Say No To Nanny

Smokefree Ideology


Nicotine Wars

 

40 Years of Hurt

Prejudice and Prohibition

Road To Ruin?

Search This Site
The Pleasure of Smoking

Forest Polling Report

Outdoor Smoking Bans

Share This Page
Powered by Squarespace

Entries by Simon Clark (3017)

Wednesday
Mar062024

Election fever? Chancellor postpones vape levy until October 2026

Well, that was a surprise.

Having let it be known for weeks that he was going to introduce a levy on vaping products to discourage children and never smokers from taking up the habit, the Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, did indeed introduce a vape tax in today's Budget statement.

The unexpected twist was that the measure won't be introduced until October 2026, by which time the Tories are very unlikely to be in government!

Meanwhile, having also floated the idea of a further "one-off" tax hike on tobacco in order to maintain the difference in cost between tobacco and vaping products, Hunt announced that the additional tax would be introduced at the same time as the vape levy.

If you're confused I don't blame you because following the Chancellor's announcement the BBC News website immediately reported that 'Hunt has introduced a new levy on vaping' and 'There will also be a one-off increase in tobacco duty', implying it would happen immediately because there was no mention of the critical date, October 2026.

Moreover, what no-one has reported is that there are no other changes to excise duty on tobacco in today's Budget - including the annual escalator (inflation plus two per cent) - so tobacco duty has effectively been frozen, for now at least.

Why this should be the case is a bit of a mystery, but I suspect it may have something to do with the fact that previous hikes in tobacco duty were reported to have increased the rate of inflation, and that's the last thing the Government wants or needs ahead of a general election.

I should add that I don’t for one second think that a future Labour government will repeal Hunt’s vaping levy. If anything, they might impose even harsher duties on tobacco and vapes.

Either way, Forest's response is reported by Asian Trader here – Hunt announces extra tax on vaping from 2026.

We’ve also been quoted by the Press Association, the Independent, Daily Mirror, London Evening Standard, and several more.

Update: The Sun is reporting that 'The price of cigarettes is set to rise to an eye-watering £16 following a one-off increase of £2 per 100 cigarettes or 50 grams of tobacco'.

Don't know where they got those figures from but I assume they are referring to the 'one-off increase' scheduled for October 2026. We’ll see.

Update: The figures above were obtained from Spring Budget 2024 Policy Costings (page 26). And, yes, they do refer to the October 2026 increase.

Tuesday
Mar052024

Another liberal conservative bites the dust

I was sorry to hear that former government minister Paul Scully is to stand down as an MP at the forthcoming election.

Minister for London from February 2020, and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Tech and the Digital Economy from October 2022, he was surprisingly sacked from both roles in November last year.

That came a few months after he failed to be selected as the Conservative candidate for London mayor. Remarkably, given his ministerial role at the time, he didn’t even make the shortlist.

I’m biased, but on the few occasions our paths have crossed, I have found him to be extremely pleasant and approachable.

He first came to our attention at the Conservative party conference in 2011 where we hosted a comedy night at the Comedy Store in Manchester.

It prompted the former Sutton councillor to tweet:

Forest fringe at the comedy store is possibly the best ever I have attended at conference. Smokers showing antis how to do #nudge. #cpc11

Elected to Parliament in 2015 as the MP for Sutton and Cheam, he was therefore an obvious choice when we needed someone to speak at our 2016 fringe event in Birmingham.

With 500 guests squeezed in to a Birmingham night club it was very noisy and our two guest speakers - Paul and LBC broadcaster Iain Dale - struggled to be heard.

Nevertheless they handled the situation with aplomb and, by coincidence, Iain even interviewed Paul on his programme last night.

The last time I saw Paul in person, but not to speak to, was at a Conservative Muslim Forum event to mark the coronation of King Charles last year.

As I wrote at the time:

I’m not entirely sure what Paul Scully’s connection with the CMF was, but I was interested to hear him say he was running for Mayor of London.

