In tobacco veritas

In tobacco veritas
Let's set a match to the smoking ban before it completely destroys social life in Britain

Five months on from the imposition of the draconian ban on smoking in public places in England, its negative effects are becoming more and more apparent.

For the pub and entertainment business the ban, which followed similar ones in Scotland and Wales, has proved a disaster. Last week, Enterprise Inns, the UK's second-largest pub group, warned of "closures across the industry". It has put 96 of its 2,700 pubs up for sale.

And in Wales, where a ban on smoking was introduced in April, pubs have lost an estimated 20% of their trade.

Bingo halls and working men's clubs are also feeling the pinch. In Scotland, more than 20 bingo halls have already closed since the ban was introduced; scores more are under threat of closure across Britain. Mick McGlasham, an official with the Club and Institute Union (CIU), which runs 228 working men's clubs, predicts the ban will be "the last straw" that forces clubs to close.

But the smoking bans are wrong not just because they are putting people out of jobs and adversely affecting the economy. The main objection to the anti-smoking legislation is the way it is destroying social life in Britain.

Britain's estimated 12 million smokers have a choice: they go out to a pub or club and then have to stand outside, like social outcasts, on a cold and often wet pavement every time they fancy a smoke; or they simply stay at home. Unsurprisingly, millions are opting for the latter.

It's hard to escape the conclusion of Jemma Freeman, the managing director of cigar importers Hunters and Frankau and a keen cigar smoker herself, that the government does not really want us to meet in public places any more, and would much rather we all stayed home and vegetated in front of the television instead.

Smoking is, first and foremost, a social activity. When I moved to Hungary, in the mid-1990s, the custom was still for everyone to put their packets of cigarettes on the table in the bar/cafe so that people could help themselves to whatever they wanted to smoke. It was considered the height of bad manners not to offer your tobacco around. Offering a cigarette, or a light, was a great ice-breaker, and the way in which many a friendship was forged.

It is no coincidence that in the decades in Britain during which smoking was at its peak - the 1940s and 1950s, when around 80% of the population smoked - social cohesion was also at its strongest; and no coincidence either that the decline of smoking in Britain has coincided with the atomisation of our society.

As well as destroying social life, the smoking ban also marks, as the artist David Hockney has pointed out, the death of bohemia in Britain. Bohemia without smoke simply isn't bohemia. Those looking to escape this dull, sanitised, McDonald's-ised world for a while now have to head to Paris or Brussels: the French House, in Soho, will sadly no longer suffice.

The great tragedy about the ban is that a compromise solution, one that would have respected the rights of smokers and nonsmokers alike, could so easily have been found. Instead of following the example of Ireland, which imposed a blanket ban, why couldn't we have adopted the measures favoured by our neighbours on the continent? I recently spent a week in Belgium, where smoking is allowed in all pubs, cafes and bars, but not in enclosed public spaces, such as railway stations, or establishments that sell food, unless the proprietor can provide a separate, confined smoking area. It's a solution everyone I spoke to - smokers and nonsmokers - seemed perfectly happy with.

But instead of attempting to reach a compromise, the government instead opted for an all-encompassing ban more in line with Nazi Germany (which, unsurprisingly, was the first country in the world to introduce restrictions on smoking in public) than with a supposedly liberal, democratic European nation.

It's good to report, though, that the fightback against the ban has started. A new group that aims to campaign for exemptions from the ban for pubs, clubs and bars is being formed. Expect to hear a lot more about it in the new year.

This is an issue that concerns not just smokers but everyone who wants to live in a society where compromise rules, rather than intolerance.

Let us hope that by this time next year, common sense will rule again, and Britons will once more be able to light up their cigarettes, pipes and cigars in pubs and cafes without riot police the building being surrounding the building.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/neil_clark/2007/11/its_time_to_stub_out_the_smoki.html
http://www.neilclark66.blogspot.com/

Smoking ban is killing pubs, says landlord

Smoking ban is killing pubs, says landlord

A PUB landlord has sounded the death knell for the traditional English pub after his takings have dropped by almost 30 per cent since the smoking ban started.
David Church, who runs the Two Brewers on Olney High Street, said his takings have dipped since the cold weather began in the middle of October, after a summer that seemed relatively unaffected by the smoking ban.

"Trade dropped marginally in the summer after the smoking ban started," said David.

"But because the weather wasn't great and there wasn't much sport on I can't say whether this small drop was simply down the the smoking ban.

"Since the weather has turned cold, however, I have really noticed a big drop in takings. I think this is because smokers would rather stay at home to have a cigarette with their drink than come to the pub and have to sit out in the cold and the rain."

David, aged 47, is a non-smoker who has worked the pub industry since he was in his teens. He has been the landlord of the Two Brewers for 10 years and believes the smoking ban has signalled the end of the typical English country pub.

"It's normally really busy
here at the weekends, but just last Friday the whole bar was empty because everyone was out the back smoking. That means anyone walking past would look in and think it was really quiet and dull inside and could be put off from coming in.

"We are being pro-active about the ban by offering a really comfortable smoking area and adding more to our menu, along with special events like wine-tasting and comedy nights. But all of this means our regular custom will completely change.

"I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of pubs close after what appears to be a difficult winter ahead. The government has completely killed the English pub."
http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/Smoking-ban-is-killing-pubs.3535449.jp

Smoking ban threat to bingo hall

Smoking ban threat to bingo hall
FLEETWOOD'S long-established bingo hall is in danger of closing down – and the indoor smoking ban is being blamed.
The operators of the Top Ten Bingo in Poulton Road say the Government ban, which started on July 1, had an immediate effect – but things are getting worse with the colder weather.
The ban means smokers who once enjoyed a cigarette in the hall must now go out into the cold – and many customers just don't want to do it.
Manager Craig Lambert is optimistic he can turn things around, but he admits the bingo hall will be in danger of closing down if the trendcannot be halted.
He said that in November last year the hall was seeing 1,500 customers through the door a week - now it is down to an average of 900.
Mr Lambert said: "The Government has been very inflexible with the law. In some Continental countries, bar managers can pay a little extra to allow smoking at the bar, but not here.
"Smokers are being treated like lepers and many pubs will also feel the affects this winter."
After the original Fleetwood Pier set-up closed, the bingo hall still known as 'Barneys' became the town's only bingo operation.
Mr Lambert said that if the Top Ten did close, it would have a devastating social effect on its customers, many of whom are older, single ladies.
He said: "Bingo offers them a chance to get out and talk to people – without it many of them will become more isolated."
Housed in the former Victoria cinema, the bingo hall opened in 1967.
http://www.fleetwoodtoday.co.uk/fleetwood/Smoking-ban-threat-to-bingo.3534522.jp

Blackpool football fans fined

Blackpool football fans fined
Six Blackpool supporters who ignored the ban at the Bloomfield Road Stadium on Tuesday night were caught by undercover trading standars officers,whilst smoking during the game against Norwich.
The club has stated that the undercover operations will carry on and if needed they will suspend season tickets and introduce bans from the ground
http://www.blackpoolfc.premiumtv.co.uk

Smoking ban has stubbed out pub, say regulars

Smoking ban has stubbed out pub, say regulars
By Richard Woolley
REGULARS at a pub which is to close this week claim it has become the Dales' first victim of the smoking ban.
The Malt Shovel Inn at Wirksworth Moor is closing its doors at the weekend, and saddened punters say it will leave a void in the community.

Drinkers at the pub said numbers dropped noticeably after the smoking ban was introduced in July, and they fear this sent the pub into a downward spiral.

Martin Miller, a regular of 11 years, said: "The smoking ban has definitely been a large factor.

"Quite a lot of pub attendees tend to be smokers – I would say at the Malt Shovel it was about 30 to 40 per cent.

"When the ban came in the clientele reduced noticeably.

"The pub has a smoking shelter but at this time of year it is not particularly inviting.

"People now have no place to meet, the employees have no jobs and the politically correct can content themselves in victory."

Fellow punter Howard Knot, a pipe smoker of 40 years, said: "I used to go to the Malt Shovel five or six evenings a week just for the social end of it.

"I object very strongly to anybody dictating to me so after the
ban came in we stopped going altogether. Now we go one evening a week.

"It's hard enough for these businesses to make a living out of it before this. The Government can't say pubs are doing as well because they're not."

Licensee of the Malt Shovel, Barbara Brown, told the Mercury the smoking ban had been "a factor" in the closure but declined to comment further.

A spokesperson for the Beer and Pub Association said: "We are getting a mixed picture since the ban was introduced because, while some pubs are doing better, others are facing difficult trading conditions.

"Pubs that are more food based and have been able to invest in better smoking provision are thriving while some others are struggling, which is what we had always warned."
http://www.matlockmercury.co.uk/news/Smoking-ban-has-stubbed-out.3531697.jp

Smoking ban is a killer

Smoking ban is a killer
By Gazette reader

I AM a professional musician of some 30 years, playing in bars and clubs, and have been dismayed by the effect of the smoking ban. Whereas we were promised that the grateful customers would flock to premises providing a smoke-free environment, the reality has been that I have been playing in mostly empty bars, while the few customers left have been shivering outside in the rain and cold.

I have never seen such a collapse in trade, which happened immediately after the ban and has not improved since. This ill thought out law has destroyed social life in this country at a stoke, as people decide to stay at home, guzzling cheap supermarket alcohol and no doubt smoking in front of their children. I have no problem with restrictions on smoking in shops and other public places, but a total ban in pubs, forcing people to sit outside in the wet and freezing cold, while being denied adequate shelter is surely unreasonable.

Most people I know are upset and angry about this ban, and if it is not reversed it will lead to the demise of many premises which have previously been the hub of the community.

Peter F Cooke
http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/letters/lettersroundup/display.var.1862325.0.0.php

Sales of food not benefiting from pub smoking ban

Sales of food not benefiting from pub smoking ban

Pubs serving food are not benefiting from the smoking ban, because people head home for a cigarette, according to a new report.
A report in The Publican found more than half of pub landlords noticed no change in food sales following the ban in July.

Debbie Reilly, the tenant at the Narrow Boat Inn in Weedon, said: "Food sales have stayed the same.

"The only thing we've noticed is that people don't stay in the bar after their meal to have a coffee and a cigarette, they go home, which is decreasing our coffee sales."

The survey found overall sales of food and drink were down in 21 per cent of pubs questioned.

Peter Yates, co-landlord of The Olde Sun in Nether Heyford, said beer sales were slightly down but food sales were the same.

He said: "It's not very good the way it's going. The smoking ban is not helping anyone."

The Britannia Inn in Bedford Road has seen an increase in food sales, but manager Mark Cook said: "Those places serving bar snacks aren't going up and up.

"It's just a better atmosphere to eat in a restaurant and we've seen an increase of around five to 10 per cent."
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Sales-of-food-not-benefiting.3528089.jp

Smoking ban fails to lift food sales

Smoking ban fails to lift food sales
The smoking ban has failed to boost food sales for most pubs according to a recent report.

According to The Publican Food Report 2007, 54 per cent of pubs have seen no change in their food sales since the smoking ban was introduced on 1 July, compared to 33 per cent who said sales have increased.

One fifth of pubs however, found that their overall sales have fallen since the ban was implemented.

The report is the result of more than 300 pubs, which also found that the average customer spends £14.86 on dinner and drink, a penny down on 2006. This contrasts to The Good Pub Guide’s findings, which stated that the price of a pub meal had risen to £20.

John Porter, pub food editor of The Publican, said: “The Good Pub Guide is based on recommendations by readers, so tends to feature special occasion and destination venues, where prices are likely to be higher.

“The pubs we survey are more typical of the real pub market. The results show that as consumers tighten their belts, and after the smoking ban coincided with one of the worst summers ever recorded weather-wise, it’s a tough market out there.”

The Publican

Birmingham Mail readers call for an end to pub smoking ban

Birmingham Mail readers call for an end to pub smoking ban
By Emma Cullwick, Birmingham Mail
BIRMINGHAM Mail readers have voted in their hundreds to call on the Government to lift the controversial ban on smoking in public places.

The Mail reported last week how landlords at pubs and clubs across the city, including Hurst Street and Harborne, fear the ban is wiping Birmingham off the entertainment map.

They say trade is plummeting as smokers opt to smoke at home rather than having to do it in the cold outdoors since the ban was introduced on July 1.

In a special investigation, we revealed how landlords were uniting to lobby the Government to have a re-think on the legislation.

The Mail asked readers whether they believe the ban should be lifted.
Some 69 per cent of readers voted in favour of the ban being abolished and 31 per cent against.
http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/



What can I do to amend the smoking ban?
In several parts of the country,people are running small scale petitions to lobby their MP.
Some areas are targetting Labour MP's who are worried about losing their seat at the next election-especially now the Tories are winning the battle of the polls.
Labour agreed exemptions to the smoking ban before the last election. Under pressure,they will amend this ban.
I suggest wording the petition to apeal to smokers/non smokers and business owners:

"We the undersigned ask for your support to amend the smoking ban.
We don't think it is safe or fair to make elderly/lone women and vulnerable members of society smoke on the street.
Whilst respecting non smokers we also don't think its fair to ask normal smokers to go outside to smoke-smoking is legal.
There should be a compromise that allows exemptions to the ban for small bars with no gardens-which would protect smokers, eliminate noise and litter problems on the street and protect pubs likely to suffer the most from the smoking ban.

We ask you to consider indoor and seperate smoking rooms within pubs that have modern air filtration systems.This would protect non smoking customers and staff."

Ten pubs and clubs in one constituancy,200 signatures each,contact the local press and you have a mini campaign-imagine 50 campaigns across the country-there are already several.

find your MP/MEP/Local councillors
http://www.writetothem.com/

Remember,alot of pub goers are not always internet users.

If you start a campaign,or are thinking of one,let me know and i will bulletin for help and support in your area.

What can I do to amend the smoking ban?

What can I do to amend the smoking ban?
In several parts of the country,people are running small scale petitions to lobby their MP.
Some areas are targetting Labour MP's who are worried about losing their seat at the next election-especially now the Tories are winning the battle of the polls.
Labour agreed exemptions to the smoking ban before the last election. Under pressure,they will amend this ban.
I suggest wording the petition to apeal to smokers/non smokers and business owners:

"We the undersigned ask for your support to amend the smoking ban.
We don't think it is safe or fair to make elderly/lone women and vulnerable members of society smoke on the street.
Whilst respecting non smokers we also don't think its fair to ask normal smokers to go outside to smoke-smoking is legal.
There should be a compromise that allows exemptions to the ban for small bars with no gardens-which would protect smokers, eliminate noise and litter problems on the street and protect pubs likely to suffer the most from the smoking ban.

We ask you to consider indoor and seperate smoking rooms within pubs that have modern air filtration systems.This would protect non smoking customers and staff."

