Unforseen Consequences

A horror about mythical Welsh fairies had filming relocated to north Yorkshire after crew found out about strict non-smoking rules on sets in Wales.

Does it matter these days, when so much film scenery doesn't exist outside of a hard disc anyway? 

The ban made it impossible to make key scenes look authentic, according to Rabbit Trap, external director Bryn Chainey, as the main characters Darcy and Daphne Davenport - played by Dev Patel and Rosy McEwen - are chain smokers.

It's a film, an original script - if the filming in Wales was felt to be so necessary, just write them differently to please the prodnoses, surely?  

In England, there is an exemption if someone is required to smoke as part of a role, according to the British Film Commission, external.

Relaxing the rules around film sets in Wales was discussed in detail more than a decade ago in the Senedd, with the BBC warning it could move filming of prestigious dramas over the border, but proposals were dropped after opposition from campaign groups.

Well, that's about the level of decision making we've come to expect from the Labour fiefdom in Wales, after all. 

While the Rabbit Trap team had encountered other issues around filming in the country, the director called the smoking ban "the nail in the coffin" for its original plans in Wales.

"It gives the audience a visual hint at the anxiety they're not talking about."

You're hiring these people to act, surely they can convey that some other way? 

"The only workaround would have been using CGI (computer-generated imagery) to make the cigarettes appear to burn and produce smoke," Chainey said. "That would have looked fake and was out of our budget."

As he is half-Welsh, the project was inspired by Chainey's desire to connect with his roots, with the film set entirely in a remote cottage. Welsh actor Jade Croot, from Merthyr Tydfil, whose character is bilingual, was cast in a main role. The production team then spent months searching Wales for the ideal location for filming.

And flouncing off to Yorkshire when he came up against the nonsense that has overtaken the land of his roots, rather than change his script. 

Advertising Agencies Are Also Smarter Than MPs…

...which is not hard, there are things at the bottom of the Mariana Trench that are smarter than Starmer's mob.

The festive season is traditionally a time of national culinary overindulgence but eagle-eyed viewers may have noticed that this year’s crop of big-budget Christmas TV ads have been decidedly lean and sugar-free.

And mostly dreadful. The only vaguely amusing one was Argos' two mascots kidnapping a guy who thought 'Argos is just for toys'... 

From Tesco and Waitrose to Marks & Spencer and Asda, the UK’s biggest exponents of extravagant festive food marketing have put their Christmas ads on a diet to comply with new regulations banning junk food products from appearing in TV ads before 9pm.

Regulations that don't exist yet, but of course big business is cravenly bending the knee before it has to: 

The UK advertising watchdog will officially start cracking down on ads featuring junk food on TV – and in paid online advertising at any time of day – from 5 January. But the UK advertising industry voluntarily chose to start adhering to the new rules from October, making this TV’s first-ever low-fat, low-sugar and low-salt Christmas.

Can't really say I noticed since it mostly seems to affect things I don't eat, like gravy:

Quirks under the regulations rule out showing gravy on the traditional Christmas dinner’s roasted meat centrepiece in festive ads. However, a “marinade, glaze, dressing, seasoning rub or similar accompaniment” will keep the advertising watchdog away, according to the government’s new rules.

It's 'strategic' to surrender before you are forced to? 

“Advertisers are having to be very strategic,” said Richard Exon, the co-founder of the ad agency Joint. “There is an upside for creativity here. ”

“Are we ready? Yes,” said an executive at one big food retailer. “But it is far too complex. There is going to be a long period where the advertising watchdog has to work through complaints from those looking out for products that may break the rules.”

Because there will be complaints, albeit not geniune ones, all from the army of censorious prodnoses that the government encourage with legislation like this. Because they cannot be appeased and it's folly to ever try:

“This government pledged to raise the healthiest generation of children ever and yet they’ve ignored the evidence, instead pursuing a policy that essentially enables business as usual,” said Fran Bernhardt of the campaign group Sustain. “Industry will be celebrating another ruined health policy, while the UK’s children have been let down once again.”

Ah, these bastards again... 🙄

“Advertising agencies are problem-solvers,” said Paul Bainsfair, the director general of the trade body the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising. “They have just had to adapt and use their ingenuity to find solutions for their clients – something they have always been so good at.”

Let's hope they devote maximum effort to it, because it will upset all the right sort of people if they do... 

Crushing All Joy Out Of Life…

They have been a familiar sight at takeaway sushi shops around the world for decades but it could be the beginning of the end for fish-shaped soy sauce dispensers. South Australia will be the first place in the world to ban them under a wider ban on single-use plastics that comes into force on 1 September.

Why? I mean, they are tiny and useful and make you smile when you see one (or maybe that's just me?). What possible reason could there be to ban them? 

The device known as shoyu-tai (or soy-sauce snapper in Japanese) was invented in 1954 by Teruo Watanabe, the founder of Osaka-based company Asahi Sogyo, according to a report from Japan’s Radio Kansai. It was then common for glass and ceramic containers to be used but the advent of cheap industrial plastics allowed the creation of a small polyethylene container in the shape of a fish, officially named the “Lunch Charm”.

And charming they certainly are. But they must go. Because eco-loons are soulless people. 

Under South Australia’s new law, only pre-filled soy sauce containers with a lid, cap or stopper and containing less than 30ml of soy sauce will be banned. Plastic sachets will be allowed but the government hopes bulk bottles or dispensers will be used in sushi shops instead. The South Australian environment minister, Dr Susan Close, said each plastic fish container was used for just seconds but “their small size means they’re easily dropped, blown away, or washed into drains, making them a frequent component of beach and street litter”.

Must be a peculiarly Aussie thing, I've never seen one over here. 

Other single-use plastic items included in the ban are plastic cutlery and expanded polystyrene food packaging, such as pre-packed instant bowl noodles.

So we'll cut down more trees to make wooden takeaway cutlery instead? Make it make sense!  

Dr Nina Wootton, a marine ecologist at the University of Adelaide, said plastic sushi fish are more damaging because they could be mistaken for food by marine life. “If it hasn’t already been broken down into microplastics yet and it’s floating around in its whole form, then other organisms that eat fish that size could think it is a fish and then eat it,” Wootton said.

Amy proof this has ever happened? Surely if there was, you'd show it? 

How Dare People Enjoy Themseves In Summer!

 

'Worrying' for whom? Glad you asked, Reader - it would appear to be the usual NuPuritans and funsponges the progressive press so loves to pander to:

Yuck. “RTDs are booming,” said Steve Young, Bacardi UK’s business unit director, back in May. RTDs? Ready-to-drink beverages, the preferred name for alcopops among those that market them. See also FABs (flavoured alcoholic beverages). Is it just Breezers? Nope. Drinks giant Diageo has launched a new campaign across 20 countries to restore the fortunes of Smirnoff Ice, amid a near doubling in RTD sales over the last decade, fuelled by new brands including BuzzBallz.

How terrible it is that the populace should feel entitled to enjoy themselves in the sunshine! 

How have these RTDs managed to overcome the inexorable decline in alcohol consumption? Gen Z have started drinking again.

Why not? The news is enough to drive them to it, after all! 

The March Of The NuPuritans Continues

Schools in England should be banned from giving pupils cakes or biscuits as part of their lunch because they contain so much sugar, food campaigners say. They want ministers to overhaul the rules that guide schools on the nutritional content of the meals they serve to outlaw such sugary snacks.

Who are these fun sponges? 

The call has come from Action on Sugar, a group of nutritionists and other health experts at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), who campaign on the health dangers of too much sugar.

Oh. Of course.  

At the moment schools are allowed under the school food standards to give pupils desserts, cakes and biscuits as part of the lunch they receive on the premises. They include sweet treats that are either bought in or made from scratch, such as cakes, buns, pastries and scones.Action on Sugar made its plea after an analysis it undertook of the sugar content of dozens of cakes, chocolates and biscuits that have as much as 12 teaspoons in them. For example, Ritter Sport marzipan has 51g per packet while the same firm’s whole hazelnuts and white whole hazelnuts contain 44g, the equivalent of 11 teaspoonfuls. “These findings reinforce the urgent need for a complete ban on cakes and biscuits currently permitted under the school food standards at lunchtime, as they are unlikely to align with current maximum sugar guidelines,” said Dr Kawther Hashem, a lecturer in public health nutrition at QMUL and Action on Sugar’s head of research and impact.

“We have a duty to every child to make every school a sanctuary from unnecessary sugar, so they can grow up healthier, stronger and free from the risks of diet-related disease.”

Why are we employing foreigners in hijab to tell us what to eat?  

First, You Got Reindeer Fillets Dropped From Lidl's Christmas Range...

...and now look what you're trying to ban!

Animal rights activists accused a British company of 'ruining the spirit of Christmas for children everywhere' after advertising...

Oh, here we go... 

