My question to you David is ... What are your intentions regarding smoking in pubs/bars and clubs ??
I am a heavy smoker and admit it is a dreadful habbit, but I allways respect the rights of those who dislike smoking.
Since the ban on smoking in Ireland it has been reported that sixteen thousand bars in have closed down (probably more now), and now it has been banned right across mainland Britain.
Locally, where I live the pubs are becomming quieter and quieter as the weather gets colder and smokers can't stand comfortably outside and enjoy a fag! Even non smokers that I know of are complaining that the total ban is ludicrous because the pubs are becoming empty and soleless (no atmosphere :-) ).
The ban on smoking is destroying the pub industry, and yet another part of our culture. Everything the Labour goverment touches they reck, yet they claim they dont want to change our way of life. They are certainly changing things for the poor pub owners and their staff - countless jobs and careers lost - and nights out ruined for all.
Pubs allways used to have a tap-room, usually the smokiest place in the house. Could this idea not be re-adopted? I bet publicans would breath a sye of relief if such a compromise could be met, and their pubs became profitable again.
I ask you this as you are likely to make PM one day soon - even sooner if a vote of no confidence could be brought upon the present government. Its often a habbit of newly elected governments to say "This is how we were left it, and this is how its going to stay ...". Are you going to do the same with this issue, and others ? Or will you change things back to at least something similar to how they were for the benefity of everybody ?
Andy I am 100% behind you on this. Whether smoking takes place on private property should be the owners choice and no one elses, government has no business meddling with private property, the pubs are suffering terribly.
You I think would be interested in this thread where a debate has been taking place for some time.
Hi Donnie. Thanks for your reply, and I'm sorry I didnt spot your blog. I'm new to using this forum and had all on locating my own post. Now there are two similar threads on the go, the question is, will David Cameron provide a response to either ?
David Cameron did give a reply some weeks ago, where he stated he did not think that this issue would be revisited, as so many MPs, mainly Labour and Liberal (conservates voting 2 to 1 against the ban) voted for it.
I always thought that Conservatives supported the least government interference in peoples lifes and considered that adults were capable of making their own decisions, but it is increasingly looking like they are following the same PC path as Labour. I would like to have seen them put Winston churchill the greatest leader ever outside of a pub!
both of you are talking about YOUR rights but the reason the vote was given to ban smoking in public areas was to protect those who didn't want to smoke and therefore shouldn't be put in a situation where they are "forced" to smoke.
I think it says more about people who smoke that they can't even go to the pub without smoking now and how addictive this substance is. Look at what your saying about supposed pub numbers aflling because people find it too cold to go outside and smoke. Either wrap up warm or don't do it, its a simple alternative.
And for the record hasn't there been research in the UK to show that drinker numbers have actually increased since the ban and earnings from food have increased considerably.
I really wish smokers would all stop being so selfish and think about others.
Donnie - Yes, it's like a two tier society, one for them and the other for us. You cant have a cigarette in within company grounds, or public houses or just about anywhere else, yet MP's are allowed to smoke in their own offices. They dont want usto know what their yearly expendeture is, and yet they want to know every single morsel of income and outgoing that we have so that they can tax us to high heaven.
"And for the record hasn't there been research in the UK to show that drinker numbers have actually increased since the ban and earnings from food have increased considerably." ... they might be doing but not in pubs.
And who is selfish ??? Did I not suggest in my original mail that there was a solution for all by re-introducing the tap-room. Who did you say is being selfish MrPoshman ?? Well why dont you ask the brewerys the liscensees, the publicans and last but not least the people who used to enjoy a night out.
Andy you are correct and if you read the above post of mrposhman you can see the same old rubbish being trotted out.
Whilst you and I would support non smokers in their right for non smoking venues thousands if they want them, people like the above poster would deny you the same right for smoking venues. I was under the impression that we lived in a society that supported equal rights, but only when it suits. We will soon be in a situation where a heroin addict can shoot up in a pub legally, but you and I would get fined for using a legal product.
People who say smokers are selfish are realy the selfish ones, they wish to deny the owners right to choose which customers he wishes to encourage, and whilst they want their own venues they wish to deny others theirs.
It goes like this I dont like what you are doing, I disaprove of it so therefore you must stop it and be like me.
Ugh all mindless drones on a treadmill of water, lettuce leafs ect.
I support non smokers rights to non smoking venues, how about others recognising that smokers should have the same rights to their own venues staffed by smokers or those non smokers who dont mind smoking.
for the record prior to this ban pubs were closing at the rate of 50 per month, they are now closing at the rate of 50 per week, check out the Morning Advertiser to see the dire straights they are in. RIP English Tradional Pub
This site is made up of publicans, smokers and tolerant non smokers from England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all fighting for freedom and real democracy. Check out their Science Section it blows SHS out of the water.
