In 2007 the parliament was asked to vote on prohibiting indoor smoking and most of the MPs voted to do so and yes. The proposition came from the Labour Party government that had just been under Gordon Brown for days and was supported almost only by the governing Labour Party’s MPs – only 47 members of the House of Commons voted for the unneeded superfluous form of legislation to pass from the main opposition Conservatives and from the Liberal-Democrats, and 7 from other parties, while the Labour MPs contributed 274 votes in favour of the smoking ban or the smoking prohibition which means exactly the same, with 275 other votes being against it. They were of course implicitly asked the same question themselves as they were implicitly asked whether to refrain from smoking indoors. The upper House of Lords has many cigar-smoking members who would have never seen it in that way who were also asked to vote against their own actions and in some way to veto them upon being asked the same question.
In 2017 the parliament was asked to vote against more immediate interests of the tobacco industry and its customers and consumers, on whether to dispose the functional use of their trade-marks, which also amounts for intellectual property theft on behalf of the government. Confiscation would be a better term, but this can be left for those who have reason. For exiting from where you are is not the logical consequence of smoking a cigarette. Most MPs voted yes on this occasion and plain packaging was imposed on legitimate goods of the market followed by unfair and excessive taxation practices.
The government that behaves in this way should know the following: Ordering people about is unspecialised work and you don’t need to know anything to do it. Ordering people about is not the same as ruling the country, it does not equate to government. And on top somebody has been paid to do that. From the taxpayer, and against the other taxpayer. Asking 650 MPs to vote yes or no to prohibit everyone from smoking inside is deception and a felony. It should not have happened at all in the first place and is beyond the scope of legitimate political power. It is indeed for that reason unconstitutional – the result has not been agreed upon by society in advance and has not been voted upon with the consent of its members.
You cannot use the same democratic procedure to decide about something else that falls within the constitutional scope of civil rights and liberties in their most basic form, unless you declare it to be your own will, like that of a dictator, in an open display of pure fascism. The will of 650 MPs should not override the will of the people who want to smoke and are being prevented and moved about to do so, the will of the citizen who is otherwise free to act and interact, to create and to satisfy their ambitions who must then be free according to their human right to move and circulate.
Bring Back Smoking Freedom 