Browse > Home / Personal Freedom / ASH abuse of public money must end

| Subcribe via RSS



ASH abuse of public money must end

June 22nd, 2011 Posted in Personal Freedom by

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) is a campaigning health charity set up in 1971 by the Royal College of Physicians to work towards eliminating the harm caused by tobacco.  This could have been a force for good –  afterall there is nothing intrisically wrong with wishing to reduce the harm caused by tobacco.  It rather depends how you go about it – and that is so often  determined by who is footing the bills.

ASH receives huge amounts of money from the taxpayer  and sadly, like so many publicly funded bodies with too much money and too little scrutiny it has NOT gone about its task well. ASH has now become a fat, over-staffed, political, and single-minded organisation hell bent on eradicating smoking from the face of the earth, by whatever means necessary.  Where it could have worked with the industry to find solutions to the issues, it has set itself up against the manufacturers, the retailers and the consumers. And much of its so-called advice has been at best ineffecitve , and all too often counter-productive , with huge financial and social unintended consequences.

The future of ASH’s government funding must, now,  surely be in doubt.  Here we have an  organisation funded by government, actively lobbying government – often behind closed doors and with alarming success. I say “alarming” becuase it is. Government spending money to lobby itself makes ordinary folks blood boil at the best of times – indeed David Cameron said he would put a stop to it –  but this extraordinary abuse of public money surely can’t continue in the current economic climate.

I don’t say abolish ASH – we live in a free country. But government funding must cease. I came

 Read this letter from Kieran McDonnell, president of the National Federation of Retail Newsagents, to David Cameron :

21 June 2011

Dear Prime Minister,

Formal complaint regarding breach of the Ministerial Code

I write to you in my capacity as President of the National Federation of Retail Newsagents (NFRN), which represents 16,500 newsagent members across the UK, with a complaint regarding the conduct of your Public Health Minister Anne Milton with reference public statements made and circulated on 15th June when Ms Milton attended the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking & Health’s 40th anniversary for Action on Smoking & Health (ASH).

At the meeting, Ms Milton credited the Vice Chair of the group (and former Chair of the Health Select Committee) Kevin Barron MP for his help “behind the scenes” when addressing smoking legislation. In addition the Minister also accepted an award and presented an award to the Director of ASH.

This statement and public acceptance and deliverance of awards to an organisation that has been lobbying her department, MPs and other government departments (and indeed is granted government funding on the basis that it not be used for lobbying purposes) has called into question the manner in which recent tobacco display ban legislation has been made; and the ability of the Minister to be considered unbiased on the issue.

I attach a copy of the event report from an independent parliamentary reporting service and would ask that you formally conduct an investigation into the conduct of your minister in the light of her public admission that she had worked with an officer of an ASH funded parliamentary lobby group on recent legislation “behind the scenes”. Moreover, this inappropriate conduct necessitates a review of the legitimacy of the legislation itself.

We have long suspected that ‘behind the scenes’ dealings have been going on in the formation of this legislation in the manner in which it has been pushed through without running the legislation past the Reducing Regulation Committee; without identifying a ‘one out’ for the legislation; and indeed without fulfilling the BRE Guidance to undertake a Small Business Impact Assessment.

In light of these recent statements, I regrettably now see proof of these suspicions which is deeply offensive to our members who have campaigned so hard to see the government fulfil its pre-election commitments to bring the debate back to the House of Commons for a free vote and which the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats publically opposed in opposition.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Kieran McDonnell
President, National Federation of Retail Newsagents

Tags: , ,

157 Responses to “ASH abuse of public money must end”

  1. Barry Homan Says:

    WOULD YOU ALL GET OFF THIS BOARD AND GET BACK TO YOUR LIVES, RIGHT NOW! WHY NOT DEBATE THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF CUT GRASS? YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TIME AND LIFE’S JUST PASSING YOU BY, IF YOU DON’T WANT TO WORK IN A SMOKEY BAR THEN DON’T! IT CAN’T BE PUT MORE SIMPLY, THIS WHOLE DEBATE IS LUDICROUS, YOU COULD DRAG IT ON FOREVER – IT’S STUPID!


  2. John Gray Says:

    Don’t shout Barry. It’s bad for the heart, don’t you know?


  3. Dick Puddlecote Says:

    Last 😉


  4. James Gray Says:

    @ Dave Atherton

    Hi there, you mention in an above post the following –

    “3. There are 30 studies done into ACTIVE smoking. The findings are that cigar smokers and pipe smokers (because they do not inhale) do not run any higher risk of lung cancer, emphysema and an early death. In fact pipe smokers live on average 2 years longer than non smokers.”

    Do you happen to have any reference to the sources you indicate (the 30 studies etc)?

    Are they included in the documents indicated in the same post (SCOTH) or are there separate bodies of work?

    The reason I ask is because this very claim is an oft quoted favorite of my old dad, a happy pipe smoking, tobacco growing fellow, and former GP, who read an article by Richard Doll some time in the 60s and took up smoking the very same day. But he has never been able to find the actual source of the claim, or even the article, and is starting to doubt his own recollection. I would love to give him the original statistical foundation for the “2 years longer” claim for a birthday present. Although, I think he might already have had more than his extra two by now!

    Any help much appreciated.


  5. john Says:

    Reference Guide to Epidemiology of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, the principal reference for instructing US courts in regard to epidemiology. The Manual states: “…epidemiology cannot objectively prove causation; rather, causation is a judgment for epidemiologists and others interpreting the epidemiological data.” [6], and “.. the existence of some [associated] factors does not ensure that a causal relationship exists. Drawing causal inferences after finding an association and considering these factors requires judgment and searching analysis.” [7] and “[w]hile the drawing of causal inferences is informed by scientific expertise, it is not a determination that is made by using scientific methodology.”.

    Thus, while epidemiologists insist that their discipline is a science, clearly it is not the solid experimental science that produces reliable causal connections to fuel new scientific discoveries, successful technological advances, and defensible public health policies. More to the point, if multifactorial epidemiology does not operate in the framework of science, what warrants of reliability could it offer?

    It remains a fact that in over 50 years of trying to induce cancer in animals using tobacco smoke, not even one study has yielded a statistically significant result that links cancer to tobacco use


  6. Italy Pride Says:

    Hello my friend! I want to say that this post is awesome, great written and come with approximately all significant
    infos. I would like to see extra posts like this .


  7. vaping zone harbison hours Says:

    although same customers came returning to purchase sweeter dessert flavors after developing accustomed to vaping using tobacco or coffee tastes.