Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html en-gb 30 Sun 19 Apr 2015 19:13:03 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html Dunroamin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=99#comment132 126. Electric Hermit: For once, I shall adopt a favourite nationalist style of response and merely repeat what you wrote with minor changes, aka the '"No, you are!" Response':"Opinions based on the lies and distortions peddled by the SNP and nationalists cannot possibly have the same status as opinions based on facts." Thu 23 Sep 2010 12:08:15 GMT+1 GrassyKnollington http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=98#comment131 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 12:07:59 GMT+1 Dunroamin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=97#comment130 Loving how the nationalists are so 'angry' over this. Can't quite imagine them being such obsessive and fanatical supporters of this policy if it had been a Labour idea.As for this obsession with a certain "independent and impartial website", that actually only contains pro-nationalism articles and also only allows pro-nationalism comments to be posted, why not refer to it by it's more accurate name?:'Natnet Braveheart' Thu 23 Sep 2010 12:06:32 GMT+1 jakeponsonby http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=96#comment129 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 12:05:59 GMT+1 redrobb http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=96#comment128 Yes indeed it was doomed to fail, perhaps because of flaws and any such policy could be thwarted courtesy of white van man etc. But I suspect some heavy lobbying from groups with a particular interest. Listen the producers of all type of beverages are those that should be targetted, but not where they can re-coup losses by simply increasing prices to joe public. I suspect a great many of bigger ones use convenient off-shore tax avoidence vehicles to safely grow their wealth even further! For every A&E / Ambulance / Surgical / Police / Anti Social need, due to the harm of alcohol use, its these companies cash hordes that should be raided! I can here the lobbisists scuttling across the floor..... Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:45:56 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=95#comment127 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:42:50 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=94#comment126 Congratulations, Muckledug!Now, have we worn the mods down or was it just a shift change? Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:39:47 GMT+1 Electric Hermit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=93#comment125 111. ziggyboy"I am entitled to my opinion on minimum pricing."That you are entitled to an opinion is not in question. We are all entitled to an opinion. But this does not mean that all opinions are equally valid. Opinions based on the lies and distortions peddled by the Tory/BLP alliance at Holyrood cannot possibly have the same status as opinions based on facts. Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:32:18 GMT+1 Gary Hay http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=93#comment124 Alcohol is a luxury, not a god-given right of citizens. Labour should be encouraging the poor to buy food and clothes for themselves and their children instead of labouring a disingenuous point about poor people being hit the hardest by an alcohol increase. The same can be said for cigarettes. Ok, it's unpopular to tax life's little luxuries, but looking at the bigger picture I can only see positives in increasing the price of alcohol and tobacco. I appreciate things that much more when I have to save to buy it or make a sacrifice to obtain it. Alcohol and Cigarettes should most definitely be within the reach of the poor, but not to the extent where Labour treats it as their god given right. The argument against minimum pricing is without doubt a political one and instead of criticising the policy - Labour (as responsible ((ha!)) opposition) should be suggesting that Scotland be given powers of taxation over alcohol and cigarettes so that the health levies they "ALLEGEDLY" prefer can be enforced.OOPS, that'd be called fiscal responsibility, wouldn't it... can't say that - the NATS have already been asking about that...No, instead what they do is concoct a commission that looks at bringing Scotland AND England in line with each other regarding "floor pricing" (isn't that just minimum pricing by a another name? No flies on Labour, eh?) instead of realising that Scotland is driving the change it itself wants.I can see this newly found obbsession with "mutual policy change" backfiring spectacularly with Labour, who if I recall correctly were proponents of the idea that policy in Scotland shouldn't be dictated in England? ha ha!Well Grey, it's a two way street. If the Scottish Labour want to influence policy in England because of your hatred of the SNP, I can't wait to see what you'll be saying when England and Wales enforce mutual policies of public sector cuts in Scotland. Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:25:04 GMT+1 Electric Hermit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=92#comment123 50. shcart"However what percentage of folks back in the UK actually believe this was genuinely intended to restrict drinking for health reasons rather than creating yet another deceitful tax."Minimum pricing is not a tax. If you don't understand that then you don't understand enough to comment sensibly. Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:23:27 GMT+1 Eddie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=91#comment122 #115 - and you seriously think the SNP plan would have made one iota of difference! - Living in cloud cuckoo land, that's the SNP for you.What the SNP should have done is ban selling alcohol in any location other than Supermarkets or off licences. If not that then at the very least, any corner shop caught selling booze to underagers should lose their licence to sell alcohol permanently. Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:21:41 GMT+1 Electric Hermit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=90#comment121 38. ziggyboy"Minimum pricing in my view is not the way forward as it will hit the reponsible drinkers. "Why not try thinking for yourself instead of parroting the unionist cabal's propaganda. Try explaining exactly how minimum pricing would impact "responsible drinkers". Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:20:37 GMT+1 muckledug http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=90#comment120 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:15:37 GMT+1 muckledug http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=89#comment119 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:05:43 GMT+1 muckledug http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=88#comment118 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:04:47 GMT+1 A Voter http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=87#comment117 Further to my post #34 those who are interested can see the full story and MSPs comments during the Health & Sport Committee meeting at this link:- http://f2cscotland.blogspot.com/2010/09/press-reports-abound-yesterday-and.html Thu 23 Sep 2010 11:03:32 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=87#comment116 111. ziggyboy"because I don't agree with the SNP I must be a Unionist."No. I was going by your previous posts, which indicated a Labour identity. Sorry for getting that wrong. Thu 23 Sep 2010 10:51:54 GMT+1 heraldnomore http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=86#comment115 Well done boys, fair takes me back to that great C'nut debate.Was that the same chap on with Kaye this morning, who gave such gracious support to Ms Deech? And weren't they all discussing some leadership election or other about which no one other than members can have any input? Why so much publicity to the subject on the sacred BBC? Thu 23 Sep 2010 10:43:17 GMT+1 fairliered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=85#comment114 Breaking news! All Italian restaurants in Scotland have been closed down after it was found they were selling expresso coffees.Meanwhile, outside said restaurants, youths are allowed to get out of their faces on cheap cider.That's Labour for you. Thu 23 Sep 2010 10:40:24 GMT+1 rolfrae http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=84#comment113 My previous comment asked (rhetorically) if Brian was still asking the difficult questions, as he had once promised to do, and it was removed by the mods for being offensive. Why has the BBC become so sensitive to criticism? Thu 23 Sep 2010 10:13:11 GMT+1 birnie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=84#comment112 Ingenious and perceptive comment, Sid! It should be appreciated elsewhere. Thu 23 Sep 2010 09:53:27 GMT+1 sid_ts63 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=83#comment111 soosider & uilleam_beag fully agree but remember it's scaldin not stewn that will get you the real answer and the real questions Sid Thu 23 Sep 2010 09:04:51 GMT+1 ziggyboy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=82#comment110 I get it now - because I don't agree with the SNP I must be a Unionist.Sorry to disappoint all of you but I actually actively campaigned out on the streets for the SNP in the last election which is probaly more than Oldnat did.I am entitled to my opinion on minimum pricing. Thu 23 Sep 2010 08:32:23 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=81#comment109 Indeed Soosider, I concur.Candles, tents, now!Nascent old newts. Thu 23 Sep 2010 08:18:16 GMT+1 soosider http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=81#comment108 good grief even to question why the BBC would have a policy to ban those three words leads to your post being removed, why would they possible expend so much energy on what is surely such a trivial matter? Thu 23 Sep 2010 08:02:36 GMT+1 Anagach http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=80#comment107 This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain Thu 23 Sep 2010 07:58:44 GMT+1 soosider http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=79#comment106 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 07:47:51 GMT+1 soosider http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=78#comment105 or even an anagram, as I am very concerned about Wetlands Consent Thu 23 Sep 2010 07:41:32 GMT+1 soosider http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=78#comment104 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 07:39:13 GMT+1 sid_ts63 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=77#comment103 morning ,dnaltocstenswen , not even kaye with an e wants to discuss the defeat of the government yesterday Oh my is there a problem?Sid Thu 23 Sep 2010 07:31:30 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=76#comment102 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 03:10:06 GMT+1 Feil Gype http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=75#comment101 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:54:41 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=75#comment100 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:45:20 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=74#comment99 Goodnight mods.You were only following orders. An excuse used profusely in 1945. Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:35:00 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=73#comment98 I'm referring this site for further consideration, and heading off to bed.Will the site be any better when I wake up? Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:25:17 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=72#comment97 Why take the stonea lump of rockthe quater moon may point where's it was cut? Any news!..........ouch Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:19:21 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=72#comment96 This is wonderful! Any combination of 3 normal words within a sentence (and we all know what these 3 words are) mean that the mods are required to refer the post to a "higher authority". I doubt that Brian is important enough to be that authority.A chorus of "Rule Brittania" seems appropriate here. Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:13:43 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=71#comment95 Le Lafosse?more then one but less than threea hidden past-expelled and fleeMore no news? Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:12:08 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=70#comment94 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:05:54 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=69#comment93 There will be plenty of BevvyingThe worlds eye's aren't on us?Well! i don't suppose that will make the news either. Thu 23 Sep 2010 02:00:18 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=69#comment92 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 01:57:10 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=68#comment91 This post has been Removed Thu 23 Sep 2010 01:30:52 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=67#comment90 90. kered"Incy Wincy spider sure does like that spout."That should make the news. Thu 23 Sep 2010 00:52:41 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=66#comment89 83Incy Wincy spider sure does like that spout. Thu 23 Sep 2010 00:07:18 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=66#comment88 83 Incy Wincy spider got blootered and washed out. Thu 23 Sep 2010 00:05:08 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=65#comment87 83 Incy Wincy spider got blootered on the spout water LoL. Thu 23 Sep 2010 00:04:18 GMT+1 kered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=64#comment86 83 Incy Wincy spider got blootered on the spout water LoL! Thu 23 Sep 2010 00:03:34 GMT+1 handclapping http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=63#comment85 #82 also in italicBut they do have a problem. There is nothing on www.scottishlabour.org.uk that indicates what line should be taken. In fact its worse; this is not news. Usually they have an audio of a cock crowing to announce another triumph over the SNP but there is nothing, absolutely nothing about the biggest defeat the SNP have had in the whole of their time in Government.Shurely shome mishtake. Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:56:13 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=63#comment84 82. oldnatI thought I'd just save the mods the bother! Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:48:27 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=62#comment83 82. oldnatcurtains its in bold type. Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:28:15 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=61#comment82 Incey Wincey Spider climbed up the water spoutDown came the rain and washed poor Incey outOut came the sun and dried up all the rainSo Incey Wincey Spider climbed up the spout againIncey Wincey spider climbed up the water spoutDown came the rain and washed poor Incey outOut came the sun and dried up all the rainSo Incey Wincey Spider climbed up the spout againA moderator in actionhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNoIzj3Ihwo Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:19:20 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=60#comment81 This comment has been referred for further consideration. Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:12:51 GMT+1 highlandarab http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=60#comment80 wow oldnat:You're not having much luck tonight are you? It makes it all the more intriguing trying to guess what you are saying. I bet it's not very complimentary.Unless of course your text is the following message "This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain" just sent multiple times.Ach well, it was hammering down with rain in Dingwall on the way home from tonights match, and I need to go and dry off and have an early night - I'll tune in tomorrow morning and see how your campaign for publication is coming along. Good luck. If it gets too much for you you could always live dangerously and down a highly caffeinated cup of coffee while you are still allowed to. Wed 22 Sep 2010 23:09:06 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=59#comment79 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:58:29 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=58#comment78 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:55:35 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=57#comment77 This comment has been referred for further consideration.Must be the most used phrase by the BBC are they hoping to get in the guinness book of records or are they expecting to get a gold medal at the commonwealth games in India as having more reporters than competitors. Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:50:30 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=57#comment76 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:50:00 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=56#comment75 http://mypseudepigrapha.blogspot.com/2010/09/hootsmon-headlines_22.html Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:42:40 GMT+1 Feil Gype http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=55#comment74 oldnat are you acting like a yob again ? The beeb will make you sit on the naughty step ! Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:39:52 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=54#comment73 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:27:31 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=54#comment72 Labour are planning licencing 'Coffee mornings' and registering all venues as these places are sometimes infested with todlers in pushchairs because steering them in a straight line can be difficult after a cafeine induced adult pushing them in a weaving dangerous manner on the pavement. Usually to avoid oncoming pedestrians staggering along in groups after imbibing the legal cheap alchoholic spirits. Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:18:07 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=53#comment71 Fascinating to see how obsessive the Beeb appears to be in restricting access to alternative views. Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:17:24 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=52#comment70 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 22:03:24 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=51#comment69 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:53:33 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=51#comment68 65. oldnat"Does the BBC consider a website that takes an Independence, rather than a Uniionist, stance to be profane?"The BBC is against democracy as that would undermine its priveleged status, I believe there is an investigation going on but whats its remit is I can't remember. Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:48:08 GMT+1 fairliered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=50#comment67 #65 Oldnat wrote: "Does the BBC consider a website that takes an Independence, rather than a Uniionist, stance to be profane?"Only if its Scottish Independence. Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:47:36 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=49#comment66 Looks the hackers have gone beyond twitter and targetted the beeb. Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:38:58 GMT+1 clammylegg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=48#comment65 http://www.newsinenglish.no/2010/09/21/oil-fund-reaches-dizzying-new-highs/If only! Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:37:12 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=48#comment64 Does the BBC consider a website that takes an Independence, rather than a Uniionist, stance to be profane? Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:23:27 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=47#comment63 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:22:28 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=46#comment62 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:21:57 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=45#comment61 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:21:24 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=45#comment60 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:20:55 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=44#comment59 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 21:02:40 GMT+1 jakeponsonby http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=43#comment58 Labour / Tory Alliance Condemned as Alcohol Proposals BlockedGoogle the above phrase for more info. Wed 22 Sep 2010 20:45:40 GMT+1 Anagach http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=42#comment57 I think you are all being just a wee harsh with the old unionist parties.Sure they have done little to tackle drink related issues, except have a dram with the odd editor or police of a Friday afternoon. But they feel that electoral damage with arise if they offend the drinking classes. Wed 22 Sep 2010 20:39:36 GMT+1 inmykip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=42#comment56 " The electoral consequences? I doubt whether this particular issue, important though it is, will sway substantial numbers of votes at the next Holyrood elections: at least, by comparison with the much bigger impact of public spending cuts. "I can assure you Brian that the next time Ross Finnie knocks on my door looking for votes he will be leave with an understanding of why he won't be getting mines. Wed 22 Sep 2010 20:39:14 GMT+1 inmykip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=41#comment55 #50 "As for cost helping with drinking. Government needs to stop treating people like children. Nanny doesn't always know best, people can make there own decisions."Oh and by the way shcart it actually IS about about children drinking, since part of the problem involves underage drinking. Wed 