SPECIAL "shelters" could spring up outside thousands of pubs, bars and restaurants under details of the Government's planned smoking ban released today.
Draft proposals for the crackdown on smoking in public places - due to be introduced in England next summer - suggest that the practice will still be allowed inside roofed structures as long as more than half the sides remain open to the elements.
A spokesman for the British Beer and Pub Organisation, which represents the UK industry, said: "What pub landlords will be looking at is providing shelters outside for smokers. Now we will be examining in detail what constitutes an enclosed space under these plans."
The proposals, which are being put out for consultation by the Department of Health, indicate that much the same rules would be introduced in England as are already in effect in Scotland.
Roof
Virtually all structures with a roof - even just a canvas awning - would be subject to the ban unless half the sides were permanently open to the air.
No-smoking signs would also need to be prominently displayed at each public entrance to premises. Breaching the rules would result in a fine, with local authorities taking responsibility for enforcing the ban in buildings such as offices, licensed premises, and also most public transport.
The Government hopes the measures will protect everyone from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke when at work or at leisure.
Smokers will also have an environment where it is easier to give up, it is alleged.
Public Health Minister Caroline Flint said: "We have worked closely with stakeholders in drafting these regulations and continue to listen to the opinions of the public, stakeholders and the commercial sector in the countdown to going smoke-free next summer."
The details of the measures were generally welcomed today as providing clarity so businesses could begin preparing for the ban.
But Nick Bish, of the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers, said defining a parasol in a courtyard as a roof would be "crazy". He hoped there would be a "light touch" in enforcing the ban, and said he was pleased that it appeared the Department of Health would provide free signs in the run-up to implementation.
Costs
He added: "The costs on a unit-by-unit basis may not be considerable, but this is a burden on every shop and office in the land as well as on pubs and this is surely the time to buy shares in a signage company."
Ruairi O'Connor, public affairs spokesman at the British Heart Foundation, said it was "good news" that the regulations appeared "easy for all to understand".
But he said it was important that exemptions from the ban for some workplaces were kept to a minimum.
"Whilst we acknowledge that some places, such as prisons and care homes, face greater challenges in becoming smoke-free than others, these places should not be forgotten.
"We want to see a phased plan to make all workplaces and enclosed public places smoke-free - with no exemptions - and we call on the Government to show when and how they will do this."
Local Government Association public health spokesman David Rogers said: "Smoke-free public places will only become a reality if the regulations are clearly understood by both the public and businesses alike.
"It is pleasing to see the Government has avoided introducing any costly or confusing exemptions that would have made it extremely difficult to make this legislation work. Local authorities must now be given sufficient resources to enforce the ban and make it a success."
Ian Willmore, a spokesman for anti-smoking pressure group Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), said: "We are very pleased that juvenile offender institutions and mental health facilities that are not long-stay will be smoke-free, but we want to see the Government commit to a timetable to move all mental health units and prisons to smoke-free status."
'Complications'
The Conservatives also criticised the consultation as "riddled with complications".
Shadow Health Minister Andrew Murrison said: "It will leave local councils, employers and managers none the wiser about the cost and enforcement of the proposed legislation.
"Typically the Government has tipped the balance in favour of `Big Brother' style enforcement, such as the 'hotline' for people to report incidences of failure to comply.
"Unless more clarity is provided, organisations will face huge bills from lawyers employed to ensure compliance."
DO you support the governments' proposals on banning public smoking? Have your say.
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 23 and replies | View All
Karen, Bolton (18/07/2006 at 13:24)
Bill Hicks, Visiting Manchester (18/07/2006 at 14:30)
Anon, Ontario, Canada (18/07/2006 at 16:17)
etc.
Smoking is allowed in designated outside areas such as "suitable" restaurant/bar patios providing such areas are not covered or partly covered by any type of roof. (No sides either.)There are inpectors on patrol enforcing the rules and handing out fines. There's talk of putting smoking areas on rooftops to get round the rules.
The bottom line is smokers will either
get wet or sweat/freeze their
a**e's off depending on the weather. What a shame!!
Colin Grainger, Banff, Scotland (19/07/2006 at 09:14)
This law, baseless in science, is divisive, illogical and unfair. It is a bad law, and in time, will wither and die.
I pray daily for it's early death.
