Run, rabbits, run

Woke up this morning to find that my daughter's two pet rabbits had escaped from their hutch overnight. There was a large, tell-tale hole where they had burrowed out from their run. What made it worse was that my daughter is currently in France on a school exchange trip so I'm in charge of her pets!!

We searched high and low but it was obvious they weren't in the garden. The question was: how long had they been on the run and how far had they gone? I resigned myself to the fact that they were lost, possibly forever, when our neighbours knocked on the door and said: "There's a grey rabbit in our garden. Is it yours?"

We rushed round and there, bold as brass, was Ringo sitting under a deckchair. It took ten minutes to catch him but catch him we did. There was no sign, though, of Sadie, which was unusual because they are normally inseparable.

Well, we took Ringo home and within minutes the neighbours were calling to say that a black rabbit was now lolloping around their garden. So back we went and after a short struggle she too was caught and taken home.

All this happened around nine o'clock this morning. Goodness knows what our other neighbours thought as we ran back and forth. Life in our quiet little close doesn't get more exciting than this!

Vote for Stavros Flatley!

I have watched most of Britain's Got Talent this week and with the exception of one or two acts the "talent" has been very thin on the ground. Of the judges, only Simon Cowell has had the bottle to tell contestants the truth - most of them are rubbish. And even he has had to choose his words carefully at times, although the meaning has been fairly clear.

Last night we saw a dreadful example of parent power as 10-year-old Hollie Steel's mother pleaded with the judges to allow her daughter to sing again after she burst into tears during her performance.

Presenters Ant and Dec were obviously mortified by the whole experience, although it was compelling television. Dec, in particular, was clearly thinking, "I'm a celebrity, get me out of here!". Again, it was Cowell who got a grip on proceedings but I think he was wrong to offer Hollie a second go, because it appeared to be in direct response to her bursting into tears again when Ant told her there wasn't time. And did I detect a small stamp of her foot as well as she buried her face in Dec's stomach? (Violet Elizabeth Bott, anyone?)

I thought she did well to recover from her first attack of stage fright, but when she froze for a second time that should have been it. The judges should have said hard luck and well done and judged her on that performance. No matter how old you are you shouldn't be rewarded for bursting into tears and stamping your foot.

I'm no fan of Susan Boyle either so the winner HAS to be the father and son combo otherwise known as Stavros Flatley. Click HERE to see their original audition. What a marvellous moment that would be should they win.

Update: I have just read a quote by Hollie Steel's mother in the Weekend section of the Daily Mail. It must date back several days at least (ie before last night's performance) and I think it's quite revealing:

"She's a sensitive little child. She has to have a bit of encouragement before she thinks she's good ... And since she's been on the show, things have got better at school. She'd been having problems with a couple of girls, but when the newspapers discovered she'd been bullied, the kids back-pedalled. They don't dare bully her now that she's been in the newspapers. She's having brilliant fun and we want her to get some sort of record deal and release an album. She's never get a break like this again."

Never get a break like this again? No wonder the child feels under pressure.

Update on Saturday, May 30, 2009 by Simon Clark

Sorry, Stavros, you were rubbish tonight. The best act was Diversity.

Anti-smokers brought to book

It's half-term so yesterday we visited my parents in Derbyshire. They live in a small hamlet in the Peak District. It was a beautiful day so I sat in the garden and read Velvet Glove, Iron Fist: A History of Anti-Smoking by Chris Snowdon which is published next month.

I can't speak highly enough of this extraordinary labour of love. I've read many books on smoking and this is best by far. It's a superb read. To use that old cliche, it's a page-turner, which is some achievement. It's packed with information but it's also very readable - serious yet hugely entertaining.

Better still, this is no fire-breathing polemic. The amount of research that has gone into it is staggering. And the tone is moderate throughout which is important because it will appeal to a far wider readership.

Velvet Glove, Iron Fist is published on 22 June. Forest is hosting the book launch at Boisdale where Chris will be signing copies and saying a few words. You can also pre-order your copy HERE.

In the meantime I will wet whet (!) your appetite by publishing the occasional snippet on this blog.

Health and Sport Committee - official report

The official report of last week's meeting of the Scottish Parliament's Health and Sport Committee is now available. Witnesses included Forest, Japan Tobacco International, Tobacco Retailers Alliance, Scottish Grocers Federation and BII Scotland. Click HERE.

The report of this week's session (27/05/2009), featuring ASH Scotland (see below), will be available next week. You can view the video HERE.

