Smoking Ban in Public Houses

dod

In principle I welcome Minister McDowells proposals to make adjustments to the laws that license Publicans in Ireland. Because of the fact that so much of the social fabric of Irish life is built around drinking occasions, it is arguable that the publicans are one of the most powerful factions in Ireland. For this reason, former Ministers for Justice have been unwilling to confront them, or, at least, when they did nominally confront them, the Vintners faction always forced the government to back down. We all acknowledge the difficulties that an excessive drink culture has caused in Ireland- causing fractures within families, for young adult peer groups, ‘social drinking’ on a Friday night which is a euphemism for binge drinking, rape allegations that cannot be substantiated because the victim cannot recall what came to pass due to her state of inebriation, and so forth- the list of examples is endless.

I wonder, though, about his proposal, in conjunction with the political dead-duck Minister for Health Martin, to enforce a complete ban on smoking in all pubs from the beginning of next year. Firstly, let me say that I am not a smoker. I do not object to smoking as such and I do not object to people in my company smoking. However, like many other non-smokers, I do not enjoy sitting in an atmosphere that is laden with second-hand smoke.

The pub magnate Louis Fitzgerald I think it was, who, when realising that this smoking ban proposal was imminent, suggested a self-regulated scheme whereby every pub would be broken up 50% non-smoking and 50% smoking. Again, in my opinion, this would be unenforceable and is a typical example of the Vintners faction appearing to pander to the government by seeming to adhere to the legislative requirement in the full knowledge that it could not be implemented in practice. Where exactly do you define the border between the two areas? What if a smoker has to pass through the non-smoking area to get to the facilities? What is the penalty for somebody inadvertently taking out a cigarette in the non-smoking area- a slap on the wrist and a knowing wag of the finger? How do you decide what staff work in the smoking area and who in the non-smoking area? When (as will inevitably happen) a non-smoking former member of the bar staff sues for bronchial problems caused by exposure to second-hand smoke in the workplace, will it entitle all those who worked in the smoking sections of pubs to sue, but those who worked in the non-smoking sections will be considered not to have been sufficiently exposed to the risk factor?

The implementation of a 100% smoking ban in all public houses would be enforceable in large urban centres. Send in a plainclothes Garda and if photographical evidence of a violation of the rule can be found, then the suitable penalties can be imposed. However, what about Smiths pub down in some rural village, miles from civilisation. Auld Tom has been coming in for thirty years after his days work for his pint of stout and a puff on his pipe. If this is your pub, are you going to explain to him that he is now to be denied his only indulgence? In a village atmosphere, are you going to be the small town Garda who, incurring the wrath of the locals, shuts down the pub, which is the centre of the village social life for a violation that ultimately intruded on nobody?

What about others who work in a service industry like bar staff, but who are not covered by this legislation? Those who staff the travel agencies? Hairdressers? The people who work behind the counters in bookmaking offices? The estate agents? Shoe shop assistants? The list is endless. Bar staff and customers are not to be exposed to second hand smoke, but those who find themselves in similar circumstances but outside a public house environment may be exposed to a customers second-hand smoke.

I think the solution to this problem is to allow a publican to chose whether his public house is a smoking public house or not. Non-smoking public houses could be encouraged through some sort of marginally lower government duty on drink sold in these venues. That a public house is a non-smoking venue must be clearly advertised outside the premises. However, whether a smoking venue or not, minimum standards of air quality must be enforced at all times. These air quality standards would be defined in terms of environmental measures that can be easily assessed by environmental inspectors. Modern air conditioning equipment would allow the publican to ensure that these standards were adhered to. Auld Tom can continue to smoke away, but the bar must ensure that the air is clean for other customers. In this way, a non-smoker can chose to enter a non-smoking bar, or, even if he enters a smoking bar, because of the clean air standards is guaranteed not to have the irritation, or the potential health threat, of second-hand smoke. These air standards should be enforced in all the other places where staff and customers find themselves working in a service environment- the travel agencies, shoe shops and so forth. Inspectors finding a premises in violation of these air standards will be able to report the violation to the Gardai who will be able to take the appropriate steps to enforce whatever the appropriate penalties are.

