Lord Steel calls for ventilation to allow smoking in pubs

Former Lib-Dem party leader Lord Steel proposed an amendment to the Health Bill which would allow pubs to provide safe, well-ventilated smoking areas where no-one was expected to work.

The move was backed by several Lords and by campaign group Freedom to Choose which has argued that ventilation is the way forward.

Lord Steel told the Grand Committee of the House of Lords: " Passive smoking is not only harmful but it is also offensive to many people. My amendment recognises that. Under my amendment, any place such as a restaurant or a pub will have to provide both smoking and non-smoking facilities. ​

"Under my new clause, it will not be possible to have a pub or a restaurant which does not provide smoking facilities."

He added: " So my amendment simply says that as long as the premises have clearly designated smoking and non-smoking areas, the smoking areas have adequate ventilation and that no employee is required to work in a smoking area—because that is an important part as well—smoking should be permitted in bars and restaurants."​

His amendment will be voted on, as with all others, at the Report Stage of the Bill which could be months away.

If no ammendment succeed, smoking will be banned in all enclosed public places in England.

March 2007 smoke ban call - click here to see story​

To comment on this or any other story email us by clicking this link​

Your Comments​Alastair Elliott​ via email 21/04/2006"This is the most sensible option that I have heard to date and is exactly what the people on the Big Debate are trying to achieve, I take my hat off to Lord Steele for a very Common Sense approach."

Alison Piearce​ via email 21/04/2006"Lord Steel has come up with an excellent proposal which caters for everyone's needs, let's hope his initiative succeeds so that England and Wales can truly retain a 'hospitality' industry."

Loraine McGregor​ via email 21/04/2006"I can only say "Thank God" that the House of Lords exists. Lords Steele was one of the many voices of reason at yesterdays debate and I am extremely grateful that they are still around to protect the public from this Nanny State Government."

Chris Broscomb​ via email 21/04/2006"Re: Lord Steele's contribution.It's so unusual to see simple, clear commonsense.

All legislation should have balance but this is one occasion when the provision of the 100% Healthy & Safe environment for workers is put above the needs of a large proportion of the community.

Communities are people and their needs are being ignored by Government.

Perhaps this 100% protection should be given to all workers including emergency service personel by banning every activity even 'healthy' ones that put them in danger."

James Middleton​ via email 21/04/2006"Which member if big tobacco is paying m'lud to try and spike legislation saving uk lives ? Is there such a thing as enforcing a declaration of interests on m'lud ?

A recent study in british medical journals online 'blowing smoke bat's air filtration scheme' shows how bat and big tobacco knows the ventilation smokescreen fiasco is a sham and does not work and only removes smells not carcinogens and poisons which are in the pm2.5 range which nose and throat hairs cannot stop a similar report to parliament bills committee revealed the same so m'lud should reconsider his position , get the indisputable facts and then reconsider his position.

Like the 'whitecoats' scientists who sold their reputations for big tobacco's bucks, sooner or later the truth will surface when the insider, wigand 11 emerges.

Robert Feal-Martinez​ via email 21/04/2006"There is no difference James whether scientists are selling their souls to big tobacco or those like Professor Jarvis the Chair of SCOTH who has sold his to big PHARMA, promoting smoking cessation products which ASH say has only a success rate of 12 to 14%. Your facts are just lies put about by ASH have been examined and scientifically explored by those who have no connection with any interest group. I mean of course The Bigdebate, Freedom to Choose. We have examined the studies, looked at the research and can conclusively show that ETS/Passive smoking is like 10'000 other carcinogens which are irritants and present no long term harm. These are the facts which finally the people and Peers are seeing. As for ventilation the rubbish spouted about Tornado size winds used by the Minister again in The Debate was from a remark made by a self appointed expert James Repace in a court case with no evidence to back it up. Again fact. The truth is serious air flow and extraction studies show 99% of all air borne particles can be removed and the air cleaned to remove the smells. Lord Steele and many others know that because Freedom to Choose provided the evidence. The truth is out there all you have to do is eek it with an open mind. Freedom to Choose have no money, no sponsors just a desire for truth. Thankly the Lords intend to fight our cause for Democracy."

Bill Gibson​ via email 24?04/2006"

Maybe it is you James who needs to consider your position as the report you mentioned was from 1996 and then dusted down a few days prior to the vote in Parliament on the 14th February with a view of swaying public opinion.

But first go to : http://www.faac.ca/content/ventilation%20solutions/Blackdog%20study.pdf and digest this study.

Before you then whinge that the results must have been rigged, no this study was carried out by an independent research organisation that is predominently used by the U.S. Government. I will be using this study in the Court of Session in Edinburgh later this year to demonstrate the full effectivness of Ventilation combined with Air Filtration."

Mandy Vincent​ via email 24/04/2006"I was so excited with Lord Steel when I heard that, thank you so much. James would not like to see smokers at all. But my husband of 32 years does not has never smoked and ventilation would suit us both he does not want to stand outside and freeze or sit like a larry on his own in comfort. Believe me there are many in this situation. Please remember James it is still a legal product. You also have no compassion then I assume, for elderly people who are being forced outside nursing homes. I would like to know who speaks for them. I thank God for the Lords and there voices on our behalf. Not all smokers are Anti."

Devaine​ via email 24/04/2006"Don't all sides make these sorts of claims? even if the risk is relative, rather than absolute, doesnt the removal of smoking from the pub environment save illnesses and lives? What would you say to the people who do get ill from passive smoking?

Before you say im in favour of the ban, i would like to say one more thing.

To make the govenmental debate mean something, the one thing they should do is actually include their own bar into the debate. If they are going to decide something like this they really shouldnt exempt their own backyard."

Lisa Thill​ via email 24/04/2006"Under my new clause, it will not be possible to have a pub or a restaurant which does not provide smoking facilities.

[Lord Steel] added: " ... smoking should be permitted in bars and restaurants."

Interesting opinion for a group calli