Friday, 9 April 2010

Labour Kill Businesses, Especially Pubs

Cameron adroitly targeted a raw Labour nerve during PMQs on Wednesday.

The Prime Minister has made the decision to introduce a jobs tax which will kill the recovery. This morning on GMTV, he said that business leaders who oppose this decision have been deceived. Is the Prime Minister really telling us that he knows more about job creation than business leaders who employ almost a million people in this country?
Of course he is. I'm surprised he took his fingers out of his ears long enough to understand the question, to be honest.

You see, we've always known that Labour hold to the attitude that they always know better than anyone else, but refusing to accept that a flood of top business leaders may have a point really does make them look rather stupid.

There they are, clutching the same numbers every week, convinced that they are going to win the lottery of business ideas when the odds are stacked high against them. Quite incapable of admitting their folly, they continue adhering to dogma and ideology while closing their every sense to the damage they are causing, or are about to cause.

It's a case which has been conclusively proven in their destruction of the hospitality industry. A fact they not only refuse to admit but, astoundingly, try to spin in the opposite direction.

Survey data, anecdotal evidence and reports in the media seem to indicate that the impact on the hospitality trade as a whole has been at worst neutral and in many cases positive. We have seen no significant evidence to date that implies that smokefree legislation [...] will create any long-term economic problems for pubs or the hospitality trade in general.
Gillian Merron also parroted this nonsense despite personally meeting a delegation of publicans from her Lincoln constituency ... just before she threw their petition in the bin.

It will come as no surprise that the experience of the trade is brutally at odds with Labour's wild flight of fantasy.

The smoking ban attracted plenty of comment. Despite being in place now for nearly three years, two thirds agreed the ban should be partially appealed to allow more choice, as 72 per cent said it had hampered their business.
I'm not sure that could be classed as "at worst neutral, and in many cases positive", are you?

It certainly isn't positive for Labour's election chances. This conclusion filled the Puddlecote household with much glee.

Only two per cent of the 169 licensees responding to our survey said they would vote Labour on May 6.
The Publican, who carry this survey, have laid out an election 'manifesto' which they will be presenting to the parties, and hey, look at this proposal.

4. Review the smoking ban in light of its impact on trade
You know, the impact which Labour, turning their sand-buried heads and having a look around, are absolutely certain hasn't happened.

Still, there will be a review. In fact it is already underway, but the result has already been purchased by Labour. They're spending about a million quid on it. Only £47,000 on the effect it has had on pubs, though.

4. Smokefree - feasibility study - secondary analysis of data relating to the hospitality sector

Cost: £47,000

Status: Ongoing

Contractor: University of Aberdeen .

Principal researcher: Prof Anne Ludbrook.

Publication: no outputs to date.
So, this Anne Ludbrook, she must be a publican, yeah? Or a brewer, or a distiller, or someone involved in the hospitality industry in some way?

Of course not.

Anne Ludbrook, Programme Director of the Evaluation of Health Improvement Programme, University of Aberdeen

[...] she has been involved in a range of research activities and in consultancy work for the NHS and the World Health Organisation. Her current research interests are focussed around the use of economics in health improvement. Recently completed work relates to the cost-effectiveness of interventions for alcohol misuse, the effect of income change on health and the health and economic impacts of smoking in public places.
And they say the tobacco industry is crooked?

Publicans are crying out for help. In the industry, three quarters of those still trading after Labour's hammer blow are suffering financially, and there is a concerted campaign in favour of an amendment.

Yet Labour commission research exclusively from those who have made a multi-million pound business out of producing statistics to order, and use health advocates to scrutinise the hospitality industry.

Labour are truly, abhorrently corrupt. There is no other word for it.

If you run a business, or wish to hold down a job, in this country, your chances are a lottery which depend on the whims of quite appalling Labour bastards.

Like I said before. Expenses? It wasn't the paltry sums involved, it was just a chance to give politicians a well-deserved bloody nose. One day, these anti-social hooligans might learn some respect for the electorate.


Anonymous said...

