HALLOWEEN HATE CRIME

ASH is hate inciting and fear mongering again without any evidence at all.

It seems smokers are now a bigger threat to children than the Bogeyman.

HT - Simon Clark

Chairman of the board

Directors (in the past known as Directors’ Bitter) allegedly took its name from a special beer set aside for the directors of the Courage brewery at Alton in Hampshire, which was then released to the public. In the late 1970s it became Courage’s contender in the “premium bitter” market, competing with the likes of Ind Coope Burton Ale, Ruddles County and Eldridge Pope Royal Oak.

For a few years in the early 1980s I lived in Surrey, where most of the pubs were tied to either Courage or Allied Breweries, so I became quite familiar with Directors. To be honest, in that section of the market I tended to prefer the drier, hoppier Burton Ale, but recognised Directors as a good beer that, while predominantly malty and fruity, did not allow itself to be overwhelmed by sweetness.

It was then brewed at the Courage brewery in Bristol, but after that closed in 2000 went to the John Smiths plant at Tadcaster, a rather unlikely location for an essentially “Southern” beer. As the international breweries sought to divest themselves of their cask beer interest, the Courage brands, including Directors’ lower-strength stablemate Courage Best, were sold to Wells & Youngs in 2007 and are now brewed at Bedford.

Directors has a strength of 4.8% ABV and comes in a brown bottle with the characteristic Wells & Youngs wide shoulders. The label is dark red, which leads you to expect a reddish beer, which indeed it is, mid-brown with a copper-red tinge. Again the picture makes it look paler than it actually is.

It has a shallow but lasting head, rather thicker and creamier than the other W&Y beers, and noticeable although not overpowering carbonation. The initial aroma is fruity, and its basic character is malty and fruity, but with a hoppy note too and a surprisingly dry aftertaste. It’s certainly not a sweet, syrupy beer and, while it drinks its strength, you can imagine having more than one.

While it won’t appeal to lovers of pale, heavily hopped beers, it’s a good example of the traditional English robust, malty strong bitter. Although I haven’t tried the current cask version, Wells & Youngs have succeeded in recreating in bottle something that retains much of the character of the beer I remember from the 80s. It’s also a distinctive beer that you might well be able to identify in a blind tasting.

I DID IT!

You might have noticed that My Profile has changed to take into account the fact that I'm no longer an MA student but an MA graduate.

After two long years, aching feelings of impending failure and doom, thousands of hours spent over a laptop staring at a computer screen, scribbling notes on paper, worrying about the next assignment and how I'd manage to fit it in around ever increasing work commitments, and just a general but inexplicable view that I wasn't worthy, it's all over. I passed.

My 90 minute script dissertation got me a First but an overall Commendation after taking into account getting a Second in fiction and a Second in the academic side of the work. I'm more than happy with that.

The script is still with the Agent for consideration. The wait is killing me but I'm told it's arrived safely and it could be another 10 weeks or so before I hear if I am accepted or rejected. If it's taken then I'll obviously be over the moon. If not, then I have other ideas and it will just take me longer to get where I want to be.

I have a huge sense of personal achievement. This course has proved to be like walking around a cliff edge with a very narrow path from beginning to end. My initial application resulted in anguish because I was told I hadn't demonstrated any talent. I tried again. I convinced myself I was no good and was, actually, just in the middle of telling a friend that I'd put the dream of being a fiction writer to bed once and for all when the call came from the University inviting me for the interview.

Having then been accepted, the next biggest hurdle was finding the funding to pay the £4000 over the two years. I opted for instalments. In my own mind, I was on payasyougo. I decided to drop out when the money ran out even though there would still have been some sort of financial liability if I did. Luckily, a regular work contract came in. I was able to see the course through.

I ranted back then about how Nulabour had priced the poor out of education. If I had done an undergraduate course, I could have got funding. I was told to apply to my county council who told me Govt policies supported those doing a UG course but not an MA course. Apparently because it's thought by then that you've done the UG and you don't get funding twice.

It seemed crazy to me because I'd never done a university degree of any sort before. I went from A levels in 1992 to an MA in 2008. It kind of implied that if you don't have the funds to climb the social ladder then you should know your place and not bother.

Anyway, that's all water under the bridge now. The only thing left to do is take part in Graduation day but I've decided against it. My sister seems to be the only one who is bothered. My kids would support me if I wanted to do it but it's no big deal. My other half understands. If my mother was still alive then I'd go for it to make her proud. I'm proud enough of myself not to have to wear a gown and a big hat to prove it.

If my script does get taken up, that will be the time to party like it's .. errrr ... 1999 ... if only we could. In the absence of the freedom to choose a public place where I'd like to celebrate my new found educashun, I'll settle for a smoky drinky night at home.

Here's hoping ...

MIND YOUR LANGUAGE

Boris Johnson caused quite a stir with his comments on the NuGovt's ethnically cleansing of the poor from London because of changes to housing benefit.

I only heard about it while watching Question Time this week and the outrage spluttered forth from various members of the panel who didn't like Boris's choice of words.

Historian Simon Schama said it was an insult to those that had actually been ethnically cleansed, oppressed, wiped out as a race in the holocaust, or thrown into gulags that made the use of this kind of comparison in modern times offensive. He said we really should mind our language.

I knew exactly where he was coming from and although I have a lot of respect for Mr Schama, I have to say that I profoundly disagree. By not suggesting such comparisons are we in danger of forgetting the hate that led to such "cleansing" of historical social and racial groups?

Just knowing it happened in the past against certain groups, doesn't mean it can't happen in future. I don't believe that using such comparisons denigrates or diminishes the exclusive torture, eradication attempts, or cruelty of those who have suffered under historical tyrants. Just because we live in the 21st century doesn't mean it won't happen again. It must be highlighted whenever there is a fear that public opinion of a group could lead to unfair treatment of that group and only by using this language can eyes be opened.

I talk of smokers here, of course, and the often "offensive" comparison made between the hatred of smokers and the hatred of Jews in Nazi Germany. It comes about specifically because Hitler invented the still unproven theory of passive smoking or SHS in part to get at the Jews.

Of course smokers are not being packed off and sent to death camps even though they are excluded from all public places and there is no employment law to protect them from prejudicial employers. The hate that some people have of smokers is the same as the hate Hitler had against the Jews and other races he thought "filthy" "unhealthy" or "undesirable."

Had NuLabour stayed in power, I have no doubt that by the end of their term smokers would be criminalised and the first stage of locking them up in uncomfortable places such as prisons would have been the next item on the eradication of smoking agenda.

Constantly keeping in the public's conscience how such atrocities as the holocaust came to be means there is less chance of the tyranny which brings such outcomes as "ethnic cleansing" going unnoticed by the masses in future.

Ethnic cleansing doesn't start there. It starts with hate, misinformation and misrepresentation by Govts with ideological aims whatever period of history we live in and whatever group it is aimed at.

BLOGGERS COME, BLOGGERS GO

I see that Anna Raccoon's blog has been resurrected and taken on. I hope the new authors carry on her traditional campaigning style that saw injustices against jailed pub landlord Nick Hogan and fined ash dropping pensioner Shiela Martin overturned.

Meanwhile, I learned this week that Mr Eugenides has given up blogging and he gives his reasons :

Partly this is due to busy-ness in the real world, but that's only half the story. The other half is a noticeable dropping off in my levels of rage since the prime raison d'etre for that fury were ejected from office in May. I share the scepticism of some readers towards many aspects of the new government's platform, and worry that their reforms will be too timid, their policies wrong-headed, their instincts far from libertarian. I worry, in short, that they will disappoint us, as I know you do too.

But what I don't have now is that same hate. The last administration filled me with disgust; the mere sight on my telly of a Charles Clarke, a John Reid, a - God forgive me for even typing the words! - Patricia Hewitt, sent me flying into almost uncontrollable loathing. And without fury, without rage, without spite, this blog is nothing, really - or at least, not what it was - because the way it's written, it is set up for polemic, not placid discussion.

It seems rage has diminished a lot since the last election. I remain in perpetuated anger until some kind of fairness comes to the smoking issue and I expect I'll continue blogging at least until then.

Meanwhile, I like millions of others and not least those small business men and women who have lost their livelihoods because of NuLabour's ideology on tobacco control, continue to mourn the demise of the great British pub.

The Regulars from Grant Hodgeon on Vimeo.

GOD AND MY RIGHT

"God and my right shall me defend"

Covering Magistrates courts does make you slightly cynical about the meaning and dispensing of "justice."

It's a legal system, that goes back to King John and the Magna Carta and the plebs having the right to be judged by their peers. It's something to do with fairness but there is nothing fair about British justice.

The problem is that now we are a few centuries on, the average defendant is not being judged by his or her peers, they are being judged by three people who are of a different social class and mindset and can't possibly relate to the third generation Chav stuck in poverty without hope of getting a job let alone being somehow "equal" to those that sit in judgement on the bench.

I guess that's why there are certain "statutory" penalties in a bid to ensure some kind of "fairness" which does make me wonder why on earth three magistrates sitting on a bench often go out to retire and consider sentence for so long that they fail to get through an average court list during one morning's sitting.

There have been times when sitting in a magistrates court and trying to make a living from each case I pick up is like sitting and having teeth pulled. For example, when someone's up on drunk and disorderly the penalty is always going to be a fine. So why on earth do some benches have to go out and take half an eternity to come back and fine the defendant? I end up coming out sometimes lucky to have just covered my petrol costs.

The court I cover had a district judge last week. One man sitting on the bench with actual legal knowledge who whizzed through each case and in the main dishing out what I considered to be "fair" sentences.

I say "in the main" because there was still the odd occasion when his judgements or comments when sentencing made my blood boil.

There was the case of the Lituanian who came to this brave new world of NuBritain looking for work. Instead of finding his share of gold in this Promised Land, he found the odd few days of work for which he wasn't always paid. With rent to pay, and a need to eat, he accepted an offer to lend him money in the hope that he would be able to find more permanent and fair work to repay the debt. He couldn't.

His benefactor then moved in to demand the loan be paid back. The Lithuanian couldn't oblige and the loan shark couldn't have been more pleased because he now had a new "foot soldier" to do his dirty work. He was part of a gang who preys on migrant workers who fall on hard times to get them to go out shoplifting high value goods.

The Lithuanian was taken to certain stores, given a foil-lined bag (which deactivates the door alarm) and told to steal certain goods. He got caught and he alone had to face the music. He'd never been in trouble before but the comfortably off district judge had no sympathy. He said the defendant shouldn't have allowed himself to be used by this gang. He jailed him immediately, without pre-sentence reports, to six months jail - although he's likely to serve three.

In other words, the district judge played into the gang's hands. They'd used the Lithuanian as a human shield and the judge shot him. He said that he had a duty to protect the multi-billion pound retail industry that loses "million and millions every year". And I thought the system was about being judged by your "peers" and protecting the little man against the power of those with enough wealth to oppress you into submission.

I know I'm quite naive at times, and too soft-hearted, but I would have at least given him a chance. If the ultimate aim was to protect the "industry" then surely by allowing him his freedom, backed up with a police operation to follow him and find the people behind his offending, then the industry would have been better protected by finding the root cause.

I guess that with this "foot soldier" out of the way, the gang will just continue with another desperate and wretched migrant without work. It doesn't feel as if "justice" for anyone has been done in this case.

That case made me sad but two others - one involving a migrant worker and the other a local both on drink driving - made me angry. The judge statutorily banned them from driving and fined them. That didn't bother me but what made me angry was when the district judge looked over their means forms to decide the level of fine they could pay.

In both cases he noted that they were smokers. In both cases he made comment about how they obviously had lots of money if they could afford to smoke. In both cases he said he was minded to fine them more because of it. In both cases he ticked them off and said they were damaging their health. He didn't, however, increase the fine following his threat. I would have reported him he if had. I would have done the same if a man wearing a designer shirt was fined more because he liked nice clothes.

Thanks to the district judge's efficiency, I came out of court with an armful of cases which helps the income a lot but I think when it comes to "fairness" perhaps three heads are better than one. Perhaps three wouldn't be anti-smokers. Perhaps three would have come to a different view about the Lithuanian. Perhaps this antiquated legal system is the best we've got.

British justice may have started with the aim of fairness but it's evolved into a means of revenge, bureaucracy and tax collection.

Rose tinted pubs

I see that the government have now appointed Bob Neill as Community Pubs Minister, whatever that may mean. It’s all too common to hear of “community pubs” being held up as an ideal in comparison with irresponsible High Street bottle bars, as, for example, in the comment here by Greg Mulholland MP that “community pubs are a crucial part of the solution to problem drinking.”

The term conjures up visions of cosy little street-corner locals with darts teams, meat raffles and coach trips to the races, the kind of pubs where most of the customers live within walking distance and regulars will greet each other in the bar. In short, the kind of place where you might ask the proverbial “man in the pub” a question and get a meaningful answer.

Yes, there still are pubs of this kind, but they represent a small and dwindling proportion of the country’s pub stock, and it is these “community pubs” that have suffered most over the past three years when legislation has decreed that half the pubgoing community have to be treated as outcasts.

And it is very misleading to imply that “well run pubs” and “community pubs” are one and the same. What about town-centre Wetherspoons? Or destination dining pubs specialising in local food and ales? Or multi-beer freehouses that most of their customers will pass numerous local pubs to visit? All types of pubs promoted by CAMRA, but not really in the accepted sense “community pubs”, unless “community” is defined as a community of interest of their customers.

How often, honestly, do you go in a pub and strike up a conversation with people you already know, but who haven’t either gone there with you or arranged to meet you there?

Perhaps if distinctions are to be drawn in the pub trade, they should be between “responsibly” and “irresponsibly” run venues. “Community pubs” is a sentimental, old-fashioned and increasingly meaningless stereotype which fails to reflect the way most responsible drinkers use pubs today.

Sensitive souls

The most recent poll followed on from my post about Premiumisation and asked to what degree buyers of bottled and canned beers were sensitive to special offers and discounts. There were 107 responses, broken down as follows:

I buy the brands I like regardless of price: 48 (45%)
I have a range of brands I like, but tend to choose those that are on offer: 24 (22%)
I often try brands outside my favourites if they are on offer: 21 (20%)
I just go for the cheapest available within the category: 4 (4%)
I never buy bottled or canned beer: 10 (9%)

So almost half of respondents said they did not tend to be influenced by offers and went for the beers they preferred. Overall, I suspect that understates beer buyers’ price sensitivity, but it applies more at the premium end of the market.

The implication of this for brewers must be that to build respect and success for your brand in the long term it is important to avoid being seen as something that is regularly piled high and sold cheap. One of the best beer marketing slogans of all time was Stella Artois’ “Reassuringly expensive”, a reputation that was destroyed by the brand’s owners in the pursuit of higher volumes. To some extent, Greene King seem to manage that with Old Speckled Hen, which apparently is the best-selling bottled beer in Britain.

And I think you’d find even if you confined the survey to canned lagers that there was more brand loyalty than might be imagined – consumers don’t just choose indiscriminately between Carling, Carlsberg and Fosters depending on what is cheapest on the day.

Freezing your drink

A new high water mark has been reached in the anti-drink tide flowing through Scotland, with the news that West Dunbartonshire Council has decided to impose a complete ban on any new drinks licences, in both the on and off-trade, in 15 out of 18 areas within the authority. In the remaining three areas applicants for licences will have to prove that customers would not travel from an “overprovision” area to purchase alcohol.

Inevitably this will lead to stagnation in the market and act to the detriment of responsible consumers of alcohol by blocking any new entrants, as Patrick Brown of the Scottish Beer and Pub Association rightly points out. “The Board appears to be more interested in political grandstanding than it is in public health,” he said.