I would never deny anybody the right to smoke, just when it affects other people then it is unfair on the people who don't wish to smell disgusting, inhale damaging smoke into their lungs etc.
Whilst a smoking room seems like a good idea do you really see it happening? How many pubs would have to spend money on building new areas for smokers and what if all people cannot fit in there? will others just start smoking by the door of the room saying "i'm blowing the smoke in there".
Its not selfish to not want to join in with someone elses habit so please stop spouting the anti-nonsmoker rubbish.
People that smoke just don't realise how horrible people smell on a night out and wake up with a burning in your throat after a night out because the facts stand that you probably wake up to that everyday.
I went to a Xmas dinner a few weeks ago and after the meal and before the coffee I excused myself and went and stood outside on Blackpool sea front in a howling gale in order to have a cigarette before the speeches.
When I returned one of the people on the table made the same point as you, that it spoke volumes about the sheer desperation and addiction of smokers that they would brave adverse weather conditions just to have a few drags on a fag.
I agreed with her. Because there is nothing that is going to come to between me and a cigarette ... not adverse conditions, not social exclusion, not adverts on the telly, not doctors, not friends, not anything.
But every time I'm forced to outside and have a cigarette, it just hardens my resolve along with my arteries than this prohibition will come between me and the ballot box.
the politicians have lost my vote, I see no reason to make any effort whatsoever for these sactimonious gits
Mrposhman i wonder if you worry about car and diesel fumes as much as you seem to worry about tobacco smoke which is mostly made up of water vapour.
With separate rooms you wouldnt have share my "disgusting habit" as you call it would you and surely in a free society it should be the owners decision as to whether he wishes to have one and spend the money not yours, its not your property, and no one forces you over the door do they.
Whilst you may dislike the smell of tobacco has it ever occured to you (probably not) that others like the smell particulary of a pipe. I can never understand the argument of it makes my hair and clothes smell, as I personally shower, wash my hair and have a complete change of clothes every day, often twice a day if I am going out - it does therefore lead me to wonder about others personal hygiene
Where a smoking room could be set up it should be. But whilst I'm totally against the government interferring in every facet of our lives I must admit as a reformed non-smoker I love coming home after a night out and not stinking like an ashtray.
Astrocat well said, I realy dont think that politicians have any idea at all how utterly despised and hated this ban is, its spiteful, petty, vindictive and discriminative. Interestingly I read a comment by someone the other day that smokers (human beings) are only allowed 50% protection from the elements, thats a roof and one wall, whereas animals are given 95% protection in a shed, says it all realy
Mr Poshman - as my original mail suggested and as OneMarcus has just pointed out, there are ways to compromise.
Going back to your previous mail
" How many pubs would have to spend money on building new areas for smokers and what if all people cannot fit in there? "
... Looking at how they are been hit, how many publicans would jump at the chance to bring back their profits and secure their livelyhoods ? The government would love it too. All that building work, tax and revenue on labour and materials.
Donnie - thanks for the link. I have signed the petition, and subscribed to news of other such petitions too. I will have a better butchers at that site in due course.
Firstly Donnie, it is nothing about how many people shower a day as most people do, the fact is that after a night out do you come back abnd go straight in the shower or do you get home and either sit on the couch / pass out on the floor / go to bed. I would generally do something along the lines of the latter and hence where smell transference occurs. Are you saying that everytime I go out I should have to watch my sheets and clean my couch?
Astro - I have nothing against people who smoke and I probably didn't explain my point about people who have to go out for a smoke, I have nothing against that but in Andy's first post above it states that the pubs near him have got quieter and quieter as smokers don't go to pubs at all because its too cold to go outside for a fag. Sorry but I think thats pretty shameful to be honest, you dictate your social life by a stick of tabacco, now thats rather sad. I state again I ahve nothing against smokers who go and smoke outside.
Donnie - I do worry a bit about diesel / traffic fumes but its my CHOICE to live in London and therefore its my CHOICE to put myself in the danger of this pollution.
When I went out before the smoking ban I had NO CHOICE as to whether I breathed in smoke, now i do have a CHOICE, so I don't understand your point thanks.
Smoking rooms are all well and good and were probably discussed but how could this be policed? Its obviously much easier to police a total ban than one with many loopholes, though if they could have brought it in I see no problem with that.
Mr Poshman. People have smoked in pubs since time in memorial. Thats the way it has been and thats the way it should stay. You keep on giving us your idea of selfish, well heres mine. Why dont you stand outside and freeze to death with a drink, while the rest of stay inside and have a sociable pint and a fag. Some might then think you pathetic to have to go to the trouble of going to a pub to by a pint and stand outside and sup it!
you've missed my point. I haven't said that smokers are selfish for smoking, those that complain as to why they can't blow smoke in my direction are selfish.
i also said it was sad that people didn't come to pubs because it was too cold to have a smoke which I stated was sad that they had to amend their social life due to a tube of tobacco.