...trophy Reindeer hunting trips during the festive season.

Well, if that's when they are in season, why not? 'Rudolph' is, after all a creature of fiction. Not real. Sorry, kiddies!  

The Fife-based firm does not say how much a trip costs but it is understood to be thousands of pounds and even suggests to trophy hunters the best type of rifle with which to kill a reindeer.

I'd expect them to... 

Explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes called the firm of trophy hunters 'cowards' and 'evil', saying to the Mirror: 'This is probably the most un-British thing I have ever heard of. If we needed proof of just how evil trophy hunters really are, then this is surely it.

'These cowards are happy to ruin the spirit of Christmas for children everywhere. How dare they. For a British company to be profiting from this disgrace is beyond appalling. We need a complete ban on this sick industry.'

Is that the royal 'we', Ranulph? I need no such ban. And while we are banging on about 'un-British things', could we also include 'sticking your nose in someone else's pleasures'? 

Because that's about the most un-British thing I can think of... 

You Work For ‘The Guardian’, Zoe…

…it’s surely not just at Christmas?

If public calorie announcements have their own specific message – the establishment of a set of rules, with numbers attached, because how can you police others’ behaviour if the law isn’t laid down in advance? – it is marginally less ridiculous than the companion advice of how to avoid a hangover this party season. I’ve read all of these, in new and old media, since time began, partly so you don’t have to, partly because they have the shape of an ancient riddle. The tips, whether it’s “Alternate every drink with a glass of water” or “Never drink more than four units in one go” always boil down to: “Don’t get drunk.”

A Guardianista complaining about NuPuritanism and killjoys is rather rich, isn’t it? 

Scrooge Is Alive And Well And Living In Lincoln...

The Lincoln Christmas market, a four-day celebration which sees over 300,000 people attend per year, was prevented from opening over the weekend after the local Labour Party-run council prohibited the festivities from taking place.

The leftist politicians justified their decision by claiming that the popularity of the market presented a “risk to public safety” due to alleged overcrowding.

But at least the mayor Mr Bean (Ed: Seriously...?) didn't miss out: 

"Lincoln Mayor Biff Bean spent the weekend in the city’s sister city of Neustadt in Germany and reportedly attended a Christmas market there."

Typical local council; pleasure for me, none for thee... 

H/T: IanJ via email

Shock Horror!

Allow me to translate from this 'Guardianese': 'Companies sell stuff people want to buy.'

The figures prompted a coalition of health, medical and children’s organisations to demand an urgent crackdown on “the irresponsible behaviour of health-harming industries”.

The NuPuritans in full cry, once more. Christmas must be nearly here!

The manufacturers were making vast profits by bombarding consumers with marketing and deliberately obstructing efforts by the government to restrict their activities, such as seeking to discredit scientific evidence of harm.

You can only 'discredit science' with proof. If your proof is better than theirs, we'd listen. That's how science works.  

The report was drawn up by health organisations and the economics consultancy Landman Economics. It is the first to estimate exactly how much money people in Britain are spending on “risky consumption” of products that evidence shows are, or can be, bad for human health.

Which 'health organisations', exactly? 

The research was undertaken by the Obesity Health Alliance (OHA), Alcohol Health Alliance (AHA) and Action on Smoking and Health (Ash) in conjunction with Landman Economics.

Ah. The usual suspects, indeed... 

And, Sadly, You're Wasting Your Time, Philda...

I am here to tell you on behalf of my country and many governments across Africa, that to save the animal kingdom we must put sentiment aside — and look at the facts.

But no-one wants to hear the facts, even when they come from the Minister for Environment and Tourism in Botswana. 

You know, someone who the liberal establishment should be listening to, if all their proclamations about self-government meant something...

Hunting revenue has connected villages to clean water and electricity, built roads and schools, founded businesses and helped struggling families. It has also created watering holes for animals that lie safely beyond village boundaries, and created animal-proof censors that can alert villagers if wildlife is close. Sadly, all too often, Westerners focus solely on animal welfare at the expense of human life in Africa.

And you know what the real tragedy is, Philda? 

Often, they couldn't give a damn for the animals either, no matter how they beat their breasts and rend their garments - it's all about stopping people enjoying themselves in ways of which they don't approve...

To talk about wildlife without taking into account lives and livelihoods is a terrible misstep — which is why, while prioritising sustainable development, the Botswanan government also puts people at the heart of policy. So how does it work in practice? Since the 1980s, and with the ongoing support of the UK, we have implemented a community-based natural resource management programme, allocating hunting quotas to communities, administered by a trust set up by villagers. Once issued with their quota, they can then find global partners who will pay for the right to hunt. These rights are tightly controlled and hunting without a permit carries a hefty prison term ranging from five to ten years. The revenue from these permits goes directly into the community coffers.

