Parliament Votes Total Smoking Ban

Boyish-Tigerlilly · Post by **Boyish-Tigerlilly** » 2006-02-15 04:10pm

True. I assume the full smoking ban would make a big difference in that problem. I don't know why they don't do that more often. What really is the point of a partial ban (that gives waivers) and those that only affect a given area. People will just leave to go somehere that allows it (as they have). Seems a waste.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2006-02-15 06:59pm

Consider it this way BT, there's two variables here whether it has an economic impact or not it will definetly have a public health impact by reducing exposure to arsenic, polonium and a whole raft of other noxious chemicals. So even if there is a small economic cost for bars etc. there is a good to weigh against it.

Money is a means to an end, not an end...and the profitability of buinesses means nothing if it comes at a higher cost in other terms.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2006-02-16 06:23am

Congrats. I wish my Government did the same.

Hillary · Post by **Hillary** » 2006-02-16 08:26am

If public health is that much of a concern, surely alcohol should be subject to a ban way before tobacco. It certainly kills more third parties (through violence and drink driving) than passive smoking.

Funnily enough, I don't smoke but I also don't agree with the ban. The result of it will be a big shift in the makeup of pub-goers. The poorer, working-classes (a high percentage of who are smokers) will finally be ousted and replaced by nice middle-class families who allow their precious treasures to run amok while you're trying to have a quiet drink and complain if you swear. I suspect this will spell the end of the traditional pub in England which is sad. All we will have are gastropubs, musicpubs, sportspubs and family pubs. The small 'locals' who rely on their regulars to survive will disappear as they remain at home or spend less time there.

A lot of the smokers will end up drinking at home and a lot of old people, who's only real contact with others is down the pub, will be isolated.

As for the financial angle, if the pubs/clubs are likely to see no change in turnover from a smoking ban, why have the pubs that have already instigated a ban been suffering so badly. It's no coincidence that Wetherspoons suddenly came out in favour of a ban after a large percentage of their premises became non-smoking and they started to lose money.

It's another populist bill from Blair's government. There are far bigger concerns in respect of public health than passive smoking, but tackling those would be unpopular. Much the same in respect of the absurd hunting bill - tighter controls on the conditions farm animals endure would have saved far more suffering.

The hypocracy of the pro-ban brigade also leaves a bad taste for me. The idea that suddenly everyone is deeply concerned about the health of people who work in bars is laughable. Like fuck they are.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2006-02-16 08:45am

Hillary wrote: It's another populist bill from Blair's government. There are far bigger concerns in respect of public health than passive smoking, but tackling those would be unpopular. Much the same in respect of the absurd hunting bill - tighter controls on the conditions farm animals endure would have saved far more suffering.

The hypocracy of the pro-ban brigade also leaves a bad taste for me. The idea that suddenly everyone is deeply concerned about the health of people who work in bars is laughable. Like fuck they are.

From what i've heard this really wasn't Labour's idea and Blair and Co. only supported a partial ban. They were pushed into this by the Lib Dems. True?

Hillary · Post by **Hillary** » 2006-02-16 08:52am

Col. Crackpot wrote: From what i've heard this really wasn't Labour's idea and Blair and Co. only supported a partial ban. They were pushed into this by the Lib Dems. True?

Not really. Basically, the previous Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, favoured the partial ban, but he was replaced by Patrica Hewitt who believed in the hardline approach. She managed to get the support of the Labour backbenchers and left the Government with little option.

To be honest, the partial ban was a nonsense and would have been very difficult to define and, therefore, enforce.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-02-16 12:29pm

This was a free vote. No one forced anyone, it was all down to the moral code of each MP involved, as a free vote should be on such issues like abortion. A partial ban is unworkable and a rather useless compromise.

Ubiquitous · Post by **Ubiquitous** » 2006-02-16 12:38pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Hillary wrote: It's another populist bill from Blair's government. There are far bigger concerns in respect of public health than passive smoking, but tackling those would be unpopular. Much the same in respect of the absurd hunting bill - tighter controls on the conditions farm animals endure would have saved far more suffering.

The hypocracy of the pro-ban brigade also leaves a bad taste for me. The idea that suddenly everyone is deeply concerned about the health of people who work in bars is laughable. Like fuck they are.
From what i've heard this really wasn't Labour's idea and Blair and Co. only supported a partial ban. They were pushed into this by the Lib Dems. True?

You have been reading too many messages from The Guid and Plekhanov, I suspect!

As AV said, it was a free vote and was basically forced upon Labour by the public hostility to the stupid compromise that Labour offered in its manifesto.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2006-02-16 02:54pm

Hillary wrote:If public health is that much of a concern, surely alcohol should be subject to a ban way before tobacco. It certainly kills more third parties (through violence and drink driving) than passive smoking.

Violence and drink driving are already banned activities; this is just banning passive smoking (except in private residences) which is completely consistent.

DocHorror · Post by **DocHorror** » 2006-02-16 06:53pm

I say its great. They've already banned smoking in pubs here in Ireland with no serious loss of trade.

Oh no'es the lung cancer wannabes have to stand outside for a puff on their death-sticks.

I can now go to the pub & only come home stinking of booze, without my clothes being marred for the rest of the week by cigarette smoke.