Disarray in the Tobacco Control Industry

It is easy to point to recent disagreements among The Holy’, but the question that arises is whether or not these disagreements have any effect on politicians, since they, and only they, have the power to persecute smokers and vapers.

I found it quite cheering to read the following via ‘The View From Cullingworth‘:

I soon realised that the greens and their industrial and bureaucratic allies are used to getting things their own way. I received more death threats in a few months at Defra than I ever did as secretary of state for Northern Ireland. My home address was circulated worldwide with an incitement to trash it; I was burnt in effigy by Greenpeace as I was recovering from an operation to save my eyesight. But I did not set out to be popular with lobbyists and I never forgot that they were not the people I was elected to serve. 

Indeed, I am proud that my departure was greeted with such gloating by spokespeople for the Green Party and Friends of the Earth. 

It was not my job to do the bidding of two organisations that are little more than anti-capitalist agitprop groups most of whose leaders could not tell a snakeshead fritillary from a silver-washed fritillary. I saw my task as improving both the environment and the rural economy; many in the green movement believed in neither. 

That is a statement from the out-going Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson.

When such a former Minister voices his antipathy to special interest groups regarding the environment, it ought not to be long before a Health Minister voices his antipathy to health zealots. But the weird thing is that Paterson had to wait until he was out of office to make his statement. Why is that? Why did he not say, shortly after taking up the position, “I will not be influenced by special interest groups”?

But there is a difference between environment and health. ‘Environment’ is something that people might mull over theoretically, whereas ‘Health’ affects them directly and personally. Except that, for the most part, the ‘war on smokers’ does not affect them personally – they have been traumatised into believing that it is so. That makes it far more difficult for a Health Minister, or even an ex-health-minister, to speak out.


But the problem is very, very deep. Decades of propaganda underpin the IPCC in the UN – and lots and lots of money. As a first step to de-bagging the Environment Lobby (‘the green blob’), the simple answer is to stop handing them our money. A lot of small nations have not paid a penny of their ‘dues’ to the FCTC organisation, but the amounts are small. States like the UK, Japan, Germany, etc, underpin the TCTC gang by continuing to fund it. Admittedly, the contributions are small (in the region of a mere half a million pounds each), but these direct contributions enable vastly more knock-on costs. This is a weird variation of normality, since costs generally tend to diminish as they spread out. That is not the case regarding climate control and tobacco control. The costs increase exponentially.

Why is that so? The reason is that the primary costs (contributions to the FCTC gang) are dispensed to ‘experts’ in fund raising. For example:

a) UK provides FCTC with £300,000.

b) FCTC funds NGOs which demand funding.

c) UK gives funds to NGOs.

d) NGOs create new NGOs.

e) New NGOs demand funding.

f) New NGOs are in universities, which demand more funding for ‘studies’.

g) Studies are not quite sufficient, and so more studies are required by the universities.

h) Universities demand more funding for studies.

And so on.

What is the solution? Is it not obvious? STOP FUNDING THE FCTC!!!


We seem to have a ‘democratic deficit’. I know that that phrase is pretty meaningless, but it does suggest some curious effects. To me, it suggests ‘bread and circuses’. It suggests to me that, as long as the vast majority of citizens are content with their menial lives, and are permitted to amuse themselves in ways that are ‘approved’, then the ‘elite’ can enrich themselves with impunity. Having said that, it really does not matter how filthy rich the filthy rich are, provided that the people generally are not excluded from the beneficence of modern, industrial advantages.

A friend of mine (sadly deceased now), who spent many years in America and Canada, told me that: “Anyone in employment in the USA is well-paid”. Whether or not that is true, I do not know, but it sounds about right, in the majority of cases. But it might have been a reflection of the American dynamic – people will move from one job to another at the drop of a hat. That has not always been the case in the UK since we have always placed a premium on ‘loyalty’.

It is a sad reflection on modern life that ‘loyalty’ no longer means any more that ‘bread and circuses’, in the form of loyalty to football clubs and such. Despite our individual and regional differences (I speak to some extent about Scottish devolution), we used to be a Nation. That Nation was “Britain” and “British”.


It is getting late. The title of this post is “Disarray in the Tobacco Control Industry”. Even the most violently anti-tobacco-industry are becoming aware that there is  a difference between anti-tobacco-industry and anti-tobacco-harm. That is, people like Glantz are becoming ‘pillars of salt’ (being toxic entities). You might like to look at this:



‘People who Enjoy Tobacco’ need to divorce themselves from ‘statute laws’ created by vicious tyrants. The statute laws cannot and dare not mess about with our rights to be self-sufficient.

When looked at from the perspective of individuals who enjoy tobacco, nothing matters other than persecution.


%d bloggers like this: