General rant about cig bans & tax issues.

[MeatGrl1]

As a non smoker I am glad that this has been put into place because to be honest it made me gag everytime I stepped foot into a club, bar or whatever because of the smoke from ciggys. Also the stale smoke would cling to your hair and add to the groogy dirty feeling the morning after a night out.
However I can also see from the smokers view how this was a bad idea as I am friends with people who smoke !
But all in all I am glad this has been put into place, now we need to work on the public places because there is nothing worse when your a non smoker and you pass a smoker in the street and they puff that smoke in your face .. It makes me gag, I can't help it.

That's my view on that !

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by RadioMaster

But the result (in both cases) stays the same: youre dead

Smoking is something I (not completly) jokingly refare to as suicide on the instalment plan.

However, that is pretty much what it is.
SELF harm.

When is the last time a kid doped out on tobacco held up an off licence to feed his habit

The last drive by shooting over the tobacco dealing business?

When was the last time somebody was overcome with the affects of tobacco and ran down a child?

When's the last time a bloke went home and beat his wife because he'd had a couple of cigarettes too many?

When's the last time there was a fist fight fueled by tobacco?


Unlike other drugs, both legal and illegal, smokers are far more apt to do harm to themselves and themselves alone.


YES Passive smoking (a Self-contradictory term if ever there was one) IS an unacceptable by product of smoking.
That is the exact reason that non smoking bars should exist.So that people who do not want to smoke or sit in a smoky atmosphere risking damage to their health can eat drink and be merry far from the smoky cloud created by the puffers of the world.


But I fear that I still cannot see a single compelling argument to say why it is illegal for Landlords to have the right to decide if they want to run a smoking or a none smoking pub.

Non smokers would still have places to drink in smoke free bliss, and would never have to cross the door of a smokers pub.







One thing that DOES gall me BTW, is that smoking is still permitted in the bars at the houses of parliament.
One rule for one eh?

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by Deb

Ok looks like I have to spell this out...

You see me to be the only one thinking along the lines you are that all the pubs are shutting and the trade is doing so badly. So as you are in Liverpool and we aren't then maybe it's only Liverpool thats being affected.

Sorry Deb, but that is as ridiculous as me saying that the smoking ban only works in your street.

[Deb]

As I also said most of what i'd posted was tongue in cheek and a joke. You don't actually think I meant it was just Liverpool surely.

[Deb]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

However, that is pretty much what it is.
SELF harm.

but not self harm to those who have to passively inhale it.

But I fear that I still cannot see a single compelling argument to say why it is illegal for Landlords to have the right to decide if they want to run a smoking or a none smoking pub.

So should they also make it the drivers choice to wear a seatbelt? there's many things the goverment has taken the rights away for.

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by Deb

but not self harm to those who have to passively inhale it.

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

YES Passive smoking (a Self-contradictory term if ever there was one) IS an unacceptable by product of smoking.
That is the exact reason that non smoking bars should exist.So that people who do not want to smoke or sit in a smoky atmosphere risking damage to their health can eat drink and be merry far from the smoky cloud created by the puffers of the world.

I've nothing more to add to that here.

[Deb]

So what happens outside of bars and restaurants? how many people are putting their loved ones at risk in their own homes / cars and many other places?

Another thing, it's not only bars and restaurants thats had this ban, but I don't see these places being moaned about. The work place, that must affect many. shopping centres. Tons of public places have been affected.

[Hypnobabe]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

...As I say, i've always believed a bar should be allowed to have smoking/non smoking sections, but let's take the idea a step further...

The only problem with this is that if you have a smoking and non smoking SECTION in a bar or restaurant, they're both smoking sections. I'm a non-smoker, and always have been. Before the ban, if I went out to a pub, I'd stay in the non smoking section, as very few of my friends (apart from the ones on here, that is) are smokers. I would still return home with a tight chest, stinking of cigarette smoke, because smoke is airborne, and it travels. You don't need to be in the same section for it to affect you. The best solution for me is to ban smoking altogether, since the nation would be much healthier, but it's not going to happen, is it?

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

Tax collected per year for tobacco = 8 Billion pounds.

Money spent per year on tobacco related illnessess = 3 Billion pounds.


The 5 Billion pounds is what is left over AFTER you've accounted for smoking related illness Deb.

As others have said, there are figures that are directly related to the smokers, but I'm sure there are other factors to take into consideration. As a hypnotherapist, I've had clients come for smoking cessation. One lady in particular wanted to have an elective operation, and was told in no uncertain terms by her surgeon that he wouldn't operate if she was still smoking. Not because he was being awkward, but because smoking extends healing and recovery times. That means the patient is under the care of the surgeon/GP/district nurse/clinic nurse/whoever for longer, which costs money, and means someone else has to wait longer to be treated. It also means they need more dressings/prescriptions, as they take longer to recover, and although the majority of people pay for their prescriptions, in a lot of cases the actual cost of the drugs or dressings is subsidised by the NHS, so that's more money.

I believe we should ALL have the right to choose, and my choice is not to smoke, or to go to places where I'll have someone else doing it in my face. Neil, you say that landlords should be allowed to choose - what if all the pubs where I live choose to serve smokers? That takes away MY choice, is that then fair?

Incidentally, I'd like to jump on the stop standing in doorways bandwagon too, it does sort of defeat the object of having a smoking ban if you have to walk through a cloud of smoke to get into or out of your smoke free environment

[RadioMaster]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

But I fear that I still cannot see a single compelling argument to say why it is illegal for Landlords to have the right to decide if they want to run a smoking or a none smoking pub.

Something we have to keep in mind here is that we lived in a 'mixed' society. Smokers are friends of non smokers and vice versa. (Hell, just look at people on this forum!!)

So, would bars for smokers and for non smokers be a help? Not really as youd generate a two class society.
Non smoking friends of smokers will always want to spend time with their friends, so its highly unlikely that a group of people would divide into two because some of them smoke and some dont.

So they'll all visit one pub together, now what would be best, to have a smoking ban, or not?
If some of them smoke all the non smokers will be affected and suffer.
Will the smokers be affected and suffering if they all went to a bar with smoking ban, because their friends dont smoke and they have to go outside for five minutes? Maybe, but as I said earlier, it's has to be decided who's personal right to express themseves is more imprtant...

[The Flying Mouse]

OK, just to clarify here..............

I am saying that pubs should have the right to be smoking or non smoking.
I am saying that after a long day's work, Joe Bloggs should be able to pop into the pub and enjoy a ciggie and a drink, which has been the simple pleasure of many of the working class since pubs, beer, working class people, and cigarettes were all invented.


What i'm NOT trying to say that smoking anywhere you want with no regard for other people and stifling everybody with unwanted second hand smoke is ok.


People who put their families in harms way because they want to smoke in front of them are irrisponsable.
I'm not arguing that at all.
The same time, it's none of my business, and not really what the thread is supposed to be about.


I can see the wisdom of not having smoking in offices as people who are not smokers are required to work there.
As for shopping centres, I don't think i've EVER pushed a trolly around Asda while sucking on a cancer stick.
To be honest, it's not something that i've ever wanted to do.


The thing about a pub is that is a ADULT RECREATION AREA.

Passive smoking to children is not an option as children shouldn't be in the pub in the first place.

The only passive smoking going on is to other adults in the room, who are old enough to be aware of the health implications.
If non smokers do not want to be in that enviroment, there should be non smoking pubs for them to drink in.



Smoking, as i've said before on this thread, is a horrible habit.
I'm not diputing that.

I'm putting forward an argument for debate that there should be places to suit both smokers and non smokers.

[daveake]

Originally Posted by Deb

Another thing, it's not only bars and restaurants thats had this ban, but I don't see these places being moaned about. The work place, that must affect many. shopping centres. Tons of public places have been affected.

Well, the common argument is that pubs rely on their regular drink 'n' smoke clientele for a large part of their business. The problem with that argument is that as has been demonstrated by the pubs that have been non-smoking since before the ban came into force, they find that they sell more food once they do ban smoking. For example, Wetherspoons had an *increase* in turnover of an average 12% in the pubs where they banned smoking themselves.

Dave

[The Flying Mouse]

It's pretty much a given that some pubs that do food are going to see an increase in food sales.

What about pubs that don't do food?

[Lord Kagan]

Originally Posted by daveake

For example, Wetherspoons
Dave

excellent place for cheap drink... well cheaper than other bars...

[daveake]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

It's pretty much a given that some pubs that do food are going to see an increase in food sales.

What about pubs that don't do food?

Like any other business, they need to respond to market changes in the way that they see is best. Anyone who runs a business and allows it to fail by not making those changes is someone who needs to not be running a business.

Dave

[The Flying Mouse]

Coming back to the NHS issue Claire, go to any A&E on a Saturday night, and you'll see more NHS pounds being literally bled all over the floor as a result of drunken fights, people hit by drink drivers, and drunken antics gone wrong than anything a smokers recovery time can do to a budget.


In fact, if you think about it, with all the fights alcohol provokes, with all the people run down by drunken drivers, alcohol must be the costliest drug there is in terms of NHS treatment and police manpower.

But that is, as I say, besides the point on wether we should be allowed to have smoking and non smoking pubs.

[Deb]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

OK, just to clarify here..............

I am saying that pubs should have the right to be smoking or non smoking.
I am saying that after a long day's work, Joe Bloggs should be able to pop into the pub and enjoy a ciggie and a drink, which has been the simple pleasure of many of the working class since pubs, beer, working class people, and cigarettes were all invented.

The thing about a pub is that is a ADULT RECREATION AREA.

The only passive smoking going on is to other adults in the room, who are old enough to be aware of the health implications.
If non smokers do not want to be in that enviroment, there should be non smoking pubs for them to drink in.

Many things that were once seen as ok, now aren't. More and more people have learnt smoking really isn't. Because it was acceptable yrs ago doesn't mean it has to stay that way. Not wearing seatblets was once ok, talking on mobiles, even drink driving yrs ago was seen as an ok thing to do. eating the unhealthy British diet is now known to be bad for us.

Like others have said why should they make the 2 options as that then again takes away our right as to what we do and we didn't decide to take up this disgusting habit. like RJ says having two options takes away ours and who has more of a right? IMO the non smokers and as far as i can see, you really are the only one seeing it the other way. Hence why there is a total no smoking ban I guess.

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by daveake

Like any other business, they need to respond to market changes in the way that they see is best. Anyone who runs a business and allows it to fail by not making those changes is someone who needs to not be running a business.

Dave

Sorry Dave, but I just can't agree with that.

How many pubs do you know?
How many sell food?
How many have the facilities to make and sell food?
How many would you eat at on a regular basis?

Take The Cuckoo for instance.
A pub I used to be the entertainments manager of, and was hit hard by the smoking ban.

Most of the regulars are local to the area.This is the case of most "boozers".
Who is going to pay for meals at the pub when they can go and eat whatever they want at home?

You're not going to get anywhere selling food and drink in a place where it's not what the customer wants there and then.
You might as well stock McDonalds with beer and call it a shrewd business maneuver.

How many people eat at Wetherspoons 3/4/5 times a week?

Wetherspoons is good at being what it is, and that is a licenced restaurant that does cheap and cheerful grub.
Wetherspoons is not a local pub dependant on local trade.
Wetherspoons is a high street brand like WH Smiths, Woolworths, or Burger King.
They live off passing trade.
Wetherspoons, to me, is not a pub.
Just somewhere that happens to sell food and drink.

[djfierce]

When i moved to herts some years ago, i became a bus driver and on my travels i found a pub that had a very successful gimmick, the sign outside said.........



We're smoke-free


this was four years before the smoking ban came in place, but they were always really busy everytime i went past.That's great right? Well when the smoking ban came in place they had to find a new gimmick as people could then go anywhere for a smoke free drink, also had to spend a fortune rebranding and removing their nolonger valid gimmick from their leaflets,sign, ads etc yet another business affected by the smoking ban

[daveake]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

Sorry Dave, but I just can't agree with that.

That's fine. The Wetherspoon figure came from, er, Wetherspoons. You're welcome to enlighten them as to the error of their ways. They've shown that it's perfectly possible to increase turnover whilst banning smoking.

Every business has to live with change. The ones that do best are the ones that embrace change and adapt quickly. I have zero sympathy for business people that blindly assume this not to be the case.

Dave

[djfierce]

actually neil where i live and used to live, every small and big pub does food of some description.

And the small local village 'boozer' i used to work at did food too, and alot of regulars had food almost every day, people do eat out of their own homes, either because the food is so cheap or because it is so good, or as the dreaded social occasion

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by Deb

takes away our right as to what we do

Of course you have the right to decide.

You have the right to be a non smoker in a non smoking pub.

You have the right to be a smoker in a smoking pub.

You have the right to be a non smoker sitting with friends in a smoking pub.

You have the right to be a smoker sitting with friends in a non smoking pub.

You have the right to be a smoker sitting alone in a non smoking pub with a diet coke instead of a beer.

You have the right to stop smoking.

You have the right to START smoking.


You have the right to do whatever the hell you want.


What is the problem with allowing some pubs to be smoking and the rest non smoking?

[djfierce]

Originally Posted by daveake

Every business has to live with change. The ones that do best are the ones that embrace change and adapt quickly. I have zero sympathy for business people that blindly assume this not to be the case.

Dave

absoutely, i think it's called um ... progress

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by djfierce

actually neil where i live and used to live, every small and big pub does food of some description.

And the small local village 'boozer' i used to work at did food too, and alot of regulars had food almost every day, people do eat out of their own homes, either because the food is so cheap or because it is so good, or as the dreaded social occasion

Well that's very different from this neck of the woods hun.

Some pubs do food, but most are still places of DRINK.

[djfierce]

Neil...i'm just wondering something


Just say there were two pubs one smoking one not like you want.

And i agree to meet you for a drink to catch up with you.

Where would you insist we go??

[daveake]

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

Wetherspoons, to me, is not a pub.
Just somewhere that happens to sell food and drink.

Sorry, I missed this bit.

OK, how about Mitchells & Butlers (M&B)? Do they run pubs worthy of the name? Guess what happened when they banned smoking at 200 of their pubs in England and Wales? The effect on sales growth was less than 1% for the following quarter.

Dave