Coalition mayor smokes in bar, breaks own party’s law


Last Tuesday the mayor of Deurne in Noord Brabant was questioned by the city council about his smoking in a public bar. Since July of this year smoking has been banned in bars in the Netherlands. The ban has met with a lot of resistance, and many smokers openly defy the law. As far as I am aware this is the first time that a public official was caught red-handed breaking the anti-smoking law. A salient detail is that mayor Gerard Daandels of Deurne is a member of CDA, the Christian party that is in the vanguard of the Jihad against fun: it was CDA minister Klink that proposed the smoking ban.

Daandels response: “You can hold me responsible for everything in matters of enforcement, but not for this unenforceable measure. […] I went to three bars where people were smoking. If a hundred people are smoking, you no longer give an example by not smoking.”

The Department of Public Health commented: “Even mayors are bound by the law.”

Link: Brabants Dagblad. Via Jong Nieuws. Depiction of the Deurne coat of arms by Wikipedia user Tibor, distributed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2.


  1. Márcia W. says:

    Have you copyrighted “Jihad against fun” already?
    Wish you and all the 24 a 2009 plentiful of fun!

  2. Eric says:

    Hahaha, that was the one line that stuck with me too,
    great find, “the Jihad against fun”!

  3. CarolT says:

    The anti-smokers are guilty of flagrant scientific fraud for ignoring more than 50 studies, which show that human papillomaviruses cause over ten times more lung cancers than they pretend are caused by secondhand smoke. Passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus, so the anti-smokers’ studies, because they are all based on nothing but lifestyle questionnaires, have been cynically DESIGNED to falsely blame passive smoking for all those extra lung cancers that are really caused by HPV.

    The anti-smokers have committed the same type of fraud with every disease they blame on smoking and passive smoking, as well as ignoring other types of evidence that proves they are lying, such as the fact that the death rates from asthma have more than doubled since their movement began.

  4. Branko Collin says:

    Carol, please try and keep the nutjobbery limited.

    Márcia, thanks for the wishes, and a good 2009 to you and all other 24 Oranges readers too.

  5. Watchdog says:

    If the mayor challenged the law based on its dismal scientific illegitimacy, he can say that no one has to obey patently illegitimate laws.
    That is…the laws are all based on harms of tobacco. Trouble is, no studies have been presented showing that smoke from tobacco ITSELF is harmful. “Studies” routinely fail to analyze or define what this smoke is. Some cigarettes (depending on national laws) may contain absolutely no tobacco but, instead, fake tobacco made from all sorts of industrial waste cellulose. One cannot get Tobacco Smoke, the supposed target of the laws, from that.
    Other, typical cigs, are so adulterated with pesticide residues, radiation from phosphate fertilizers, any of over 1400 untested non-tobacco additives, chlorine, etc etc that it is preposterous, even a lie, to call this “tobacco”. It is legitimate, and necessary, to call that “Pesticide and Chlorine-Contaminated Tobacco” however. Medicine, science, and law require such qualification.

    Typhoid-Contaminated Water, for instance, is not just “water”.

    It is entirely off-target to only challenge bans on grounds of “right to smoke” or “property rights”. Such challenges ignore and even accept that the laws are based on proven bogus science at their roots. Such laws imply that it is OK for cigarette makers to secretly experiment on, and poison, smokers with some of the worst industrial substances on the planet…dioxin being easily the worst of the worst…but that the unwitting smokers are the villains to be burdened with slander, expulsion, and repressive laws.

    See the site noted, and also

    Bottom line is that no Public Interest has been shown to justify bans on tobacco. If officials wish to protect public health by prohibiting the known toxic, cancer-causing, fire-starting, kid-attracting and addiction-enhancing cigarette ADULTERANTS…smokers and non smokers would support that…and we would not be fractured into “smoking” and “anti smoking” factions. Victimized smokers, and their attorneys, ought perhaps see some serious compensatory damages coming their way. It is nice that so many smokers do not seem to be greedy for that money, but it is beyond peculiar that smokers have no outrage at being so defrauded and Guinea pigged…not to mention sickened and killed.

    If health officials do not know about the pesticide residues and the dioxin-producing chlorine adulterants, and that radiation, etc., they have proven themselves to be utterly incompetent in this area. If they do know about those non-tobacco threats and harms but fail to tell or warn anyone, or to ban the substances, they are derelict in their sworn and paid duty to the public. By their blaming the victims, and scapegoating a public-domain natural plant, they have indeed joined the cigarette cartel in covering up one of the worst incidents of mass consumer fraud and poisoning (if not murder) in industrial history.

    To not expose, question and charge these “concerned” officials for all of this, smokers might as well open the door and invite Global Tobacco Prohibition in to have a permanent chair.

  6. Wiel says:

    This is not that exceptional. Many local officials of this party have tried to get their MP’s to change the law. The whole local council of the city of Maastricht (except the Greens) has sent an official letter to the national government to change the law.

    The smoking ban law has shown to be non-reinforcable in the past months, where 80% of bars do not comply to it. Even one of the major anti-smoking lobby groups today sent out a press release today that, according to their information, the smoking law is a dead piece of legislation.

    We are now waiting for the lawsuits that will be started against this legislation in January. In these lawsuits, all the lies that this law is based on will be attacked. Including ETS (Second Hand Smoke).

  7. P Gatti says:

    Quote. “The Department of Public Health commented: “Even mayors are bound by the law.””

    Nope, not when the law is based on junk science questionairs. Let’s see some real physical science that SHS poses a hazard and then we’ll obey the law. Till then you can take your law a shove it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL