Tracy's law

Labour MP Tracy Brabin will today propose a Ten Minute Rule Bill to introduce legislation to ban smoking on hospital sites in England.

She explains her reasons for the Smoking Prohibition (National Health Service Premises) Bill in the Yorkshire Post (Why I want to change the law to stub out smoking on NHS hospital grounds and Politics Home (It’s time to make hospital grounds smoke-free).

Forest's response reads:

Introducing a law to ban smoking on hospital grounds would be an abuse of parliamentary time.

The overwhelming majority of NHS trusts already have smoke free policies that include on site smoking bans.

Individual trusts, not high-minded politicians in Westminster, should be allowed to decide their policy on smoking and the extent to which they enforce a ban, partial or otherwise.

Threatening to prosecute people for smoking on hospital grounds is not only disproportionate to the offence, it would discriminate against the elderly and the infirm who may find it difficult if not impossible to go off site.

Hospitals can be stressful places and for some people smoking is a comfort at a difficult time. Patients especially have a right to expect some empathy and compassion.

A bill that bans smoking on NHS sites is no way to treat people who may be at their lowest ebb.

I'll keep you posted.

Update: I discussed this on BBC Radio Leeds at lunchtime.

I was also quoted by the Yorkshire Post - see Smoking must be banned in all hospital grounds as Tracy Brabin MP bids to change the law.

My James Delingpole moment and how I was saved by Clive Bates

On Thursday night journalist James Delingpole floundered badly as a guest on This Week (BBC1).

Pressed by presenter Andrew Neil to justify his defence of a no deal Brexit (which I also support), the Spectator columnist eventually bailed out of the uncomfortable inquisition by saying, with frank and engaging honesty:

“Um, I don’t know the answer to that.”

Delingpole - who spoke at a Forest event a few years ago - has now written a long mea culpa, ‘What it’s like to die on a BBC politics show’, in which he admitted the cardinal sin of not preparing properly.

It reminded me of something I wrote in 2016:

This may sound obvious but some people don't prepare properly for interviews. Despite years of experience I'm not immune to this either. For example, there have been occasions when I've blithely agreed to do an interview without asking what they want me to talk about. Live on air I've then been asked questions I wasn't prepared for. I've muddled my way through but it's not been a comfortable experience.

I've also agreed to do interviews at short notice on subjects I knew relatively little about at the time and almost come a cropper. On one occasion, ironically, I was saved by Clive Bates, the former director of ASH (although he didn't know it). It was a few years ago and we were talking about e-cigarettes when the presenter suddenly asked me to explain exactly how they worked and how much they cost. There was a short silence while my brain stood still. Thankfully Clive stepped in with the answers. (Don't worry, I know now!)

That (and another interview on food) taught me never to give an interview without being reasonably well briefed on the subject in advance. It may sound obvious but over-confidence or failure to do homework trips everyone up eventually.

See ‘Rough guide to dealing with the media’ (Taking Liberties).

"President Trump has already said he is happy to give us a fantastic deal" @JamesDelingpole tells @afneil #bbctw pic.twitter.com/E6Ci4S0s9N

— BBC This Week (@bbcthisweek) January 25, 2019

‘England - Britain - has not gone mad’

Yesterday’s post had a dig at those people in Ireland who like to believe Brexit is driven by nostalgia for the British Empire.

By coincidence this lazy stereotype - which depicts us as fundamentally racist - has been well and truly roasted in the Irish Times today.

Responding to Fintan O’Toole, one of Ireland’s leading columnists, John Lloyd, a contributing editor at the Financial Times, writes, 'Why Fintan O’Toole has got Brexit all wrong' (Irish Times).

Worth reading.

Whatever happened to Ireland’s rebel spirit?

The Irish are even more obsessed with Brexit than we are.

After I flew into Cork last month I spent the first 30 minutes in a taxi listening to an RTE phone-in on the subject.

Callers were unanimously opposed to Brexit and it was doing my head in until the taxi driver announced that his sympathies lay with Brexiteers like me.

Over dinner that night I found myself in conversation with two people, both Irish, who insisted, like some of those callers, that Brexit was all about immigration.

“Nonsense,” I said, indignantly. “Yes, it may have been a factor but for millions of people Brexit is primarily about sovereignty.”

The following day my Forest colleague John Mallon posted a thoughtful piece on the subject on his blog. He concluded:

The sin the Brits appear to have committed is their stated desire to be free to run their own country.

John is one of the very few Irishmen I have met who has taken the trouble to understand why so many Brits want to leave the EU.

On a previous visit, for Forest’s Golden Nanny Awards in Dublin in November, I got in conversation with several people who were openly dismissive of Brexit and our reasons for voting to leave.

Even Chris Snowdon, who was there as our guest and is normally the most equable of people, turned away in disgust at what he was hearing.

I can understand why many people in Ireland are concerned about the impact of Brexit on their country – the economy in particular – but that doesn't justify the lack of respect bordering on hostility for the outcome of a democratic referendum in a neighbouring country.

