The state we're in

Last week wasn't the prolonged break I was hoping for.

On Thursday, for example, after Sky News cancelled a live interview from my home (scheduled for 7.10am), BBC Radio London asked me to talk about plain packaging on the Vanessa Feltz Show.

I like Vanessa. In my experience her views are broadly libertarian and she let's you put your point across without repeated interruption.

Unfortunately she was on holiday and in her place was someone called Jeni Barnett whose face (I Googled her) is vaguely familiar from television.

Barnett is an ex-smoker. I'm not saying the two things are connected but she gave the tobacco control spokesman (I didn't catch his name) the easiest of rides.

When it was my turn she argued with just about everything I said. At one point I accused her of being "patronising" and "middle class" in her attitude to smoking. She didn't like that at all and claimed (in a remarkably plummy voice) that she was far from being middle class.

"Well, I won that argument," she told listeners as I was faded out. So much for BBC impartiality!

The same day I was also invited to take part in the BBC Radio Wales phone-in.

The discussion was prompted by two stories – a report in the Western Mail (Ban on smoking in cars with children is backed by the Bevan Foundation) and the suggestion that the Coalition Government is going to introduce minimum pricing on alcohol.

A fellow guest was Ian Johnston, former president of the Police Superintendents' Association.

Johnston argued that a ban on smoking in cars was a step too far. Enforcing such a ban, he added, should not be a job for the police who had better things to do with their time.

If I heard him correctly, he also used the words "nanny state" and warned that if smoking is banned in private vehicles the next step would be a ban on smoking in the home.

His comments would be music to our ears but for one thing – he's retired. If only a serving officer would echo those words whilst in office!

The previous time I was on the Radio Wales phone-in (in November) I was joined by a GP who was also critical of a ban on smoking in private vehicles. He too was retired.

Now these may be isolated examples but I don't think so. The truth, I suspect, is that there are a lot of people in the public sector who are opposed to heavy-handed regulation but while they are employed by the state they dare not say anything for fear of jeopardising their careers. Only after they have retired will they risk speaking out - which, I'm sorry to say, is too late to influence the powers that be.

There are exceptions to the rule. A practising oncologist criticised the BMA for wanting to ban smoking in cars on the Today programme, but it's rare to hear that on national radio or television.

I understand the difficult position GPs, policemen etc are in so I'm not being uber critical. The conundrum is how to give them a voice without putting their jobs at risk.

Nurses For Reform is a brave attempt to change the NHS from within. What we need, in addition, is a broad church campaign that will challenge (from within) excessive state interference in people's daily lives. A bit like The Free Society but it has to be led by people who currently work in the public sector and are prepared to speak out.

Wishful thinking? We'll see.

The year ahead

Tobacco control campaigners never rest. Or so it seems.

In the past decade a ban on tobacco advertising and sponsorship was followed by a ban on smoking in all enclosed 'public' places including licensed premises.

After that activists moved quickly to ban cigarette vending machines and the display of tobacco in shops. (The latter, opposed by the Conservatives and Lib Dems in opposition, will be enforced in large stores later this year and in small shops from 2015.)

Meanwhile, and with little or no public debate, the 'denormalisation' of smoking (and therefore smokers) became official government policy with a series of publicly funded campaigns that included slogans such as 'If you smoke, you stink'.

The principal battlegrounds in 2012 are very clear:

1. Smoking in cars: following the largely negative response to the BMA's call for a ban on smoking in all private vehicles, and the almost certain failure of a Labour MP's bill on the subject, it would be easy to be complacent.

That would be a mistake. Tobacco control doesn't take 'no' for an answer. Like those non-elected mandarins in Brussels, they keep pushing until they get what they want.

Not for the first time devolution poses a serious threat to personal liberties. In Northern Ireland all political parties support a ban on smoking in cars and, as we saw with the smoking ban, as soon as one part of the United Kingdom introduces legislation the others fall quickly into line.

2. Smoking outside: in 2009-10 most of the interviews conducted by Forest on the subject concerned hospital grounds. In the past twelve months the debate has moved on. Now we are more often than not invited to defend smoking in or around play areas and public parks. Invariably the debate is less about health and more about adults acting as role models for impressionable children. Taken to its logical conclusion this would seem to support a ban on parents smoking in (or around) the home as well.

