Well after yesterdays masterclass from Herr Brown on how to "win" voters over-especially when they are lifelong NuLiebour supporters-the gloves are off folks!
Here in the somewhat overcast Midlands I dread to think what he would have called my mate 'Pete' for what he would have said. In fact I can't see, no matter how polite he may have been, how he would have made the news with his views! Perhaps Gordon (the 'grinning jackernapes' doppelganger extraordinaire with the plastic smile now firmly pasted on the countenance, no matter what the circumstance!) would have been honest, for once, and simply told him to f**k off as in his world these things didn't happen!
Immigration is a sore point with many British born & breds for it is the european immigrants that are bringing this country to its financial knees (in part) due to the great disparity between monetary power in respective countries.
5 years ago my friend, a kitchen/bathroom fitter, could earn a decent wage without ripping people off in the process. He was happy with his lot, not too happy that he sometimes had a 3 week break between jobs but generally happy. Nor was he an exhorbitant pricer of jobs for the trade had already determined that it was £'x' per cupboard fitment, or £'x' per electrical socket moved/removed/created - whatever.
Well, work started drying up and he seemed to spend more time at home than not, more time in the pub than not (until July 1st that is!) and was generally now pissed off with 'his lot'
The household budget was cut month by month and paying for the normal things we come to expect was getting to be a real struggle as the months went by. Even the modest family holiday got the sack as finances did not allow such an illustrious pleasantry. He was worried, he was concerned for with a good few years of 'working life' left my friend was not a happy bunny at the prospect of more years of struggling to even get a job.
One fine day salvation came from the telephone. Mr Asraf phoned him-18 months after my friend (Pete)had been round to quote for his kitchen fitting in a reasonably large extension. "I am smelling gas all the time Mr Pete, please come to my house and help me?" Not unaturally 'Pete' was pissed off but intrigued at the same time thus agreed to go and see what Mr Asraf was moaning about.
To simplify matters here, the new gas cooker was situated on the opposite side to where it originally was due to the new extension, thus the proverbial 'mile away' from the inlet connwction.
It didn't take Pete long to ascertain the nature of the "I'm smelling gas Mr Pete" for, after removing 3 of the kitchen plinths he spotted the glorious sight of 23ft of green hosepipe connected, either end, by 'jubilee clips'. That was the gas supply to Mr Asraf's newwly refurbished kitchen! Class job folks. Class Job!
Pete dutifully told Mr Asraf what the problem was and pointed out that it was only a matter of time before the pipe perished and Boom-Boom, "new kitchen in sky-and probably half the extension as well!"
"Mr Pete, you are very good man, you fix for me-please?" Pleaded Mr Asraf.
"I certainly can Mr Asraf, but you are looking at about £'x' to do it properly in copper pipe and affixed to the walls correctly as 4 of your base units have to come out to get the bloody pipes in!"
The hands went up in horror at this idea, "oh no, non, no" he cried, "I pay these mens £500 to fit my kitchen, I not paying anymore-you do for me, please?"
After a bit more conversation Pete found out that 2 Kossovans had been touring the area, picking up jobs willy-nilly and charging £30 per day-no matter what the job was! To top it all Pete knew them and had actually used them as labourers (when they first got here) for a small extension build. As Pete had said at the time, "by God, they can dig!"
But now, after nearly 2 years of living here it seemed that their 'talents' had evolved somewhat and there was no end to their repertoire! They were both living in a small, cheapish hotel at the taxpayers expense, getting dole money and sending money home to their village in Kossova every single week-unbelievable. Pete decided to catch up with them for he knew that every saturday night they would enjoy a drink in the Polish Club near the hotel.
He told Mr Asraf that it was his own fault the gas pipes were of such a standard and that if he didn't want to pay proper money to have the proper job done it was up to him. Plinths replaced, tools in box-gone!
Forward to saturday night:-
"Hi Bissan, how's it going mate?"
"Ah, Mr Pete, you have job for me? yes?," replied the Kosso' as Pete smiled at them and accepted the frothing pint. During the next hour Pete found out that as his workload had decreased, theirs had, naturally, increased. Well, at £30 per day labour charge it would! Pete also found out that they were leaving "your very good and kind country" as they had now accrued enough money "to buy my village!"Between them, accepting all the benefits this country affords such people, they had managed to send almost £25,000 back to their homeland, live here for nothing for almost 2 years and live in state aided funded hotel to boot!
Pete had seen his mortgage rise & fall like a yoyo, struggle for work, forget about holidays and had almost contemplated 'signing on', so desperate were things becoming.
Who was the idiot here?
So Mr Brown, when your 66 year old pensioner cornered you like a rat on the immigration problem, why was she such a bigot? Why did you not heed the voice of the people-God knows you need to. You thought you had got the perfect model to make your disastrous walkabout/talkabout a massive PR success-except for the fact that you are so out of touch with reality you didn't even think your team needed to prompt the 'subject' with the correct answers to your questions! To top it all, you even managed to completely upset a lifelong NuLiebour stalwart! You are a walking disaster man, you are a thorn in your own side. You have killed your own election chances for good-and all because a little old lady brushed on the subject of immigration-whereas Pete would have torn you to shreds on the subject !
The problem here is that, are the other two 'head in the clouds' leaders of your ilk-or do they actually listen to the voice of the people? I somehow doubt it so just where will this country end up.
As for Mr Asraf, there was a flurry of action re fire engines and ambulances a few weeks ago in his part of town. Pete doesn't know for certain but when the local paper reported the event he had a wry , almost satisfied smile on his face.
The power of immigration people! Immigration!
Thursday, 29 April 2010
Saturday, 10 April 2010
Bookmakers & Smokers-Bad, Bad Day!
On the day the nation looks forward to with no little anticipation it seems as if the Gods have conspired against the two arch enemies of millions. Bookmakers? you either love 'em or hate 'em-that's the way of it.
When you lose to the 'old enemy' some (very few actually) treat the loss as 'just another day at the office', but many treat he loss as a personal affront to their pride, their skills as a 'winner picker', their pocket. This feeling of ill-will grows, slowly but surely as time marches ever onward. Anger and resentment grows against the dreaded 'bookie', who although probably just an average man/woman with limited means (no! not everyone is like Ladbrokes) trying to make a living each day, is the butt of all acrimony in the world of punters.However, today when all punters rejoiced. Today was the day when the bookie got severely spanked, hammered into the ground, mercilessly pounded by their thousands of clients, for Tony McCoy, champion jockey for the past, seemingly, ten decades finally won the Grand National on the 10/1 jt favourite "Don't Push It". Aptly named, the horse was tenderly eased into the race 6 fences from home and it was easy to see from there that Monsieur McCoy was about to ride the perfect race (barring a fall of course) an ease his way past the front running Black Apalachi-himelf very well fancied by the punting brigade. In fact, had Tony McCoy decided to "push it", Don't Push It would more than likely have thrown the towel in and refused to run on-much to the despair of his legion of followers.
The race could not have turned out much worse for our bookie friends as the 2nd & 3rd were 14/1 & 16/1 chances with the 4th being the other 10/1 jt favourite. A total disaster for the bookmakers nationwide. We are talking of £millions paid out on this one race alone-a bad, bad day for the bookies!
On another topic, probably somewhat nearer to our hearts, our intrepid colleague Dave Atherton has yet again been published in the British Medical Journal. In response to supposed medical, scientific expertise Dave has cast doubt upon the methods, results and conclusions of several of the findings. Indeed, dave has, to his credit, basically demolished the above and reduced it to nothing less than junk science. Be a smoker or not, looking at what these 'eminent professionals' have produced I am in full agreement for Dave has taken each argument apart systematically and simply destroyed the lot. 'The boy dun good'
The RCP report, quite obviously benefitting greatly from imput from ASH-or at the very least strong guidance-came under fire from Dave for as we all know, it is/was full of estimated deaths for this , that and the other. These physicians even blame smoking for middle ear infections. What next? ingrowing toenails? This whole anti smoking crusade is becoming more farcical by the day as more and more absurd claims spew from the mouths of the so called righteous ones.
However, despite Dave's brilliant destruction of these 'learned & wise people' it is the following response that inspired that same anger as punter to bookie illustrated above for a Mr Stephen Black (Management Consultant) of London responded with this absolute gem!