Ten pubs and clubs in one constituancy,200 signatures each,contact the local press and you have a mini campaign-imagine 50 campaigns across the country-there are already several.

find your MP/MEP/Local councillors
http://www.writetothem.com/

Remember,alot of pub goers are not always internet users.

If you start a campaign,or are thinking of one,let me know and i will bulletin for help and support in your area.

Pub's trade is hit by smoking ban

Pub's trade is hit by smoking ban
By Liza-Jane Gillespie
A LANDLORD in Berkeley has warned that the five-month-old smoking ban is killing his business.

Charles Andrews, landlord of the Mariners' Arms in Berkeley, said people were being put off going outside to smoke because of the colder weather.

He said: "I think since the colder weather arrived it is having a big effect.

advertisement
"People are thinking I don't want to go to the pub because if I want to smoke I've got to go outside."

England became smoke-free at the start of July. The law was introduced to protect employees and outlawed smoking in virtually all enclosed public places including pubs, clubs, bars and restaurants.

Mr Andrews, who has owned the Mariners' Arms for four years, said that in the last month he has had to reduce his staffing costs by 20 per cent by reducing hours and not replacing employees who leave.

He said: "I'm extremely worried about the pub. I'm trying to cut costs. If I can't cut my costs enough the pub could be facing an uncertain future."

Mr Andrews said he is trying to attract new customers to his pub with food offers and by providing an outdoor shelter for smokers.

"I've been trying to keep a brave face and be optimistic.

I hoped that the ban might see some more people who don't smoke come to the pub but that hasn't happened.

"With the warmer weather we didn't see a massive change, but now with the colder weather there has been quite a drop in the last month," he added.

Dr Susan Hatton, 59, of Berkeley, who is a retired doctor, is a regular at the Mariners' Arms.

She said: "I think we are in grave danger of losing the pub. I am not against the ban completely. I don't know why we can't have most of the pub smoke free and then just have a smoking room.

"There is an elderly gentleman who smokes a pipe. He has a wife with Alzheimer's, who he cares for, and his one pleasure of the day is to have a pint and his pipe but now he has to go and stand outside in the cold."

The smoking ban has led to an increase in drink-spiking, according to the Roofie Foundation.

The smoking ban has led to an increase in drink-spiking, according to the Roofie Foundation.

The charity, which deals with drink spiking and date rape cases, said the motivation for drink spiking has been theft rather than sexual assault.

The Foundation has received between 200 and 300 calls regarding drink spiking thefts since the smoking ban came into effect on 1 July.

Previously it had not received any calls regarding drink-related thefts.

The ban has meant people are leaving drinks unattended while they go outside to smoke.

"I think one of the motivations behind this current phase of drink spiking is to incapacitate to enable robbery," Roofie's Graham Rhodes told the BBC.

"We are getting more and more reports of people who have been drink-spiked in pubs.

"They have thrown-up, they have been ill – in some cases passed out – and when they have woken up, their mobile phone is gone, credit cards, cash, anything they can get their hands on."
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=54146

Smoke ban has not boosted sales for most pubs

Pubs fighting for food share
26 November, 2007
By John Porter
Smoke ban has not boosted sales for most pubs, says The Publican Food Report 2007

The ban on smoking in UK pubs and bars has not delivered the predicted boom in people eating out at their local, according to exclusive new research for The Publican.

But the battle for a share of consumers’ dwindling disposable income means that a meal at the pub is better value than ever.

More than half of pubs, 54 per cent, said they had seen no change in their food sales since the smoking ban was introduced, compared to just 33 per cent who said food sales had increased. One fifth of pubs, 21 per cent, said their overall sales, including food and drink, have fallen since smokers were consigned to the great outdoors.

The survey of more than 300 pubs carried out for The Publican Food Report 2007 found that the average customer spend on food and drink at dinner is £14.86 – a penny down on the 2006 figure.

The cautious note sounded in The Food Report contrasts with a claim by the Good Pub Guide last month that the price of a pub meal had risen to £20 a time for two courses plus a glass of wine.

John Porter, Pub Food Editor of The Publican, said: “The Good Pub Guide is based on recommendations by readers, so tends to feature special occasion and destination venues, where prices are likely to be higher.

“The pubs we survey are far more typical of the ‘real’ pub market. The results show that as consumers tighten their belts, and after the smoking ban coincided with one of the worst summer ever recorded weather-wise, it’s a tough market out there.

“However, for customers’ that means that a meal at the pub is excellent value.”

The survey found that soup is the best selling pub starter, and meat dishes and pies the most popular main course. A traditional fruit pie or crumble is pub customers favourite dessert.

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=57827

Council urged to ban pub smoking shelter

Council urged to ban pub smoking shelter
By Echo Reporter
COUNCILLORS are being urged to take action over what is said to be a 'rudimentary' smoking shelter put up in the grounds of a historic listed Purbeck pub.

The Kings Arms in the High Street at Langton Matravers near Swanage has not had any district council approval to put up the wooden-framed plastic sheeting-roofed structure.

Now councillors on Purbeck's planning board will on Thursday be considering a report which urges the initiation of enforcement action on conservation grounds.

advertisement
The pub is on the south side of the main road running through the Purbeck village.

Councillors are to be told that the smoking shelter, which is in the south-west corner of the grounds, cannot be seen from the highway or from a nearby public footpath.

There is a 2m high stone wall running around the pub's eastern and southern boundaries.

The planning board is being recommended to approve a notice demanding the complete removal of the shelter within three months.

The pub, which is mainly in white-painted brickwork, was listed as grade two in late 1984 and is within the village's conservation area.

Councillors are being told that a complaint came in to the council in September and the pub's owner had been told that the smoking shelter had gone up in breach of planning control.

The report says: "The structure was a rudimentary shelter constructed with a wooden frame and plastic roof which it is understood had been erected in order to provide patrons with a smoking shelter following the coming into force of the Health Act 2006 and the Smokefree England regulations made thereunder."

The councillors are being told that despite informal discussions the pub's owner had not been able to come up with any solution which 'would satisfactorily address the concerns of the local planning authority in respect of the structure due to its unsympathetic appearance' in relation to the listed pub and its impact on that building.

Council officers claim that as it is now the shelter is 'incongruous' and 'detrimental to the visual amenity of the conservation area'.

They maintain that putting up such a shelter in the grounds of a pub needs planning permission.

And they argue that, while accepting the pub is used by residents and tourists, a smoking shelter could have been built in materials in sympathy with the stone boundary wall or the pub itself.
http://www.thisisdorset.net/display.var.1857090.0.council_urged_to_ban_pub_smoking_shelter.php

SALMOND VOICES SUPPORT FOR BINGO INDUSTRY IN ROW OVER TAX

SALMOND VOICES SUPPORT FOR BINGO INDUSTRY IN ROW OVER TAX
The first minister was drafted in to lift some of the gloom hanging over Scottish bingo halls yesterday as taxation and the effects of the smoking ban cast a dark cloud over the game.

Alex Salmond pledged his support to fight double taxation in the industry after calling a game of bingo at Fraserburgh.
Current taxation rules require the bingo industry to pay gross profits tax and VAT on participation fees. Other gaming industries are only subjected to gross profits tax.

Meeting players and staff at Carlton Bingo on Mid Street, Mr Salmond called for an end to the discrimination and a fair deal for bingo.

The Banff and Buchan MP said: "We need to bring an end to this taxation disparity between bingo and other gaming industries.

"I think the most devastating example is that cash bingo gets taxed at 27% whereas a casino gets taxed at 15%, and I don't understand how you can have a situation where a good, working-class innocent pastime like bingo playing gets taxed more than casinos, which clearly are more controversial and problematic.

"The disparity seems unfair and I will be pressing Alistair Darling to do something about it in the Budget. I want him to bring the taxation on bingo halls in line with other forms of entertainment."

Carlton Bingo operations director Brian King said the game in Scotland had faced tough times over the last 18 months since the smoking ban was introduced.

He added that double taxation was another major issue.

"We are calling for bingo to be on an equal footing with other gaming sectors and I am delighted that the first minister has lent his support to this issue," he said.

Nurse banned over mistakes

Nurse banned over mistakes
A NURSE who told a patient smoking was not bad for them has been banned from working for at least 18 months.

Jan Langham also made up instructions on a prescription and tried to feed a patient toast when they were not eating solids, the Nursing and Midwifery Council heard.

The errors were made at Clacton Hospital, Essex, in 2005 and 2006.

Langham, in her 60s, quit and moved to Turkey but the NMC still banned her “because of the serious nature of some of the allegations”.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article503091.ece

British pint is under threat, say city landlords

British pint is under threat, say city landlords
LANDLORDS from Peterborough pubs have echoed national concerns that beers sale are at their lowest since the 1930s.
The humble pint used to be the backbone of the local pub, it was what they were all about.

But seven million fewer pints per day are now being sold in Britain than in 1979 – the beer market's peak – a drop of 22 per cent.

Peterborough has a proud link with the traditional pint – and the city's annual real ale festival attracts thousands of people each summer who are keen to hear it for the beer.

The slump has been blamed on a number of factors, including changing tastes, a shift in drinking culture, health reasons and cheap supermarket booze deals.

Landlord at the Palmerston Arms, in Oundle Road, Woodston, Dave McLennan, agreed the number of pints being supped had fallen – but said tradition wouldn't fade that easily.

He said: "The way I look at it, going to the pub is part of everyday social life. We have a lot of regulars who have come in for years.

"But the term regular has changed, 20 years ago it meant someone who would come in five or six days a week, now it is more like two or three.

"Communities are being moved from town centres and into big shopping complexes. Shops, post offices and butchers are all suffering, and now it seems pubs are being hit too.

"There is a shift towards drinking wine, as it is a more consistent drink, you don't get the worry of having a 'bad pint'.

"And supermarkets sell cheaper alcohol. People may drink at home more, but they miss out on the pub atmosphere."

The British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) added that the smoking ban has had an effect, with a seven per cent drop in pub beer sales this year alone.

The BBPA is calling for the Government to put a freeze on beer duty to prevent the price of a pint from spiralling above £3 – a move which is backedby the Campaign for Real Ale (Camra).

CAMRA Peterborough and District spokesman, Robert Barnes, added: "The smoking ban has had an impact, but hopefully things will get back to normal when people get used to it.

"A lot of village pubs are now relying on food sales to keep their businesses going, this is evidence that beer sales are falling."

Landlord of the Black Horse, in Nassington, near Oundle, David Hydon, said: "There are a number of issues which is affecting beer sales. I concentrate on food to keep the business going.

"Also a lot of people living in villages are commuters, so they don't tend to come to the pub during the week, but open a bottle of wine at home, which was unheard of a few years ago."

But John Tyler (63), who was enjoying a lunchtime pint in the Drapers Arms, in Cowgate, Peterborough said: "What's the enjoyment of drinking a warm can of beer at home.
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/British-pint-is-under-threat.3511250.jp

HAVE WE GIVEN UP ON GIVING UP?

HAVE WE GIVEN UP ON GIVING UP?
Be the first reader to comment on this story

The number of people giving up fags since the smoking ban was introduced is lower than expected, latest figures suggest.

Statistics reveal a record high number of people gave up smoking in Lincolnshire ahead of the ban on smoking in public places.

A total of 1,078 people sought NHS services to quit the habit between April and June this year.

But since then, around 60 fewer people than expected have given up each month.

Now health bosses are hoping the wintry weather will encourage more people to quit.

Gary Burroughs from Lincolnshire's NHS-funded Phoenix Stop Smoking service said: "I think we are still reaping the rewards of the ban.

"It's a gradual process and with it getting colder people are going to be less tempted to stand outside pubs or the workplace for a cigarette.

"I am expecting to see a higher number of quitters in our results for October to December than usual.

"You can notice it out of the window from our office.

"In the summer there were lots of people standing around smoking.

"But over the last few weeks there's been nobody."

Mr Burroughs said last month's change in the law preventing teenagers under the age of 18 from buying tobacco could only encourage non-smoking.

A new rule in the Highway Code stating that drivers smoking would be charged if it caused them to be distracted should also help.

Health improvement principal at Lincolnshire PCT, Brian Porter, said a record amount has been invested in the Phoenix service - £1m in the county - this financial year.

There are now 70 GP practices in the county offering the Phoenix service which employs 10 full-time staff.

"Summer is always the quietest time of year for us with the numbers peaking at new year and in March for No Smoking Day," he said.

"It is impossible to predict human behaviour that accurately and all we can do is make an estimate.

"But the high numbers of people quitting ahead of the smoking ban was definitely not a flash in the pan."

Duty manager at Lincoln's So Luxe bar, Rob Drake (25), said over the past few weeks it had become rarer to see people standing by the Brayford smoking.

"It is becoming less attractive to stand outside in the freezing cold," he added.
http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/

Bingo chief calls for scrapping of VAT

Bingo chief calls for scrapping of VAT
By Lucy Warwick-Ching
November 22 2007 02:00

Bingo profits have gone up in smoke following the cigarette ban and Simon Hannah, chief executive of Riva Gaming, is warning that 100 bingo clubs could close within six months.

The industry - 600 clubs across the UK - is under heavy pressure and last month Rank warned on profits as customers stayed away because of the smoking ban. Top Ten Holdings produced more bad news for the industry yesterday and it is clear that Riva Gaming will also be hit.

"Against the background of the smoking ban, the reclassification of slot machines and the ever- increasing licensing costs imposed by the authorities, bingo also suffers from double taxation," said Mr Hannah.

"Where betting shops and casinos pay only 15 per cent gross profit tax, we must also pay 17.5 per cent VAT on our bingo income, putting us at a significant commercial disadvantage", he added.

Mr Hannah, alongside the rest of the bingo industry, wants VAT on bingo profits to be scrapped.

The Bingo Association is meeting this week with the government to discuss the possibilities for a restructuring of the tax.

"We would like a level playing field so we can compete with the bookmakers. Bingo is the only gaming sector to pay VAT as well as gross profit tax," said Mr Hannah.

In the 1960s, when bingo was at its most popular, there was more than 1,500 clubs. In 2006, that number was about 650. Since then 50 have closed with another 100 in jeopardy. "This is currently not an attractive space in which to operate," says Mark Brumby, analyst at Blue Oar Securities.

"However, the government - arguably - does not want the whole of the bingo industry to shut down - and it just might. Bingo provides the only social interaction for some elements of society and a legislative climb-down is not out of the question".
FT.com

French smokers, tobacco sellers protest ban on lighting up in cafes

French smokers, tobacco sellers protest ban on lighting up in cafes
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PARIS - Thousands of fuming Frenchmen marched through the streets of Paris Wednesday.
But they weren't striking transportation workers or disgruntled civil servants. The protesters - some 10,000 of them - were mainly tobacco sellers protesting an upcoming Jan. 1 ban on smoking in French cafes.

Some 10,000 protesters wearing Day-Glo vests marched from the Montparnasse train station to the National Assembly to press for more flexibility in the anti-smoking measure.