3. Plain packaging: aside from prohibition, this is the Holy Grail for tobacco control. The danger is, many consumers (smokers and non-smokers) may be lulled into taking a more relaxed view of plain packaging. Those that are may seriously under-estimate the long-term impact. Today tobacco, tomorrow alcohol, fatty foods and dairy products. The implications for all consumers are far-reaching because a ban on product branding and the enforced use of 'disgusting' colours and grotesque images is a real challenge to a free society.

I won't list them all now but the arguments for plain packaging are built on a number of fallacies. One is that packaging equals advertising. If this was true 'coloured' packs would have been outlawed at the same time as tobacco advertising but no-one, not even tobacco control, thought to argue that branded packs represent anything other than a means to distinguish between different brands (a minimum requirement in a free market).

Another fallacy is that cigarettes are sold in 'glitzy' packaging designed to entice young people to start smoking. Where is the evidence for this, apart from a half-baked 'report' by the British Heart Foundation (supported by ASH)?

Tens of millions of people have chosen not to smoke despite being exposed regularly to the sight of branded cigarette packs in shops and superstores. Should we deny consumers the sight of any branded product that might conceivably carry a health risk?

Furthermore the expression 'plain packs' is highly misleading. There is nothing plain about plain packaging. The Australian government has decided that the colour of all packs should be a deliberately unattractive olive green (or drab green as it became known when olive growers complained!).

In addition, two-thirds of the pack will feature grotesque images such as rotting teeth and hideous tumours. Is this an extension of the "uglification of England" that David Hockney once spoke of in relation to the escalation of'No Smoking' signs?

There is of course another battleground - the ban on smoking in pubs and clubs.

Faced with all the other challenges it would be easy to accept the existing legislation and move on. That is something Forest will never do. I won't lie. An amendment is going to be very difficult to achieve but 2012 marks the fifth anniversary of the ban in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and we will do everything we can to highlight the impact of the ban on pubs, clubs and consumers. In short, as long as there is support for change, we will continue to lobby politicians and government.

Given our limited resources it will be difficult to fight on all these fronts but with your backing we will do everything we can.

The good news is that we are in far better shape than we were prior to the smoking ban when, as I have often said, Forest ploughed a rather lonely furrow. We have plenty of friends out there, including readers of this and many other blogs.

The dramatic events in Stony Stratford in July showed what can be done when libertarians work together (an achievement in itself). It helped however that our principal opponent was a certified fruit loop and we had only one target to aim at. Tobacco control won't make the same mistakes again.

Over the coming weeks we will announce a number of initiatives including a new campaign that is currently in development. Details will be announced here and on the Forest website.

Happy New Year!

PS. I don't expect smoking in the home to be a major battleground in 2012 but we are not complacent – far from it. As I wrote in December, ASH is on the case and recently published a briefing paper on the subject.

Meanwhile Chris Snowdon has been highlighting the "bizarre case of Peter Lavac who blames two people who lived in a flat below him for 18 months for giving him lung cancer and now plans to sue". Full story here. Definitely one to watch.

Update on Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 16:55 by Simon Clark

Congratulations to David Hockney.

Britain's greatest living artist – a member of Forest's Supporters Council – has been appointed a member of the Order of Merit by the Queen.

The order, the BBC reports, was created by King Edward VII in 1902 and is restricted to 24 members and rare additional foreign recipients.

Curiously, an anti-smoking comment along the lines of 'Hockney is not worthy of the Order because he's a smoker' has been removed from the BBC website.

That's entertainment

Looking forward to seeing The Ladykillers at the Gielgud Theatre in London this evening.

It features Ben Miller (Armstrong and Miller) and Peter Capaldi (Malcolm Tucker, The Thick Of It).

Good family entertainment!

Smokers' lungs can help at high altitude says climbing expert

At last, some good news for smokers.

A news agency has just asked me to comment on the argument, put forward by a "climbing expert", that people who smoke are more likely to do well when climbing high peaks because smokers' lungs can cope better with high altitude.

Since I am neither a smoker nor a climber I am still considering Forest's response (if any). Any suggestions?

Update on Thursday, December 29, 2011 at 14:30 by Simon Clark

A friend, a non-smoker and a climber (Kilimanjaro, Mt Blanc and many more), writes:

I sound like a 60 a day man over 4000 metres but I am prepared to believe that consistently depriving oneself of oxygen might help. You can prepare for high altitude by breathing reduced oxygen air through a mask for a few hours a day for several days. It is all to do with air pressure at the end of the day.

