Public Health England can't confirm how many smokers took part in Stoptober 2016
Friday, November 18, 2016 at 12:43 A couple of weeks ago I emailed Public Health England:
I would be grateful if you could confirm how many smokers signed up to Stoptober 2016.
Last year an announcement about the number who signed up for Stoptober 2015 was made on 30 October 2015. So far however I have yet to see a similar announcement for this year's event. If the figure is not currently available can you tell us when it will be made public?
In addition, could you please confirm (a) the total sum that was paid to Phil Tufnell, Craig Revel Horwood, Chris Kamara and Natasha Hamilton to promote Stoptober 2016 and (b) how much the total budget was for Stoptober 2016.
The total sum paid to comedian Al Murray and others to promote Stoptober 2015 is in the public domain (it was reported by the Mail on Sunday in February 2016) so I hope you will share with us the total sum you paid to your four celebrities in 2016.
To be fair they responded very quickly and within 24 hours had replied to my query about the four celebrities. (I wrote about it here.)
Thereafter my full enquiry was treated as a Freedom of Information request and although I was advised only this week that a reply might take several weeks, I have today received this response:
1. The strategy for Stoptober 2016 was to focus on overall participation rather than sign ups to PHE tools. As such, the evaluation will focus on quits at a population level. It is expected that all strands of the evaluation will be finalised early February. Therefore, in accordance with the Section 22 – information intended for future publication, exemption, the information you have requested is exempt from disclosure.
2. The celebrities Phil Tufnell, Craig Revel Horwood, Chris Kamara and Natasha Hamilton were paid in total £29,000 for their work on this year’s Stoptober campaign. This represented payment for their time and input in creating content that featured across campaign channels, as well as for any expenses incurred during filming and recording time.
3. The total media spend for Stoptober 2016 is approximately £545,000. This figure is indicative and excludes VAT. Final media costs will be available only after the campaigns 2016/17 financial year spend has been confirmed and completed.
It's bit of a non-story but it's interesting (to me at least) that PHE has abandoned its previous method of judging the success of Stoptober.
In 2014 for example we were told that "over 250,000 smokers stubbed out their cigarettes for Stoptober". In 2015 the figure was "over 215,000", a fall of 15 per cent.
Participants were called 'sign-ups' so I assume people registered to take part.
I'm guessing that PHE has abandoned this measurement of 'success' because they feared an even greater drop in 2016.
To avoid negative publicity and awkward questions about the use of taxpayers' money, PHE is now going to focus on "overall participation" and "quits at a population level", whatever that means.
Clearly they don't have any figures so for "evaluation" read estimates and calculations.
It will be interesting to see how they spin it but I'm sure it will be done in a way that will try to justify more public money being thrown at this event next year.
Good news for celebrities in search of easy money, less so for everyone who has to pay for it.
PS. I'm aware that, in the overall scheme of things, the money spent on Stoptober is relatively small, but it's not just Stoptober is it?
It's the accumulation of public money that is spent on anti-smoking campaigns, including stop smoking services, that grates.
ASH, of course, is currently lobbying the DH to commit spending millions of pounds on mass media anti-smoking campaigns.
Currently there is also a huge lobbying campaign to discourage cutbacks to local stop smoking services, despite the massive drop in the number of smokers using them (51 per cent between 2010 and 2015).
Why should public money be wasted on services that a dwindling number of people want to use?
Meanwhile, if PHE sees the need to evaluate the impact of Stoptober, surely the Government should do the same for a host of other anti-smoking policies and initiatives?
Instead, encouraged by ASH and other taxpayer-funded bodies, ministers stumble from one anti-tobacco measure to another, blissfully ignorant of the impact each one is having.
And even when they have no impact at all (the ban on smoking in cars with children comes to mind) each policy is acclaimed as a 'success'.
Well, we know how it works and Stoptober is evidence of that. When the original measurement of 'success' no longer produces a 'positive' result it's time to ditch it and adopt a different approach.
Having ditched 'sign-ups' as a measurement it will be interesting to see how PHE 'evaluate' the 'success' of Stoptober 2016.
Sadly we'll have to wait until February but whatever method they use I'm sure it will be creative.
Reader Comments (6)
The truth is, obviously, no smokers, not even 1, quit or took part in stoptober hence they are refusing the information and claiming it is exempt from the right to know.
The antismoker movement and public health are dishonest liars and charlatans and our media is disgraceful in failing to report the vast waste of money funding these bullies that would otherwise go to the NHS to fund cancer treatment for children and others currently denied certain treatments on cost grounds.
Anyone who cares about the health of children and honesty in politics would never support the vanity projects that dishonest public health promotes with money that we all know could be put to better use in 250,000 other ways.
"quits at a population level", whatever that means.
Sounds like they are just going to guess
Unbelieveable waste of public money and unacceptable medding in our lives. Its time all these people had all public funds withdrawn.
On January 3rd they'll bribe people to take part in a survey in which one question will be "Did our Stoptober campaign influence your decision to quit? Yes No
and all those who vaguely remember seeing a Stoptober leaflet and thinking "I'll leave it til the new year" will answer yes in the flush of success of having stopped smoking for one day.,
As Pat says, they could have spent the money on more deserving causes
"Quits at a population level" clearly means that they're going to find some way to "calculate" (read "invent") that an implausibly number of folks stopped smoking last month.
And then take credit for it.