Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Tough restrictions on cigarette sales planned by health minister

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 February 2009
PLANS to ban cigarette vending machines and tobacco displays in shops were set out by the Scottish Government today.
The sweeping changes to tobacco sales rules were revealed in a move aimed to protect future generations from smoking-related disease.

Public health minister Shona Robison said: "The health risks associated with smoking are both enormous and well d
ocumented.

"But stopping smoking is hard and the vast majority of smokers I've spoken to wish that they'd never started.

"So that's why the measures in this Bill are aimed at stopping children starting to smoke in the first place – by making it less accessible and less attractive to them."

The move is part of wider changes contained in the new Tobacco and Primary Medical Service (Scotland) Bill, which include a registration scheme for retailers and granting trading standards officers the power to fine retailers selling tobacco to under-18s.

Retailers who continue to break the law will be banned from selling tobacco.

The Bill will also close a loophole to prevent the privatisation of GP surgeries.

Ms Robison continued: "Point-of-sale marketing is a powerful tool and I believe it's totally inappropriate for cigarettes to be promoted in this way.

"Similarly, I believe there is no place in a modern Scotland for cigarette vending machines – we wouldn't allow any other dangerous product to be sold in this way.

"Too many people have already watched loved ones suffer and die as a result of smoking-related illnesses. I'm determined that we must do all we can to protect future generations."

Retailers warned of the high cost to small shopkeepers and said the ban on displays will increase the fascination with smoking among young people.

John Drummond, chief executive of the Scottish Grocers' Federation, said: "The Scottish Government's argument that tobacco displays encourage young people to smoke is simplistic and immature."

Shopkeepers may have to spend between £5,000 and £10,000 to comply with the new rules, he said. Government cash would be better spent stopping sales to under-18s.

Mr Drummond added: "Scottish Grocers' Federation is concerned a ban is more likely to increase young people's fascination in tobacco and could encourage smokers, who do not see tobacco on display in legitimate stores, to buy from rogue traders who are prepared to sell illicit products."



The full article contains 393 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 February 2009 11:01 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Tobacco
 
1

,

26/02/2009 11:06:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 11:12:42
There is no need whatsoever for this legislation. It is blatent discrimination and will cause untold inconvenience for all concerned.

As a pipe smoker, I need to be able to see what tobacco is on offer so that I can make a decision on what I might wish to try. It is totally brain-dead to introduce this stupid legislation.

And what happens with tobacconists? Do they need to keep their entire stock under wraps?

Robison has been taking a leaf out of MacAskill's book of stupid ideas on this one. Salmond should sack them both before they have the chance to do any more damage.
3

bill-alba,

fife 26/02/2009 11:20:03
well done shona..hopefully the proposals will work.
4

,

26/02/2009 11:23:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

english charlie,

26/02/2009 11:45:00
Recent figures showed the number of young people smoking in Scotland had returned to a level last seen almost 10 years ago.

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi.....911233.stm

The anti-smoking propaganda has been a great advert for the tobacco industry.
6

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 11:56:55
Ms Sturgeon is mistaken if she thinks she can reduce youth smoking to 23 per cent in 3 years. She is more likely to achieve a situation where both adults and youth just stop bothering with tobacconists altogether and buy it off street corners. That will achieve prohibition in all but name.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/health/youth-smoking-up-despite-ban-$1255914.htm
7

Rosscobhoy,

26/02/2009 11:58:10
Let the smokers smoke and die young. Our pubs will smell better(try drinking with a guiness drinker these days, its not pretty) and they put billions of tax revenue into the system that they probably won't take back out.
8

Tris,

26/02/2009 12:04:25
We need to get through to people that if you smoke you will stink like a filthy ashtray, your breath will smell, your clothes, your hair, everything about you will be repulsive. Your teeth will be brown, your face will be wrinkled and you may well pay out huge amounts of money to die painfully of cancer or heart disease.

I know that some older people have smoked all their lives and wouldn't want to, even if they could, give it up. Fair enough. They may argue that they already hae the wrinkles and the illnesses, and at their age it doesn't matter too much if they smell of stale smoke, but surely no one can think that it is a bad idea to make it as difficult as possible for young people to take it up.

If for no other reason than it is handing money to the government to give to RBS and Lloyds, or paint portraits of Margaret Thatcher.
9

ChrisC,

SouthWest 26/02/2009 12:05:52
Is this thought through Government policy or simply a carbon copy of the wishes of unelected ASH?
Maybe they will be as successful as their previous demands ----- smoking rates UP, heart attack admissions UP, social venue closures UP, hospitality unemployment UP, social isolation UP ..........
10

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 26/02/2009 12:10:26
Many other jurisdictions around the world have gone through the exercise of banning "power walls" in shops and the outright ban of tobacco sales in chemists. Plus the tightening up of sales to kiddies.
After the initial fury from the special interests, believe me, it works.
So suck it up and get used to it. Considering Scotland's mortality rate, the SNP once again is smokin'.
Can a pub ban be far behind? Here's hoping.
11

Rosscobhoy,

26/02/2009 12:13:41
#10

No politician in their right mind would attempt to ban pubs. It is a certainty to get you voted out at the first possible opportunity. Whether it is for the good of the nation or not, not one trough dweller would be that daft.
12

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 12:17:34
#8, Tris.

You sound, just a tad, fanatical. Which other, personal freedoms, do you wish to withdraw?

No matter, as any sane person knows, prohibition is not very good at achieving its aims.
13

Glenda,

blah 26/02/2009 12:27:08
#2 Alternative Fuel Head.

You just talk such drivel......go away please.
14

IainA,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 12:30:28
Well, if you can't fix the credit crunch, can't charge income tax, can't organise a tram, can't do anything about crime or education or housing or drugs, well, why not ban visible displays of cigarettes. It cheap, it's quick and whether it's effective or not is entirely without relevance, you're seen to be doing something. And it distracts from the prospect of unemployment and eviction.

Tough on smoking, tough on the causes of smoking.

This legislation brought to you by ASH, purveyors of inaccurate and misleading statistics since 1971
15

an interested party,

26/02/2009 12:39:31
never seen an advert for illegal drugs in my life yet more than 23% of people take them

i wonder if banning cigarette advertising will have a similar effect
16

IainA,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 12:43:23
#16 an interested party

You have actually, they're called government information films

17

Nitro,

26/02/2009 12:49:16
The only results of this stupid idea will be increased rates of smoking, shopkeepers going bankrupt and people smoking counterfeit cigarettes with unknown contents.

This legislation should be stopped in its tracks and anyone involved with it should have a serious rethink, it certainly will not discourage youngsters infact it will be a challenge for them.

Their mission is not to hide tobacco from youngsters etc it is to eradicate tobbaco completly, smokers you have been warned make sure you make a stand.

As for personal comments against smokers they would not be allowed against any other section of society and should not be tolerated under any circumstances.
18

Rosscobhoy,

26/02/2009 12:56:15
#18

I don't see the sense in erradicating tobacco. Other than the fact we grow very little of it, the government takes in a fortune in tax income from the sale of it. Why would they really want to ban it?
19

Tris,

26/02/2009 13:05:37
12. Nope, I'm not fanatical. And I don't want to take away people's freedoms.

I say, if you wish to smoke, you can. Why not?

But we know a lot about smoking. Who amongst us would seriously encourage our kids to smoke, knowing how much damamge it does to their health; how much pain there is when lungs no longer work, or when circulation is affected and legs have to be taken off, how people with gum and throat cancer can't eat.

There are risks in anything that we do; sports, travel, work, whatever. But along with the health risks go the facts that no one can really deny. You look yellow and old and wrinkled before your time, and you smell like an old ashtray.

I don't know whether any of what the government is proposing will change people's habits, but it has to be better than sitting back and doing nothing.

NO freedoms are being interfered with. They are not going to make smoking illegal. In a way it is a continuation of what the UK government, and governments in most of Europe have done...... putting £5 tax on a product with a real cost of about 50p.
20

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 13:09:08
#19, Rosscobhoy.

There's more money to be made on the Black Market.

Of course there are interested parties in outlawing tobacco.
21

Rob Simpson,

26/02/2009 13:13:54
20# "NO freedoms are being interfered with."

Really? Shopkeepers deciding how to display a legal product on their own premises isn't a freedom. Or is it just a freedom you don't care about?

What's laughable about this is there's no evidence to suggest it'll result in any reduction in the smoking rates (in fact NZ decided not to push ahead with their own version for that very reason) and may make smoking MORE appealing to young people.
22

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/02/2009 13:17:09
If you make cigarettes ''bad'' then that will attract teenagers far more effectively than any advertising campaign. This is just stupid.
23

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 26/02/2009 13:20:38
All credit to the SNP for taking this forward. Now let us tackle alcohol abuse.
24

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 13:24:42
#24 WUM.