Quote:- I'm sorry to disappoint Dave Atherton, but he clearly doesn't understand the rules of argument when "just causes" such as the campaign against smoking are being debated.
The medical profession knows that smoking is very bad and it is therefore happy to use any means--no matter how illiberal or illogical--to reduce it. Since smoking is bad, passive smoking must also be bad. The scientific quality or credibility of studies about the effects of passive smoking are entirely irrelevant: only the propaganda value counts.
There are no public health brownie points in fighting for truth and high quality science.
Excuse me?
The truth is now out in the open smokers! in this world of supposed political correctness & transparency it seems the medical profession are exempt from both-and more. It seems that the medical profession have free range to print whatever they like in the name of 'worthy causes'! Smoker bashing with blatant lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & total junk science seems to be eminently acceptable to members of this profession. no wonder Campix & Zyban were promoted with such alacrity before they were even properly tested, resulting in many bizarrely airborne humanoids!
Now that Mr Black has openly stated that any means are fair when combatting those dirty, smelly smokers is it not time for smokers to uite and fight back? If governments are reliant upon such fraudsters then what chance have the weighty population got in the coming months and does their number include our clinically obese Chief Medical Officer Sir (why and for what?) Liam Donaldson or is he automaticall exempt being 'one of them'?
Dick Puddlecote's excellent blog "Burn The Fat Bastard!" spells out the insensitivity afforded to others by these health freaks
(Link:- http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.com/2010/04/burn-fat-bastard.html.
£thousands of our money being wasted on a 40' high effigy of a rather tubby 'Bunteresque' boy being burned 'at the stake' for such heinous witchery as of eating a rather large quantity of burgers! Apparently Barnslet Council see this as 'fair game' in the war against the overweight brigade. never mind peoples feelings, never mind that this may cause stress and mental disorder among a section of our society it is fair game because the righteous have decreed it so.
So, smokers, I urge you all to write to your MP and copy in Mr Blacks obnoxious but truthful reply to our man Dave's protestations. Show your MP what is going on behind the scenes. Open HIS/HER eyes to the injustice that is occurring in this country. Spell it out as to just why this country is rapidly 'going to the dogd'. Ask them if they believe in human rights & dignity for all or if they are part of this 'great exempt' body of so called medical experts?
Be a Tony McCoy, don't push it, gently warm to the task and keep chipping away at them until they 'ease' past the front runner and have a clear view of the winning line.
Today was a bad, bad day for the bookies!
Today was a bad, bad day for smokers!
But at least we now know the truth-these overpaid zealots don't need to be of scientific knowledge they merely need to be on the side of the righteous!
But hang on here a minute, surely we are the righteous (?) for it is us that speak the truth to defend ourselves against the lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & junk science used against us by the 'pretend to be' righteous!
When you lose to the 'old enemy' some (very few actually) treat the loss as 'just another day at the office', but many treat he loss as a personal affront to their pride, their skills as a 'winner picker', their pocket. This feeling of ill-will grows, slowly but surely as time marches ever onward. Anger and resentment grows against the dreaded 'bookie', who although probably just an average man/woman with limited means (no! not everyone is like Ladbrokes) trying to make a living each day, is the butt of all acrimony in the world of punters.However, today when all punters rejoiced. Today was the day when the bookie got severely spanked, hammered into the ground, mercilessly pounded by their thousands of clients, for Tony McCoy, champion jockey for the past, seemingly, ten decades finally won the Grand National on the 10/1 jt favourite "Don't Push It". Aptly named, the horse was tenderly eased into the race 6 fences from home and it was easy to see from there that Monsieur McCoy was about to ride the perfect race (barring a fall of course) an ease his way past the front running Black Apalachi-himelf very well fancied by the punting brigade. In fact, had Tony McCoy decided to "push it", Don't Push It would more than likely have thrown the towel in and refused to run on-much to the despair of his legion of followers.
The race could not have turned out much worse for our bookie friends as the 2nd & 3rd were 14/1 & 16/1 chances with the 4th being the other 10/1 jt favourite. A total disaster for the bookmakers nationwide. We are talking of £millions paid out on this one race alone-a bad, bad day for the bookies!
On another topic, probably somewhat nearer to our hearts, our intrepid colleague Dave Atherton has yet again been published in the British Medical Journal. In response to supposed medical, scientific expertise Dave has cast doubt upon the methods, results and conclusions of several of the findings. Indeed, dave has, to his credit, basically demolished the above and reduced it to nothing less than junk science. Be a smoker or not, looking at what these 'eminent professionals' have produced I am in full agreement for Dave has taken each argument apart systematically and simply destroyed the lot. 'The boy dun good'
The RCP report, quite obviously benefitting greatly from imput from ASH-or at the very least strong guidance-came under fire from Dave for as we all know, it is/was full of estimated deaths for this , that and the other. These physicians even blame smoking for middle ear infections. What next? ingrowing toenails? This whole anti smoking crusade is becoming more farcical by the day as more and more absurd claims spew from the mouths of the so called righteous ones.
However, despite Dave's brilliant destruction of these 'learned & wise people' it is the following response that inspired that same anger as punter to bookie illustrated above for a Mr Stephen Black (Management Consultant) of London responded with this absolute gem!
Quote:- I'm sorry to disappoint Dave Atherton, but he clearly doesn't understand the rules of argument when "just causes" such as the campaign against smoking are being debated.
The medical profession knows that smoking is very bad and it is therefore happy to use any means--no matter how illiberal or illogical--to reduce it. Since smoking is bad, passive smoking must also be bad. The scientific quality or credibility of studies about the effects of passive smoking are entirely irrelevant: only the propaganda value counts.
There are no public health brownie points in fighting for truth and high quality science.
Excuse me?
The truth is now out in the open smokers! in this world of supposed political correctness & transparency it seems the medical profession are exempt from both-and more. It seems that the medical profession have free range to print whatever they like in the name of 'worthy causes'! Smoker bashing with blatant lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & total junk science seems to be eminently acceptable to members of this profession. no wonder Campix & Zyban were promoted with such alacrity before they were even properly tested, resulting in many bizarrely airborne humanoids!
Now that Mr Black has openly stated that any means are fair when combatting those dirty, smelly smokers is it not time for smokers to uite and fight back? If governments are reliant upon such fraudsters then what chance have the weighty population got in the coming months and does their number include our clinically obese Chief Medical Officer Sir (why and for what?) Liam Donaldson or is he automaticall exempt being 'one of them'?
Dick Puddlecote's excellent blog "Burn The Fat Bastard!" spells out the insensitivity afforded to others by these health freaks
(Link:- http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.com/2010/04/burn-fat-bastard.html.
£thousands of our money being wasted on a 40' high effigy of a rather tubby 'Bunteresque' boy being burned 'at the stake' for such heinous witchery as of eating a rather large quantity of burgers! Apparently Barnslet Council see this as 'fair game' in the war against the overweight brigade. never mind peoples feelings, never mind that this may cause stress and mental disorder among a section of our society it is fair game because the righteous have decreed it so.
So, smokers, I urge you all to write to your MP and copy in Mr Blacks obnoxious but truthful reply to our man Dave's protestations. Show your MP what is going on behind the scenes. Open HIS/HER eyes to the injustice that is occurring in this country. Spell it out as to just why this country is rapidly 'going to the dogd'. Ask them if they believe in human rights & dignity for all or if they are part of this 'great exempt' body of so called medical experts?
Be a Tony McCoy, don't push it, gently warm to the task and keep chipping away at them until they 'ease' past the front runner and have a clear view of the winning line.
Today was a bad, bad day for the bookies!
Today was a bad, bad day for smokers!
But at least we now know the truth-these overpaid zealots don't need to be of scientific knowledge they merely need to be on the side of the righteous!
But hang on here a minute, surely we are the righteous (?) for it is us that speak the truth to defend ourselves against the lies, fabrications, manipulated statistics & junk science used against us by the 'pretend to be' righteous!
Friday, 26 March 2010
Sublime to the Ridiculous
Nick Hogan update
Today we are greeted with the news that our imprisoned, but now happily freed licensee, Nick Hogan has been confronted with a knife weilding lunatic for simply obeying the law that put him in prison in the first place!
Apparently a customer (male) was highly upset at being ejected from The Swan With Two Necks, in Chorley, for smoking inside the pub. Correct procedure according to the law! The law does not actually state that a licensee should throw a smoker out in bodily fashion but it 'expects' the licensee to ensure that no smoking whatsoever takes place inside the designated area. (Hmmmmmmm!)
You can imagine the shock when this extremely agitated 'ex' customer returned at about 3am brandishing a large carving knife, obviously intent on venting his wrath at the previous indignity.
Blogosphere collected more than £9,000 in a mere 5 days to secure Nick's release from a totally wrongful imprisonment which just goes to show the strength of feeling amongst smokers & non smokers in this country of ours. ASH, on the other hand did not amass half that amount from public donations in an entire year! The true strength of feeling s about the smoke ban methinks!
When you remember that Nick Hogan was forced to sell both Bolton leases due to dismal takings since the smoking ban was enacted and went to prison because he allowed customers the right to choose-smoke or chew NRT gum, it is a ridiculous scenario whereby this government forced him into poverty, forced him into renovating his present pub into some gastro haunt with what monies he had left and then imprisoned him after bankrupting him through extortionate 'costs' incurred by the council in pursuit of their prosecution.
Had Nick called out the Environmental Health Officers to deal with this knife waving lunatic he would have been waiting all night (and probably all the next day) for they could not prosecute a licensee in this instance - only a smoker, which represents a £50 penalty. Chicken feed.
Also, it must be noted that these officious little Hitlers are not empowered to make an arrest, chuck bodies out of pubs - or anything else actually. They are simply overpaid, reptilious revenue collectors for HMG!
Now, a question arises here folks.
Had Nick HAD to confront this cretin and his carving knife and been injured, would the Victims of crime support agency have awarded him nearly £9,000 for upholding the law - far and beyond the call of duty? I don't think so.
The police are now searching for the nutter-good luck there then!Where were they when they were needed to perform their duty?
Yet again this idiotic law, at the behest of the likes of ASH, CRUK etc has proven to be totally unsafe, ludicrously implemented and yet another licensee could have been seriously injured. but the anti smoking lobby are rubbing their hands together in glee as their anti smoking strategies divide the people more and more, close more businesses and put more licensees in danger of severe physical harm.
The people need to start banding together to defeat these zealots before this country is totally ruined and all our freedoms have been obliterated. Freedom2choose.info ARE the very basis of the people power that is needed. How many of you simply sit back and say, " I wish i could do something about it"? You can. Join with the nations leading PRO-CHOICE organisation and help to stop this destruction of our communities, our businesses, our freedoms & our human rights!
Link to story:-
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/chorley/5132899.Man_brandishes_knife_at_Chorley_smoke_rebels_pub/?ref=rss
Today we are greeted with the news that our imprisoned, but now happily freed licensee, Nick Hogan has been confronted with a knife weilding lunatic for simply obeying the law that put him in prison in the first place!
Apparently a customer (male) was highly upset at being ejected from The Swan With Two Necks, in Chorley, for smoking inside the pub. Correct procedure according to the law! The law does not actually state that a licensee should throw a smoker out in bodily fashion but it 'expects' the licensee to ensure that no smoking whatsoever takes place inside the designated area. (Hmmmmmmm!)
You can imagine the shock when this extremely agitated 'ex' customer returned at about 3am brandishing a large carving knife, obviously intent on venting his wrath at the previous indignity.
Blogosphere collected more than £9,000 in a mere 5 days to secure Nick's release from a totally wrongful imprisonment which just goes to show the strength of feeling amongst smokers & non smokers in this country of ours. ASH, on the other hand did not amass half that amount from public donations in an entire year! The true strength of feeling s about the smoke ban methinks!
When you remember that Nick Hogan was forced to sell both Bolton leases due to dismal takings since the smoking ban was enacted and went to prison because he allowed customers the right to choose-smoke or chew NRT gum, it is a ridiculous scenario whereby this government forced him into poverty, forced him into renovating his present pub into some gastro haunt with what monies he had left and then imprisoned him after bankrupting him through extortionate 'costs' incurred by the council in pursuit of their prosecution.
Had Nick called out the Environmental Health Officers to deal with this knife waving lunatic he would have been waiting all night (and probably all the next day) for they could not prosecute a licensee in this instance - only a smoker, which represents a £50 penalty. Chicken feed.
Also, it must be noted that these officious little Hitlers are not empowered to make an arrest, chuck bodies out of pubs - or anything else actually. They are simply overpaid, reptilious revenue collectors for HMG!
Now, a question arises here folks.
Had Nick HAD to confront this cretin and his carving knife and been injured, would the Victims of crime support agency have awarded him nearly £9,000 for upholding the law - far and beyond the call of duty? I don't think so.
The police are now searching for the nutter-good luck there then!Where were they when they were needed to perform their duty?
Yet again this idiotic law, at the behest of the likes of ASH, CRUK etc has proven to be totally unsafe, ludicrously implemented and yet another licensee could have been seriously injured. but the anti smoking lobby are rubbing their hands together in glee as their anti smoking strategies divide the people more and more, close more businesses and put more licensees in danger of severe physical harm.
The people need to start banding together to defeat these zealots before this country is totally ruined and all our freedoms have been obliterated. Freedom2choose.info ARE the very basis of the people power that is needed. How many of you simply sit back and say, " I wish i could do something about it"? You can. Join with the nations leading PRO-CHOICE organisation and help to stop this destruction of our communities, our businesses, our freedoms & our human rights!
Link to story:-
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/chorley/5132899.Man_brandishes_knife_at_Chorley_smoke_rebels_pub/?ref=rss
Monday, 15 March 2010
Baiting the Brainwashed
Today I accompanied a friend to the Leicester Royal Infirmary as he was somewhat nervous. The department he needed was situated on the first floor, which was not good for escaping for a fag - until we discovered an open door leading to a delightful patio'd area with benches & tables etc.
Well, an hour into this inevitable time warp of waiting around saw us testing the door and escaping onto this patio. Fag tolips, ignition, sheer heaven! We watched as the breeze whipped the exhalations away from the building and over the car park until it disappeared form view. Our bit towards 'global warming' no doubt.
Half way through this most enjoyable exercise another door was suddenly flung open and a young, rather excited nurse appeared and the following exchage took place:-
N:- Put those cigarettes out immediately, this is a no smoking hospital.
Yours truly (YT):- Indeed it may be sweetheart, but you can see we are actually outside.
N:- That doesn't matter, it's against the law to smoke on hospital grounds.
YT:- Err, wrong babe. Check it out.
N:- I'm telling you it's against the law, the hospital don't allow it.
YT:- Ah, now you have defined things correctly babe, "the hospital trust don't allow it" is more like the 'law' you think you are talking about. (she stared to look less confident)
N:- You cannot smoke out here, look, the signs say so.
YT:- Indeed your delapidated, weather beaten signs indicate such but they only transfer the wishes of the hospital trust upon the people, they do not state the law of the land. We are outside babe, not inside - smoking is only forbidden inside enclosed spaces and from my reckoning we have one solid wall with a door in and then 3 open sides, a guard rail and no roof.
N:- But your smoke is entering the windows and the patients are having to 'smell' your smoke. (My friend looked at me a bit concerned here!)
YT:- Come with me I offered, and walked over to the balcony. There's our 'escape' door onto this beautiful patio, it's shut. There are 6 windows along the balcony and all 6 are shut. There are no vents open and worse still, the wind is taking the exhaled smoke away from the building and over the car park so I don't quite see how any of your gallant, but totally erroneous assertions are true! And what do we have we out here - 9 signs affixed to walls and balcony? Just imagine the valuable resources wasted by the NHS on them! They are irrelevant.
(She was certainly not happy with that!)
N:- I shall report you to the security people if you don't stop smoking.
YT:- Sweetness, I don't really care if you report me to the Illinois National Guard, they are not empowered to do anything about it - we are outside! Outside is outside, we are obeying the law. What the Hospital Trust decides 'it' wants as policy is another matter for that is NOT law, now be a good girl and go tend to your patients while I have the last two drags on my most delightfully stress relieving cigarette and then I'll put it out and place in relevant receptacle.
She was not a happy bunny but retreated nonetheless, muttering something or other to herself. We finished our fag and left not a trace of the heinous crime that had apparently just taken place.
Back inside we were greeted by my friends name being called out by a middle aged nurse. He announced himself with a wave of the hand and she smiled,"twice I've called you" she informed us, "been out for a fag have we? - it's amazing how many do!". The twinkle in her eye told us that experience of life was a great thing in reality. She knew the situation as opposed to our young 'eager beaver' nurse full of the indoctrinations of the anti smoking brigade. Ah well, she'll learn I suppose!
I think what this has taught me is the power of mass brainwashing. The hospital say so, therefore it must be. The hospital say you (staff) must stop smokers smoking on hospital grounds so you (staff) put yourself in a position of authority when espying a smoker. It occurs not, that these actions cause resentment (amusement in this case) and could result in another 'Dartford train' incident, balcony ejection or some other equally horrible event. It is the bigotted leading the blind into murky waters by not telling them the truth in the first place.
This can only lead to one conclusion - the anti tobacco brigade are simply immoral!
Well, an hour into this inevitable time warp of waiting around saw us testing the door and escaping onto this patio. Fag tolips, ignition, sheer heaven! We watched as the breeze whipped the exhalations away from the building and over the car park until it disappeared form view. Our bit towards 'global warming' no doubt.
Half way through this most enjoyable exercise another door was suddenly flung open and a young, rather excited nurse appeared and the following exchage took place:-
N:- Put those cigarettes out immediately, this is a no smoking hospital.
Yours truly (YT):- Indeed it may be sweetheart, but you can see we are actually outside.
N:- That doesn't matter, it's against the law to smoke on hospital grounds.
YT:- Err, wrong babe. Check it out.
N:- I'm telling you it's against the law, the hospital don't allow it.
YT:- Ah, now you have defined things correctly babe, "the hospital trust don't allow it" is more like the 'law' you think you are talking about. (she stared to look less confident)
N:- You cannot smoke out here, look, the signs say so.
YT:- Indeed your delapidated, weather beaten signs indicate such but they only transfer the wishes of the hospital trust upon the people, they do not state the law of the land. We are outside babe, not inside - smoking is only forbidden inside enclosed spaces and from my reckoning we have one solid wall with a door in and then 3 open sides, a guard rail and no roof.
N:- But your smoke is entering the windows and the patients are having to 'smell' your smoke. (My friend looked at me a bit concerned here!)
YT:- Come with me I offered, and walked over to the balcony. There's our 'escape' door onto this beautiful patio, it's shut. There are 6 windows along the balcony and all 6 are shut. There are no vents open and worse still, the wind is taking the exhaled smoke away from the building and over the car park so I don't quite see how any of your gallant, but totally erroneous assertions are true! And what do we have we out here - 9 signs affixed to walls and balcony? Just imagine the valuable resources wasted by the NHS on them! They are irrelevant.
(She was certainly not happy with that!)
N:- I shall report you to the security people if you don't stop smoking.
YT:- Sweetness, I don't really care if you report me to the Illinois National Guard, they are not empowered to do anything about it - we are outside! Outside is outside, we are obeying the law. What the Hospital Trust decides 'it' wants as policy is another matter for that is NOT law, now be a good girl and go tend to your patients while I have the last two drags on my most delightfully stress relieving cigarette and then I'll put it out and place in relevant receptacle.
She was not a happy bunny but retreated nonetheless, muttering something or other to herself. We finished our fag and left not a trace of the heinous crime that had apparently just taken place.
Back inside we were greeted by my friends name being called out by a middle aged nurse. He announced himself with a wave of the hand and she smiled,"twice I've called you" she informed us, "been out for a fag have we? - it's amazing how many do!". The twinkle in her eye told us that experience of life was a great thing in reality. She knew the situation as opposed to our young 'eager beaver' nurse full of the indoctrinations of the anti smoking brigade. Ah well, she'll learn I suppose!
I think what this has taught me is the power of mass brainwashing. The hospital say so, therefore it must be. The hospital say you (staff) must stop smokers smoking on hospital grounds so you (staff) put yourself in a position of authority when espying a smoker. It occurs not, that these actions cause resentment (amusement in this case) and could result in another 'Dartford train' incident, balcony ejection or some other equally horrible event. It is the bigotted leading the blind into murky waters by not telling them the truth in the first place.
This can only lead to one conclusion - the anti tobacco brigade are simply immoral!
Sunday, 14 March 2010
More labour shite to come
Having taken a small interest in the way Labour face our so called alcohol problem, I was directed to a debate on 10th March in the House. Quite interesting actually, when you actually comprehend what they are babbling about in such pompous tones-US!
We have someone called Stoate blathering on about a committee report stating that alcohol causes 40,000 deaths per year and something needs to be done-now!
Hang on a minute, last year we were saving 40,000 lives per annum thanks to the smoke ban! Popular figure then, this 40 grand!
Up steps Mr Philip Davies MP (Shipley, Cons) and wades in like a good'un. Bless him, he's already had a bollocking for joining the debate late but says he's watched on the monitor-fair play to him for that. he states:-
"The report is certainly a useful contribution to the debate on addiction-not, unfortunately, on addiction to alcohol, but on this Government's and the Health Committee's addiction to the nanny state. They have already helped to dismantle the pub and club industry with their smoking ban. Pubs are closing at the rate of 50 a week-many because of the ban on smoking in public places-and the same fate is being felt by many clubs, such as working men's clubs. It seems that the Health Committee, not satisfied with dismantling the pub and club industry, now wishes to direct its fire in other areas, such as at cinemas and commercial broadcasters, to try to close down those industries. Many sports will also be adversely affected if its recommendations are introduced."
My new hero in a suit!
He is absolutely right of course. Labours new strategy is to destroy anything that may cost the NHS more than 1 shilling and 6pence per person so alcohol comes very high on the list. he further says:-
"All that would not be so bad if I thought that, in the end, if after all the Committee's recommendations were introduced, its members would say that they were satisfied. The problem, however, as with all these matters, is that the report panders to the zealots in society who are never satisfied. I guarantee that if all the recommendations were introduced, Committee members would, within a few months at most, come back with further recommendations because the previous ones had not gone far enough. This lobby is impossible to satisfy."
This lobby is impossible to satisfy
Well, of course, our new hero is absolutely spot on because it appears that the health lobby are never satisfied; in fact they never will be!
He further goes onto 'happyslap' his opponents with:-
"The problem with the political classes generally, particularly in this House, is that when they are faced with a problem-there is no doubt that there is a problem with excessive drinking of alcohol-the solution that they propose has to be constituted of two particular themes. The first ingredient in any solution that politicians propose is that it must show that they are doing something; they have to be seen to be doing something. The second ingredient, which we always see, is that the proposal must not offend anyone and must be superficially popular. Once again, that approach applies to many of the recommendations, most of which would not make a blind bit of difference to excessive or under-age alcohol consumption.
I was particularly struck by the speech of Pete Wishart, who made the best speech that I have ever heard in support of a Scottish Parliament. I have never been particularly in favour of it in the past, but now that I have heard that there are so many sensible people in the Scottish Parliament who oppose his zealous drive for minimum pricing, I think that is a strong argument for it. Perhaps if the Scottish Parliament were closed down, however, we could have some of those people down here and then we might have a more sensible debate."
I am truly beginning to admire this Shipley Stoker of fires.
James McGovern (Dundee West, Labour)decides to weigh in:-
"The hon. Gentleman mentioned the nanny state earlier, but Scotland is becoming something of a dictatorial state. Is he aware that the Scottish Executive are now saying that cigarettes cannot be advertised or put on the counter and even that sweets cannot be put on the counter because they might damage children's teeth? How much of a nanny state, or a dictatorial state, is that?"
Aha! so the state is protecting teeth as well now-OMG, where will this lunacy end?
Our man Philip Davies retorts with:-
"I agree with the hon. Gentleman. My problem is that those are the sort of measures that his Government are keen to introduce as well. We appear to have a Dutch auction between the Scottish Executive and the Westminster Government as to who can introduce the biggest nanny state of all. I am afraid that both are going in completely the wrong direction. I agree with the sentiment behind his point, but I do not think that his Government are any less guilty than the Scottish Executive."