You clearly have not read my post as I never said anything was selfish about standing outside having a smoke.
Whereas I think it's shameful that my social life is dictated to by government who are happy enough to take exhoribant levels of taxation from a legal product
I also think it's shameful that my social life involves adding to the worlds carbon footprint to fly to Spain for the weekend in order to import a couple of thousand fags because it works out cheaper than it does buying them in this country
Astrocat like you I will no longer fill Gordons coffers, I make trips abroad to smoker friendly countries who deserve my money far more than he and his anti smoking organisations do.
3 trips a year does the job, stuff Gordon.
People have got more to worry about with milk than a wisp of tobacco smoke thats highly diluted.
"Subjects reporting consumption of whole milk 3 or more times daily had a 2-fold increase in lung cancer risk compared to those who reported never drinking whole milk (RR = 2.14)"
I agree wholeheartedly about a smokers right to smoke.I disagree totally smokers should be allowed to force thier filthy habit on the rest of us by standing in shop doorways,or outside pubs,where,incidentally,the wind,having no concience at all,gayly blows the filth back in to us poor sufferers.
When smoking was dealt with,it should have been in ALL public areas,inside and out!!
I think you're missing something Gunnut, banning stuff is going too far. There has to be ways for intelligent people to reach a compromise. Division of pubs to smoking of non smoking areas/rooms or even smoking or non smoking pubs for instance. Sure if the is food being served it is a matter of common decency not to allow smoking but a traditional pub with a saloon and a lounge bar could allow segregation with adequate ventilation.
Same with the pistol ban, there are ways that it can be done perfectly safely. No need for the ban, just a little thought.
I must admit, when I go shooting I go outside to smoke but theres a good reason why that is a rule, gunpowder and naked flames don't go well together.
Smokeless you are wasting your time with Mr P and Gunnut, they are a sample of some of todays dictator types, they dont like what you are doing, they dont approve, they dont think you should have the freedom to do it but would squeal like stuck pigs if everyone packed up and they had to pay an extra 8p in income tax to cover it. I wouldnt waste your time debating the issue with these two they are only interested in their own selfish wants, couldnt care a less about the owner and his property rights and they definitely wouldnt care about your equal rights. Dont waste your time with them, they are uneducated, rude and have never been taught manners.
Your right Donnie, its a waste of time debating something with the likes of those who dont understand the meaning of the word debate. Everything has to suit them. These sorts of people also exist in government and political parties and are the root of something called communism - something which is happening in this country under our very noses.
Unfortunately I'm a smoker but I agree with the smoking ban. It's unfair for people who don't smoke to be in a room filled with smoke. Even I could tell the difference in my local when the ban came in. It's not just about the customers in the pubs and clubs-they choose to go in but the people who work in these places shouldn't have to put up with smoke if they don't want to.
The other good thing about the ban is that it makes me smoke less...especially in this freezing weather lol
donnie, your talk about your freedom to smoke. What happend to my freedom to breathe non-smoky air?
you see things from one way, I see things from a freedom / choice point of view which has been stated above.
Should smoking not hurt passive smokers I have no problem with smoking but it does affect passive smokers. Hence the reason why this is different to every other addictive substance as is pretty much the only one that can directly affect someone elses health.
This is not a direct attack on anyone who smokes as you still have the option to smoke but why not look at it from a non-smokers perspective as you clearly do not even bother thinking about them.
Markab, if you dont want to smoke then stop, you have the freedom of choice to do this, nobody is stopping you.
This smoking ban was brought in to supposedly protect bar workers, protect them from what, SHS is the biggest scam going. Pubs/Clubs are private property, no one is forced over the threshold no one is forced to work there. Whether smoking takes place on the premises should be the owners choice, not the smoker, not the non smoker and definitely not governments, just the owners.
Even the Select Committee on Economic Affairs sussed it out
78. Given the evidence about the impact of passive smoking, we are concerned that the decision to ban smoking in public places may represent a disproportionate response to a relatively minor health concern
http://tinyurl.com/3aqlrf
I could go on and on but I wont apart from
a) the chemicals in cigarettes are agreed with government and are within the safe guidelines
b) cigarettes are legal
c) government complains about losing the tax revenue on cigarettes from smuggling
d) government is losing no money on cigarettes through this ban, a high number of smokers are staying at home to drink and smoke.
e) The only people losing money, business and jobs are pubs
Government should pay them compensation
and as everyone who works in an office uses one of these I want to know why they have not been banned.
