declared: "Coming soon - heated garden terrace designed by Diarmuid Gavin".

According to the airport website: "The bar/restaurant will have seating for 300 people and the 2,500 sq ft roof terrace ... will be a key feature of the development." Smoking area, key feature. Go figure.

The point I take from this is that the private sector is making some effort to cater for smokers. My hope is that the market will continue to find ways to accommodate smokers and a new and more liberal generation of politicians will be more sensible and less heavy-handed in the way that they interpret and enforce the law.

Then again, a simple amendment would suffice. Not too much to ask, is it?

Above: smoking room in a pub in Dublin

Three in five smokers want smoking ban relaxed

Three years after the introduction of the smoking ban in England a poll of over 1,000 smokers has revealed that three in five smokers want the smoking ban relaxed to allow separate smoking rooms.

The survey, commissioned by the Tobacco Manufacturers Association, also shows little support among smokers for extending the smoking ban to other areas - 62% would go less often to the pub if smoking was banned in all of the pubs’ outdoor areas.

Chris Ogden, chief executive of the TMA, said:

“We are recovering from recession and it is time to lift the legislative weight off struggling local businesses and their communities. The smoking ban has, contrary to claims from health organisations, severely threatened the £6 billion pub and bingo industry by negatively affecting thousands of people working in the hospitality sector who have lost sales, jobs and their livelihoods. Here is the evidence of how the smoking ban has impacted on Britain's pubs and clubs:

In the last year, almost 2,000 more English pubs have closed making a total loss of 4,148 since the ban in 2007 and over 10,000 jobs have been lost per year.

The rate of closures has almost trebled since the ban (1.1% 2004-7 versus 2.8% 2007-10).
7.6% of pubs in England and 20% of bingo halls have closed in total since the ban.

Almost 40 pubs are closing every week.

“The TMA supports an amendment to the legislation that would give landlords the choice to allow separate smoking rooms in pubs and clubs and we would encourage the Government to improve the legislation by introducing this proportionate amendment. Adult smokers should have available to them places where they may smoke without inconveniencing others and any review should be balanced, proportionate and take into account the likelihood of continued negative impact on business.”

Champagne and caviar

Drinking a glass of champagne at the Seafood Bar at Stansted - 125g of luxury caviar, £465! It's the Cornish seafood salad for me ...

Update on Wednesday, June 30, 2010 by Simon Clark

From the sublime to the ... It's now 10.30 and I am sitting nursing a pint of Guinness in the Met Bar at the Metropole Hotel in Cork. Sadly they stopped serving food at 9.45 but a kindly barman has offered me a small bowl of Bombay mix and "room service" which translates as a sandwich if I am really, really hungry.

Not sure if I want to go back to my room. The plumbing is so noisy it took ten minutes to pipe down after I turned the tap on to wash my hands. Heaven knows what will happen if I flush the loo. And to think that I declined an upgrade to an "executive room" to save money.

Breakfast had better be good, that's all I'm saying.

Now that's more like it

I haven't got time to comment - I will shortly be dashing off to Stansted to catch my flight to Cork and I've still to go to the bank to get some euros and collect my suit from the cleaners - but I have just read this on the BBC News website:

The Jamie Oliver-approach will not work in tackling public health problems like obesity and smoking, the health secretary says.

Andrew Lansley told the British Medical Association conference in Brighton there must be an evidence-based approach to dealing with public health.

Mr Lansley said people needed to take responsibility for their own health.

He warned lecturing people often ended up being counter-productive.

"If we are constantly lecturing people and trying to tell them what to do, we will actually find that we undermine and are counterproductive in the results that we achieve," said the health secretary.

I have to say I'm encouraged. Hopefully the new health secretary will have a lighter hand on the tiller than some of his New Labour predecessors.

Read the full report HERE.

Note: politicians need praise and encouragement. I hope you will write to Andrew Lansley c/o the Department of Health.

Thanks - it was a blast

Thoroughly enjoyed the Voices of Freedom series of debates which finished last night. For the fifth week in a row it was standing room only. I can't tell you how relieved I was when 40 people turned up for the first event, on June 3. A day or two earlier I was seriously panicking, thinking we would do well to get double figures.

Well, after that first week, the numbers got better and better and we averaged between 70 and 80 for the subsequent debates - not bad for a room with 40 chairs, but a little uncomfortable for those who had to stand or sit on the floor.

(As I pointed out last night, the more intelligent members of the audience worked out that they had to arrive early if they wanted a seat. As you can imagine, this observation didn't go down so well with the people standing at the back!)

It didn't help that the series coincided with a hot spell but the air-conditioning coped - just.

I am flying to Ireland today but when I get a moment I will publish a review of the series. In the meantime, thanks to our partner groups (the Institute of Economic Affairs, Big Brother Watch, Adam Smith Institute, Manifesto Club and Liberal Vision), our chairmen (Mark Littlewood, Iain Dale, Claire Fox and James Panton) and, most important, our audience.

A number of people helped bring the series to life. Special thanks to Karen McTigue (The Free Society) and Mark Littlewood (IEA). Thanks too to Ruth Porter (IEA), Eamonn Butler (ASI), Alex Deane (BBW), Josie Appleton (Manifesto Club) and Julian Harris (Liberal Vision) who helped promote the various debates.

Thanks to Sue and Nicky (in our Cambridge office) and thanks to everyone at the IEA who helped out: Sam (Collins), Clare (Rusbridge), Glynn and Dan - you were all very patient. (Apologies to Clare for all the fag butts in the "garden"!)

Last but not least, thanks to Ranald Macdonald (and Barbara) at Boisdale who very kindly supplied the pre-event drinks. I lost count but I think, over the five debates, that we consumed around 12 cases (144 bottles) of good quality wine. (Perhaps that's the secret to a good event.)

The Voices of Freedom programme is not yet over, of course. It concludes with a Smoke On The Water boat party on Wednesday July 14. If you haven't yet registered please book your ticket/s asap.

Below: speakers at last night's Voices of Freedom debate - Mark Pack (Liberal Democrat Voice), Michael White (Guardian), James Delingpole (The Spectator), Julian Harris (Liberal Vision), Paul Staines (aka blogger Guido Fawkes), Brendan O'Neill (editor, Spiked) and Chris Mounsey (Libertarian party). Standing, chairman Mark Littlewood (IEA)

The week ahead

Looking forward to my trip to Ireland which follows the last Voices of Freedom debate tomorrow night. I'm flying to Cork on Wednesday, catching a train to Dublin on Thursday, and flying home (from Dublin) on Saturday. It's a business trip but I shall be staying with friends in Delgany, Co Wicklow, for two nights. Now, where's my passport?

Who holds the liberal torch in 2010?

Join The Free Society on Tuesday June 29, 2010 for drinks and debate at the Institute of Economic Affairs, 2 Lord North Street, Westminster, London SW1. Enjoy pre-event drinks at the IEA courtesy Boisdale of Belgravia then engage in rigorous discussion with leading writers, journalists and campaigners.

The last in the current series of debates is entitled:

WHO HOLDS THE LIBERAL TORCH IN 2010?
Libertarians, Lib Dems, the “liberal elite” or A N Other?

Speakers (in alphabetical order):

James Delingpole (writer, journalist and broadcaster)
Julian Harris (chairman, Liberal Vision)
Chris Mounsey (leader, Libertarian party)
Brendan O’Neill (editor, Spiked!)
Mark Pack (co-editor, Liberal Democrat Voice)
Paul Staines (aka blogger Guido Fawkes)
Michael White (assistant editor, Guardian)

The discussion, presented by The Free Society and Liberal Vision, will be chaired by Mark Littlewood, director general of the Institute of Economic Affairs. See HERE.

The first four debates in the series have been fully subscribed. To register email events@thefreesociety.org

Increasing support for smoking bans, say ASH

According to the latest YouGov survey commissioned by ASH "the [smoking] ban is increasingly popular with the public as a whole". More than three out of four people, including smokers, want it to be extended into other areas of public life.

The results of the survey are featured exclusively in today's Observer. Full story HERE. Forest is quoted, but only briefly. For our full response, read on.

The conclusions of the ASH report, which I have read, are summarised as follows:

Support for smokefree legislation has reached 80% with only one in 20 strongly opposing the law. 

Support among daily smokers has doubled since the law was introduced and for every four smokers who oppose the law there are five who support it. 

Since England went smokefree smokers increasingly regard the law as good for the health of most workers, good for the health of the general public and good for their own health. 

