David Cameron wants to change the law to ensure that cigarettes are sold in plain packages from next year.
Jane Ellison, the public health minister, put new regulations before Parliament and said that MPs will be given a free vote on the issue ahead of the general election.
She said that plain packaging is a “proportionate and justified response” because of the health risks associated with smoking.
Just gross stupidity. It doesn’t fucking work.
And yet again we see there is nothing remotely conservative about the Conservative Party. Like there is nothing liberal about the Liberal-Democratic Party. And come to that, the workers are no longer represented by the Labour Party as they are all Middle Class metropolitan trash.
Perhaps someone can explain to me what I would gain by voting for any of the three main Lib-Dem parties? There is no point voting for Cameron if all you get is this.
Christ. I wouldn’t ever vote Labour, but this at least takes some of the urgency out of the election for me. An exciting opportunity to spoil my ballot beckons.
At least Miliband will be amusing and gaffe-prone as Prime Minister…
@ Charlie Suet
Until he sinks the economy, of course.
I’d like to say I’m glad I live in Spain, but we have Podemos, the people who believe Venezuela is a good model!
Cameron will do anything the hegemonic pressure groups tell him to do. Only a fool would vote for this man. Cue Theophrastus.
I’ve said it before; just as the Unions were the problem in the 1970s, the Pressure Groups are the problem now, and need a similar twatting to the one the unions got, from some Prime Minister whose balls are as big as Thatcher’s. David Cameron is not that Prime Minister.
The wisest words ever uttered on cigarette smoking were uttered by Sir Humphrey Appleby. As he so rightly said, smokers contribute hugely to the exchequer while alive, then they die early, which saves billions in state pension payments. What’s not to like?
The thing really for me is that despite all the discussion, the understanding human group psychology, the Public Choice Theory, the political dynamics, I still have these moments where I just feel this absolute bafflement and despair that we keep voting these arseholes in, time after time. I’m reminded of several people I know who were jubilant immediately after the last election that they’d got rid of horrible Labour. And then nothing changed. And neither will it after the next election- whoever wins- either.
Well according to the BBC’s correspondent in Australia this morning, plain packaging DOES work because smoking ‘fell’ after plain packaging was introduced.
Why mention that downward trend that existed prior to plain packaging or that the fall was steeper before plain packaging was introduced?
Oh let them get on with it. There’s good reason to believe smuggling & counterfeiting will soar. Cigarettes will become cheaper. The Treasury’ll take a large tax hit. No downsides at all.
That downward trend in cigarette consumption’s nothing to celebrate. That’s evidence of people being forced away from doing something they freely wish to do. If you’re in favour of freedom, it’s an uptick one should be applauding.
idiot, or dangerous moron? Its not just that it doesn’t work – the unintended consequences make it worse than what it replaces!
I used to cynically think the government didn’t really want to end smoking because of the colossal hole in the public finances which would result. Plain packaging will lead to increased counterfeiting and less tax revenue.
So it takes a special genius to introduce a measure which does nothing to reduce smoking but does reduce tax revenue. Absolutely outstanding.
Cameron craves column inches in the Mail like, well, a sixty a day man reaching for the pack first thing in the morning.
IMF he was serious about reducing smoking, he would announce subsidies for e-cigarettes. But he isn’t – no one in government or the Shrill Sector is truly serious about reducing smoking.
@IanB
I was one of those who was delighted to get rid of Labour, though I wasn’t all that pleased about the Tories. Just to know that some of those cunts got booted out and humiliated was a small consolation, and if that’s all I get every five years I’ll take it. Doesn’t mean I’m happy about it, but it beats eternal rule by exactly the same people, as opposed to by very similar people. Just.
‘The Treasury’ll take a large tax hit. No downsides at all.’
Except for the fact that non smokers (like myself) will end up being bled a bit harder to pay for all their shit. They aren’t going to spend less, after all.
So will it be illegal to sell an empty box with the B&H logo on it, that coincidentally happens to be exactly the right size to fit a box of fags inside?
At some point someone is going to have to stand up. The Tobacco companies should just say “No-fuck off. Pass what laws you like–we won’t obey”. That is true in all areas. If we just keep saying “Its the law” then ultimately there is little more than time between us and the cattle car. Tobacco publicly telling them to fuck off might just start a bonfire the pork would be hard-pressed to control.