You call this glamorous?!

Anti-smoking extremists want to ban the display of tobacco in shops. According to ASH, cigarette packets "glamorise" smoking. Yesterday, in the Scottish Parliament, Conservative MSP Mary Scanlon held up a packet of cigarettes and pointed out that one side had the message "Smoking kills", while the other side had the warning "Smoking while pregnant harms your baby".

According to one report, she told Sheila Duffy, chief executive of ASH Scotland: "About three-quarters of the packet is non-advertising and a sick baby on one side and 'Smoking kills' on the other – do you really think that's glamorous?"

The answer, I think, is that the ant-smoking movement will use any argument, however ludicrous, to justify the war on tobacco. Hats off to Mary Scanlon for pricking their nauseating misrepresentation. Full story HERE.

See also: Campaigners claim Scottish public backs curbs on tobacco sales (Herald)

When in Rome ...

The pre-match reports prior to last night's Champions League final in Rome were dominated by references to the temporary booze ban imposed on areas around Stadio Olimpico.

In practice many locals found a way around the ban. Fans wanting to drink in a restaurant were simply ushered to a room "upstairs". Many bars and cafes ignored the ban completely. Beer was reported to be widely available - enterprising vendors were selling bottles from buckets in the street. One report, on Five Live, said the police would chase them away but they always returned. Business, it seems, was brisk.

The Italians, it seems to me, have a healthy disrespect for bad laws. When I was in Rome a couple of years ago I was taken to a restaurant and given a table in the "smoking room". Under Italian law smoking rooms require "continuous floor-to-ceiling walls" and a ventilation system. In this case, the only thing that separated the "smoking room" from the rest of the restaurant was a thick blue curtain.

Everyone seemed happy, not least the owner who had a flourishing business on his hands. In this country, of course, no-one would get away with it because of the army of sneaks and officials who have nothing better to do than interfere in other people's lives.

See: Rome alcohol ban ignored (Goal.com)

Happy days

Writing in the June issue of The Oldie, veteran sports writer Frank Keating recalls going to his first Test match. It was 1949, the venue was Old Trafford, the opposition was New Zealand, and the home team featured an 18-year-old batsman (Brian Close) who went on to become a legend for England and Yorkshire and is still the youngest player ever to win an England Test cap.

Keating writes:

It was an entrancing day. Behind the pavilion at close of play I asked Close to sign my autograph book: before he did so, he told me to hold his ciggie's still-burning dog-end. It was a Wills Woodbine.

On the second morning, we were there when the players arrived. Talk about a quiet drag behind the pav! Was it a Smokers' Convention or a sporting Test match? Sixty years ago it was, of course, the way of the world. The New Zealanders arrived from their hotel in a coacj, disembarking in a fug, pipes and ciggies at full bellow almost to a man ...

Like their captain [Freddie Brown], Bill Edrich, Godfrey Evans, and Reg Simpson were pipemen, and each were billowing post-breakfast clouds; so was popular roly-poly Black Country leg-spinner Eric Hollies, his burning-bowl furnace, I remember still, letting loose particularly pungent and ripe emissions. Ah, was this my first ever Condor moment?

Gnarled ex-miner and opening bowler Les Jackson was at his Woodbines. In the public prints Len Hutton, we knew, advertised both downmarket Black Cat cork tipped and Phillips 'Special Sport' untipped; but here in real life the pale maestro was shamelessly smoking classy Player's Navy Cut untipped. So was Denis Compton. Ex-Navy amateur Trevor Bailey was chain-smoking, naturally, Senior Service.

In 1949, Britain and its sportsmen were snug in the calming embrace of m'Lady Nicotine. No health scares then. Why should there b? Of that historic all-dancing all-smoking first XI of mine, only one (Hollies, who died of a heart attack at 69) failed to make three-score-and-ten.

Edrich died (after a staircase fall) at 70, Hutton at 74, Compton and Evans at 78, Brown 80, Washbrook at 84, Jackson at 86. Happily still with us, full of the joys, and playing strokes all round the wicket are Close 78, Bailey 85, and Simpson 89. Happy days.

Happy days indeed.

John Bercow: in his own words

One of the favourites to succeed Michael Martin as Speaker of the House of Commons is John Bercow. Bercow would be a controversial choice because he is not universally liked by his Conservative colleagues who are suspicious of his conversion from rabble-rousing Right winger to Blair-lite reformer. Many Labour MPs, however, appear willing to support him just to annoy the Tories.