Anthony, Accrington,Lancashire (19/07/2006 at 10:05)
Mike Robson, Newcastle (19/07/2006 at 13:09)
Mike(Non smoker)
Bruce Fox, Indianapolis, IN, USA (19/07/2006 at 13:47)
I live alone and work at home. I eat, sleep, and drink at home also.
As the world is taken over by Disney I prefer to live in reality.
Charles, london (19/07/2006 at 14:54)
passive smoking is based on "cod" science!! Antis just get a life!!!!
let the bar owner decide the smoking policy!!
if the workers dont like it they should seek work elsewhere!!
ASh have brainwashed people with their propaganda!!
Belinda, Edinburgh (19/07/2006 at 15:08)
Karl, Manchester (19/07/2006 at 15:23)
ChrisB, Cornwall (19/07/2006 at 15:28)
Now we're told if we want to go out we should sit in a shed that even the RSPCA would condemn.
Roll on another trip to Spain where commonsense has prevailed.
Colin Grainger, Banff, Scotland (19/07/2006 at 17:28)
I have been to plenty of pubs since March. None of them happen to be in Scotland. I travel regularly to the Netherlands and guess what? They have ventilation and it works. I travel regularly to South Africa and guess what? They have ventilation and it works. I travel regularly to Botswana and guess what? They have ventilation and it works.
You, my friend, are thinking with your nose. The smell can be dealt with. Ventilation is the only answer to this ridiculous situation. Your cult do not understand this. For shame.
When they come for something legal you enjoy, dont ask for my help.
Mandy Vincent, cambridgeshire (19/07/2006 at 18:01)
This ban is based on lies and propoganda. That is how easy Hitler was followed. I have only just understood how.
Only the stupid people who think bans will make people give up will make them want to smoke more.
Blurchy, Manchester (19/07/2006 at 18:04)
maybe the government could make some car shelters and they can all rev up in there yes thats ridiculous just like the smoking law
Mandy Vincent, cambridgeshire (19/07/2006 at 20:22)
smokers to the left-chubbies to the right-please let those perfect folk through.
UHMM let me think now who else wanted perfection.
They have more tolerance than us know, well that says it all really
Colin W, Stockholm (20/07/2006 at 05:32)
Morag, Gorton (20/07/2006 at 08:55)
Karl, Manchester (20/07/2006 at 11:07)
I'm not thinking with my nose: I'm thinking using the research the smoking-related cancer lab I work in generates. I deal in facts, not hysteria and chemically-induced irrationality.
I see research papers on the effects of second-hand smoke (even in 'ventilated' bars) and guess what? The research says it damages the health of non-smokers - whether you can smell it or not.
If you love conditions so much abroad, perhaps you should consider moving there permanently where your needs are obviously being met.
And 'cult? That's a funny term for professors of oncology!
F, Manchester (20/07/2006 at 16:16)
If that makes me tragic, then fair enough, but I enjoy smoking and also enjoyed the company of other smokers during that time.
It was reported that after the smoking ban, bars in the city took 1/3 less revenue partly due to the fact that when people went to a bar they ended up having a better time outside with their cigarettes and friends, in fact it was the norm to see the patios & beer gardens full & the inside bars empty even during the winter months.
If people really think that a non-smoking ban will deter people, I look forward to seeing non-smokers realising they must drink alone inside or join their smoking friends outside... what a conundrum for them!
A further point to note.... as i experienced when the ban was introduced, as many pubs, bars, workplaces didn't have patios or outdoor smoking areas, this forced many smokers to simply stand out on the pavement late at night in huddles.... I'll be interested when all the miserable non-smokers begin moaning that they feel intimidated by having to avoid large groups of people with their hoods up (due to the rain) smoking in the street by walking in the road ha ha ha!
This ban will bite you on the rear you petty petty fools!
Donal McCarthy, Cork, Ireland (22/07/2006 at 17:02)
Recent research [here on these pages and elsewhere] shows that those whose livelihoods depend on anti-tobacco research are even more bigoted than, well, the other anti-smoker bigots.
Can't say fairer than that, now can we, Karl.
Karl, Manchester (25/07/2006 at 15:34)
Colin W, Stockholm (26/07/2006 at 13:20)
David, Altrincham (06/08/2006 at 20:57)