All things which you'd imagine would be lacking in a country such as Africa... 

Last year, our government raised £1,635,000 from a 'Special Elephant Quota' of 70 elephants, money that was channelled into improving the lives of rural communities.

But sadly, Philda, no-one that you're up against in this challenge wants to improve the lives of rural communities. They don't even really want to save the animals. And they certainly don't want to hear the facts, even from you. 

"I've Got No Willpower..."

[Redacted] is as harmful to colleagues as secondhand smoking...

Oooh, go on, have a guess! 

Bringing cake into work is as harmful to colleagues as secondhand smoking, Britain's top food tsar has warned.

*blinks* Wait, what? 

Professor Susan Jebb, the Food Standards Agency chairwoman, argues that passive smoke inflicts harm on others in the office ‘and exactly the same is true of food’. 

How? I mean, do cake particles from the next desk make their way over to me, or something? 

Prof Jebb, who teaches diet and population health at the University of Oxford, told the Times: 'If nobody brought in cakes into the office, I would not eat cakes in the day, but because people do bring cakes in, I eat them.

Well, love, that's on you. If a colleague brings in a fruit cake, nothing would induce me to eat it!

'Now, okay, I have made a choice, but people were making a choice to go into a smoky pub.'

Which is an argument for not restricting that choice, isn't it? Not for adding to the nannying fussbucketry... 

She has also slammed ministers over a decision to delay a watershed for junk food advertising, adding that it has led to a 'complete market failure' that has squeezed out health foods. 

Because no-one will eat tofu if they see a Big Mac on screen? Good lord, if this woman's an example of what abstinence does to your brain, someone bring me an eclair, quick! 

H/T: PubCurmudgeon via Twitter

Will We Get 20 Seconds To Comply..?

Supermarkets are calling for new laws that let them use AI to verify a customer is over-18 when buying alcohol.

Oh oh!

Recipe for disaster!

But wait! Why 'over 18'? Don't most supermarkets - willingly! - go much further and demand proof you're over 24?

The British Retail Consortium said age estimation technology would make stores 'a safer place to work and shop'. Shop assistants face over 1,300 incidents of violence and abuse every day, with staff asking to check a customer's age one of the most common triggers.

Well, it's no wonder, is it? 

Yoti, the British firm behind the software, claims it can estimate someone's age to within 18 months with near 100 per cent accuracy.

Why are we messing about with trying to save supermarkets from the consequences of their slavish capitulation to the NuPuritans then? Get this thing to the Home Office, stat! 

Yeah, You Might Just Be Right, Julie...

Oh, come on, that's just late middle-age talking, surely? They aren't that ba...

OK. Never mind.

It Took Them Two Years...

...but they finally realised what a liar he was:

Ministers are being urged to levy a £3bn sugar and salt tax as part of a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to break Britain’s addiction to junk food, cut meat consumption by nearly a third and help tackle climate change.

The government-commissioned National Food Strategy, drawn up by the restaurateur Henry Dimbleby, says the UK population’s “malfunctioning” appetites and poor diets – fuelled by consumer and manufacturer’s reliance on processed food – place an unsustainable burden on the NHS and contribute to 64,000 deaths each year.

Its most eye-catching recommendation is a levy of £3 a kilo on sugar and £6 a kilo on salt sold wholesale for use in processed food, restaurants and catering, which it says would be a world first.

He's going to agree, isn't he? Despite what he says now...

The strategy rules out a meat tax, which proved much more unpopular in a survey than the salt and sugar taxes, calling it “politically impossible”.

At the moment. But if the Blond Blancmange gives in to this, or brings it in bit by bit by stealth once the fuss dies down, it'll be back on the cards faster than you can say 'Another helping of tofu, Granny?'... 

Question It All You Like...

Steve Gooding, from the RAC Foundation, said: "We should all choose the right vehicle for the right trip to cut the size of our carbon footprint.

"It is right to question if suburban drivers need a car capable of ploughing over rivers, across fields and up steep hills just to pop to the shops."

...so long as you turn out when it brreaks down. 

Actually, don't bother. I'm in the AA. Thankfully.

