Smoking ban

ok no-one else has bought it up so I will.

What am I missing here, why has this been such a problem.

Surely public enclosed spapces = ban smoking, why is it not that simple? There has got to be something to this. Upset too many "lords" fagging away in the private clubs???

Geez like if Ireland and Scotland can come up with a ban and sort it out quicker than us, how stupid does this make our government look?

Labour = no back bone.

I mean staff still have to work in Pubs, private clubs, so this means it ok for them to inhale 2nd hand smoke and get cancer then is it?

A ban should be a ban, plain and simple.
:JOEL: bloody labour :JOEL:

 

I don't know but I am disgusted by it, it means I still have to suffer from the effects of second hand smoke at gigs. With pubs I am not so bothered as I avoid the smokey ones anyway but I really wanted it to be banned in clubs and gig venues.

 

I am a smoker, but I would support a total ban.

The trouble is the government have got cold feet on this so now its a ban on places that serve food.

Presumably then the workers in non food pubs have no rights to their health?

This is where they have screwed up, all or nothing, it makes no difference if the pub serves food or not.

 

Although I am an ex-smoker. I recall being sick of going to pubs where your eyes would sting due to the amount of smoking going on. The main problem that I saw, was a complete lack of efficient air extraction. I think a lot of people wouldn't bother too much about smoking in pubs, if the owner faced up to spending some of their profits on removing the smoke.

Smoke in restaurants is just minging!

BTW, I live in Scotland, support the total ban, and love having a pint in some of Dublin's pubs - what a change there is over there. The Dublin smokers find the craic is in the pubs that have an area outside for smoking. One place I visited had outdoor tables with barstools, parasols, and space heaters! I think the non-smokers are enjoying going out like never before.

 

Rod the government proposals call for a total ban on smoking in a pub with food, there is a bit og a grey area is that includes the garden, and what constitutes food.

The confusion as I see it is if the government are doing the ban for health reasons or what, if health reasons then it has to be a total ban (so everyone can stop going to the pub and smoke cigarettes at home around their kids.)

 

Gary,

There is definitley a grey area of what constitutes food in some of the pubs I have been in!

Yes, a total ban is the only sane way to go, anything else is giving mixed signals. If we want to reduce the deaths caused by smoking - including passive smoking -, the government HAS to get the finger out. Bit difficult for politicians to take decisions though, what with their fingers in so many pies, another grey (meat) area.

 

This pointless IMO. There was talk, if smoking was banned in pubs, to have "smoking bars" like they do in other countries. So if that happenned, how are we any better off?

I'm not a smoker FWIW, but I do enjoy the occaisional ciggie when i'm drunk, and if it were banned, that would discourage me altogether, which would be good.

 

This is another argument for the complete ban, I have found during my research as a moderator of one of the biggest forums on the planet and the biggest UK based forum that most under 30's don't smoke. If they do its for social reasons and very rarely.

As you say if the was a complete ban these people would not light up at all.

I am lucky enough to live in a nice part of Manchester with plenty of airy bars so smoke is not a problem. Where smoke really seems to be a problem is gigs, these venues have poor ventalation and are basicaly a trap full of tar and carbon monoxide.

Smoking in cinemas has been banned (if by choice rather than law) for years so I don't see whats such a big deal about pubs.

I would support smoking bars if they had to pay a huge licence so they became the minority bars.

The Manchester Evening News did a poll last year and 72% of people said they wanted a complete and out right ban, interestingly Manchester has one of the highest amount of smoking residents in the country.

I am sure people will moan about a full ban taking away their liberties but I think its about time none smokers had the liberty of being able to go to a pub without stinking like a factory owned by BAT and risking lung cancer.

 

Whilst I can I appreciate it's particularly unpleasant to have to have smoke in the air whilst eating, surely if the driving force behind this legislation is health then I don't see the relevance of whether or not you are tucking into ham, egg and chips whilst breathing in second hand smoke.

Matt.

 

I don't quite get what you mean. Eating chips only harms you not others around you and I think that is the point of the ban.

 

What I mean is - the proposed legislation seems to say that you will be protected if you happen to be having a meal but if you are not (i.e. you are in a non food pub) then you will continue to have to suffer second hand smoke.

If the driving force is making meals more enjoyable than fair enough but if the goal is to improve the nation's health then people should be protected against second hand smoke whether they are eating or not.

Matt.

 

Thats what I don't get either, it seems labour are scared that ban would put off their working class smokers. Things have moved on so much though, I don't know a single person my age that smokes apart from the very rare social ciggie. I am sure many young people do, but they are still minority.

The eating thing is very silly, at least Weatherspoons are banning it in all their pubs but then thats the law now anyway.

I am hoping what might happen is once people get used to the idea of smoke free pubs the none food pubs might introduce a voluntery ban as more people will be put of them and on them, on other hand those pubs might contain a lot of smokers than they used to.

I have never seen anybody smoke in few none smoking pubs I have been to in Manchester and nobody smoke in the pubs and clubs in Ireland. I am sure enforcement won't be a problem.

These silly rules will confuse matters though.

Also what is the punishment for smoking in a food pub?

 

The bottom line is that landlords are largely against it. It's not called 'the hospitality industry' for nothing. Apart from the fact that most pub owners and staff are smokers [otherwise they wouldn't be doing it, would they?] the bare facts are that no pub owner is going to chase away the pub bores..Speaking as someone who has worked the graveyard shift in a hotel bar - the only people dumb enough to sit up till 3 in the morning drinking stupid expensive drinks are the mugs who spend £10 per day burning leaves. People with sense are not the best customers in most bars.

 

You don't get caner from eating egg and chips, the damage that 2nd hand smoke causes has been proven, so if its for health reasons, it should be a total ban, and if smoking is banned at workplaces, then pubs / clubs should be included, again why should staff be put at risk, for what at the end of the day is probably minimum wage.

I'm surprised, especailly in todays soceity of sueing anyone for anything, that someone hasn't taken a smoker to court for attempted murder, cos technically that's what it is.

Anyone doing that should be done for abuse! That is physically damaging the kids health and they don't have a choice.

If smokers must smoke (ie not strong enough to give up) then they should do this on their own and NOT be putting other people at risk.

 

Then why have Wetherspoons volunteered to make all their pubs smoking by 2006? (before the law was passed) they have also already banned smoking in many of their pubs.

Regarding late nights that is just often apart of a good night out, it dosn't always mean drinking stupid amounts.

 

Very good point AT, and judging by our local WS its hasn't had any effect on customers always busy and the smokers are banished to outdoors where they belong. Its a nice place to go and have a few drinks and the beers cheap too so a winner all round!

 

It will be interesting to see what happens to my local suburban wetherspoons, its the cheapest pub outside the city centre south of the city so it has had a bit of trouble in the past. It has also been granted a 1:00am licence, so the place will change quite a lot.

One of things I didn't like about it was the fact it was very smokey hopefully that will now change. I am also wondering what my local cafe/bars will do, I will asume they will just serve food as not that many people smoke in them anyway.

 

If you're so strongly compelled to go to a pub where there is such danger I think you need to examine your own motivations.

Explain to me why I shouldn't be allowed to operate a business that caters for people partaking of a legal activity.

Paul

 

The talk surrounding pubs is such that you would think it was law people went to them.

As I said I would support a ban I am not fussed one way or another.

However the fact is smokers have rights too. And what are people going to the pub to do? Fill themselves with poison.

Going to the pub is a choice that adults make. They choose to go to relax get away from home for a while and see their friends. They wish to imbibe liquid poison and smoke poison, those that do not smoke can choose to go or not to go, they can also choose not to walk down the street with cars either.

One other point I would make, even in the busiest pubs nower days I am rarely blurry eyed from all the smoke in there, in my expereince pubs seemed to have addressed some of the issues with extractors etc (I am not for one minutes suggesting this effect passive smoking) and it seems clear that more people are choosing not to smoke. Plus local pubs are getting quieter because of all the legislation crap placed on them (such as this) and the prohibitive cost of drinking out now.

All I am saying is get a grip. The government didn't set out to make pub lunches taste better they set out to make out they were interested in peoples health (And not the revenue from ciggs) and by just banning in food pubs they are sending the wrong message.

A ban in pubs as I see it will have a couple of effects:

Some rural pubs doing food to stay afloat will go under (There is a delicate balance here between a few meals each night and punters drinking), the argument is that more people will go to the pub to eat if there is no smoking. Bollocks.

Towns and cities will see a super net increase in smoking in the streets. Just as in San Francisco when I was there, there will be huddled masses in the street getting a cigarette before returning to the bar.

For non smokers, they can drink poison without the fear of inhaling poison.

Pub ceilings will be cleaner.

People will be healthier

Just as business smoking bans, people will still smoke. The government need to tackle this issue another way, (but oh that revenue!)

 

Explain what steps you will take to ensure the safety of your employees.