Perhaps if we were to tackle Forum abuse, we may have a better standard of debate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But there again WUM, you may disagree.
25

Otis B. Driftwood,

26/02/2009 13:24:51
20.
"NO freedoms are being interfered with"
(Well not mine, anyway)
"Nope, I'm not fanatical"

Really?
26

english charlie,

26/02/2009 13:26:06
#20. You must learn from ASH how to phrase your comments. You have forgotten to insert all the 'mays' and 'coulds'. I have been smoking for about 55 years and in very good health and the longest living persons were/are smokers. I find that pubs smell worse now because some non-smokers talk out of their backsides, at both ends.
27

claire,

ayrshire 26/02/2009 13:42:37
I think Shona has more on her plate than tobacco advertising! She is probably on big tobaccos payroll as they couldn't get as much publicity if they were paying thousands on prime time TV!! Well done Shona! The kids don't buy from shops, they buy on the black market! Shona needs to think about the obesity and drinking epedemics. Banning fast food and buckfast will make sure we all live to be very old then hey, who is going to pay for all the 'ever so healthy' altzeimers/demential people? I'm sure she will have brought in the firing squal for all those drinkers, smokers and obese individuals by then, staffed by the 'holier than thou' residents of the moral high ground. We are all living in a police state and we should all be very afraid. Whatever anyone does - smoking, eating or drinking, the sound of jack boots is never far behind.
28

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 26/02/2009 13:45:41
25

Frank, shame on you. For once, I am being serious.
29

Luke Skywalker,

26/02/2009 14:00:23
Claire at 28. I assume you are horribly obese, smell foul and are too drunk to comminicate coherently. If that is what you wish - fine by me. It is a free world. However, please do not turn up on the doorstep of a hospital financed by me when your cancer starts and expect free treatment.
30

IainGlasgow,

26/02/2009 14:02:51
#14

The trams were organised fine. The only problem just now is with a German contractor trying to wrangle more money to offset its losses on other projects. If they couldn't give an accurate quote to begin with its their fault and they probably shouldn't have been awarded the contract when Scottish construction companies are struggling to survive.
31

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 26/02/2009 14:03:00
30

Luke, while I agree with your sentiments, I cannot agree with your spelling - "comminicate" coherently? Sounds like a dodgy Frenchman.
32

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 14:15:30
#30, LS.

Aren't you the sanctimonious cretin!!!

Obviously, you and yours - and maybe, not even yours, are the only ones who pays taxes!!!
33

claire,

26/02/2009 14:15:50
Luke, for the record I am 8st, healthy, dont drink much and only smoke 6 fags a day! I have never had chest problems in my life and at 43 that aint bad! I wear clean clothes and have a bath every day and certinly don't smell! My point was that the government are stamping all over all of us. You don't need to pay your taxes on my account Luke but don't expect me to fund your hospital treatment! I pay enough to the government by way of taxes on my cigarettes and am more than entitled to amy hospital treatment I will need in the future!
34

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 14:19:42
#29, WUM.

I apologise.

Tell me, do you approve of the move towards the prohibition of smoking?

If so, would you advocate the same approach for alcohol?
35

,

26/02/2009 14:33:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
36

Hugh Roscombe,

26/02/2009 14:36:39
Luke's a puke. Best ignore.
37

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 14:36:41
Opponents of independence used to say that an independent Scotland would be a dreary, miserable, puritanical place.

It seems they were right.
38

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 14:47:59
The Health & Sport Committee has its own agenda on tobacco all worked out. Don't expect to be listened to if you disagree with it. You will be identified as a pro-smoking lobbyist. If you are not with them you are against them.
39

BillyC,

Paisley 26/02/2009 14:49:45
Funny the health service was set up as an insurance against people becoming ill through no fault of their own.

Now it is dyng on its feet because of the type of people on here who think that they can do what they want because they pay for it.

It is time to privatise the NHS if for anything else just to show these numpties just how much everyone subsidises everyone else when it comes to the likes of the NHS. If everyone had to pay for their own health they would get a shock how much it would cost and just look at America where the people who can even afford health insurance are being conned out of treatment by the insurance companies.

If adults were not smoking then the kids would not be smoking. It is also a laugh to see smokers and drinkers slagging off junkies as if somehow they are any different to them. That's it just keep encouraging the kids to be as stupid as yourself - all these people clogging up the wards are nothing to do with your drug!
40

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/02/2009 14:58:18
40 Actually obesity is a greater scourge than tobacco, and smokers pay for their treatment via all the taxes we pay, in actual fact we subsidise non-smoking lard-butts all the time. But people don't find it acceptable to hurl insults at fatties, and yet they do at smokers. Funny that.
41

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 14:59:39
BillyC

there is no evidence that more is spent on smokers' healthcare then the revenue they bring in. Do you have the evidence that clogged up wards have nothing to do with alcohol/genetics/old age/industrial pollution/sheer bad luck?

'If adults were not smoking then the kids would not be smoking.' But adults do smoke, and there is absolutely no point in designing a new world order based on non-smoking. Have all these politicians dropped their tobacco related pension portfolios yet? http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16867847&method=full&siteid=66633&headline=pensions-tobacco-link-probe-name_page.html

42

Tris,

26/02/2009 15:00:31


22. Well you have a point there. But there are many freedoms that are denied to us for one reason or another. Surely if this stops kids killing themselves because they think it's cool to smoke, it's not the end of the world to lose the right to display tobacco.