Correct - the biggest nanny state of all - what a pathetic title to 'win'!
Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North, Labour) decides to put the government side forward with this gem:-
"It is clear that the hon. Gentleman and I come from polar opposite positions, but he is making the classic freedom speech. He is saying that we have the freedom to do what we want, without intervention from the state."
So we can take it from Mr Hopkins that labour ARE against freedom of speech, freedom of choice, freedom of actions, freedom of enjoyment, freedom of expression, freedom of thinking for ourselves, freedom from.....everything!
I can see another SCOTH Committee being formed only this one will be called SCAIH (Select Committee on Alcohol Injury & Health). We already know by the SCOTH committee shambles of mistruth that SCAIH will present a case where drinking alcohol will be considered more dangerous than necking arsenic!
The minimum pricing structure is already being considered, this debate proves that much. What bothers me is that these numpties in parliament can only see that increasing unit price will affect the millions of low paid workers who simply enjoy a drink. It will not affect the hardened 'Diamond White' substitute crap who will simply pay the extra to get pissed as newts. Yet again, the health Lobby have a one track mind, but with alcohol they dare not ban it-could you imagine the uproar? So, what will happen is simple folks. The Health Lobby will make all the representations they can possibly make, they will spend £millions on public awareness adverts etc and will force more businesses out......of business!
It seems that the cost in benefits to this government matter not one iota compared to the wishes of the Health Lobby. Our new friend, Philip Davies has already pointed out the obvious to the House but it seems opposition is rife to his ideas.
I mentioned freedom of choice earlier. When election time comes, please don't hesitate, exercise your freedom of choice and vote this shower of lillylivered shite out of power. If you don't, the Health Lobby will be running the unhappyest country in the western world!
We have someone called Stoate blathering on about a committee report stating that alcohol causes 40,000 deaths per year and something needs to be done-now!
Hang on a minute, last year we were saving 40,000 lives per annum thanks to the smoke ban! Popular figure then, this 40 grand!
Up steps Mr Philip Davies MP (Shipley, Cons) and wades in like a good'un. Bless him, he's already had a bollocking for joining the debate late but says he's watched on the monitor-fair play to him for that. he states:-
"The report is certainly a useful contribution to the debate on addiction-not, unfortunately, on addiction to alcohol, but on this Government's and the Health Committee's addiction to the nanny state. They have already helped to dismantle the pub and club industry with their smoking ban. Pubs are closing at the rate of 50 a week-many because of the ban on smoking in public places-and the same fate is being felt by many clubs, such as working men's clubs. It seems that the Health Committee, not satisfied with dismantling the pub and club industry, now wishes to direct its fire in other areas, such as at cinemas and commercial broadcasters, to try to close down those industries. Many sports will also be adversely affected if its recommendations are introduced."
My new hero in a suit!
He is absolutely right of course. Labours new strategy is to destroy anything that may cost the NHS more than 1 shilling and 6pence per person so alcohol comes very high on the list. he further says:-
"All that would not be so bad if I thought that, in the end, if after all the Committee's recommendations were introduced, its members would say that they were satisfied. The problem, however, as with all these matters, is that the report panders to the zealots in society who are never satisfied. I guarantee that if all the recommendations were introduced, Committee members would, within a few months at most, come back with further recommendations because the previous ones had not gone far enough. This lobby is impossible to satisfy."
This lobby is impossible to satisfy
Well, of course, our new hero is absolutely spot on because it appears that the health lobby are never satisfied; in fact they never will be!
He further goes onto 'happyslap' his opponents with:-
"The problem with the political classes generally, particularly in this House, is that when they are faced with a problem-there is no doubt that there is a problem with excessive drinking of alcohol-the solution that they propose has to be constituted of two particular themes. The first ingredient in any solution that politicians propose is that it must show that they are doing something; they have to be seen to be doing something. The second ingredient, which we always see, is that the proposal must not offend anyone and must be superficially popular. Once again, that approach applies to many of the recommendations, most of which would not make a blind bit of difference to excessive or under-age alcohol consumption.
I was particularly struck by the speech of Pete Wishart, who made the best speech that I have ever heard in support of a Scottish Parliament. I have never been particularly in favour of it in the past, but now that I have heard that there are so many sensible people in the Scottish Parliament who oppose his zealous drive for minimum pricing, I think that is a strong argument for it. Perhaps if the Scottish Parliament were closed down, however, we could have some of those people down here and then we might have a more sensible debate."
I am truly beginning to admire this Shipley Stoker of fires.
James McGovern (Dundee West, Labour)decides to weigh in:-
"The hon. Gentleman mentioned the nanny state earlier, but Scotland is becoming something of a dictatorial state. Is he aware that the Scottish Executive are now saying that cigarettes cannot be advertised or put on the counter and even that sweets cannot be put on the counter because they might damage children's teeth? How much of a nanny state, or a dictatorial state, is that?"
Aha! so the state is protecting teeth as well now-OMG, where will this lunacy end?
Our man Philip Davies retorts with:-
"I agree with the hon. Gentleman. My problem is that those are the sort of measures that his Government are keen to introduce as well. We appear to have a Dutch auction between the Scottish Executive and the Westminster Government as to who can introduce the biggest nanny state of all. I am afraid that both are going in completely the wrong direction. I agree with the sentiment behind his point, but I do not think that his Government are any less guilty than the Scottish Executive."
Correct - the biggest nanny state of all - what a pathetic title to 'win'!
Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North, Labour) decides to put the government side forward with this gem:-
"It is clear that the hon. Gentleman and I come from polar opposite positions, but he is making the classic freedom speech. He is saying that we have the freedom to do what we want, without intervention from the state."
So we can take it from Mr Hopkins that labour ARE against freedom of speech, freedom of choice, freedom of actions, freedom of enjoyment, freedom of expression, freedom of thinking for ourselves, freedom from.....everything!
I can see another SCOTH Committee being formed only this one will be called SCAIH (Select Committee on Alcohol Injury & Health). We already know by the SCOTH committee shambles of mistruth that SCAIH will present a case where drinking alcohol will be considered more dangerous than necking arsenic!
The minimum pricing structure is already being considered, this debate proves that much. What bothers me is that these numpties in parliament can only see that increasing unit price will affect the millions of low paid workers who simply enjoy a drink. It will not affect the hardened 'Diamond White' substitute crap who will simply pay the extra to get pissed as newts. Yet again, the health Lobby have a one track mind, but with alcohol they dare not ban it-could you imagine the uproar? So, what will happen is simple folks. The Health Lobby will make all the representations they can possibly make, they will spend £millions on public awareness adverts etc and will force more businesses out......of business!
It seems that the cost in benefits to this government matter not one iota compared to the wishes of the Health Lobby. Our new friend, Philip Davies has already pointed out the obvious to the House but it seems opposition is rife to his ideas.
I mentioned freedom of choice earlier. When election time comes, please don't hesitate, exercise your freedom of choice and vote this shower of lillylivered shite out of power. If you don't, the Health Lobby will be running the unhappyest country in the western world!
Friday, 12 March 2010
Deb's Mantra
Immediately after the "No Smoking Day" which saw Nick Hogan released from his disgracefully manipulated prison sentence by a government that engineered his bankruptcy I bring you Deborah Arnott's mantra for the coming years!
Entitled ASH: The Third Sector's Vital Role, it lays out the dream of the anti tobacco zealots to rid this country of what is a perfectly legal past-time: smoking! I'll begin with this bit:
"Our information function is to change the climate of understanding, opinion and awareness about the ‘tobacco epidemic’ through effective use of the evidence base."
Tobacco epidemic? What epidemic is that then, Debs? Since the 1960s, smoker prevalence has declined by the decade! The 1950s and 1960s may have been an epidemic but 2010 sees a mere 23-25% of the population as smokers.
"There are concerns that tobacco control has slipped down the public health agenda now that advertising is banned andsmokefree legislation implemented throughout the UK."
Do you have any idea why, Debs? Perhaps the colossal cost to this country of interfering with people's human rights may have something to do with it? Perhaps the rapidly swelling dole queues from the hospitality sector may have something to do with it? perhaps the number of empty pubs & clubs now boarded up may be causing concern to government for boarded up businesses bring in no revenue.