The Chair of the Licensing Board, councillor Jim Brown, said: “We have far too many pubs, bars and off-sales shops given the size of the area.” Just what right does this self-important twerp have to make judgments as what constitutes “too many” pubs or off-licences? Surely the number is determined by the level of business – if all are trading profitably, then there cannot be too many.

And what evidence is there that freezing licences is likely to reduce either consumption in general or so-called “problem drinking”?

The policy is also likely to hold back economic development in the area, as who would want to open a new supermarket, hotel or sports club if they were unable to get an alcohol licence for it?

The report doesn’t say whether existing licences will be transferable – if they are, the move will have the unintended consequence of handing a potential goldmine to anyone who has one, as they will be able to sell it to the highest bidder.

Dog amongst the pigeons

Tee hee, James Watt of BrewDog – never knowingly uncontroversial – has said that keg is the future of craft beer in Britain.

“I don’t think cask is an appealing way to get people into beer,” said Watt. “Cask is more sleepy, stuffy, traditional and just has this kind of stigma attached to it which isn’t going to get young people excited.

“It’s all CAMRA, beards, sandals, beer bellies, hanging out at train stations at the weekend. We think keg beers could be the future of craft beers in the UK.”

Watt also argued keg better suits the beer styles the company produces.

Keg also has the advantage of allowing bars to stock interesting and unusual draught beers where they don’t have the turnover for cask.

It would be amusing to see a few CAMRA fuddy-duddies squirming if forced to make a choice between cask Greene King IPA and keg Punk IPA.

A cut worth making

Simon Clark of FOREST sets out very clearly here how immense sums of money are given by the government to ASH and other anti-smoking organisations who overwhelmingly use it to lobby the government to further tighten restrictions on smoking.

Two examples: commencing June 2008 the UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies will receive £3,694,498 over five years. It was also awarded a £1.2 million grant to develop and pilot several projects to implement smoking cessation services. Smoke Free North West meanwhile secured almost £1.9 million from the PCTs in 2008 to “complement core national funding”.

ASH UK, for example, received a direct grant of £142,000 from the Department of Health in 2009 (£191,000 in 2008 and £210,400 in 2007) plus £110,000 from the Welsh Assembly Government in 2007. In 2008-09 ASH Scotland received £921,837 from the Scottish Government followed, in December 2009, by a £500,000 grant from the Big Lottery to fund a major three-year research project into smoke-free homes in Scotland. ASH Wales meanwhile received £115,800 from the Welsh Assembly Government in 2008-09 and £113,000 in 2007-08.

The comments thread to that posting is well worth reading!

Surely the government should not be funding what are basically pressure groups full stop, and in this time of economic stringency this is money that should be at the top of the list for cutting. Any smoking cessation activities carried out by these groups should be brought under the wing of the NHS, and their campaigning should only continue to the extent that it could be financed by genuine donations from the public. Which I suspect would be very small indeed.

Of course, the same also should apply to Don Shenker and his miserable crew of sarsaparilla-sipping anti-drink zealots at Alcohol Concern.

Pressure drop

This post on Paul Bailey’s blog refers to the phenomenon of “top pressure”, which was widespread in the 1970s, and was described and decried at length in CAMRA publications. What this involved was delivering real ale to pubs in casks, but then connecting a cylinder of CO2 to it, and using the gas pressure to force the beer to an illuminated keg-type font on the bar.

It must have largely been a Southern phenomenon, as I don’t recall ever knowingly coming across it in the North, where a lot of the beer was real, and a lot of what wasn’t real was “tank” (which maybe merits a post of its own). In fact the only occasion when I have drunk what I believed to be top-pressure beer was in a Whitbread pub in Alton, Hampshire in about 1981. By that time the practice was in steep decline, as real ale, and the handpumps that symbolised it, were once again perceived as attractive.

The system also had a unique drawback of its own, in that not only did the gas pressure make the beer fizzy and prevent it maturing in the cask, but it also tended to disturb the sediment, so you would end up with a pint of slightly hazy pseudo-keg. Thirty years or more on, it’s hard to see why it was done, as it combined the worst of both worlds, lacking both the freshness and authenticity of cask and the consistency of genuine keg.

But, back in those days, fizzy beer that came from illuminated boxes on the bar was seen as the future, and brewers who lacked the funds to invest in kegs, kegging lines and pasteurisation facilities climbed on the bandwagon by sending out cask beer and making it masquerade as keg. How times change.

CUT FUNDING TO TOBACCO CONTROL INDUSTRY

We've all been told to tighten our belts and there is no doubt that the lowest paid among us will suffer the most in the spending cuts round.

So why on earth is so much public money still being thrown into that black hole of Tobacco Control?

Forest - the group that represents 12 million consumers - points out in the link above that scam charities and a myriad of smoke-free organisations are sucking the public purse dry and getting millions of our cash from Govt to lobby Govt to - errr - do what the Govt wants.

It's time this stopped. We ALL have to tighten our belts including those in the anti-smoking industry who leech and lie for a living.

Streets paved with gold

The next Wells & Youngs beer to sample is Young’s London Gold. This is a bottle-conditioned beer of 4.8% ABV*, packaged in a brown bottle with an attractive green label. It was previously known as Kew Gold – presumably it has been renamed to give it a wider appeal. I’m not sure if the recipe has been slightly tweaked or not – it tastes much the same to me.

Although bottle-conditioned, it pours clear, with all the yeast sticking to the bottom of the bottle. The colour is a bright pale gold, similar to many lagers.

It has a strong natural carbonation, with obvious spires of bubbles rising in the glass, although it did not form a large head. This is a good sign that it actually has been enjoying some secondary fermentation in the bottle.

There’s an initial floral hop aroma, with malt starting to come through further down the glass. It has a carbonic bite, but overall a fairly soft, subtle flavour. There’s nothing wrong with subtle beers, as I have said here.

Boak and Bailey have compared it here to a British Kölsch, which is quite an accolade.

It would make an ideal refreshing summer pint, although the question has to be asked whether it is perhaps a bit too subtle for its own good: there are other golden ales, most notably the similarly bottle-conditioned Hop Back Summer Lightning, which are more in-your-face.

* The website says it’s 4.5%, but the bottle definitely says 4.8%.

BANNED

"Everything the Govt does is backed up by guns and force..."

DEAR GOVT ....

Maryetta Ables from Forces International (sorry there is no link as the site appears to be down)has given some thoughts on the rerlationship between Govt and citizen.

I agree they should get thier noses out of our lives and leave us alone to grow and develop our own quality of life.

"Dear Government:

It is time I got this off my chest. Your behavior lately has made me feel increasingly uncomfortable. I think it is time we broke it off.

Many warning signs of an "unhealthy relationship" exist here....

You want to know:

Where I am all of the time
Who I am with
What I am eating
What kind of medicine I take
What I say on the internet and everywhere else
Who my friends are
What my kids are learning at school
What kind of light bulbs I use
What kind of car I drive

It is to the point now where you are trying to limit my choices on just about everything! You don't want me to be able to grow and trade my backyard vegetables! You want tell me how much I "deserve" to earn! Even if I decided to take up fishing in the river near my home, you are making rules and regulations about that too!

Here is the bottom line. You are oppressive, intrusive and abusive and I want out."

Me too!

MORE BBC BIAS

Well done Nigel Farage for raising the issue of the blanket smoking ban on BBC Newsnight this evening. It's such a shame that the interviewer - or political correspondent as he called himself - wasn't a bit interested.

The correspondent said that he had been asked by his editor to look into the "political issue of smoking following Nick Clegg's 'confession' on Desert Island Discs." He had no idea it was a political issue at all and neither did he care.

