I think they are all barking up the wrong tree.
Its just more PR for greedy winterton, for more getting his fizzog in the local press.
Dont think at all that he is a help.They are all misled

Well done the pubs of Macclesfield. If the pubs throughout the country had done this in the first place, they wouldn't be in the sorry state that they're in now and over 80,000 would still be in work.

This country is big enough to cater for everyone, non-smokers and smokers, and it should have been up to the private business what smoking policy to adopt.

The ban needs to be reformed immediately by introducing an element of choice to stop the further decline.

www.freedom2choose.info

I'm disappointed they're wanting supermarkets forced to raise their prices to accommodate a sector with a broken business model.
The Pubcos and their profiteering attitude are principally responsible for rising prices at the taps.
Cheaper supermarket alcohol is nothing new and for decades the two outlets managed to coexist, but all of a sudden its a huge problem and can't be tolerated?
I support the creation of smoking rooms. SHS is nowhere near enough of a work hazard to warrant banning it. You can run diesel engined vehicles indoors, but smoking is too dangerous!?!?!

I agree with Helen. Other countries publicans acted earlier and have already got exemptions. If enough publicans join in perhaps we too could get exemptions.

It is good that at least one MP realizes the huge error his peers have made, and better that some pub owners/managers are starting to get together and save their industry.

I wish them well in their campaign and hope they are an inspiration to their colleagues throughout the country.

Many people are trying to fight this unwanted ban. The antis were never BANNED from investing their own money into smoke-free venues, were they.
Here is one event taking place on the 28/29th January - http://www.antiprohibition.org/ticap_pages.php?q=6
The TICAP Conference
1st World Conference Against Prohibition: "Smoking Bans and Lies"
Brussels, at the European Parliament Building, 27/28 January, 2009

I will not go out now to pubs, I know many others feel the same way, ventilation/air filtration should have been one of the ways forward. Many smokers have partners, husbands, wives, friends and family, who are non-smokers. The smoking ban has killed the atmosphere in thepub venues, that is what my non-smoking hubby stated, the first time we went out for a drink after the ban.
This is the most vindictive ban in my lifetime memory, it did not take into account all the eldery people who like to socialise either.
Thank you Sir, this whole vendetta against smokers has gone way too far.
freedom2choose.info for tolerant non-smokers and smokers alike, fighting for choice and TRUTH, please join us

Pubs were losing trade long before the smoking ban came in. Many people want a more varied choice of where to eat and drink and have experience of continental and other offerings which are more attractive.
One of the reasons for the ban was to protect pub workers as well as customers. Plus the government has a responsibility to try to improve the public health of the nation and "rights" of one group of people addicted to a particular drug may seem less important in that case.
That publicans should be asking for other suppliers to be more expensive to protect them is a bit rich.

What will we have next? restaurants demanding that the price of meat is put up? Ice cream vans wanting a levy on family tubs of chocolate chip?
Next and Top Shop wanting a tax on sewing thread?

My experience, limited though it is, is that pubs are nicer places now and I can spend some time in one without having to wash my clothes afterwards.
Of course it is not all pubs that are suffering. Some are doing very well since the ban. perhaps the ones complaining should revisit their business models rather than try to restrict businesses that are getting it right.

Pubs in the UK have been closing at a rate of 27 a week over the past year with 1,409 pubs closing during 2007, research revealed today.

The British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA),carried out a study.
The closure rate in 2007 was seven times faster than 2006 and 14 times faster than in 2006.

Maccspider.
Yes, you're right. Pubs were closing before the ban. In fact, 102 closed in 2005, 216 in 2006 and a whopping 1409 in 2007. We all know that it has got worse since then throughout 2008.

Now I wonder what happened on 1 July 2007? No it wasn't the credit crunch, this only happened in 2008; no it wasn't cheap supermarket booze, we'd had this for years; oh, I remember now, it was the smoking ban. A bit more than a coincidence really.

Maccspider, if choice was re-introduced to allow for smoking and non-smoking venues, then you would still be able to frequent a non-smoking venue, so why should this bother you?

As for your concern for the hospitality workers, I would suggest that you re-read the article. It is the hospitality workers themselves who are petitioning for a reform to the ban. They, just like our very own H&S Executive, understand that secondhand smoke is not a workplace health hazard.

MaccSpider.
Totaly agree with you.

But also it would help if the the taxman did his bit,
the taxman is far too greedy on the drinks prices.
I always have a joke done on me here being english,

They take a bottle top fill it up with spirits pour it in a glass, and say thats all you get in england for your money. I take that in good spirits(forgive the pun)
because it is true.
Here because of less tax you get three times as much for your money.
The big conglomerates can sell a lot cheaper than a family owned pub.
There should be smoking rooms inside also with air conditioning installed.
Vat on goods here is 5% on everything.

So, Sir Nicholas is backing a campaign to allow the use of one highly dangerous addictive drug, in order to increase the profits of the dealers of another! We were better off when he was still in hiding weren't we?

http://www.antiprohibition.org/pagina_base.php?q=6

1st World Conference Against Prohibition: "Smoking Bans and Lies"
Brussels, at the European Parliament Building, 27/28 January, 2009




Impact of Smoking Bans
Epidemiology and passive smoking fraud
Toxicology and ventilation
Public health ideology and the pharmaceutical industry
Political fight against tobacco prohibition
FIRST WORLD CONFERENCE AGAINST PROHIBITION BY TICAP

PRESS RELEASE

London, UK, October 2008 - The International Coalition Against Prohibition (TICAP) will hold its first world Conference on January the 27th and the 28th, 2009. Because of its prominence in these times, tobacco prohibition was chosen as the theme of the inaugural conference. Unfortunately, the denormalization of smoking comes at the expense of many citizens' rights and it sets a very dangerous precedent, along with causing immediate and devastating economic repercussions.

The conference "Smoking Bans and Lies", will be held at The European Parliament Building in Brussels. Subjects presented for discussion at the gathering will include: the impact of smoking bans, passive smoking exposure studies, the pharmaceutical lobby and the politics of prohibition.

TICAP includes more than 20 organizations from all over the world who share the conviction that prohibitions are a threat to democracy and a free society. Once an individual's right to choose is eliminated, special interests are enriched and state intrusion is tremendously augmented.

With this conference, TICAP intends to lay the foundations of an active, world-wide opposition to the expansion of a political trend that uses questionable science and public health institutions as vehicles to control citizens.

Before the ban, pubs closures averaged 4 per week in the UK. After the ban pub closures are running at 35 per week and the future is looking bleaker. This adds up to some 80,000 job losses since the ban!
More and more members of the medical profession are exposing the deceit and downright lies of anti smoking cults such as ASH and the pharma industry (see the report from Prof. Med Molinard for a recent example). At last an MP is standing up for basic common sense, granted a bit late in the day, but I can only hope it will set an example for other MPs. A bit of civil courage should be part of an MPs makeup. I must say that we have been missing this for many years now,

Let's get a few things out of the way first.
"Cheap supermarket booze is destroying pubs"
Rubbish. There has been cheap supermarket booze for years.
"It is the credit crunch"
Rubbish. Pubs were closing at an alarming rate for quite a while before the current economic downturn. They began to fail in July 2007, a couple of weeks after the smoking ban.
"There are pubs doing better now than they ever were"
This is not rubbish, but these are not pubs. These are what used to be pubs and have now become licensed restaurants, usually with a childrens play area.

What about the traditional pub, a place where people meet to have a drink, a game of darts maybe, have a good banter with the other 'locals', possibly sit down and put the world to rights - and if you enjoy a pipe or a cigar or a cigarette, have one of those as well. This kind of pub is suffering to the tune of five a day closing, with the management and staff becoming unemployed, and the knock on effect on their suppliers. Don't ANYBODY try and say this is not because of the smoking ban.

This ban was to protect the workers, protect them from what?, (not that there are going to be many places left for them to work anyway). I have documents stored, including the World Health Organisation, the Health and Safety Executive, the present Government and the House of Lords, and they all say the same thing, that harm from second hand smoke is minor and does not cause serious illness, and our proper pubs are disappearing fast because of a law based on fabrication.

I agree with RTS,
6/11/2008 at 12:13

Imposing restrictions on supermarkets is not the answer. The fact is, pub trade was decimated 1st July 2007 when the smoking ban was introduced. This is because 70% of regular pub goers are smokers. There's always been cheap alcohol available at the supermarkets however smokers chose to go to the pubs and pay the higher price for alcohol as they weren't necessarily going just for the alcohol but for the atmosphere and to socialise. Now that the pubs are empty there's no point going as there is no atmosphere or anyone to socialise with. In an attempt to cover up yet another major cock up the government are saying the ailing pub trade is the result of the economic down turn. That is complete and utter nonsense. This country has faced economic crisis' in past and I challenge anyone to come up with a news story from those days saying the pub trade was failing because of it. Instead of creating more restrictions the government should just hold their hands up to their mistake and do away with the smoking ban and let the free market decide which businesses fail and which succeed.

The irradication of smoking in society can only be a good thing.

No one smokes on Star Trek and I think that proves everything.

Can anyone actually see Nick Winterton in this photo?

What do you reckon spider?

slinkywizard, you said "No one smokes on Star Trek". It is interesting that you mention this. I remember an episode of "Enterprise" where they found some people marooned on a planet. One of the ladies had lung cancer caused by polution (sounds familiar) and Dr Flox (I think that is is name) said "I will take her back to the ship to cure it", "How long will that take" said Capt Archer, "About 2 hours"!!! Ironic that isn't it.

If only eh?

Wanna buy some death sticks?

"you don't want to sell me death sticks" - Obi wan.

Thank goodness there is at least one M.P. who is prepared to stand up and be counted. Congratulations to him. Perhaps he would made a good President of the UK.

Now from the reaction here people will see just how unjust this anti smoking legislation is.

Just for the record, I am not, and never have been a smoker.

Sir Nick is bang on that smokers deserve a smoking area inside pubs if the landlords are willing. This State dictate (ban) and nannying has gone way too far. It's now bullying, abusive and actually a social apartheid.

Just as I wholeheartedly support the analysis on the economically and socially destructive smoking ban I equally disagree strongly with trying to dictate beer prices at supermarkets.

Firstly drinking in pubs is a social event and a part of our culture and heritage. The price of beer is not a significant factor.

Secondly this is a market economy. Politicians and pubs themselves should not tamper with other businesses rights to market products unless the competition is unfair, rigged or corrupt in some way.

We cannot have some sectors of the business community pulling strings to disadvantage or fix prices for other businesses or where the heck would it stop???

And consumers will not appreciate it either. It's a can of worms and very bad PR for pubs.

Ban the ban. Don't ban business.

Its true pubs have been dying for years. Society and peoples habits have changed. When worked in business lending in the late 90's for a reputable high street bank they wouldnt touch a pub that wasnt either child friendly or with a strong focus on the food side (they usually work in tandem)

All the pubs mentioned here need a time machine to the 1970's or earlier not a relaxation on smoking laws to make a profit.

To Macc Spider (the first poster):

If you want to go to the kinds of pubs that you describe (restaurants, really) all well and good. There should be places to cater for you.

But others go to pubs for different reasons. A chat with mates, a game or two, a pint - and a fag.

Why should dictate that what is alright for you is allowed - but what others want is banned?

You yourself simply wouldn't go to those places where people smoked. Fair enough. Don't go.

The answer to the conundrum is obvious - the places closing down are the working class pubs that overwhelmingly served working class men.

That's what the smoking ban has done. It's closed down a choice that should have been open to all - and not loaded in favour of the health fascists.

Smoking is ingrained into society, so many people make so much money from it that its allowed, we are talking about protecting peoples rights to kill themselves here, its crazy.

Smoking should be licensed, you should apply for a license to smoke and pick your ciggs up like drugs at a chemist, like methodone.

The facts are out there - smoking kills.

The traditional "boozer" is an increasingly rare place due to many reasons:

o Social changes away from "a pint or two on the way home from work"
o The smoking ban does hit them more than pubs serving food. The demographics of the people going in them are different
o Upward only rent rises by greedy pubcos
o A general decline in going to the pub due to better home entertainment and cheap supermarket drinks
o Poor business acumen by the licensee (it happens...)
o Success of drink driving law

The later is one I don't think anyone can really argue with although it's effected rural pubs which are actually at higher risk of closing than town centre pubs. They are often worth a lot more as bricks and mortar than a pub business.

Winterton is often an advocate of the pub and has rallied on similar causes before. He's done it more often than he needs to for just publicity.

As the pubs officer for the local Macclesfield CAMRA branch, I've asked for this subject to be put on the agenda for discussion. We are acutely aware of the situation with pubs and actively trying to find ways to help.

Cheers, Rob
Macclesfield CAMRA Pubs Officer
www.whatpub.org

I'm sorry, but I don't think that smoking should be licensed.
Smoking is a perfectly legal (yet highly taxed) life-style choice, just like so many other life-style choices that not everyone pursues in.
Anything that is legal within a country should be catered for. Our country is big enough for that surely?
There's nothing wrong with offering an element of choice to cater for all needs - who could possibly complain about that?