If selected as the Tory candidate the odds will be strongly against him winning, but he would run a very good campaign, I'm sure, and I wish him well.

Sadly, that wasn’t to be, and we are now set to lose one of the relatively few liberal conservatives in the House.

What a shame.

Monday
Mar042024

Name games 

According to The Times today:

A vaping levy has been denounced by free-marketeers, smokers’ rights lobbyists and the vaping industry but, unusually, welcomed by both public health campaigners and the tobacco industry.

The ‘smokers’ rights lobbyists’ referred to are Forest but for some reason (lack of space, I’ve been told) our actual quote (solicited by the paper) was omitted.

For the record, it read:

"If the government is serious about promoting e-cigarettes as a substantially less harmful alternative to combustible tobacco, a levy on vapes will send completely the wrong message to consumers.

"Vaping products are already subject to VAT. Imposing even a small levy will simply add to the confusion that exists in many smokers' minds about the risks of vaping.

"Worse, if the government hikes tobacco duty again to maintain the difference in price between tobacco and vapes, that will inevitably drive more smokers to the black market.

"Both measures would therefore be counterproductive and an unnecessary own goal."

Oddly enough, the day after Rishi Sunak announced he intended to introduce a generational tobacco sales ban, The Times ran a story headlined 'Smoking ban plan burns Big Tobacco'.

According to that report:

The tobacco industry and associated lobby groups denounced the government’s plan, warning that it would benefit the illicit market.

‘Associated lobby groups’ was another oblique reference to Forest and it followed a 5-10 minute conversation I had with one of the paper’s journalists that I assumed was on the record.

Despite that, Forest wasn’t mentioned by name, nor was anything I said quoted directly in the piece.

Now, five months later, it’s happened again which begs the question: why the aversion to mentioning Forest by name?

It can’t just be a lack of space, can it?

Monday
Mar042024

Let's make some noise

Thanks to political blogger Guido Fawkes for shining a light on the murkier aspects of the Government consultation on the generational tobacco ban.

Following the announcement by the prime minister in October that he wanted to raise the age of sale of tobacco by one year every year, the Government launched an eight-week consultation, with a closing date of December 6.

In my experience, most government consultations are scheduled for three, or sometimes four, months.

Likewise, the subsequent reports tend to be published three months after the closing date, although it can sometimes take much longer (eleven months in the case of the plain packaging consultation).

In this instance, the Government's response was published less than eight weeks after the closing date, and that period included the two-week Christmas period, so it's probably fair to say it was produced in half the time it normally takes.

Either way, the consultation attracted nearly 28,000 legitimate responses, and to no-one's surprise:

The large majority of responses supported the government proposal to create a smokefree generation. Respondents were mostly in favour of the proposed measures to tackle youth vaping, particularly restricting point of sale displays and restricting packaging.

Interestingly, however, the report failed to provide a list of respondents (notably the 896 organisations that responded to the consultation), despite the fact that this has been standard practice for most if not every government consultation Forest has ever contributed to.

The reason it's important is that we suspect that many of the organisations and NGOs that responded to the consultation will be public sector bodies or have links to the public health industry.

Of even greater concern, though, was the extraordinary revelation that the Government had chosen not to consider the views of the 307 respondents with disclosed links to the tobacco industry 'when determining our policy response' due to the 'vested interests' of the industry.

As you can imagine, retail groups with legitimate links to the tobacco industry are up in arms at the admission that their views on the proposed generational tobacco ban have not been considered, despite the fact that it could have a significant impact on their businesses.

Ditto the proposed ban on disposable vapes, for which views were also sought.

Meanwhile we're outraged that the views of law-abiding consumers have also been sidelined in this unprecedented fashion.

Forest has been contributing to government consultations for decades and this is the first time any government (including devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales) has told us that our views have not even been considered, let alone acted upon.

To get some answers from government, Conservative MP arl McCartney submitted several written parliamentary questions.

Far from addressing his legitimate concerns, the Government (via the DHSC and health minister Andrea Leadsom) simply doubled down and is refusing to publish the names of the organisations that responded to the consultation. 

This includes organisations with disclosed links to the tobacco industry, so it's impossible to know for sure which groups have had their views disregarded by ministers and civil servants.

Not only is the lack of transparency breathtaking, but using the WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) as the excuse for ignoring the views of legitimate stakeholders is both pathetic and and fundamentally undemocratic.

Furthermore, with retail crime at an all-time high, the Government has – incredibly – chosen to disregard the views of retail organisations just because they have links with the tobacco industry whose products they buy and sell.

It's one thing to ignore the views of the tobacco industry (although I believe that's wrong too), but disregarding the views of other organisations with a legitimate interest in the proposed legislation is scandalous and should be challenged in court.

One more thing: public consultations are usually designed to generate feedback on a particular proposal, following which the Government considers and then decides its next move.

In this instance, as Rishi Sunak made clear at the Conservative conference in October, and again when the new coalition government in New Zealand announced that it intended to repeal the generational ban legislation introduced by the previous (Labour) government, he had obviously made up his mind to introduce a generational ban long before the consultation closing date, and months before the report was published, so the whole process has been a complete sham from start to finish.

Anyway, now you can see what we're up against, I hope you will write to your MP and make even more noise.

See: Sunak's smoke and mirrors ban

Saturday
Mar022024

Now I’m 65

Hard to believe, I know, but I’m 65 today.

The funny thing is, it only seems like yesterday that I was ‘celebrating’ my 60th birthday.

I wasn’t too fussed, if I’m honest, but my wife decided to mark the occasion by booking an evening, with an overnight stay, at a Michelin star restaurant at a secret location in rural Lincolnshire.

That much I knew in advance. What I didn’t know is that she had also arranged for two of our oldest friends to join us, which was an unexpected surprise.

It was only the second Michelin star restaurant we had ever been to (the first was in Cambridge), but since then we’ve developed a bit of a taste for them (no pun intended).

I don’t have a favourite because they’ve all been very different, but the one I remember most, partly because of its size, was Menu Gordon Jones, a tiny (and pleasantly informal) restaurant in Bath.

It was fully booked yet the eponymous chef not only did all the cooking, he also greeted guests at the door on arrival, and visited our tables to explain several of the seven courses on the menu.

That level of service, albeit in a very small restaurant, is pretty impressive, but I don’t envy the restaurateurs who have to maintain such a high standard every day to justify their Michelin star/s.

Anyway, for my 65th birthday today we’re driving to Norfolk where we will be staying at a Michelin star restaurant in Old Hunstanton.

En route I will reflect upon the fact that it’s not that long ago that men retired at 65 (when they could collect their state pension), with women retiring at 60.

Previous generations were sent on their way with a gold watch, but I can remember when the average age for men was 72 so the ‘golden’ years of retirement were relatively short, and something that people looked forward to after a hard working life.

More recently there was a period when my generation talked of being able to retire early, and I have a several friends who did just that.

One was 50 when he retired, and another was just 40, although it would be more accurate to describe him as semi-retired because he soon got bored and found work as a non-executive director with various companies.

Another friend retired from the civil service at 55 but he too found the days without work rather long so he took up dog-walking.

Today, if they live to their eighties or nineties, people who retire in their fifties or even sixties face the prospect of 20 or 30 years without work, which is why so many people, instead of retiring early, are voluntarily working longer, although money may also be a factor.

In my case I have no imminent plans to retire because I enjoy my job. Also, while it can be challenging, it’s not physically demanding so I reckon I’ve got a few more years in me before I embark on that round-the-world cruise.

Wednesday
Feb282024

Was it something I said?

According to a study led by UCL researchers, 'Most smokers wrongly believe vaping is at least as harmful as smoking'.

