AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH



What I want to know is why couldnt we have a few designaged pubs, I understand what Candie is saying about smoke drifting through I always thought that the smoking & non-smoking areas were daft I think we will all be going over old ground here but why not have certain pubs that are for smokers and certain ones for non-smokers.

We already know the majority of larger chains would be non-smoking so why not let the smaller back street pubs and some clubs remain as smoking venues, there can be signs outside indicating whether they are smoking or non-smoking, everybody has a choice then to do as they please.

The argument I had from a non-smoking colleague was that thsi would then limit their choice to where they dined, my answer was well I guess it would have to be a compromise on both parts because the smokers have limited options too, as like I said most places would be smoke free the non-smokers would have more option with the smokers having to find a designated pub.

But as we all know the Scottish government think they can tell us what to do so theres no point arguing about it the law has been passed and it will happen up here in 2006.

What gets me is that if they are so concerned about smoking why not ban it all together. Oh no sorry they would loose too much money...........What I want to know is who will enforce these laws, I can imagine how pleased the PF will be when they have somebody in court for accidentally lighting up in the wrong place.........The knife culture in Glasgow is at an all time high, there have been at least two murders most weekends for the past few months with thousands more injuries from knife culture, its on a downward spiral fast, Willie Rae remains silent and the problem keeps getting worse.......... but they would rather spend their time on issues such as smoking while important (but can be addressed later) I feel personally are less important than the issues in our cities at the moment ohhhh Gems me thinks you have opened a whole new can of worms, like I say though not much point in arguing now since the law has been passed and it WILL happen......

Just so my question does not get lost in my rant...


What are peoples opinions on the suggestion I made in the above post about having well signed designated pubs for smoking & non-smoking bearing in mind that the majority would probably me non but the smaller backstreet pubs where they rely on old men propping up the bar with a fag in one hand and a pint in the other to carry on allowing smoking.

I certainly know of a pub like this in each area where I live, I wonder what will happen to those pubs too un-trendy for anybody else but old men who spend their pensions drinking....I wonder what those old boys will do too when their days of drinking & smoking are cut short......I do think lots of pubs will suffer especially in smaller areas like Argyll where I come from where the pubs rely on locals rather than tourists.

I don't like the idea of a nanny state but this is one of those things we need the government to legislate against for our own good. It might be the one little push some people need to give up and can only be a good thing. I would take it further than the present laws and say no one should be allowed to smoke in their own home if it contained children either.

But if they were doing it for our own good dont you think they should be banning it all together........

Of course they should - but do you think they would get away with that ? Even this small step forward is going to be hated and resisted by smokers.

No of course they wouldnt but not because of resistance from smokers, god knows they have passed unpopular laws before when it suits, the wouldnt do it because of the money they would loose from cigarette sales which is HUGE...................what gets me is that they make out as if they are doing something good but in reality they dont want pepople to quit but have to be seen to look as if they are doing something positive. I read the statistics somewhere and what they make compared to what they spend on smoking related ilnesses is much much more......Arrgghhh I just get pissed off about this subject really bugs me no end.

Some Snippets from Todays Scottish Daily Record:

"Since the ban in Ireland tourism has dropped by 30% and just last week one pub was forced to close putting 400 people out of work"

Paul Waterson Chief of Scottish Liscenced Trade Association said

"We are entering a crazy scenario that if you smoke illegal drugs such as marijuana in the street you will be given a warning. But if you smoke a cigarette in a pub you will face a £2,500 fine".

"the (scottish) Executive has snubbed the silent majority in force of the voicferous anti-smoking minority. They have waved two fingers at the people of Scotland who want restrictions but not total bans"

"I am disgusted that the people we have voted into Scotlands parliament have abused their power in this way. To abuse freedom of choice is to abuse democracy and what we have now is Mickey Mouse politicians trying to make a name for themselves. They are not interested in doing the will of the people if they are crimanilising people because they choose to light up a cigarette".

Tim Lord of TMA

"Opinion polls have shown the majority of people in Scotland want more restrictions on smoking in public places but not a ban"

Laura

But restrictions have been shown not to work - it's one thing to put up signs saying smokers sit here, non smokers there but the smoke doesn't read the signs and stay on the smokers side of the pub or restaurant. I know the tax paid on cigarettes is huge but take away the need for hospital beds for smokers, the care given to elderly smokers who cannot breathe well enough to manage alone and the suffering from due to passive smoking and we have a healthier environment which is far more important than the taxes raised surely.

Apparently *i will try and find the document where i read this* the amount of money the government makes is significantly more than what they have to spend on smoking related ilnesses as I said before.

I agree that its daft having one pub with a non-smoking and smoknig section because the smoke just drifts over.

What I do think would be much better is to have designaged smoking and non-smoking pubs, that is the whole pub is either smoking or non-smoking. That way everybody has a choice, we all know the larger chains already ban smoking without the restrictions so why not something like this and give everybody the freedom to do as they please, the non-smokers to enjoy themselves without putting their health at risk not to mention stinking of smoke etc and the smokers to have their right to light up and have a fag .........seems a win win situation for both imo.

But if we see this new legislation as just the start of an all out ban your plan would just slow it down

The cost of smoking is not just the cost to hospitals - having "given up" significant years of my life to care for relatives dying from smoking related illnesses I can guarantee they were in hospital very little but the care needed to keep them at home was enormous !