It is with great sadness that we have to report that Carol Cattell passed away quietly in her sleep on the 4th April surrounded by her family. Her children Sam and Jo paid tribute to their mum by saying “We were incredibly privileged to have this wonderful woman as a friend and our Mum. Thank you for everything.” One can only begin to understand the pain that they are feeling.
Carol had been a member of Freedom To Choose (F2C), for over six years. A true supporter of choice in lifestyle choices, her presence was always an inspiration to F2C. Carol lived in both Greece and Yorkshire and the only complaint I ever heard her voice was the oppressive Greek summers! Although their far more relaxed smoking attitudes was a big positive!
I met Carol a number of times and she was a warm, intelligent and hugely entertaining lady. I will never forget when she popped in to visit my partner and me as we went through numerous bottles of red wine and the obligatory packet of cigarettes.
We are all heartbroken. Our thoughts and prayers are with Sam and Jo.
Rest in peace Carol for you have touched so many of us.
As some of you will know, over the years full smoking prohibition has been creeping its way into mental hospitals. We covered this creep from its first case in the United Kingdom in 2008 when Rampton Mental Hospital banned patients from smoking at all. Resident patients defending their human rights took their case all the way to the Court of Appeal, but very unfairly lost. This completely biased ruling set the precedent for full smoking prohibition. Now due to a demand from ‘Public Health England’ (PHE) and the ‘National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’ (NICE) NHS mental hospitals across the country have taken full advantage by completely banning smoking on their grounds, effectively forcing patients to quit against their will. This pointless and sadistic policy has also been fully encouraged by anti-smoking “charity” ASH and “mental health charity” Mind.
There is good news though. Just when the likes of ASH and so called mental health charity Mind thought they had got away with it, a new backlash has come about in the form of ‘Campaign against Smoking Bans in Psychiatric Units’ (CASBIPU). We fully back this campaign all the way because the issue of smoking is not just about choice and leisure; it is also about the human rights of a person knowing what’s best for them. While many smoke for enjoyment, many also smoke because it is therapeutic in alleviating anxiety, which is especially true concerning mental health issues. Obviously ASH absolutely hates the idea that tobacco is used as medication, as that truth would destroy their relentless crusade to get tobacco banned outright. ASH and Mind are desperately trying to argue the case “it’s for their own good”: not only is that insulting to those with mental health problems, it is also a completely pathetic argument in every sense.
Obviously this policy will greatly amplify patients’ symptoms on arrival to hospital, in turn keeping them locked up longer, further amplifying their symptoms. They will probably smoke twice as much when they get out, just to recover from the trauma. This will also lead to increased violence on wards and increase the chance of ward suicides. Understandably those suffering a mental breakdown will now avoid seeking help. Another interesting point is that in convention III, article 26 of the Geneva Convention it states “The use of tobacco shall be permitted” which means mental health inpatients are being treated worse than prisoners of war.
Moving on to Mind, they are a “charity” too big for their boots which instead of helping people with mental health issues bullies them, which is not surprising considering some of Mind’s origins stem from advocating eugenics. Ironically Mind with the slogan “For better mental health” promotes the Human Rights Act 1998 on its own website, which includes prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, right to liberty and security, respect for your private life and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and the right not to be discriminated against, but fail to mention it does not apply to them. They also state “Our policy work influences government so that people with mental health problems can get the support they need and the respect they deserve”. What Mind deserve, along with their allies, is an end to their government funding, a complete boycott from the general public, followed by their own incarceration.
Meanwhile we applaud SANE, a genuine mental health charity, for speaking out against this sadistic measure.
So why should the general public be so concerned about this? If they can do it to innocent people who happen to have mental health problems, they can do it to you. ASH is just using this sadistic and evil experiment, to then bring it onto the masses. It is quite clear from this that ASH and their supporters want full tobacco prohibition at any cost and if they do get what they want, they will not stop there. It is said that, when you trade liberty for security you lose both, or liberty for health in this case. We have always been criticized for calling the anti-smoking movement a bunch of Health-Nazis, which is a bit unfair on them, as they are not really Health-Nazis, but just Nazis. The fact is, using the most vulnerable to experiment on against their will, does resemble eugenics. Let us not forget that the original Nazis were also very anti-smoking based on their eugenics program of building a super race. Even the modern anti-smoking movement has slipped up openly stating that smokers should be refused treatment and left to die, a Dr Mengele culture that is also resonating against drinkers and obese people. You can support CASBIPU by signing their petition linked at the bottom below.