My local Labour MP said he voted for a total ban because it had been
a huge success in Ireland and he and his wife did'nt like the smell of smoke. Why do people still vote for this worthless widgett,yep
you got it right first time, the town has been Labour since Watt
Tylers days,they'de vote labour if
a neutered whippet put up.

White Feather Distributor

Anonymous said...

Only 2% of publicans say they would vote Labour.???????????
Does that mean the other 92% will
be sticking posters up in their joints attacking Labour's pub
killing measures. Dont think so,
its the gross apathy of the publicans thats kept the ban in place.Prior to the FEB 2006 ban
vote the government held a stakeholders survey on the proposed
ban. Out of 59000 pubs and 17000
other venues 550 responded mostly
"in favour" of a total ban.
The back stabbing clubs thought they were exempt nodding with approval. Judas found hanging
rings a bell. Some foodie outlets
will fight tooth and nail to keep the ban ,we know why.

Time for action

westcoast2 said...

I listened to a person from the BBPA (British Beer and Pub Association) on LBC talking about the high number of pub closures.

He mentioned several reasons, none of which (in the segment I heard) included the smoking ban.

Indeed if you visit the BBPA site and search on 'Smoking Ban' or 'Ban' it returns Zero results.

The BBPA say they represent over half of Britains pubs and have members that account for 98% of beer brewed in the UK.

Why is the BBPA not mentioning the smoking ban?

Spartan said...

Dick ... how do they do the smoking scenes in programs like Ashes to Ashes? They must be in a studio, right? ... because they obviously aren't outside in the club, office scenes etc. So how do film and tv companies get round the ban?

Dick Puddlecote said...

Legislation exempts smoking for 'artistic' purposes, Spartan. I think (?) that Scotland doesn't even allow that!

Spartan said...

Thanks for giving me the direction ... found it.


6. Where the artistic integrity of a performance makes it appropriate for a person who is taking part in that performance to smoke, the part of the premises in which that person performs is not smoke-free in relation to that person during his performance."

So, how about a film detailing on how pubs used to be before the ban? Choose a pub, form a film club, for realism use members of the public ... and off you go. lt should take about a year to film :)

Spartan said...

edit ... make it a national competition for the best film. :)

Anonymous said...

Not allowed to mention the smoking ban,probably on a "promise"for
later appointments.

Do publicans actually belong to this outfit voluntarily or is there
something sniffy about the set up.
Its blatantly obvious it has
nothing in common with the rank and file so who keeps giving it
a stage to lie on.

Judas Finder General

Eddie D said...

A great number of the studies that support smoking bans seem to emanate from the UC Centre for Tobacco Control Studies(UKCTCS).

Interesting to note the following from their own website:-

Competing interests of UKCTCS staff

John Britton chairs the Royal College of Physicians Tobacco Advisory Group and is a member of the board of trustees of Action on Smoking and Health

Peter Hajek undertakes consultancy for and has received research funds from a number of companies developing and manufacturing smoking cessation products.

Paul Aveyard has accepted hospitality from the pharmaceutical industry. He has done consultancy and research work in smoking cessation for Pfizer, McNeil, and Xenova Biotechnology that has led to payments to him and his research account.

Linda Bauld is vice-chair of the Cancer Research UK Tobacco Advisory Group and serves as Scientific Adviser to the Department of Health on tobacco control.

Tim Coleman has, within the last 5 years, done occasional consultancy work for companies that manufacture NRT products (Johnson and Johnson, Pierre Fabre Laboratories). He has also advised a Public Relations company on the strength of the evidence for using Nicobloc as an aid for smoking cessation.

Robert West undertakes research and consultancy for companies that develop and manufacture smoking cessation medications. He has a share of a patent for a novel nicotine delivery device. He is a trustee of QUIT. His research is funded mostly by Cancer Research UK.

Eddie D said...

While killing off the hospitality industry the government has created another economy ( The Smoking Cessation dreamworld ) funded by the taxpayers of course.

