News Article Comments : Smoke ban starts July 1, 2007

RE: Smoke ban starts July 1, 2007

Ian...do you actually frequent pubs...pubs are NOT for children. Pubs are for adults for adult activities, there are plenty of places already within the hospitality sevtor such as Brewer Fayre chain and the like that meet the demand for families with their Fun Factories etc.  Smoking may Kill but even that claim is now debatable with recent revelations regarding Richard Dole , however I do not dispute the dangers, here lies the difference Passive Smoking does not and until there is clear scientific evidence to prove otherwise why should we see businesses be bankrupt based on lies. You say that a pub is a toxic environment, is it any more toxic than the environment that one has to travel through to get to the pub in the first place or the school or hospital for that matter?

Why has Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Italy, Japan and many states in the USA been able to successfully introduce Smoking Restrictions without resorting to a total ban?

When solutions are available and have been introduced in other countries, why not here or is it more to do with the hope that people will seek your services?

You sidestep the question put to you, the nations simply cannot sustain the family orientated venues seven days a week or to find themselves shutting up after 8pm as the kids need to be home for bed. Or are we about to see a new super league of mini pool tables and mini darts champions thrust into the limelight. ( It is now difficult to raise pub teams in Scotland as a direct result of the ban)

When asked a simple marketing question you roll out the usual nonsense we have become used to from someone with no knowledge of the business end of the trade. Your vision of  family friendly environment is an economic disaster waiting to happen, as bank interest rates rise we already see family outings being the first casualty and with more rises inebitable soon,

This post replies to Ian Smith > RE: Smoke ban starts July 1, 2007

RE: Smoke ban starts July 1, 2007

Ian you appear to have a reading problem. Jon often claims to be speaking for all non-smokers and says that they don't have choice. There is no contradiction in me saying that most non-smokers have no real problem with smoking. I for one don't put smoking as a reason not to visit a venue unless the system employed to give sufficient air movement is inadequate or non-existent. I am certainly not alone there as all Polls that ask specifically about smoking in pubs are against a ban. 

You then say '"Are you speaking for all non smokers?..." ' (sic), No; read the sentence that preceded it. I don't understand your use of quotation marks here as it is not anything I have written or as far as I can see anything anyone else has said.

Despite being a keen rock climber as a teenager I now suffer from vertigo; I know I am not alone and have learnt how to avoid situations that are going to cause me stress because of my phobia. I know full well most fairground rides will cause me stress so I don't get on them. The phobia is my problem and unlike those with a smoking phobia I don't unrealistically expect everywhere to cater or even care about my phobia.

So what is the problem for the minority of people with a smoking phobia reading the sign outside of pubs and making an adult decision about whether or not the venue may be to their liking before they enter?

Most studies show that there is little or no risk, with even a few suggesting that cohabiting with smokers decreases the risk, of developing diseases that are also linked to smoking. I suspect that there are a larger number of people killed by falls from heights every year than may even remotely be connected with the involuntary inhalation of cigarette smoke.

I have a high volume community pub with 14 various teams that play from here combined with a 'men's club' and a 'social club'.

So why do you think I should be happy in alienating the basis of this pub's trade to appease the phobia of someone who

This post replies to Ian Smith > RE: Smoke ban starts July 1, 2007

RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007

Ian... you would put people's health first before money...then I challenge you to remove your pricing policy from your web site and provide your services free. Would you also inform the Department of Health of your views as we all suffer from the postcode lottery when seeking treatment but then you will probably deny this as well.

I have spent a good part of today on a 400 mile round trip to meet with publicans in the north of Scotland who have found their livelyhood virtually gone. Is this your vision of the future...because that is what will happen. As I said, you are welcome to attend the meetings in Scotland that are planned, this week on Wednesday in Cowdenbeith and in the New Year in Edinburgh or are you unwilling to face reality. 

The next phase of the Scottish Executive social engineering policy will be the eventual introducion of a max 4 units of alcohol per person per night...this is no joke and was mentioned in conversation by a current Executive minister.

Ian, it worries me that your understanding of life is so very limited considering your occupation.

http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/news/press_releases/only_one_in_ten.html

This post replies to David Pott > RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007

RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007

As someone who has studied Child Psychology, and has a diploma in the subject, I would say Ians parting comment was akin to the little boy taking his ball home because his friends wouldn't play by his rules. The reaction is similar to that of Jon and the Alberts, when they challenged to debate, using facts not propoganda they disappear for weeks or months on end. I'm sure this forum will survive.

This post replies to Ian Smith > RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007

RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007

 Robert, you talk about facts versus propaganda, the facts of the case are up to each individual and their own opinion. I am an adult and have managed pubs for years so I do have an opinon that I like to voice. No one has rocked up at my pub with a pamphlet of facts and figures telling me that passive smoking is bad for me and I should keep away from those cursed smokers. With everything, I have a choice but I do live in a democracy that I respect. In this case I agree with what is happening here. It has happened in many other Countries and similar changes regarding smoking legislation has happened in recent history. Other recent legislation passed included longer opening hours and what furore that stirred up amongst the same posters challenging the smoke debate. Truth is, there were no riots on the streets, yet that is all forgotten as the comrades in arms are marching off to their next personal challenge. When the smoking debate started my Area Maanger said to us "If we don't provide for the non smoking customer the Government will make us do it". That has been clear since day one in the managed trade and they did do something about it. I blame those private owners who felt they could and should challenge this. They are the ones to blame for the blanket ban. If they hadn't stuck two fingers up then this would not be happening. And I go further and suggest that those here and those on the Publican forum are those who stuck two fingers up and should be blamed for doing this to the trade. You triumphantly say that people like me disappear when challenged, yet the truth is, I get bored with it all. You say I can not have an opinion, my opinion is wrong and then have the higher than thou attitude blaming everyone else. I look forward to July and I do like reading the big non debate debate forum and here but if I disappear its only because I am bored and not because your highly crafted debate has won me over.

This post replies to Bill Gibson > RE: Smoke ban to start July 1, 2007