Freedom2Choose’s AGM will be held on Saturday 5 December at the Pavilion End Pub, Watling Street, London, EC4M 9BR. It’s the same venue as last year.
The formal members’ meeting starts at 2.00pm and will be very short, maybe 10-15 minutes. There will be informal and lively discussions afterwards when friends and supporters are also welcome to join us. Do come along and look for us round the pub– we haven’t bothered to book a room for such a short time. The pub closes at 5.00 pm and some of us may then drift elsewhere…
There is a thread on the forum here for paid-up F2C members only.
Following on from my last article (Nightlife Burning Out) nine months have gone by. But nothing seems to have changed for the better concerning the nightlife industry with still ever more bars and nightclubs going out of business. Historically this industry has always had the image of being on the edge of legit and ethical and little seems to have changed to the present.
Ironically there is one small meaningless law that is still enforced by the book with no ifs or buts. Yes you’ve guessed it, that nanny state smoking ban! While it is claimed by our politicians, councillors and many that this is part of a new progressive and fairer society, nothing exposes this lie more than your average nightclub. Yes it is true that getting roughed up in the nightclub back alley, courtesy of the ex-con bouncers, is “generally” a thing of the past in this country, due to the now mandatory security licensing. Other than that little else is enforced for the benefit of the customer.
The biggest issue going now is on the door discrimination, which is rife. Although there has been the introduction of the Equality Act 2010, which makes it illegal for any business to deny service to a customer on grounds of prejudice, the nightlife industry seems to have immunity from this law while it is being disproportionately abused on small businesses. Despite this law, it only covers a few minorities status, meaning it is still perfectly legal to deny entry and discriminate for anything else including your weight, wealth, social status etc, or even just down to whatever mood the security and management are in. So are local authorities, police, politicians doing anything about this? In fact no, they are actually encouraging it by adding further conditions and restrictions to enter a nightlife establishment including fingerprinting, breathalysing, and more thorough body searches, which fits in line with the so called progressives.
Freedom2Choose has always exposed the hypocrisy of those behind the smoking ban who claimed it was part of bringing in a better and more caring society. This has been more about degrading the individual, as well as to evolve a fascist health agenda on the masses which would lead to anti-drinking, anti-sugar, anti-fat along with many other sides to it. So what is to blame for the mass closure of nightclubs? While the smoking ban may now be playing a small part, it was still the catalyst, but if that was not enough, nearly all clubs and bars have gone even further to ban vaping indoors. Even though local authorities are as well to blame for playing their part, a lot of the nightlife industry, though not all, is putting their personal ego first, before making money, let alone company ethics, by using what freedom they have left on its own customers seeing them as little more than cattle.
To conclude, progressiveness means change, but it does not always mean change for the better.
Now and again something crops up that normally would be outside of the remit of Freedom2Choose, in this case it is the Kids Company scandal. Most smokers have children and contrary to the belief of ASH and the Department of Social Services they love their children as much as any other parents do, some are willing to love children who are not their own too but are denied permission to help children in need of good homes by DSS because they choose to smoke, while at the same they protest that there are not sufficient parents willing to foster.
That aside the Charity Kids Company, a government paid charity (just like ASH) are in trouble due to allegations of child abuse. As a result HMG rightly stopped the KIds Company’s funding while Scotland Yard conduct their investigation.
In response to this scandal a petition has been launched to end government funding for all charities, as seen below:
A “charity” which receives taxpayer funding is simply not a charity. In light of the Kids Company scandal it is fair to say that a symbiotic relationship between gov. and charities is unhelpful and inappropriate. Taxpayer funding turns charities into unaccountable Quangos. This is morally wrong.
Freedom2Choose would like you to consider supporting this petition, why you ask, would we want to deny all charities government funding?
It is not because we are anti charity, far from it, as an organization we contributed to a charity which sent D-day veterans back to Normandy so that they may pay their respects to fallen comrades, it was the right thing to do, after all they fought so hard for our freedom and lost many brave friends doing so. Taxpayers are forced to make contributions to charities that in the normal course of events they would not choose to donate to, an inappropriate use of taxpayers money.
Nor is that the only reason, Government funding of charities makes them quangos, as a direct result they are immune from Freedom of Information requests, in other words you cannot find out what they spend your tax money on! This is morally wrong.
Any organization which has “charitable purposes” in law (which are strictly defined legally and not always the same as what are commonly understood as “philanthropic”) and an income of £5,000 or more a year, currently has a duty to register as a charity.