Despite claims to the contrary, there is no evidence of overall harm to the licensed trade with the alcohol “on sales” licenses increasing by 5% in the first year of the law. 

Research shows that the law resulted in a 2.4% drop in the number of heart attacks in England resulting in 12,000 fewer admissions and saving the NHS £8.4 million in the first year alone. 

In response to these conclusions, here is the full statement I gave the Observer on Friday:

"Surveys conducted by the Office for National Statistics before the smoking ban was introduced showed that a majority of people, approximately 70 per cent, were opposed to a comprehensive ban. Polls conducted by Populus for Forest during the same period produced almost identical results. It was clear then that if offered a choice of smoking and non-smoking rooms in pubs and clubs, a substantial majority of adults supported choice.

"Of course attitudes have changed since the ban was introduced, but not as much as ASH would have us believe. Smokers have been forced to adapt, and many have done so, but there remains a great deal of anger and resentment at the extent of the ban. There is also considerable support for amendments to the legislation that would allow, for example, separate smoking rooms in pubs and clubs.

"According to independent research, a majority of smokers believe the legislation is too strict and should be amended. Of those who want to see the ban relaxed, three in five support designated smoking rooms and one in three believe the ban should be lifted in all pubs and bars.

"There are over ten million smokers in Britain and even if you accept ASH's figures that still leaves millions of potential customers dissatisfied with the law as it stands. In the current economic climate Britain's community pubs need every customer they can find and it doesn't help if millions of people are effectively being told, 'Sorry, we can't accommodate you'.

"It is ridiculous to suggest that the smoking ban has had no impact on Britain's pubs and clubs. The evidence is staring people in the face. Thousands of pubs have closed since the ban was introduced. Yes, there are a other reasons, including the recession, but the smoking ban is undoubtedly a significant factor. This has been acknowledged by a many people in the hospitality industry who know a lot more about the trade than ASH.

"A change to the legislation that would allow separate smoking rooms would be welcomed by many landlords and we know there is cross-party support for such an amendment.

"Any attempt to extend the smoking ban to outdoor areas or private spaces, including cars, will be resisted strongly. Smokers are fed up being the whipping boys for politicians and campaigners like ASH."

Responding to the claim by ASH that the smoking ban has resulted in a 2.4 per cent drop in the number of heart attacks in England resulting in 12,000 fewer hospital admissions, I added:

"This is another example of smoke and mirrors by the anti-tobacco lobby. The number of heart attack admissions had been falling for several years, even before the public smoking ban, so what we are seeing is part of a trend that has nothing to do with the ban. It is disgraceful to suggest otherwise."

Update on Sunday, June 27, 2010 by Simon Clark

This post - Peter Kellner, YouGov and ASH - was originally written on October 8, 2008. In view of the latest YouGov poll commissioned by ASH (see above) you might like to read it again.

ASH and the Observer

The Observer has an ASH "exclusive" in tomorrow's paper. I can't say what it is but it won't come as a surprise to readers of this blog or anyone familiar with the spin and propaganda pumped out by the tobacco control lobby. What interests me is how much prominence the paper chooses to give it. I will publish Forest's response in the morning. Watch this space.

Alan Plater has gone outside

I was very sorry to read that the dramatist and screenwriter Alan Plater died yesterday, aged 75. Alan wrote the lyrics to "I'm Going Outside" which features on the Boisdale/Forest CD You Can't Do That! Songs For Swinging Smokers. He was delighted with the recording and sent this email:

Dear Simon

CDs arrived this morning - lovely set which we played over a late and lingering breakfast - will pass on to all worthy friends.

Best wishes
Alan

Unfortunately he and his wife Shirley were unable to attend the Forest dinner at The Savoy when "I'm Going Outside" was performed live for the first time. (The event conflicted with a prior engagement in Orkney.) Nevertheless, he sent us a message which I read out on the night:

Hope you're having a wonderful evening - and since we're probably hanging around a cycle shed in Orkney trying to light a fag in pouring rain and a Force 10 gale it's pretty noble of us to be thinking of you at all.