Even GPs get their share of taxpayers money :-

APPENDIX 2 Page 7(h)
” GPs and Pharmacies are reimbursed for service delivery (inflation still to be applied for 09-10):

£10.50 for each client setting a quit date.

£40 for each client still quit at 4-week follow-up

£10.50 for each client not quit at 4-week follow-up. No additional payment for those not followed up at 4 weeks.

Pharmacies only – £3 per supply of NRT. ”

Eddie D said...

Once the government have set up all these smoking cessation organisations there must be something else they can spend taxpayers money on.


Funny how the same names seem to appear all the time.

This is the NHS Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training.

Mrs Rigby said...

Mr Puddlecote. You have a little problem, because the BBC says the newspapers disagree with you about NI.
"Could the tide be turning in the National Insurance row? Several newspapers lead with attacks on the businessmen who have backed the Conservative stance."

About pubs?

Dens of iniquity - they should all be closed down, and off licenses, and supermarkets shouldn't be allowed to sell alcohol to anybody under 95. The rest of us can sit in our sanitised homes, drinking smoothies, made by Coca Cola. - Things go better that way!

Eddie D said...

Here are some details of grants and contracts:-

Research grants and contracts


49. West R, Analysing data and writing up papers arising from the ATTEMPT cohort study. Sanofi-Synthelabo, €10,000, 2004-2008.

50. West R, Zatonski W, Cedzynska M, Aveyard P, Stapleton J. Tabex Smoking Cessation (TASC) trial. NPRI. £188,000, 2006-2009.

51. West R, Vangeli E. An in-depth investigation of the causes and process of relapse to smoking. Cancer Research UK. £39,000, 2006-2008.

52. West R. Contribution to Smoking Toolkit Study. Pfizer Consumer Healthcare. £150,000, 2006-2011.

53. West R, Wardle J Smoking cessation: population and clinical approaches. Cancer Research UK. £2,850,000, 2007-2012 (Award number C1418/A7972)

54. West R, Contribution to Smoking Toolkit Study. Pfizer £170,000, 2007-2008

55. West R, Contribution to Smoking Toolkit Study. GlaxoSmithKline. £50,000, 2008.

56. Ussher M, Aveyard P, Evans P, Hucklebridge F, Ibison J, Reid F, Steptoe A, West R The effect of hydrocortisone on desire to smoke and tobacco withdrawal symptoms Cancer Research UK £34,885, 2007-2008 (Award number C8641/A8419)

57. Ussher M, Aveyard P, Coleman T, Marcus B, Barton P, Manyonda I, Lewis B, West R A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of physical activity as an aid to smoking cessation during pregnancy National Insitute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment.£1,182,613, 2008-2011.

58. Britton J, McNeill A, Aveyard P, Bauld L, Hastings G, Hajek P, West R The UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies. UKCRC £5,000,000, 2008-2013.

59. Aveyard P, West R Rapid reduction versus abrupt quitting for smokers who want to stop soon: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. British Heart Foundation £151,701 2008-2010 (Award number PG/08/047/25082)

60. West R Contribution to the Smoking Toolkit Study. Department of Health £164,000 2008-2009..


timbone said...

I was rehearsing at a pub in Audenshaw. The landlord smoked and hated the ban. He had 'early doors' for the regulars when the ashtrays came out.


He didn't want a partial smoking ban because he did food. He said that had there been a partial ban he would have lost a lot of his trade to the wet led pub down the road. What wet led pub down the road? Oh, the one that was now boarded up.

It's a dog eat dog situation.

Eddie D said...

One of the arguments put forward dor a total smoking ban was that it would provide a " level playing field " for the pubs and clubs.

Well they certainly have got just that:

I have never seen so many " level playing fields " where previously there used to be pubs.

JuliaM said...

Not allowed to mention the smoking ban,probably on a "promise"for
later appointments.

Do publicans actually belong to this outfit voluntarily or is there
something sniffy about the set up.
Its blatantly obvious it has
nothing in common with the rank and file so who keeps giving it
a stage to lie on."

If the BBPA functions like a union, then it's no surprise that it's behaving like a union.