22 Sep 2010 20:17:18 GMT+1 inmykip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=40#comment54 #50 "As for cost helping with drinking. Government needs to stop treating people like children. Nanny doesn't always know best, people can make there own decisions."This isn't about Nanny knowing best, this is about people not willing to take responsibility for their excessive alcohol consumption and the misery and cost to society therein. I live in this society and I want it changed for the better, if introducing minimum procing is a step towards improving this society then I'm all for it. Wed 22 Sep 2010 20:04:27 GMT+1 inmykip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=39#comment53 #47, probably on doubles, he won't have a leg to stand on, then again his arguments rarely do. Wed 22 Sep 2010 19:58:08 GMT+1 RandomScot http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=39#comment52 shcartThe notion that this is a deceitful tax does not bear scrutiny.. There is no tax involved here, and if it were Westmister would get it, not Holyrood.This is minimum pricing, the exchequer is not levying an additional excise duty Wed 22 Sep 2010 19:56:10 GMT+1 uilleam_beag http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=38#comment51 47. At 7:36pm on 22 Sep 2010, fairliered wrote:#45 InMyKip wrote "What! no pearls of wisdom from the Reluctant one."He's probably away having a celebratory drink!_____________Aye well, ah'm no bothered so long as he keeps off the caffeine. ;-) Wed 22 Sep 2010 19:18:19 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=37#comment50 50. shcart"I doubt there were any where near as many alcoholics during WWI and WWII."Because alcohol was extremely highly taxed then - and most of the Scotch was being shipped to the USA. Haven't you seen/read Whisky Galore? Wed 22 Sep 2010 19:12:45 GMT+1 shcart http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=36#comment49 Brian,I'm a Brit living in the US so my opinion is probably moot. However what percentage of folks back in the UK actually believe this was genuinely intended to restrict drinking for health reasons rather than creating yet another deceitful tax. The level of taxation back there is already obscene, hence why I now live in the US.Can you honestly imagine that the corporations would be allowed to benefit from the extra income, Do you believe that the chancellor wouldn't roll this out to the rest of the country if the 'Scottish experiment' had worked, and then levy tax increases on the per unit charge rather than per bottle.Just remember metrication, before that Petrol went up a penny or two a gallon and we all said ouch and looked for the next garage, After metrication the minimum increase soon became a penny a litre (or a 350% larger per unit increase). I dont know how many units there are in a bottle of Scotch but it used to be 24. We used to complain at Number 11's 20p per bottle increase what will you do with a 2p per unit (48pBottle) budget increase. It doesn't sound much but it will really hurt.As for cost helping with drinking. Government needs to stop treating people like children. Nanny doesn't always know best, people can make there own decisions.Government needs to help people out of the state where they need to drink. Healthy individuals aren't made by forcing folks to do, or not do, something they are made by giving them the self respect and motivation to make good decisions. I doubt there were any where near as many alcoholics during WWI and WWII. Why?, because everyone had a goal. What do they have now? No goals, Little if any National Pride because thats politically incorrect. Many of their jobs are now done in China and India (where the Corporations pay significantly lower wages and taxes), They have a group of self interested politicians who milk them for everything they can, and in many cases unemployment levels that gives them absolutely no incentive to bother get off there ass and try to get a job.Governments the world over need to start milking the corporate coffers and bonus pools of the 'Money lenders' and 'Investment firms' whose dishonesty screwed up many of the worlds economies. Nations need to start producing at home again because services alone really do not generate real wealth just keep it moving. Wed 22 Sep 2010 19:00:45 GMT+1 rog_rocks http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=36#comment48 Well after that stunning victory; Is it true that there is a party at Pacific Quay tonight? Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:58:13 GMT+1 cwh http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=35#comment47 "38. At 6:31pm on 22 Sep 2010, ziggyboy wrote:Minimum pricing in my view is not the way forward as it will hit the reponsible drinkers. More education is needed to hit home to the young people the damage excess alcohol can do."---------------------------------------------Responsible drinkers also have to use hospitals, Police and Social Services so how wil they feel standing in the queue behind all the people with alcohol related problems clogging up the system. Systems which will be even more clogged and pressured by the demands and costs made on them by alcohol related problems once the 'savings' are imposed and jobs lost. This was a chance to save some of those jobs. Labour and the others would not take it.As to the poor, of course Labour wants them to have cheap alcohol. At all costs the poor must not be allowed to come out of their cheap, alcohol induced mist lest they wonder why, after generations of voting Labour and 13 years of a Labour Government, they are still not out of the bit. Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:47:00 GMT+1 fairliered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=34#comment46 #45 InMyKip wrote "What! no pearls of wisdom from the Reluctant one."He's probably away having a celebratory drink! Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:36:50 GMT+1 fairliered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=33#comment45 Given the number of times the opposition parties have voted against the Government for purely party political reasons, I wonder when (if?) the SNP will start to fight back. The voters won't know the truth if they aren't told. The media won't tell them. I remember when the SNP used other means to gain publicity. Are they too busy being a party of government to fight their corner? Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:34:44 GMT+1 inmykip http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=33#comment44 What! no pearls of wisdom from the Reluctant one. Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:30:30 GMT+1 fairliered http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=32#comment43 It's very sad that the unionist parties hate the SNP so much that that would rather see some of their own supporters die of alcohol-related diseases than vote to help improve their health. Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:27:12 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=31#comment42 41. sneckedagainThere seems to be a problem with the site. Doubtless those running it are out of their skulls on coffee. Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:17:27 GMT+1 oldnat http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=30#comment41 38. ziggyboy"The so called 'experts' always seem to go into hiding when it comes to the crunch.Minimum pricing in my view is not the way forward as it will hit the reponsible drinkers."The experts weren't in hiding. They gave evidence to the Health Committee. Obviously, the Unionist MSPs either weren't listening, or were simply determined to oppose.As to your view on minimum pricing - repetition of a Labour Party slogan isn't an argument. Now if you were one of the people who actually know about the problem, we on this side of the debate would listen. Still, I look forward to your attempts to ban the sale of coffee. Wed 22 Sep 2010 18:14:48 GMT+1 Dave McEwan Hill http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=30#comment40 My comment is getting blocked fro some reason Wed 22 Sep 2010 17:57:40 GMT+1 Dave McEwan Hill http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=29#comment39 Well, that's it then. Labour, Tory and LibDem campaign for the next election "Cheap booze for the working class!" Wed 22 Sep 2010 17:56:49 GMT+1 Dave McEwan Hill http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=28#comment38 Well, that's it then. Labour, Tory and LibDem campaign for the next election "Cheap booze for the poor!" Wed 22 Sep 2010 17:56:17 GMT+1 ziggyboy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=27#comment37 The so called 'experts' always seem to go into hiding when it comes to the crunch.Minimum pricing in my view is not the way forward as it will hit the reponsible drinkers. More education is needed to hit home to the young people the damage excess alcohol can do. Wed 22 Sep 2010 17:31:30 GMT+1 It wisnae me http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=27#comment36 We already have minimum pricing - excise duty.What we need is for the manner in which this is applied to be amended to relate it to the alcohol content.As to the specious argument that increasing the price will increase the profits of supermarkets, etc., if (WHEN!) Scotland resumes its independence, the increase will be achieved through taxation rather than by way of pricing directives.For the timebeing, however, if the cost of an off-sales licence was to be increased MASSIVELY, then retailers would - of their own accord - increase the price of low cost, high volume products. AND the money would be for the benefit of local residents.Has anyone asked those in those living just south of the border how they view the prospect of being inundated by booze-trippers from Scotland? (Thinks: Might be yet another inducement for Berwick to come back to the fold.)If it was really going to be a moneyspinner, though, then all of the supermarket chains would be putting in planning applications to open superstores in the northernmost reaches of England - notwithstanding the prevailing licensing laws. Wed 22 Sep 2010 17:25:56 GMT+1 cwh http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=26#comment35 The opposition parties rolled out some pretty threadbare criticisms of minimum pricing which became ever more threadbare with each airing. First they said there was NO evidence to show that price increases reduce consumption. WRONG. Analysis of HUNDREDS of studies on the effect of price on consumption of alcohol has shown that if you raise the price of alcohol either through increases in duty or by OTHER means then consumption falls AND increasing the price of alcohol is more effective in reducing consumption than other methods. Then we had: It will penalise reasonable drinkers. NO.If reasonable drinkers, of whatever age or financial (i.e the poor so beloved of Labour) circumstance, moderated their drinking such that their weekly consumption lasted for 2 weeks rather than 1 then under minimum pricing they would SAVE money and their health would benefit. Even