Fine sentiments, Mr X.
But I’d suspect, wrong issue.
A stand needs to be taken but the ground to fight on needs very careful choosing. Defeat is not an option.
Any suggestions?
Everybody will have to choose their own point. But there has to be one because if we just keep accepting what they hand out the slope only goes one way. They end up with absolute power over us. At the moment the polits still have to keep their theatre of bogus legitimacy going to get their way. All done legal like. At this point their attempts to squash opposition will still have to be in that frame. They can’t claim tobacco becoming refuseniks is “terrorism” –the standard excuse for tyranny–and if smokers stood up as well instead of wallowing in self-hatred–I have no doubt the state would back down.
Just been sat having dinner and in excess of the government alcohol limits at Jimmy’s on the Mall in Brisbane (great people watching venue). A voice came over the tannoy stating “please note that Queen Street Mall is a non-smoking area, please stop smoking now.”
How effing scary is that?
Ellison, dining at The Westbury:
Sommelier: “Here is the Chablis Grand Cru Madame ordered.”
Ellison: “It doesn’t say that on the bottle. In fact it doesn’t say anything on the bottle.”
Sommelier: “Not quite, Madame, you see ‘ere on the back it says it will make you go blind and kill you and ‘ere is a large picture of George Best’s first liver.”
Ellison: “That’s disgusting, don’t show it to me. Still, pour away, Pierre.”
Ellison: “Fuck me, it’s horse piss! What is it?”
Sommelier: “An unusual vintage to be sure Madame, but quite the fashion in the best restaurants.”
Ellison: “Oh well, pour it out and bring another bottle.”
Somm., back in the kitchen: “Get the van down to Tesco’s quick and get another dozen 2 litre plastic bottles of the cheap crap.”
@bloke (not) in spain: January 22, 2015 at 11:43 am
A stand needs to be taken but the ground to fight on needs very careful choosing. Defeat is not an option.
Any suggestions?
Yes… What they should have done in Australia to nip it in the bud… Simply state that “if we cannot sell our product in our branded packaging we will not be selling it at all” and cut off the legal fag supply to the entire country. Imagine the effect of 25% of the adult population suddenly being either forced to go “cold turkey” or buy from “man with van”. less than 3 days to total insurrection IMHO. 🙂
Trouble is, like the politico, they have neither the balls nor the trust in each-other to do it
.
So let’s make the tobacco market more like the marijuana market: A multi-billion dollar international industry beyond the reach of governments whose only financial contribution to the economy is a huge deficit spent on trying to police and enforce all the laws against it, along with the cost of criminalisation and imprisonment of all the previously good contributors to society who we manage to hoover up.
Yes, that will work.
As for what will begin the eventual fightback, I’m tempted to say only the collapse of the economies of europe, but a possible trigger might be that moment, (soon), when the shit hits the wind turbine and all the diesel generators and all the factories sending their workers home can’t stop our third world energy supply system from collapsing into a heap.
But then I was always overly optimistic.
I’ve a feeling the windmills might be the one.
A. They’re big, obvious & very expensive to replace. And, thanx to their locations, extremely difficult to protect.
B There’s a direct connection between taking one down & an instant reduction in electricity costs. For the feed-in tariff is based o production.
C Big structural hits are the ultimate buzz for the demolition minded. After the first couple it might get competitive. Most down in one hit. Novel & amusing methods. The challenge of the tough nut to crack…
As per the EU Referendum blog Camo-clowns gang have spent 1+ billion on expensive (and more polluting than coal/gas/nuke) small diesel generators (up to container lorry size) to try and ensure that the lights don’t go off this winter despite the piss-poor performance of the Windy Millers.
b(n)is:
I’ve often wondered about that.
In the past I’ve said to colleagues as we’ve passed a wind turbine, Every rotation of that thing, you and I get poorer. But I’ve never actually estimated how much poorer. Anyone done the sums?
Seems to me that destroying wind turbines would be an entirely praiseworthy act of public service. Sure, there’d be losers: parasites, getting forcibly separated from their host. As the host, I can’t say I object.
Pingback: British Blogging | Longrider