I'm not an abolitionist; I have no problems with people smoking (although I prefer not to share their smoke), but I've seen people dying as a result of smoking, and for that matter excessive drinking, and it most certainly is not a pretty sight.

I'd like to see what we can do to discourage kids from doing what so many older people have done. At 16,17, 18 you never think of the day that you will have lung cancer.

43

Tris,

26/02/2009 15:05:31
#41. Again I take your point Observer. Smokers pay a lot of taxes and far more than the cost of their cancer care will ever be. People who eat excessively don't, and yet already cost a HUGE amount, in particular with diabetes treatments.

Personally I don't call smokers or fat people names, but I wouldn't want my kids to smoke or get fat.
44

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 15:07:19
#43

Hiding tobacco won't make kids think more about lung cancer. It's only wishful thinking that makes people think that kids will lose interest in a forbidden fruit. Also it is bound to empower illegal traders because in time even adults will lose the association between tobacco and lawful purchasing. They will just look elsewhere, and rogue traders will be only too happy to give them a better deal than they would have got in the shops anyway.
45

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 15:13:53
#11:

"No politician in their right mind would attempt to ban pubs"

No politician in their right mind would consider banning smoking in pubs.

No politician in their right mind would consider banning cigarette machines

No politician in their right mind would consider banning tobacco advertising

No politician in their right mind would consider raising the legal tobacco purchase age to 18

Do you see a pattern here? All of these things were being said by the vast majority not that long ago. Therefore, we HAVE to deduce that the country is being run by politicians who are not in their right minds---but we knew that anyway didn't we?

46

,

26/02/2009 15:14:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

BillyC,

Paisley 26/02/2009 15:27:54
Ah the usual drivel about smokers etc who pay more than they ever would need to pay for treatment. Go watch Sicko by Michael Moore where people are having to sell their home to pay for cancer treatment and it still is not enough and this being rich people who end up being pennyless as a result - and this is just one example.

It is not just about cancer, with smoking there are also the other things like heart, lungs, stroke and circulatory problems and they usually end up with a combination of these.

The I pay more in taxes brigade also imagine that fully equipped and manned doctors surgeries, hospitals, ambulances etc just miraculously appear out of thin air when it comes to costs.

Lets privatise the NHS and we will see how smart everyone is then after all thats the way it is heading because of these people.
www.paisleyexpressions.blogspot.com
48

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 15:28:23
Glenda, Tris and all those who are in favour of this ridiculous charade...

Here's a thought... Over the years we have been (falsely) led to believe that any form of smoking is lethal, including if you smell smoke but have never smoked in your life.

Are they really trying to tell as that smoking the occasional cigar without inhaling it is just as potentially harmful as chain smoking Capstan Full Strength and deeply inhaling each puff? Actually, they are. They are even telling us that being in the same room as someone smoking said occasional cigar is as dangerous as being the Capstan smoker.

Plainly---as even a nursery school kid could tell you---is patently ridiculous. Whilst I accept that the Capstan smoker is putting his/her health in jeopardy, if you try to tell me that the occasional cigar smoker is in danger of harming his health then I will think you are talking from where the sun don't shine. If you then try to tell me that hanging around in a room with the cigar smoker is dangerous, I will call for you to be sectioned on the grounds of clinical insanity.

Robison and her ilk should never be allowed anywhere near a position of power. She simply doesn't understand basic facts. Salmond really does need to sack her---along with her loopy soul mate, MacAskill.
49

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 15:33:30
# BillyC.

If I were you I'd stop drinking that Paisley water. It's makin' yi mental, so it is!!!

Billy, BTW, where does the money for the NHS come from?

Billy, do you pay your whack?

Billy, would you be better off if the NHS was privatised?
50

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/02/2009 15:35:38
44 I don't particularly want my child to smoke either, but I am quite aware that as soon as you take measures to try and control people's behaviour, especially young people, by telling them something is bad for them, and trying to limit their access to it, it will make them determined to do ''it'' whatever that is.

Obesity is probably linked with smoking in a way, like many young girls I started smoking because it was ''cool'' and it kept you thin. That's probably still true now, you've got role models like Kate Moss puffing away like a chimney. When you are up against influences like that, hiding cigarettes or banning advertising won't make any difference.
51

Ewan Randall,

26/02/2009 15:38:04
Who could disagree with the Scottish Government considering this to be an important health issue?

As an important health issue has it not created enough concern over its use for measures to be taken to reduce the nation’s consumption?

