The Smoking Ban Debate - What is it all about?
The government is in the process of considering putting in place a ban on smoking in public places such as cafes, restaurants, pubs and offices. This week, with the Scottish Executive close to introducing such a ban in Scotland and the rest of the UK possibly following suit, we explore what the debate is all about.
What are the pros and cons of a smoking ban?
Those who are for the ban warn that the link between passive smoking and lung cancer is becoming stronger, and they want smoking to be prohibited in public places in the UK. Many smokers trying to give up also admit that such a ban would help them to quit.
Those against it say that there is no need for such a ban and that the tourism industry is taking enough measures to deal with the effects of passive smoking. The Freedom Organisation for the Right to Enjoy Smoking Tobacco (Forest), founded in 1979, say that an outright ban is not needed, and that both smokers and non-smokers should have the right to choose. (http://www.forestonline.org/output/Page1.asp)
Some believe that smoking in public should be restricted, but that a "blanket ban" is not a good idea.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3978147.stm)
Is a ban on smoking in public places the only way to deal with the negative effects of smoking?
The government has taken measures in recent years to try to diminish the harmful effects of smoking. These include increasing the cost of cigarettes, and restricting tobacco advertising. More recently, some pubs and restaurants have taken measures to reduce the effects of passive smoking, such as introducing better ventilation in pubs to reduce the smoky atmosphere.
However, it is not clear if the results of actions like these have had enough of an effect. In Norway, for example, despite the fact that tobacco advertising has been banned for 30 years and that a packet of cigarettes costs about £6, this has not deterred smokers. One in three people smoke cigarettes, and there has been an increase in tobacco-related deaths. Norway introduced a national ban on smoking in bars and restaurants in June. In Canada, where smoking levels are some of the lowest in the world, public health experts say that this is because of tough anti-smoking measures adopted in recent years. As well as bans on smoking in workplaces and lots of public places, cigarette packets bear graphic images of the damage done to internal organs by smoking. (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/3758707.stm)
One line of reasoning against a total ban is that a compromise is necessary. Some pub owners say that they would be willing to make their premises 80% smoke free. (http://www.corbytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=317&ArticleID=880250)
Would a ban on smoking in public places work?
Would people be willing to step outside the pub to have a smoke? In Ireland, where strict anti-smoking legislation was introduced in March banning smoking in pubs, restaurants and other workplaces, most smokers have observed the new legislation without dispute. Many say that the government should wait longer to see the effect of the ban in Ireland before deciding whether to implement it in the UK (http://www.corbytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=317&ArticleID=880250)
What are the negative effects of a smoking ban?
Anti-smoking laws have provoked a strong debate in the US. In New York, smoking has been banned in bars, clubs and restaurants since March 2003. Some bar owners say their businesses are suffering and smokers say their rights are being infringed. (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/3758707.stm)
Diageo, the company which owns Guinness, have also blamed the smoking ban in the Republic of Ireland for a fall in sales. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/3991835.stm)
There may also be uncertainty over who will implement such a ban. In Scotland, where a ban on smoking in public places is due to be announced soon, senior police officers have told the Scottish Executive that they will not enforce it. In Ireland, regional health boards are involved in enforcing the ban - they can impose fines and take away drink licences from premises where the ban is ignored. (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1346053,00.html)
Another argument against a blanket ban is that it would take away personal freedom.
http://www.corbytoday.co.uk/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=317&ArticleID=880250
What is the Latest?
According to the Telegraph this week, the Government is to ban smoking in restaurants and offices but will allow it to continue in pubs. This would come into effect after the next election and would be preceded by an advertising campaign to persuade smokers to quit. The newspaper quotes John Reid, the Health Secretary, who is a former heavy smoker, who said that he would like to see everybody in Britain give up cigarettes, but stressed that it was a matter of personal choice. "The state cannot make the decision to quit for you," he said.
Do you think that a ban on smoking in public places like restaurants, bars, cafes and offices should be put into place? Why not post your views on the Messageboard?
(YCIA cannot be held responsible for the content of the websites highlighted in this article.)