reasonable drinking will, over time, adversely affect their health. If they cannot moderate their drinking then they have passed from ‘reasonable’ to borderline alcoholic. Or they can spend the same amount that they do now but buy less alcohol – again saving money and benefiting their health.By the way what is ‘reasonable’ in the context of alcohol consumption? Last week some statistics were published which said that the AVERAGE drinker consumes the alcoholic equivalent of 89 bottles of wine per annum – is that ‘reasonable’? And who are these ‘reasonable’ drinkers that they have to be protected when the costs of alcohol abuse to the NHS, Police and Social Services and to society at large is running at 3.5 billion pounds per annum? Then there was the argument that it would be ‘putting money into the pockets of supermarkets. Various amounts have been given starting at 90 million pounds and now 140 million pounds. No information on how the figure was calculated is ever given – does it allow for the levy that supermarkets will have to pay? But put this supposed 'windfall profit' into context. We are talking of a sector of 9-10 supermarket chains whose total earnings in the UK is 120 BILLION pounds -Tesco has overall earnings in the UK of 39 billion pounds on a one third share of the market. On this they make profits ranging from tens of millions up to Billions of pounds for the leading supermarkets. So not selling too much at a ‘loss’ are they? Not even alcohol. There will be a penny here, 2p there and 5p elsewhere across their other goods to compensate for any ‘loss’ on alcohol sales. Suddenly the 140 million pounds does not look such a great sum especially when set against the 3.5 BILLION pound cost to NHS etc.Then we had: ‘It won’t work because people can go to England to get cheap drink’. But there is ample evidence to suggest that minimum pricing will be introduced in the rest of the UK since it is supported by all parties in the Commons, by Labour and Plaid in Welsh Assembly, by LibDems (See their General Election manifesto – English version) and various English councils. They are probably waiting in order not to further embarrass their colleagues in Scotland.And on and on with ever more risible arguments as to why they cannot support it.Labour’s only attempt at some sort of positive contribution to the debate was their Alcohol ‘Commission’ – an inflated title for something of little substance – which was roundly shredded by the Health Committee as unworkable.The opposition parties’ refusal to accept Ms Sturgeon’s offer of a sunset clause clearly demonstrated that their position was one of political posturing for party advantage. But the statements from Ms Baillie and her opposition colleagues on this also demonstrated a woeful ignorance about how parliament works. Ms Sturgeon was merely making explicit that which is implicit in all Acts of Parliament once they are passed – namely that they are subject to review, amendment and/or repeal if circumstances demand it. The Ten Commandments were set in stone NOT Acts of Parliament all are subject to review and Ms Sturgeon merely set a term for review of this bill. So not a 'concession' but an acknowledgement of Parliamentary procedure.The Scottish Government does not have the power to raise the duty on alcohol so have come up with an imaginative alternative. It has the support of health professionals of every calibre and level in the NHS and beyond, the police and social work professionals. Minimum Pricing also has the support of International experts and is included as one of the measures to be tried in a draft report by the WHO on tackling the problem of excessive alcohol consumption worldwide. Against all of that the opposition to this bill was purely one of opposition for oppositions sake. The minimum pricing commitment is part of a range of measures included in the bill and has NEVER been represented by the SNP as the final solution to the problem of alcohol abuse but as a starting point for a concerted effort to bring the problem under control. It is the Unionist parties who have mis-represented it as a ’silver bullet’ in order to criticise it. Wed 22 Sep 2010 16:52:03 GMT+1 rolfrae http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=25#comment34 This post has been Removed Wed 22 Sep 2010 16:05:23 GMT+1 A Voter http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2010/09/smoking_ban_moment_denied.html?page=24#comment33 I find the title "smoking ban moment denied" amusing as the Scottish Parliament in the form of the Health & Sport Committee prevented any questioning of the evidence that resulted in the smoking ban OR the presentation of any NEW evidence by Freedom To Choose(Scotland)." Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab): It is important to consider all the issues in detail. That is why I agree that when post-legislative scrutiny of the 2005 act is undertaken, consideration of the issues that the petitions raise should be right up there with consideration of the other impacts of the smoking ban. It is right and proper for consideration of such matters to feed into that scrutiny.The Convener: Without prejudging the post-legislative scrutiny, I think that it would be appropriate for the issues that the petitions raise to be considered along with other issues, such as the impact of the ban on businesses. Are members content with that approach?" THERE HAS BEEN NO POST LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY TO DATE ON THIS SUBJECT.What are they afraid of? Wed 22 Sep 2010 15:59:50 GMT+1