The UCL press release was embargoed until 4.00pm this afternoon and is getting quite a lot of coverage.

Yesterday I was invited by BBC News (online) to respond to the study so I sent this comment:

“Government is partly to blame for the confusion because banning disposable vapes and threatening to severely restrict the display and packaging of e-cigarettes is hardly the best way to promote a reduced risk product that has helped millions of smokers to quit.

“Furthermore, is it any wonder that smokers are confused about the perceived risk of vaping when the message coming from government and the public health industry is that the only people who should vape are adults who want to quit smoking, and no-one should vape long-term or recreationally.”

Naturally they didn't use any of it, although they did quote Deborah Arnott, the outgoing CEO of ASH.

Was it something I said?

Update: After a little prompting (by me) BBC News has updated its report to include my quote.

Tuesday
Feb272024

Farewell to Vice

Another online magazine bites the dust.

It was reported last week that Vice Media, ‘the former poster child of the digital media revolution’, is to make redundant hundreds more employees and ‘cease website operations’, moving instead to a “studio model”.

According to The Times:

Vice started as a punk magazine called the Voice of Montreal in 1994 before it moved to New York, retaining its reputation as an edgy and often provocative publisher, with editions worldwide. It later branched out into news, audio and television.

Last year, however, the company filed for bankruptcy and was sold for $350 million having been valued ‘at about $5.7 billion’ in 2017.

I have no interest in Vice (I was too old, even when it was launched, to be part of the target audience), but our paths did cross once or twice.

In 2016 a Forest fringe event at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham was featured in an article that gave it a surprisingly positive review:

What the party was like: Actually really good. An upper-middle market bar packed to the gills with free booze, mini burgers, pocket ash-trays (a weird plastic wallet thing you can carry around) inscribed with the words, "Say no to outdoor smoking bans," and leaflets about how "A once benign nanny state has become a bully state, coercing rather than educating adults to give up tobacco."

Entertainment: It was advertised as "Eat. Drink. Smoke. Vape.", so like all good parties there were no frills beyond the amount of inebriants you could stuff in your body.

A few years later we were contacted by another Vice journalist and I spent two hours being interviewed for an article that was never published.

I was subsequently approached by a ‘casting producer’ who wanted to interview me for a subsidiary Vice project and nothing came of that either, but I wasn’t surprised because it was clear by then that the former ‘punk magazine’ was fully on board the anti-smoking juggernaut and any views that opposed the Establishment-led orthodoxy on tobacco had no place in the world of Vice.

(Oh, the irony.)

The most obvious example of Vice abandoning its punk origins was the launch in April 2019 of a £5 million ‘Quit Cigarettes’ initiative funded by the tobacco giant Philip Morris International (PMI), whose goal is a smoke-free (sic) world.

Featuring some of the most puerile articles I have ever read on any subject, headlines included:

How Smoking Increases Chances of Genital Warts

This Is How Smoking Makes Your Penis Shrink

How Smoking is Ruining Your Sex Life

Is Smoking a Deal-Breaker on Tinder?
Are Festivals Doing Enough to Phase Out Smoking? 

How Cigarettes Blight British Seaside Towns

Why It’s Time to Ban Smoking in Airports For Good

Are You Being Bullied Into Smoking Cigarettes?

As I wrote here, the project ‘seemed determined to belittle smokers and their habit and was so tedious I eventually stopped visiting the site because I couldn’t imagine that anyone would take it seriously’.

To this day I would love to know how PMI execs justified the expense, but this is a company that also threw hundreds of thousands of dollars the way of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (before parting ways last year), so I guess £5 million was small change.

As for Vice, in 2016, when she was 19, my daughter offered this damning appraisal:

"It's written by a bunch of pathetic twenty somethings who hate anyone who doesn't agree with their uni politics.

"They pass their bitterness off as sarcastic humour. I much prefer Dazed and Confused if you're gonna read that stuff."