Rather than spend four minutes giving smokers fair coverage and a chance to explain exactly why it matters, he chose to waffle about how no-body gives a shit. He didn't have Simon Clark's take on it as the representative of 12 million consumers, neither did he ask F2C, the smoker's lobby and support group.

No, the prick decided to portray it as a non-issue before even looking into it and backed up his argument by asking busy people in the City - and probably just around the corner from his office - and foreign tourists who frankly haven't got a clue who Nick Clegg is or whether people here care or not about smoking.

What an insult - and they expect us to pay a licence fee for this as well.

Premiumisation in practice

As noted on their own blog, BrewDog have now got three of their beers listed in Morrisons, who of the “big four” supermarkets arguably take the most conservative approach to their beer range. They are Punk IPA, 5am Saint and Trashy Blonde, and they are priced at a somewhat eye-watering £1.59 for a 330ml bottle. Tesco, in comparison, sell Punk IPA and 77 Lager for £1.39 a bottle. Morrisons sell a wide range of 500ml premium bottled ales for £1.69 each, or £5.50 for 4, which works out at 27.5p per 100ml. The BrewDog beers, in contrast, are 48.2p per 100ml, 75% dearer. Are they better beers than Pedigree or Abbot Ale? Very possibly. Are they that much better? The jury is still out on that one. I did pick up a bottle of 5am Saint, as I’ve never tried that particular beer, but in general I think I’ll be waiting for the offers to kick in.

KERRY McCARTHY MP CAUTIONED

Well, it looks as if Miss Goodytwoshoes Kerry McCarthy MP has been cautioned by police . How the hell she knew the results of the postal vote in advance amazes me but then of course we live in a fascist society where elections are all but rigged.

I used to like her. I recall a couple of years ago - after she posted a patronising piece following a Forest do that low income smokers were too stupid to know what was best for them - that I debated the smoking issue on her blog.

I felt it was good to engage with an MP - and that the MP might actually listen. I was naive back then and didn't realise it was about money and hate and not health.

I poured my heart out on her blog and felt encouraged when she said that she would think about what I'd told her when the smoking issue came up in the House again.

Then she immediately voted for a tobacco display ban without thought for the little consumer like me or the little business person who runs the local corner shop. As far as I know, she has voted for every spiteful piece of anti-smoker legislation that was forced upon us while NuLabour was in power.

That's why I'm not sorry that her arrogance has finally landed her in trouble.

The only reason she gave for her hatred of smokers was that her granny died of cancer. Yes. This really is the quality of intellect and bigot that our House of Commons attracts.

As for rigged elections, it looks like a bit of gerrymandering is afoot in my County. I'm told the NuCons are aiming to change the boundaries again so that they can reduce the chances of any other party ever getting elected here.

Beware of AV - it won't be in the little person's interest but it will benefit whatever dictatorial party is in power at the time and can only ever bring just a govt we can't stand. We need a change - the Coagulation is not it.

AN APPEAL FOR JUSTICE

When 23 year old Mark Corely went missing his family hoped that he would turn up but five months later his body was found in a snow covered field miles away from home. He had been shot in the head.

His family was devastated but when five people were arrested for his murder, they thought at least that justice would be done. Seeing the scum go down for taking a life so treasured would at least give Mark's mum and dad some peace.

But this is Britain and justice is a word that doesn't mean what it says. Police incompetence meant that Mark's murderers walked away free after it came out out during the trial in 2002 that police illegally bugged private consultations between the solicitors and the accused.

Mark's dad Tony Corley said : "The judge halted the trial saying the police had committed flagrant breaches of the law but the detectives on the case were not charged - just disciplined for their wrong doing.

"Meanwhile, the five defendants were freed under the Human Rights act and as a result, no one has been convicted for Mark's murder."

If this happened to me, I think I'd want revenge. If the law wouldn't help me get justice for my son, then I'd be damn sure to try and get it for myself. Tony, however, has channelled that anger and frustration into something that can help other parents like him.

He has set up a support group for parents who received no justice after a son or daughter was murdered called StandTogether One of the members is the father of a son who was chased into the path of a lorry by thugs who then got less than six months jail time.

For all the crap we constantly hear about how life is so precious in this country we have to pour billions of tax payer's money in helping us all live longer and more healthily, but when push comes to shove, life in the UK doesn't matter at all. Mark Corley is proof.

Tony says that all the police officers involved in "investigating" (I use the word loosely) his son's murder have since either retired or moved on. It appears no one is willing to reinvestigate this murder - bearing in mind the change of law on double jeopardy, you would think that Lincolnshire Police might at least try and bring some peace to this troubled family that they let down so badly.

They owe it to the Corleys to look at this matter again but money is still worth more than life and justice in the UK and the cost of reinvestigating this case would probably be too much.

Meanwhile, Tony is doing all he can to help other parents in this situation but he needs help. He is asking for donations and fund-raising ideas for the new group he only founded this year.

He has also written a book about his experiences called More Questions Than Answers and you find details about it HERE

Anything you can do to help, support, or just spread the word about this injustice and Tony's group, would help to bring peace to a troubled family that Britain has let down so very badly.

LIFELONG SMOKER EVICTED AT 88

Looks like denormalisation has actually got to the point where smokers are being made homeless. How else could the monster who is throwing an 88 year old lifelong smoker out into the street do it with such lack of empathy and compassion? This sort of behaviour against such a defenceless pensioner by the power of propaganda is considered normal these days.

After all, what would the righteous do if they couldn't enforce their caring upon us by forcing us out into the cold?

While cowardly Cleggy plays politics with smoking, when as Dep PM he should be writing to the Canadian PM to register his disgust, the pro-choice movement has jumped into action in response.

We don't have anti-smoker funding that achieves such great things as the eviction of old people from their homes, but we do have passion and a real desire to help those that are being abused because they are smokers. We do what we can. We show strength.

Rich White, the author of Smoke Screens, the Truth About Tobacco, and the Pro-Choice Smoking Doctor have written to the housing association asking them to reconsider on humanitarian grounds. They are asking for as many signatures as possible on a letter and he hopes to gain support from members of the world-wide pro-choice movement.

More details of how you can help is HERE and HERE

My post on FB about this story appears to have kicked off the campaign. H/T Dick Puddlecote.

Losing your Spoons

The other day, I received an e-mail from Fleurets, the licensed trade estate agents, about the Red Lyon in Whitchurch, Shropshire, a former Wetherspoon’s pub that is now closed and up for sale. It could be yours for £300,000, freehold and contents.

I’ve recently praised Wetherspoons’ skills in site identification and property management. But it’s clear they don’t always get it right. This web page listing all of Wetherspoon’s outlets, also lists 99 former ones that have closed. In some cases, they may have moved to bigger and better premises nearby, but in others they must have misjudged the local market, as they spectacularly did with the Edwin Chadwick in Longsight, Manchester.

There are Spoons in some fairly small market towns, of similar size to Whitchurch, such as Ross-on-Wye and Haverfordwest. I don’t know the Red Lyon, so can’t really comment on why it closed, but it would be interesting to look into the reasons that lead to Spoons succeeding in some small towns, and failing in others. This news report links it to a general decline of pubs in the town. There is a Cheshire example in the Lodestar in Neston on the Wirral. Maybe a key factor is the extent to which a town is a magnet for people from the surrounding area.

Turning a blind eye

I’ve never thought much of Robert Crampton as a newspaper columnist: he always comes across as one of those who writes whimsical, knowing drivel that doesn’t actually say very much, in other words much like every writer in the unlamented Punch magazine. Indeed, I remember a column he wrote a few years ago in which he effectively said “I don’t see the point of pubs. I once went in one and didn’t like it.”

However, he’s spot on in a recent column in the Times, which I can’t link to because it’s behind a paywall, but which has been reported in the Morning Advertiser. In this he argues that tolerating under-18s drinking in pubs is a way of socialising them and teaching them the rules of the adult world, a point that has been made before by Tim Martin of Wetherspoons, amongst others.