Alan also sent me the lyrics for "I'm Going Outside" which we reproduced on the back of the menu. Sub-titled "Lament for July 1st 2007" they read:

I'm going outside and I may be some time
Good enough for Churchill but now it's a crime
The puritans in Whitehall say I'm lower than slime
So I'm going outside and I may be some time

They've issued banning orders to the taprooms and the clubs
You can only have a smoke if you're banged up in Wormwood Scrubs
The wagging of the fingers and the shaking of the heads
Have sent us all a scurrying to the cycle sheds

I may be some time 'cause I'm going outside
Call me unworthy but I've got my pride
Call me unclean but let me confide
I may be some time 'cause I'm going outside

I blame Sir Walter Raleigh for bringing home the fruit
The imperial tobacconists who corner all the loot
The hypocrites in government who grab their share of swag
A plague on all their houses and I need a drag

I'm going outside and I may be some time
Once approved by Royalty but now it's a crime
We're now officially classified as lower than slime
So I'm going outside and I may be some time

Quit smoking, save your money and get wealthy
And you're guaranteed to die of something healthy
But I'm going outside and I may be some time

Alan was on the Forest mailing list and I know he opened our emails - so we kept in touch, sort of.

Unknown to me, he was diagnosed with cancer three years ago but continued to work. Best known for his prolific output for television, the Daily Telegraph reports that "His final television play, Joe Maddison's War, set in Newcastle during the Second World War, is in production for ITV, and stars Kevin Whately and Robson Green, with a cameo appearance by Sir Derek Jacobi".

You can read the full obituary in the Telegraph HERE.

Smoke on the water

Forest, The Free Society and Free Spirits present
SMOKE ON THE WATER
Reception and riverboat party from
Westminster Pier on The Thames
Wednesday July 14, 2010, 7.15-9.45pm
Live music and cash bar
Admission free but strictly RSVP
events@thefreesociety.org

Note: The Elizabethan (above) has an open covered walkway on three sides, allowing guests to smoke as much (or as little) as you want.

Bad laws must be challenged

The Scottish press reports that Imperial Tobacco, "one of the world’s largest tobacco firms", has launched a legal challenge against Scotland’s ban on displays of tobacco and cigarette vending machines.

According to the Scottish Daily Express, the company "is seeking to have the legislation set aside in a judicial review, claiming the measures are beyond the legal scope of Holyrood."

Imperial, said the Herald, believe that if the measures comes into force it would criminalise currently lawful activities over the sale and display of tobacco products.

What made me laugh, though, was the comment from Sheila Duffy, chief executive of "anti-tobacco charity" ASH Scotland:

"I am completely unsurprised at this attack on democracy by a major multinational tobacco company."

Ha ha! Let me remind Ms Duffy that the smoking ban was introduced despite opinion polls in Scotland (and England) demonstrating clear opposition to a comprehensive ban. And of the course the ban in England, Wales and Northern Ireland was introduced despite a Labour manifesto commitment for significant exemptions to the ban.

Fake charities like ASH embrace the concept of "democracy" only when it suits them.

I was unaware of Duffy's remark otherwise I may have responded to it. Instead, I gave the paper the following quote (they used the first para):

"There is no evidence that banning the display of tobacco will reduce youth smoking rates so there is no justification for a law that will inconvenience a large number of adult consumers and damage thousands of small retailers."

"The display ban has no purpose other than denormalising a legal product and stigmatising over a million adult consumers.

"Bad laws must be challenged and reviewed so we welcome this development."

The bully state: how has this happened?

Another full house attended the Voices of Freedom debate in Westminster last night. I counted 70 people but there may have been more. They were competing for 40 seats so it was a bit like musical chairs but no-one seemed to mind.

In fact there was a great atmosphere and lots of laughs, which is my barometer for a successful event.

Thanks to our speakers - Isabella Sankey (Liberty), Mark Wallace (Taxpayers Alliance), Josie Appleton (Manifesto Club) and Philip Johnston (Daily Telegraph) - and to our excellent chairman James Panton who maintained a lively pace, "nudging" panellists to stick to their allotted time.

I wish I could remember more of what was said but I had too many things on my mind, including my own speech. During the Q&A one question stood out. Referring to the development of the bully state, someone asked, "How has this happened?" Unfortunately we ran out of out time before we could answer it properly.

So, one more debate to go. "Who holds the liberal torch in 2010?" is on Tuesday June 29. Hope you can join us.