we didn’t go to pubs because of the smoke and certain restaurants because of it.
had smokers and publicans etc. sorted proper no smoking rooms 100% compliance (areas dont work it drifts and prats walk through smoking to loos or to just see someone!). then the law would never have happened.
the big hate is to see a dogger get out of his car light up and walk over to talk to use and when we say sorry we don’t play with smokers they throw it away and think there in!
do they note realise they sink of it breath, cloths ,skin, hair mainly hands anything they touch ends up smelling.
there’s also the guy with profiles that say non smoker they turn up for a meet chewing gum and stinking of smoke and they look all hurt when they get the bums rush!!
total prats!
i cant quote any figures on the tax made from tabacco sales and the cost to the NHS in smoking related illness.
however it goes bigger than just treating people once they are so ill, there are the days off work ill, the DLA the incapacity the sick pay, the drs time on visits, the perscriptions for free stop smoking products, the advertising and health promotion, the illness caused to unborn children,delivery complications, the child born to a smoking household, the longer recovery times for illnesses or opperations of smokers, the fires caused by cigerrettes, the insurance pay outs, the fire brigade.
shall i go on?
i know some people enjoy smoking but hand on heart would you be happy if you caught you child smoking? no? why beacuse we know the possible risks.
xx fem xx
watching my dad die of lung cancer aged 55,never seeing his greatgrandaughter born, never saw me graduate, no cost can cover that.
xx fem
I saw this in the paper today which made me chuckle.
There are always ways to get around things. No doubt this Government who hate the little man standing uo to them, can pick the bones out of this one.
Good luck to her and may many more use the same loophole, to stave off the threat of having to close their pubs down.
yeah - I just saw that too - absolutely brilliant, I hope more pubs do it
I've read this thread with interest for a while now and this last piece of news I find intriguing.
Not the loophole bit at all, that will be stopped in an instant, but the fact that because of it, the pub saw an increase in trade.
It makes me wonder now if people went to the pubs, as they were, for a social drink, or a social smoke?
It's some evidence to suggest that this ban on pubs nationwide needs to be looked at and while I would not advocate smoking in all pubs ever again, I would certainly think that certain pubs that allow smoking should be seriously considered.
I'm still not convinced smoking is entirely to blame for pubs closing. There are other greater economic factors at work there too and you only need to travel to your local shopping precinct to see the somewhat desperate state of affairs caused by the recession. I am sure this has had an effect on pubs too. The majority of people cannot afford to go out as much these days, smokers and non-smokers alike.
However evidence that clietele base can be increased by allowing smoking to me suggests that this should be looked at and perhaps "smoking" pubs should be considered along with "non-smoking" pubs. So that way everyone has a choice. However even with that I can foresee problems.
Interesting reading though.
Res, as a smoker, I used to enjoy sitting in a pub having a pint and a smoke.
Now, I invite fellow smokers over to mine and we have a couple of beers and a smoke.
Whilst my impressions are anecdotal, I know several smokers who stay home because of the ban.
I sing in a band and most of my gigs are in pubs - the day the ban came in, audience numbers fell off a cliff. All the muzos I've spoken to have experienced the same and the landlords all agree.
I don't have the time or inclination to conduct an academic study on this, and yes the recession is almost certainly a factor too (but this post-dates the ban), but I'm strongly convinced from personal experience and that of many others, that the ban has had a huge detrimental impact on customer numbers in pubs.
I am a smoker but very rarely use pubs on the odd occasion I did or do even before the ban I would go into the pub garden or outside to have a cigarette as most of my friends don’t smoke. But I don’t think a carpet ban was the answer, it was the easiest answer the government could find to make it easy on them, and basically let everyone get on with it.
What I don’t think they considered in their (if you want to call it) planning was
a) the livelihood of a lot of people within the pubs
b) what a detriment affect it would have on small village life where the pub was one of the main places for a social gathering especially for the older folk where it was one of the places they could just about get to on foot, to meet up and have a chat.
c) The decreased risks to other pub uses, but increased risk to children and babies. Before pubs used to be crowed on major sporting events to meet up with friends to watch with a pint and a cigarette. Now a lot take cans home and watch it on TV and invite friends around to watch.
Other countries can manager to combine the two, why can’t we by having segregated smoking areas, like the company I worked for years ago that indroduced this long before the ban was inforced, there were more non smokers in the smoking area than smokers.
I think the government should question more on what everyone would like, before assuming all non smokers would like a carpet ban because a few selected polls told them that is what was wanted.
The government causes the feelings of them and us and just sits back and still smokes in comfort, as they didn’t ban it in their bar in parliament I am lead to believe I would stand corrected if I am wrong.
Maybe the government could have coughed up some help with the revenue it makes on alcohol and cigarettes to have created an even balance to make everyone happy
)