“Part of the tacit arrangement with the landlord was that we had to keep a low profile, behave ourselves, act in at least a civilised manner, learn the etiquette of communal socialising.

“If you got too gobby, you would be chucked out. Literally chucked out.

“Being in a pub meant that you absorbed a code of behaviour and that code did not include being an annoying little prat, or what is nowadays called antisocial behaviour.

“A pub is actually a very good place — much better than a street — for older men and women to pass on words of wisdom or warning to those who need to hear them.”

Unfortunately, the current draconian insistence on age-checking paradoxically makes the problems of underage drinking worse, not better.

What is needed is not a change in the law, but a tacit acceptance that, unless trouble is caused, a blind eye will in many circumstances be turned. If you know you are underage, you haven’t a leg to stand on if you step out of line. A similar blind eye is often turned, for example, with underage sex and many minor motoring offences, so it can’t be said that it never happens.

The deception that isn’t

Last night, the local CAMRA branch did a crawl of some of the pubs on the east side of Stockport town centre. One of the pubs visited was the Queens on Great Portwood Street. Go in, and you’re greeted by the sight of two handpumps dispensing Robinson’s Unicorn and Hatters. However, ask for either, and the barmaid will not pull the pump but flick a little switch to dispense your beer. Shock! Horror! Fake handpumps! But, in fact, the beer you get is cask-conditioned, served via electric meters, so while it may on the face of it look like a deception, it isn’t. The Unicorn was fine, and a beer I could happily have drunk all night, although those who went for the Hatters weren’t so happy. It’s a smartly-decorated, comfortable pub that, while never likely to be a CAMRA favourite, perhaps gets dismissed too easily.

I’ve expressed in the past a certain amount of nostalgia for the disappearance of metered real ale dispense. I know handpumps are an unequivocal symbol of cask beer, but in my view electric meters provide the ideal halfway house between sparklering a beer to death, and serving it flat, they remove the ability of incompetent bar staff to cock up dispensing a pint, and they give you a full measure too! Once very common in the North-West (especially in Robinson’s, Hydes and Greenalls pubs), the Queens and the Flying Dutchman on Hillgate are the only pubs I know of that still have it.

Incidentally, the best beer of the night was (handpumped) Robinson’s Battering Ram in the Tiviot – a wonderful pub that is like stepping back into the 1950s.

Proxy parenting

A South Shields woman has been fined £80 for buying cider and sparkling wine for her 14-year-old daughter to drink. Fair enough, you may think, and the report doesn’t go into the circumstances in detail. Possibly the fact that the alcohol was being drunk by the girl’s friends as well was a significant factor in the case.

But it does raise questions as to where it is right to draw the line. The law is quite clear that if an adult buys alcohol on licensed premises on behalf of a minor, they are committing an offence. But the offence is specifically in the proxy purchasing. It is not illegal for someone between the ages of 5 and 18 to drink alcohol, and nor is it illegal for parents to give their children alcohol. If a parent gave their 14-year-old daughter a glass of wine and she took it out into the park, would that be an offence?

Although it might not be an example of first-class parenting, I do not believe I would be committing an offence if I went into Tesco Express to buy a ready-chilled four-pack of Stella, went back to my car, and gave one of the cans to my hypothetical fifteen-year-old son who was sitting in the back seat. It’s far from unknown for parents to buy alcohol for parties given by their under-18 children, or to give their children alcohol to take to such parties.

Is this a case of the authorities seeking to push the boundaries and uninformed people who feel a bit guilty about their behaviour meekly acquiescing?

BLOGGER'S NEW NOVEL

He's one of the best bloggers in the sphere and so this, his first published novel, has got to be great read. It's out in April.

Congrats Leg Iron.

Bottled beer poll

The current poll is intended to find out to what extent people are influenced by in-store offers when buying bottled or canned beer. After I’d done it, it occurred to me that there is really a fifth category – people who don’t mainly stick to familiar brands, but are always on the lookout for something new or unusual. But if you take that approach, and don’t pay much attention to the price tag, then the first answer, “I buy the brands I like regardless of price” is the best one to go for. So far, that’s well in the lead, which will no doubt disappoint Cooking Lager and his campaign for cheap lout.

NULABOUR IS STILL IN POWER

It doesn't matter what it calls itself or what name we know it by, but today's Government has shown itself to be exactly as we had before.

These CUTS sound very much like they came straight from the economic mouth of NuLab. They had to if unproven green issues come before people and economics, and other countries' needs come before our own.

It seems as if nanny is still in control. After all, what use of this database if it's not for our own good? I'm sure that was a NuLab idea as well wasn't it?

And then there's the NuLab control freakery idea of keeping tabs on everything you do by spying on your own private emails. Nanny says this has to be done because the nasty terrorists are after us. I'm sure the spam messages that get through to my inbox about penis extensions are vital evidence in the war on terror so perhaps I shouldn't complain.

If you're on Facebook, you can join the email May Day. I remember when the group was called "cc all your emails to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith."

Yup. The "Coalition" is same government as we had last time. I could have sworn we had an election but then I forgot that we now live in a dictatorship.It doesn't matter what party gets the majority vote, the Govt always wins. Democracy is dead in Britain.

Snippery slope

A US charity called Project Prevention is offering drug addicts £200 if they agree to have a vasectomy so they can’t pass on their degenerate lifestyles to the next generation. Apparently alcoholics (however defined) will get £100. Whether or not this will actually produce the desired results is doubtful, and you can’t help wondering where all this is going to end. What about people who weigh 20 stone? What about long-term benefit claimants? It’s not hard to find people prepared to express Sun-reader type opinions that “they shouldn’t be allowed to breed”. What about smokers? What about heavy drinkers, or indeed anyone who drinks more than the officially sanctioned annual thimbleful? Or those who don’t eat their “five a day”?

The discredited eugenics movement of the early 20th century is generally thought of now as being about racial purity, but in reality it was just as much, if not more, about improving the quality of the population by preventing the feckless underclass from breeding. The well-known novelist H. G. Wells, generally regarded as a man of the political Left, advocated ridding the world of the “unfit” through forced sterilisation, and he was far from alone. It seems that this mentality of making value judgments as to who is fit to reproduce and who isn’t, based on “lifestyle” criteria, is starting to creep back in again by the back door. It’s certainly widely spoken of already in relation to healthcare entitlement.

HELP US FIGHT DENORMALISATION

I haven't heard if any smoke-free quangos have been axed in the public spending cuts and bearing in mind the multi agencies have already had half a billion pounds off us in five years, then I would have thought it would be ripe for plucking.

Imagine what much needed public services could be saved if we stopped giving almost £1 million to ASH Scotland - an organisation that couldn't survive without Govt funding because the general public does not support it.

Certainly Simon Clark at Taking Liberties makes a sound, reasonable and common sense argument for trimming costs at ASH Scotland which has come up with 33 more torturing ways to finally deal with the problem of smokers.

They have the hate crime denormalisation to cause us to be shunned and avoided by our friends, neighbours, and employers even though they know the aim of denormalisation is to create hate and shame.

This explanation from a poster in the comments section on Simon's post shows they really mean business. Smokers must quit or they will be legally discriminated against and hate against them will be legally backed up with Govt funds to public health.

Tobacco Denormalization and Stigma

"In fact, many tobacco denormalization programs tend to embrace the stigmatization of smokers as a public health tool.

Stigma is achieved through a moralization of smoking. For instance, public education campaigns on the adverse health outcomes of smoking paints those who smoke as engaging in morally reprehensible behaviour.

The philosopher Martha Nussbaum, for instance, has argued that humiliating or dehumanizing the victim is “central” for stigma to be enacted, and, following Goffman, the stigmatized person has to recognize this humiliation (spoiled identity) as a reality.

