Welsh council bans staff from smoking

A Welsh council has banned its staff from smoking at all during working hours.

The move by Denbighshire council means staff will no longer get fag breaks and will not be allowed to smoke in council vehicles

In their homes​The ban even applies to council tenants who receive home visits - they will get letters asking them not to smoke in front of council staff.

In a statement the council said it was "obliged to provide a safe working environment for its staff"​.

Even employees who work outside will be banned from smoking while on duty.

Safe working environment​Councillor Paul Marfleet, Cabinet Lead Member for Finance and Personnel, said: "Denbighshire County Council is obliged to provide a safe working environment for it's staff.​

"It is for this reason, that we have formulated the no smoking policy. It would be wrong of us to presume that by designating specific smoking areas, that there would be no potential danger to non-smoking staff of inhaling passive smoke."

He said the council would be offering support for staff wishing to give up smoking.

Let us know what you think. A sensible precaution or a step too far? Email us by clicking this link​

Your Comments​Robert Feal-Martinez​ via email 17/05/2006"Let us hope that employees take this issue to court and challenge whether the council has any right to tell people they cannot smoke in their own time. Will the unions back these workers, of course not. You can steal from your employer and get union support, you can abuse your employer and get union support, you can even fail to do your job and still get union support. The world is going mad but hopefully very soon, the Public will know how underhand and devious this Government , ASH, SCOTH and all the rest really are. Keep watching the media, the truth is almost out."

Sharon Donald​ via email 17/05/2006"Why does this council think it can tell people what they can and can't do in their own homes. This sounds very much like a threat to people who use council services and have people going in to assist them such as home helps. What an appalling way to treat vunerable people. This shows perfectly what the anti smoking brigade are nothing more than bullies picking on the most vunerable in society who can't fight back. The council should remember smokers are also taxpayers and rate payers who are paying their wages and do not expect to be told what to do in their own homes by council employees. They should be taken to court. There are plenty of other people in the private sector that would be only to willing to take on these jobs."

Alastair Elliott​ via email 17/05/2006"How dare these councils dictate to people how they should live their lives, they should provide at least an outdoor smoking area, once again this is just victimisation of Smokers.

I throw down a challenge to these people, PROVE BEYOND DOUBT THAT SECONDRY SMOKE IS HARMFUL TO NON-SMOKERS before you introduce draconian measures like this. I advise these people to take a look at the Enstrome report that was conducted two years ago, it stated that the effects of secondry smoke was so insignificant that people should not worry, this was also stated by Sir Richard Doll himself.

Ken Nason​ via email 17/05/2006"Birmingham city council made this edict nearly twelve months ago. At that time I asked a question which to this day remains unanswered by anyone.

If secondary smoke is such a danger to workers health that it warrants stopping council workers from entering a house where the occupant is or has been smoking WHY has no case EVER been brought and proved by worker, union, or health and safety executive abainst ANY employer in this country?

Why if it such a danger has the health and safety executive never acted independently on this "obvious" danger to employees health?

If it is such a danger then prosecution of employers who do not protect their staff would have been a cheaper method of protection than a ban wouldn't it?

Any body have the answer?

Liz Barber​, 17/05/2006Well,well, isn't the anti smoking persecution on a roll? Don't they just have right on their side? Isn't it great thet ASH, a non elected, supposed charity, is infiltrating every area of our work, social and home life?

Sharon Donald​, 18/05/2006I totally disagree with this smoking ban being imposed. This government dumped its manifesto on this issue as it has done on several other issues and has received votes by default - in other words by fraud. Pubs and clubs are private businessess and belong to the owner, it should therefore be the owners choice as to whether smoking is allowed or not. What this government is proposing is that all pubs should be non smoking, but at the same time will not allow someone to open a pub for smokers staffed by smokers, how undemocratic is that in a so called free country. This ban is not about protecting peoples health it is about the prohibition of tobacco and businessess will pay the price for a long time to come. Some will survive some won't. We are currently living in a dictatorship not a democracy.

John Gray​, 18/05/2006The ban in Denbighshire is indeed extreme with councillors jumping on what they perceive to be a trendy bandwagon which will make them look good. Morover, when you consider their expressed paranoia over environmental tobacco smoke, you begin to realise how twisted the minds of many people have become on this issue.

However, it's quite interesting to witness first hand the effects of a mass psychosis.

Bob Williams​ via email 19/05/2006"Calm down, calm down.

If you look at this report on other websites you'll see that the council still allows people to take a smoking break during the working day, they just have to clock out and do it in their own time rather than being funded to smoke by public money. If you don't agree with this, why not ask the Government to raise the premises licence fee so that the costs of council staff smoking is carried by our trade rather than the public? Any takers for that one?

All they are ASKING people to do when having a visit at their home is not to smoke while the council worker is there.

Hardly grounds for the scaremongering posts that are above is it?"

Belinda Cunnison​ via email 23/05/2006"As a council tax payer, I would rather pay a worker to smoke during a break if he or she wanted to then expect them to apply nicorette patches. Public money paid to help people stop smoking in such a hostile environment is money down the drain.

As to people 'only' being 'asked' to stop smoking in the presence of council workers, what kind of legislation is that? In Scotland it goes further as people are asked not to smoke for an hour before council workers turn up (making the assumption that they are not delayed of course). And what if they don't stub out? Do council workers have the right not to deliver core services?

Robert Feal-Martinez​ via email, 23/05/2006Chris is of course right, out of 33 organisations consulted only 2 could loosely be described as from the trade. The rest were health!!! charities, anti lobbyists, if fact those who wanted a ban.

As for the 27500 from Cancer Research we've shown conclusively they they distort there polls why should we believe these were real representatio