smoking and the pub

[etccarmageddon]

Originally Posted by smicer07

Pointless debate ultimately. Smokers are usually selfish people who only think about themselves, which is why they can't understand the non-smoker's viewpoint.

good to see you back Simon. I think that's too much of a generalisation - perhaps the truth is smokers are either doing it because they have an addition or because they dont care about the health issues.

what I fail to understand though is why it's so important to be able to go out and smoke during your evening in the pub unless you're addicted. obviously many smokers know their hobby is unpleasant for non smokers but they still choose to do it when non smokers are within breathing distance.
__________________

Originally Posted by Salu

...Smokers. It is NOT fair to smoke in public. You are free to smoke on your own or with like minded associates but you should not be permitted to damage other innocent people's lives. If that takes legislation to enforce then so be it. It is not much different to the protection the law proffers to assaulting others. Smoking is an indirect of assault in my opinion.....

looks like someone made my point better than I did!

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by SlackDad

The landlord should be free to decide on an individual basis in consultation with her/his customers.

What about the staff that work in the pubs? Should they not have a say too? Sorry but having been in a number of pubs and clubs where you end up having to scrub the stale cigarette odour off you as you leave I'm in favour of a blanket ban of smoking inside pubs/ clubs/ restaurants etc. Unfortunately I can't see it happening until someone in the government gets a spine
There is waaay too much money and therefor influence in the cigarette and alcohol industry for any form of controls to be legislated for properly.

[SlackDad]

Originally Posted by Paul

What about the staff that work in the pubs? Should they not have a say too? Sorry but having been in a number of pubs and clubs where you end up having to scrub the stale cigarette odour off you as you leave I'm in favour of a blanket ban of smoking inside pubs/ clubs/ restaurants etc. Unfortunately I can't see it happening until someone in the government gets a spine
There is waaay too much money and therefor influence in the cigarette and alcohol industry for any form of controls to be legislated for properly.

Agree with you on the staffing point. But leaving it down to an individual pub by pub decision may mean that some pubs would become smoke free while others continue as before. Staff would then have a choice over which environment to work in.

[etccarmageddon]

you cant 'consult your customers' over an issue like this as your customers are every changing unless you suggest a pub is forced to put it to a customer ballot periodically.

[Angua]

A pub by the river a few miles away (in the middle of nowhere) was done up at great expense a couple of years ago, since when they have had a total smoking ban throughout the pub. They have a good reputation for food and are still going strong dispite having a large part of their trade as summer river users!

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by clarie

<snip>
Pub by the way, is short for public house. Therefore the landlord is duty bound to provide for the public, and to work in the interests of the health of the public. It is not just down to the landlord what he does on his premises, as a publican he has to consider health and safety issues.

<snip>.

Seriously Clarie, don't post clap trap like that, it only serves to make you look either ill informed or ignorant You haven't got a clue have you? I used to be a landlady. As a land lady, BII qualified and well aware of my legal H&S 'duties' to the public, I can actually pick and choose who I provide for. If I don't like the look of someone, I can bar them, and they would not win a case in court to overturn that. A pub is one place where the customer is certainly not always right.
__________________

Originally Posted by Paul

What about the staff that work in the pubs? Should they not have a say too? Sorry but having been in a number of pubs and clubs where you end up having to scrub the stale cigarette odour off you as you leave I'm in favour of a blanket ban of smoking inside pubs/ clubs/ restaurants etc. Unfortunately I can't see it happening until someone in the government gets a spine
There is waaay too much money and therefor influence in the cigarette and alcohol industry for any form of controls to be legislated for properly.

Again, no-one is FORCED to work in a pub. If you don't like the conditions of a job, then you don't apply.

[SlackDad]

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

you cant 'consult your customers' over an issue like this as your customers are every changing unless you suggest a pub is forced to put it to a customer ballot periodically.

No, but I'm sure a consultation period over a period of time would successfully canvass the opinion of the regulars whilst getting a representative view of everyone else.

Originally Posted by orangebird

Seriously Clarie, don't post clap trap like that, it only serves to make you look either ill informed or ignorant You haven't got a clue have you? I used to be a landlady. As a land lady, BII qualified and well aware of my legal H&S 'duties' to the public, I can actually pick and choose who I provide for. If I don't like the look of someone, I can bar them, and they would not win a case in court to overturn that. A pub is one place where the customer is certainly not always right.

That's pretty weak, OB. Your right as a landlady to bar someone you don't like does not in any way detract from the status of your establishment as a public house. If you were to enforce your right to pick and choose your clientele to any significant degree, you wouldn't be a pub, you would be a private members club, and they have different licencing terms.

You might be able to pick and choose your clientele, but you cannot pick and choose which aspects of health and safety law you uphold, even if you think they make trading more difficult. This new Law is being framed in health and safety terms.