Such an effort at manipulating the mores of society has clear implications for persons living with psychiatric illness. As UBC‘s Kirsten Bell and colleagues notice, “denormalization policies have the effect of sanctioning stigma implicitly directed towards a particular segment of the population: the segment with the least ability and/or willingness to quit”

Interestingly, denomalization programs are antithetical to public health efforts which are focused on eradicating stigma – particularly around eliminating negative public perceptions of people who use illicit drugs.

However advocates such as Bayer argue that the burden of stigmatizing denormalization policies imposed on vulnerable populations (e.g., individuals living with psychiatric illness) is justified by the (potential) benefits to that population."
http://neuroethicscanada.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/tobacco-denormalization-and-stigma/

That's why people have to do that huddled and shunned without adequate shelter thing, if they want to smoke a cigarette in public.
In obeying the law , you conform to the desired stereotype."


This denormalisation is certainly working in already criminalising smokers as can be seen here by another Smokers as litterers case - and get the tone of the piece. The media has bought into denormalisation without even realising it. It makes me ashamed to call myself a Journsalist when my "colleagues" can turn on their readers without fighting the big Pharma companies that fund this hatred or even questioning the necessity of this kind of action.

Yes, I know I've debated this before - litter is litter but smoking litter is somehow worse than dropping chip papers, beer cans, or chewing gum that takes a decade to clear. Cig ends are biodegradable. It's like dropping a leaf. SHS is an invention. It does not kill. The truth in their game of smoker hating really doesn't matter anymore. After all tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

I have talked on here of raising funds to prosecute these people for hate crime and I am still waiting for an offer of legal help. I'll keep repeating it until some comes forward. There are fears, I know, that if we lose this legal battle then we'll be fooked. We have nothing to lose. We're fooked anyway. This could be the turning point we need to be treated as equally as other people and to make the hate stop. If we do not, they will hound us out of our homes and jobs.

I say again, if you don't smoke or don't like smoking and you support this programme of denormalisation, then you ARE supporting the same kind of hate as the Nazis began to show towards the Jews long before the holocaust - the final solution - came along. That took time. Smokers may not end up in the gas chamber but we will end up locked up in very uncomfortable places when tobacco is made illegal and it will. It is simply a question of time and is already on the bigots tick list of things to do.

First, like the Nazis made the German people accept hate of the Jews, the likes of ASH Scotland and ASH UK are making ordinarily decent people hate smokers with the same passion. Ask yourselves this. If ASH et al really cared about helping people to quit and they really cared about people full stop, they would not promote this programme of denormalisation. It is inhuman. It comes from a standpoint of hate. It promotes and legalises hate. Please make this hate stop and stop supporting this.

The smoking ban is only part of this. Choice means just that. We can choose to be the people we are. It matters not whether we can smoke in a pub or not. What matters is the smoking ban lays the groundwork for the next phase to finally rid the world of smokers. It legalises hate and discrimination. Is this really what you want?

If you want to save the services that matter, then join us. Stand with us. Write to your MP and demand that hate crime against us stops and denormalisation ends. If you do not, you will have to live with the shame of criminalising law abiding people because of who they are. If you do not, it will be your turn next.

Is this really what you want?

* UPDATE - Smokers are now deemed a terrorist threat I despair.

Going bananas

Wells & Youngs were recently kind enough to send me some samples of their premium bottled ales, so I’ll be progressively reviewing them over the next few weeks. Clearly I have to declare an interest here, but on the other hand I’m not going to say something is good when I don’t think it is, as you can see from this book review, which I wanted to like, but couldn’t.

Wells & Youngs are in the second division of brewers of PBAs alongside the likes of Badger and Shepherd Neame, but behind the market leaders Marston’s and Greene King. They also now own the Courage brands. They have a distinctive portfolio of beers including one or two that are a bit out of the ordinary. Interestingly, all their Young’s branded beers are bottle-conditioned.

The first one I sampled was one of their more unusual brews, Wells Banana Bread Beer, which weighs in at 5.2% ABV.

I’ve never really been a fan of beers brewed with fruit, and some British cask ales with strawberries and raspberries have been among the most unpleasant I have ever tasted. However, the distinctive taste of banana, which doesn’t really have any element of sweetness, seems to suit beer rather better.

It comes in clear glass in the distinctive W&Y bottle shape tapering slightly out to the shoulder. The colour is mid-brown, but a dark tan without any reddish hint. The picture makes it look paler than it actually is. The head is fairly small, but lingers down the glass; there’s a full mouthfeel and distinct although not excessive carbonation.

The beer itself is fairly dry, with an underlying maltiness and hops too, but not of the floral kind that might struggle with the banana. The banana flavour, while not overpowering, is very evident – this is much more than a beer with a “hint of banana”.

Overall a good, unusual but eminently drinkable beer which makes an interesting change from more mainstream brews. Obviously it won’t appeal to those who don’t like the taste of bananas, and probably best to have one while relaxing in front of the TV rather than something you would drink as a session beer. The fruitiness would also make it a refreshing summer beer.

I have enjoyed it as a cask beer in the past although it is not listed in the current Good Beer Guide – which also, interestingly, says that after taking on the Courage brands, Wells & Youngs’ total brewing volumes are now more than Greene King’s.

HITLER WOULD BE PROUD

Grrrrr - THIS has got me raging today.

The woman who is paying addicts £200 at the most desperate times of their lives justifies it because she has adopted children of addicts. Sanctimonious bitch. There is simply one problem with drug addiction - it is a criminal offence. If it were not, the whole issue could be dealt with adequately. Hell - look what they've done to smoking - a legal but unpopular herb which has dramatic quit rates.

Decriminalise drugs, run an education (not lying) programme alongside it and use the waste of time currently used in schools scaring kids to death with tales of doom if they don't eat properly.

In short, take away the market that this horrible woman who set up this charity plans to get rich on by telling those with the lowest of low self esteem that they will NEVER be good enough to have children.

At least the british media doesn't seem to have jumped on the bandwaggon here and is urging caution. At least they have some balance. At least drug charity Addaction has slammed the idea as exploitation. Hallelujah for that!

WELL...?

I'm astounded!

Was THIS written by Dick Puddlecote?

STOP DENORMALISATION NOW!

I am none of these things so stop denormalising me. This is a programme that aims to encourage hatred against smokers - a minority group and all it's about is fat cats getting rich on the misery of others.

Wasn't "denormalisation" by another name what the Nazis used to make the majority believe that Jews were sub-human beings,.

Sorry for those of you who believe that smokers are less human than Jews and are offended that we complain about where the Govt backed hatred of smokers is leading but when we are promoted as ...

Smokers as malodourous
Smokers as litterers
Smokers as unattractive and undesirable housemates
Smokers as undereducated and a social underclass
Smokers as excessive users of public health services
Smokers as employer liabilities

...then perhaps you can see where this anger and fear of the future as a dedicated,lifelong and cultural smoker comes from.

Denormalisation should be illegal. Why is our Govt and our countrymen not standing up for us against this programme? Those of you who are fat or like an alcoholic drink will be next and then what? Denormalisation of those who have dark hair, dark eyes, and as far from Arian looking as Romanian Gypsies?

FFS - Wake up! This must stop. This is THE most important issue this century.

Smooth operator

Well, my survey on “do you drink ‘smooth’ bitters?” has closed, with fairly predictable results:

Yes, and I never touch cask: 3 (3%)
Usually, but I occasionally drink cask: 0 (0%)
Sometimes, but I prefer cask: 11 (10%)
No, not if I can help it: 81 (77%)
I prefer other draught products to ales: 5 (5%)
I never drink any draught beer or cider: 5 (5%)

But if cask is so strongly preferred, why is it that “smooth” commands a substantial price premium? In Wetherspoons the other day, Ruddles Best Bitter was £1.55 a pint, John Smith’s Extra Smooth, a beer of similar strength, £1.95. Robinsons, Holts and Hydes all price smooth higher than cask bitter. In the real world, Pete Brown’s cask beer price premium is a long way off. Real drinkers will pay a premium for consistent but bland smooth beer.