Edmund King, from the AA, told the BBC: "Talk of banning the advertising of SUVs is a naïve approach. Some of the cleanest cars come in the SUV shape but are all electric such as the Jaguar I-Pace, Tesla Model X or Hyundai Kona.

"The auto industry is developing a wide range of cleaner, greener vehicles with some of the best in SUV styles," he said. "Not all SUVs are large. Small SUVs are among the most popular cars on sale, because they usually offer the high-set driving position, practicality, safety and looks of more traditional off-roaders, but without the high price, running costs or emissions."

He added: "Cars like the Nissan Juke are often the family car of choice in suburban areas."

It seems the long march through the institutions hasn't quite made it to the AA yet.  

"Take Two Wheels And Call Me In The Morning..."

The Bungler just keeps getting more and more incoherent.

They will be able to get free hire or borrow bikes from surgeries.

Assuming they can get into those surgeries in the first place, eh, Boris? And...'free' hire? Err, no. The taxpayer's paying. Again.

The PM has pinched the idea from former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, whose £7.2billion cycling and walking plan unveiled at last year’s General Election included bikes on the NHS.

The fact that the most widely reviled Labour leader for a century thought it was a good idea is a sign it's not, you moron!

It is part of Mr Johnson’s new obesity strategy, which demands calorie counts on restaurant ­menus and alcohol sold in shops.

What happened to your opposition to 'sin taxes', Boris? Why should your brush with death mean we all have to suffer?

The Better Health campaign, aimed at 35million overweight Brits, will ban junk food ads ­before 9pm and target online ads.

Like a reformed smoker, he's determined to change everything...

No, We Will Not Curtail Our Choices To Make Your Job Easier!

Police officers have urged ministers to call time on 24-hour licensing , after three-quarters of police officers and 50% of ambulance staff told a survey they had been injured while handling drink-related violence.

A survey run by the emergency services?

Respondents to the survey by the Institute of Alcohol Studies…

Ah. I guess we (the taxpaying majority) can safely ignore it, then.

… said there was a culture of fear among emergency service workers about being attacked when dealing with alcohol-related incidents.

Part of the job. Like fishing dead bodies out of rivers and being in the front lines of riots.

Suck it up! You aren’t a conscript, you’re a volunteer, and if you failed to realise the job had less savoury aspects to it, well, more fool you!

The move had changed policing forever, a sergeant told the survey. The majority of police time was now spent “dealing with the fallout from the night time economy,” he said. “No longer are we able to patrol residential areas to catch burglars etc.”

Wait a minute, I thought you were bleating about not doing that due to those awful Tory cuts? Now it’s because you’re too busy with drunks?

Make up your damned minds!

Katherine Brown, the director of the Institute of Alcohol Studies, said: “Our report shows how alcohol takes up a disproportionate share of emergency service time, costing taxpayers billions of pounds each year.

…

Brown said: “Police officers we spoke to would far rather be dealing with burglaries than Friday night drunks. We call on the government to better support our emergency services and implement policies to ease this burden, such as minimum unit pricing for alcohol.”

OK, 1) that cost is more than offset by the billions of pounds taken in alcohol taxes, and 2) the EU has already ruled that minimum pricing is a no-go, you collective punishment-loving moron!

Not that the police need to rely on convenient third parties to demand collective punishment – they are pretty hand at initiating it:

Police in London are urging shopkeepers to refuse to sell eggs and flour to under-16s in the run-up to Halloween in case they use them to target the homes of elderly and vulnerable residents.

They might want to make bloody pancakes, or be buying shopping for someone else, though? What sort of idiot demands that they be inconvenienced anyway?

Oh. Of course. A Labour Party idiot:

Labour councillor for King's Cross Jonathan Simpson dismissed suggestions the initiative is an overreaction.

"The police don't send out letters lightly," he said. "I don't have a problem with it. It may inconvenience some young people but it is probably a week or so and I would rather that than have a vulnerable or elderly resident attacked.

"I wouldn't want an elderly or vulnerable resident to be faced being pelted in a violent way at any time of year. It is a way of preventing that."

Another way of preventing that would be to round up all the elderly and vulnerable and lock them up for a fortnight. Why not try this? What’s that? They have rights? Why, yes. Now you get it…

And I’m sick and tired of the only answer to police issues being collective punishment.

Enough! No more. If your ‘solution’ to a crime problem unfairly impinges on the rights of others top go about their lives unhindered and unobstructed, then you haven’t thought it out.

And we pay you to do that. So off you go, and come back with a better solution.

The Unenforceable In Full Pursuit Of The Unspeakable…

Car cruisers will be banned from Southend after the courts granted an injunction against them.