If tobacco had to be considered along side all other consumer products that were ingested would it not have already been banned for its carcinogenic properties?

If these things are so, could it not be said that the measures the Scottish government have chosen for reducing the use and dependency on tobacco are an ideal progression in the lowering of health risks to the Scottish people?
52

Luke Skywalker,

26/02/2009 15:41:49
32 WUM. I stand corrected and do appreciate your assistance. My sincere apologies. Now, please could you correct Frank 33's muddling of singular and plural. Thank you.
53

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 15:49:37
#52

If by 'measures to be taken to reduce the nation's consumption' you mean the smoking ban, that is not why it was passed. It was passed in the interests of employees to protect them from the alleged threat of secondary tobacco smoke.

You are dealing with things as they might have been, not as they are. Tobacco is not banned, because the government needs the revenue (especially in the current climate when other interests are failing). If government benefits from the revenue, it should look after the providers of such revenue.

Tell me why this measure will persuade people to buy tobacco from a shop, rather than more cheaply from a rogue trader who will give them twice as much tobacco for the weekly budget than they get at present.

No, encouraging illicit markets in tobacco or alcohol is not a progressive measure in the interests of people's health.
54

,

26/02/2009 16:00:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
55

Westfield Bairns,

Falkirk 26/02/2009 16:10:12
I think the SNP are quite right to introduce these rules on smoking. Scotland has a problem regarding unhealthy habits and i'm not immune to this, however if you don't legislate most people will, unfortunatly, eat,drink and smoke themselves to death its human nature. oh and another thing anything that curbs the tobacco industry gets my vote, this industry would quite happily get your 4 year old hooked on smoking. I smoked for many years until recently
56

,

26/02/2009 16:16:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
57

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 16:20:08
#56:

"I smoked for many years until recently..."

Maybe you should consider taking it up again...

I do not want legislation. I want the freedom to make my own choices and the permission to live with the consequences.

#52:

"Who could disagree with the Scottish Government considering this to be an important health issue?"

Me.

It isn't a health issue at all. It's nothing short of nazi bigotry. It is un-neccesary, discriminatory, causes inconvenience and is the product of fanatical lunacy.

When the government stop taking excessive amounts of money from smokers then I will believe that they actually want to see people give up. At the moment they are doing very nicely thankyou, from us all whilst vilifying and marginalising us. That is NOT acceptable.

With the current levels of taxation borne by the average smoker, they have PAID for the right to light up where and when they wish to do so.

Robison should be sacked. Pure and simple.

58

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 16:20:22
spot on 55 ...

The ASH Nazis can swivel !

I smoke occasionally and less so these days and I find the hysteria surrounding it laughable. Between Cigs H&S, sexism and racism these are akin to the wild and non sensical witch hunts of the 17th century.

There is a very bad case of out of control herd instinct regarding these issues and a sad reminder that very few people actually have minds of their own.

If you feel so precious
59

heavensentmum,

26/02/2009 16:21:08
Ban the vending machines they cost a fortune and you don't even get a full packet.
60

IainA,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 16:24:46
#41 observer

We're easier to outrun
61

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 16:33:56
#60:

Now that's a good point.

If they had been campaigning to force cigarette vending machine operators to use packs of 20 and charge no more than a small percentage higher then supermarket prices, I would be right behind it.
62

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 16:38:48
Sorry - con't ....

To the so called health brigade who are so eager to tell everyone else what to do ..... If you feel so precious that you or your kids can't take a little whiff of cigarette smoke every now and again - perhaps you should take a look at what they put in your water, your food, the 200 or so carcinogens in exhaust fumes or the fact that BBQ fumes are some 30 times more carcinogenic than cig smoke ... etc etc ...

Cig smoke is the least of your worries you fools ... trust me !

Oh ... and get a life !
63

Eve,

Scotland 26/02/2009 16:45:58
#2 Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head: Well ask the shop assistant to show you whats availble. It's an easy question for some one to ask. Thats if your no out of puff, I supose.

How many tobacconists do you know of in Scotland? And do you really think that non-smoker adults, children and youths would go in to such a shop? I would geuss it was highly unlikely that people under the age of 40 would go in to such a shop.

The idea is that ciggarts and tobaco are not advertised in any form to young people, who are curouse about certain things. Smoking I geuss whould be one of them. We don't want the youths to become adicted to this habbit, that will drain there finacial resourses and rect their health.
64

BillyC,

Paisley 26/02/2009 16:51:22
#50 Frank McBride

Where does the money for the NHS come from?

The money comes from everyone who pays tax, NI or who buys things with vat added, company profits etc.

Do you pay your whack?
Paid my whack from since I left school in 1974 less years for college, university etc until 2001 where after an accident at work I have been a regular user of the NHS. After 7 years of wishing for something to be done I am hoping that at 1.30pm tomorrow I will fnally have word that they will be able to operate on my back as it is affecting legs also (To be truthful I am apprehensive about it as well).

Would I be better off if the NHS was privatised?
No I would not and neither would anybody else. That is exactly my argument. We all get far more out of the NHS than we put in, we all subsidise each other. The tax that everyone pays does not just go to pay for the NHS, it goes to pay for everything.

The vast majority of the people could not afford health care before the set up of the NHS and if it was privatised it would not take long for this to be true again.

It is about time the people decided what kind of society they want for their kids because it is this selfish "I pay for this so I should be able to do what I want" attitude that is creating the sick and selfish society that we now have.
65

heavensentmum,

26/02/2009 16:53:18
You set out with good intentions get a couple of drinks down you neck and then the start to tease you. You know you want to, you know you will enjoy it, how can you not fancy me. Then when you give into temptation you have to pay through the nose for less and have to go out into the bl***y cold to smoke them and wake up full of regrets in the morning.

66

,

26/02/2009 17:03:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 17:06:19
#65, BillyC.

If you read your own final paragraph, you may realise why I pulled you up.

Yes, we do live in a sick and selfish society. I wonder if that may, in some way, be associated with zealotry?
68

english charlie,

26/02/2009 17:33:09
'The pregnancy rate among under-16s has risen 6.4% in one year'. I remember when it was a fag behind the bike shed!
69

,

26/02/2009 17:40:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 17:46:50
Eve:

You don't smoke do you? As a result, you don't fully grasp the fact that different tobacco products have different characteristics. It's not a case of asking the assistant, I need to be able to see what is available and browse---especially when buying cigars or pipe tobacco.

Fair enough, the cigarette smoker who always smokes the same brand come what may won't have an issue with this, but for those of us who like to be a bit more adventurous, this stupid legislation will just be a complete pain in the derriere and will just cause frustration.

I know of several tobacconists in Scotland as a matter of fact. Unless you are a keen smoker, you will probably not even notice them yourself. They often sell other products such as shortbread etc and there is no reason why kids couldn't go into them. It is still legal for a kid to buy Dad a box of pipe cleaners, a nice ashtray, lighter or pipe for his birthday. I really don't see what your point is here.

Dedicated tobacconists should be exempt this daft legislation in any case. What will the next move be? To force tobacconists to black out their shop windows in th esame way that "adult" shops are forced to? Not even bookies have to do this now and there is far more upset and hardship around that arises from excessive gambling than will ever arise from excessive smoking. Go Figure...
71

BillyC,

Paisley 26/02/2009 17:51:45
#68 frank mcbride

The NHS is not going to survive if people do not wake up and start taking responsibility for themselves. There is no difference between drinkers, smokers and junkies they are all taking poisonous addictive substances and the reason things are getting worst with all of these is because of the irresponsible adults who are passing this off as cool to the young.

It is these zealous smokers, drinkers and other drug takers, as well as the greedy and lazy, that are going to cause the privatisation of the NHS, no one else. It is these present generations that do not know what life was like without the NHS and it is they who will be making sure that their kids don't have it!
72

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/02/2009 18:01:23
72 The NHS is not going to be privatised because of smokers. In case you haven't noticed, the generation that fought the war and were the creators of the NHS all smoked like lums. It survived. What pressures the NHS faces are largely because people are living longer and there are new treatments. Can I give you a newsflash - non-smokers die every day. You are not going to eradicate cancers and heart attacks and strokes and and all the other myriad of illnesses that smokers AND non-smokers die from. Giving up smoking does not bestow eternal life, maybe if it did that would stop people smoking, but it doesn't.

73

Glenda,

blah 26/02/2009 18:11:30
Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head......you never give up, do you?

Please waddle off back to the ashtray you obviously live in.
74

Itchy,

26/02/2009 18:12:04
#65 "The vast majority of the people could not afford health care before the set up of the NHS and if it was privatised it would not take long for this to be true again. "

Translated into plain English, this means that a free lunch is possible.

"It is about time the people decided what kind of society they want for their kids because it is this selfish "I pay for this so I should be able to do what I want" attitude that is creating the sick and selfish society that we now have."

This is health fascism and precisely what is wrong with Scotland.
75

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/02/2009 18:19:15
#72, BillyC.

The thing that MAY lead to the privatisation of the NHS is Corporate greed, but this can only happen with our consent.

A major problem with the NHS is the structure imposed upon it by the Thatcher Govt. which replaced frontline workers with managers; and we all know that managers produce empires. So more pen-pushers, fewer frontline workers and less new equipment.

To adopt your solution, we would have to prohibit any pollutant producer, most additives and ensure that everyone ate a "perfectly balanced" diet. All enforced by legislation.

That scenario, BillyC, is the logical conclusion of your zealotry.

Is that what you are advocating?
76

Ewan Randall,

26/02/2009 19:26:37
(#54) – (Belinda-2) – Did you or did you not read the article at the top of this page?

Did you or did you not understand what the article was about at the top of the page?

As the article at the top of the page was about plans to ban cigarette vending machines and tobacco displays in shops, would it not of been prudent of you to have assumed my post was in some way at least in part connected?

What makes you believe I was talking about a smoking ban?

Do you believe it is the alleged threat of secondary tobacco smoke which makes unborn babies stop breathing for 5 minutes when a pregnant woman inhales from her cigarette?

What makes you believe the Scottish government is trying to persuade people to buy tobacco?

Isn’t one of the main reasons for the planned ban to make the selling of tobacco less visible to children?
77

Zyskandar A Jaimot,

Orlando, Fl., USA 26/02/2009 19:31:24
Within the flames are spirits*
(*canto xxvl, line 50, The Inferno of Dante)

I remember what the 60's were before things began
To change reverberations of a jukebox

Between my legs poems pulsing in my head like
Smoky suffering false patterns of Carnaby street

Fashions worn everywhere as the easy-influenced men
Sported Nehru jackets into bars where I would hang-out

At first innocent the girl-next-door
Looking like a virgin until I learned to smoke

Then waiting like some predator trying to look sexy
Sullen dangerous done up in shiny smooth leather

Common and easy but cunning as any Cleopatra
Lighting up cig after cig making it with

Intoxicatingly eager boys or men as whiskers tickled
My ear while tobacco speckled lips made prints

Of fire down my neck to aroused n^ipples
Allowing them to continue their moaning about

"How hot I was - how turned on they were" and I could
Feel their burning so that we couldn't wait

Rearing like wild horses from stale sheets never
Laundered filled with sweat screaming

Nicotine addicted nights watching us both as if
I was a magician's girl observing our act knowing the secret

And when they were spent discarded like
Crushed butts still glowing thick painted with my

Lipstick where every flame enfolds me with
A forlorn trust that burns I remove a cigarette from

The pack holding it by the tip savoring the sex
That brings out the taste of illicitness planting

It wantonly in my mouth even now defying prohibition
Hoping for the groovy tunes to fire me up again.


© By Zyskandar A. Jaimot On 3/22/2007 7:51:18 AM










78

Ewan Randall,

26/02/2009 19:35:24
(#58) - (Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head) - With a one in two chance of smokers getting cancer from smoking how can smoking not be a health issue?

As the Scottish government isn't taking money from smokers then does this mean you believe that they actually want to see people give up?
79

english charlie,

26/02/2009 20:22:14
Ewan. What comics do you read?
'unborn babies stop breathing for 5 minutes when a pregnant woman inhales from her cigarette' and
'With a one in two chance of smokers getting cancer from smoking'.
How did so many babies survive in the baby boom years of the 1950s and 1960s? Only about 6% of smokers get lung cancer and even non-smokers get lung cancer.
80

Eve,

Scotland 26/02/2009 20:38:31
#71 Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head: "there is no reason why kids couldn't go into them. It is still legal for a kid to buy Dad a box of pipe cleaners, a nice ashtray, lighter or pipe for his birthday."

No offence ment but; What decade are you living in? The 1920's, 30's, 40's? Judging by that stament, I would geuss pre-1980's. Lets be honiset here the images of "dad" smoking a pipe died a few degades ago!!!

Your the first person who has made that stament to me and talking about present date. At primarry school, we're told about thoes kind gifts were popular in the Victorain times and the 1920's!!

"To force tobacconists to black out their shop windows in th esame way that "adult" shops are forced to?" Sorry I haven't seen many blacked out windows resently, Anne Summers and another shop don't remeber the name both have displays in there windows. Are you talking about the hard core ones, that only sleazey old men go to?

Any way feel free to tell us more about the nice ashtrays? I have came across a few pretty ones on my travels, most made in certain Asain country.
81

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 21:08:20
When will people start living as opposed to trying not to die and failing to live as a result?

Cigarettes are bad for you. So is flouride and chlorine in your drinking water as is the tonnes of carcinogenic matter spewed out by industry and our own motor cars, our food is polluted and devoid of nutrients.

There are really more pressing health matters than a few cigarettes. Our culture is being dictated to by militants who would have us smoke free and tee total so they can gloat and merry in their whims becoming law.

One thing is for certain that most of us will die one day of something ! I wonder if these militant ASH folk will, on their death beds, wish they had lived more or whether they will die whinging cowardly wrecks of people that such a thing would have happened to them !?