Personally, I can’t stand the stuff, and in extremis would prefer cooking lager.

WHO'S IN CONTROL

A must-watch, common sense video. Beware contains some violence but please share. This is a very important message.



H/T Simon Clarke at Taking Liberties.

The video was made by a tobacco company. I think the industry knows more about it's business and it's threats better than health professionals - like smokers know more about smoking than anti-smoker political lobbyists who claim to be doing it "for their own good."

Clearly they are not. They are kidding themselves.

It's not going away

Earlier this week, David Nuttall, the new Conservative MP for Bury North, put down a private member’s bill under the Ten-Minute Rule to amend the smoking ban in pubs and clubs. It was defeated, but by the surprisingly narrow margin of 141 votes to 86 – and this for a hastily-submitted measure where there was little opportunity to lobby for support. Much of the opposition seemed to be simply recycling the same old clichés with little sense of conviction – see Dick Puddlecote here. What is to say that a better-organised bill, with more time for lobbying, could not do even better? The antismokers have argued that the ban enjoys overwhelming support, and is a done deal on which there is no going back, but clearly this isn’t the case.

This underlines the fact that the the smoking ban very much remains on the political radar. Contrary to the hopes of the antismoking lobby, opponents of the ban are not going to “move on” or “stop crying over spilt milk”. The passage of time does not render the ban any more acceptable, or any more right, if anything quite the contrary. And the issue won’t go away until the ban is relaxed.

The secret of our success

Wetherspoons are undoubtedly the greatest success story of modern times in the pub trade, all the more so because they have achieved that success in an overall declining market. They have about 1.5% of the total number of pubs in the UK, but because of the average size of their pubs probably account for more like 10% of pub drink sales. While there have been a few attempts to take them on, such as Bass’ Goose chain, none have really amounted to much. Although they offer low prices, that is far from the whole story as to why they have prospered so much. So what is the business model that has led them to enjoy such success?

• They are very good at identifying sites that will fit the Wetherspoons formula. It’s rare for them to make a mistake. The Edwin Chadwick in Longsight was a rare exception where they seem to have completely misjudged the area, although I could see a Spoons working in the centre of Levenshulme a mile down the road. The success of Tesco is built on astute property management as well as retailing skills.
  
• Wetherspoons sites are always ones with a lot of pre-existing footfall – they are primarily targeted at customers who are already in the area, or would be visiting it anyway.
  
• By definition then, they are not destination venues. There is seldom much point in visiting a Spoons other than the one closest to you at the time (or maybe one out of a handful in a city centre). This may seem a negative factor, but it is fundamental to the business model. While a few Wetherspoons pubs do have car parks, they would avoid any site where a majority of customers would be expected to travel by car. They wouldn’t open up, for example, in the Rams Head at Disley or the Waggon & Horses at Handforth. In this context, it will be interesting to see what kind of fist Spoons make of some of the new pubs they have acquired in more suburban locations such as the Black Horse in Northfield, Birmingham and the Childwall Fiveways in Liverpool
  
• They offer low prices and largely undercut the local competition, although they aren’t necessarily as cheap as often imagined. A perception of good value counts for a lot. If there’s a Spoons nearby, as a customer you have to justify to yourself paying more elsewhere.
  
• Their all-day food offer, while obviously more adequate than inspiring, cannot be beaten in their trading locations for range and value. All-day pub food is still rare in town centres.
  
• Their pubs are designed to be unintimidating and welcoming to the casual user and occasional pubgoer, hence the shopfront type appearance and open-plan layout. They are deliberately intended to be “unpubby” – I am sure the lack of fixed seating which I personally find offputting is a considered policy.
  
• Their drinks range offers something for everyone, from the shot drinker to the real ale buff – nobody can object that “they don’t sell that!” It’s an easy default choice for a group to go to Wetherspoons. They probably have the widest customer age range of any pub chain.
  
• Although it’s obviously in their commercial interest to sell cask beer, they also recognise that it is useful to keep CAMRA sweet. If CAMRA started generally condemning the chain it could do a lot of damage.
  
• They have constantly varying offers and promotions to maintain customer interest.
  
• They offer a consistent formula across all their pubs (with a few minor regional tweaks). This may be condemned as bland and uniform, but you know exactly what to expect, and it makes it much easier for the company to stay in control of what is on offer and maintain standards.
  
• They have now achieved a critical mass so that the chain promotes itself through word of mouth – say to someone “there’s a new Spoons opening in Puddlebury” and no further explanation is needed.
  
• They have created a subtle differentiation between the Wetherspoons and Lloyds No.1 brands which allows them to widen their potential market in the “night-time economy”, although the two can be indistinguishable in the daytime.

Wetherspoons have now become so big that it would now be effectively impossible for any other operator to mount a direct challenge – they are the “category killer” of the urban pub world. Indeed, Tim Martin openly acknowledges Wal-Mart as a role model. While I’ve said more than once that as a pub connoisseur I’m lukewarm about them (although I do use them) you can’t argue with their success. The same opportunities have been open to others – after all, Wetherspoons started small thirty years ago – but they have failed to take them.

WAR DECLARED - JOIN THE RESISTANCE!

I've just had time to watch this video posted on this excellent post by Leg iron.

I echo his words and rallying cry : "We are fighting a war in which we cannot lose any more. So take off the gloves, forget compromise, and light up the tabs of war."




My favourite part about the voice over comedy on this vid is "I would quit if I didn't think I'd become one of them."

And remember, if you support the ban, you are supporting the same kind of hate that led to the murder of millions of Jews and other "undesirables". When we can all choose to socialise in either smoking or non-smoking places, is it really worth supporting a ban that takes us socially backward, promotes intolerance, and legalises discrimination.

If you do support this, then you are less than human so please don't pretend to care about people to hide your hatred of a minority group. Hatred of smoking and smokers is the most selfish obsession in the world.

You only have to read through the comments on David Nuttall's blog to realise that anti-smokers are mentally unbalanced and filthy people.

They don't, apparently, wash their clothes unless near a smoker. I wouldn't want to stand near them now smoking is banned in pubs and other places. They don't wash themselves or their clothes anymore and seem to be happy lounging in their own scum. They must stink of BO and other horrible things which is part of the reason why pubs are no longer a pleasure to visit.

The anti-smokers and health phobics (we used to call them hypochondriacs years ago) make the place stink with their own self righteousness and lack of personal hygiene.

BYE ANNA RACOON ... AND THANK YOU

God, I will miss Anna Racoon. Grumpy Old Twat writes a tribute to the loss the brothers and sisters in the Blogosphere will feel now that Anna's witty and political musings are gone.

Yes, Blogging can be hard work, and the abuse you get can be hard to take as well as the constant defending of your position when you've said it a million times. No one pays us. We do it for passion and to be heard when no one else is listening.

Some bloggers rant, some investigate, and others reflect, suggest or downright mock. Whatever they do, bloggers are far more entertaining and influential on those the authorities have never been able to reach. It's sad that another of our number has gone. I hope one day she will come back.

ASH FUNDS HATE AND PREJUDICE

Why am I not surprised that Welsh ASH has funded research to show that smokers really are despicable people.

It was never going to show the truth because that does not fit with the smoker haters' agenda. Imagine presenting ASH with a paid for study that said smokers were actually mentally well balanced people and our evidence shows that you smoke phobic and health freaks are the real nutters.

This bit in the Spiked article linked above gets me the most. The patronising enforced caring really makes me want to vomit when the truth is that anti-smoking cowards hide behind "the poor" because they generally don't speak up for themselves so they can lie in their name. Well - NOT IN MINE!

Indeed, there are all sorts of reasons why people might be less concerned about their health than health guardians feel they ought to be. One of these is poverty: if your life is a bit of a grind with limited opportunity, then having another beer or smoking another fag might be a more appealing prospect than an extra few weeks, months or years of old age. As the Marmot Review on health inequalities noted earlier this year: ‘People with a higher socioeconomic position in society have a greater array of life chances and more opportunities to lead a flourishing life. They also have better health. The two are linked: the more favoured people are, socially and economically, the better their health.'