Whether a complete or a partial smoking ban is implemented will not directly affect me. It will not compromise where I go out or when I go out. However I believe the ‘clean-air’ approach is more balanced and more enforceable, can be applied across a broader range of industries than simply public houses, and likely to lead to less confrontation in the short-term.

davelerave

the vintners might be against a ban on smoking but i'm sure the people on the ground(the bar staff) are all for it.i dont think the ban will be enforced by gardai in anyway they've better things for doin .There's goin to be a lot of people takin fag breaks outside pubs.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by davelerave
i dont think the ban will be enforced by gardai in anyway they've better things for doin .

Running their own pubs and other nixers.

Imposter

Originally posted by davelerave
the vintners might be against a ban on smoking but i'm sure the people on the ground(the bar staff) are all for it.

Bar staff take the job knowing they'll be working in such an environment. They can always look for a job in a different industry if they're anti-smoking in bars.

I don't think this argument coming from the view of barstaff has any merit. Coming from the view of customers is a different story though.

i dont think the ban will be enforced by gardai in anyway they've better things for doin .

They have better things to be doing but are they doing them?

Wolf

What a load of old Bollax :mad: I know some ones going to shoot me down for this but this kind of ban is bloodly stupid, it almost like puting a drinking limit on pubs what a load of horse testicals.

growler

I think it's the first time I can remember a socially progressive and quite unpopular law being brought into this country in a long time, fair play to Mc Dowell for having the balls to go push this one through. Smoking does no one any favours except the shareholders of carrolls and players.

Couple of points: what about hairdressers etc etc. , welll you have to start somewhere and people spend more time in pubs smoking than they do in the hairdressers. It would be a lot easier to implement in other premises at a later date.

The argument for the old fella in the pub in ballymacough is very interesting , I had never realised how much your average irish smoker cared for the comfort of their nicotine addicted country cousins but this point is raised by everyone anti this law. Well, tough ****, let the publican build a little hut in the back garden for his loyal smokers, but the law and our government does not have a moral obligation to allow people to continue with a habit that directly adversely affects the health of others around them.

Gardai, I think most people agree that the coppers have better things to be doing / would lose a lot of respect locally in implementing this law , so create a self financing enforecement unit that issues on the spot fines to both publicans and/or smokers in breach of the law, with backup to be provided by the guards if it turns ugly ,with the licensee becoming liable for greater penalties if their customers cause problems.

Overall this should be applauded, maybe they make some other tough decisions that are in the interest of their voters and not just businesses.

Lemming

The reason why McDowell is pushing this through is because he knows that the publicans wont do anything to alleviate the situation off their own backs. Divide a pub in two? Please. Don't make me laugh. It's lip service.

If the publicans really gave a damn they'd have installed PROPER air-conditioning a long time ago. But no, they want to create as smokey and warm an atmosphere as possible to make you buy as much drink as possible to "cool down". It's as cycnical a business as they come here in this country.

F*ck them.

bug

If the publicans really gave a damn they'd have installed PROPER air-conditioning a long time ago. But no, they want to create as smokey and warm an atmosphere as possible to make you buy as much drink as possible to "cool down". It's as cycnical a business as they come here in this country

I'm a smoker myself, as a smoker I enjoy a cigarette, but do not enjoy sitting in smoke filled warm atmospheres. I think that publicans should be given guidelines between now and january next year to give them the chance of having Proper air-conditioning installed, the department of health can then inspect the systems in individual pubs, pubs who haven't installed these systems by january 1st should have this smoking ban imposed on them. I know it would cost money, but in the interest of public health it should be done. One particular pub I have been in Sosume in the city centre has a excellent air-conditioning system.
IMO publicans will lose alot of money because of this ban, so an air-conditioning system is an investment.