I don't smoke very often but enjoy the occasional ciggie ! - no harm I'd say but is someone who lights up in a pub really a criminal worthy of attention by the powers that be ?

I think a bit of perspective is in order and their is a few too many ivory towers and 'more righteous than thou' sorts around these days ....

If you are so pathetic that you NEED to get worked up about a bit of cig smoke - then you really need to think about how weak you are!
82

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 26/02/2009 21:12:58
PS:= my english was terrible just then ... forgive me !
83

Tris,

26/02/2009 21:35:13
~83

You call smoking "living". Of course we all die of something; nothing surer. But lung cancer, or gum cancer are nasty ways to go, usually long and drawn out too, and there's no Dignitas in Scotland.

There is no harm in the occasional smoke, as you say, but for how many people is that a reality? For how many does it start off like that and by 20 they are smoking 20 a day, which must come in at around £40 a week!

Anyway, loads of people seems to disagree with this so it will probably fail.

84

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 22:45:13
#77 I think I read it yes. You were talking about measures against smoking and I thought you might have been including the smoking ban, as well as this legislation that they are threatening us with. But if you weren't, never mind, I can live with it.

I am not sure how many babies stop breathing in the womb if their mother smokes, or whether it does them lasting harm. If it happens to all babies I can only assume it does little damage as so many of us are the children and grandchildren of smokers, and the average life expectancy is still over 75. I have certainly not seen that put forward as evidence for the dangers of secondary smoke.

What makes me think the Scottish government wants people to buy tobacco? Let me put it this way. A man has a daily budget for tobacco of about £5.50. He gets fed up not being able to see what brands of tobacco are available at the shop (under the smart new regime) and decides to try a local dealer instead. He finds that the £5.50 buys nearly twice as much tobacco and lasts two days. The difference is that the government gets nothing. So the government would like the man to buy tobacco from the shop, because otherwise their source of revenue gets cut off.

Yes it is to stop tobacco being visible to kids, but what makes them think it will work?
85

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 22:49:48
The New Zealand government doesn't think it works:

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/no-evidence-tobacco-ad-ban-works-nz-pm-20090224-8g4p.html
86

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 23:02:38
#86

http://www.isdscotland.org/isd/5767.html

See the five points listed. The idea that heart attacks started to go down after the smoking ban came in is unfounded. If you go to the spreadsheet tables there you will see that the heart attack rate has been going down for years and in fact for some heart conditions is now beginning to flatten out. For angina there has been a jump. I am not familiar with lung cancer tables but recent reports suggest that the rate will go down but actual numbers will go up (will get my head round that later: it assumes that the smoking ban will make a big difference when we don't even know whether smoking has increased or decreased as a result).

We might have proportional representation in Scotland. We don't have anything like a second chamber, and we seem to have committees that can do whatever they want. So far what they've wanted to do hasn't inspired me to a greater faith in nationalism - on the whole.
87

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

26/02/2009 23:16:34
78...Give us more of that by the way...you could become the Hootsmans resident poet...and dont that verse just sum it up...the delusion of being a smoker...aye been there...smoked the t Shirt...dont it make me look like an adult eh?...oh sheet now I'm hooked what do I do now?...might as well just keep smoking....

Everybody knows what lurks inside a fag...aint seen any organic ones yet...formaldehyde???...I mean come on!

There is an advert down below for "Cigarette supplies in China"...be better off jamming your head in an old gas oven....
88

Tris,

26/02/2009 23:28:11
#87. The Scottish governmnet does not collect taxes. It makes nothing directly from the cigarette tax. All taxes and duties are paid to the London government, which then hands out pocket money to Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast.

Interesting point there that the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man have far more control over their own finances than Scotland does.
89

Belinda-2,

26/02/2009 23:52:47
#91

Yes you have a point there. The point only applies directly to the UK.

90

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 27/02/2009 01:25:12
Eve:

"Lets be honiset here the images of "dad" smoking a pipe died a few degades ago!!!"

They didn't as faras I am concerned. I am a dad, and I smoke a pipe.

"Anne Summers and another shop don't remeber the name both have displays in there windows"

Anne Summers is not an "adult" shop. At least it is not the kind that I am talking about.

#79:

"With a one in two chance of smokers getting cancer from smoking how can smoking not be a health issue?"

I don't know where you got that from but let me tell you now, it is rubbish. I don't know what the chance of "smokers" getting cancer is but it is a hell of a lot better odds than 1 in 2.

Like I said earlier, you can't generalise "smokers" in the way that you are doing. If this kind of misconception is widespread then I think I am starting to see how all this anti-smoking rubbish has become so prevalent nowadays. You are being lied to. Wake Up!!

#74:

"you never give up, do you?"

No. Clearly you do.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.