When Ireland voted on the Lisbon Treaty in 2008 and 2009 it never once occurred to me to mock or criticise the Irish people for either result, although I did raise an eyebrow at the decision to hold a second referendum to get the result the EU and the Irish government wanted.

As a British citizen and a resident of the UK it was none of my business how they voted.

I should add that I’ve been a regular visitor to Ireland for 15 years - mostly on business but sometimes on holiday or to visit friends - and I always enjoy going there.

Brexit however has revealed a chippy, anti-British attitude I thought was largely in the past.

A common theme, which I stumbled upon on social media, is the laughable idea that supporters of Brexit want to recreate the British Empire.

The vote to leave the EU, so the narrative goes, is a reflection of our colonial arrogance.

It may not be a direct comment. Sometimes it can be something as small as ‘liking’ a tweet that includes a snide or derogatory remark about the UK or those who voted for Brexit.

But those ‘likes’ speak volumes and I was genuinely shocked by the identity of some of the people behind them. Several I knew personally.

As I say, I accept there are genuine fears about the impact of Brexit on Ireland, but instead of working with the British government the taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, has been the neighbour from hell, never knowingly underselling the potential perils.

One might forgive him if it wasn't for the hypocrisy.

Here's what Brendan O'Neill, another Irishman and one of the heroes of the effort to save Brexit, had to say about "Varadkar’s meddling in British politics" – Leo Varadkar is being played like a fiddle by Brussels.

Which leads me to the ultimate irony.

Previous generations in Ireland fought to be independent of Britain yet today the Irish seem happy to be subservient to the politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels.

(The same is true in Scotland where the Nationalists demand independence from the UK but are happy for Scotland to be shackled forever to the EU.)

Meanwhile Brexiteers are mocked and patronised.

Yesterday, for example, an article published by the Guardian also appeared on the Irish Times’ website. Contempt, derision and middle class snobbery oozed from every line.

‘England’s rebel spirit is rising and it wants a no deal Brexit’ read the headline.

But the question no-one seems to be addressing is, whatever happened to Ireland’s rebel spirit?

The manner, for example, with which the smoking ban was introduced and even celebrated was a revelation to those of us who thought the Irish would resist or simply ignore it.

No such rebellion - passive or otherwise - took place. Tellingly there was far greater opposition to a public smoking ban in the UK.

Likewise there has been little or no opposition to other nanny state measures, whether it be the sugar tax or plain packaging.

OK, so these are minor issues for most people but the absence of any serious debate is still shocking.

Since launching Forest Ireland in 2010 we’ve tried numerous times to organise, with third parties, debates and discussions on a variety of issues related to individual liberty.

Few people are interested.

Student unions support campus-wide smoking bans and when we suggest a public debate no-one wants to know.

Groups with names like ‘Liberal Ireland’ come and go, enjoying a brief wave of support before dying on their arse through apathy and indifference.

Consumer choice advocacy groups (with the exception of Forest Ireland) are non-existent.

And the number of genuinely liberal commentators in the Irish media can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Today, if you want to experience anything approaching a ‘rebel spirit’, you have to cross the Irish Sea to England.

I've no idea why that is and it’s probably not for me to speculate, but if any Irish readers wish to comment I’d be interested to hear your views.

Seat belts and the nanny state

Reports say Prince Philip has been seen driving 48 hours after he was involved in a serious car crash.

Good for him.

For generations we were told that if you fell off a horse (literally or metaphorically) the best thing to do was to jump straight back on.

Today’s reports however suggest that by taking to the wheel so soon Prince Philip is being reckless.

OK, I get that he’s 97 but in my eyes that makes his rapid recovery – and his determination to get back in the saddle as soon as possible – even more worthy of praise.

Sadly, instead of lauding this remarkable man’s indomitable spirit, the media chose to highlight the fact that not only was he was back on the road but - shock, horror - he was also driving without a seatbelt.

Commentators – even supporters of the royal family – were quick to chide him.

The issue interests me however because I genuinely believe that the introduction of a law making it an offence not to wear a seatbelt was an important moment in what has become the gradual erosion of individual liberties over the past 40 years.

Eleven years ago, on January 31, 2008, I wrote:

Today is the 25th anniversary of the introduction of the law that made it compulsory to wear seatbelts in cars. I know this because yesterday afternoon I got a call from the Jeremy Vine Show on Radio 2 asking what I thought about the issue.

To be honest, I rarely give it much thought, although the health lobby sometimes use the example of seatbelts to molify opponents of public smoking bans. "Oh," they chirp, "people were against compulsory seatbelts but everyone accepts them now. The same will happen with smoking bans."

There is a big difference, of course. Wearing a seatbelt, especially since the introduction of inertia reel belts in the Seventies (ie the ones that allow you considerable movement), is not a major inconvenience. In fact it's no inconvenience at all so I am perfectly happy to belt up because it doesn't have a negative impact on the quality of my life.

If I stop and think about it, however, I do object to the fact that if I choose not to clunk click every trip I could be stopped and fined. Whether I wear a seatbelt should be no business of the state. If I am in an accident and smash my head on the dashboard or the steering wheel or, worse, get thrown out of the car because I am not wearing one, that's a risk that adults should be allowed to take.