There also has to be demonstrable public benefit.
There are some charities that claim to work for the public good, I ask you is it for the public good that a charity was responsible for and played an active role in forming legislation that has put thousands of single mothers with their dependent child(ren) on to the dole queue because their legislation destroyed the livelihood of their pub landlord employer? Or Pensioners became prisoners in their own homes because the places where they socialized cannot allow them to smoke and as a consequence closed adding more people to the already overstretched dole queues. How about inmates in mental hospitals who self medicate with tobacco to relieve their stress in their everyday lives? Some Psychiatrists believe that forced abstinence does more harm than good to these unfortunate human beings.
The Trustees of a charity have a legal duty to ensure that it sticks to its purposes, refrains from political activity, that its financial affairs are conducted transparently and prudently, and that it reports truthfully and promptly on its activities to the Charity Commission.
As stated above some charities have become politically active, they formulate legislation, advise committees while being paid by the taxpayer, a violation of the rule that says a charity should refrain from political activity.
This is wrong, it needs to be stopped, you can help stop it and see your tax money used appropriately by signing this petition, as the anti-smoking lobby keep reminding us “It’s for the children” in this instance, by signing it would truly be, in part, for the children.
I am sad to report that Colin Grainger has passed away. One can only begin to imagine the pain his family and friends are feeling. Colin was a former Chairman of Freedom2Choose, soon after our inception in 2007. Tributes have poured in to celebrate the life of a man who fought for the freedom of others, these are typical.
Gruff @gruffdiver 3h3 hours agoWill miss you @CaptainRanty RIP Farewell Colin, you will go down on the right side of history
— Gruff (@gruffdiver) March 16, 2015
Anna Raccoon @AnnaRaccoon1 4h4 hours agoRIP @CaptainRanty – A long time good friend to me. An original Libertarian.
Old Holborn @Holbornlolz 5h5 hours agoWell, that’s some shit news. RIP @CaptainRanty So long Colin. And thanks.
Well, that’s some shit news. RIP @CaptainRanty So long Colin. And thanks.
— Old Holborn (@Holbornlolz) March 16, 2015
A man who pioneered F2C as a presence in the media and steered us into the mainstream. I always remembered us working on a letter to Jeremy Clarkson asking for his support. Clarkson did not reply but in his Sun column he referred to us as a “half arsed organisation, which I hope are fully arsed soon.”
Colin worked in Africa in sales. He was always posting pictures of bars where smoking was allowed, making me envious.
Colin had a marvellous sense of honour and humour. An intelligent and thoughtful a man who immediately earned your respect though never made you feel in debt because of it. A good friend, a powerful colleague and sorely missed already.
Colin will not only be remembered for his fine work but also his wonderful family. His lasting legacy is our respect and those who would control our lives had much more to fight.
Freedom2Choose would like to pass on our heartfelt condolences to his family and friends to a quite magnificent man.
RIP Colin Grainger 1962 – 2015
Dad and me, 1949
When I was only four weeks old they took me from my mother and gave me to strangers. I didn’t see her again for over twenty years.
This was a perfectly normal event in England. It was done in the best interests of the child and according to the best principles and practice of social work and the law regarding adoption. My natural mother was unmarried, and my adoptive parents were good people, but childless.
I was lucky and enjoyed not only a loving childhood, but also an adoptive father who was a man of great compassion and honour, and ahead of his time in his thinking. Against the prevailing wisdom he not only told me from my earliest memories the story of my adoption, but also kept my natural mother informed through letters and photos as I grew up. The year I turned 21 he arranged a meeting between us and she became a wonderful part of my own family and an acknowledged and well-loved grandmother of my children. I was with her holding her hand when she died aged 86, the year after my father had passed away at the same age.
Nowadays the principles and practice and the law regarding adoption have changed dramatically. Far from the old advice to sever all ties between natural parent and child and to keep the knowledge of adoption from the child, contact is now encouraged in all but the most difficult of circumstances and adopted children have the legal right to full information about their background.
Why am I telling you all this, I hear you ask?
Well, a few days ago I read that Staffordshire County Council’s social work department banned a couple from adopting because the father had been seen using an e-cigarette. Not even a real cigarette! And at least “13 other councils across England state they will not place under-fives with e-cigarette users. They include Bury, Kirklees, North Tyneside, Durham, Warrington, West Sussex, Poole, Cornwall, Camden, Wolverhampton, Sandwell, Walsall and Dudley councils.”