In September’s ph.com David Hunter, Chair of the UKPHA, looked forward to 2027 when “smoking will be well on the way out and will have become ‘denormalised’ as a legitimate socialactivity”. There are many other issues crowding to the top of the public health agenda – alcohol, obesity, sexual health – and allrequire urgent action."..... "Pardon me? What was that?
Dear David, thanks to your (in part) ill advised total ban, smoking is very much NOT well on the way out. In fact, the people have been so disgusted at your so called denormalisation programme that tobacco sales are up, smoker prevalence is up and many councils now invest their pension funds in tobacco shares!
As for your other issues 'crowding to the top of the public health agenda' we all know that you (the government & health lobby) are trying to save the NHS expenditure by 'denormalising these activities' as well. But, don't YOU understand that all the tobacco tax raked in pays for smoker related treatments, alcohol related treatments and even our weighty friends' treatments? Plus a few quid left over to have an 'anti-tobacco party' with! Perhaps, being associated with the medical profession you should see an NHS 'shrink' and get your thinking straightened out David for you must understand that people retalliate to bully state tactics.
"Despite the squeeze on public health budgets it’s still important that smoking retains its fair share of funding and we mustn’t end up robbing Peter to pay Paul. For if smoking continues to decline at the current rate of 0.4% a year it will be a long time after 2027 before smoking will become ‘denormalised’. At current rates of decline some 16% of the population, nearly 7 million adults, will still be smoking in 2027."
Debs, when are you and others like you going to realise that smoking is an individual's freedom of choice? When are you going to realise that people are basically born to be smokers or not, as the case may be? When are you going to realise that you will never eradicate smoking at all? If you did actually do this, just think how much the extra 30p-35p on your income tax is going to hurt you in order for government to balance the books from the lost TT revenue! Quite ironic really Debs, you get paid for wiping smokers off the face of England and then pay the government back in tax – what a hoot!
"However, the Stop Smoking Services can only realistically make a modest contribution to the reductions in smoking prevalence and health inequalities and this is not, and cannot be, the prime reason for their existence. Professor Robert West has calculated that the DH target of 800,000 four-week quitters over three years represented at most 160,000 long-term ex-smokers who would not otherwise have given up smoking during that time frame. This represents a prevalence reduction of only 0.1% a year."
So government is spending all this money to reduce 'smokers' by 0.1% per annum-well just how much per smoker does that equate to Debs? And the latest announcement from your pal Burnham has gone up in smoke too, for he wants the smoking population reduced to 10% well before 2027! Oh dear me, what has gone wrong, have the smokers had the audacity to retalliate by smoking more?
"In order to make major inroads into smoking prevalence the whole range of tobacco control measures need to be fully implemented, not just NHS Stop Smoking clinics. As set out by the Department of Health there are six strands including: helping smokers to give up; second-hand smoke (and now the legislation is in place the priority must be protecting people in private places such as cars and the home); education and media; reducing tobacco promotion; labelling and regulation (including under-age sales, smokefree legislation and the ad ban); and taxation and smuggling."
Now we are getting to the dastardly plans that are being hatched-despite protestations to the contrary from certain overpaid anti tobacco zealots.
Helping smokers give up...OK then, that would be by NRT products that have a 98.4 FAILURE rate, I assume?
Second hand smoke (SHS) has never been proven to have killed a single person yet – unless of course you have the death certificate Debs!
Education and the media: well,, government has spent an absolute fortune on the media yet it has made no difference to smoker prevalence except to increase it! I would have preferred my kids to have learned their "times tables" rather than how many carcinogens might be in a cigarette-a lot more useful in future years methinks!
(reducing tobacco promotion; labelling and regulation (including under-age sales, smokefree legislation and the ad ban); that's it Debs, you go fo the jugular! Don't dare let pretty packets be seen, tell everyone that the horrible pictures tell them what smoking does to them-excepting why is it that 49% of lung transplants actually came from smokers? get 'fags' under the counter so that small shopkeepers find making a living becoming a struggle-let's start closing them down along with the pubs shall we?
and taxation and smuggling..of course, the easiest way to stop people smoking-added tax on tobacco products-as if extra tax ever stopped any smoker enjoying smoking. However Debs, the added tax would certainly help out the government funding you receive on a yearly basis so I suppose that this is really a self supporting strategy!
Smuggling... Now this is hilarious Debs, it really is! Do you not see that by bleating on about raising the tax to frighten smokers off with another 10p-15p per pack is actually leading us into buying more smuggled tobacco products? Do you actually think that the 'great unwashed' (admittedly not as erudite as your eminent self) are going to care whether a packet of fags is £5 or £6 when they can buy the same for half the price abroad? Check out S. Ireland wher the government is now screaming from the rafters that they have considered 'they' are losing out on £1m per week in tobacco tax. Wow Debs...£52m per annum not going into government coffers-some damage that is girl! Well done, you've really helped out a small countries economy there then! I know what your simplistic answer will be Debs, employ more Customs Officers. Yeah, why not put more strain on our rapidly shrinking resources Debs. Most of Europe is taking note of the financial disaster smoke bans cause whereas you seem to be oblivious to the obvious.
(and now the legislation is in place the priority must be protecting people in private places such as cars and the home) Ah! now we are getting to it Debs. So you do want to invade our property rights after all. Why?. What has our private home got to do with you, ASH or anybody else? We buy these places to live in live in them as we wish to do so. It is certainly not for any overpaid lackey of the health lobby to intrude upon our home & lifestyles. An Englishman's home is his castle Debs, remember that. start invading man's private property and you may well start a revolution-could you handle that I ask?
Cars come under the same banner as homes. I brought my car to enjoy, to drive about where and when I wished. I also brought it as it had an ashtray in it - as smoking helps me concentrate. I also brought the beast to transport my tools to work opportunities so if you decide to bend government into legislating in such a manner I shall be forced to sell said car and retire to the dole queues-along with 120,000 ex hospitality workers! Can you see what your zealotry is doing yet Debs?
"This December all local authorities are consulting on new LAA outcomes frameworks, so now is the critical time. We need your help. The clock is ticking."
What these 'new LAA outcomes frameworks' may consist of is anyone's guess but I would imagine it will be to the detriment of a minority factio; ie, smokers. Where you have hit the nail on the head is "The clock is ticking." It truly is Debs, for your charitable organisation (though uncharitable to your fellow man) organisation is working diligently to bankrupt this country-and is succeeding nicely! No tobacco revenue coming in, income tax raised, social outlets closed by the scores weekly, income to government from such businesses diminishing weekly, dole queues lengthening-oh yes Debs, you are leading England into financial oblivion my girl. i see a true Dickensian case of the MicCawbers coming on here Debs-and all through your diligence and lack of foresight for you are blinded by the need for power over others (smokers) and the ability to maintain your yearly vastly inflated, income. and you enjoy getting paid for making the lives of others miserable. Obviously, being a most charitable uncharitable soul at heart, you cannot live and let live, which is what the bible supposedly teaches us!
Just to cheer you up after this tale of woe Debs I will finish on a note of despair for you. The "Justice for Nick Hogan" appeal in blogosphere raised more money in 5 days than ASH received in public donation for the entire year. Wouldn't that tend to make you feel a little insecure re your continuing employment of removing peoples human rights one by one?
Link:- http://www.fphm.org.uk/resources/newsletters/phcom/archive/2007/phcom_Dec2007.pdf
Entitled ASH: The Third Sector's Vital Role, it lays out the dream of the anti tobacco zealots to rid this country of what is a perfectly legal past-time: smoking! I'll begin with this bit:
"Our information function is to change the climate of understanding, opinion and awareness about the ‘tobacco epidemic’ through effective use of the evidence base."
Tobacco epidemic? What epidemic is that then, Debs? Since the 1960s, smoker prevalence has declined by the decade! The 1950s and 1960s may have been an epidemic but 2010 sees a mere 23-25% of the population as smokers.
"There are concerns that tobacco control has slipped down the public health agenda now that advertising is banned andsmokefree legislation implemented throughout the UK."
Do you have any idea why, Debs? Perhaps the colossal cost to this country of interfering with people's human rights may have something to do with it? Perhaps the rapidly swelling dole queues from the hospitality sector may have something to do with it? perhaps the number of empty pubs & clubs now boarded up may be causing concern to government for boarded up businesses bring in no revenue.
