Tobacco control invokes teen spirit

Just off the plane from sunny Cape Town and I see the Scotsman has used the quote I sent them on Friday:

"Public policy shouldn’t be based on the subjective opinions of teenage children.

"Adult smokers are entitled to a choice of tobacco product, whether that be slim, menthol or standard cigarettes.

"If government really wants to stop children smoking they should focus on education and enforce existing legislation.

"Targeting packaging and individual products that have a very small market share is an irresponsible distraction from the real issues.”

The context is yet another study by tobacco control researchers at Stirling University which is summed up by the newspaper's headline - Scots teens 'think slim cigarettes less harmful’.

Credit to the Scotsman for giving us the chance to respond.

The paper also invited Forest to react to this story - [Scotland's public health minister Michael] Matheson to proceed with plain cigarette packaging - which appeared on Saturday.

This time they didn't use my response, probably because the report already included a quote from the Tobacco Manufacturers Association.

Here it is anyway:

"There is no evidence that plain packaging will reduce smoking rates.

"There are several reasons why people smoke. Packaging isn't one of them.

"Since plain packs were introduced in Australia illicit trade has gone up and smoking rates have remained the same.

"There is no reason to think that Scotland will be any different.

"Plain packaging is gesture politics that has nothing to do with responsible tobacco control."

Anyway it's good to be back, even if the weather is a far cry from the weekend when I got sunburnt whale watching from the upper deck of a small boat bobbing up and down in the Atlantic Ocean.

Report to follow.

Do smokers have rights?

I'm giving a presentation on smokers' rights this week.

In Cape Town.

Do smokers have rights? This is a rhetorical question, obviously, but I'd be interested to read your comments.

I'm also going to address the question:

Does the tobacco industry do enough to support the consumer? If not, what more could it do?

Answers, please ...

Are teenagers really so easily influenced by what they see and hear?

I wasn't intending to write about Lou Reed again.

Hundreds of people – fans, music critics, journalists – have had their say online and in print all week so there's very little to add.

Apart from this.

If you believe the Tobacco Control mantra that children must be protected from the sight of a cigarette pack or the influence of an actor smoking on screen (to list just two examples), how come thousands of people like me didn't experiment with drugs in our youth?

I was 14 when I first heard Lou Reed and the Velvet Underground.

The lyrics of 'Walk On The Wild Side' and 'Make Up' (a lesser-known but equally catchy song about New York transsexuals) may not have been fully understood by an innocent schoolboy living in Fife, but there was nothing ambiguous about a track called 'Heroin'.

There was no doubt about the meaning of 'I'm Waiting for the Man', 'Venus in Furs' and other songs either.

Did they encourage me to take drugs or dabble in S&M? What do you think?!

So my point is this: if you believe – like Tobacco Control campaigners – that teenagers are so easily influenced by what they see and hear, it follows that we should restrict or regulate the records they can be exposed to as well.

The same argument could be used in relation to the packaging.

I like a good album cover as much as anyone but I have never bought an LP, cassette or CD because I liked the cover.

That includes the 12" single of Blondie's breakthrough hit 'Denis'. I bought it because I loved the record. The cover was a bonus!

It's the music – not the packaging – that counts.

The same is true of cigarettes. It's not the pack that matters but the little sticks inside. No amount of 'research' can obscure that simple fact.

So why treat teenagers like idiots?

As my 16-year-old daughter often says to me, "I'm not a moron, Dad."

Smokers' rights and tobacco control on BBC Breakfast

Ian Dunt is editor of Politics.co.uk. In September he wrote:

The anti-smoking movement has always been hysterical and unhinged.

See: Banning smoking in prisons is a threat to public health.

This evening he tweeted:

I'll be on BBC Breakfast tomorrow at 7:20 and 8:50 talking about smokers' rights and the endless tedium of the anti-smoking brigade.

Joining Ian on the programme is my occasional sparring partner Andrea Crossfield, chief executive of Tobacco Free Futures.

I'm delighted and encouraged that someone like Ian is taking the trouble to speak out against Tobacco Control.

He will probably earn himself an entry on the Tobacco Tactics website where state-funded 'researchers' will dismiss him as a stooge of Big Tobacco, but to the best of my knowledge there is no financial link between Ian, Politics.co.uk and the tobacco companies.

He is doing this because he can think for himself and, in his own words:

The anti-smoking lobby long ago gave up on reason or proportion. It is propelled merely by its own insistence that a long life is more moral than a luxurious one. It is a club with an open door policy for the tedious and the jealous.

Dunt v Crossfield should be worth watching.

Update: They've changed the schedule - oh, and BBC Breakfast is only available on the BBC News channel after 7.20 on a Sunday.

I missed the first interview, because it was broadcast before 7:20. The second is now at 8:40 not 8:50.

Promises, promises

The Dundee Courier yesterday invited Forest to respond to the following initiative:

Smokers are being encouraged to stub it out at home as the Smoke Free Homes initiative launches across Tayside.

The scheme asks smokers to acknowledge the affect their habit has on others and encourages them to sign up to make their home smoke free ...