What, in the name of all that’s holy, are they so frightened about? We know that even real cigarettes pose no danger from secondhand smoke: for example, see this WHO-commissioned study on lung cancer – Boffetta 1998 – which concludes there is no significant risk, and even some benefits, to children. To be concerned about secondhand vaping is, frankly, stark raving bonkers.
So, formal adoption services have now performed an absolute somersault, all in the name of ‘safeguarding the children’. In the past, adoptive parents were potentially banned if they planned any contact with the natural birth mother, and deeply frowned on if they didn’t maintain the pretence of natural parentage to the adopted child. Nowadays would-be adoptive (and foster) parents are banned if they smoke, and banned even if they don’t smoke but use e-cigs. As our last article ‘Of Puppies and Politicians‘ said: “Every day sees…new definitions of who are considered to be fit parents…they maintain if you are obese, if you drink even moderately, if you smoke you are not fit to be a parent…the obese, those who drink moderately and those who smoke (are) barred from adopting or fostering children. Worse still, while they are denormalising the obese, moderate drinkers and smokers, children are still suffering real abuse both by a small number of parents and state run children’s homes…”
As an example of real child abuse, and in stark contrast to the extraordinary vigour with which social and other statutory services protect children from the imagined harm done by cigarette smoke and e-cig steam, here is the full published Serious Case Review into the tragic story of Blake Fowler who was killed aged 7. It makes harrowing reading. He was let down on at least 18 separate occasions when there could have been genuinely protective state intervention. Instead, there was lethargy and incompetence.
I was lucky. I survived, and was allowed to be brought up by a decent and loving couple.
Oh, did you guess? My father was a lifelong smoker.
Of Puppies and Politicians
The time has come to talk of Puppies and Politicians: ASH whistle and they come, wide eyed and tails wagging, their only desire to please their masters. They are the politicians, those whom we elect to represent our interests: not the interests of business, not the interests of 20 or so bigoted “fake”-charity workers in London, but our interests, John and Jane Public.
Two events occurred recently that have wide ranging effects on the smoking community. Actually no, it’s not just smokers: it also includes parents and drivers, a very large part of the adult population of the UK.
First on the agenda is plain packaging. Plain packaging has been in and out of the news for a long time, but to date only Australia has implemented this policy. There are many opponents of plain packaging, and very few who will benefit from plain packaging. From the outset this legislation has been contested. Simon Clark of FOREST has consistently opposed these measures on television, radio and in the press, Angela Harbutt at Hands Off Our Packs opposed the measures at the public consultations, and our own F2C Chairman Dave Atherton has spoken both with politicians and the media at length on the issue. Further opposition came from the retailers’ association and packaging manufacturers. Even the Police are opposed to it. The grounds are many and varied: one politician has been removed from her position for abusing her position during the consultation yet, despite all the public opposition in the polls (excepting Yougov whose owner sits on the board of ASH – a clear conflict of interest), the bill not only passes but is deliberately brought forward for political expediency ahead of the General Election!
What effects will this legislation have? Australia, which has already implemented plain packaging, is currently being sued by several countries for the damage done to their economies, for trademark infringements to trademarks protected by the UN and other international treaties. The same is likely to happen to the UK and it may take years to settle, it may cost us the taxpayers £millions or even £trillions to defend, and £millions more if HM government is found guilty. They had better pray that Australia does not lose its case as legal precedent will have been set under international law.
It will only serve to increase black market traffic in tobacco as it has in Australia,and increasing taxation to pay for HMRC to intercept such traffic. Worse still it creates national security issues: the government is well aware that some of the illicit profits go directly to terrorist organisations (some years ago they even produced television advertisements warning the public) like Al Quaeda. This bill is a gift for them since plain packaging is easier and cheaper to reproduce than current packaging. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the state is a crime, it is treason, and by “taking advice” from ASH they are putting our country at greater risk of terrorist acts.
Plain packaging will not reduce the numbers of smokers. If Australia is any guide, the numbers have actually increased, including the numbers of young people taking up smoking before they are old enough to weigh the possible implications of their decision. F2C said that Sir Cyril Chantler’s “fact finding” tour from Down Under seems to have been a waste of taxpayer’s money. While far too early to draw any firm conclusions, certainly there seems to be no evidence of any reduction in smoking or sales.
Black market cigarettes are increasing in sales. A report by KPMG, paid for by cigarette manufacturer Philip Morris International (PMI) found a rise in contraband from 11.8% to 13.3%. PMI also have reported a rise in sales of 0.3% during 2013.
