Posted by Donnie on Friday, 23 February 2007 17:54:10

Votedave at long last someone with some common sense and a democratic view not a selfish one - however as a smoker I detest smoky atmospheres and therefore demand ventilation be installed, you will find most smokers dont want to be sat in a fog. Thank you for your tolerant unselfish attitude - perhaps it could be drinks on the house.

Posted by Tizzy on Friday, 23 February 2007 18:25:39

The ban will come in on 1 July. This government is not open to any reasonable proposals on this subject. By the time DC becomes PM it will be too late for many clubs and pubs. Many rural pubs will be forced out of business and the property developers will move in.

As a smoker I would support a ban on smoking if it was alongside a ban on sales of tobacco products. Of course, that will not happen because the Chancellor depends on the income derived from the tax.

What to do? Perhaps villages and small towns club together, buy your local pub and rent it out to the ex-publican. That ex-publican can then hold private parties in his 'private home'.

Posted by ChriB on Friday, 23 February 2007 18:34:27

Votedave - A much more tolerant suggestion than the one enacted by Parliament.
There was no consideration for Social or Environmental damage infact the only thing to be found in the Partial Regulatory Impact assessment was a misleading or ill-thought out economic consideration.
According to this PRIA the cost of alterations would have been minimal but we have heard of the trade setting many millions aside for smoking shelters; a figure of £1million was suggested for Education but £12.5million has just been spent on the 'hook' advert; between £5million and £13million was suggested as the cost of implementing the ban but as we have heard recently the Government has provided £29.5million for their smoke police.
How many more biased and inaccurate figures were put forward and how much biased and inaccurate information was fed to MPs by the Health Committee and anti-smoking activists before the vote.
No account was taken of community and personal damage from closed pubs or bingo halls or the impact upon those many smokers and non-smokers who will lose their simple pleasures, become more isolated and in many cases suffer from depression, a condition that is proven deadly.
Another major impact of Government's legislation is the creation of outdoor smoking areas with patio heating. These will produce a massive amount of greenhouse gasses at a time the Government has suddenly become guardians of the environment.
It would be much more sensible, less divisive, less expensive and more 'British' for premises to be encouraged to go smoke-free or remain smoke-friendly with air quality controls.
It's a shame David C has dismissed any changes to this legislation.

Posted by mulluski5 on Saturday, 24 February 2007 01:44:58

Thank you votedave, I have a husband of 32 years, he has never smoked I always have, I have two older chidren who smoke and one who skydives as a hobby but does not smoke. Ventilation and non-smoking pubs or rooms should have been the way forward. We had a great time at Xmas in the pub. Next year it will be parties. The hypocrisy of it all is enough to drive most crazy.
It does not affect me much at the moment, but I cannot believe what they have accpted as the norm, for the elderly and disabled. Or for workers who cannot even smoke outside in the open air, some are sent of site. That has nothing to do with health, it is to do with control. I do not know anyone who wants to give up, I do not either, I enjoy smoking, elderly people who have smoked a lifetime need a lifeline. They were not given a voice, they are human beings, talk of respect I hear from Blair, he should give some to the elderly and the vunerable even if he does not give it to me. It will be a long time before I ever vote for Labour again.
I dislike his visions, intolerance turns to hatred, to often seen on these boards, no amount of bullying will force smokers who do not want to give up, give up, it will make them more determined not to.
Given that this has come from the USA where 1 in 10 women are on anti depressants, while it may be good for big Pharma, it is not good for people. Do not let it happen here.

Posted by Belinda on Saturday, 24 February 2007 02:45:22

Eminently reasonable.

Posted by skegy on Sunday, 25 February 2007 12:12:57

Unfortunately the brain dead are in charge of the asylum. What I have observed is that the brain dead hate anyone thinking for themselves, they hate people enjoying themselves, because they are sterile people. Near me is a "gay" pub and it's a busy pub, I'm heterosexual so I don't drink there. If there's a pub called say "The Free Thinker" where people smoke, fags, pipes, bongs, dustbins, bonfires etc. I would assume a non smoker would also avoid such a pub. Not at all, they want it closed down. Good here ain’t it.

Posted by Donnie on Sunday, 25 February 2007 14:14:55

Quite so skegy - I would have like to see them evict Winston Churchill from his local, as well as some of these

http://www.jusonline.nl/smokers/gallery01.html

The point is this must be the most ridiculous piece of unthought out legislation ever. For instance say I have the plumber into my home to do a job, does this then not then make it his place of work and therefore am I breaking the law by smoking in my own home which I have worked and paid for.

The same principle would apply if I had caterers or any one else in to do a job would it not. I never thought I would see the day in England when peoples private property rights were trampled on

What about boats, does this law only apply within British Waters.

There are so many other angles to this law than meets the eye and it is all about control feaks controlling you in my opinion. What ever happened to England and what it stood for, 10 years of Labour have destroyed it.

Posted by Jimllfixitfc on Wednesday, 28 February 2007 21:56:32

I semi agree why could the law not have been: every pub must provide a non-smoking area seperated by bricks and mortar ? Then if they can not provide this they must be totally non-smoking.

The accomodation of one group of people of a certain opinion should never come at the total expense of another group with a differing opinion.