Ashes to ashes: balance and the BBC

Having been ghosted by Matt Chorley’s producers on Five Live (see previous post), what happened next was no more than I expected.

Promoted as a discussion about the smoking ban 20 years on, the choice of guests was hilariously one-sided, despite an assurance by the producer that “We're keen to reflect all opinions in the discussion”.

First to be introduced was Patricia Hewitt who was Secretary of State for Health when Labour introduced the bill that banned smoking in all enclosed public places in England. She was then joined by Caroline Flint, who was public health minister from 2005-2007, and the tone was summed up by Chorley (I think) who described it as a “lovely reunion”.

According to Hewitt, the ban was a “step forward for public health”. Public opinion, she said, had been moving in favour (omitting to mention that, given options such as designated smoking rooms or more ‘smoke-free’ areas, only a minority supported a complete ban on smoking in pubs).

Flint said the ban was introduced because the government was “trying to reduce smoking rates”. At the time however the ban was justified largely on the grounds that non-smokers (bar workers in particular) had to be ‘protected’ from secondhand smoke. On that subject, Flint said the science and medical evidence was clear, passive smoking affected people’s health, and she described the ban as the “best piece of legislation”. “Brilliant job,” agreed Hewitt.

Into this love-in, Chorley introduced a third guest, someone I had never heard of. Nigel Jones was a licensee when the ban was introduced and he is currently a spokesman for the Campaign for Pubs. Backstreet community pubs suffered, he said, and pubs in general lost a lot of trade. “Pubs that didn’t change definitely suffered.” Change, he added, “took a while to happen” which is why “businesses need [government] support”. Nevertheless, pressed by Chorley, he believed “It is better” since the ban. (Try telling the hundreds of proprietors whose pubs closed in the direct aftermath of the ban.)

Last but not least, Five Live listeners were introduced to our old friend Linda Bauld, professor of public health at Edinburgh University. According to Bauld, author of ‘The impact of smokefree legislation in England: Evidence review’, published in 2011, the impact of the ban was “pretty significant” and she proceeded to describe the short and longer-term impact including a reduction in hospital admissions for heart attacks, a reduction in asthma cases, with smoking prevalence reduced from 22 per cent to 10 per cent in the 20 years since the ban.

Some of you may recall how contentious Bauld’s paper was when it was published, especially those heart attack claims which went unchallenged by Chorley, as did other comments. In fact, I don’t recall him challenging a single thing anyone said.

The last word went to Hewitt and Flint. According to Hewitt, the ban was the “biggest thing we achieved” and she was “hugely proud” of it. Flint agreed. The ban, she said, was the “biggest win in my time as minister”.

To be fair to Chorley and his producers, his guests made some interesting points and the discussion was conducted in a good spirit, but that’s because three of the four guests were on the same page, and even the fourth was agnostic about the ban.

My issue is this: there was no attempt at balance. None. Tendentious statements were made and there was no-one to challenge them. It reminded me of a similar discussion on Times Radio in 2021 when several guests were invited to mark the 50th anniversary of Action on Smoking and Health. On that occasion they were Deborah Arnott, CEO of ASH, Patricia Hewitt (again), and public health professional Prof Robert West.

I described that as a bit of a ‘love-in’ too, the difference being that I was brought on towards the end and Deborah and I had a brief but lively disagreement that the presenter didn’t much care for. His name? Matt Chorley.

Ashes to ashes: the smoking ban 20 years on is available on the BBC website. It starts one hour in. The programme will be available for a few weeks so do have a listen.

PS. After yesterday’s programme I emailed Chorley’s producer:

I’ve just listened to the item and if that line-up of guests was designed to ‘reflect all opinions’ about the smoking ban then it’s a sad reflection of what passes for balance on Five Live. 

I lost count of the number of claims that could and should have been challenged but Matt clearly had no interest in playing devil’s advocate with the result that the listener heard only one side of the debate, especially in relation to public opinion and the alleged health benefits of the ban. 

Unfortunately it is no more than I expected when I heard you were going to address ‘20 years of the smoking ban’. I wish I had been wrong but there we are.

I’m not expecting a reply.