The tobacco sellers want the rules modified to permit smoking in establishments with special ventilation systems.

The demonstration is one of a handful of protests this month against reforms by President Nicolas Sarkozy aimed at modernizing France. The smoking ban, however, was adopted before Sarkozy took office in May.

The tobacconists, joined by members of cigar clubs and teahouse owners, insist that changes they are seeking would respect the spirit of the decree.

Rene Le Pape, president of the Confederation of Tobacco Sellers, came away from a Tuesday meeting with Health Minister Roselyne Bachelot disappointed and angry, saying there was a "total blockage."

Tobacconists fear they will lose clients unable to have a cigarette with their coffee and will lose money on other products typically sold in "cafes tabacs" - cafes where cigarettes can be bought.

Those opposed to the ban also fear for the survival of cafes in rural areas where they are often the only community gathering spot.

French authorities have been trying to wean the country off cigarettes in increments for years.

A Feb. 1 ban on lighting up in workplaces, schools, airports, hospitals and other "closed and covered" public places like train stations forced France's smokers outdoors - but not out of cafes.

Birmingham pub bosses say smoking ban is killing business

Birmingham pub bosses say smoking ban is killing business
Nov 21 2007

Worried pub landlords today claimed Birmingham was at risk of being "wiped off" the entertainment map as revellers turn their backs on the city's pubs, clubs and bars. Some blame the demise on the smoking ban, others claim high rents are forcing businesses out. Birmingham Mail Chief Reporter EMMA CULLWICK investigates.

WHEN Debbie Pardoe converted her tanning salon into a bar in Birmingham's Gay Village five years ago, business boomed and she declared it the best decision she had ever made.

But now Debbie says trade at Equator, in Hurst Street, is diminishing and she's blaming it on the smoking ban introduced in England on July 1.

"The whole of the Gay Village is struggling," she said.

"The area is really quiet, it's like someone killed off Birmingham and wiped it off the map. We're starting to think it must be because of the smoking ban.

"I'm breaking even and paying my bills but who knows how bad it will get as the winter sets in."

She said the real impact of the smoking ban has not been reported because pubs and clubs fear painting an honest picture puts even more revellers off.

"The Government said that the ban would encourage more non-smokers to go out, but I haven't found that's the case at all," added Ms Pardoe, who is a non-smoker.

"The Government really needs to have a re-think on the ban, it's about time people stood up and started fighting against it."

She said the city council should offer financial help to bars facing big outlays to create outdoor areas for smokers.

Andy King, owner of The Fox, in the Gay Village's Lower Essex Street, added: "The ban has killed the atmosphere of many pubs. My beer garden could be packed out while there's nobody inside the pub.

"I'm not a smoker but I think we should be able to decide if we are a smoking or non-smoking pub, then it's down to the customers to decide where they go."

Pat Lilly, owner of Angels in Hurst Street, added: "Instead of going out, friends take it in turns to go around each other's houses where they won't be told that they can't smoke."

Martyn Gittins, a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator in Harborne, said the smoking ban was also hitting pubs along the village's High Street.

"I've being speaking to landlords in Harborne and many have expressed worries about how the smoking ban is hitting trade," he said.

"Four pubs have already closed in the area since the ban was introduced and it's only a matter of time before more follow. I'm not a smoker but I can see how the ban is having a detrimental effect. Bad laws generate bad outcomes."

Paul Hooper, the Department of Health's tobacco policy manager for the West Midlands, said: "I think to blame the new law for a lack of trade is a bit unfair but it could be true in some places.

"Smoking is particularly prevalent amongst the gay community, but several projects have been working with that community to try and help those who want to give up. The law's about protecting health."


Birmingham mail

Dangers of second hand smoke exaggerated, claims new study

Dangers of second hand smoke exaggerated, claims new study

November 21, 2007 11:17 IST
The perils associated with passive smoking have often been cited as reasons to seek a complete ban on smoking in public places, but a new study claims that the dangers of second hand smoke have been exaggerated.

In a new study, long time American anti-tobacco activist and physician Dr Michael Siegal has expressed grave concern over the 'obfuscation of facts' about second-hand smoke.

"The inaccuracies lie in overstating the effect of a single, transient exposure to second hand smoke-- a claim which cannot be validated by any scientific evidence," he says.

Siegal contends that only repeated exposure to second hand smoke is likely to increase the risk of a heart attack for a non-smoker.

"As far as the actual possibility of causing a heart attack is concerned, it is all the more unlikely. For that matter, even chronic exposure to second-hand smoke cannot cause a heart attack in a healthy non-smoker," he said.

Drawing parallels between eating a single fatty meal and being exposed to second hand smoke for 20-30 minutes, he said, "The 30 and 20 minute claims were based on studies that observed merely changes in the heart's functioning."

Siegal goes on to explain how all cardiac risks posed by exposure to second-hand smoke are in fact, reversible, that is a little while after the non-smoker is removed from the smoking environment, the heart resumes its prior state of functioning.

Siegal says that the argument that second-hand smoke "can raise a non-smoker's risk of suffering a fatal heart attack to that of a smoker" seems unfounded since only people with a history of severe coronary disease or asthma are likely to suffer any serious damage from such a transient exposure to second-hand smoke.

According to experts back home, however, whatever be the proven or non-proven basis of such arguments, smoking in public places should be avoided at any cost.

"No argument should deter me from not smoking in front of my family and co-workers," said Dr Ravi Kasliwal, senior cardiologist with the Indraprastha Apollo Hospital.

Growing evidence about the health risks of passive smoking has prompted many countries to ban smoking in public areas.
http://ia.rediff.com/news/2007/nov/21smoke.htm

Police target motorists who smoke

Police target motorists who smoke
• Police 'on look-out' for drivers who smoke
• £60 on-the-spot fine; other charges possible
• Smoking called 'distraction' in new Highway Code

Police are targeting motorists who smoke while driving to try to reduce accidents.

The acting deputy chief constable of Merseyside Police, Bernard Lawson, has told his officers that they will be expected to be 'on the look-out' for drivers who smoke.

Smoking is now mentioned in the recently revised version of the Highway Code as a dangerous distraction.

It is up to the discretion of police officers how the reference is implemented, according to the Department for Transport (DfT), but consequences could be serious.

A £60 on-the-spot fine is possible if motorists are caught, but if the driver was deemed to be not in proper control of his car, he could face prosecution for driving without due care and attention of for failing to control his vehicle.

The reference in the Highway Code was added after evidence showed that smoking at the wheel had contributed to crashes, the DfT said
http://www.whatcar.com/news-article.aspx?NA=229243

Pub closures in wake of smoking ban "inevitable", says Enterprise boss

Pub closures in wake of smoking ban "inevitable", says Enterprise boss
20 November, 2007
By Hamish Champ
Ted Tuppen warns that lower quality wet-led pubs will suffer

Enterprise Inns chief executive Ted Tuppen said while most of his group’s pubs were coping with the smoking ban, closures across the industry in the coming months were inevitable.

“The majority of our 7,700-plus estate is now well positioned to manage the risks and opportunities that the ban has created, although we envisage that the ban will lead to a number of pub closures across the industry, particularly amongst lower quality wet-led outlets,” he said.

Announcing Enterprise’s annual results today, which saw turnover down 5.3 per cent at £921m and pre-tax pre-exceptional profits down 4.7 per cent at £301m, Tuppen said the operator had worked closely with its licensees “to create effective smoking solutions, sometimes through investment and always with encouragement, advice and support”.

Average pub EBITDA had risen 6.2 per cent to £68,200. “Some pubs will have done really well, and others will have done badly,” Tuppen said.

Prompted by the ban, food sales across the Enterprise estate had risen by 13 per cent during the year, with such sales accounting “at least” 20 per cent of average pub turnover.

However Tuppen warned against chasing food sales for the sake of it.

“With standards of pub food constantly improving, there is a risk that the market place for 'value for money' food may become overcrowded, so our advice to licensees tends towards 'do it really well or not at all', focusing above all on the key strengths of each individual pub, and always trying to make sure that their pub is the best in each locality.

“The coming year will be difficult for some pubs and we remain cautious about the next six to nine months,” said Tuppen, who noted that 96 Enterprise pubs had been identified for sale as alternative use.

“However, we are confident of a positive outcome as the smoking ban becomes an accepted part of pub-going and licensees and customers alike enjoy the benefits of the more pleasant, healthier, smoke free regime.”

Issues such as the poor summer had hit pubs, and Tuppen paid tribute to those licensee who had “rolled up their sleeves and got on with sorting out and reopening their pubs”.

Meanwhile shaky consumer confidence was affecting sentiment going forward.


“Consumer confidence is a real issue going forward. It is difficult to tell how things like price increases will impact on consumer behaviour over the next year, but caution would seem to be the watchword,” he said.

Tuppen meanwhile called on supermarkets to play their part in responsible alcohol retailing.

“One must question the pricing policies of the major supermarkets and some other off trade outlets which sell alcohol, which is generally consumed in an unregulated environment, at very low prices.

“Not only do they, on occasion, sell alcohol at prices below cost but they have cheap alcohol at the heart of promotions policies, particularly in the run up to Christmas.

“When it comes to the important issue of tackling irresponsible drinking, it is up to all stakeholders to face up to their share of responsibility.”

Tuppen meanwhile said Enterprise’s discussions with the tax authorities concerning the possibility of becoming a real estate investment trust were “ongoing
http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=57741&c=1

Howitt has premises licence revoked

Howitt has premises licence revoked
19 November, 2007

By James Wilmore

Blackpool smoke ban rebel has 21 days to appeal decision on Delboy's Sports Bar

Smoke ban rebel Hamish Howitt today had his premises licence revoked by Blackpool Council.

The council’s licensing panel revoked the licence on Howitt's Delboy's Sports Bar on the basis that three of the four licensing objectives had not been upheld. These were: prevention of crime and disorder; protection of children from harm, and protection of public safety.

A spokesperson for Blackpool Council added: “It was noted during the review that the premises had breaches of health and safety law and license conditions, including the lack of a doorman and lack of membership to Pubwatch.

“A proven underage sale was also brought to the attention of the panel.”


Howitt was earlier this month fined £500 and ordered to pay £2,000 costs and a £15 victim surcharge after pleading guilty to 12 offences of allowing smoking on his premises. He became the first licensee to be prosecuted for flouting the ban.

He is due back at Blackpool magistrates court on Wednesday after being issued with a summons for allegedly flouting the ban again.

The council spokesperson added: “Some weight was given to the failure to comply with the Health Act 2006, insofar it was a breach of the licensing objective to prevent crime and disorder.”

Howitt has 21 days to lodge an appeal with the magistrate's court, and, if appealed, the panel's decision will not come into effect unless the appeal is dismissed by the court.

He revealed last month that he is selling his bars, but will continue to fight the ban.
http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?storycode=57734

Lemmy,motorhead,flouts ban

MOTORHEAD frontman LEMMY is facing a $100 (GBP50) fine after openly flouting a smoking ban at a concert in the U.K. The heavy metal legend - real name Ian Fraser Kilmister - was playing a gig at Hallam Arena in Sheffield, England on 6 November (07) when he lit a cigarette on stage, breaking the new law which came into force on 1 July (07), banning smoking in all enclosed public places. A British police spokesman says, "Other venues on the tour will be notified and appropriate action may be taken should any further incidents take place."
http://www.contactmusic.com/

Smoking ban and summer rain hits Enterprise profits

Smoking ban and summer rain hits Enterprise profits
Nov 19 2007
Solihull-based Enterprise Inns - the UK's second largest pubs group with more than 7,000 outlets - is tomorrow expected to unveil a five per cent fall in full-year profits following the impact of smoking bans and the poor summer weather.

Analysts are looking for pre-tax profits of around £300 million in the year to September 30.

After an initial "honeymoon" period of the ban with new customers venturing into pubs - reflected in a reasonably encouraging trading update in September - investors will be looking for indications on the current state of trading as winter approaches.

Blue Oar analyst Mark Brumby said: "November and the first frosts of the winter may test the resolve of customers,

particularly its smokers. Add to that the possibility that the consumer is slowing and trading may be about to get somewhat more challenging."

Another feature of results is likely to be any update on the group's potential plans to take on tax-efficient real estate investment trust (REIT) status and unlock cash for shareholders.

The recent credit crunch prompted it to postpone plans to raise £750 million of additional debt by the end of 2007, although the group has continued with its share buy-back programme.

Redditch-based car parts and bicycle retailer Halfords is well set for strong first-half results on Thursday after a bullish trading update at the beginning of October.

The retailer, which sells one in three bikes in the UK, enjoyed like-for-like sales growth of 5.5 per cent in the six months to September 28, at the top end of market expectations.

Halfords, which has its roots in Birmingham, is one of the UK's biggest non-food retailers with 433 stores - and one of the better bets amid more challenging times for the retail sector, according to Charles Stanley analyst Sam Hart.

Mr Hart, who predicts pre-tax profits eight per cent higher at £47 million for Halfords, said: "Halfords is amongst the most defensive UK retailers, given its exposure to the non-discretionary car maintenance market and a relatively low transaction value of around £21."

Halford also looks hard-done by with a 15 per cent fall in its share price since July as demand for its revamped Apollo and Carrera bicycles and in-car equipment such as SatNavs and MP3 players continues to buoy the group, Mr Hart said.

The firm may also choose to update on its three trial stores in the Czech Republic, and signal intentions over further expansion plans in Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, Scottish & Newcastle's trading update tomorrowwill be overshadowed by the increasingly bitter pursuit of the business by European duo Carlsberg and Heineken.

The brewer, parent of Hereford-based Bulmers, accused the pair of trying to buy the business "on the cheap" as it rejected an improved £7.3 billion takeover proposal last week - a move branded "ill-informed and intransigent" by the would-be buyers.

Edinburgh-based Scottish & Newcastle, which also makes Kronenbourg 1664 and John Smith's, faces being broken up if the proposed takeover goes ahead.
http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/

SMOKING BAN

SMOKING BAN
Back in September I completed a 50-mile hike in Shropshire known as Wild Edric's Way, carrying upwards of three stone in my rucksack.

Each evening I pitched my tent on a campsite on the outskirts of each town and village I'd arrived at that day, and after a wash and brush-up, plus a change of clothes, I headed for the nearest real ale pub to quench my thirst.

As usual on these solo expeditions, I set my stall out on the pub table, consisting of hiking diary, map, and postcards to write to relatives and friends.

I have been doing this for 35 years. This year, due to the smoking ban, I had to venture outside for a cigarette with my pint, returning later, chilled, and with my train of thought for writing totally out of the window.

Apart from this infringement of my freedom of choice, I had to leave all my personal belongings on the table; but nothing was stolen.

I remain, therefore, totally opposed to the ban. A lot of the pubs were empty, some devoid of atmosphere, as most of the locals were outside under various shelters. Their tourist season was coming to an end, but their local had been nigh on taken from them. This act is destroying an English institution.

