The cost of the No-Smoking Ban.
The Croydon Guardian has an interesting Freedom of Information response this week.
Wandsworth Council invested £174,785 on employing and training staff to enforce the smoking ban. A further £32,445 went on producing ‘no-smoking’ signs, conducting a survey to find out how many businesses would be affected and ‘producing a range of publicity materials so that the new legislation was fully understood’.
Over £200,000! Is this replicated all across the country?
Wandsworth has no fines, prosecutions or penalties to show for this expenditure (good job too, I don’t have enough energy for another ‘Nick Hogan’ campaign!) but taken to task for this waste of money justifies it to their local paper as its OK – ‘the money came from a central government grant’.
No, it’s not OK. Central Governments Grants aren’t some sort of magical money tree, they are comprised of taxes on hard working members of your community – and its not ‘OK’ to squander it enforcing an unjust ban that doesn’t appear to have been flouted in your area.
?
June 16, 2010 at 11:08
-
There is only one way to recoup the losses of second hand smoke fairy
tales. Vote them all out, for gross incompetence, then sue both them and the
extortionists lobby groups hired by governments for every cent they own.
There is an old shell game that was once very popular with the street con
artists, until the local constabulary cracked down. The same methods of bait
and switch have been used by the ASH centric fanatics to promote the divisions
of communities internationally. And the financial rewards enticed by coercing
elected officials with emotional blackmail to pay, trillions now, into the
promotion of nicotine patches and chewing gum, are legendary.
Here is the rub.
If you take all the health ailments known to man and test to see if they
are associated to those who smoke, in more significant numbers than in those
who don’t smoke, you find the arguments against smoking.
All the rest are obviously associated to non-smokers and you categorize
those as the effects of second hand smoke, with an assumed universal exposure.
A win win no matter how you judge it.
The fanatical mind always finds a way to promote self sanctimony. Money is
the primary motivation here however.
You have all been taken to the cleaners and only self denial and shame,
will hold you back from demanding the prosecutions of the lot of them.
- June 15, 2010 at 17:53
- June 15, 2010 at 14:52
-
Smuggling.
They caused that with their exorbitant taxes.
My
guesstimate, half the tobacco products consumed in the UK smuggled or
purchased abroad.
My other guesstimate is the 25% adult smokers is
wrong.
Why?
That figure is based on ligitimate sales only.
Amount of
adult smokers given up since the ban = O (may have possibly
increased)
Success rate of NHS smoking cessation officers = O
The cost
to the taxpayer = A bloody fortune
The cost to the hospitality industry =
disaster
The cost to the smoker within society = demonisation
,aparthied
Only fools, bigots and those complicite with Pharma or non jobs in the anti
smoking industry think it’s a good idea now.
- June 15,
2010 at 13:39
-
WTF?
Tobacco Control Officers?!? Employed by the local council??
- June 15, 2010 at 13:54
-
It’s not the “Tobacco Control Officer” that wtfs me, as that’s typical of
council HR department bollocks-speak – it’s the
- June 15, 2010 at 17:05
-
When did you ever see a non-job advertised for less than
- June 15, 2010 at 13:12
-
Like pretty well all of the control-freakery & excess of jobsworths
imposed on us since 1997, this has absolutely bugger all to do with public
health, or any genuine concern for our welfare.
It’s all about control:- putting us in our place, keeping us there and
conditioning us to unthinking immediate obedience.
I would like to remind these sphincters that they work for me, and that I
am their boss.
I’d like to remind them with something big, heavy and very very pointy…
- June 15, 2010 at 13:05
-
Re: above revelation:
Quite agree with you of course, and while we’re on the topic, I would also
like to reiterate that you and Old Holborn deserve a bloggers’ medal of
galantry for your Nick Hogan campaign.
Would like to make the observation that, being resident in Croydon until a
short time ago, I can testify that the Croydon Guardian is your typical
lefty-supporting rag. The letters pages are given mostly to the Labour
councillors to make fake whinges in, the paper has an ENTIRE page devoted to
“Green Business” and they do their utmost to devote their sloppy reportage to
discreditting anything right of centre.
Given their editorial stance, I am intrigued that they choose to highlight
an unpopular socialist policy. Although I notice that this same story was
posted in their sister paper the “Wandsworth Guardian”.
It would be interesting to know if the paper also sent these FOI requests
to all other councils in the area. (Or was it the Tax Payers’ Alliance? The
article wasn’t clear.)
- June 15, 2010 at 12:57
-
- June 15, 2010 at 12:38
-
lt is certainly replicated in my city. Recently they appointed a Tobacco
Control Officer with a salary of
- June 15,
2010 at 13:20
-
“The Tobbaco Control Office has vowed to crackdown on
smuggling…”
Isn’t that the job of the HMRC/UKBA..?
- June 15, 2010 at 16:02
-
Yes, but why have one load of overpaid state numpties when you can have
two? Or better still three or four?
Just keep ashakin’ that ole money tree.
-
June 15, 2010 at 17:16
-
“The results of which were that many cigarette pacets were not from the
UK so smuggling was to blame.”
So you don’t have any EU immigrants then?
- June 15, 2010 at 12:34
-
Miss Raccoon:
This is very embarassing for my cousin Clinton “The Bill” Parakeet as you
have shown an embarassing photo of him on your heading.
He wishes to issue the following statement:
“I would like you to know
that when that photo was taken of me, I did not inhale at that time and that I
did not have sexual relations with that owner’s hand . Y’all take care
naah”
- June 15, 2010 at 12:59
-
Daedalus – I’m surprised that you aren’t more embarassed by this relative
of yours…….
https://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/gordon-brown-says-c-word-whos-a-naughty-boy-then/
- June 15, 2010 at 13:14
-
I’m squawkless! Would you believe me if I said that, as you can tell
from its plumage and beak, that the specimen in your link is of the
species “Cockatoo Cocciupiae Gordoomis”. They are nasty, useless creatures
who bring shame to the Psittaciformes order and I completely disown them.
Please ignore!
{ 16 comments }