See also: My brush with Vice and its help to quit smoking project (July 2019)
PMI-funded Quit Cigarettes initiative stubbed out (February 2020)

Below: Vice promoting its Quit Cigarettes initiative on the London Underground in 2019

Sunday
Feb252024

All the world’s a stage

Visiting the Byre Theatre in St Andrews last week brought back a lot of memories.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I was in two school productions at the Byre, The Taming of the Shrew in 1974, and Our Town (by Thornton Wilder) in 1976.

In The Taming of the Shrew I played Lucentio who is ‘struck by love for Bianca at first sight’.

To be honest, I wasn’t a good actor and it didn’t help that I had to share the stage with Ron Porter, who was in Year 6, two years above me.

Ron played Petruchio and according to a review in the local paper:

Ron Porter’s affability shines out like the proverbial beacon ... as the most experienced member of the cast, he has the confidence to be able to establish an immediate rapport with the audience. ... [He] turned in his usual high standard of performance as the enormously arrogant Petruchio.

I didn’t even merit a mention but I console myself with the thought that, 50 years later, Ron is still enjoying a successful acting career under the name Ron Donachie.

We returned to the Byre for Our Town in January 1976. I played George Gibbs, a schoolboy who was falling for Emily, who lived across the street in a small provincial town in America, circa 1910.

As written by Thornton Wilder (in 1938), Our Town requires very few props and one of the props we employed was a step ladder.

For much of the play I sat on the top step which I think was supposed to represent George staring out of his bedroom window at Emily’s house, while George’s younger sister sat on a lower step giving him/me the benefit of her ‘advice’.

Well, that’s how I remember it. Either way, we spent what felt like a great many hours on that ladder in rehearsal prior to our three night run, so I can truly say we suffered for our art.

(Spoiler alert: George marries Emily who dies in childbirth in act 3, so not a happy ending, but it was a very happy production that I remember with great fondness.)

Between Shakespeare and Thornton Wilder I was in Charley’s Aunt, a Victorian farce that became a global success after it was first performed in Bury St Edmunds in 1892. Our production took place in school, in the assembly hall.

The weirdest production by far, though, was a series of short one act plays that we performed after our final exams in 1976.

The one I was in featured a young couple and their ‘dead’ baby and was set in a graveyard.

I played the man and a week before the performance the director took us to rehearse among the gravestones that sit alongside the ruins of St Andrews Cathedral.

At his insistence, the performance also featured my first (and last) on stage snog which might have been unremarkable had it not been for the location (a graveyard) and the ‘dead’ baby. Either way, it prompted several members of the audience to walk out.

Realising my acute limitations as an actor, I steered clear of the drama society at university and took part in just one play, an English Department production of a ‘domestic burletta’ first performed in 1826 that made a virtue of loud, overwrought acting with no need for nuance or subtlety.

Luke the Labourer did however enable me to share a stage, albeit very briefly, with the extremely talented Bill Anderson who went on to enjoy a stellar career as a writer and director in theatre and television.

Apart from an absurd student union pantomime, that was the last time I ‘acted’ on stage and the part I played was a far cry from my stage debut at Winbury School in Maidenhead in 1968.

Winbury was a small independent prep school and, if I remember, the school hall was an old Nissan hut that doubled up as the dining hall where we had lunch.

There was a stage at one end and because it was an all boys’ school someone had to play the girl and that someone was me.

According to my mother, the headmaster complimented me on how attractive I looked, which is probably the best review I ever got.

And the name of the play? Queer Street.

Update: I have found a cutting – a review of Luke the Labourer, no less – from the Aberdeen Press & Journal. Here's a snippet:

Last night, after the interval, the show took on a life and vigour that had been lacking earlier and although the players generally entered into the spirit of the piece, their enthusiasm ran away with them on occasion, when firmer discipline and less inclination to find the situation comic themselves might have paid dividends.

Below: Yours truly playing Farmer Wakefield and taking it very seriously.