I for one know that I would prefer not to enter a pub if I can't have a ciggy. I'm not running out the door every five minutes...someone will take my seat, or I could miss that goal.

DaithiSurfer

I am against smoking in pubs.
I got asthma and i can't get a nights sleep after going to the pub.
If you want fresh air go up the mountains you say.
Well if you want to smoke go outside is what i'll be saying lol.
Why should the person whio is not causing the smoke problem be the want to stay out of the pub though?
Surely the smokers should be the ones to suffer instead of the long suffering non-smokers?

Lemming

Originally posted by bug
I think that publicans should be given guidelines between now and january next year to give them the chance of having Proper air-conditioning installed, the department of health can then inspect the systems in individual pubs, pubs who haven't installed these systems by january 1st should have this smoking ban imposed on them.

TBH, I'd be in favour of this more than just a blanket ban, since a blanket ban has to be imposed and there's no incentive since you're damned if you do and damned if you don't (from the publicans point of view).

I also think that dangling a carrot in front of them will be far more painful for them than the blanket ban since it'll cost them (potentially) a massive sum of money to acheive and an even more massive sum of money if they don't, which is another reason why I'm more in favour of it.

Having seen the difference abroad, returning to Irish pubs is a f*cking joke.

Imposter

Originally posted by Lemming
Having seen the difference abroad, returning to Irish pubs is a f*cking joke.

Well said.

DaithiSurfer

As for people saying that they won't go to the pub if they can't smoke....
Don't make me laugh

rubadub

"a complete ban on smoking in all pubs from the beginning of next year"
-the ban is on smoking in the workplace, pubs just happen to be workplaces. it would be discrimination not to include them.

"suggested a self-regulated scheme whereby every pub would be broken up 50% non-smoking and 50% smoking. Again, in my opinion, this would be unenforceable"
-not just unenforceable but useless. it is similar to letting people only urinate and deficate in the shallow end of a swimming pool and hoping nothing will make it to the deepend. smoke wont reach a magical line and choose to stop spreading.

"Auld Tom has been coming in for thirty years after his days work for his pint of stout and a puff on his pipe. If this is your pub, are you going to explain to him that he is now to be denied his only indulgence?"
-you explain it to him the same way the busdriver told auld mick that he couldnt smoke on the bus to work anymore like he did for 30 years. "sorry it is the law, end of argument Tom".

"In a village atmosphere, are you going to be the small town Garda who, incurring the wrath of the locals, shuts down the pub, which is the centre of the village social life for a violation that ultimately intruded on nobody?"
-the gardas job is to uphold the law, end of story, he doesnt make the laws. if they have any problems they should contact their politicians. in letting people smoke to get more business the publican knows he is breaking the law and only has himself to blame if closed down, just like a publican who serves after hours to get more business.

"What about others who work in a service industry like bar staff, but who are not covered by this legislation? Those who staff the travel agencies? Hairdressers? The people who work behind the counters in bookmaking offices? The estate agents? Shoe shop assistants? The list is endless."
-as far as i know it is a total ban on smoking in the workplace including travel agencies and hairdressers etc. do you have any information otherwise?


"These air quality standards would be defined in terms of environmental measures that can be easily assessed by environmental inspectors. Modern air conditioning equipment would allow the publican to ensure that these standards were adhered to"
-this is sadly not true. studies have shown that most air conditioning units cannot reduce gas levels to what inspectors regard a safe level. most remove the tiny smoke particles but not the invisible toxic gases like carbon monoxide. it could be done but would be impractical, i.e. every smoker you have to hold their cigarette under a vent just like a welder's vent hood. otherwise it would take a vent system which would be like a galeforce wind in the pub to fully extract the toxic gases.

davelerave

Originally posted by Lemming
The reason why McDowell is pushing this through is because he knows that the publicans wont do anything to alleviate the situation off their own backs. Divide a pub in two? Please. Don't make me laugh. It's lip service.

