News Article Comments : Smoking ban High Court challenge

RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

I am obviously very pleased to have reached this stage, and one would hope that the Government will grant exemptions under the regulations, allowing for a Regulated Indoor Air Quality Standard. As I have repeatably said F2C was never about a complete repeal of the ban, Patricia Hewitt has power under the Act to amend the Regulations without recourse to Parliament. We are prepared to demonstrate by sound scientific research by experts in the field of Ventilation/Filtration and ethical Medical Research Institutes that air improvement of the order of 99.3 to 99.97% can be achieved making indoor air cleaner than outside air, without the need for bans. This equipment contrary to Government claims, even for rooms of up 100sq metres would be less than £5000, and for smaller rooms the cost would be in the hundreds. Compare that to smoking areas being constructed from £1000 to £70 to £80 thousand, with no gurantee of retaining existing customers and pubs and clubs would be stupid not to want it. The fight is not over we still need support and donations. We've reached the point that the anti smokers on this site consistently said we wouldn't. As I have always said, F2C under advice have set the agenda rather than followed others wishes.

This post replies to this thread

RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

We can only hope Caroline that F2C is granted an audience with Patricia Hewitt as the Edgeware Road Association has been  on behalf of the Shisha Cafes. Anything less would be an insult to 14 million plus people who are either smokers or tolerant non smokers. If such a meeting did take place Mrs Hewitt would be hard pressed to dispute our research, on both ETS and Ventilation. I think she would also be uncomfortably surprised at the depth of out knowledge and information showing shall we say, Governmental malpractice.

This post replies to this thread

RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

You are quite right Eddie the media has been culpable in this conspiracy of silence. But I think it is appropriate at this time to remind everyone how duplicitous HMG/DoH and ASH etal have actually been:

Secondhand tobacco smoke kills at least 3600 people a year in the UK, according to a new study, including the death of one pub or bar worker every week. Konrad Jamrozik at Imperial College, London, UK, says exposure to secondhand smoke in all workplaces leads to the Etc So how come in 2004 when this research was published it was 3600 and now it's variously 11 to 13 thousand. Lies pure and simple.

This post replies to Eddie Douthwaite > RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

So how come in 2004 when the research was published it was 3600 now it's various 11 to 13 thousands. Simple answer it is all lies. More questions we want to put to Mrs Hewitt.

This post replies to Robert Feal-Martinez > RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge

That's relatively easy to explain in the UK as I said in 2004 Professor Jamrozik a visiting professor at Imperial College released research that said 3600 people a year die of passive smoking related illness, of which 700 were in the public places and the workplace. That's 191/2%, a statistic designed to fan the flames that ETS was highly dangerous, And yet in 2005/6 during the smoking debates in the Commons and elsewhere Patricia Hewitt and Caroline Flint clearly had not got with the programe they both stated that 95% of all deaths and disease from Passive Smoke occurs in the Home and quoted Professor Jamrozik's study as the source of the information. All of a sudden deaths from Passive Smoke magically had risen to 13000 a year, and would you be surprised to learn that the 700 remained the same, and, you've guest it, that works out at a little over 5%, in line with their public statements. To date no one has explained this sudden 400% increase in just a year. How would you view such clear distortion of the truth. I would call it a LIE, that both Ministers need to explain to the Public.

This post replies to Colin Grainger > RE: Smoking ban High Court challenge