L. EDMONDS
Derby Road, Stapleford
This is nottingham

Smokers face outdoor ban

Smokers face outdoor ban
Brian Lashley
PUB landlords could be prosecuted for allowing customers to smoke OUTSIDE their bars.

Police want to cut down on the large groups of drinkers who gather on pavements next to pubs and clubs after they were banned from lighting up inside.

Officers say the smokers can pose an `environmental hazard' by blocking the pavement, creating too much noise and increasing the potential for trouble.

They suggest landlords allow no more than 15 people to smoke outside their premises at any one time. The latest anti-smoking drive comes four months after a nationwide ban on anyone lighting up inside public buildings and work places.

But landlords say the new proposal would be impossible to enforce. One bar owner said it was `absolutely ludicrous'.

Any pub which is reported for creating an environmental hazard can be inspected by council officials and face prosecution if the landlord fails to act.

Staff at Night And Day on Oldham Street, Manchester, have placed notices on the door warning that only 10 people are allowed to stand outside and smoke at a time.

It is understood the bar received a visit by environmental health officers following complaints from local residents. However, the council said it had no record of any contact with the bar. Police raised the issue of smoking outside bars at a stormy meeting with the Manchester Pub and Club Network (MPCN) - which represents more than 500 landlords.

Sgt Gareth Parkin, from the City Safe team, said: "We are working with pubs, clubs and bars to offer information and advice about crime prevention and safety. We want to come up with ideas for how best to manage crowds who gather outside pubs and clubs to smoke. Our aim is to assist the licensees."

Phil Burke, of the MPCN, acknowledged that pub landlords would have to address the problem. But he said many were opposed to yet more regulations.

He said: "When the idea to limit smokers outside to about 15 was first suggested it got quite heated."

One Manchester city centre landlord, who did not want to be named, said: "It's ridiculous. The only way we would be able to limit numbers smoking outside is by holding people in venues against their will, which could cause a riot."

A council spokesman said: "We would certainly respond to any complaints or concerns we receive about crowds gathering outside licensed premises.

"We have not set limits for the number of people allowed to smoke outside licensed premises and we work closely with pub and club managers, the vast majority of whom manage their premises very well."
Manchester evening news

Some bars ignore state’s smoking ban rather than lose customers

Some bars ignore state’s smoking ban rather than lose customers
AKRON, Ohio — Some Ohio bar and restaurant owners are ignoring the state’s public smoking ban for fear of losing customers, risking fines up to $2,500 and nuisance charges before the health board.

The ban, passed by Ohio voters in November 2006, outlaws indoor smoking in most public places, including bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and, pending court appeals, private clubs such as VFW halls.

Many businesses are trying to bring their workplaces into compliance, said Cheri Christ, the sanitation supervisor for the Akron Health Department. Many others quietly — or in some cases flagrantly — ignore the ban in an attempt to hold on to a regular customer base.

Local health departments began enforcing the law on May 3, and have since logged about 17,900 complaints of violations, or 92 a day. After an initial warning, a second violation is $100, growing to $2,500 for fifth and subsequent violations.

Fines can double for bar owners who flagrantly break the rules, said Terry Tuttle, environmental health supervisor for the Summit County Health Department, who is charged with enforcing the law. Business owners may also face nuisance charges before the state health board, which could lead to more fines or possibly forced closure of their business.

To date, Corky’s Thomastown Cafe in Akron has drawn 37 complaints and owner Billy McFrye has been fined $100. McFrye said the ban has cost him at least 25 percent of his business.

“People aren’t coming out,” he said. “I’ve got numbers from last year to this year, and you can see it. It’s unreal. It’s gross.”

Contrary to some predictions, nonsmokers haven’t come out to replace smokers who now choose to do their drinking at home.

“Nonsmokers don’t go out anyway,” McFrye said. “They’re the cheapest people breathing air. I’ve been in business 23 years, and I know there’s nothing cheaper than a nonsmoker. I’m really upset with it. I wish the people who voted for it would get cancer.”

Bars and restaurants may suffer a further drop in sales as winter approaches and smokers are forced to bundle up to step outside for a smoke, said Jacob Evans, spokesman for the Ohio Licensed Beverage Association.

However, other business owners credit the ban with increased business. Ed Gazdacko, owner of Sto-Kent Family Entertainment Center in Stow, a bar and bowling center, worried that business would suffer but after an initial drop after the ban has seen an influx of new customers.

“The atmosphere is better. I’ve got new families coming in here, and they tell me: ’We knew you kept a clean place, but because there was secondhand smoke, we didn’t come here. Now we do,” Gazdacko said.

Some are seeking creative methods to keep customers coming without the appeal of indoor ashtrays. After business dropped about 25 percent at Bingo Night at the Immaculate Heart of Mary Catholic Church in Cuyahoga Falls, the church dressed up its outdoor space with an awning, free coffee and propane heaters to keep smokers warm in chilly weather.

The church’s bingo business is back to at least 95 percent of what it was before the smoking ban, and attracted some new players, said parishioner Matt Pagni.

“Prior to the smoking ban, it was awful,” Pagni said. “You’d come home from bingo, peel off your clothes and head straight to the shower.”
Cantonrep.com

SHAH RUKH KHAN has come under fire

Actor SHAH RUKH KHAN has come under fire in India for openly flouting a smoking ban. The Bollywood star could face action by Indian authorities after allegedly smoking at a cricket match in Mumbai and at a media conference in Delhi. Anti-smoking group the National Organisation for Tobacco Eradication (NOTE) is calling for the 42-year-old star to explain his actions. A spokesman for the group says, "This is not how a superstar should behave. Adored by millions (he) cannot lend a helping hand to promote smoking. "We will be filing a case against him at the local court." However, the star's lawyers have rejected the allegations, arguing Khan was smoking on both occasions in private places. His attorney says, "A space where the general public does not have any access is excluded from the definition of a public place.
Contract Music

SNOOKER CLUBS CRY FOUL OVER SMOKING BAN

SNOOKER CLUBS CRY FOUL OVER SMOKING BAN
Snooker clubs have been brought to their knees by the smoking ban, according to Lincolnshire players.

The Lincolnshire and District Billiards and Snooker Association says it has experienced a dip in membership since the ban began in July.

And its remaining members are calling for the Government to have a change of heart.

The sport traditionally takes place in dimly-lit, smoky rooms but this image of hazy baize tables has slipped away.

Now, instead, players play frames alone while team-mates huddle outside to drag on their fags.

Many who like to smoke are now turning their back on the sport, according to association secretary Bernie Barker.

He said membership had slumped by 15 per cent since the ban - although so far the county's three snooker divisions have held up.

"It's killing the sport," he said.

"In snooker there should be a good team atmosphere.

"But instead of watching and supporting, team-mates are going out for a cigarette.

"I just think the Government hasn't really looked into the impact it's having on pubs and clubs."

Mr Barker's dire warnings have been swept aside by the Government, which insists that the ban benefits both smokers and those who might otherwise breathe in their smoke.
This is Lincolnshire

SMOKING MAY BE OUTLAWED BUT IT'S NOT A BLANKET BAN

SMOKING MAY BE OUTLAWED BUT IT'S NOT A BLANKET BAN
As the winter chill kicks in, one Bristol bar has introduced an eco-friendly way of keeping smokers warm in the cold - offering them blankets.The bar at the Tobacco Factory in Southville has been handing out woollen blankets to smokers as an alternative to warming them with patio heaters.

Although staff admit some of their customers get funny looks when they are wrapped up on the terrace, they say the idea has been a big success.

George Ferguson, architect and owner of the venue, believes patio heaters should be banned because he says they are damaging to the environment.

Mr Ferguson picked up on the idea of using blankets in Scandinavia, where he says people sit out under them throughout the year.

He said: "Since the smoking ban our streets and squares have been even more littered with these devilish devices. They make no sense at a time when we are quite rightly being implored to combat global warming by insulating our buildings and saving energy and CO2 emissions.

"In any case, patio gas and electric heaters look horrible and give uncomfortable uneven heat."

The Tobacco Factory has a stash of 10 green blankets for its customers.

Bar manager Gaby Aranda believes more and more people will use them as the weather gets colder. She said: "We've had a mixed opinion on it but most people think it's been a success and think it's great being cosy under a blanket. Those who wear them think it is great and those who don't say it's silly."

Many pubs in Bristol have brought in patio heaters to keep smokers happy since the smoking ban in enclosed public places was introduced in July.

Rather than just being popular in the summer, they are now used all year round, and the widespread use of outside heaters has exploded.

Stuart Hignell, owner of St Philip's-based Bristol Gas Supplies Limited, said sales of gas for patio heaters at his business have increased three-fold on last year.

He believes the damage caused to the environment by patio heaters is a drop in the ocean.

Mr Hignell said: "When you compare the UK's CO2 output to America and China, it's nothing. We all do our little bit for the environment, like turning lights off when they are not being used, but you go to America and see six-lane highways full of gas-guzzling cars."

This is Bristol

SEX PISTOLS - PISTOLS PUFF AGAINST THE BAN

SEX PISTOLS - PISTOLS PUFF AGAINST THE BAN

SEX PISTOLS frontman Johnny Rotten flaunted the smoking ban by puffing away on a cigarette before and during the band's Brixton Academy show on Wednesday night (November 14th).

The outspoken punk smoked backstage with members of their crew before the band's sell-out show, the Sun reports, and then lit up when the band took to the stage.

He then launched into a tirade, urging members of the audience to join him in sparking up a cigarette, despite the possibility of facing a £50 fine for every time they smoked.

"I can't believe you lot aren't smoking," he said, according to the newspaper, "What kind of country is this if you can't even have a smoke?"

Rotten isn't the first star to flout the smoking ban, after members of THE ROLLING STONES lit up on stage at London's O2 Arena earlier this year.

However, on that occasion both the aging rockers and the venue avoided punishment, with Greenwich council stating it was "satisfied" the incident was a one-off.

http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/pistols%20puff%20against%20the%20ban_1050207

Bar owners ask court to overturn smoking ban

Bar owners ask court to overturn smoking ban
By COLLEEN SLEVIN
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
DENVER - Bar owners who say Colorado’s smoking ban is pushing them out of business asked a federal appeals court on Thursday to overturn the ban, even though some fear a decision won’t come soon enough to save them.

A coalition of bars, taverns, bowling alleys and bingo halls asked the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to rule the ban is unconstitutional. They argue the ban discriminates against them because the original law exempted casinos, cigar bars and smoking lounges at Denver International Airport.

The state argued it has logical reasons for granting exemptions and lawmakers have since extended the ban to casinos starting Jan. 1, 2008.

Appeals court judges heard oral arguments from both sides Thursday. Rulings in appeals cases usually take weeks or months.

Opponents of the ban filed suit after the law was passed in 2006. A U.S. District Court judge ruled against them last year, and they appealed to the 10th Circuit.

Joel Spector, a lawyer representing the coalition free of charge, told the appeals judges that exempting some businesses made no sense because the stated purpose for the law was to protect people from secondhand smoke.

The judges asked if that argument was still relevant, since lawmakers later expanded the ban to casinos.

Spector said the case is still valid because the state could reverse itself and allow smoking in casinos if it loses a lot of tax revenue.

Judge David Ebel said lawmakers can take incremental steps to fight smoking by exempting some businesses but still serve the purpose of protecting people from smoke.

‘There’s less smoking after the statute than there was before the statute,’ he said.

Jason Dunn, a former state assistant attorney general representing state government in the case, said Colorado had a right to exclude casinos because of the tax revenue they provide to the state - about $100 million in 2006.

Some of the revenue supports the state’s historical society and the three historic mountain towns where the casinos are located.

He said the airport was excluded because many of the smokers in the lounges are passing through the state and cannot go outside to smoke for security reasons.

Cigar bars were excluded because they were businesses that relied so much tobacco sales, he said.

To be exempt, cigar bars must have gotten at least 5 percent of their revenue from selling tobacco and renting humidors to patrons before the law passed.

Ebel seemed doubtful that revenue was enough reason to exclude casinos.

‘You’re saying the almighty dollar trumps the equal protection clause?’ Ebel asked, drawing a nod from one of the bar owners watching the hearing.

Ebel wondered whether a tire company could ask the government to put its competitor out of business if it agreed to pay higher taxes.

Smoke ban blamed for Oxford closures

Smoke ban blamed for Oxford closures


"We're hearing about two to three pubs a day closing countrywide - the trade is going through a really hard time."

Be fore the ban,publicans and the breweries were told by ASH that a smoking ban wouldn't harm their trade,and,just the opposite,non smokers would flood into pubs and they'd all be booming-the smoking ban would ignite their trade.

Of course this was a lie,any research you do on smoking bans shows the same statistics-a drop of trade between 20/40%, a slight decrease in the amount of smokers and cigarettes consumed in the first year-year two it get back to normal.

Smoking bans don't stop people smoking-SHS doesn't kill anyone-thousands of pubs will close-Pubs/Inns are part of our heritage,history and current community-how many pubs run darts/pool/football teams etc. How many pubs raise money for charity? How many people do our pubs house and employ?

One pub every eight weeks is closing in Oxford because of the smoking ban, according to the Oxford Mail.

The Oxford branch of the Campaign for Real Ale said the closure rate was speeding up sparked by the ban and increased competition for the leisure pound.

Chairman Tony Gould told the paper: "Pubs are closing at an alarming rate and the situation is getting critical.

"In the old days, people went to the pub and the cinema - those were their main distractions - but people lead such busy lives nowadays and it's hard to get them to come out to community pubs.

"The smoking ban certainly doesn't help. The ban, rising property prices and the sale of cheap alcohol in supermarkets is killing off our pubs."

John Madden of the Guild of Master Victuallers told the Oxford mail: "We're hearing about two to three pubs a day closing countrywide - the trade is going through a really hard time."

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=53614

Scots reject further restrictions on smoking

Scots reject further restrictions on smoking
I am sure if we asked the following question also,we would get a good % say yes.

"To save the UK pub industry,should we allow exemptions to the smoking ban for pubs with noo gardens and should we allow indoor smoking rooms with good air conditioning and ventilation?"

87% say smoking ban has gone far enough, substantial majority opposed to bans on smoking in cars, on public footpaths and open air parks, outside pubs, clubs and places of work ...

THE Scottish public is overwhelmingly opposed to further restrictions on smoking, with almost nine out of ten people saying the current ban has gone far enough. These are the findings of a major new poll conducted by Populus for the smokers' lobby group Forest. 63% believe the current policy to be about right, while 24% think it goes too far. Only 11% believe it does not go far enough.

A large majority of Scots believe it would be unreasonable to ban smoking in private homes (76%), private cars (69%), public footpaths (69%) and open air parks (66%). A substantial majority are also opposed to a ban on smoking on beaches (61%), outside pubs and clubs (61%), and places of work (61%).