If you’re wondering ‘How..?’, given that car cruises are usually no more than young folk in nice cars driving up and down, well, take heart. You aren’t alone.

The injunction obtained from the High Court forbids any car-cruise events from happening anywhere in the Borough until September 2016. However, the authority admits it is still working with Essex Police to draw up plans on how to enforce the injunction.

Well, quite! If everyone who owns a particular car or type of car WhatsApps their chums & says ‘Fancy a drive to the seaside and back?’ is that illegal?

If Mr & Mrs Average are out for a pootle down to Thorpe Bay in their vintage Jag, do they risk Essex Police zooming up behind them, lights flashing, because that’s the fifth vintage Jag in a row that’s passed their waiting patrol car?

It followed the furore after a ‘static’ car meet up earlier this month, that saw hundreds of vehicle enthusiasts descend on Western Esplande. However, a small number of them were doing ‘burnouts’ and driving recklesssly during the event.

Then why not arrest that ‘small number’ for the offences they committed, and leave everyone else alone?

Independent Martin Terry, who is responsible for transport at the authority, said: “I’m very pleased that we have successfully obtained this order, which will enable us to take tough action against any groups who comes to our town with the intention of driving recklessly.”

“Anyone who organises such an event now does so at their own peril and we will not be shy in bringing the full force of the law to bear.”

“At the same time I’m kindly asking the public to be vigilant and report any incidents to the police if you see them occurring.”

God, if anyone thought that electing independents would get you a different type of politician than the overbearing, NuPuritan prodnoses of the main parties, then Martin Terry is here to prove you wrong, isn’t he?

The Tyranny Of The Perpetually Offended…

A café owner in the town where 5-year-old April Jones was abducted and murdered has defended putting up a sign featuring a joke about kidnapping.

Just savour those words. You have to defend humour, now.

The sign read: “The more you weigh, the harder you are to kidnap! Stay safe. Eat cake!!”

And a local resident, one Angharad Penrhyn, tweeted a photo ‘questioning it’. As you do, these days.

Penrhyn said she was apparently told she was being “hypersensitive” about an incident which happened “years ago”, when she complained about the sign.

Good! If a few more of these whinging ‘concerned types’ were met with a robust ‘Sod off, princess!’ the world would be a better place…

Responding to the complaint, the café owner claimed in an interview with the BBC that April Jones’ family had visited the café but “have not said anything” .

And even if they had, why should that oblige the café owner to remove it. They’ve already lobbied to have a perfectly good cottage knocked down, FFS!

The Independent has attempted to contact Chimes café for a comment.

Why? Why not contact Angharad Penrhyn instead, and ask her how she manages to get through a day without hyperventilating?

Science With George Monbiot!

I know this statement will be unwelcome. I too hate the idea that people cannot change their circumstances. But the terrible truth is that, except through surgery, for the great majority of sufferers obesity is an incurable disease.

Now, I’m not going to tear shreds off the idiocy of that statement, mainly because Chris Snowden already did.

But we’re talking here about progressives that think nothing whatsoever of believing that people can ‘change sex’ (with the aid of science), yet size and weight is suddenly fixed and immutable.

Industry and government will resist the obvious solutions until they can be resisted no longer. Eventually the change will have to happen, with similar restrictions on advertising, sponsorship, display and accessibility to those imposed on the tobacco pedlars. One day, though not before many thousands have needlessly died, it will become illegal to advertise any food or drink that merits a red traffic-light warning. They will be sold only in plain packaging, with health warnings, on high shelves.

Slippery slope, anyone?

Haven’t sensible folk like Dick & Leg-Iron & Longrider been warning you that smoking would just be the start?

Does this seem draconian to you?

No, it sounds insane. And evil.

If so, remember that obesity afflicts a quarter of the adult population, and is rising rapidly. It causes a range of hideous conditions, just one of which – diabetes – accounts for one sixth of NHS admissions and 10% of its budget. In what looking-glass world is this acceptable? If smoking demands fierce intervention, why not overeating?

Well, why not? And when that’s been ‘conquered’, what next?

This is the choice we face: to recognise that the only humane and effective means of addressing the obesity epidemic is to prevent more people from being hooked, by restricting the pushers – or to continue a programme of fat-shaming, bullying and compulsory treatment, whose only likely outcome is unhappiness. Now ask yourself again: which of these options is draconian?

The former, idiot. The latter penalises only those affected, not everyone else who isn’t.