In September 2001 Bercow had just been promoted to shadow chief secretary to the Treasury when I interviewed him for the Freedom Association magazine Freedom Today. Here are some quotes that may interest friend and foe alike:

On Europe ...
"I have always maintained that the European Parliament should not be given more powers and that the European Commission already has too many."

On Parliament ...
"It's a great institution. Every day I have a glint in my eye and a spring in my step. I simply cannot understand how people can be elected to the British Parliament and then denude it of its powers."

On New Labour ...
"The saccharine smugness of Blair and his cronies will antagonise millions of voters who want to see results and not be force-fed on a diet of spin and statistics."

On Labour's economic record ...
"They inherited an extremely good economic legacy. They didn't squander it but there are a lot of problems brewing. Growth is not assured and they will eventually pay the price for over-regulating business, especially small businesses. The chickens will in due course come home to roost."

On Michael Martin ...
"I ... [long pause] ... simply did not think that Michael Martin was of a calibre to be elected Speaker of the House of Commons. I voted accordingly. We must make the best of the circumstances. He has every right to occupy the chair becaue he won the election but there is a difference between respecting the office and esteeming its occupant."

On Conservative MPs ...
"I know of some Conservatives who think it's slightly indecent to get up and ask a question. To get up and ask a hostile question is well and truly beneath their dignity."

On John Bercow ...
"I'm naturally awkward, disputatious, troublesome, unwilling to accept something just because it is imposed upon me ... I have, I know, a rather aggressive debating style, never knowingly understated ... I try not to be rude but I do argue in a very forceful and rumbustious fashion."

And finally ...
"I'm not that ambitious. Of course I want to make a good contribution but I'm not going to sell my soul. My natural desire to speak my mind will be my downfall."

PS. John Bercow is often described as a "social liberal". In my 2001 interview he said of the Conservative party: "Unless we show that we respect the interests of women, ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and and the experiences of millions of young people, we cannot expect them to listen to us on other matters."

In 2006, ignoring the interests of another sizeable minority, he voted "enthusiastically" for a complete ban on smoking in public places. See HERE.

See also: John Bercow says he is ready for the Speaker's role (Guardian, 20 May 2009) and John Bercow to repay £6,500 capital gains tax (Daily Telegraph, 23 May 2009)

Too much information, Nadine

I have met Nadine Dorries twice, and very briefly; once when she was a panellist at a Free Society event ("Freedom and the Internet") at last year's Conservative party conference, and again when she was a judge in our Tories Got Talent competition at the same conference.

For what it's worth I sympathise with her domestic situation. She's a divorced mother-of-three, which can't be easy. It doesn't bother me that she kept quiet about the location of her "main home". She is self-evidently a hard-working MP and the fact that she spends most of time in her constituency (where she has a second home) should be considered a plus not a minus.

Nor do I care that she described the Daily Telegraph’s daily disclosures of MPs’ claims as “torture” and warned that some MPs are "at suicide risk". OK, it was almost certainly ill-advised (if I was David Cameron I'd be hopping mad) but that's her opinion and she is entitled to it.

What I do object to is that she described herself on her blog this week as a "cheeky scouser", adding:

"I like to go into the rooms of the faceless and nameless in Parliament, sit on their desk and ask pertinent questions like: who are you? What do you do?"

For that image alone I am calling on the member of parliament for mid-Bedfordshire to do the decent thing. Nadine, spare us any more of these distressing revelations, please!

Update on Saturday, May 23, 2009 by Simon Clark

I wrote a draft version of this post last night but I didn't publish it because I was interrupted by Have I Got News For You and Reggie Perrin - and after that I fell asleep.

The original unpublished post featured a much longer quote from Nadine's blog which mentioned the owners of the Telegraph and some idle speculation about the paper's motivation for running so many stories about MPs' expenses. I've very little time for conspiracy theories so I didn't take any of it (including her final comment, "Scary stuff!") seriously.

This morning I discovered, via Iain Dale, that Nadine's blog had been taken down. Dizzy Thinks has the full story.

If the speculation is true (it hasn't yet been confirmed) it strikes me as an extraordinary over-reaction by those responsible because it will only fuel further speculation not to mention the paranoia of excitable MPs. Free speech is just as important as freedom of information. A major national newspaper should be big enough to defend both.

What it does highlight is that the internet is not isolated from the real world. The same laws of libel and defamation apply and everyone - bloggers and those commenting on blogs - should bear that in mind.