The poll also showed that the majority of Scottish residents strongly reject any moves towards smokers being discriminated against in areas such as employment and medical treatment. A huge majority, 84%, think that being a smoker should not be a barrier to getting a job, while two-thirds believe that whether a person smokes should not affect them getting medical treatment.

The survey also found that further restrictions on smoking ranked just fifth on a list of priorities for improving public health, with only 8% of people considering it to be the most important. According to the poll, 44% of people in Scotland believe that reducing poverty should be the Executive's number one priority. This is followed by improving housing conditions (22%); providing more facilities for physical recreation (9%); reducing alcohol consumption (9%); further restrictions on the sale and consumption of tobacco products (8%), and banning advertising of food high in sugar, salt or fat (3%).

Forest spokesman Neil Rafferty commented: "Where smoking is concerned, the Scottish public clearly believe that enough is enough. Smokers may seem an easy target but they are voters too and a large number are sick and tired of being lectured and treated like lepers. Politicians of all parties should listen to public opinion and reject further attacks on those who choose to smoke."

Brian Monteith, MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife and one of the leading opponents of the smoking ban, said: "Apart from a few anti-tobacco zealots and health fascists there is clearly no demand for further restrictions on smoking. The Executive's ban already goes too far and will cost it some votes in the Labour heartlands. It should take heed of this research and resist any temptation to use its regulatory powers to stigmatise smokers further."

Notes for editors:

1. Populus interviewed a random sample of 1,010 adults aged 18+ across Scotlan by telephone between 27 October and 1 November 2006. Results have been weighted to be representative of all adults in Scotland.

2. 24% of the sample smokes daily, 8% occasionally. 23% are ex-smokers, while 47% have never smoked. These rates accord with smoking prevalence rates for the UK as a whole.

http://www.forestonline.org.uk/output/page370.asp

The facts in the way of a good story

The facts in the way of a good story

It looked like a vindication of the smoking ban in Scotland - in little more than a year, the heart attack rate had been cut by almost a fifth. But look at official figures, says Michael Blastland, and it just doesn't stack up.
It was dramatic research that made headlines everywhere. A 17% fall in the number of heart attacks in the year since Scotland stubbed out smoking in public places.

Startling - if true.

Few questioned the research when it was revealed two months ago. Politicians trumpeted the numbers as vindication of a policy introduced a year earlier than in England. Journalists obediently followed suit.

The most arresting finding was that heart attacks among non-smokers had apparently fallen even faster than smokers, suggesting that passive smoking was often to blame.

Then a week ago, with rather less fanfare, routine statistics on hospital activity were published by the official source for health data in Scotland, as they are every year, this time including the time since the ban.

These show a fall in heart attacks for the year from March 2006 - not of 17%, but less than half as much at about 8%.

What's more, taking out the recent trend, this is halved again. Heart attacks have been falling steadily for some years now. The percentage falls in the three years before the ban were 5.1%, 4.7% and 5.7%. So the fall since is still bigger than the trend would lead us to expect, but bigger only by about three or four percentage points - an improvement, but retreating fast from the magnitude of 17.

The latest release also makes clear that even an 8% fall in heart attacks is not unprecedented. There was another, larger drop between 1999 and 2000 of about 11% (see chart).

This seems to demonstrate significant variability around the trend, suggesting that last year's 8% drop might even be the result of chance. It is conceivable, although perhaps unlikely, that the smoking ban had no effect at all. The figures could be a result of no more than the ordinary ups and downs of statistical variation from one year to the next.

There have been several other initiatives designed to reduce heart attacks in Scotland recently, and any or all might also have played a part.

If we look at all heart attacks, rather than just emergency admissions, the fall last year according to the official data was slightly smaller again - about 7% - against falls in the past three years on this measure typically of about 4%.

Rise and fall

Scotland's deputy chief medical officer, Peter Donnelly, said at the time of the study in September: "One of the most important findings is the reduction in heart attacks. We believe that the smoking ban was a large contributory factor to this drop."


Scotland's ban came into force 20 months ago
It is not clear on what evidence he could now make such a claim. Any claims of causation now look premature. Even the latest figures are provisional and subject to revision.

Such claims are, in fact, positively damaging. What is unquestionably a good news story - the consistent and impressive decline in heart attacks in Scotland over many years - has become overshadowed by squabbles about the smoking ban.

Worse, the true reasons for this success may be overlooked if too much credit is attributed to the ban on unreliable evidence.

So why such a discrepancy between the two numbers?

The first study was presented at a conference in Edinburgh two months ago by a research group called StopIt (Study Of Public Place Intervention on Tobacco Exposure).

The latest statistics come from ISD Scotland, part of the NHS responsible for health data. Dr Colin Fishbacker, an ISD official, says the two studies used data from different sources. "We wouldn't expect the sources to agree exactly. The routine data we publish is based on the discharge summary sent to the GP and medical records for coding. The StopIt study was a specific research exercise."

Numbers game

There are other factors that may might help explain the discrepancy. The first study, unlike the routine data, was a sample, not a total for all Scotland. And although the sample included nine Scottish hospitals with about two-thirds of heart attack admissions, patients did not have to take part.


A patient in cardiac intensive care
There is also a suggestion that the StopIt study compared 10 months before the ban in March 2006, with 10 months after. So the two periods might have spanned different parts of the year. It paid particular attention to distinguishing between smokers and non-smokers, and this may have affected the way the study was carried out.

But because the data on which the StopIt study was based has never been published, and nor has the study itself, it is impossible to say exactly how it was done. Attempts to obtain it or to talk to the lead researcher have gone unanswered.

Once the number was out, politicians were certainly not about to exercise any scientifically-minded reservations about its reliability. The story became political as much as medical.

None of this rules out the possibility that the ban is having an effect. Such a conclusion would be as reckless as declaring that the ban explains everything. But how much effect it's having - if any - no-one knows.

As for the flurry of excitable headlines, what appeared to be hard medical evidence now looks more like over-hasty and over-confident research, coupled with wishful political thinking and uncritical journalism. Whether the same will happen now attention has shifted to the effect of the bans in England and Wales remains to be seen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7093356.stm

Councils are winding down their inspections of English pubs to see they are complying with the smoking ban.

Councils are winding down their inspections of English pubs to see they are complying with the smoking ban.

New figures from the Department of Health (DoH) show the number of inspections in September was down roughly one third on August.

And there were almost three times as many checks in July - the first month of the ban - than August.

A DoH survey of 326 English councils - 92% of the total - shows that 4,097 inspections of licensed premises, excluding restaurants and venues with accommodation, took place in September.

An earlier survey of 333 councils showed that 6,024 inspections occurred in August, down from 16,807 in July. The July survey combines findings from two halves of the month - 321 councils were surveyed in the first half and 335 in the second.

A spokesman for local government co-ordinator Lacors said: "Council officers have visited tens of thousands of premises since 1 July, answering any questions hosts might have and giving advice and guidance where necessary.

"The number of visits to premises continues to fall, showing that follow-ups are rarely needed as the majority of pubs, clubs and other workplaces are fully compliant."

Meanwhile, compliance rates hardly changed over the three months, from 97.3% in July to 97.5% in August and 97.9% in September. Compliance rates with the rules on no-smoking signage were 94.2% in September and August, up from 91.3% in July.

A total of 798 written warnings were issued in the first three months for failing to prevent smoking. Five court hearings occurred in relation to breaches of the ban.

There were 5,192 written warnings, 17 fixed penalty notices and two court hearings for not displaying the correct signage.
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=53436

Higher drink tax and no smoking at home – beware of the new nanny state

Higher drink tax and no smoking at home – beware of the new nanny state

This is a shot across the bows from The "Times" today-these reports are published to gauge oppinion against bans and policy.
The smoking ban stinks does not support smoking but does support freedom of choice.
If it is the Governments job to worry about health then we can safely say they have failed in their education.
With obesity,they have allowed fast food shops to open side by side by dide across our country-like America.
They have not controlled supermarkets who fill their shelves with Trans fat laden food,sold cheaply-like America.
Cooking is not cool and not taught in schools like it used to be,so we are constantly told we are stressed and the good old fast food shops and supermarkets come to our rescue,when we all know we can knock up a quick stir fry quicker than we can wait for a home delivery pizza.
We know the government made up the statistics for 21/14 units of alcohol per week.
More bans are coming,don't sit back and accept them.


Higher alcohol taxes, halting 24-hour drinking, banning smoking in people’s homes and adding fluoride to water supplies are justified intrusions to improve public health, senior academics said yesterday.

A report by the well-respected Nuffield Council of Bioethics concludes that the Government and industry are not doing enough to prevent binge drinking or obesity and should promote healthy lifestyles through stricter measures and deterrents.

The authors, a group of doctors, lawyers, philosophers and other experts, argue that the much-maligned “nanny state” should be replaced by a new, more sensitive idea of “stewardship”. Campaigners described the report as a potential manifesto for a bully state and industry groups bristled at the prospect of tighter regulation.

The council, which considers ethical questions raised by advances in medical research, looked at alcohol, obesity, smoking, infectious disease and fluoridation of water. It identified alcohol consumption as a huge public health problem and said that the Government could do more. “Increasing tax on alcohol and restricting hours of sale have been shown to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption,” its report states. “Yet the Government’s alcohol strategy has focused on public information campaigns and voluntary labelling schemes, measures that have been shown not to be effective.”

A Sugared Pill
Lord Krebs, who chaired the report committee, said yesterday: “People often reject the idea of a nanny state but the Government has a duty to look after the health of everyone and sometimes that means guiding or restricting our choices.”

The central concept of stewardship differed from the nanny state by being “more sensitive to the balances between public good and individual freedom,” he said. The report concludes: “The stewardship model provides justification for the UK Government to introduce measures that are more coercive than those which currently feature in the National Alcohol Strategy.”

Lord Krebs said that ministers should revisit the decision to introduce 24-hour licensing laws in 2005. At a briefing yesterday in London, he said: “The Government should implement tougher measures to tackle excessive drinking. There is also an urgent need for an analysis of the effect of extended opening hours on levels of alcohol consumption, as well as on antisocial behaviour.”

He added: “When 24-hour drinking was introduced, it was suggested to create a continental-style café culture. If you walk down any of the main streets of Oxford at 11 o’clock — one is known as ‘Vomit Alley’ — we all see a conspicuous absence of continental café culture.”

The report, in preparation since February last year, recommends that producers and sellers of alcohol should take more responsibility for preventing harm to health. It also says that the arguments used to justify banning smoking in enclosed public spaces would “also apply to banning smoking in homes”. This would be extremely difficult to enforce, but local authorities and the courts could preside over exceptional cases where children with a respiratory illness could be at such a risk that intervention may be ethically acceptable.

The Nuffield report comes as a coalition of 21 organisations headed by the Royal College of Physicians prepare to form a new Alcohol Health Alliance, which plans to lobby for a 10 per cent rise in alcohol taxes and tighter regulation of the drinks industry. Details of the Alcohol Health Alliance are expected to coincide today with a conference organised by the college on reducing the harm caused by alcohol.

The UK Public Health Association welcomed the report, saying that it represented an evidence-based approach that could counter health inequalities, but Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ lobby group Forest, said: “Politicians should take care not to overindulge in social engineering. Potentially, this report is a manifesto for a bully state in which people are increasingly forced to behave in a manner approved by politicians and evangelical health campaigners who want unprecedented control over our daily lives.”

Jeremy Beadles, from the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, added: “The people clamouring for an increase in taxes and regulation on the drinks industry ignore the fact that alcohol consumption is actually falling. Increasing the cost of alcohol will just hit the vast majority of people who enjoy a drink in moderation.”

Dawn Primarolo, the Health Minister, said that the Government’s strategy to tackle harmful drinking was comprehensive and included an independent review of alcohol pricing.



Bullying or encouragement? How we could be more protected

Obesity
— The food industry should be encouraged or compelled to improve labelling and health information on products
— Town planners and architects should be trained to design buildings and public spaces that encourage people to lead more active lifestyles. This could include segregating walking and cycling routes from heavy traffic, and maintaining more public parks and children’s playgrounds

Smoking and alcohol
— More coercive measures on alcohol abuse, for example taxes on alcoholic beverages could be increased
— “The general ethical and scientific arguments that apply to banning smoking in enclosed public spaces also apply to banning smoking in homes”
— The policy of 24-hour licensing laws should be reviewed
— NHS treatment should be witheld or delayed for those for smokers or heavy drinkers unless they seek help

Fluoridation
— Voters should decide whether fluoride should be added to local water supplies, currently only available to 10 per cent of Britons. Increasing the practice is controversial because of a lack of good-quality evidence on the potential benefits and harms

Infectious disease
— Anonymised data for assessing and predicting trends in infectious disease can be collected without consent, “as long as any invasion of privacy is reduced as far as possible”

Source: Nuffield Council on Bioethics
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2859623.ece

Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door

Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door

Fresh from their success winning a statewide smoking ban in bars and restaurants, Minnesota's anti-smoking advocates are ready to zero in on where you live.

One anti-smoking group will kick-start a campaign this week to encourage landlords to outlaw smoking in their buildings. While the program would be purely voluntary for now, some communities might follow two California cities by considering broader ordinances that would apply to multi-unit dwellings.

Smoke-free groups are also considering pushes to restrict drivers who smoke with kids in their cars, park users who smoke and even cigarette-dangling youth-sport coaches. Still, condos and apartments appear to be the next battleground in the state's smoking wars.

It's part of a national trend aimed at snuffing out those who light up. Chicago can now fine people up to $500 for smoking within 15 feet of beaches and playgrounds. Albuquerque nixed smoking at the zoo. Davis County, Utah, has extended its ban to golf courses and cemeteries.

Outdoor smoking bans grow

The number of cities and counties that prohibit smoking in outdoor areas such as parks, stadiums and outdoor cafes has jumped from 30 in 1999 to 1,124 today, according to the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation.

In Minnesota, groups still have many millions of dollars from their tobacco settlement warchests to combat the harm of tobacco and secondhand smoke -- and many ideas about how to do it.

"We're getting a lot of calls from tenants saying that they are getting second-hand smoke getting into the living unit from somewhere else in the apartment building," said Brittany McFadden, director of the Live Smoke Free campaign. "They are not letting anyone smoke in their unit but smoke is drifting in from other people's units, balconies or patios. They are getting sick from their own living space and there's not a lot they can do to protect themselves."

The program will focus on apartment buildings in the seven-county metro area and seeks to educate landlords about the benefits of adopting smoke-free policies.

Big Brother or deterrent?

At the 58-unit Talheim Apartments in Chaska, residents have had six months to brace for the building-wide ban that goes into effect Saturday.

"Some residents have complained: 'What's next?' But one person told me he's so glad because he's been trying for years to quit and this might help," said Sheila Knox, Talheim's apartment manager. "I'll be out sniffing in the hallways."

While the statewide law prohibits smoking in common areas of apartment buildings, there is no provision regarding individual apartment units. Earlier this year, two California cities -- Belmont and Temecula -- passed ordinances for smoke-free rental unit housing.

Some local smokers interviewed on Friday thought government was overstepping its bounds by shifting bans inside the confines of their homes. Others shrugged and said they expect the smoke-free screw will only be tightened.

"It's ridiculously Big Brother to go and tell me what I can and can't do in my own home," said Brian Van Sickle, 32, of Minneapolis.

"I can see not allowing smoking in cars with kids, but going into your own space if the landlord doesn't mind? That's too far," said Barb Jensen, another Minneapolis renter.

Electrician Mike Riggs of Becker, who was taking a cigarette break while helping build a 200-unit apartment building in Minneapolis, said fewer fires might be ignited by smokers falling asleep. "But I don't see smoke drifting through an inch-and-a-half of drywall," he said.

Dollars and sense

Economics will be part of the pitch to voluntarily go smoke-free. On average it costs two to three times more to prepare a rental unit for a new tenant after a smoker moves out because of the increased costs of carpet replacement and re-painting, McFadden said.

ClearWay Minnesota, the state's independent nonprofit that administers $202 million of Minnesota's tobacco settlement funds, said the adoption of the smoking ban will mean refocusing some of its resources. Leaders foresee a shift from advocacy and lobbying efforts against secondhand smoke to helping ensure monitoring and compliance of the law, which took effect Oct. 1.

Anti-smoking advocates see other opportunities, including pushing for laws that restrict or prohibit smoking, largely at the local level. Norwood Young America, for example, has an ordinance that prohibits smoking in city parks during youth activities. The Three Rivers Park District, formerly Hennepin Parks, is discussing a proposal to make portions of the district tobacco-free.

Statewide ban wasn't the end

"I think we are really short-sighted if we think that we just crossed the finish line," said Jeanne Weigum, executive director of the Association for Nonsmokers -- Minnesota. "The smoking rate in Minnesota didn't go down because we passed a law. Anybody that looks at this as anything except another important step along the way is really missing the point."

But with the enactment of the smoking ban, some of the usual funding partners are declaring at least a partial victory and have begun to deploy some of their resources elsewhere.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield in Minnesota, for instance, has allocated approximately $35 million from 2006-2008 toward tobacco prevention efforts, including about $14.5 million in 2007. But next year, at least partially because of the enactment of the smoking ban, Blue Cross expects to redirect a portion of its budget for nonsmoking efforts to a new anti-obesity campaign. It expects to reduce its anti-tobacco spending by about $4.5 million.

"We continue to adjust our budgets annually, based on our progress in each area, the opportunities, and judgments about what will be most effective," explained Blue Cross spokeswoman Karen Lyons.

As the debate continues, one thing that won't be discussed is an outright prohibition of smoking.

"That's no more likely to work than the alcohol prohibition was likely to work," said Weigum, of the Association of Nonsmokers. "It was a real failed strategy in the '30s and it's no more likely to succeed now."
MSNBC

Smoking rebel's vow as he faces new court battle

Smoking rebel's vow as he faces new court battle
By Paul Fielding
REBEL publican Hamish Howitt says he will fight a fresh prosecution "all the way" after licensing chiefs slapped another case on him.
Just 48 hours after becoming the first landlord in the country to be prosecuted for allowing people to light up inside his premises, licensing chiefs issued a new summons.

On Monday Howitt, 55, admitted 12 offences of allowing smoking inside the Happy Scots Bar on Rigby Road, Blackpool.

Speaking to The Gazette, he said: “Instead of pleading guilty I will be pleading not guilty this time.

“I am planning to fight this all the way.”

He told the court it was a political stance against the Government’s controversial no smoking in pubs laws.

On Wednesday, Blackpool Council sent staff to the bar and Howitt, of Park Road, Blackpool, was served with a new summons alleging he had continued to allow smoking on the premises.

A council spokesman said: “I can confirm a new summons has been served in relation to Mr Howitt which is answerable at Blackpool Magistrates’ Court later this month.”

Blackpool Gazette

N.H. smokers joining social clubs

N.H. smokers joining social clubs
Saturday, November 10, 2007
MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) Rather than smoke outside, smokers are joining social clubs not affected by New Hampshire's ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.

`We've had people come here just for the smoking,' said Tanya Sanborn of the Lafayette Club.

Sandborn said the club has gotten at least 20 new members since the Sept. 17 ban.

Meanwhile, Peter Telge, owner of Milly's Tavern, said he has lost a few customers.

`A lot of my members were telling me I should turn one of my rooms into a private club, because those that aren't going back are turning to private clubs,'' Telge said.

Membership at the Lafayette Club costs about $20 a year, and a new member needs to be sponsored by a current one. Member Dave Danico said that he has had a lot of requests for sponsorship lately.

`I've been sponsored elsewhere, and people are already asking me, and I've been a member for two weeks,' Danico said.

But the ban may help both businesses in the end. Telge said he's now seeing tables full of new faces.

`They always say, 'You've got great food. We never came in here because of the smoke,' Telge said.

Telge said that even some smokers are starting to come back.

`They're all coming back slowly,'' he said. `They just don't hang out as long.'

The businesses can request a designated outdoor area where smoking is allowed. Customers can bring their drinks with them. If they venture out of the designated area, the businesses can be fined.
http://wbztv.com/newhampshirewire/NH--SocialClubs-Smoke/resources_news_html

Are smokers the only bad drivers?

Are smokers the only bad drivers?

SMOKING, once taken for granted in all sections of society, is fast becoming the number one social taboo. After the smoking ban in public enclosed spaces was introduced in July, further measures have seen its sale being banned to under-18s.

Now, however, Merseyside police want to go one step further and – under the guise of a road safety crackdown – prosecute motorists who light up at the wheel in their own car.

It is not the act of lighting up per se that police are targeting, but that motorists who do so run the risk of driving without due care and attention, or failing to control their vehicle.

It is worth pointing out that officers have always had the powers to prosecute motorists acting in this way, suggesting they have turned a blind eye to it in the past.

But now that open season has been declared on cigarettes and those who smoke them, police feel ready to enforce the existing legislation.

Such a crackdown is bound to provoke some mixed feelings, even on the part of non-smokers.

For one thing, surely what people do in the privacy of their own car is a matter for them, and, provided it does not endanger other road users, should stay that way.

There is also the problem that, while it is easy to spot a motorist talking on a mobile phone while driving, the act of lighting a cigarette – and of it leading to a situation where the motorist is temporarily not in control of the vehicle – is likely to be far harder to observe and to prove.

Perhaps, rather than adding to the persecution complex of smokers, it might have been better if the police had stressed they were simply mounting a campaign against driving without due care and attention – whatever the reason for it.

No-one can doubt that the aim of the campaign is a worthy one – to improve safety on Merseyside’s roads – only that smokers are necessarily the worst or the only offenders.

Liverpool daily post

Singer and fans free to smoke at virtual gig

Singer and fans free to smoke at virtual gig
Adam Sherwin,
Media Correspondent

The smoking ban has done terrible damage to the karma of rock stars used to wielding cigarettes on stage.

But now Richard Hawley, the rocker from Sheffield nominated for the Mercury Prize, has found a way around the ban with a “live” performance in the 3-D environment of Second Life, the virtual world that operates its own currency, industry – and public health rules.

Hawley’s fans, who created their own digital characters, or “avatars”, to attend the performance, saw the singer’s movements digitally captured from a session in a Manchester studio.

To the singer’s satisfaction, the digital Hawley was able to light up and rest his virtual cigarette in an ashtray on top of his amp, apeing his real movements in the studio. His avatar fans could follow suit, as Hawley performed a selection of folk and country classics.

“There is probably a Second Life government who will give me a Second Life fine but that’s too bad,” said Hawley, 40, who admits that he was “impressed” to see his home recreated on Second Life, complete with his jukebox and copies of the Sheffield Star. “I’m still trying to get my head around my first life, never mind a second one,” he said.

A smoke-free pub is a very empty place

A smoke-free pub is a very empty place
By Vicki Woods

We knew the pub would be in trouble when the smoking ban came in. As the cold spring wore on and the regulars huddled round the log fire in the front bar, Anne, the landlady, kept saying: "It'll ruin me."

When we first came to the village, the Oak was a Courage pub, run by a purple-faced landlord called Peter. The first time we walked in, on a Saturday, the front bar fell silent. Countrymen in workboots stared at the Londoners in fashion wellies and only when mine bottlenosed host said: "What can I get you?" did the stand-up-and-shout resume. My husband muttered: "You're not in Chiswick any more, honey," and began introducing himself as a wannabe local.

We carried our drinks to the back room, the snug - a messy, old-fashioned parlour with lumpy sofas, wing-chairs, dogs, babies, grannies, ottomans, an upright piano and a tea-chest bass. No bar: only a tiny hatch in one corner.

advertisement
Sunday lunchtime was less Straw Dogs and a bit more Tattersall check, so I started to like it a lot. It was a real pub, a proper pub. Children would go to the bar for Cokes and crisps when they were too little to see over it.

You'd get all sorts of a Sunday. Andrew Lloyd Webber, newly remarried, lately knighted, would bring the likes of Cameron Mackintosh and Robert Powell for a bit of slumming.

When Anne took over the lease, it was still a Courage pub. She's been running pubs for 32 years; first went behind the bar at 15. ("Illegally. At the Good Intent.") But the Thatcher anti-monopoly legislation that broke the big brewers meant the "pubcos" were taking over.

"First it was Maritime, then Labatt's. Now it's Enterprise." I think it was Labatt's that wrecked the interior, turning a 17th-century inn into a retro-Victorian town pub. The snug became a stand-up bar with a telly in it. All the parlour furniture was thrown out and one of those chilly "family rooms" was tacked on at the back.

Still, the pub kept its character enough for Londoners to goggle at, right up until last July. "It's a real pub! A real old-fashioned local! Great British all-day breakfast, £4! Blimey - two eggs. You're sooo lucky."

Now it's empty. The front bar is almost never used. Regulars lurk near the "smoking door" and the Sunday lunchers sit in the garden - unless it rains, which it's been doing since July 1. Where are the non-smokers?

Anne: "To be honest, I don't think non-smokers are pub-goers."

She's a lifelong non-smoker herself, funnily enough. She lives above the pub. The fact that the smoking ban extends over the entire premises (even into her sitting-room upstairs) doesn't worry her. Empty pubs worry her.

Against the smoking ban, Enterprise sent Anne a large umbrella. It's the sort of sunshiny umbrella that might grace your Caribbean verandah on a breezeless morning. Nobody sat under it during the washout summer; they clustered by the smoking door, like London office workers, collars up against the wet west wind.

It was my neighbour the headhunter who introduced the new slang "smirting" to these parts. His daughter, a London office worker, told him it meant smoking + flirting. ("It's the cool way to meet people, Dad.")

Seeing as he's on one of his recurrent "I've given up Hamlets" jags at the moment, he waggishly tells me to "stop smirting with Boris" every damn Sunday, sigh. That's our village Boris, by the way, not the world's.

The Caribbean-style umbrella was not deemed by any means smirtable in flood-warning weather. Enterprise must be aware of that: its website links to a company called Crown Awnings, which offers "total outdoor smoking solutions" for landlords who want to "exploit the outdoor opportunity".

Anne, whose takings have fallen by half since July 1, cannot afford to exploit her outdoor opportunity with solutions (decking, marquees, outside audio-visuals). It's a rural local, for heaven's sake.

My husband mentioned to Boris and Phil that the pub could use a regulation outside smoking area, with a roof and no more than 50 per cent walling. He and my neighbour the headhunter emptied their pockets as a kickoff towards materials and, 24 hours later, Boris and Phil had built the thing.

The roof is a great asset: peppered with small sweet nuts from the fine 70ft walnut tree that rears up by the back door. You can scoop them up in handfuls. Still, it's nippy out there.

Anne is not renewing her lease when it comes up next year. Is it the smoking ban? "That's part of it. Anybody driving past looks in the front bar and probably thinks we're closed. I reckon we've lost 25 grand this year. Cold, wet summer as much as the smoking ban.

"But it's not just the ban - it's all the paperwork you have to do now. All the red tape. Risk assessments for insurance, health and safety at work. It's a nightmare. Endless lists of boxes to tick. The broken-glass policy."

What? "Tells you how to pick up broken glass, what you have to do, what you have to wear." What you have to wear? "Goggles, gloves! I know, I know." She fetched her red-tape folder. It's very thick.

One of the things Anne has a legal duty to do as landlady of the Oak is to make sure she doesn't sell drink to anybody who is drunk. Stifling a snort, I can just about understand that, and so can she. She's been pocketing car keys and driving regulars home for as long as I've known her.

But another of her (many) legal duties is "to manage asbestos in commercial premises". She shows me a helpful "short guide" (12 A4 pages). It makes clear that it is Anne's duty to find any asbestos, to presume that all and any materials in her pub contain asbestos "unless you have strong evidence that they do not", to make and keep an up-to-date record of said asbestos, assess the risk of said asbestos, prepare a detailed plan about managing said risk of said asbestos, review and monitor said plan, and on and on.

I look around the 17th-century pub, with my mouth open. "I know, I know. I keep telling 'em it was built before they had asbestos."

The lease is up on February 18. On the 19th, the pub will close. Me, I don't think Enterprise - or anybody else - will reopen it. This is not gastro-pub country. We're bereft.

Daily Telegraph

Let Us Ban Smoking Bans

Let Us Ban Smoking Bans

If one were to walk into a typical bar, the overall atmosphere would be a bunch of people sitting at the bar carrying idle conversation with whoever is around or watching TV. There would be a group of people crowded around a pool table making bets on who’s going to win, and who’s going to play next, and some guy would be putting money into a jukebox reminiscent of some time in his life that the song reminds him of. All of this is going on while people are drinking and smoking. They all for the most part are just getting off of work and are looking for a place to smoke a cigarette and drink a beer after a long day. Take that away and now one has a bunch of angry men and even some women that can’t get the one freedom they look forward to after working all day. The one part of the daily routine that they work for and that they enjoy has suddenly been taken away. Banning the cigarette is taking away the one thing they use to relax. Putting the smokers outside is just as bad because they become a second class citizen. Although in most places this hasn’t happened yet, it is becoming the trend as smoking bans are steadily creeping their way into society. Groups all across the world are taking action with the claim that the smoking that a person exhales is extremely harmful to everyone around him. This is called passive smoking, or more commonly known as second hand smoking, and, according to the studies done by many anti-smoking groups, is extremely harmful to anyone who breathes it in no matter how dilute it is or the brevity of the exposure. But the truth is, there are many different ways to prevent passive smoking from having any affect at all on anyone around the active smoker without the use of smoking bans. In this essay we'll just talk about one.