Don't tell me for a start that those with highly paid jobs don't find their lives a bit of a grind. All those long hours at work, day after day. Money has nothing to do with it. Who the fuck are these arse sniffers to dismiss "the poor's" lives in this way. When was this Marmot last in the heart of the sink estate? Cnut!

And the view that those who have more money are somehow immune to bad health makes me want to pee myself if it wasn't so crass. Try telling actor Christopher Reed that all his wealth saved him when he took a risk and rode that horse that broke his neck and killed him slowly over 10 years. Try telling that to actress Grace Kelly, Princess of Monaco, when the fast car her daughter liked killed her after plunging off a cliff!

I assume you get the point that lots of money won't save you and being poor doesn't mean your life is shit. But it is good ammo in ASH's lie box to fund continuous prejudice and hatred and blind the soft and stupid.

These organic fart sniffing MPs in Parliament - all 141 of them who voted against David Nuttall MP's amendment - should hang their heads in shame. His 10 minute rule was was defeated and it seemed the knob NuLab MP Kevin Barron took note of crazed anti-smoking plants or stooges from ASH.

I have to say I am over the moon that my MP Karl Mccartney supported David Nuttall. I think I'll ask my technical expert to set up a gallery of the 86 heroes who dared to support us to go with my blog mascot Philip Davies. I salute them.

RIP SOLOMON BURKE

He was so right.

MP's CALL TO AMEND THE BAN

Obviously I welcome this move by MP David Nuttall to try and get an amendment to help struggling pubs that are dying because of the smoking ban and my fingers are very firmly crossed that someone will listen and actually take the common sense approach.

His 10 minute rule goes before the House of Commons tomorrow. I don't want to be negative but it appears the anti-smoking bigots are already getting the guns out to drown out the noise of anyone speaking up for us.

As one who does like pubs, but enjoys cafes and restaurants more, I wonder if anyone at all cares to bring back the choice there as we never hear of amendments coming that way. I'm still mourning the loss of my favourite Italian Restaurant that went a few months after the ban was imposed.

I think that now after three and a half years of social exclusion, it will be an uphill struggle and the coagulation Govt has not shown itself too willing to be fair about this. They are the same kind of fart sniffers as those who steal tax payers money to feather their own nests. They claim to care about people.They care only for profit.

I also worry that as much as MPs might want to suport David Nuttall, CaMoron and Cleggy won't be able to oblige because they are slaves to the EU and the commissioner has recently announced a move to ban smoking across the whole of Europe. Yes. The commissioner that we can't vote for but who dictates to us because that Scottish prick Gordon Brown gave Britain away with the Lisbon Treaty.

I could be wrong. I often am. Let's wait and see. Tomorrow, after Mr Nuttall's address to Parliament, we could see the first day back towards freedom and inclusion for our minority group so maligned and slandered by those with so much to gain financially from the misery they continue to impose.

And in David Nuttall's own words on his blog which is worth a read and comment of encouragement.

A London Eye

The last time I ventured within the M25, my car was broken into in a hotel car park, doing over £300 worth of damage, and stealing a valuable classic Pentax SLR camera. So I’m not really inclined to repeat the experience any day soon.

Tandleman makes regular visits to London, and has remarked in the past how the pub scene there, at least in the inner areas, seems to be much more vibrant than in the country as a whole. But London is very different from the rest of the country, and really is not representative.

The much more intensive provision of public transport, and the much higher proportion of middle-class residents of inner-urban areas are both likely to result in a much healthier pub trade than in the rest of the country. Only in London is it not considered unusual for a middle-class family to eschew a car.

It seems to me that Pete Brown’s Cask Report is very London-centric in its outlook, with its claims that cask beer attracts an upmarket clientele, and that some licensees are put off serving cask because of the lower margins it commands. That last point just does not resonate here at all – almost without exception, the reasons pubs don’t serve cask are (a) they see it as too much bother, and (b) they believe, rightly or wrongly, that there is insufficient demand for it.

This also leads to a more general problem in politics as so many “opinion formers” live in London, yet in numerous ways it is not representative of the rest of the country, transport of course being a prime example. We have seen this with the congestion charge that seems to work in London, but has been decisively rejected by electors in both Manchester and Edinburgh.

Campaign with a Capital C

There have recently been a few ructions about the undemocratic proposal by CAMRA’s National Executive to remove the right of members to set the annual membership fees. I am a member of a professional accountancy institute, and that august body allows its members to vote on fees each year, so why it is such a problem for CAMRA I struggle to understand.

In this month’s issue of What’s Brewing, Colin Valentine, the CAMRA chairman, says “We are not a drinking club. We are not an appreciation society. We are a Campaign with a capital C.” But for many members the first two are precisely how they regard CAMRA. As I have described here, it has been extremely successful both in creating a social network of beer enthusiasts, and in promoting the appreciation of “quality” beer.

However, looking at the other side of the coin, in what campaign, as such, has CAMRA ever achieved success – setting aside the infamous Beer Orders which proved to be largely a disaster for the pub trade and the brewing industry?

It has also, of course, signally failed to campaign effectively, if at all, against the biggest legislative assault on pubs in its lifetime, not to mention doing little to confront the rise of the neo-Prohibitionists.

The question must be asked, what precisely, beyond the general appreciation of good beer and good pubs, is CAMRA campaigning for today? Possibly this is something that the current strategic review being carried out by ex-MP John Grogan will help to resolve, but don’t hold your breath.

The Ultimate Curmudgeonly Jukebox

There have been a number of posts recently in the beer blogosphere about people’s ultimate pub jukebox. Now it has to be said that beer snobbery has nothing on music snobbery, and there is a whole range of acts whose music might be utterly unlistenable and devoid of commercial success but still merits a high place in the “critical canon”. Whereas I make no apology for liking Magnum, and for liking Sam Smith’s Old Brewery Bitter.

I am an unabashed fan of classic rock and AOR. So here are ten tracks, not necessarily my ten favourite tracks, but ones that, if I walked into a pub and heard them playing, I’d say “yeah, alright...”

• AC/DC – Hell’s Bells
  
• Belinda Carlisle – Lay Down Your Arms
  
• Big Country – Wonderland
  
• Boston – More than a Feeling
  
• Dire Straits – Single Handed Sailor
  
• Don Henley – Boys of Summer
  
• Heart – Crazy on You
  
• Mountain – Nantucket Sleighride
  
• Pearl Jam – Alive
  
• Tom Petty/Stevie Nicks – Stop Draggin’ My Heart Around

And I haven't even mentioned Roxette!

If you go in any rock pub, you’ll find a band cranking out covers of Bad Company, AC/DC and Van Halen, and the critically preferred wank will be nowhere to be heard.

Edit: Thanks to Mark Wadsworth for the cartoon.

LOVE AND ALL THAT

It might be quiet around here over the next few days. I'm off to daughter No 1's wedding.

I've got my posh dress, my posh hat, my heels, and flats just in case, and I almost know by heart the piece she has asked me to read.

Shakespeare's Sonnet 116.

Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove.
O. no! it is an ever-fixed mark,
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wand'ring bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his
Height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and
Cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come;
Love alters not with his brief hours and
Weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error, and upon me prov'd,
I never writ, nor no man ever lov'd.

Right. That's the practice done - now on to help the other half with his speech.

COALITION CHEATS AND LIARS

I'm so sick of false promises and downright lies from these con artists

A lesson learned rather too late but I hope smokers, drinkers, fatties, free thinkers, libertarians, normal people, and those who really want change don't vote for these cheats and liars again.

We must all vote for one party next time and send them a message. WE FUCKING MATTER! The only power we have is at the ballot box. Please don't waste your vote again on these tossers.