Children are a different matter. Best to err on the side of caution, I’d say, although I wonder sometimes how the baby boom generation ever survived childhood, what with the absence of seatbelts and all those adults puffing away in their presence.

It could be argued that being forced to wear seatbelts was a small step towards the modern bully state. We meekly accepted what politicians and campaigners told us – that tens of thousands of lives would be saved every year – and assumed that would be an end to it.

Now, 25 years later, it's compulsory to wear seatbelts in the back as well as the front of the car. Failure to buckle up in the back of a cab is also an offence (although I don't know anyone who does). Perhaps we should all wear straitjackets and be done with it.

To be clear, I don’t have a problem with wearing a seatbelt but I still believe it should be my choice, not the state’s, whether to use one.

Likewise motor cycle helmets. Personally I wouldn’t dream of riding a motorbike without a helmet (I wouldn’t dream of riding a motorbike full stop!) but that should be my choice, shouldn’t it? What business is it of government?

Truth is, the laws on seatbelts and motor cycle helmets ushered in a era in which government has played an increasing role in how we live our lives, micro-managing our behaviour to the nth degree.

More interesting however than the question of the Queen’s husband and his unemployed seatbelt is this.

Last week Prince Philip crashed a Land Rover Freelander. Within 48 hours he had been supplied with a ‘new’ one.

I understood Land Rover stopped manufacturing Freelanders in 2014. So where did the ‘new’ one come from and if it's secondhand why wasn't he given a new Land Rover Discovery Sport, the model that replaced the Freelander five years ago?

Asking for a friend.

Diary of a smokers’ rights campaigner

Several years before I began writing this blog in 2007 I kept a ‘Forest’ diary.

I recently stumbled upon some entries from 2003 and 2004 and thought you might like to read them.

It was an interesting period for Forest, not least because we were struggling a bit financially.

We lost two members of staff - who we couldn’t afford to replace - and in 2004 we had to give up our London office and move to cheaper premises in Cambridge.

At the same time we faced what was perhaps Forest’s biggest challenge, fighting increasing demands for smoking to be banned in public places.

Flitting in and out of these entries are Joe Jackson, Antony Worrall Thompson and David Hockney who all made significant contributions to the national debate.

I’d forgotten the number of times Joe and Anthony in particular helped us out when we were overwhelmed with requests for interviews or simply needed another voice.

Another entry records a meeting Forest chairman Lord Harris and I had with John Reid, Labour’s Secretary of State for Health. At the time it felt like an important moment. Now it's barely a footnote in history.

Looking back, I’d also forgotten how much travelling was involved. These entries record meetings and interviews in Cardiff, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Plymouth, to name a few, but there were many, many more.

To say they stretched our resources would be an understatement. The meeting with John Reid, for example, took place in London on a Friday afternoon. That morning I’d also given evidence to a Welsh Assembly committee in Cardiff.

2003 also saw the appointment of Deborah Arnott as director of ASH, replacing Clive Bates. I had a few things to say about her too!

The full cast of characters who make fleeting appearances in these entries includes Lionel Blair, Edwina Currie, Bob Geldof, Allen Carr, Julia Hartley-Brewer, Tony Blackburn, Marcus Brigstocke and many more.

It’s a long read but if you’re interested click here.

Forest at 40

Founded in 1979, Forest is 40 years old this year.

To put that in context, in 1979 Margaret Thatcher was elected prime minister, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, Iran became an Islamic Republic and former Liberal Party leader Jeremy Thorpe went on trial charged with attempted murder.

The Sony Walkman was launched, the first issue of Viz was published in Newcastle upon Tyne, the first J D Wetherspoon pub was opened in the London Borough of Haringey, Sid Vicious died and the price of milk shot up to 15 pence a pint.

Almost 40 per cent of the adult population smoked and the government advised men to drink no more than 56 units of alcohol a week.

Oh, and the turnout in Britain for the first direct election to the European Parliament was 32 per cent.

Next month we’ll announce the date of a special 40th anniversary dinner.

Each week I shall also be dipping into the Forest archives. It’s been a long journey so watch this space!

Logo: Dan Donovan

Fool for you

Forest supporter Joe Jackson has a new album out this week.

Fool is the 20th studio album of his career.

It comes out exactly 40 years after the release of his first album, Look Sharp, in January 1979.

Starting next month Joe will be touring America and Europe playing songs from five of those 20 albums, “each representing a decade”:

Look Sharp (1979), Night And Day (1982), Laughter And Lust (1991), Rain (2008) and Fool (2019).

The UK dates are in London, Birmingham, Glasgow and Manchester. The London Palladium show sold out well before Christmas which is pretty impressive.

For the full list click here.

See also: Joe Jackson looks back on four decades of doing it his way with anniversary tour, new album (Billboard).

Older readers may recall that in 2004 Joe wrote and recorded a song protesting against the New York smoking ban.

Proceeds from the single were donated to three smokers' rights groups, Forces and NYC Clash (USA) and Forest (UK).

You can listen to it here.

Above: ‘Fabulously Absolute’ from the new album Fool. Below: 'The Uptown Train' from Rain.