Onward!

I was a bit surprised to hear that Sir Simon Clarke, my near namesake and the former MP and Cabinet member, had been appointed director of Onward.

It’s not that I think he won’t do a good job, but Clarke is on the centre right of the party and Onward, a think tank founded in 2018, always struck me as being on the centrist, wishy washy left of the party.

Labour MP Lucy Powell, now Leader of the House of Commons, arguably thought so: “I think Onward are a fantastic think tank”, she is reputed to have said.

That may be but hopefully this is a political realignment and Clarke's appointment will signal a new dawn for a think tank that was also described as ‘close to Rishi Sunak's Downing Street’. Enough said.

Either way, now that Sir Simon is back in the Westminster bubble, does that mean I can expect more media requests that, on closer inspection, are intended not for me but for him?

At least that isn’t as bad as being summoned to the House of Commons to meet an MP, only to find that the person the MP thought he was meeting was … Simon Clarke.

See: What’s in a name?, Confusion reigns, and Another case of mistaken identity

PS. As I write this, Onward is hosting a keynote speech by Kemi Badenoch, which is a good sign. A penny for Lucy Powell’s thoughts!

Lib Dem MP proposed raising age of sale of tobacco to 25

The Tobacco and Vapes Public Bill Committee has been meeting to discuss and debate amendments to the Bill.

There will be a further two sittings today.

The biggest surprise so far was the amendment, submitted by Helen Maguire, the Lib Dem MP for Epsom and Ewell, to raise the age of sale of tobacco to 25.

It was a surprise because many of us were expecting an amendment to raise the age of sale from 18 to 21. Where 25 came from I’m not quite sure but the gist of the argument seemed to be that, as most smokers start when they are young, extending the legal age of sale to 25 should more than cover that age group so there is no need for a generational ban. (I paraphrase.)

Maguire is not on the public bill committee, and cannot therefore move amendments in Committee, so it was moved on her behalf by Dr Caroline Johnson, the Conservative shadow health minister.

Johnson, who supports the generational ban, made it clear she didn’t support Maguire's amendment but felt it should be debated "so that hon. Members can establish for themselves whether they wish to support" it.

"Although the amendments were tabled by a Member who is not a member of my party, and I do not actually agree with them, I want to ensure that they get a proper hearing."

To be clear, had Maguire's amendment been passed (spoiler alert: it wasn’t) it would have replaced the generational tobacco sales ban.

When it came to a vote it was supported by just two members of the Committee, Jack Rankin and Sarah Bool, two of the four Conservatives on the Committee, with 14 against. (Johnson and Gregory Stafford, the fourth Conservative on the Committee, both voted against.)

Neither of the two Lib Dems on the Committee (Liz Jarvis and Danny Chambers) supported their colleague's amendment, and I'm guessing the only reason Bool and Rankin voted for it is because they concluded that raising the age of sale to 25 was marginally better than a generational ban, which they oppose.

Nevertheless, fair play to the pair of them. Their voices have been loud and clear. Rankin, in particular, has spoken at length, often opposing his Conservative colleague, Caroline Johnson, who is an enthusiastic supporter of further tobacco control measures.

But I'll come back to those blue on blue divisions in another post. I'll return too to some of the other amendments that, if adopted, might be cause for concern.

In the meantime Forest’s written submission to the Committee has now been posted on the Parliament website. The full list (there are currently 53 written submissions) can be found here.

Howard’s way

Thanks to Howard McWilliam for the illustration of Keir Starmer below.

This is the third time we have commissioned an exclusive drawing from one of the best illustrators in Britain. The first time was in 2016 when we needed something to help promote our Axe The Tobacco Tax Escalator campaign.

We had been looking for an artist who could draw a recognisable likeness rather than an extreme caricature, and I had noticed Howard’s work because at that time he was often responsible for the illustrations that appeared on the cover of The Week.

George Osborne was Chancellor when we commissioned our first two illustrations. One featured Osborne at his desk surrounded by cigarette packs and piles of cash. (See George, don't do that.)

For the other he wore an Arthur Daley style raincoat and was standing in a dark and rather seedy alleyway, as if he was an illicit trader.

Last year, in response to Rishi Sunak's plans for a generational ban on the sale of tobacco, we commissioned Howard to produce an illustration of the then prime minister pushing a pram while dressed as a nanny, and in the pram was a bearded man wearing baby clothes.

That was the illustration that led to the seizure of a banner we tried to take on to the parliamentary estate for a reception at the House of Commons. According to security staff it was “offensive”. (Guido Fawkes has the story here.)

After the election, with Labour in power and Sunak no longer in Number 10 (but with the Tobacco and Vapes Bill still a priority for the new government), we asked Howard to redraw it with Sir Kier replacing the former PM.

I should add that Howard is in great demand so a further illustration, featuring Secretary of State for Health Wes Streeting, will have to wait.

