BOLTON WANDERERS
Have Bolton Wanderers dipped into the transfer market? What plans does the club have next season? Click here »
|
|
|
|
Confusion reigns over smoking ban in public places
6:46pm Tuesday 20th February 2007
Comments (12)Consumers are confused about details of the impending smoking ban in England and Wales.
Nearly six out of 10 people do not know when the restrictions come into force, according to trade magazine The Publican.
A survey of nearly 1,000 people found 41 per cent thought smoking would still be allowed in private members' clubs. And 19 per cent believed the ban would not apply to pubs which did not serve food.
The ban comes into force on April 2 in Wales, April 30 in Northern Ireland and July 1 in England.
The ban will affect virtually all enclosed workplaces and public places, including pubs, restaurants and membership clubs.
The ban is likely to have some positive benefits for the pub trade, the survey showed. One third of the non-smokers questioned expected to visit pubs more often as a result. Some 37 per cent of all respondents - and 51 per cent of non-smokers - were more likely to eat in a pub.
Daniel Pearce, deputy editor of The Publican, said: "There is an urgent need for more information otherwise pubs will have to face up to unhappy customers when they discover they can no longer smoke in their local."
Your Say YourThe Bolton News
Chris, says...
6:45am Wed 21 Feb 07
41% do not know the details and many of the others do not like it so it is pretty obvious that the majority of the people have never given their opinion.
The ban is an atrcious piece of social engineering showing that Government has ignored 25% of the populace by legislating to exclude 25% of the population from following a legal lifestyle in any regulated indoor venue.
The simple answer would have been to allow choice - Smoke-free & smoke-friendly venues. This would have been a much cheaper option than the one that will soon be in effect which has already cost businesses and the Government well over a £100 million more than they predicted in their Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment.
£1 million became £12.5 million for education, £5 to 13 million became £29.5 million for enforcement and a minimal sum for alteration to premises has led to breweries and other businesses to set many, many millions aside for smoking shelters.
This is activist-led legislation ignoring the needs and wishes of the people of this Country. Fortunately groups like Freedom2Choose are willing to fight for an ammendment.
Non-Smoker Heaton, says...
8:04am Wed 21 Feb 07
I may not be a supporter of the Blair Government but this is one thing they (eventually) got right. The writing is on the wall for you smokers, many countries are banning you polluting habit, even France, Italy and many parts of the USA as well as Ireland.
Get real - we don't like what you do and we are in the majority.
Chris, says...
9:11am Wed 21 Feb 07
Studies show that smoking prevalence decreases far more with education and encouragement than through legislation such as Blair is enacting.
There would be no need for any non-smoker to be affected in any hospitality venue IF the Blair Government had encouraged smoke-free venues (probably costing far less than is currently being spent) and ensured clear signage to indicate smoke-free or smoke-friendly.
Mike Davies, says...
9:45am Wed 21 Feb 07
kerry, 572-195 says...
1:13pm Wed 21 Feb 07
i live on a main road breathing in fumes from lorries and buses all day long but yet i cant have a ciggarette if i fancy one in the pub.
lets have smoking and non smoking pubs problem solved
sam, says...
1:16pm Wed 21 Feb 07
they can all chuff away on their fine cigars all day long
one rule for us and another for them
charming
Simon, Sunderland says...
3:38pm Wed 21 Feb 07
Chris wrote:so, "Smoke-free & smoke-friendly venues "?
We keep being told that the ban is a popular measure but this report seems to undermine this staement. 41% do not know the details and many of the others do not like it so it is pretty obvious that the majority of the people have never given their opinion. The ban is an atrcious piece of social engineering showing that Government has ignored 25% of the populace by legislating to exclude 25% of the population from following a legal lifestyle in any regulated indoor venue. The simple answer would have been to allow choice - Smoke-free & smoke-friendly venues. This would have been a much cheaper option than the one that will soon be in effect which has already cost businesses and the Government well over a £100 million more than they predicted in their Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment. £1 million became £12.5 million for education, £5 to 13 million became £29.5 million for enforcement and a minimal sum for alteration to premises has led to breweries and other businesses to set many, many millions aside for smoking shelters. This is activist-led legislation ignoring the needs and wishes of the people of this Country. Fortunately groups like Freedom2Choose are willing to fight for an ammendment.
Isn't that a bit like having a urinating and a non-urinating part of a swimming pool?
The rancid poison of ****-smoke still permeates the cleaner areas of society - so, do yourself a favour, and pack it in.
I guarantee you'll benefit, as well as giving the majority of the poluation a well-earned breather!
Dennis, Cambs says...
4:15pm Wed 21 Feb 07
Isn't that a bit like having a urinating and a non-urinating part of a swimming pool?
No because there isn't,as far as I am aware any demand for this type of swimming facilty.
There is however a need to retain the choice for people on smoking & non smoking pubs.
If as the non smoking lobby would have us believe the vast percentage of the population want non smoking then market forces would ensure the demise of the smoking pubs.
Most of us know of course that this simply is not true & for many local pubs to survive, there must be a choice.
Chris, says...
7:46am Thu 22 Feb 07
The action he mentions does actually happen but swimming pools are not closed down. The problem is managed through applied technology.
He also wrote of a 'rancid poison of 'something' smoke' permeating cleaner areas -Quite strong and descriptive language eh? How much dilution is required to satisfy some anti-smokers? Unfortunately there are some with such a blinkered view who look no further than smoking for the cause of all the World's ills. It might be a shock for some to follow this link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,389990,00.jpg
- maybe we should move to Malta!
Dennis mentioned the potential demise of many local pubs but what is often forgotten is that many the (ex)customers of pubs, bingo Halls and cafes will have their main social pleasure removed. Isolation and depression are also killers.
Ellie, uk says...
1:42pm Fri 9 Mar 07
Steve, says...
2:31pm Tue 27 Mar 07
In this section
- £1m drugs are recovered after swoop at lock-up
- £1m bid for new council houses development
- Goods seized at house after police break in
- Transport police team signal their intent
- Man jailed for murder of Saeed Hussan
- Heatwave putting pressure on A&E
- Bride to be sheds six stone for her big day
- Unions join fight to save council jobs
- Nashville award for country DJ
- Help X Factor star Laura land her first number one
Sponsored Links
Local advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Thomas Laprade, Thunder Bay,Ont. Canada says...
4:33am Wed 21 Feb 07
A smokeless environment
I believe that non-smokers, like anyone else, have this right. But how
far does
that right extend? Should it take priority over someone else's rights?
Airplanes, court houses, publicly owned buildings and anywhere else an
individual might be forced to go should properly be included in any
smoking law.
What should not be included are places located in or on private
property,
providing an individual is not compelled by necessity or law, to
frequent or
work at that specific location.
Second-hand smoke is not a significant health risk.