Skip to main content

Big ban theory pushed by the Guardian


Celebrating the fifth anniversary of the ban on smoking in public places, the Guardian published a well written leader celebrating this policy as almost cost-free and that could save untold numbers of lives. This neatly encapsulates the seductive power of anti-smoking measures in the minds of MPs. The second claim - saving lives - could perhaps be better stated as prolonging lives.

Moving swiftly on, the newspaper says that it took 60 years for a "smoking ban" to be introduced. The Guardian has a reputation for grammatical errors. Perhaps this is shorthand for "smoking in public places ban".

However, it goes on to discuss how single-issue campaigns on things like seatbelts and lead-free petrol worked. Professional awareness, campaigns for public awareness, industry reaction, then finally government action.

What is next? Alcohol and obesity, the Guardian says. The government, it says, is trying to avoid taking action by passing responsibility to local government and the industry. This won't work, it says. It wants action now, not in 60 years time.

The person who wrote this never invested their own money in setting up a local business. They have no sympathy for the impact that excessive regulation makes on local shops. They are writing for the public health lobby. It exists.

What is interesting is the response that the comment generated. "So all the people warning first they'll come for your fags, then they'll come for your booze weren't wrong" starts the first one, and on it goes. Perhaps the Guardian should research its readers a little more closely. Perhaps they are not all in the public health lobby.

It is true that public health policy in the first half of the 20th century made a huge impact on the well-being of society. People who learned skills in their 20s stayed economically active until they were 65 and this benefited all society. However, extending the average lifespan of people from 70 something to 90 something, if that is what is projected is unlikely to have a similar benefit.

Local traders need to be vigilant. The risk of regulation hurting their businesses is very real.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Three secrets of great merchandising

Look at the ceiling and top wall of this McDonalds restaurant. There is a picture of two good looking healthy people having fun and some bright primary colours. Ask yourself what is the purpose of this picture? In the latest issue of Retail Newsagent in a feature on merchandising, Andrew Knight of RI tells its independent readers that they need to think about using sharp pictures of non-packaged products linked to people consuming goods. Perhaps this has been taken to the next level by the fast food chain - that is selling the feeling of being happy and healthy rather than the products. A second, related tip from the same feature is made by most contributors - it is vital to keep windows clean and clear of clutter. "I believe that less is more," says Roli Ranger, a retailer from Ascot, Berkshire. He has posters for promotions in between the windows that are regularly updated and discreet signs in the windows. Third, a highly visible well-stocked promotion at the entranc...
3 comments
Read more

Busy street, empty shop, missed profits

True in part to my New Year resolution, I held a business meeting in an independent coffee shop today just next door to a Starbucks. The cafe was presented well and four staff were busy preparing for the lunchtime rush, at 11am. As my guests were late, I had a half hour overview of footfall on the street outside and in the restaurant. Six customers. Barely enough to form the queue in Starbucks or Pret-a-Manger just down the road. Plus one Italian girl who dropped off her CV. Some people stopped to look at the posters in the window and moved on. The owners seemed quite happy. When I left just after 1215, they were doing brisk trade. However, I have the impression that the business is not working hard enough. It could easily have managed 120 customers between 11 and 12, instead of 12. This is lost profit as the fixed overheads and staff costs are already in place. The owners are clearly busy - perhaps too busy to take time to look at the potential that their cafe has. What shou...
2 comments
Read more

Sticks and stones do hurt

My 17 year-old son returned from a rock festival this week wearing a wristband proudly declaring him 0ver 18. He explained how easy it had been to use someone else's ID to get the identification and said it was ironic that he had not needed to show the over 18 band when buying alcohol. Today, Scottish retailer Abdul Qadar is complaining that public authorities are asking people to lie about their age when making test purchases. What trading standards officers may be forgetting is that the fact that retailers invest in a business premises and trade consistently from it make their job much, much easier. The alternative, a world of markets and itinerant traders, will be far harder to police. Mr Qadar's sense of injustice is fair. Those retailers, like Mr Qadar, who value their investment will seek to trade legally and will not sell alcohol to people under the age of 18. Asking children to lie about their age to local traders is a slander on all retailers.
2 comments
Read more