If the main argument is that second hand smoke is harmful, then according to an interview with an air conditioning man named Kerry Labat, Sr., the old idea of air exchange would ventilate the air in such a way that the amount of smoke and other pollutants in the air would decreased by a rather large percentage. Air exchange is an open ventilation system that blows air from outside into a house while cooling or heating it. Once this air is inside of the house, it is then sucked back outside through a series of vents and filters that run along side the vent that brings the air in. This transfers the heat, or lack of heat for that matter, to the air coming into the house which effectively saves energy and keeps the air fresh and clean. This is actually a concept that the ancient Egyptians used as well as many castle builders. It was a very common way to cool off a house through air ventilation rather than air conditioning since that wasn’t existent until the mid 1800’s and wasn’t commercialized until the 1900’s. Combining air ventilation and air conditioning would give us what we are talking about now. If this were to be made a part of the international building code (IBC), then one wouldn’t have to ban smoking in their bar or restaurant on behalf of the health of others.

This particular form of ventilation is expensive and not all buildings have it either. It’s also hard to enforce such a thing throughout an entire country by means of police. So it is true, this wouldn’t solve the problem. Passive smoking would still be a part of every bar and restaurant. If this were to be enforced by the IBC, then policing it would just be a normal job from a normal person. As for the price, it would pay itself off over a few years. It’s more efficient, so it saves energy therefore saves money and is good for business because the air is cleaner so non-smokers aren’t bothered by smokers. This effectively keeps both parties happy without segregating them into smoking and non-smoking tables or putting smokers outside which makes them second class citizens.

In the major issues that the world has put its attention to, smoking bans have been one of the biggest over the past twenty years. Major anti-smoking organizations have fought endlessly to rid countries of tobacco products while tobacco industries have fought just as long to keep their product a part of the tradition of this world. Anti-smoking organizations use passive smoking as a main part of their argument, and tobacco companies use the smoker’s rights as a main point of their argument. To break this down it would take a great amount of study to produce an answer to the question of whether or not smoking should be banned completely.

Anti-smoking organizations have so far convinced over twenty countries to completely abolish smoking. By doing so they’ve ended a traditional part of society in each of these countries and effectively turned large fractions of the population in these countries into criminals. The American Cancer Society (ACS), the World Health Organization (WHO), the American Flight Attendant Association (AFAA), the Surgeon General and many other organizations have all done studies and reports that state that smoking and second hand smoking kills large numbers of people annually. The typical media never questions any of these reports or studies and never goes against anything that is said. It has become a politically correct statement.

Tobacco industries are slowly losing this war as the politically correct truths in the world are becoming enforced throughout. Their end of the fight is that the rights of the smoker should allow them to do as they please to their body. Taking that away would be an infringement on their rights as human beings. The anti-smoking groups are saying that their product is deadly not only to the smoker but also to the people around the smoker. Because it’s also dangerous to the people around the smoker, these groups say that smoking bans should be enacted to protect the safety and well being of the non-smoker. According to the research of the tobacco industry, second hand smoke isn’t as lethal as originally thought, and it doesn’t kill people. The typical media always questions any of the reports or studies and goes against just about everything that the industries have stated. This is completely opposite of what the anti-smoking organizations have said and backed with their research. So the question is who is right?

That answer can be found in a very statistically powerful study done by James E. Enstrom and Geoffrey C. Kabat using data from the Cancer Prevention Study number 1 (CPS I) done by the ACS from 1960-1998 on passive spousal smoking. These two scientists received funding from an anti-smoking organization and funding from a tobacco company. They are both long time non-smokers and have done studies proving that active smoking is much more lethal than originally thought. Their study done on passive smoking proved the opposite, though. It proved that passive smoking is actually much less lethal than originally thought. Their study involved different levels of exposure to second hand smoke as well as never smokers, former smokers and ever smokers being divided up into three different groups to keep false information from brewing. They also considered the lifestyles of these people, their diet, and their medical history. When they were having their work published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), who only publishes ten percent of all submitted work, it had to go through rigorous peer review to be considered and published. With all of this to make sure that nothing would come out false, one would think that their findings would be public and finally have put an end to all of this controversy. Apparently not because this study was published in May 2003, almost four and a half years ago, and most people never even heard of it. Why would such a large and significant study have such a small impact on all of this controversy? The answer is that the anti-smoking groups want to downplay their findings since it isn’t the answer they were seeking. They make money off of donations from people trying to stop lung cancer. If this organization can convince people of anything that might harm them, then that’s more of a chance of a donation. Although this may sound like a noble cause, it’s still incorrect and for that matter scandalous. This study proves their argument wrong, and it seems that they aren’t willing to accept that. It proves that active smoking doesn’t harm the people around them.

In researching this topic, I was almost convinced that I would come out with a weak argument against banning smoking because of how often one hears about the harmful effects of active and passive smoking alike. But two things saved my paper. One was a statement, and another was my father. My father is an air condition repairman and salesman. Hearing about the topic I was working on, he told me all about air exchange; how it works, its efficiency, how to convert a closed system to an open system, and how much it costs. The other was when I read the statement by the Surgeon General, “There is no safe amount of passive smoking.” It made me wonder how they could make such a claim. That statement, according to their statistics, is saying that if I were exposed to only ten minutes of second hand smoke for the entirety of my life, then I’d have a twenty-five percent increase relative risk for lung cancer and coronary heart disease as opposed to living with a smoker who smokes more than forty cigarettes a day my entire life and still getting the same twenty-five percent increase. Since reading that statement and pondering it’s validity, I’ve come upon a large amount of evidence that contradicts that statement including that of the studies done by the anti-smoking organizations themselves although it was hidden in carefully worded statements and bad methodology making it much harder to find. Also, I shouldn’t mention this as I have no evidence to prove its validity, but my father mention while on the subject, “The amount of smoke we breathe in while standing next to a smoker is already less than one percent. So, how can we be doomed to die from second hand smoking when we breathe in more toxins by staying inside our house for a day than standing hand in hand with a smoker for a week?” I also e-mailed four different entities about their studies done on passive smoking. Three of them had findings that stated a high relative risk of death from passive smoking, and one had a statistically insignificant increase of relative risk of death from passive smoking. The only person to reply to my e-mail was Dr. James E. Enstrom who was also the only person to have findings for a very low relative risk. He seems to be the only one willing to defend his work and refute anything that would be said about his work. The others seem to be too busy. If they can’t defend their work then it’s not worth considering valid. If air ventilation keeps the amount of smoke to a very small amount and the affects of second hand smoking has a statistically insignificant affect then there should be no need for bans as it would only infringe upon the rights of the smoker.

Kerry P. Labat, Jr.
http://www.myspace.com/kerrylabat

Smoking ban shuts ice-cream parlour after 60 years

Smoking ban shuts ice-cream parlour after 60 years

A POPULAR ice-cream parlour is shutting after 61 years because of the nationwide smoking ban.
Luigi Minchella's café at the Nook, South Shields, is now up for sale, after hundreds of regulars deserted it because of the smoking regulations, its owners say.

Today, Trevor Minchella, owner and manager, said the new law has had a disastrous effect on his business.

He said: "The smoking ban killed off this cafe. Most of my customers were from a generation who frowned at the thought of having to stand outside in the street just to smoke.

"A lot of people would come in after doing their weekly shopping along this street, to relax with a cup of coffee or an ice-cream, but the smoking ban put them right off."

Rachel Spence, head of member relations for the North East Chamber of Commerce, said: "This is the first example we've heard of a business closing here in the north east because of the smoking ban.

"It's always sad to see a business close, particularly as this has been caused by a piece of legislation passed by the Government.

"Most businesses are coping well. However, smaller firms which relied on the custom of older people are finding it harder, so we sympathise with Mr Minchella."

The business was opened in 1946 by Mr Minchella's great-grandfather, Joseph, then handed down to son Louis who extended it from a simple ice-cream parlour into the large cafe that stands there today.

Trevor Minchella eventually took over from his father, and has worked there for 38 years.

The 55-year-old added: "I'll be sad to let it go after all these years, but I've been thinking of winding down towards retirement for a while now. The smoking ban has just forced me to shut up shop quicker than I'd have liked."

He'll now focus his attention on his last remaining outlet, in Seaburn, Sunderland, where some of his staff will be relocating to.

Simon Clark, director of Pro-Smoking group Forest, said: "It's such a tragedy to see a branch of a family-run business close, especially as it's been at the heart of the South Shields community for decades.

"This wouldn't have happened if the Government had made some allowances for smokers, and allowed smoking licences to be handed out to a small number of outlets.

"The negative business effects of the smoking ban are taking hold in Scotland and Ireland now, and it won't be long before we see more businesses following Luigi Minchella's lead."

The premises are up for sale with estate agent Colin Lilley.

The firm's advertising blurb says: "Situated in prominent shopping parade, an opportunity to purchase substantially spacious premises, ideally suitable for a variety of uses, currently used as a coffee bar.

"Excellent potential for the discerning purchaser.
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/Smoking-ban-shuts-icecream-parlour.3447784.jp

JD Wetherspoon bar sales hit by smoke ban

JD Wetherspoon chief executive John Hutson has admitted that bar sales are falling at a faster rate because of the smoking ban.

Hutson told Reuters: "Food has continued to be double digit positive similar to what we said in August but bar sales which had strayed into single digit negative territory have slid back a bit further to the higher end of single digits."

The admission comes after weekend press reports that analysts were predicting a drop in expected profits at Punch Taverns when it announces its results on Thursday.

Regent Inns also warned yesterday that profits at its entertainment bars, such as Walkabout, may be hit by the smoking ban and if England's football team fail to qualify for Euro 2008.
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=53114

Anti-smokers target apartment buildings

Anti-smokers target apartment buildings

Banning smoking in multiunit residential buildings is seen as one of the final frontiers for health advocacy groups in the United States.

The Smoke-Free Environments Law Project based in Michigan said 60 public housing authorities in the United States have smoke-free policies, The New York Times reported Monday.

A number of cities in California have adopted smoke-free housing ordinances while the question of smoke-free housing legislation has been raised at the state level. In 1997 Utah passed an amendment stating that tobacco smoke may be considered a nuisance if it drifts from one residential unit to another. Utah's law also states that apartment complexes and condominium associations have the right to adopt smoke-free policies.

Legal expert Edward Sweda of Northeastern University Law School in Boston told the Times he knew of no law in the United States prohibiting residential property owners from banning smoking.

Since 1991 at least 27 lawsuits have been filed over smoking in multiunit buildings and judges have often sided with the non-smoker, Sweda told the Times
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/11/05/

Winona bars feel pinch of Minnesota smoking ban

Winona bars feel pinch of Minnesota smoking ban

By Käri Knutson / Winona Daily News

Winona bars are reporting a steep decline in business a month after a statewide smoking ban went into effect.

At the 500 Club, bartender Becky Brinkmeyer has noticed some regulars aren’t staying as long. Others aren’t coming in at all.

“People used to come in here because they can’t smoke in their car or home,” Brinkmeyer said. “Now they can’t smoke here.”

Matches, lighters and ashtrays that used to adorn the bar are now put away. You can still buy cigarettes at the bar. You’ll just have to step outside to enjoy.

Bar owners throughout the state are reporting a drop in business as a result of the smoking ban, and with winter coming, they fear it could get worse. Liquor stores seem to be enjoying some benefits, but bars in nearby parts of Wisconsin aren’t necessarily seeing a bump in business.

Winona bar operators concerned about the impact of the ban have asked the city to relax its restrictions on serving alcohol outdoors. On Monday, the city council is scheduled to consider an ordinance to allow alcohol on some enclosed patios and decks where smoking is permitted (see story at right).

The Winona American Legion has seen a similar decrease in sales, and not just alcohol. Bartender Barb Schewe says pull-tab charitable gambling sales are way down.

“We get the same people. They just don’t stay,” Schewe said. “Once it gets cold, I think it’ll be worse.”

The same story is playing out across the state, said Tavern League of Minnesota director of communications Sue Jeffers. “We’re feeling the pain everywhere,” she said.

Early estimates indicate an average loss of 20 to 30 percent in bar sales, Jeffers said. Places that also serve food are fairing better. Jeffers, a former bar owner, said a 2005 smoking ban in Hennepin County contributed to 137 bars closing.

In spite of bar owners’ claims, the sales slump doesn’t seem to have shown up in their liquor purchases.

Schott Distributing services about 100 bars and restaurants in the Winona area. General sales manager Bernie Schott said he saw no change in the company’s October sales.

“There’s no apparent trend we can see so far,” Schott said.

Schott has been told by distributors in other states with a smoking ban to expect about a 2 percent decrease in sales.

Not flocking to Wisconsin

Bob Baures, owner of George’s Bar in Bluff Siding, Wis., said customers aren’t flocking to his bar across the river.

“It’s been pretty minimal — maybe about a five percent increase,” Baures said.

Other bar owners on the Wisconsin side of the river say they haven’t seen an increase in business.

While Minnesota’s smoking ban may give bars like his on the border a slight edge in attracting some out-of-state customers, Baures is afraid a proposed smoking ban in Wisconsin would hurt businesses like his, too.

Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle this year introduced a bill to outlaw smoking in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants.

Jim Jenkins, owner of the Trempealeau Hotel in Trempealeau, Wis., made the decision to go smoke-free in 1994. He was concerned for his health and the health of his employees.

“It was either go smoke-free or get out of the bar business,” Jenkins said.

There were some very unhappy customers, some of whom never came back. Others did come back and brought their non-smoking friends. Jenkins decided to focus on being a family restaurant.

“We’re really happy with what happened to us,” Jenkins said.

Smokers staying home?

The smoking ban may be a boon for liquor stores.

Third Street Liquor owner Ken Siebenaler said he’s seen a slight increase in sales, but it’s too early to tell if it’s because more people are drinking at home rather than the bars.

Kato Liquor manager Aimee Larson said her store has also seen a slight increase. “I think we’ll see more of an increase as it gets colder,” she said.

The real test for Winona bars will come in about six months, said Tom Overland, owner of The Bar and the Mankato Bar. He said both businesses have experienced about a 20 to 30 percent loss.

“We’ll just have to ride it out,” Overland said. “I’m thinking sooner or later they’ll get bored with watching TV.”

No citations

Winona police have yet to issue a citation for smoking in a bar and say they haven’t gotten any complaints.
http://www.winonadailynews.com/articles/2007/11/04/news/01lead.txt

Lidl Ban Sale Of Cigarettes

Lidl Ban Sale Of Cigarettes
Nov 5 2007 By Ian Fletcher

Healthy Move By Store Chain

DISCOUNT supermarket chain Lidl are to stub out cigarette sales in their Scots stores.

The move comes after Lidl began promoting healthy lifestyles.

From next week, tobacco will no longer be stocked in any of their 78 Scottish stores.

