Smoking ban is inadequate
How did the Government manage to so completely screw up the smoking in pubs issue? It's hard to believe that ministers and senior civil servants who surely can muster a few brain cells between them could design a "solution" that only serves to create a greater problem.
The White Paper on Public Health will divide the pub trade. It will no doubt keep a small army of lawyers busy for several years as they attempt to make sense of proposals that have left most of us bug-eyed with bewilderment.
My local serves food from lunchtime until 8pm in the evening. Does that mean that smoking will be banned for most of the day but will be all right at 8.01 in the evening?
Many pubs serve food between noon and 2pm and 7pm to 10pm in the evening. Will smoking be banned while food is served but allowed at other times? If so, the smell of cigarettes will permeate the pubs and hang around while food is available in the evenings.
The main problem is a simple one: the proposals will create a two-tier pub business. Brewers and pub companies will spend the time between now and 2008, when the Government's plans come into law, deciding which outlets will concentrate on food and will be smoke free, and those that will be turned into smoking dens with no food served at all.
So much for improving public health! It is a proven fact that the majority of smokers belong to the poorer sections of society. They also suffer from poor diets and die younger than more affluent people.
Far from helping the poor to give up their addiction to nicotine and the knock-on demands that smoking-related illnesses make on the NHS, they will now be told to use pubs reeking with cigarette smoke where the only "food" on offer will be crisps, peanuts and other offerings rich in fat and sugar. Is the Government seriously encouraging people to smoke themselves to death and to avoid eating decent food in pubs?
The result of the inevitable split in the pub business will be a move towards more gastro-pubs in which food will dominate. In many existing gastro pubs, beer has been sidelined as it is considered unsuitable for consumption by respectable middle-class diners.
The important work carried out in recent years by the Campaign for Real Ale, Greene King and Coors' Beer Naturally campaign will be seriously undermined, just at a time when the campaign is starting to bite. Tesco reported last month that sales of distinctive bottled ale are booming and many customers are demanding information about which beers go best with food.
The same thing is happening in pubs as many publicans and brewers stage special events to match beer and food. These events will go into steep decline as some pubs turn their back on food, while others become quasi-restaurants, with an emphasis on wine rather than beer.
The welcome trend towards families eating in pubs will also be harmed. Many villages have only one pub. If those pubs, in a bid to hold on to their regular and older customers, decide to stop serving food to allow smoking to continue they will drive away families looking for somewhere to enjoy a drink and a meal.
And what happened to the government's concern for people who work in pubs? They will still suffer the ill effects of passive smoking if their places of employment choose the food-free option.
An outright ban on smoking would have been the sensible way forward. It would have safeguarded the interests of pub workers, children and the vast majority of people who do not smoke. It would also have encouraged smokers who wanted to continue to visit pubs to give up their addiction to nicotine.
The smoking debate has got nothing to do with the "nanny state" or an attack on liberty. Smoking kills. Passive smoking kills. I do not defend a smoker's "liberty" to cause me serious illness.
By ducking and weaving, the Government has done nothing to curb smoking and will encourage people to continue their addiction in smoking dens. The White Paper is woeful and inadequate, and the people who wrote it should hang their heads in shame.