Taxpayer pays women to quit smoking

I have just done an interview for BBC Radio Sheffield in response to THIS story about pregnant women in South Yorkshire being paid to stop smoking.

Personally I think it's a complete waste of public money. Why should the taxpayer fund this scheme? And what about the very many pregnant women who quit smoking without being bribed to do so? Don't they deserve a bob or two? (Call it an allowance. MPs do.)

As I have said before, I think women should err on the side of caution when it comes to smoking during pregnancy, but let's not exaggerate the scale of the problem. To hear the "evidence" it's a wonder that any child whose mother smokes during pregnancy survives infancy, let alone childhood.

The emphasis, for now, is on caring for mother and child. This is the nanny state at its most benevolent, happy to use public money for the "greater good". (On Radio Sheffield the woman responsible for the scheme justified the cost by comparing it to "the cost of caring for ill babies for the rest of their lives". I reminded her that children born in the Fifties, when 40 per cent of women smoked, are now living longer and healthier lives than ever before. She airily dismissed this point, arguing that people didn't know about the risks in those days.)

It won't be long before the bully state muscles in. Pregnant women caught smoking will be routinely vilified, accused of child abuse or, worse, arrested and charged with a criminal offence. We can't let that happen.

Update on Friday, May 22, 2009 by Simon Clark

I forgot to mention it but there was an outrageous article by Anne Diamond in the Daily Mirror last week. The opening line says it all: "Smoking around your kids is tantamount to child abuse". You can read it HERE.

Who profits from anti-smoking hysteria?

We have received a request for information about the side effects of the anti-smoking drug Chantix/Champix and the relationship between anti-smoking groups and the manufacturers of smoking cessation drugs.

The relationship between the pharmaceutical companies and the anti-smoking lobby is more overt in the United States than it is here, but I was reminded of an article on the Samizdata blog published in 2005. It was written by Alex Singleton who is now a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph. Alex wrote:

Only a few years back, banning smoking in bars and restaurants was seen as an implausible idea. But New York's smoking ban made a big difference. New Labour guru Stephen Pollard, caught up in the euphoria of a trip to New York, enthused in a pro-ban article for the Independent:

"Years of leaving it to individuals to decide how to behave have had almost no effect for the better. In New York, the impact of legislation has been truly wonderful, reclaiming the city from smokers who, as experience clearly shows, almost never act considerately ... The fact is, the ban works in New York City, and I’ll bet a jumbo packet of Marlboro Lite that it would work here, too. So rise up and unite, clean air freedom lovers of the world. Let’s ditch our principles, and push to make London a capital in which we can all breathe freely."

But there was another cause for the ban aside from misguided Blairite euphoria: a major lobbying effort. And a major player in the campaign for a smoking ban was Pfizer, writing cheques in support of a ban. There is a commercial reason for Pfizer being in favour of a smoking ban. By reducing the places people can smoke, life is made uncomfortable for smokers, leading to more people wanting to give up. Pfizer sells Nicorette which helps people quit. Smoking bans mean higher Pfizer profits.

Forest, the Freedom Organisation for the Right to Enjoy Smoking Tobacco, describes Pfizer (sarcastically) as its "friends", and Forest's site gives some clues as to Pfizer's involvement. Pfizer keeps funding events at party conferences that promote bans on smoking. After one such "debate" in 2004, Forest director Simon Clark complained that Pfizer refused to have anyone on the panel who was against a ban - so all three speakers toed the same line. Another Forest columnist refers to how:

This most altruistic of companies is ... sponsoring a one-day conference in Liverpool entitled - wait for it - 'The Smoke Free City: how to improve health, business, productivity and city image by taking positive action to free your city of tobacco smoke'.

Thanks in no small part to Pfizer, we are going to get more restrictive smoking laws. As Forest puts it: "Oh, what sweet words they must sound to Pfizer's lucky shareholders. After all, smoking bans = increased sales of quit smoking aids = big, big profits. Now that's what I call music!"

Click HERE to see the original post. Any information about the relationship between pharmaceutical companies and anti-smoking groups in the UK gratefully received.

That meeting in full

Apologies for not posting this before. I got back from Edinburgh late last night and I've been in meetings in London all day.

Wednesday's meeting of the Scottish Parliament's Health & Sport Committee went much as expected. We filed in, took our seats, argued our corner for 90 minutes, and trooped out again.

I was one of eight witnesses. Between us we represented consumers, vending machine operators, wholesalers and retailers (including publicans). A single tobacco company (JTI) was also represented.

