Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Stay in Bridlington

Should the smoking ban be changed?

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 July 2009
WELCOME to a new feature on the Bridlington Free Press website.
We will be holding various debates about all sorts of issues.

Some debates will be on very important topics and sometimes it will be something completely irreverent but fun.

Sometimes the debates will be on local issues and sometimes it will be about national or international matters.

We will present two sides of an argument and you are invited to have your say by posting comments.

The first debate is about smoking and whether the smoking ban in public places should be amended.

Bridlington MP Greg Knight is campaigning for a change and lots of people have contacted this website and the Free Press newspaper to back his cause.

Arguing the case for the smoking ban is Free Press columnist Paper Clip.

So read the views and have your say ...

Smoking ban is killing pubs - MP Greg Knight and local smokers

Bridlington MP Greg Knight has launched a cross-party campaign to change the rules on smoking in pubs and clubs.

He is fighting the Save Our Pubs And Clubs – Amend The Smoking Ban campaign because he says almost 40 pubs a week are shutting down for good.

"They are a much-loved part of our national culture and it is high time for a rethink of the smoking ban."

He said the "one-size-fits-all" approach of banning smoking in every pub and club had hurt the businesses of hard-working publicans, especially in East Yorkshire.

"Many people enjoy a smoke-free atmosphere but some don't.

"Rather than exclude almost half their customers, publicans should be free to provide properly-ventilated smoking rooms which would improve their service and upset no-one," he said.

English Charlie says: "Pubs must be given back to the regular customers ASAP before many more pubs close and thousands more staff have been made unemployed."

Helend498 says: "If you don't like smoking, then you can choose to go to non-smoking pubs or non-smoking areas. If you smoke, then you can choose to do the opposite. If a landlord doesn't want smoking in his pub, then he doesn't allow it.

"It's all very simple. It's called choice. It caters for everyone's health and safeguards the hospitality trade."

And MRab2 argues: "How typical that an anti-smoking campaigner's solution involves banning/restricting something.

"These people obviously have nothing but contempt for the idea of personal liberty.

"I fully support bringing smoking back to pubs, the worst case risks never justified a complete ban."

Smoking should be made illegal - Paper Clip

SO lots of people in Brid are backing our MP Greg Knight's idea to have smoking reintroduced in pubs and clubs.
They argue the smoking ban in public places is killing the pub trade and is an infringement on their human rights.

I say smoking is killing thousands upon thousands of people in this country every year and that the filthy habit is an infringement on the human rights of non-smokers who have to breathe polluted air.

Now, before you all start texting and e-mailing me with your abuse, I will say here and now I have heard all the arguments before and you will not convince me – ever – that the smoking ban is bad.

It is the one of the best laws ever introduced in this country and was long overdue.

In fact, it probably doesn't go far enough.

Recent talk of a ban in people's own cars when children are inside gets my support.

If the use of mobile phones at the wheel can be banned then surely so can smoking!

Are drivers in full control if they are smoking? Less so than if they are eating a bar of chocolate and motorists have found themselves in trouble for snacking at the wheel.

Any parent irresponsible enough to smoke in the car so their children have to breathe in their cigarette fumes deserves a fine.

Smoking is dangerous, it kills. It even says so on the packet. Passive smoking can kill.

If I wanted to risk my health and have my mouth tasting of an ash tray I would smoke – but I don't, so I shouldn't have to put up with smoke when I go into a pub or wherever else selfish people want smoking reintroduced.

I don't want to sit on a table in a non- smoking part of a restaurant 10ft away from the smoking part because I will still smell it.

Let's take smokers' arguments one by one:

"Pubs are closing because of the ban." Are they? Tell me which pubs in Brid have.

"Elderly people have to stand outside pubs or cafes to smoke in the rain or freezing cold." No they don't, they can do it at home.

"The ban has killed the atmosphere in pubs. People can't get into a conversation anymore because they have to go outside for a cigarette." Utter tripe. Smoking kills people, not the atmosphere in pubs.

"We could have properly ventillated rooms or extractor fans." Sorry, I would still smell it.

"Cigarette butts are left on the floor outside businesses and council staff have to clear them up." Simple, smokers could be less lazy and stop littering.

"Our grandparents fought world wars for us to be free in our own country." Yes they did but they were fighting Hitler not a smoking ban!

You want to change the ban smokers?

Change it, make it tougher, ban cigarettes and tobacco completely – then we can save the NHS millions of pounds and we can all live a longer and healthier life.

Put that in your pipes and smoke it.

What do you think? Post your comments!



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 July 2009 1:19 PM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Bridlington
 
Prev
1
2
1

Jimmy Onebelly,

Brid 03/07/2009 14:20:24
Smoking kills so why allow it? Roy Castle died of passive smoking. I used to work in a bar and had to breath in loads of cigar and cigarette fumes every night and it was horrible. Smokers stood at the bar and blew smoke into the working area. It was awful.
2

AK Matty,

03/07/2009 15:16:54
There should be a complete ban on smoking. Cigarettes are addictive and like other addictive drugs they should be illegal. The NHS spends far to much money treating smokers and other people have to miss out or wait ages for treatment through no fault of their own.
If smokers cannot quit themselves then the government should make them quit by making it against the law.
3

JOHN R COPSEY,

BRIDLINGTON 07/07/2009 00:19:27
Just four words of advice to any smokers' who think that Greg Knight can influence the governments policy on smoking in pubs'--------don't hold your breath.
4

english charlie,

09/07/2009 18:13:12
Roy Castle assumed that passive smoking gave him lung cancer, because like millions of others, at that time, he thought that lung cancer was only caused by smoking. He did not have an autopsy while he was alive, so it was only an ASSUMPTION. Alcohol the the fifth most dangerous drug and tobacco is only ninth, so should alcohol also be banned.
5

sheenadon,

darlington 09/07/2009 18:31:15
If the government had just gone along with what they proposed to do in their manifesto I think the whole thing would have been accepted and everyone would now be getting on with their lives but no. Once elected they turned the whole thing on it,s head. It simply was unnecessary to cause so much devastation.Landlords should ideally have the right to say what,s acceptable in their own premises but failing that a room should be made available for the smokers.
6

Nitro,

Uk 09/07/2009 18:44:43
Firstly as a non smoker there should be choice.

It should be the owner of the properties decision on whether it should be smoking or no smoking, not a petty nanny state government.

Smokers pay 6 times the amount of taxation that the government say it costs to treat smokers and are a tax raising bonanza.

As for Roy Castle It is said that he self diagnosed himself as dying from the effects of SHS but there is no evidence. Check out the Roy Castle website
.
7

helend498,

09/07/2009 19:17:31
I'll stand by original comment -
"If you don't like smoking, then you can choose to go to non-smoking pubs or non-smoking areas. If you smoke, then you can choose to do the opposite. If a landlord doesn't want smoking in his pub, then he doesn't allow it.

It's all very simple. It's called choice. It caters for everyone's health and safeguards the hospitality trade"

BTW Jimmy - Roy Castle did not die from passive smoking - he died from lung cancer which has numerous causes. He self-diagnosed himself. Not one of his doctors confirmed this.

AK Matty, smokers pay in 6 times more to the NHS with the increased taxes than the NHS pay to treat them. You should be grateful of the excess funding that you're getting from smokers - it's paying for a lot of your treatment.

On the other hand, we could make cigarettes illegal like you suggest, but I wonder which public services would take the hit? Or would it be the tax-payer instead?

Why we can't have a ban/restrictions like the majority of countries throughout the world which cater for all their citizens, is totally beyond me. As usual though, with this out-of-control government, it's all or nothing and ban, ban, ban.
8

Iris Beltram,

09/07/2009 19:44:04
It's a good job that there are many smokers in the country as the NHS would fold if they ceased getting funding from the billions of duty raised by the government for the NHS.
All the anti smokers wouldn't like that as they would be denied services that smokers pay for. Much more goes into the kitty from smokers than is taken out by so called 'tobacco related illness'
There has not been one recorded death in the world where 'second hand smoke' has been named as a cause.
It is a lie that it as in any way a danger. A lie perpetrated by the pharmaceutical industry in order to sell billion of dollars worth of NRT. The likes of ASH etc. are funded by these huge companies and are expected in return, to come up with dubious statistics to perpetuate the incessant demand for profits.
Are the public really that stupid to believe that a whiff of smoke is a killer.
Stand near a vehicle, barbecue,open fire etc. and see the output of toxic chemicals !!
9

sirob,

Scotland 09/07/2009 21:12:40
Freedom to choose. This is what Britain used to be.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but not to inflict it on everyone else. Paperclip's fanatism makes a jihad look like a school outing!
The way to stop smoking is by education, not prohibition. Nobody is proposing smoking in trains/planes/buses/restaurants, etc, just a separate room in a pub/club. Paperclip would not get so much as a whiff of smoke, unless choosing to enter.
At a stroke, smokers/litter would disappear from our streets and children would no longer see people smoking and want to imitate(like they do)There would no "running the gauntlet" of smokers/smoke outside doorways either.
If the Labour Government had not renaged on its manifesto pledge, then the present, sad, scenario would not have happened and thousands of people would still be employed.
Has the ban reduced smoking? - NO! After years of decline, numbers of smokers have started rising again!
What is worse, over 30% of smokers that quit, using gum, have become addicted to it, leading to some very nasty medical conditions.
10

ME MOI J'AI,

bridlington 15/07/2009 15:08:30
I love going out and not stinking of smoke. I have asthma and was told as a young child to avoid smoking myself at an older age and also my parents smoked so i was a passive smoker. This stopped when doctors told my parents if they carried on i would end up sufering very badly by them doing so. They found stopping hard so they smoked outside. Always!!!! When i go into town for a night out i know i can go out and enjoy myself and having no smoke causing my asthma to flare up. I think its great. I also like to eat out as a family and i like everyone else love a good pub grub meal and i can go in with my family (young children also one has asthma) without inhaling the stale smelling smoke. It feel free to breathe in a pub at very long last! The amount of asthma sufferers have doubled in recent years so for health reasons alone should not be allowed to happen again! Its also a good point that some pubs should have discretion if they can or cannot smoke but im young and why should i have to spend my night in weatherspoons non smoking area while me mates are down loop etc where say there owner allows smoking? So always going to be a pro and a con! Many people are against the return of the smoking and i am one of them!!
Prev
1
2

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 

Today's Vote

Are the new parking charges cheap enough for Bridlington residents?
Yes they are fair enough
No they are still too expensive


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.