Cigarettes under counter in Queens Speech

I've railed before about the absurd proposal to make shopkeepers put their tobacco products out of sight under the counter (go to the topic column on the right and click "smoking" for my thoughts on the subject). Just so that there is no doubt I'll say again that I don't smoke, never have done and hate the thought of it. But now that the matter has resurfaced as part of the recent 'Queens Speech' I shall have to let rip again.

Above a certain age it is perfectly legal to smoke so why is it in anyway acceptable to tell a retailer that he or she cannot display cigarettes openly. It is legal to sell them or it isn't, there's no half and half situation here, that to me is as plain as daylight. As I've noted before excess alcohol consumption can ruin your health and in the worse case scenario can lead to premature death so why are the supermarkets allowed to have their booze on public display? I've pointed out too the impracticality of keeping the fags below the counter in a busy retail environment and the cost to the shopkeeper in preparing for this nonsense legislation.

We are told that the new law will apply first to supermarkets and then to the small shops and I believe that it was Lord Mandelson who came up with the idea that small businesses shouldn't suffer initially. That bit might sound a decent concession but is it? My argument on that aspect is that how do you define a supermarket - a huge number of small shops are laid out on the supermarket principle and many of them are in groupings like Mace and Spar. So will they be included in the first group to be affected by the new law? As usual not thought through.

I have been trying to think of any precedent in this country to this draconian legislation. Now I don't know now whether it was a new law or something akin to a Code of Practice but some might point out that the magazines banned to the 'top shelf' could be an example of something similar. Not at all because whether one agrees or not about soft porn magazines being sold they are still on open display and the retailer hasn't incurred extra costs. The other one is solvents, I've no idea whether glue sniffing and suchlike is still prevalent among young people but I think that it's mandatory for ID to be produced or at least I've seen individual stores with notices to that effect.

As I mentioned in a previous rant there are specialist tobacconists about - I can think of a well known one in Exeter - what are they supposed to do? I know that the health police will point out that Canada has already gone down the route of keeping tobacco products under cover but that doesn't make it any more right. Back to my original argument: tobacco is either legal or illegal, it is as simple as that.

Smoking ban law is stupid

Although a fervent non smoker I've ranted before about the stupid approach of the authorities at trying to reduce smoking and its effects in this country. I had bridled at the suggestion that cigarettes be placed out of sight under the counter; this to me was an interference in the liberty of the shopkeeper to sell a perfectly legal product to those above a certain age in the manner he or she saw fit. Now we have a chap, a Mr Gordon Williams, being fined for smoking in the workplace. Let me fill in the background to why Mr Williams received his on the spot fine.

Gordon Williams is a painter and decorator and also a smoker. The police and local council were doing a safety spot check on vans, builders vehicles and the like at a lay-by near Aberystwyth in Wales. That was fine. Mr Williams and a companion in the van were both smoking cigarettes as they waited their turn to be checked. Mr Williams' van was his own vehicle, not a company van and he wasn't at that moment using it for work but going out to get some teabags for the wife. It was decreed by the jobsworth at the lay-by that the van was Mr Williams' place of work and that therefore he shouldn't have been smoking and was issued with an automatic penalty ticket for £30! Now I know that conflict can occur between a rule for the good of the community and a person's individual liberty but this incident just goes to show how patently ludicrous a law or its interpretation can be.

Mr Williams understandably paid up not wanting to see the fine increase to £50 because of non payment. Now though he wants to appeal over the matter; I wish him well in his endeavours.

Rest of Britain may ban cigarette displays

My last piece was about Scotland's decision to instruct traders to hide their cigarettes under the counter even though these products are perfectly legal to sell to adults. Now it seems that there is to be a consultation period after which the open display of cigarettes could be banned in the rest of Britain. I've just looked in my 'Yellow Pages' to see 5 businesses listed under 'Tobacconists - Retail'. What are they and all the general stores selling cigarettes supposed to do if a ban is implemented? Who will police all of this? To me such a law would be an infringement of human rights both for the shopkeeper and smoker, it would be great if this could be tested in the courts. As a non smoker I would love to see more and more give up the weed and fewer people take it up but this is quite definitely not the way to go.

