Mark Sparrow is a writer, journalist, photographer and broadcaster. Presenter of Channel 4's Dispatches: 'The Truth About Hospital Food'. Mark uses Twitter to debate and discuss issues at @markgsparrow.
First they came for the smokers
© Mark Sparrow 2015
‘First they came for the smokers, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a smoker.
Then they came for the drinkers, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a drinker.
Then they came for the carnivores, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a carnivore.
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.’
My humble apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller who was said to have written that well-known poem showing how the Nazis managed to seize power by tackling one group at a time until there were no more groups to attack.
Now of course I’m not accusing public health officials of being Nazis as that would be just silly but I am suggesting they are using a similar ‘salami method’ of slicing away at our freedoms little by little, all in the name of ‘the common good’. Of course it’s all done with the best intentions and usually done to ‘protect’ children from some evil, and most people accept that protecting children is a jolly good thing; but every time a public health official is quizzed about another call to ban or crack down on something, they always swear blind that it’s all they want: ‘thus far and no further’ they claim.
Unfortunately as soon as one goal is achieved another one pops up and the pressure to ban and control is relentless. For instance, when it comes to smoking, initially public health officials called for small warnings on packs of cigarettes. Once that victory was won they agitated for larger and more graphic warnings. And once that was secured they pushed for a Europe-wide ban on smoking in public buildings. Although it wasn’t strictly speaking an EU initiative, originally the European Parliament was included in the smoking ban but after six weeks of smoke-free legislating the politicians decided to let their own ban go up in smoke and the European Parliament went back to allowing smoking. Smoking is also permitted in the Members’ Bar of the House of Commons. Obviously one rule for us and another for them.
As a non-smoker, and the majority of us don’t smoke,
it seemed perfectly reasonable to take away someone else’s right to smoke in order to protect my right not to breathe in the second-hand smoke. However, the ban didn’t stop there as the legislation in various European countries forbad smokers from even sitting in a smoking room on their own where no one else could be harmed by their smoke. ‘It’s for your own good,’ they were told. ‘We’re making it easier for you to give up by making it more difficult for you to smoke.’ Oh how the chain-smoking Orwell would have loved that particular piece of double think.
Now that the smoking ban has taken root in Britain there are calls to ban smoking in open public areas. The city of Bristol has decided to outlaw smoking in some public spaces and even though it’s not yet enforceable by law, the red-trouser-wearing mayor of Bristol, George Ferguson, clearly hopes that ´tutting power´ will ensure the rules will be enforced through social pressures such as over-dramatic coughing, muttering, hard stares and head-shaking.
The war on smoking received another fillip recently with the announcement of UK Government plans to introduce legislation for standardised packaging for tobacco where individual brands will be replaced by drab olive green packets with a standard font on the bits of the packaging that aren’t already plastered with pictures of diseased lungs and bits of human offal, all designed to destroy the last drop of enjoyment from an £8 packet of fags, most of which is tax.
Amazingly, the Government has agreed to this measure despite there being very little conclusive evidence to show that standardised packaging reduces the number of smokers. On the contrary, there’s evidence to suggest that plain packs will offer a huge opportunity for gangs to peddle counterfeit cigarettes produced from sub-standard tobacco that could contain anything from animal dung to floor sweepings.
When the Government announced plans for standardised packaging for cigarettes, some of us claimed that public health puritans would call for alcohol to get the plain packaging treatment.