Update: Deadline News has the story here – Smokers could be on top of the world, claims climbing expert.

I particularly like the quote from Henry Stedman, author of Kilimanjaro: the Trekking Guide to Africa’s Highest Mountain:

“While those of my clients who’ve led a blameless, tobacco-free life frequently struggle with the altitude, long-term smokers tend to saunter up.

“Breathless, certainly, and often wheezing – but headache-free and happy. Of course, we’re not seriously suggesting you take up smoking – but it’s interesting, isn’t it?”

British Heart Foundation wants plain packaging bill

"Children and young people hoodwinked by cigarette packaging", says the British Heart Foundation in a press release issued today.

Children and young people are being hoodwinked by glitzy cigarette packaging with more than a quarter of young smokers making health assumptions based on branding.

Just over 25 per cent of 16-25 year-old regular smokers surveyed for the British Heart Foundation (BHF) believed one branded cigarette pack was less harmful than another based on the packet design alone. Yet the reality is that all cigarettes contain harmful toxins, tar, and carbon monoxide.

This is one of the findings of a BHF report published today ahead of a Government consultation on whether the UK should adopt 'plain packaging' for tobacco products.

The report, which includes survey responses from more than 2,700 16-25 year-old smokers and non-smokers, reveals three quarters think selling cigarettes in 'plain packs' - with no colourful branding or logos, and larger health warnings - would make it easier for people to smoke less or quit.

One in six (16%) said they'd consider the pack design when deciding which cigarettes to buy while one in eight (12%) said they'd choose a brand because it was considered 'cool'.

The overwhelming majority (87%) thought plain packs were less attractive than branded packs, and shows how plain packaging could make a significant difference in deterring young smokers.

Betty McBride, director of policy and communications at the British Heart Foundation, said: "As informed adults we know that smoking is a deadly addiction that kills half of all smokers. But young people are not always fully aware of the risks, and the power of branding holds more sway.

"Tobacco advertising is rightly banned in the UK. Yet current glitzy packaging clearly still advertises tobacco on the cigarette box. It's an absurd loophole the tobacco industry takes full advantage of to lure in new young smokers. We must close if we really want to protect younger generations from taking up this fatal habit."

Forest responded with this quote:

"There is no evidence that plain packs will make any difference to youth smoking rates. The vast majority of young people are influenced not by packaging but by peer pressure and the fact that members of their family are smokers.

"Tens of millions of people have been exposed to branded cigarette packaging for decades and have never been encouraged to start smoking. To suggest that people are so easily influenced by the sight of a coloured pack is not only patronising, it's downright offensive."

See Branded cigarettes safer, say 25% (Press Association), Young smokers attracted by cigarette branding, says survey (Daily Mirror)

Sue Carroll's "rants" must not be in vain

The death of Mirror journalist Sue Carroll, aged 58, is very sad news.

It's a huge loss not only for her partner, family and friends, but also for Forest and anyone who values old-fashioned virtues such as tolerance, courtesy and common sense.

Sue outed herself as a member of Forest in 2006. I don't know when she first registered her support but our paths had crossed the previous year with the publication of a book she had co-written with Sue Brealey. It was called The Joy of Smoking and Sue (Brealey) asked if we could help promote it. Afterwards Sue (Carroll) sent "a very quick line to say thank-you for all the help you've given us, it's very much appreciated".

Later that year she accepted our invitation to take part in what became a famous Forest event at the Labour party conference in Brighton (David Hockney leads opposition against ban on smoking in all public places). Afterwards she joined Hockney, Joe Jackson and several other guests for a private dinner that still makes me laugh and smile when I think about it.

In March 2006, shortly after MPs voted to introduce a comprehensive public smoking ban in England, we invited her to a Forest party at the Groucho Club in Soho. Hosted by Antony Worrall Thompson, the event featured the Forest Annual Awards and the winner of the Best Journalist of the Year award was ... Sue Carroll.

Afterwards she emailed to say: "I was absolutely thrilled with my award, thank you so much for nominating me, it's good to know all my rants haven't been in vain."

The following year, just days before the introduction of the smoking ban in England, Sue was one of 400 guests at Forest's Revolt In Style dinner at the Savoy Hotel in London. The event – which featured guest speakers Andrew Neil and Claire Fox – inspired an article in the Mirror: Our freedom has gone up in smoke.