Scotland moves forward on tobacco display ban

It was a couple of months ago on the 24th March that I wrote an angry piece about a proposal to ban open display of tobacco products in shops. I made clear at the time that I've always been a non smoker but that the suggestion that cigarettes should be kept under the counter was totally wrong. The reason put forward for this draconian measure was to stop young people being tempted to take up smoking - what a load of rubbish that is.

Putting it simply there are two options here. Either manufacture and sale of tobacco products should stop or if they are to remain legal then the retailers should make the decision as to where they go in their shops. Above a minimum age it is quite legal to buy them so why should shops be pressured into the expense and no little inconvenience of hiding them from view? I had thought that commonsense might prevail but it now looks as if the display ban is going to be implemented in Scotland. It strikes me that our decision makers haven't the first idea how shops work in this country, the small newsagent/tobacconist will be particularly affected where business depends on a large number of very small sales and fumbling under the counter to find the right fags for the customer will be a time consuming operation.

Exceesive alcohol drunk by young people can also be adictive and with the capacity to damage one's health ultimately. Perhaps the Scottish Parliament should tell Tesco and the rest to make sure that no alcoholic products are in view in their stores. The other point to stress is that it is extremely dubious that such a ban on tobacco will have much of a desired effect, it would be much better to continue with educating people not to get hooked on the dreaded weed.

Cigarettes may go under the counter

Before I start this rant let me make one thing clear: I don't smoke, never have smoked, never will smoke. When the smoking ban started last summer I rejoiced in the fact that my occasional foray into a local pub would not mean second hand smoking for me or my returning home smelling like a well used ashtray (having said that I have some understanding of those people who suggested that pubs for instance should have designated smoking areas, totally impractical I believe but nevertheless I have a little sympathy toward that viewpoint).

What has happened now though (rant begins here) is that the government have suggested the idea that pubs divest themselves of cigarette machines and that shops hide their fags under the counter. The reasoning we are told is that youngsters won't be so tempted to take to the dreaded weed. I want to know who has let the lunatics out of the asylum. The first point is that, for better or worse, the sale of tobacco products to people over a certain age is a legitimate activity. That being so surely the retailer has an absolute right to decide just where he or she puts these products. Have the thought police the remotest idea how the retail sector works? The answer appears to be "no". Go into a busy newsagent first thing in the morning and the last thing the assistant needs is to bend down and fumble around under the counter to give their customer twenty fags to go with the paper whereas at the moment they just have to reach a shelf behind them. And what about the cigarette kiosk at a supermarket? Are they supposed to have a blank wall behind them with their wares hidden from view. In a small shop or corner store there would have to be a considerable outlay too, in modifying the layout, for the hard pressed proprietor - are they supposed to pick up the tab?

We all know these days about the ruinous effects on health that smoking can bring. Drink alcohol to excess and one's life can be shortened. Using the same skewed logic then a supermarket should have kiosks with all their liquor out of sight and out of mind. I have seen no convincing evidence to suggest that young people seeing tobacco products on a shelf are any more likely to indulge than if they knew they were hidden under the counter. As for cigarette machines in pubs surely these establishments have suffered more than enough without this prohibition as well.

I was surprised to see that David Cameron has stated that the idea is one worth considering. Get into the higher echelons in politics and it seems reality and common sense are left behind.

Smoking ban

From a purely personal perspective I'm pleased that the smoking ban in public places in England came into force on Sunday 1st July. I guess I've been fortunate in never having had a desire to smoke but I'm very conscious of the smell resulting from the habit and am increasingly concerned about the possible health effects from inadvertently inhaling other people's smoke.

Much has been made by some of the smoking lobby of supposedly another infringement of people's liberties. But what about the rights of the non smoking fraternity? It had been suggested that pubs could choose whether to be 'smoking' or 'non-smoking' so you had a choice. This might work in a town but not in a great many villages where there is just the one pub. Yes I realise that for many smokers who regard a fag to go with their pint in the same way I think of bacon and eggs - just isn't right if one of those magic ingredients is missing, being deprived of their fix spoils their drinking experience. But this is one instance where I think those concerned with health and wellbeing have got it right.

On the minus side this is yet one more law that is demanding on those who have to administer it. In this case it is our hard pressed councils; will this mean more staff are required? And I'm sure that there will be some anomalies so we can expect some clever solicitors exploiting loopholes. With so much complex legislation around these days it is inevitable that some folk will get caught out even though they don't intend to break the law.