The Tayside Smoke Free Homes scheme encourages people to sign up to either a GOLD or SILVER promise to help keep their home smoke free.

The GOLD promise means you agree to no smoking in the house, while signing up to the SILVER status promises that smoking will be confined to one room in the house and never in front of children.

My response:

"This is so patronising. No-one should be told how to behave in their own homes.

"Most smokers are considerate to those around them, especially children. They don't need to sign pledges to change their behaviour.

"Adults resent being lectured or treated like children and this scheme does both.

"If campaigners don't want people to smoke at home they should support separate, well-ventilated smoking rooms in pubs and clubs.

"Tobacco is a legal product and consumers must be allowed to smoke somewhere without this constant harassment."

I'm not sure if a report will appear. I got the feeling that, like me, the paper thought the whole thing was a bit ridiculous.

We'll see.

Update: A report did appear - Smokers encouraged to stub out at home - but without a quote from Forest. And me a Dundee United supporter too!

One lie leads to another

Who's this having a crafty fag outside the Houses of Parliament?

Why, it's Luciana Berger who recently replaced Dianne Abbott as Labour's shadow public health minister.

The photo was taken in June and posted on Twitter by @eyespymp.

More recently, during the Labour conference in Brighton, she was again seen lighting up:

A few months' earlier Berger denied that she still smoked. On March 14, in response to another sighting, she protested:

H/T Guido Fawkes (Luciana lights up)

The point is, who cares that she smokes? What's sad is that she feels she has to deny it.

Unfortunately her personal battle to quit may be about to influence public policy.

Yesterday, responding to a report suggesting that "the number of people using the NHS in England to stop smoking has fallen for the first time in four years (Fewer smokers' using NHS in England to try to quit, BBC News), Berger said:

“These figures confirm that this Tory-led Government have completely lost their way on public health. The fact that fewer people are successfully quitting or trying to quit smoking with NHS help for the first time in five years should set alarm bells ringing.

“David Cameron promised tough action on smoking, but he has completely caved in to big tobacco and vested interests. Standardised cigarette packaging is proven to make smoking less attractive to young people, but Ministers have gone back on their pledge to introduce it.

“With around 570 children starting smoking in the UK every day, we need action now. That’s why Labour will be bringing forward an amendment to the Children and Families Bill next month to introduce standardised packaging. Ministers should do the right thing and support that change.” (Labour News)

Like her predecessor Diane Abbott, Berger is peddling the line that the Government has gone back on a "pledge" to introduce plain packaging.

As we know, there was no "pledge". The Government said it would conduct a public consultation on the measure and it delivered.

Former public health minister Anna Soubry - another (former) smoker - made no secret of her desire for plain packaging but the Government never committed itself to the measure.

Berger, like Soubry, is playing politics and it can only be a matter of time before she too declares that she only started smoking because of the "glamorous" packaging.

Like so many politicians her motto appears to be, "Do as I say, not as I do".

PS. Last night I was on LBC discussing the "fall" in the number of smokers using the NHS to stop smoking.

After pointing out that the NHS has a poor record of success in this area, I suggested that smokers who want to quit are increasingly turning to e-cigarettes - a free market solution - in favour of state-run smoking cessation services.

Rubbishing the claim that e-cigs might become a gateway to tobacco, I pointed out that banning their use at work or elsewhere represents a ban on nicotine, a drug that may be addictive for some but is probably less harmful to our health than caffeine - and no-one is suggesting that we ban or restrict our consumption of caffeine. Not yet, anyway.

So once again I found myself acting as cheerleader for e-cigs and the vaping community. I hope they appreciate it!

Tobacco Products Directive: one more chance to influence UK government

We need your support - again.

Forest's No Thank EU website has been updated and it now reads:

On October 8th 2013 MEPs voted to ban menthol cigarettes, prohibit ten packs, outlaw pouches of hand rolling tobacco below 20g, and increase the size of health warnings to cover 65 per cent of the pack or pouch.

The European Parliament, the European Commission and government ministers from the 28 member states are now negotiating the final text of the Tobacco Products Directive. It is still possible to influence the outcome but you MUST make your voice heard NOW.

Even if you have written to your MP already, please write again asking them to raise your concerns with the ministers representing the UK government in the current negotiations.

To help you we have drafted a NEW letter and with your permission we will email it to your MP on your behalf.

With your permission we will also send a copy to the relevant government ministers. We will advise them it is "for information only" and you don’t expect a reply. Finally, if you have not already done so, please sign our online petition.

The new letter to MPs reads:

On October 8th members of the European Parliament voted to ban menthol cigarettes, ten packs and pouches of roll your own tobacco under 20g.

As one of your constituents I am writing to express my strong opposition to measures that will restrict choice with little evidence they will improve public health.

I hope you agree with me that the EU should not dictate the flavour of tobacco or the size of pack available to consumers in the UK. Ten packs, for example, are often purchased by adults for reasons of economy or because they are trying to reduce their consumption.

If the revised Tobacco Products Directive is introduced in its current form it could also have serious consequences for retailers in Britain, many of who will lose business as outlawed products are sold on the black market.

The European Parliament, the European Commission and government ministers from the 28 member states are now in negotiation over the final text so it is not too late for the UK Government to influence the outcome.

I would be grateful if you would raise this issue as a matter of urgency with Jeremy Hunt, Secretary of State for Health, and public health minister Jane Ellison.

Many of you will have written to your MP/MEPs before the vote on October 8 and you may have received a discouraging reply.

Nevertheless we cannot allow the TPD to become law without doing everything we can to dissuade the UK government from supporting it in its current form.

So, please send the new letter to your MP and give us permission to copy it to the relevant UK government ministers.

If you sent the original campaign letter I'm afraid you will have to enter your contact details again but it takes less than a minute.

Over to you.

Lou Reed: end of an era

One of the first records I ever bought was 'Sweet Jane' by the Velvet Underground.

The song was originally released in 1970 on Loaded – the band's fourth album – but Lou Reed had left even before the record came out.

I bought it as a single in 1973 when it was re-released to cash in on Reed's success with 'Walk On The Wild Side'.

Johnny Walker featured it as his 'Record of the Week' on Radio 1 but it didn't make the charts.

The small independent record shop in South Street, St Andrews, 400 yards from my school, didn't even stock it so I had to order a copy. It arrived a week later and I remember going to collect it.

To this day 'Sweet Jane' remains my favourite Lou Reed song, although it's hard to choose one. The original studio version still sounds incredibly fresh, even though I've heard it thousands of times.

On my iPod however I've got numerous live and cover versions, some by bands I'd never heard of, and each one is very different.

You could put together a compilation featuring 15 or more versions of 'Sweet Jane' and it would be one of the most eclectic albums in your collection.

Anyway, in 1973 no-one would have dreamt that 40 years later Reed would die aged 71 and be hailed as a "rock legend" and much more.

It was unthinkable. Your average Radio 1 listener would have dismissed him as a one hit wonder and not even readers of NME, who knew better, would have predicted a long and successful future, such was his well-documented lifestyle.

I ought to give my sister some credit because it was she who inadvertently introduced me to Reed via Transformer, the 1972 album produced by David Bowie.

I remember sneaking into her bedroom when she was out, removing the album from its sleeve, and putting it on her portable record player.

I was only going to listen to the first few tracks but there wasn't a dud song on the album. It just got better and better and I listened to the whole thing, pausing only to turn the record over.

After buying 'Sweet Jane', I worked my way back. A compilation album, 'Lou Reed and the Velvet Underground', was released on cassette and I bought that.

It introduced me to tracks from the first three VU albums including 'Venus and Furs' (I had never heard anything like that before!) and 'Sister Ray', a 17-minute epic I played as loudly as I could on my tiny Phillips cassette player.

To cut a long story short I went on to buy every Lou Reed album ever released with the exception of Metal Machine Music, an infamous double album that features four sides of 'experimental' feedback.

I bought every live album plus numerous compilations.

I collected every Velvet Underground album as well, including live recordings and a box set.

And then there were the live performances – Brixton Academy in 1982 (I think), Wembley Arena (1989), Hammersmith Odeon (1992), Hammersmith Odeon again (2007) and Nottingham Royal Concert Hall (2008).

At those last four concerts Reed played a single album from start to finish – New York, Magic and Loss, and Berlin.

Ah, Berlin. That was the album that followed Transformer but it was so different it was a commercial disaster.

It was described as one of the most depressing records ever made.

Where Transformer was a pop record, full of hooks and amusing lyrics, Berlin was the complete opposite.

It was difficult on first hearing - I was 14 - but I grew to love it and it remains my favourite album ever.

When Reed and his band performed Berlin live in 2007, supported by an orchestra and children's choir, it was a genuinely moving event.

I was also at the Playhouse in Edinburgh in 1993 when a re-united Velvet Underground featuring the original line-up played a short but lucrative European tour.

Purists didn't like it but I'm glad I was there. I've got the live album from that tour too.

So tonight really is the end of an era for me.

No more Lou Reed albums. No more Lou Reed concerts. No more 'Lou Reed is horrible to journalist' stories. (Boo hoo.)

But what a fantastic legacy.

He's not to everyone's taste (relatively few, in fact), but he's been a huge part of my life and I'm very grateful.

See also: The scary genius that was Lou Reed (James Delingpole, Telegraph Blogs)

The soundtrack to much of my life (Mark Mardell, BBC News)

Lou Reed created music that will live on for as long as songs are sung (Neil McCormick, Daily Telegraph)

PS. By coincidence, my birthday is the same day (March 2) as Reed's. Spooky.

I should also mention – and it still bugs me almost a quarter of a century later – that in 1986 I recorded a documentary about the Velvet Underground that was broadcast on The South Bank Show.

The following year the tape was in my VHS machine when it was stolen by burglars who broken into our house in Camberwell and took not only the video machine but also the TV.

To the best of my knowledge the programme has never been repeated nor is it available on DVD. Very annoying.