Of all national newspaper columnists, it was Sue who was most likely to rail against the smoking ban and other laws designed to bully and denormalise ordinary men and women who choose to smoke. Given the Mirror's overwhelming editorial bias against smoking, her support was not only welcome, it represented a rare glimpse of common sense in a newspaper that lost its way many years ago.

In recent years I saw her once or twice on the Alan Titchmarsh Show (ITV). She seemed in good spirits. She looked great too so it was a genuinely shocking moment when I read, earlier this year, that she had pancreatic cancer and the outlook was bleak.

I waited in vain for her column to reappear in the Mirror and two weeks ago I thought long and hard about sending her a Forest Christmas card but decided not to in case our light-hearted illustration of Santa holding a cigar between two fingers shaped like a 'V' might strike the wrong note with someone who was seriously ill. It may have amused her but I didn't want to take the risk.

In person I was struck by Sue's modesty and the fact that she seemed quite happy not being centre stage. In contrast her writing was fearlessly outspoken and she held nothing back, witness these highly personal accounts: I had my face burnt off so I could look 10 years younger (May 2010) and, earlier this year, My cancer fight - Mirror columnist opens her heart over pancreatic tumour.

The latter includes this comment:

No one has blamed my lifestyle, so I don’t regret a single cigarette or cocktail. I’d love my old life back but I was as determined then, as I am now, not to whinge about life being unfair.

The absence of self-pity is one of many reasons to mourn Sue Carroll's death. Others include her outspoken support for personal choice and her empathy for ordinary people, especially those who choose to smoke and drink.

We have lost a very good friend who will be greatly missed.

See also: Daily Mirror columnist Sue Carroll dies aged 58 (Daily Mirror), Sue Carroll obituary (Daily Telegraph), Sue Carroll - the columnist with a direct line to the Mirror's readers (Guardian)

Update on Thursday, December 29, 2011 at 11:01 by Simon Clark

The Independent has this to say:

She became a star columnist in 1998 ... Her favourite targets included political correctness, yobbish behaviour and the "health police". A militant advocate for the right to smoke in public, she appeared on platforms at meetings organised by Forest, the tobacco industry's lobby group [sic], in their failed attempt to head off the Labour government's ban on smoking in pubs and restaurants.

See: Sue Carroll: Journalist acclaimed for her straight-talking columns

Happy Christmas

Apologies for the lack of posts this week. I've been busy doing other things.

Yesterday, for example, the dog was sick and I had to take him to the vet. (Seems bouncy enough this morning.) Today the fridge packed up. (Then again, on Tuesday my wife told me the boiler wasn't working when she had actually switched it off by mistake.)

Anyway, just off to do my final Christmas shopping – having already collected the turkey from the butcher in the neighbouring village at 7.00am this morning – so with that I'd like to wish you all a very happy Christmas.

Back next week.

Paul Toole, king of Christmas lights

Don't miss tonight's Cutting Edge documentary on Channnel 4.

Described as "heart-warming, quirky and entertaining", King of Christmas Lights explores the world of "extreme Christmas decorating".

One of the stars of the film is Paul Toole, 36, from Somerset, who "has one of the biggest and best Christmas light displays in the country - on which he spends around £5000 each year".

I met Paul in 2007 shortly after the introduction of the smoking ban when he and fellow DJ Chris Elliott organised not one but three marches in protest.

We met in Wells, Somerset, the day before the second march. (See Paul and Chris walk tall.) After the third march, in recognition of their efforts, I invited them to the Forest reception at the 2007 Labour conference and wrote about it on this blog:

The theme of the evening was how the nanny state is being replaced by the bully state. I said a few words along those lines and then introduced special guest Paul Toole. Paul and his partner Chris Elliott have - bravely, in my opinion - stuck their heads above the parapet and organised two marches in protest against the smoking ban. The first was in Wells, Somerset, where they live; the second was in Glastonbury. Next month they are taking to the streets again, this time in Bristol.

I was struck, recently, by something Paul had written. Essentially, he pointed out that, as a gay man, he had experienced discrimination and intolerance. Now, just as society is becoming more tolerant of the gay community, he is experiencing similar discrimination and intolerance because he's a smoker. I asked him to make this point and he did so with some passion. We need more people like Chris and Paul to stand up and be counted. I am delighted they were able to come.

See Another dose of hard Labour.

As you will see tonight, Paul subsequently found a more appreciative audience for his entrepreneurial drive. In common with smoking, however, not everyone shares his passion for, ahem, "extreme Christmas decorating".

Warmly recommended.