Campaign fighting for rethink over smoking ban
A CALL has been made to reinstate smoking in Bristol's pubs.
Campaigners who say the ban on lighting up is threatening the future of traditional pubs will be taking their case for relaxing the law to Westminster tomorrow.
-
The Save Our Pubs and Clubs campaign has prepared a report which claims traditional inner city pubs have suffered the most since the introduction of the ban four years ago this week.
Robert Hancocke, landlord of the Mardyke, in Hotwell Road, agrees and is among those backing the campaign. He said: "I run six pubs in the city and I have seen a big decline in the trade since the law came in.
"I've been doing this for 15 years and I've seen a lot of pubs close in the past few years. Obviously there are other factors involved but I would say the smoking ban is 90 per cent responsible.
"We haven't got a garden area here so smokers have no choice but to go out on the street to smoke, which also creates problems.
"People are all outside and no one is in the pub. It is just ridiculous."
On July 1, 2007 smoking at work, pubs, restaurants and public buildings was made illegal in a bid to cut deaths from second-hand smoke. It was also intended to help smokers to quit, and discourage children from taking up the habit.
But the Save Our Pubs and Clubs campaign wants the law to be revised to allow separate ventilated smoking rooms in bars and clubs. They are holding a reception at the House of Commons tomorrow, lobbying MPs to garner support.
John Madden, executive officer of the Guild of Master Victuallers, said: "The smoking ban has put a huge strain on the traditional urban pub. Many regular customers decided to smoke and drink at home and very few non-smokers came in to replace them.
"The result has been the closure of thousands of pubs. Licensees have lost their livelihoods, bar staff have lost their jobs, and many communities have lost their social centre."
The campaign is gathering speed as figures obtained by the Evening Post show that only 24 people have been fined for lighting up in licensed premises in Bristol since the smoking ban was brought in.
No smoking fines were issued until 2009, two years after the ban was introduced.
In that year ten £50 fixed penalty notices were handed out by the council's public health services team.
These fines are reduced £30 if paid within 15 days.
In the following 12 months between April 2010 to 2011, 14 fines were given out.
It is not known how many have been issued so far this financial year.
A spokesman for the city council said: "All the above were issued because the recipients were observed to be in possession of lit tobacco in a prohibited place."
There were no fines listed for businesses failing to display no-smoking signs, which is another requirement of the law.
Doctors estimate second-hand smoke kills more than 600 people a year.
In Bristol more than 7,500 smokers have been helped to kick the habit with support from NHS Bristol.
90 Comments
View all
by Utopian_Dream
Friday, July 01 2011, 2:12PM
“"the smoking ban were lifted no doubt you'd see some increase in trade"
I think you'd see a decrease in trade. Non-smokers don't like to come out of a pub stinking of smoke.”
by Pinkstone
Friday, July 01 2011, 12:49PM
“If the pubs kept their prices competitive, it would have more effect than reversing the smoking ban.
Its easier for a brewer to deliver thousands of bottles to a supermarket warehouse than it is to deliver small consignements to individual pubs. therefore with the bargaining power of the supermarket its always going to be cheaper from say Tesco s.
Smoking has had a very small effect on the pub trade but if you look at Witherspoons see how they are coping with the smoking ban and its a success story.
At least I come home at night , with my clothes not stinking of smoke.”
by Tegu_lady
Friday, July 01 2011, 12:29PM
“I was just reading some statistics regarding the percentage of the population who smoke, according to these figures only 22% of men over 16 smoke cigarettes 2% smoke cigars and 0.5% smoke a pipe. So nearly a quarter of the men over 16 in the UK smoke in some way or another.
That's quite a minority, makes you wonder how damaging the smoking ban could actually be....
That said, I agree the ban is having a small cumulative effect but I believe social and economic pressures are the real killers here. If the smoking ban were lifted no doubt you'd see some increase in trade, make pub prices more realistic and I think you'd have to be careful you didn't get trampled to death by the stampede of people heading for the bar.”
by Utopian_Dream
Friday, July 01 2011, 12:06PM
“My logic: banning smoking in pubs did not cause them to close... There are other, more contributory factors that closed pubs to close, as I listed.
What's your logic, or are you just contradicting the fabric of reality for the sake of argument?”
by Erinaceus
Friday, July 01 2011, 11:46AM
“@Utopian_Dream
Indeed, those are contributory factors - have I denied it? By your logic, the fact that smoking bans hit pubs would imply that cheap supermarket booze doesn't...”
by Utopian_Dream
Friday, July 01 2011, 11:32AM
“Oh dear, have you forgetten about the recession? Or the supermarkets selling cheap alcohol and pubs selling expensive alcohol which are the main contributing factors to pub closures.
No? Don't agree with reality? Just blame it on the smoking ban, then”
by Erinaceus
Friday, July 01 2011, 11:23AM
“@acjboyle
'Guess the weak smoky people would kick up a fuss and pretend that banning smoking causes pubs to close, for instance'
I'm not a weak smoky person (whetever that is); I gave up twenty-five years ago. But to deny that 'banning smoking causes pubs to close' is simpy untrue. Not the truth matters much to fanatics like yourself, I fear.”
by Utopian_Dream
Friday, July 01 2011, 11:05AM
“I agree with acjboyle.. Smokers, you've had your day, now is time for clean air in pubs... I suggest you try quitting smoking. Clean, unpolluted air is much more life enhancing than inhaling carcinogenic fumes into your blackened lungs. Oh and dont try and push your filthy habit on those who do not want to smell it.”
by Junican
Friday, July 01 2011, 2:58AM
“@ ashleyvale.
""..thousands of horrific life-shortening illnesses caused by tobacco...""
The more I see these sort of comments, the more I despair about the level of sheer ignorance I see.”
by Junican
Friday, July 01 2011, 2:50AM
“It would be vastly progressive if ASH ET AL along with the whole of Tobacco Control were eradicated, lock, stock and barrel. Having said that, their blandishments are getting more and more ridiculous. I see that Amanda Sandford of ASH has welcomed the plan of Stony Whatsit to ban smoking in the streets on the grounds of putative harm from spittle on fag ends. Well, I may change my mind about ASH ET AL - perhaps they should remain in existence since they add so much to the gaiety of the nation. But not funded by the taxpayer.”