One or two thought it was quite a tough session but I've experienced worse. Far worse. In fact, once we got started I quite enjoyed it. It helped being one of eight. If there are only one or two of you there's far more pressure. You're in the spotlight and there's very little time to think between questions.

The "roundtable" nature of the meeting helped too. It was less confrontational and we could choose when to enter the discussion, rather than being put on the spot.

That said, my favourite moment (from a personal point of view) was when Labour's Helen Eadie asked if I would retract my claim that a ban on vending machines was "extreme". She seemed to think that because the idea is enshrined in the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control that makes it all right.

Until then I had been rather restrained. I couldn't miss this opportunity, though, so I launched into a short rant about politicians and their need to ban things. When I finished the Convenor (Christine Grahame) paused and said, drily, "So the answer is 'No'." It got a laugh.

The other highlight (for me) was when the SNP's Dr Ian McKee predictably raised the issue of funding. "I am pleased to say," I said, "that Forest gets donations from Imperial, British American Tobacco and JTI."

After the meeting I took the liberty of seeking him out for a quick word, which went something like this:

"Dr McKee, I was very happy to answer your question about funding. I wonder, though, if you could ask ASH Scotland, when they appear before the committee next week, how much money they get from the taxpayer."

Tune in, folks - but don't hold your breath.

The Press & Journal has a short report on yesterday's meeting HERE. Or you can view the entire proceedings HERE.

Another day at the office

This morning I am giving evidence to the Scottish Parliament's Health & Sport Committee. Subject: the Scottish Government's plan to ban the display of tobacco in shops and outlaw cigarette vending machines.

Apart from Forest, other organisations invited to give evidence (in a room very similar to the one above) include the Association of Independent Tobacco Specialists, British Institute of Innkeeping, Japan Tobacco International, National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators, Tobacco Retailers Alliance, the Scottish Grocers Federation and others. Next week the likes of ASH Scotland will have their say.

They say it's a roundtable "discussion" but I'll be pleasantly surprised if it is. This is the third time I've given oral evidence to a Scottish Parliament committee and it's fair to say the experience has been more cross-examination than discussion.

One or two committee members are openly anti-tobacco and their hostility tends to colour proceedings. It can be difficult at times to remain entirely calm.

This morning's session starts at 10:00. Report to follow.

See: Tobacco lobbyists fight plans

Memories of Thistle Street

As I often do when I'm in Edinburgh I'm staying in a hotel in the Grassmarket, a short walk from the Royal Mile. There are some excellent restaurants in the area and the hotel itself boasts a bright fifth floor dining room with floor to ceiling windows that overlook the back of the castle. It's a great place to have a full Scottish breakfast but I may have to give it a miss tomorrow because I've got an eight o'clock meeting.

When we moved to Edinburgh in January 1993 we rented a flat in Thistle Street, which is about as central as you can get. Thistle Street runs parallel to George Street in the New Town and has bags of 18th century charm. In our first week the cobbled street disappeared under a thick white blanket of snow. I'll never forget it.

We lived above an antique shop which was owned by our landlord, the father of a friend of mine. Aldric was quite a character. He owned numerous properties in Thistle Street. Our flat was originally a series of single rooms. Aldric bought them, one by one, as the owners died or sold up.

To give you an idea of living conditions 200 years ago, an original notice above the door of our sitting room read: "No more than 14 people shall live in this room". Our bedroom was a similar size so I assume that up to 14 people were allowed to live in there as well.

I loved living in Thistle Street because it was so close to everything you could ever want or need - pubs, restaurants, newsagents ... and tea shops. I used to spend hours reading the papers and eating toasted teacakes in the local tea shops. (Now I think of it, that's when I started to put on weight, so Edinburgh has a lot to answer for.)

After 18 months we bought a flat in Morningside, a mile or so from the city centre, and later still we moved to a house in Dalkeith, just outside Edinburgh. But for atmosphere, charm and convenience, Thistle Street was impossible to beat.

Travel news

Later today I will be checking into a hotel in the shadow of Edinburgh Castle. But first, I have to catch a train ...

Update on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 by Simon Clark

I've been on the train for 90 minutes. We have just left York and I am drinking my first gin and tonic of the day. "Do you want a receipt, sir?" asked the attendant. Er, no, thanks. What do you think I am - an MP?

PS. The train I'm on is bound for Inverness. I wish I was. (I'll tell you why later.)