Went into a small Waitrose today, not my local shop and went to the cigarette counter to see they have covered up the display with sliding doors. I asked for my normal brand and the young lady said

"Oh I'm sorry, I've just sold the last packet about 5 mins ago".

"OK" I said, "can I see what else you have".

She replyed "sorry sir, I am not allowed to show you".

Now I don't blame the young girl as I know she is only following what her employers tell her to do but come on...

OK, it's an unsociable habit, I do respect other people and not blow smoke in their face.

I stand outside a pub as well which is also not a problem.

I do not smoke in the car when my children are in it, again not a problem, I love them,

but now I have to try and guess what is behind the sliding doors and hope they have not inflated the prices like some petrol stations do.

I have got to ask all you smokers in FCCUK land,

Do these people in power think that hiding the packets is going to stop you smoking?

BTW to all non approving non smokers out there, I know what you go through when you get a face full of smoke, I used to be a non smoker to.

I don't believe covering up the fags will deter people at all and is yet another stupid law we don't need.

In fact, I think it'll make youngsters more curious and by covering up the tobacco products, it'll make them 'feel illegal' and more tempting to try and get hold of.

As for trying to get a look behind the screens for an alternative brand, I would have asked for a brand that doesn't exist and then while the screen was open, as the assistant looked for the non existent brand, I'd have quickly looked for an alternative

Or just kept her there opening the screen constantly by asking how much are the Lamberts, how much are the Bensons, how much are the cheapest brand you have, etc

Now that sounds like a plan

I am old enough to remember when 'Super kings' first hit the bill boards on every main road throughout the country...the picture of a well known super star looking cool whilst taking a lug on a fag. Six foot by 12 foot and in colour!
I can't be sure but it more than likely helped me into a thirty year habit of smoking. So perhaps hiding the bloody things will stop children from being influenced?

I agree advertising cigerettes and alcahol is bad.
So saying that, all those people standing outside pubs and clubs trying to look cool/warm should be hidden away behind a door.

Errr...

Back in the day I was a smoker, managed to kick the habit in'89. I've seen the price of tobacco rise steadily upwards ever since & I've thought to myself about the money I have not wasted on cigarettes, even on lighters & matches, hey it all adds up.

Just to put a new slant on things the revenue on tobacco runs into billions each year, last count was something like 12 billion That is a very large sum of money in anyone's book. A point that I've often wondered was for argument sake if everyone managed to give up smoking for one reason or another, there would be a very large hole that the government would need to fill/find from an other source..... Just a thought....

It's not just direct revenue either; smokers live for less time and while they do suffer from chronic illnesses they tend to do so for a shorter time. So fewer smokers equates to more pensions to pay out and more NHS spending on elderly patients.

So, if the government wants to eliminate smoking then it needs to find something to replace it which attracts billions of pounds of private spending, is totally ethical, but which also kills people young.

I support a plan to abolish all speed limits for motorbikes

Just ban airbags for all people under twenty-five; replace them with big steel spikes poking out of the steering wheel.

Yep, I've been saying this for years too. I've no idea why we keep trying to discourage smoking.

Didn't the Rusian government publicly encourage smoking nd drinking recently as I'd good for the economy?

Tobacco taxation earns the Government about £9.5bn (2011-2012) add the VAT of about £2.6bn and that gives a total tobacco revenue of about £12bn.

2010 government research suggested the following COSTS -

• NHS costs of treating the diseases known to be caused by smoking£2.7 billion
• Cost of lost productivity from providing smoking breaks (£2.9bn)
• Increased absenteeism by smokers (£2.5bn)
• Cleaning up cigarette wastes (£342 million)
• Cost of smoking related fires(£507m)
• Loss of economic output due to early death of smokers - training & development (£4.1bn)
• Costs of treating passive smokers (£713m)

The report suggsted that total costs of smoking exceeded £13bn.

Sorry Bob but Cost of lost productivity from providing smoking breaks (£2.9bn)

I smoke on my official 10 minute tea break which is one in the morning and one in the afternoon. I don't drink tea or coffee but I do see my work mates going to make a cuppa at least 3 times in the morning and 2 times in the afternoon taking about ten minutes each time. I'll let you do the maths.

Blame tea or coffee for lost productivity.

If it wasn't for Coffee, there would be no productivity at all from my lot. I'm trying to quit though, down to just 6 mugs a morning.

So that explains why deliveries take so long up there

smokers should be first in the queue for treatment, thanks for funding NHS

You what? Where are these figures pulled from?

Article here estimates its costs the UK economy £1.4bn per year due to absenteeism.

However, our friends at ASH have the figures Bob quoted. The report is here. Mind you, I think ASHs findings should be taken with a pinch of tobacco.

I'm afraid that smacks of a made up category to support an anti smoking argument. Does this figure take into account reduced pension costs due to early death.

As a lifelong non-smoker (although I've done my fair share of passive smoking) I would like to take the opportunity of thanking smokers for their contribution to the Government's coffers. Any shortfall would have been levied on something I buy.

Seems to me that tobacco and alcohol revenue strengthens the case for legalising and taxing drugs and prostitution.

Quite right. The revenue from Southampton alone could pay off the deficit in a week.

Straight off the bat that article commits a cardinal sin (my emphasis)...



The first paragraph tells us there is a correlation between smoking and numbers of days of work missed, the second draws the conclusion that smoking is the causal factor.

Meh. What's a correlation and a conclusion between friends?

Damn, beaten to it.

I'm keeping that, Barnacle uses a smiley shocker!

People, I have had absolutely NOTHING to do with any of the research that has been undertaken into Smoking. All I was doing was highlighting some research had been commissioned by part of the UK government. Clearly the government commission had presented findings of this research, along with other research, to parliament and thus policy decisions on smoking have been made.

I contributed to this debate in response to those who were expressing a belief that the loss of smoking related tax income would be of detriment to the UK economy and government TAX revenue.

One would hope that those who made the policy changes would have had access to this research and other information that allowed them to make an informed policy change.

Further, it was even suggested in an earlier post that encouraging smoking would be of greater benefit to the UK economy. There was absolutely zero evidential support to back up this claim yet it is me who seems to be receiving challenge on what I posted

I say again "This is not my data" all I am doing is re-distributing research data used by our Government to make policy decisions.

I personally have never smoked, not even taken a drag. Though I suspect as a child of smoking parents and previous work environments that I have done my fair share of passive smoking.

Both my parents and one of my closest friends all died early due to smoking related deaths. Both my Mothers siblings never smoked and are both now in their late eighties. Of my fathers siblings, all the smokers died but the two that never smoked are still living. I know it can be argued that some folks smoke and live to a ripe old age but I feel that if encouraging people to stop could help loved ones stay around a little longer then that's no bad thing. I do accept though that some folks will fight an pick holes in everything.

The evidence is out there though...

The figures I distributed earlier were taken from local government "Stoptober" campaign literature. I accept that all research is paid for by someone, often with pre-desired outcomes in mind but the evidence is out there.

Oxford University NHS research (2009)

2013 NHS smoking report Within this report it is stated "It is important to consider that these are costs (Over £5bn of NHS spending)of treating smoking-related illnesses and do not include costs related to working days lost or social security ill health payments for example, nor do they include any costs related to the effects of second-hand smoking".

Back in the 70's & 80's I remember friends who wouldn't wear seatbelts. They offered no end of reasons why they shouldn't wear one. The most dramatic reduction in UK road deaths actually came about after the 1983 seatbelt law was passed. So lives were saved in spite of the nay sayers.

Ah yes, king size filter tip seat belts.... .....