In September’s ph.com David Hunter, Chair of the UKPHA, looked forward to 2027 when “smoking will be well on the way out and will have become ‘denormalised’ as a legitimate socialactivity”. There are many other issues crowding to the top of the public health agenda – alcohol, obesity, sexual health – and allrequire urgent action."..... "Pardon me? What was that?
Dear David, thanks to your (in part) ill advised total ban, smoking is very much NOT well on the way out. In fact, the people have been so disgusted at your so called denormalisation programme that tobacco sales are up, smoker prevalence is up and many councils now invest their pension funds in tobacco shares!
As for your other issues 'crowding to the top of the public health agenda' we all know that you (the government & health lobby) are trying to save the NHS expenditure by 'denormalising these activities' as well. But, don't YOU understand that all the tobacco tax raked in pays for smoker related treatments, alcohol related treatments and even our weighty friends' treatments? Plus a few quid left over to have an 'anti-tobacco party' with! Perhaps, being associated with the medical profession you should see an NHS 'shrink' and get your thinking straightened out David for you must understand that people retalliate to bully state tactics.
"Despite the squeeze on public health budgets it’s still important that smoking retains its fair share of funding and we mustn’t end up robbing Peter to pay Paul. For if smoking continues to decline at the current rate of 0.4% a year it will be a long time after 2027 before smoking will become ‘denormalised’. At current rates of decline some 16% of the population, nearly 7 million adults, will still be smoking in 2027."
Debs, when are you and others like you going to realise that smoking is an individual's freedom of choice? When are you going to realise that people are basically born to be smokers or not, as the case may be? When are you going to realise that you will never eradicate smoking at all? If you did actually do this, just think how much the extra 30p-35p on your income tax is going to hurt you in order for government to balance the books from the lost TT revenue! Quite ironic really Debs, you get paid for wiping smokers off the face of England and then pay the government back in tax – what a hoot!
"However, the Stop Smoking Services can only realistically make a modest contribution to the reductions in smoking prevalence and health inequalities and this is not, and cannot be, the prime reason for their existence. Professor Robert West has calculated that the DH target of 800,000 four-week quitters over three years represented at most 160,000 long-term ex-smokers who would not otherwise have given up smoking during that time frame. This represents a prevalence reduction of only 0.1% a year."
So government is spending all this money to reduce 'smokers' by 0.1% per annum-well just how much per smoker does that equate to Debs? And the latest announcement from your pal Burnham has gone up in smoke too, for he wants the smoking population reduced to 10% well before 2027! Oh dear me, what has gone wrong, have the smokers had the audacity to retalliate by smoking more?
"In order to make major inroads into smoking prevalence the whole range of tobacco control measures need to be fully implemented, not just NHS Stop Smoking clinics. As set out by the Department of Health there are six strands including: helping smokers to give up; second-hand smoke (and now the legislation is in place the priority must be protecting people in private places such as cars and the home); education and media; reducing tobacco promotion; labelling and regulation (including under-age sales, smokefree legislation and the ad ban); and taxation and smuggling."
Now we are getting to the dastardly plans that are being hatched-despite protestations to the contrary from certain overpaid anti tobacco zealots.
Helping smokers give up...OK then, that would be by NRT products that have a 98.4 FAILURE rate, I assume?
Second hand smoke (SHS) has never been proven to have killed a single person yet – unless of course you have the death certificate Debs!
Education and the media: well,, government has spent an absolute fortune on the media yet it has made no difference to smoker prevalence except to increase it! I would have preferred my kids to have learned their "times tables" rather than how many carcinogens might be in a cigarette-a lot more useful in future years methinks!
(reducing tobacco promotion; labelling and regulation (including under-age sales, smokefree legislation and the ad ban); that's it Debs, you go fo the jugular! Don't dare let pretty packets be seen, tell everyone that the horrible pictures tell them what smoking does to them-excepting why is it that 49% of lung transplants actually came from smokers? get 'fags' under the counter so that small shopkeepers find making a living becoming a struggle-let's start closing them down along with the pubs shall we?
and taxation and smuggling..of course, the easiest way to stop people smoking-added tax on tobacco products-as if extra tax ever stopped any smoker enjoying smoking. However Debs, the added tax would certainly help out the government funding you receive on a yearly basis so I suppose that this is really a self supporting strategy!
Smuggling... Now this is hilarious Debs, it really is! Do you not see that by bleating on about raising the tax to frighten smokers off with another 10p-15p per pack is actually leading us into buying more smuggled tobacco products? Do you actually think that the 'great unwashed' (admittedly not as erudite as your eminent self) are going to care whether a packet of fags is £5 or £6 when they can buy the same for half the price abroad? Check out S. Ireland wher the government is now screaming from the rafters that they have considered 'they' are losing out on £1m per week in tobacco tax. Wow Debs...£52m per annum not going into government coffers-some damage that is girl! Well done, you've really helped out a small countries economy there then! I know what your simplistic answer will be Debs, employ more Customs Officers. Yeah, why not put more strain on our rapidly shrinking resources Debs. Most of Europe is taking note of the financial disaster smoke bans cause whereas you seem to be oblivious to the obvious.
(and now the legislation is in place the priority must be protecting people in private places such as cars and the home) Ah! now we are getting to it Debs. So you do want to invade our property rights after all. Why?. What has our private home got to do with you, ASH or anybody else? We buy these places to live in live in them as we wish to do so. It is certainly not for any overpaid lackey of the health lobby to intrude upon our home & lifestyles. An Englishman's home is his castle Debs, remember that. start invading man's private property and you may well start a revolution-could you handle that I ask?
Cars come under the same banner as homes. I brought my car to enjoy, to drive about where and when I wished. I also brought it as it had an ashtray in it - as smoking helps me concentrate. I also brought the beast to transport my tools to work opportunities so if you decide to bend government into legislating in such a manner I shall be forced to sell said car and retire to the dole queues-along with 120,000 ex hospitality workers! Can you see what your zealotry is doing yet Debs?
"This December all local authorities are consulting on new LAA outcomes frameworks, so now is the critical time. We need your help. The clock is ticking."
What these 'new LAA outcomes frameworks' may consist of is anyone's guess but I would imagine it will be to the detriment of a minority factio; ie, smokers. Where you have hit the nail on the head is "The clock is ticking." It truly is Debs, for your charitable organisation (though uncharitable to your fellow man) organisation is working diligently to bankrupt this country-and is succeeding nicely! No tobacco revenue coming in, income tax raised, social outlets closed by the scores weekly, income to government from such businesses diminishing weekly, dole queues lengthening-oh yes Debs, you are leading England into financial oblivion my girl. i see a true Dickensian case of the MicCawbers coming on here Debs-and all through your diligence and lack of foresight for you are blinded by the need for power over others (smokers) and the ability to maintain your yearly vastly inflated, income. and you enjoy getting paid for making the lives of others miserable. Obviously, being a most charitable uncharitable soul at heart, you cannot live and let live, which is what the bible supposedly teaches us!
Just to cheer you up after this tale of woe Debs I will finish on a note of despair for you. The "Justice for Nick Hogan" appeal in blogosphere raised more money in 5 days than ASH received in public donation for the entire year. Wouldn't that tend to make you feel a little insecure re your continuing employment of removing peoples human rights one by one?
Link:- http://www.fphm.org.uk/resources/newsletters/phcom/archive/2007/phcom_Dec2007.pdf
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
Greg Mulholland-No Thanks!
In the wake of Andy Burnham's last ditch proposals to kill off smokers, pubs and entertainment we find an absolute gem printed in the Oldham Evening Chronicle from Mr Greg Mulholland, chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group. I quote:- "Just when pubs have got to grips with the smoking ban and have found ways to cater for non-smokers and smokers alike, this nanny state New Labour Government wants to ban something else".
Excuse me!
"Just when pubs have got to grips with the smoking ban...."
So pubs have now got to grips with the smoking ban have they? And since when was that then? I don't know of any pubs in my area that would now refuse the option of choice if it were offered as they are all suffering horrendously from the ravages of the smoke ban. Even pubs that now cater for OAP cheapo meals at dinner time would now snap up such an offer as they have found that cold weather puts off OAP's fancying a £3.50 dinner time food binge! Snow, rain and/or cold is plenty enough to keep them at home!
He goes on to state, "This really is quite ludicrous as well as draconian and will cause more damage to pubs that are already hard hit in the current climate".
Excuse me!
Greg, just for information purposes, the Draconian bit came in on July 1st, 2007. It was called a blanket ban, for this was the day that the death knell for thousands of pubs was signed by your fellow MPs riding on the back of the most dubious SCOTH committee report-you know the one Greg, it was THAT report set up by a government to ignore 83% of world studies into SHS, possible harm & mortality so as to base this Draconian ban something. It's all the Dept of Health bleat on about when stating the reasons for the ban-and it is utter crap!
Further stating:- “It is as if members of the Government wake up and think ‘What can I do to damage the pub trade today?"
Excuse me!
No Greg, as stated above, that happened on July 1st, 2007 or rather Feb 14th, 2007 when the muppet brigade actually voted on the proposal without knowing the truth of the SCOTH Committee report. The sheep merely followed the head bleater into the 'ayes' dept, thus the dye was cast for 12 million soon to be leperised citizens of this country.
To cap it all:- “It is high time Ministers woke up to the positive role that pubs play in communities and as a controlled, sociable drinking environment are actually an important part of the solution to problem drinking, rather than treating people as naughty children and trying to ban everything.”
Excuse me!
Why was this not stated prior to the 'free vote' exercise then perhaps we might have had the option of choice-yes CHOICE Greg! In a democratic society, which we once were, choice would have been offered to all parties. Smoking rooms, non smoking rooms, licencees able to make decisions for themselves and consumers able to go where they felt most comfortable. So simple to enact. Instead we have the ludicrous situation where, having allowed the puritans to get a major foothold people like Mr Mulholland are now fighting to preserve what little dignity smokers and licensees have left! Stable-horse-bolted spring to mind.
I've added the link to this article :- http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/36464/beer-garden-smoking-ban-draconian
You really do need to check out one of the 'comments' as it just shows how avaricious (and basically how thick some people are) when it comes to smoking areas.
I quote:- "I agree entirely that there should be a smoking ban in beer gardens. Last summer while dining outside at various pubs in the area it was a pain as everyone who smokes were also sat outside next to family's eating food.Bring it on the sooner the better!" (Courtesy of 'Saddleworth')
This poor misguided fool must live on another planet! Why does he/she think the smokers were outside enjoying a fag with their pint? Surely he/she should have been inside savouring the atmosphere of all that had become his/hers since July 1st, 2007. Surely this creature of contempt must realise that to sit outside was to invade the only area left open to smokers or does this person seriously consider that the ban applies to a 50 sq metre area around where ever it chooses to sit?
There are some seriously sad people on this earth and this smoking ban has brought them to the fore in no uncertain terms. I remember a similar scenario occurring last summer (well, on one of the four warm days we enjoyed at any rate). The young barmaid/waitress served our meals outside but the two 'ladies on the next table complained about people smoking on the patio'd area. The barmaid politely pointed out that if they didn't like it they could sit inside and she would happily serve them there. The two 'ladies' rounded on her in no uncertain terms and reported her to the management for insolence! Happily, on this occasion, the manager backed up the barmaid/waitress completely, only to be told "you can be sure we will never eat here again!"
Such is the single mindedness of some folk.
But back to our 'champion' of the All Party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group I have to ask the question, "what is the point of fighting for our outdoor spaces when you haven't got the balls to fight for any indoor rights Greg?" The battleground is not beer gardens Greg, the battleground is sectioning pubs so as to allow smokers and non smokers inside where it is warm, cosy, protected from the elements on a cold winters day. It is only by doing this that you will get the punters back in pubs on a regular basis. SHS has never killed anyone (unless you know better Greg) but smoke bans kill businesses.
I wonder if you value your seat at all with the General Election looming for if I was in your constituency it would be "Greg Mulholland?-No Thanks". My vote would go elsewhere!
Excuse me!
"Just when pubs have got to grips with the smoking ban...."
So pubs have now got to grips with the smoking ban have they? And since when was that then? I don't know of any pubs in my area that would now refuse the option of choice if it were offered as they are all suffering horrendously from the ravages of the smoke ban. Even pubs that now cater for OAP cheapo meals at dinner time would now snap up such an offer as they have found that cold weather puts off OAP's fancying a £3.50 dinner time food binge! Snow, rain and/or cold is plenty enough to keep them at home!
He goes on to state, "This really is quite ludicrous as well as draconian and will cause more damage to pubs that are already hard hit in the current climate".
Excuse me!
Greg, just for information purposes, the Draconian bit came in on July 1st, 2007. It was called a blanket ban, for this was the day that the death knell for thousands of pubs was signed by your fellow MPs riding on the back of the most dubious SCOTH committee report-you know the one Greg, it was THAT report set up by a government to ignore 83% of world studies into SHS, possible harm & mortality so as to base this Draconian ban something. It's all the Dept of Health bleat on about when stating the reasons for the ban-and it is utter crap!
Further stating:- “It is as if members of the Government wake up and think ‘What can I do to damage the pub trade today?"
Excuse me!
No Greg, as stated above, that happened on July 1st, 2007 or rather Feb 14th, 2007 when the muppet brigade actually voted on the proposal without knowing the truth of the SCOTH Committee report. The sheep merely followed the head bleater into the 'ayes' dept, thus the dye was cast for 12 million soon to be leperised citizens of this country.
To cap it all:- “It is high time Ministers woke up to the positive role that pubs play in communities and as a controlled, sociable drinking environment are actually an important part of the solution to problem drinking, rather than treating people as naughty children and trying to ban everything.”
Excuse me!
Why was this not stated prior to the 'free vote' exercise then perhaps we might have had the option of choice-yes CHOICE Greg! In a democratic society, which we once were, choice would have been offered to all parties. Smoking rooms, non smoking rooms, licencees able to make decisions for themselves and consumers able to go where they felt most comfortable. So simple to enact. Instead we have the ludicrous situation where, having allowed the puritans to get a major foothold people like Mr Mulholland are now fighting to preserve what little dignity smokers and licensees have left! Stable-horse-bolted spring to mind.
I've added the link to this article :- http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/36464/beer-garden-smoking-ban-draconian
You really do need to check out one of the 'comments' as it just shows how avaricious (and basically how thick some people are) when it comes to smoking areas.
I quote:- "I agree entirely that there should be a smoking ban in beer gardens. Last summer while dining outside at various pubs in the area it was a pain as everyone who smokes were also sat outside next to family's eating food.Bring it on the sooner the better!" (Courtesy of 'Saddleworth')
This poor misguided fool must live on another planet! Why does he/she think the smokers were outside enjoying a fag with their pint? Surely he/she should have been inside savouring the atmosphere of all that had become his/hers since July 1st, 2007. Surely this creature of contempt must realise that to sit outside was to invade the only area left open to smokers or does this person seriously consider that the ban applies to a 50 sq metre area around where ever it chooses to sit?
There are some seriously sad people on this earth and this smoking ban has brought them to the fore in no uncertain terms. I remember a similar scenario occurring last summer (well, on one of the four warm days we enjoyed at any rate). The young barmaid/waitress served our meals outside but the two 'ladies on the next table complained about people smoking on the patio'd area. The barmaid politely pointed out that if they didn't like it they could sit inside and she would happily serve them there. The two 'ladies' rounded on her in no uncertain terms and reported her to the management for insolence! Happily, on this occasion, the manager backed up the barmaid/waitress completely, only to be told "you can be sure we will never eat here again!"
Such is the single mindedness of some folk.
But back to our 'champion' of the All Party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group I have to ask the question, "what is the point of fighting for our outdoor spaces when you haven't got the balls to fight for any indoor rights Greg?" The battleground is not beer gardens Greg, the battleground is sectioning pubs so as to allow smokers and non smokers inside where it is warm, cosy, protected from the elements on a cold winters day. It is only by doing this that you will get the punters back in pubs on a regular basis. SHS has never killed anyone (unless you know better Greg) but smoke bans kill businesses.
I wonder if you value your seat at all with the General Election looming for if I was in your constituency it would be "Greg Mulholland?-No Thanks". My vote would go elsewhere!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)