In the meantime, if you want to see more of Howard’s work ‘for magazines, newspapers, children's books, packaging and character design’, click here.

See also: Nanny Starmer reimagined by AI. I think you will agree that Howard’s illustration is a hundred times better than that conjured up by artificial intelligence!

New poll, same result

The Tobacco and Vapes Public Bill Committee is meeting in the House of Commons today.

The T&V Bill includes a ban on the sale of tobacco to all future generations of adults and I can now reveal the result of the latest poll on the subject.

The fieldwork was conducted by Yonder Consulting over the weekend (10-12 January) and the full question was:

In the UK the age at which you are legally an adult is 18. At that age a person can vote, drive a car, join the army, buy alcohol, and possess a credit card. Do you think that when a person is legally an adult they should or should not also be allowed to purchase cigarettes and other tobacco products?

The last time we asked that question was in October when the result was almost identical. On that occasion 60% said ‘should’, 31% said ‘should not’, and 9% said ‘don’t know’.

Public opinion is consistent and clear. When a person is legally an adult at 18 they SHOULD be allowed to purchase cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Shamefully, our elected representatives are not listening.

Tobacco and Vapes Bill Committee update

Quick update on the Tobacco and Vapes Bill which is currently at the committee stage in the House of Commons.

As I explained here, the Tobacco and Vapes Public Bill Committee met last Tuesday and took 'evidence' from a series of 'expert' witnesses, not one of whom opposed the Bill.

One or two were neutral but the overwhelming majority were enthusiastically in favour, rather like the Committee itself, most of whose members voted for the Bill at the second reading in November.

I was under the impression that further witnesses would be giving evidence at a subsequent sitting but I was wrong. Instead, on Thursday the Committee met again but this time to discuss and debate amendments.

This week, there are four sittings scheduled (two tomorrow, two on Thursday).

What I didn't anticipate is that someone would propose an amendment raising the age of sale of tobacco to 25 rather than 21, which many consider to be the preferred alternative to a generational ban:

This amendment makes it an offence to sell tobacco products, herbal smoking products and cigarette papers to a person under the age of 25, rather than to people born on or after 1 January 2009.

I doubt that it will be adopted by the Committee [update: it wasn't], but it’s interesting to note that it was proposed by Helen Maguire, the Lib Dem MP for Epsom and Ewell, not Dr Caroline Johnson, the Conservative shadow health minister, as I originally suggested.

Maguire is not on the public bill committee so the amendment was raised, in her absence, by Johnson who made it clear she didn’t support it but felt it should be debated. (More on this when I’ve had a chance to read the Hansard transcript of the meeting in full. I don’t want to have to correct myself again.)

Our major concern is what happens when the Bill reaches the House of Lords because that's where a small cabal of anti-smoking peers could try to drive through other amendments that are even more restrictive in other areas, especially smoking in outdoor public places.

The odds are the Government will reject any substantial amendments to the Bill as it stands, but you never know. With a huge majority in the Commons it wouldn't be difficult for ministers to push amendments through, if minded to do so.

I won't spell out what the worst case scenario might be (I don't want to give anyone ideas!) but, as things stand, nothing is potentially off the table. Either way, I'll keep you posted.

Meanwhile click here for an update of all Committee Debate sittings so far, and click here if you want to read Forest's written submission to the Committee.

Other written submissions can be accessed here. Forest's submission is not yet online but I imagine it will be uploaded sometime this week.

Tax exile on Main Street

A friend moved to Gibraltar last week.

He’s gone there for tax purposes, which is a nice problem to have, but it wouldn't be my first choice.

To be fair, I've only been there once when a cruise ship I was on made a brief port of call.

Perhaps it was the fact that our itinerary prior to Gibraltar included more glamorous locations - including Cannes, Seville, Rome, and Barcelona - but I was a bit disappointed.

In my head I had an image of England circa 1959 (the year I was born), with red telephone boxes, quaint tea shops, and chocolate box cottages clinging to the rock.

The reality, which included over-crowded and slightly grubby streets, was very different.

It didn’t help that the day we visited coincided with the delivery - to the Department of Health in London - of a petition opposing plain packaging of tobacco.

The street petition (conducted at enormous expense) had been signed by over 235,000 people over a four-month period, the three-month government consultation having been extended by four weeks with a new closing date in the second week of August 2012.

When we booked our east Mediterranean cruise we had no idea the consultation would extend into the holiday season, but as it was my responsibility to make sure all the signatures were delivered on time and to the right place, it was quite stressful being on a ship, 1,500 miles away.

Thankfully (and not for the first time!) my colleague Jacqui took charge and all was well, but as soon as the delivery was confirmed (to my immense relief) I still had the job of issuing a press release announcing the number of signatures.

This I did via my laptop from a crowded coffee shop in Main Street which, as its name suggests, is the main shopping and commercial thoroughfare in Gibraltar. (For the full story see Hands Off Our Packs: number crunching.)

Only after the press release was sent could I relax, which probably explains some of my ambivalence towards the place. Nevertheless I’m keeping an open mind and hope to pay another visit - to see my friend - later this year.

Perhaps the presence of a resident who can show me the best places to visit will help change my mind.

Meanwhile I am also planning a trip to Zurich where my aunt Dorothy will celebrate her 100th birthday in April. Watch this space.

Grandad protests too much!

Further to my previous post, I have been following Grandad's recent IT-related issues.

Not only did his own blog crash (temporarily), but he has been having problems with a new laptop.

That said, my sympathy is limited because, having purchased an HP laptop with Windows as the default operating system, he then tried to install a different operating system (Linux).

Now, Grandad seems to know far more about computers and IT than I ever will (or ever want to), but I wouldn't dream of messing with an off-the-shelf computer.

If I wanted a different operating system I'd purchase a computer with my preferred OS already installed, or I'd order it from an independent specialist and have it built to that particular specification, which is what a friend of mine does.

But I suspect that – despite his grumbles – Grandad rather enjoys the process, in the same way that he enjoys making 'incredibly complicated' items, such as a clock and functioning telescope, from model kits.

My verdict therefore is that he protests too much!

His story also reminds me of the many IT specialists I have employed over the years, some of whom have spent days trying to fix a problem whilst racking up significant bills.

It happens less these days because we no longer use custom-built platforms and software that require the sort of 'expert' help that invariably requires an expensive service fee plus additional costs whenever something goes wrong.

Twenty years ago, however, it wasn't unusual, even for a small operation like Forest, to have websites built with proprietary operating systems that were owned by a third party who were the only people who knew how it worked (or didn't).

Hard to believe now, but in 2003 Forest paid £25,000 for a new website using a proprietary operating system.

On top of that it cost us a further £5,000 for each of the next three years, which was the price of the licence that allowed us to use the software and operating system that had been designed by the company that built the website!

In hindsight we were incredibly naive but at the time we didn't know any better and we were guided by people from the corporate world whose budgets were much bigger than ours.

Since then our websites have been built, maintained, and hosted for a fraction of that price, and they’ve been no worse for it.

I’m not sure what the lesson is other than keep it simple!

PS. If Grandad reads this, perhaps he could explain – to a layman like me – the appeal of the Linux operating system.

It's not the first time I've heard it's better than Windows, but is it also better than the Mac OS and, if so, how?

Update: As I hoped he would, Grandad has responded here (An amazing insight). It's a great read!

PS. Linux Mint Cinnamon sounds like a vape juice!

Whoops, something went wrong

I am currently experiencing an ongoing problem with this website.

It doesn’t stop me posting but it takes a bit longer because when I try to login and post copy I frequently get the message, ‘Whoops, something went wrong’.

In addition I occasionally get the message, ‘500 Internal Server Error’.

This also happens when I am not logged in and click on the URL, and I am curious if readers are experiencing the same issues.

It’s overcome easily enough. You just have to refresh the page and most of the time that reboots it, although edits have to be done again which is a nuisance if I haven’t copied them.

I’ve made Squarespace (the New York-based company that manages and hosts the site) aware of the problem (it’s not the first time this has happened), but although they replied within 24 hours I sense no urgency to fix it.

The reason, I suspect, is that this blog uses Squarespace 5, software that was originally released in 2008, and fixing problems with it is no longer a priority.

Squarespace 5 was superseded in 2012 by Squarespace 6, then Squarespace 7.0, and, more recently, Squarespace 7.1.

Users like me have been encouraged to upgrade, and I would but I'm nervous in case I lose 14 years of blog posts in the process.

This is how Squarespace describes the process:

1. Start a Squarespace 7.0 trial.
2. Import your Squarespace 5 content.
3. Update the site to Squarespace 7.1.
4. Set up, style, and add to your site. You may need to recreate content that didn't import automatically.
5. Upgrade your Squarespace 7.1 site to active billing.
6. Move your custom domain.
7. Cancel Squarespace 5 billing.

One thing that concerns me is the warning, 'You may need to recreate content that didn't import automatically', because that could be quite a big job that I simply don't have time for.

I am fairly certain too that if I were to try and switch the blog to Squarespace 7.0 myself I will inevitably press the wrong key and thousands of posts will disappear into the ether, never to be seen again.

Likewise many of the images that have been uploaded since this version of the blog was launched in 2011.

To be fair to Squarespace, I’ve been very happy with the platform, which is normally very easy to use. (I’m sure it’s only a matter of practise and familiarity, but whenever I’ve tried WordPress I've found it far less intuitive.)

Anyway, if you are experiencing the same gremlins as me when you visit this blog, do let me know.

I can live with it for now if I'm the only person inconvenienced, but if it's a wider problem then I need to get it fixed, or switch to Squarespace 7.0, or 7.1, sooner rather than later.