Simon Chapman and the Oxford Union
Friday, April 10, 2015 at 14:20 A few weeks ago I was invited to take part in an Oxford Union debate.
The motion is ‘This House believes that the tobacco industry is morally reprehensible’.
The debate "seeks to challenge the view that tobacco companies – who ostensibly operate in a legitimate, legal and responsible industry – should be treated as pariahs."
I agreed to speak and was told I'd be joined by a senior executive from a major tobacco company. The identity of our opponents wasn't mentioned and I didn't ask. I'd find out soon enough.
Yesterday Australia's leading anti-tobacco campaigner Simon Chapman took to Twitter to reveal that he and fellow Aussie activist Mike Daube had been invited to propose the motion.
Typically Chapman informed his followers of this by adopting his default position - high-handed moral superiority allied to an unnecessary suggestion of impropriety and an irrelevant reference to FCTC guidelines.
His main complaint (which I partly understand) is he wasn't told the event is supported by Imperial Tobacco. But he's not alone. I hadn't been told either. Yesterday was the first I'd heard of it.
There's a simple reason for this. I'm told that on March 25, when the invitations were issued, the company's involvement hadn't been confirmed.
I imagine too that it didn't occur to the undergraduates organising the event that it might be an issue. Naive, perhaps, but hardly a hanging offence.
Instead of mentioning his concerns privately and politely, Chapman has gone public with a view to embarrassing our young hosts.
I'm not sure where this leaves the debate (which is scheduled for next month) but as far as I'm concerned this is a free speech issue so I hope it goes ahead.
If it does it will be my second appearance at the Oxford Union. The first was in 2005 when I joined forces with Antony Worrall Thompson to oppose the motion 'This House would ban smoking in all public places'.
Proposing the motion was Professor Sir Charles George, president of the British Medical Association, and Tony Blair's old friend, Lord Faulkner of Worcester.
The outcome was a win for the ayes (118 to 82) but the result was unrepresentative of Oxford students because a few months earlier the Union had been forced to reverse a self-imposed smoking ban after large numbers of students deserted the Union bar in favour of the local pubs where they were still allowed to smoke!
Apart from the result what I remember most about the event were the pre-debate dinner and photo call. The walls of the Union are covered with framed pictures of previous speakers, including presidents and prime ministers.
There's an enormous sense of history so it's nerve-wracking but a huge privilege to be asked to speak.
Free speech on campus has taken a bit of a battering recently (see Brendan O'Neil's excellent article, Free speech is so last century. Today’s students want the ‘right to be comfortable’) so let's hope Chapman's reaction to a well-meant invitation doesn't discourage others from taking part.
A healthy society requires free speech and open debate. How sad that Simon Chapman, pontificating about public health 10,500 miles away, can't see that.
Oxford Union invited me & Mike Daube to UK to debate on tobacco industry. Never mentioned that @ImperialTobacco sponsor. Incredulous.
— Simon Chapman AO (@SimonChapman6) April 9, 2015.@SimonChapman6 @GenBois @LGraen Our sponsorship of @OxfordUnion debate is no secret. We support open, transparent discussion & free speech
— Imperial Tobacco (@ImperialTobacco) April 9, 2015@ImperialTobacco @SimonChapman6 @GenBois @LGraen @OxfordUnion He's incredulous because debating with opponents is alien to Tobacco Control.
— Forest (@Forest_Smoking) April 9, 2015
Reader Comments (2)
Tobacco control doesn't debate; it dictates! After all "control" is in its name.
There is evidence that tobacco smoking in the New World dates back 12,000 years. At the time of Columbus it was North America's most widely traded crop. Natives revered tobacco and showed Europeans how to enjoy, grow, and process it. The American Revolution was funded by the tobacco trade.
Before there was modern industry, advertising, or manufacturing, humans even in the world's most remote corners were enjoying tobacco's benefits.
If one hold's the modern tobacco industry "morally reprehensible," one must also condemn the indigenous peoples of the Americas who introduced Europeans to the plant.