Banning smoking is yet another action of the nanny state - too much emphasis on one set of people's rights over those of another set.

If the Government would only come out with what we all know is the truth, i.e.-

"Smoking kills people, we're fed up with it... So you must all stop."

I'd have a lot more respect for them...

However, as any fule no, Gordon Brown and chums rake in a massive wodge of cash from taxing the hapless addictees. If one were addicted to Heroin, an illegal substance, one signs up to a rehab clinic and can pick up Methodone for nothing. If one is addicted to totally legal tobacco the Govt. says "Right, we'll have 80% of your cash in tax thanks very much." {source}

The problem here is that the Govt. also forks out a sizeable chunk of cash in order to pay for smoking related diseases - fair enough then that the activity should be taxed... However, the disparity between the two figures reveals a little too much of what I believe the Govt.'s agenda is. The revenue from tobacco is much much larger than the expenditure, which is good... it can pay for all the officials required to administer both the taxation, customs control and healthcare for smokers - right? Well, ish. I mean the NHS is a pile of bobbins and this so-called Labour Govt. has done little to actually improve the quality in real terms. So, money's going in but not much is coming out - ergo the people in power are doing something else with it.

What I suggest is that the Government fences off all the revenue from smokers and pumps it back into society in ways calculated to offset the proven damage that smoking does. A large amount should also be given to HM Customs & Excise in order to eradicate the bootlegging of cigarettes.

Another thought I had was that if the Govt. can force businesses to cater for disabled people, by altering entrances and so forth - why can't they force businesses which allow smoking to provide an area either specifically for non-smokers, or {more sensibly given that smokers represent only 20% of the population} a designated area for smokers with Air-Con etc?

Heavens, I hadn't realised how long it was since I put anything on here.

Time to rectify that problem, with some inane drivel - I'm bored at work in case you can't guess... and yes, I know it's not even 10 am yet.

The facts are as follows: I am working for a sole general practioner, of civil law in private practice. This means no crime, and very little litigation due to the fact that the clients have to cough up for everything we do themselves - rather than adding to the long list of Legal Aid cases.

However, since the Government is intent on starving criminal lawyers with its jocular rates of Legal Aid it's probably better that I am working for a chap who can afford to pay me.

Here's the rub though - if the criminal bar is being starved of cash - the best applicants may decide in their mercenary wisdom to biff off to some fat commercial set and spend their lives helping companies rip the stuffing out of each other, or overseeing huge hostile takeovers etc.
This should surely leave lots of space for fellows like me, with passable degree marks and a taste for raw advocacy - right?

Wrong. The criminal bar will close its ranks and probably only let in the few black lesbian disabled middle-aged single mothers it can find in order to prove to the Government that it's young, hip, trendy and most importantly - statistically pretty.
So - older briefs will get a larger workload for negligible extra pay, any juniors who manages to get in will be stuck for the next few years doing myriad petty offences in the hope that the fee from the Jim Hackett-esque Department for Constituional Affairs will at least pay the interest on the Labour Govt. imposed student loans.

Mind you, if Herr Clarke gets his way there'll be no need for barristers since anyone the Establishment conisders undesirable will be locked up.
Having said all this I would be surprised if I'm not awoken at 3am by some large types in leather jackets and ushered into a deliberately non-descript black car. If suppression of free speech is depicted on BBC dramas, it probably happens.

Right - back to work now that I've turned a moan into a rant and my tea mug's empty too.