If the publicans really gave a damn they'd have installed PROPER air-conditioning a long time ago. But no, they want to create as smokey and warm an atmosphere as possible to make you buy as much drink as possible to "cool down". It's as cycnical a business as they come here in this country.

F*ck them.

you drink more when you're not smoking!
their secret weapon to get people drinking more is noise(music or tv),so you can't talk

Lemming

Originally posted by davelerave
you drink more when you're not smoking!
their secret weapon to get people drinking more is noise(music or tv),so you can't talk

No, that's part of it. They don't use just one particular "technique" to get you drinking more, but several.

Peanuts, Crisps, Smoke, Crammed bars, Noise all contribute.

Stark

Great isn't it? I notice if I'm having fun in a pub, chatting, having a laugh and relaxed and stuff, then I drink hardly anything. If I'm in a cramped crowded ****hole where I can't hear myself think I drink to get wasted. So every publican's idea is to ruin your night as much as possible so they can turn a profit (particular reference to the Goat, one of the student pubs down in Cork).

dod

(Homer Simpson voice): Mmmm...... Beer....

bonkey

Originally posted by k.oriordan
I notice if I'm having fun in a pub, chatting, having a laugh and relaxed and stuff, then I drink hardly anything. If I'm in a cramped crowded ****hole where I can't hear myself think I drink to get wasted. So every publican's idea is to ruin your night as much as possible so they can turn a profit

I wouldnt say "every publican". There are quiet bars - just as there are noisy ones - in every town I've ever been drinking in.

The trick is to decide what it is you are going to a pub for, and then to go to the appropriate one. On the pull / out to get langered / quiet few beers / social chat - there's a pub catering to your taste.

The problem is that most people seem to choose a watering hole of choice, and then complain bitterly when it isnt perfect for their "mood of the day", and blame it all on the publican.

I find it laughable. If the publican is "ruining your night", then go somewhere else. If there's nowhere else to go, then ou have a choice - accept your limited options, or dont go to the pub.

Its a shocking concept, I know, but as a consumer, your only real power is in choosing what you consume, and where you consume it. Don't blame someone else for your choices.

jc

jc

Stark

sorry, there are of course some very nice pubs in Cork which I love to go to. I'm a student unfortunately though, so I'm often driven by the great unwashed masses of ucc into the nearest student ****hole to get ratfaced (have been getting away from this lifestyle though, stopped going to class outings since first year etc.)

LizardKing

One of the main contributing factors I've found is that when I try to quit smoking , I am fine at home / work however once I set foot in a smoky pub and get some drink into me , I lose it and start craving and end up giving in as I get more drunk.

So for this reason I think it would really help me to eventually quit completely. I'm sure other people have the same experiences... I'm all for the ban .... might inadvertently help add a few more years to peoples lives

Cork

I think a smoking ban is welcome in pubs.

Publicans need to ensure that their workers are not subjected to any ill health from their work environment. The same goes for their customers.

Why should you have to endure cigerette smoke in a pub?

Why should you have to smell like an ashtray after a few drinks?

This measure is a simple one - a outright ban.

& if a publican cannot control his or her premises - he or she should not get a licence to sell drink.

rubadub

the right of a person not to be subjected to toxic gases in their workplace far outwieghs a persons right to inhale toxic gases in the workplace

trickster

if you dont want to be subjected to smoke in pubs why dont you stay at home with your non smoking friends drinking can? if you dont like the way a pub is smokey dont go in there. more ppl in pubs are smokes than non smokers. the pubs will suffer a serious loss of profits, the goverment will loose out on taxes from alcahol and raise taxes on something else (petrol?). look at new york a total ban on smoking and some buisness lost over 40% of their customers....i havent heard too many bars doing really well in new york lately

colster

Smoking should be absolutely banned in Public Houses.
It is the governments and the publicans responsibility to protect the health of the employees and customers in licensed houses.
Passive Smoking is a threat to the health of the non-smoking employees and customers.
There is also a responsibility on the government to stamp out smoking altogether.
By banning smoking in pubs it will help to stamp out smoking.

Xterminator

Originally posted by trickster
if you dont want to be subjected to smoke in pubs why dont you stay at home with your non smoking friends drinking can? if you dont like the way a pub is smokey dont go in there. more ppl in pubs are smokes than non smokers. the pubs will suffer a serious loss of profits, the goverment will loose out on taxes from alcahol and raise taxes on something else (petrol?). look at new york a total ban on smoking and some buisness lost over 40% of their customers....i havent heard too many bars doing really well in new york lately

The knock on savings in costs to the health service when less drunks crowd our accident emergency wards, and less people suffering from smoking related disease will more than make up for the shortfall in vat.
Then the number of sick days from work, will be reduced etc.

Away from simply counting the costs, the knock on effects will improve the quality of life for those who dont delelop the diseases associated with smoking, as well as saving the grief for there immediate family and friend. How do you quantify the value of quaility of life?

At the end of the day, bar workers are entitled to not be poisoned during the course of their working day.

PS Irish Indo today reporting support for the ban is running at 70% in the latest polls.

X

Lemming

Originally posted by trickster
if you dont want to be subjected to smoke in pubs why dont you stay at home with your non smoking friends drinking can?

Why should WE be the ones forced to stay at home? We're not inflicting harm on another person by intake of drink? You are, by simply breathing whilst smoking.

more ppl in pubs are smokes than non smokers.

Trustworthy figures (plus source) to back this up please.

the pubs will suffer a serious loss of profits, the goverment will loose out on taxes from alcahol

The publicans will take a hit, but people will still by alcohol. Besides, isn't the government complaining that we drink too much anyway?

look at new york a total ban on smoking and some buisness lost over 40% of their customers....i havent heard too many bars doing really well in new york lately

IIRC, the ban in NYC is only in some pubs and not others, therefore the smokers are all piling into select pubs.

One other thing. The pub is a workplace as well as your socialising place.

Imposter

Originally posted by trickster
more ppl in pubs are smokes than non smokers.

What? I've been in the odd pub :rolleyes: and i've rarely seen a single table (with more than say 3 or 4 people) where the majority are smokers. Also what about people who stay out of pubs because it is so smoky? They're now new customers that the publican has and wouldn't have without the ban. And tbh most smokers will still go to pubs.

trickster

i suppose the health one is a good piont but i think ppl should be allowed to smoke if they want tooand if they know the risks of smoking. and if you go to work in a pub you should expect it to be smokey...just like if i go to work in a slaughter house i should expect to see a little blood.

Stark

They don't make you drink the blood though and you I assume you have to keep strict hygiene when working there. This isn't the case when you walk into a smoky bar. When has the long term health of a slaughter house worker been affected by their job?

Lemming

Originally posted by trickster
i suppose the health one is a good piont but i think ppl should be allowed to smoke if they want tooand if they know the risks of smoking.

Trickster, you're missing the point completely. Personally if you smoke, it's your own fault when your lungs collapse from cancer, but you're going to take me and everyone esle sitting around you along for the ride too. Get the point now?

and if you go to work in a pub you should expect it to be smokey ...just like if i go to work in a slaughter house i should expect to see a little blood.

The sight of blood isn't detremental to your health. See my above point.

Imposter

Originally posted by trickster
i suppose the health one is a good piont but i think ppl should be allowed to smoke if they want tooand if they know the risks of smoking. and if you go to work in a pub you should expect it to be smokey...just like if i go to work in a slaughter house i should expect to see a little blood.

I agree with you regarding the people who work in pubs but by your reasoning what choice does the non-smoker who also knows the risks of smoking have if he/she wants to go to a pub for a drink if you or any other smokers are there? Should they have no rights?