Was that it?
Sunday, March 17, 2024 at 9:41 How was it for you? No Smoking Day, I mean.
On Wednesday Hazel Cheeseman, deputy CEO of ASH, tweeted that her first interview of the day was on Times Radio, but when I searched for it I found that it was broadcast between 5.00 and 6.00am.
To put this in perspective, as of December 2023 Times Radio had a weekly listening figure of 492,000, which suggests fewer than 100,000 a day. Goodness knows how many are listening before 6.00am.
Thereafter, going by tweets alone, I didn’t see much evidence of any more interviews, although local councils and the public health industry did their best to promote No Smoking Day on social media.
As far as I could tell, public engagement was minimal. Instead, the main event was a reception in Parliament hosted by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health that, coincidentally, is run by ASH.
From the photos I’ve seen it took place in the Thames Pavilion (capacity 60), which is the smaller of the two pavilions on the terrace of the House of Commons. (The larger of the two, the Terrace Pavilion, holds 200.)
Those that did attend were there to support demands for a ‘smoke-free generation’ and badger the Government to publish the Tobacco and Vapes Bill without delay.
The principal speaker appeared to be junior health minister Andrea Leadsom who has become something of a cheerleader for the generational tobacco ban, and her comments were obviously designed to allay fears that the Bill might be significantly delayed, or abandoned.
Lord Bethell, for example, tweeted:
Strong from @andrealeadsom on the government’s determination to see through the Tobacco and Vapes Bill on National No Smoking Day. Really encouraging.
The bad news for Bethell is that, whoever makes the final decision on the timetable for the generational ban, it won’t be Leadsom who, despite running against Theresa May for the Tory leadership in 2016, is a fairly insignificant cog in the engine of government.
In fact, I was slightly surprised the Government didn’t take the opportunity to publish the Bill on No Smoking Day. After all, if the generational ban is as popular as they say it is, it would have been a useful distraction from everything else that happened last week.
Nevertheless, I’m glad ASH and co had their day in parliament. I’m just sorry that, outside the anti-smoking bubble, so few people noticed, or cared.
PS. On Friday afternoon the Express reported that the Bill may be published this week. To the best of my knowledge no-one else has been able to confirm this ‘exclusive’ so we’ll just have to wait and see.
The paper also suggested that upwards of 70 Conservative MPs are prepared to vote against it which may not be enough to stop the legislation, but is Downing Street really prepared to risk such a significant rebellion on what is essentially a vanity project?
See: Rishi Sunak braced for major rebellion over smoking ban in just days with 70 MPs to revolt (Express)
For the record, I’m not sure the Express is the most reliable source of news, but time will tell.
Reader Comments (5)
If the bill is published it will be interesting to see the governments own equality assessment. There may be grounds even if the bill is equitable to challenge it in the courts for conflicting with the equalities act and the European convention on human rights. Both of these make age a protected characteristic and considering that what this legislation intends to do there is an argument that it does this by not providing equality before the law as it it's unlike any other age restriction which guarantees Rights once a certain age is obtained.
Additionally sunak may not be prime minister much longer and a new leader may just drop it before a vote. It wouldn't be much of a reprieve as I'm sure labour will do the same but it may give more time to campaign against it and organize.
The anti smoker bullies always get what they want. It's a shame that Sunak ruined the Tories' chances of ever winning another election for a generation because of pandering to the professional minority and it's demand for more and more extremist policy making.
I wish I shared your optimism Matt. However, we know from experience that neither the Human Rights Act nor the Equality Act apply to smokers on the grounds that smoking is what we do not who we are, despite often being described as what we do when talking about us as an identifiable group of people.
Being a smoker is also not something covered as a protective characteristic. In other words, we can be sacked from jobs, we can be made homeless, and we can be abused or violated by anyone who won't face any sanctions for treating us less equally than others or with malice. This discrimination is often based on a dislike of people who smoke rather than any fear that a smoker will not obey no smoking rules. The law says that's OK.
As for the age discrimination, that is why, I believe, that once this piece of nonsense gets over the threshold, the next call, on the grounds of "Age Inequality" will be to demand smoking is made illegal for everyone of all ages.
We've seen how they manipulate legislation in the past. First ask for a tiny slice, then go for the whole cake.
Hello Pat,
There is definitely not a right to smoke I agree that you are correct the government could go for an outdoor ban or a total ban and neither of theese would conflict with the echr or the domestic legislation.
However there are grounds to challenge this under domestic legalisation and the echr all the way to Strasbourg in the courts if/when the act passes. you only have to have a look at what's happened to the Rwanda plan to see how potentially problematic this potentially could be for the legislation.
I am not optimistic just highlighting this is a potential avenue to continue the fight. I also think if this where to fail the age of sale would increase I think they would go for raising to 21 which wouldn't have the same equality issues. It would just be to big a jump even under salami slice tactics to go from what's proposed to a total ban straight away. So Ash's original proposal would probably become the consolation prize.
Publishing the bill has already been delayed several times( failing the equality assessment could be a reason for this)and the wider picture is one of uncertainty in the short term cu at the moment so who knows.
I often wonder how having no right to smoke became there is no protection in law if you are refused a job or housing based on your identity as a smoker even if you do not smoke in working hours or indoors.
I don't think the age ban applying to all will happen immediately but over time. My guess is that it will be introduced less than 10 years after the age ban becomes law as smokers become more of a minority and the Government accepts a compromise and tells smokers to quit or switch to vaping or else. The only hope would be if we got real change in politics one day with parties that represent people and not a minority of very noisy activists and lobbyists.
It would be nice if tobacco companies fought this on the grounds of age discrimination, as no one else has the money for lengthy and costly legal battles with Government. However, we also know from experience that tobacco companies will roll over and do as they're told without a fight. Just look at them currently scrambling over each other to denounce smoking and aim for the "smoke free world" in a bid to please people who would never touch any of their products anyway.
Let's not forget how many people refused to believe for decades that a blanket indoor ban in pubs, clubs, etc.. would be imposed because of concerns for discrimination and loss of trade and tax - but hey, look at how that ended up.
As I said, the anti smoker activists always get their own way. It is usually just a question of time and they have always from the very beginning wanted smoking to be made illegal for everyone.