Fracking surely!

No, the PM's office has already confirmed that he does not advise David Cameron on matters of policy, he is just an advisor.

They employ him for one day per week to advise them, but he doesn't advise them really, oh no, not at all.

They think we are all as stupid as the newspaper editors.

Channel 4 News collared David Cameron about Lynton Crosby and his links to the tobacco industry a couple of weeks ago. The interviewer asked a number of times whether Crosby had been involved in discussions about plain packaging, and Cameron was careful to say - each time - that Lynton Crosby had not [ilobbied[/i him on the issue. It sounded to me like Cameron was using a very specific word - lobbied - that could be taken in a general sense to mean he hadn't spoken to Crosby about it at all, but was sufficiently precise to give him (Cameron) some wriggle room if it later transpired that Crosby had been involved in discussions.

Are minimum prices for alcohol and plain packaging for tobacco good ideas?

I'm shocked that such pointless measures were even suggested in the first place. If they needed to be lobbied to drop them that just makes it worse.

Don't know if there's any truth to this or not, but I just remembered hearing that after tobacco advertising was banned the main result was that tobacco companies made higher profits because they weren't wasting money on advertising.

RL also lost out too, because Silk Cut sponsored the Challenge Cup.

Have there been any studies over whether ending advertising and sponsorship has had any affect on smoking in the UK?

Dave thought so.
The discussion is about whether his mind was changed by discussions with his advisor who just happens have an interest that is in no way a vested interest except that it has been to one of his companies.

As to whether it is a good idea for plain packaging ... well, that's a seperate topic and the likes of you and I won't want to drift the thread, will we?