[SlackDad]

Can anybody who is wholly opposed to smoking in pubs please, hand on heart, say that they never make non-essential trips in their cars. Or always look at the alternatives to cars when planning trips? Only those who answer yes to these questions (honestly), can unhypocritically support the ban on smoking in pubs (provided of course they are not damaging peoples health in other ways).

Why are we not looking at banning smoking around children in any environment, be it at home or in the car. This is more important as children can not always make a choice about the environment they are in whereas adults, generally, can. (and presumably would be more susceptible to the effects of smoke). This, of course will not happen as it would be very difficult to enforce. To me, the government banning smoking in pubs/public places makes it look like it is doing something about public health, but ultimately, as the watered down version has shown, is pretty toothless.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Chris T

That's pretty weak, OB. Your right as a landlady to bar someone you don't like does not in any way detract from the status of your establishment as a public house. If you were to enforce your right to pick and choose your clientele to any significant degree, you wouldn't be a pub, you would be a private members club, and they have different licencing terms.

You might be able to pick and choose your clientele, but you cannot pick and choose which aspects of health and safety law you uphold, even if you think they make trading more difficult. This new Law is being framed in health and safety terms.

I was merely pointing out what Clarie posted was factually incorrect. Weak or not, I don't care. At least it's correct.

[ian@huth]

It is still the same clap trap coming from the no smoking brigade who want to ban every place that doesn't fit in with their ideas. Yes, smoking is a bad habit that can affect your health and that of others who breathe the smoke. Yes, I agree that many places and public transport should be able to have a smoking ban. What I don't agree with is that smokers should be discriminated against which is what a total ban would mean.

Freedom of choice is the major issue here. Smokers should be catered for just the same as non smokers. There is nothing wrong in my eyes with the owner of a pub, restaurant, shop or business deciding that he wants to cater for smokers. By all means bring in legislation that forces the owner of a smoking establishment to display very prominent signs at all entrances which state that it is an establishment that allows smoking. Those who want a smoke free atmosphere can then choose whether to enter or not or whether they want to work there. Who is being harmed other than the ones who choose of their own free will to enter the premises.

Chris T has just said

If you were to enforce your right to pick and choose your clientele to any significant degree, you wouldn't be a pub, you would be a private members club, and they have different licencing terms.

. What if all the establishments that wanted to allow smoking decided to become private members clubs? Would there still be an objection from non-smokers and on what grounds?

[lippy]

Originally Posted by orangebird

Again, no-one is FORCED to work in a pub. If you don't like the conditions of a job, then you don't apply.

Correct!

A public house is open to the public,
it doesn't mean you can enter (of your own free choice) and dictate how someone runs their business.

If you don't like places were people smoke, don't go there!

[Angua]

I would like to see a mix of both smoking and non smoking establishments. Problem is the majority of publicans are convinced they would lose out were they to ban smoking. So no one will stick their neck out and ban smoking.

Originally Posted by ian@huth

What if all the establishments that wanted to allow smoking decided to become private members clubs? Would there still be an objection from non-smokers and on what grounds?

I see this as a public health issue. The preventable death and illness caused by smoking is far in excess of that caused by anything else. Frankly, I think tobacco use should be illegal. I know what I'm talking about - I am still witnessing the fallout caused by the death of a close relative from smoking-induced lung cancer some 20 years ago. (She was a barmaid, incidentally). It is *not* merely a personal choice when you indulge in an activity that you are fully aware is likely to kill you and leave your family and friends to pick up the pieces. It is irresponsible selfishness of the highest order.

The evidence from Ireland and from New York is that one in 12 smokers have already given up the habit as a direct result of the blanket ban that has been imposed in those places. That means there's still a long way to go, but it's a start.

What I would like to see is a progressive tightening of laws regulating smoking so that it becomes increasingly difficult to do it anywhere other than in a private house and is eventually outlawed altogether.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Chris T

I see this as a public health issue. The preventable death and illness caused by smoking is far in excess of that caused by anything else. Frankly, I think tobacco use should be illegal. I know what I'm talking about - I am still witnessing the fallout caused by the death of a close relative from smoking-induced lung cancer some 20 years ago. (She was a barmaid, incidentally).

1 in 3 people suffer from fallout of death by cancer Chris....I personally have had three members of family die of lung cancer.

It is *not* merely a personal choice when you indulge in an activity that you are fully aware is likely to kill you and leave your family and friends to pick up the pieces. It is irresponsible selfishness of the highest order.

The evidence from Ireland and from New York is that one in 12 smokers have already given up the habit as a direct result of the blanket ban that has been imposed in those places. That means there's still a long way to go, but it's a start.

What I would like to see is a progressive tightening of laws regulating smoking so that it becomes increasingly difficult to do it anywhere other than in a private house and is eventually outlawed altogether.

Yes, that's all well and good, but you didn't answer the question -

. What if all the establishments that wanted to allow smoking decided to become private members clubs? Would there still be an objection from non-smokers and on what grounds?