Party politics

As the new public health minister, Caroline Flint is charged with managing the government's smoking policy. Daniel Pearce asked her for more details.

Caroline Flint is a latecomer to the smoking ban party. The Department of Health welcomed her as the new public health minister with responsibility for tobacco after the election as the replacement for Melanie Johnson. And with the consultation on a ban launched just six weeks later she's had to get up to speed fast.

Smoking is the single issue that Ms Flint is getting more correspondence on at her Whitehall offices than any other.

Much of the correspondence, she says, is from people advocating a complete ban rather than the ban in food pubs which the government is consulting on, and which the trade has such doubts about.

Ms Flint claims the government hasn't made up its mind and is ready to listen to all the responses to the proposals. Previous consultation had shown that there was "significant support for a smoking ban in most workplaces and in licensed premises which served food", she says. "There was a smaller number of people who felt it should be banned in all pubs."

A recent Office of National Statistics report showed that fewer than a third of people (31 per cent) want an all-out ban on smoking. Ms Flint points out that the proportion is rising however, up 11 per cent in the past year.

"The same survey showed only five per cent wanted smoking allowed throughout pubs and 16 per cent wanted pubs to be mainly non-smoking but with smaller smoking areas. The shift is away from a smoking environment with a few non-smoking areas, to much more of a smoke-free environment with maybe a few places where people can - that would represent the majority of public opinion."

That may be so, but Ms Flint admits that this is not only about public opinion - government really does know best, she says.

"Over time the medical and scientific evidence about secondhand smoke has become clearer and clearer - so we have a public duty to act in this area too," she says. "It is about leading from the front, but it's also about leading with understanding and support from the public about why we are doing these things. I can't force someone not to smoke - there are plenty of places where people will be able to smoke."

Fine. So the government is acting to "protect people from the health risks attributable to secondhand smoke", as the consultation underlines. But is the health of some workers - those who work in wet-led pubs and members' clubs, which would be exempted under the proposals, for example - less important than others?

It's all about "opportunity and choice", says the prominent Blairite. "I agree that in pubs that don't serve food, workers could be exposed to passive smoking," she comments. "But for the first time people will have some real choice about whether they want to work in a smoke-free premises or not. We want to know what people say about it."

The strength of feeling​

The most pressing matter for many licensees is whether they will stay in business when some form of ban comes in. Does the government understand the strength of feeling and the real fear that pubs could go to the wall?

"There are lots of businesses which are going to be affected by these bans," says Ms Flint. "That's why we're looking to introduce a lead-in time to allow people to adapt and make some changes.

"We know most pubs have had regulars going for years and there could be some real adjustments they have to make. We want to work with people to manage it effectively and with a lead-in time which allows people to prepare their regulars for what's going to happen."

The consultation asks specifically for comment about rural pubs. Does that signify that there could be further exemptions or concessions for pubs which can prove, because of their location, they will face real hardship as a result of a ban?

No, appears to be the short answer. "We put the question in because people had raised it as an issue. We are looking to see what people say about this. But I would say we are doing this as a public health initiative, so in those circumstances I don't think it would be usual to look at issues such as compensation.

"We will be working with pubs and customers from the outset - so that they know what to expect. We're looking for a light touch, for people to understand that this is the law, and abide by the law."

Rejecting a voluntary approach​

The light touch of government is a phrase becoming increasingly used in Whitehall. But if the government really believes in it, why has it not seen fit to work closer with the trade on its own voluntary code on smoking?

If the British Beer & Pub Association is to be believed, more than half of the country's pubs will have banned smoking at the bar by the end of this year. Under the five-year plan announced last summer there were further moves to restrict smoking to 20 per cent of floor space by 2009 and move beyond that in the future. But that wasn't enough.

"The trade was looking at issues about not smoking at the bar and restricting floor space," says Ms Flint. "That all added to the general feeling that we needed a coherent policy, so the public knew where they stood on these issues.

"We did feel that just having issues around a certain amount of floorspace wasn't going to deliver what we felt we wanted to achieve over the next 10 years. The fact is that smoke drifts, it doesn't stay in a cloud around the smoker."

There are countless people, not only in the ventilation trade but among pubs and pub companies, who would argue that the trade's approach was "coherent" enough. Those arguments, it seems, are only ever likely to fall on deaf ears in Whitehall.

Ms Flint says ventilation was not a route the government wanted to go down, as its benefits were unclear. "There are too many arguments about whether it would happen fast enough, how much smoke it would get rid of," she explains.

What next?​

Wherever the consultation ends, the suspicion remains that the current action will be just a stopping point on the country's journey to an all-out ban - particularly after recent comments from Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt. Ms Flint would not disagree.

"If public opinion keeps moving in the same direction, and it is clear that more and more members of the public would like comprehensive smoking bans, I don't think anyone would ignore that. It's impossible to rule out that being the case some time down the road," she points out.

"The times have changed and clearly that has already been taken on board by publicans as they've been looking at what they can do themselves."

So they have - and it's time that publicans shouted louder about it, and added their mail to the pile of post on Caroline Flint's desk.

The trouble with food​

The biggest problem facing the government's proposal to ban smoking in pubs serving food is how food is defined. The method the government appears to be leaning towards in the consultation is a list of permitted foods in exempted pubs, which would be regularly updated.

Caroline says she appreciates the difficulties with defining food. "This is one of the things we are consulting on - is it something that is prepared and cooked on the premises? We've been looking at the definitions that are provided by the food trade that define the difference between a packet of crisps and Betty's hot pot."

The government is alive to the fact that pubs have already been exploring potential loopholes, such as becoming members' clubs, to avoid a ban. "We don't want to end up with a situation where someone can drive a coach and horses through our legislation. I don't think it's impossible by any stretch but we have to work these