The move brings them into line with the rest of their UK shops, which have never sold cigarettes.

The German chain said that the move was inspired by the Scottish government's Healthy Living programme, launched this year.

Last month, the group ran a Healthy October campaign which included big discounts on fresh produce.

A Lidl spokesman said: "We launched a campaign to encourage a healthier lifestyle in Scotland as the child obesity rates are extremely high - double the UK average."

The retailers have also launched a range of low-fat food that is being marketed across the UK.

Scotland has already seen the benefits of the public smoking ban.

Heart attack rates have plunged and researchers found a 17 per cent drop in cardiac victims taken to hospitals in the first year of the ban.

Within the first months, more than 15,000 people stubbed out for good.

But more than a million Scots still smoke and each year the habit kills 20,000.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/

FIRST SMOKING BAN FINE - FOR NOT PUTTING UP A SIGN

FIRST SMOKING BAN FINE - FOR NOT PUTTING UP A SIGN
BY MARTIN ROBINSON
POLITICAL REPORTER

10:30 - 03 November 2007



A rebellious businessman has become the first person in the East Midlands to be fined for a breach of the smoking ban legislation.

Hinckley hairdresser Richard Morris is embroiled in a dispute with Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council because he would not display a no smoking sign.

It is illegal to not put up signs warning of the ban.



As a result, the council has handed him a £200 fine - but Mr Morris has thrown it in the bin and refused to pay it.

He has now agreed to put up posters.

If the council pursues his fine, he could face court and potentially a prison sentence.

No other council in Leicestershire, Derbyshire, Northamptonshire, Rutland, Nottinghamshire or Lincolnshire has given out a fixed penalty since July 1.

Mr Morris said: "I have been given a fine by the council, but I would just say that I have filed it away in my dustbin.

"I will not be paying it on principle. I think the world is going mad with all these stupid rules. Being fined for not putting up a sign is ridiculous.

"Everybody knows what the law is and nobody needs a sign to tell them they can't smoke in my shop.

"I have put the sign up but they will not be getting any of my money."

A spokeswoman for Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council said: "The fine has been given to a Hinckley business and is yet to be paid.

"We visited this business on a number of occasions to inform the owner of the law.

"This was ignored and a fine was handed out in August."

The smoking ban came into force across England on July 1.

A Leicester Mercury survey of all Leicestershire's councils found many have carried inspections and given written warnings but not issued fines.

A spokesman for Charnwood Borough Council said: "We have carried out more than 600 inspections, with a 91 to 95 per cent compliance rate.

"We have not given any fines. There has only been one given in the East Midlands. We have given out 48 written warnings, mainly for not displaying signage."

The Government today released the results of a 1,800-person survey of workers and pub-goers.

Three-quarters of those questioned supported the law and 79 per cent believed it would have a positive effect on public health.

Backers said the low number of fines suggested the ban has become self-policing, as in Ireland and Scotland.

Minister of State for Public Health, Dawn Primarolo, said: "People of all ages are reaping the benefits of healthier, less smoky work and social environments, which in turn are seen as an incentive for many to get out and socialise more.

"The evidence is clear - secondhand smoke is a killer and removing it from enclosed public and work environments marks the single biggest improvement in public health for a generation."

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/

opposing the UK ban

A third of Scottish pubs have
reported laying off staff due
to the smoking ban, a survey
of landlords claims.

http://www.data-yard.net/10a3/scotland_pub_lo...

SIX months after the introduction of the smoking ban in Wales pubs have lost up to 20% of their trade, according to the Licensed Victuallers Association (LVA).
The group, which represents pub operators across Wales, says some businesses are on the brink of closure, while others have already gone to the wall following the ban’s introduction.
And the LVA say there is little optimism that trade will eventually return to its pre-ban levels as pubs are now regarded as hostile territory by smokers.
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales-new...

The fourth smoke ban rebel venue – HeyJo club in Westminster – continues to flout the smoking ban.
Owner of the club Dave West, who has hired Cherie Blair to force a Judicial Review of the ban, is also helping to organise a mass protest for Hamish Howitt's court appearance on 5 November.
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detai...

Smoking ban blamed for sale of pub

A disgruntled customer is thought to have daubed this message on a door of The Pack Horse pub in Chazy Heath
THE pumps have run dry at a Chazey Heath pub thanks to the introduction of the smoking ban, according to one disgruntled regular.
The entrance to The Pack Horse, on the A4074 Woodcote Road, has been daubed with the message “Very sorry we are closed. Thanks Labour + smoking ban” after it closed its doors earlier this month
http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/2016/2016798...

Cheddar businessman protesting against smoking ban

25 October 2007
A CHEDDAR businessman has been organising marches all over the country to protest against the smoking ban

http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/content/twm...

Smoking ban to hit GamingKing results
Mon 22 Oct 2007

LONDON (SHARECAST)- GamingKing’s sales level have been affected by the smoking ban and the gaming group now expects half-year losses to exceed that of the same period last year.

http://www.sharecast.com/cgi-bin/sharecast/st...

CLUBS FACING AXE AS SMOKING BAN BITES
EXCLUSIVE
By Stephen Hayward 21/10/2007
One in three bingo halls are facing closure because of the smoking ban.
About 600,000 customers have stayed away - a 20 per cent drop in attendance figures - since the July 1 ban in England. Industry experts believe around 200 of the country's 634 bingo clubs will have to shut - on top of 60 closures in the last year.

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/200...

CIG BAN? WHAT CIG BAN?

CIG BAN? WHAT CIG BAN?
CITY HOT SPOTS SMOKING AGAIN

May 27, 2007 -- While Mayor Bloomberg tries to make the world safe from greenhouse gases, his cigarette ban is going up in smoke.

Scores of trendy clubs and neighborhood pubs across the five boroughs have become smoking speakeasies, where bartenders and bouncers regularly ignore the prohibition launched in 2003.

The Post spotted scofflaw smokers openly puffing away in a dozen bars and clubs in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island during the past few weeks - including celebrity hangouts Bungalow 8, Tenjune, Butter, Marquee, Plumm and Guest House.

The violations The Post witnessed include:

* A bartender and 15 patrons smoking all night inside Doyle's Corner bar in Astoria on the rainy night of May 16. The same scenario was witnessed several weeks earlier.

* A half-dozen hipster patrons at Brooklyn Ale House in Williamsburg smoking openly at the bar and at back tables early Saturday morning.

* A bartender at Boat in Brooklyn saying, "It's 12:30. You can smoke now," as they passed out makeshift ashtrays last Wednesday night.

Earlier, she told a patron to stop smoking, but after her announcement, a number of patrons started up again and the bar was filled with smokers for another hour.

* Dozens of smokers puffing on the dance floor and in the VIP area at the Marquee club on back-to-back nights as security guards looked the other way last week.

* At least 10 people smoking in Chelsea's small, exclusive club Bungalow 8 Thursday night. A security guard walked past the smokers to tell The Post, "You can't take pictures in here."

* Half the patrons of the Annadale Inn in Staten Island lighting up in the wee hours after the bartender closed the window gate to keep out prying eyes several weeks ago.

* Several smokers blowing smoke in the small basement of Lit Lounge on Second Avenue last week.

"They used to" enforce the smoking ban, Brett, a Marquee regular, told The Post last week. "But they barely pay attention now."

Smoking has been prohibited in bars, nightclubs and restaurants since March 2003, after the Bloomberg initiative became law in the fall of 2002.

Establishments are responsible for prohibiting smoking indoors, putting up "no smoking" signs and eliminating all ashtrays. Smokers are not punished.

Fines of up to $2,000 can be issued for every violation, and after three in one year businesses could lose their licenses. From April 2006 to March 2007, nine businesses were permanently shut due to smoking.

The city Department of Health said most businesses have been compliant, although there are violators. "We can't be everywhere all the time," a spokeswoman said.

Agency statistics show 199 establishments hit with 542 violations from April 2006 to March 2007, compared to 162 establishments getting 258 violations in the prior 12-month period. The number of complaints dropped from about 3,000 to 2,000 from last year to this year.

"It's a lose-lose," said an employee of a popular club on West 27th Street. "If we send people outside to smoke, people in the neighborhood got annoyed about the noise. If we let them smoke inside, we get hit with fines."

Allowing smoking indoors is "the lesser of two evils," he said.

Katie Browne, 26, a New Jersey paralegal and frequent clubgoer, said she has noticed a rise in smoking at nightspots over the past year.

"I hate it. My clothes are back to smelling like smoke, and it's gross," she said. "But there's no doubt about it - smoking's back."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05272007/news/reg...

smoking ban great for strippers

More pubs are resorting to strippers and exotic dance nights to pull in badly-needed trade as the economy worsens and the smoking ban begins to bite.

Striptease and entertainment agencies say enquiries from pubs and clubs have significantly increased over the past six months.

One pub, the Sir Robert Peel in Kingston, Surrey, now runs stripper sessions seven nights a week, with up to three cabaret spots each day. Another pub, the Crown at Knaphill, near Woking, Surrey, launched Monday and Wednesday night sessions earlier this year after the smoking ban came into force.

Dawn Pugsley, from Angels Exotic in Windsor, Berkshire, said hard-pressed hosts were turning to strippers to entice drinkers through the door.

"We are getting a lot more enquiries from pubs and the numbers have risen sharply over the past few months or so. Licensees are telling me they are being forced to look at alternative forms of entertainment because they are struggling so badly," she said.

"More licensees are looking at these sort of nights, especially since the smoking ban began to hit trade."

Pubs advertising on the agency's website say there is no entry fee and no increase in bar prices on striptease nights, although customers are invited to donate £1 each to a "jug collection" after each session.

Crown manager Peter Hampton said business brought in by the strip shows had balanced smoking ban losses. "We are a beer pub and 95% of our regulars are smokers, so the ban hit us badly when it first came in," he said.

"We started the shows a fortnight after the ban started and it's definitely worked for us. Before we would have between 10 and 15 customers in here on a Monday, but now we are getting up to 50 people in the bar."
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=52915

Smoke ban blamed for closure

Smoke ban blamed for closure
A 100-year-old Cradley Heath pub has been forced to shut, with the landlord blaming the smoking ban as a reason for dwindling trade.

The Goldmine is now set to be demolished under plans for a care home.

Mark Walker fought plans to convert the pub into homes and the plans were thrown out in September.

However, he decided to close the pub last month as it was no longer profitable.

He said: “I think the smoking ban played a part.”
http://www.expressandstar.com/2007/11/02/smoke-ban-blamed-for-closure/

second hand smoke harmful?

I am not an Educated man but......
Excuse me if i get this out of the way first:

They are lying to you about the effect of SHS

Right i feel better now. Because of the smoking ban,up to 5000 pubs/clubs and bingo halls will close-many pubs will be turned into houses and their history and community value lost-i have cut n pasted an article below about under 18's buying tobacco,there is one very very important statement from DoH-can you spot it:

Pubs where under-18s buy cigarettes three times within two years could be banned from selling tobacco products for up to 12 months.

But despite the proposed new action against retailers, the Government has ruled out making it a crime for youngsters to try to buy tobacco.

The plans come as pubs are adjusting to the raising of the legal age for buying cigarettes, which increased from 16 to 18 on 1 October.

Under Department of Health (DoH) plans, magistrates could impose "restricted premises orders" and "restricted sales orders" for three sales to under-18s over the bar, or via machines, within a two-year period.

These orders would penalise hosts and bar staff as well as the outlet.

The premises order will prevent tobacco being sold on-site. The sales order will ban someone "selling or having management functions in relation to the sale of" tobacco products.

Orders will last up to one year and one of the three offences must be a conviction. A fine of up to £20,000 can be levied for breaching an order.

The DoH expects the orders to be in place in October 2008 as part of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.

Details were revealed this week in a letter from the DoH to councils. A DoH briefing paper says it is not appropriate to make it a crime to try to buy tobacco underage because unlike alcohol, "the harmful effects of tobacco are mainly on the individual smokers and it is, therefore, likely to be disproportionate to make buying a criminal offence".

Federation of Licensed Victuallers Associations chief executive Tony Payne criticised the inconsistency of having a law against buying alcohol while under the legal age, but not an equivalent law for buying cigarettes.

---------

Did you spot the cock up in the article:

"Details were revealed this week in a letter from the DoH to councils. A DoH briefing paper says it is not appropriate to make it a crime to try to buy tobacco underage because unlike alcohol, "the harmful effects of tobacco are mainly on the individual smokers and it is, therefore, likely to be disproportionate to make buying a criminal offence". "

This is from the DoH:

"the harmful effects of tobacco are mainly on the individual smokers"

Well in that case,why the heck can't we either go back to how we were or at least have indoor smoking rooms so non smokers do have a choice?
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=52858

The spread of campus smoking bans

I believe in the UK some college and university campus's are bringing in bans,nestled in the middle of this article is the fact that the ban will cover student accomodation-how long before we see such a ban in the UK? If they ban smoking in college accomodation,that could open the flood gates for social housing,either council or housing association-you have been warned,it will happen.

Smoking, chewing tobacco banned on IUSB campus in 2008
By DUSTIN GROVE
WSBT-TV Reporter

SOUTH BEND — One of Michiana's biggest college campuses is making a bold move to help students and staff snuff out tobacco.

A committee of students and staff came up with the new policy over the summer. Now, they're making it public.

Not only will smoking be banned, but chewing tobacco too. Indiana University administrators say it's all an effort to get people to give up the habit.


On Wednesday morning, Alan George enjoyed a cigarette between classes. And as usual, he followed the rules — puffing 20 feet away from the door.

But in two months, he'll have to make a choice — smoke off campus or quit.

"I understand the restaurants and stuff, you don't want to smoke on the premises, but campus in the open air. I don't see why that's a problem,” George told WSBT News.

"It is a stringent policy," said IUSB spokesman Ken Baierl.

A stringent policy IUSB officials say came from the top. Like a growing number of colleges and universities, IU administrators ordered their campuses statewide to come up with a smoke-free policy by next year.

"And what IU South Bend decided to do was become tobacco-free,” explained Baierl. “What that means is you can't smoke on this campus, you can't chew tobacco on this campus, beginning Jan. 1.”

The tobacco ban covers every inch of the campus property, from academic buildings to sidewalks and park benches. Once finished, it'll also include student housing across the river.

It's a trend catching on in communities across the country, with smoking now banned in restaurants, businesses and even some city parks, putting the squeeze on smokers who are now facing fewer places to light up.

“People do have individual rights but when you come together as a campus community or any kind of institution or business, you try to do what's right for the greater good," said Baierl. "We hope that people will quit smoking because of this."

"[It] might help me. Maybe not,” Alan Gage said. “It's a tough habit to quit.”

The university says it's offering free classes for students and staff to quit smoking.

You can go to the parking lot and smoke in your car, but university officials say the smoke has to stay in the car.
http://www.southbendtribune.com