Sunday 18 January 2009

Dinner for Two. And The Righteous Came Too.

If you enjoy a relaxing evening in a cosy restaurant, the (near) future looks like it's going to be rather disappointing.

In August 2007, the proprietor of a no smoking restaurant in Worcester was getting all in a tizzy at his local council's decision to fine him £200 for not putting up the mandatory no smoking signs. He hadn't needed them before, and why should he? His was a no smoking restaurant. He had this to say on the matter.

"Fine me if someone smokes in my restaurant but don't fine me for refusing to put up a sign. It's pathetic.

What's next? It will lead to us having to put up warning signs all over the restaurant about alcohol and salt in food."

Remember the days when such protests were alarmist and taking a point to extremes? Perhaps that was his intention, but under Labour, he has turned out to be as accurate as the Oracle of Delphi with that particular scaremongering statement.

Fancy ordering that bottle of your favourite Sancerre with your sweetheart? Of course, and would Sir like a warning with that?

It comes as doctors' leaders call for pubs and restaurants to display clear warnings about how many units of alcohol are contained in drinks they serve.

The British Medical Association yesterday said the information should be displayed on signs and posters in bars, and on wine lists.

Irritating as that may be, at least the marvellous chateaubriand for two will banish the stresses of the week. True relaxation at last. Of course Sir, but I am obliged by law to tell you that it is bad for your arteries and is liable to make you obese. How would you like your plate of cancer-causing agents cooked?

The FSA has not finalised the scheme yet, but is looking for caterers to provide calorie information on menus with more information about fat, salt and sugar content included on leaflets at the outlet.

While the watchdog is focusing on the large food chains at the moment, it said if the scheme proved successful there was no reason why small, independent caterers could not follow with some help.

... and of course, rounding off the meal with a fine cuban or a sobranie light is perfectly acceptable. Your waiter will be happy to give you and your beau directions to the icy car park.

Labour. Tough on relaxation, tough on the causes of relaxation.

Don't believe the righteous will be happy with any of this though. It won't be long before they are calling for bans on certain foods and alcoholic drinks. Don't believe it? It's not like they've not imposed their healthist will on private business owners before through legislation, is it? Even the restaurateur in Worcester is probably stunned at the speed at which his worst-case scenario is becoming worst-case fact.

I reckon they may start by banning parma ham.

HAM and bacon should be cut from our diets to avoid the risk of bowel cancer, a landmark study has shown.

The World Cancer Research Fund study found strong evidence that eating red meat and processed meats such as pastrami, salami, and frankfurters can cause bowel cancer.

"Did you have a relaxing evening, Darling?"

"Did I fuck. I'll stay at home and do the ironing next week."


vincent1 said...

Another sad but funny piece of writing Dick, thank you, the last 2lines are classic.

I have vision of so many warning signs on the windows and doors, you will not be able to see through them. It makes me feel so angry and sad.
The kids, they do all this for, will not have a life, just guilt, from the time they get out of be, until they get back in it. Yet the stupid bastards cannot see it, can they. for smokers and non-smokers alike, fighting for choice and TRUTH

Have you ever read the book "Scared to Death" by Cristopher Brooker and Richard North?


vincent1 said...

sorry error should be- from the time they get out of bed

Mark Wadsworth said...

While the watchdog is focusing on the large food chains at the moment, it said if the scheme proved successful there was no reason why small, independent caterers could not follow with some help.

Define "successful", FFS.

"First they came for the large food chains, but I did not protest because I was a small, independent caterer".

On a pedantic note, those 'no smoking' signs were written by illiterate shits. The correct preposition is 'on the premises' not 'in the premises'. That is an extra twist of the knife for me, as a pedantic chain smoker.

Sue said...

LFAT seems to have it in for the smokers again. He's denying that the smoking ban has anything to do with the demise of our pubs.

With conservatives like that, you have no hope of getting a democracy back and I will certainly never return to Stalag UK!

Viva Espana!

Dick Puddlecote said...

I think he is short on info Sue. It's good to see that he is fine with the idea of smoking rooms, there are only a very few that don't agree with that.

Shame Patricia Hagitt, Sir (haha) Liam Donaldson, and the quite startlingly-deluded Alan Johnson are amongst them.

banned said...

Mark Wadsworth "The correct preposition is 'on the premises' not 'in the premises'. " That annoyed me too.

I think that you will find that pubs already have to display about 20 notices from 'gambling small amounts', under-age drinking, healthnsafety, family policy, no smoking, no off-sales, employment law, security, banned persons, licenses and etc.

If the smoking ban is not responsible for pubs closing why is it that the six that have closed in my city in the last 12 months all had one thing in common ? They all lacked a private outdoor space for smokers ( and their friends ) to gather ?