The other issue is smoking in private vehicles with children aboard. This is another slide down the slippery slope: the same slippery slope that ASH so emphatically denies exists. Freedom 2 choose has said that:
“Holden Pearmain on behalf of the Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association surveyed 1,000 smokers and drivers. They found that 76% did not smoke in the car with children and 11% would ask(2).”
Legislating against something that is no more than a lack of consideration is taking a very large hammer to crack a very small nut. Many parents will act inconsiderately on occasion but that is no excuse for the state to take over parental responsibilities. The state should only get involved if there is real demonstrable harm being done.”
“Amendment 57BB introduces two worrying precedents:
The Government will be invading people’s personal domains for the first time. This could be the anti-smoking lobby’s first step towards banning smoking in private homes. Other pressure groups will use this in future as a precedent to enforce their lifestyle beliefs on the population backed by the force of Government.
The police would have to enforce a health directive for the first time. Surely the police have far more important things to do. In any case, even with police commitment, the law will be impossible to enforce. The enforcement angle will be used as a foot in the door to banning smoking in cars where no children are present which would be an entirely different matter and not one to be undertaken lightly.
Amendment 57B is an enabling clause:
It gives the present and any future health secretary carte blanche to introduce further laws on tobacco (which could be seen as a precedent for other policy areas) without recourse to Parliament. Democracy, anyone? Surely this in itself should be sufficient to reject it. ”
We also said that Philip Davies summed up events pithily by saying:
“We are supposedly here to try to defend the freedoms of people in this country. This Government want to trample over every single one of those freedoms.”
Note that this is an enabling act so it is not law yet – but can and will be made law whenever a current or future health minister wishes.
So we have a system where one person can write legislation for 60,000,000 people without opposition, without debate among our elected members of parliament, accountable to no-one and worse, without the consent of the electorate who pay their wages: truly a dictators’ charter. I remind each and every politician that they have no power to govern without the consent of the people and definitely not by the consent of the 20 or so people who work for ASH alone!
Every day sees further encroachments on the rights of ordinary parents to raise their children, and new definitions of who are considered to be fit parents. A glance at the work of social workers tells all: they maintain if you are obese, if you drink; even moderately, if you smoke you are not fit to be a parent, if that were not the case the obese, those who drink moderately and those who smoke would not be barred from adopting or fostering children. Worse still, while they are denormalising the obese, moderate drinkers and smokers, children are still suffering real abuse both by a small number of parents and state run children’s homes where, if the press are to be believed, paedophiles are rife and all manner of abuses both physical and mental take place. The latest case to come to our attention is that of seven year old Blake Fowler who died after no less than 18 opportunities to help him were missed.
Then there are the drivers, some of whom are also parents and smokers or obese. They pay dearly for their right to own their car: they pay road fund tax that should maintain the roads they use yet grind to a halt due to poor maintenance or if a few snowflakes land on our roads. Like smokers, they pay excessive tax on petrol, treated like a cash cow, fined for slightest infraction when good advice is a better option. There are persistent offenders, of course, and they are the ones who should be fined for breaking the law, but they are a small percentage of the driving population.
As of October 1st smoking drivers will become a more lucrative cash cow, penalised by taxation for buying tobacco, penalised for smoking tobacco in their private vehicles, the same vehicles they are penalised for owning by excessive petrol taxation. It has been claimed that smoking in cars produces 11 times the amount of toxins produced in a bar before the health act 2007 prohibited smoking. All vehicles have some form of air conditioning, yet no one cares that it admits thousands of times greater pollution into their car than smoking a cigarette, and diesel fumes are claimed to be a greater source of cancer than smoking ever will be, but it is the smoking drivers who are penalised, not the oil companies.
This legislation is bad on so many levels, formulated at the behest of no more than 20 people when thousands said no, legislation that victimises the majority of the voting population, parents, drivers and smokers alike. It helps promote the senseless bullying of at least a fifth of the voting public and is worthy only of a dictatorship
These politicians have the audacity to introduce this legislation scant months before the General Election. Perhaps the time has come to reassert the fact that they govern by our consent alone by removing them from office at the ballot box
Perhaps now is the time to talk of Puppies and Politicians….
Except for Big Tobacco
A quick post to draw attention to the Government’s consultation on raw tobacco. Responses to the consultation have to be in by 30th Jan 2015!
Nothing2Declare have written about it here:
And have also given suggestions as to possible responses here: