Save our pubs ... amend the ban
Wednesday, January 28, 2009 
Yesterday afternoon someone sent me a text message. "Where are you?", it said. "At the Queen's Head in Coggleshall, Essex," I replied, truthfully.
It's early days but we are currently working on a new campaign called "Save Our Pubs and Clubs: Amend the Smoking Ban". (I know, it's a bit of a mouthful, but it does what it says on the tin.) Coalition partners include the Adam Smith Institute, the liberal think tank Progressive Vision and, most important, several branches of the Federation of Licensed Victuallers Associations who represent self-employed licensees in the licensed trade.
Yesterday was our first meeting with publicans. Our host was Paul Lofthouse (above) who runs, with his wife Liz, the Queen's Head in Coggleshall. Paul not only initiated the meeting, he also got the local media interested, including (as you can see HERE) the BBC.
As I say, the campaign is currently in development but as soon as there is more to report (including how you can help), I'll let you know. In the meantime we need to find many more publicans like Paul Lofthouse who are willing to stand up and be counted.
Simon Clark
See article in local paper HERE. The story was also covered by BBC Radio Essex.
Reader Comments (38)
Now then,It will be interesting if more publicans are going to support this effort. I will put the message across as best I can, but I don't hold much faith.
I have tried before and all the repsonse is a shrug of the shoulders.
Lets see what the almighty truthful Beeb has to say.
Marvellous news Simon, at last some real action. We have all heard enough talking over the last 18 months to last a lifetime. This is what I have been advocating since this whole disastrous mess was first initiated. Well done.
P.s. When the film starts, there is a bald headed guy in the background, obviously smoking in front of the camera. Was this done as a protest, and will or could the pub be prosecuted for it?
last night the first episode of the new series of "Shameless" aired on Ch4....one scene showed an empty pub on a Friday night...all the regulars were sitting outside smoking and drinking from tins..no one was patronising the bar.....finally the landlord caved, and said "OK you win, you can smoke inside"
IF ONLY
Good news. Alas too late for many of my favourite Oxfordshire pubs. My monthly gig at an Irish pub [real, not themed] is no more. Landlord has sold on and moved back to Ireland, following a 22% drop in takings post-ban. The newly music-free punter-free pub is currently selling beer at £1.50/pint ahead of it's relaunch as yet another gastro-pub.
Nulabor will, of course, portray this campaign as the work of vested-interests. If the licensees won't get with the program, then they shall be demonised alongside the tobacco-lobby, for know-better-than-thou nulabor care not a jot about cultural-heritage, nor for the livelihoods of ordinary people. No, what matters to self-serving nulabor are stupid arbitrary plucked-from-air targets and statistics fiddled to show how well nulabor are doing at meeting them.
I shall hate nulabor for as long as I live. No word is too low to describe them, not even that four letter word the tabloids use to whip up righteous indignation about benefit-cheats.
They will fall - badly - at the next election as they've been found out and the spin just doesn't work any more, but nulabor's crimes against democracy - crimes against this country and it's people must never be forgotten.
It's a bit late now isn't it?
Sorry to sound a bit deflated over this, but shouldn't you have been doing this before the ban?
It was obvious what would happen, except to those that believe every word that comes out of lobby groups during lobbying stages, ie NuLab MPs with a huge majority.
What you should be doing is going directly to HMG. They keep stating that they will do anything within their power to keep people in jobs. Utter rubbish. Tell that to the publicans, the taxi drivers, the musicians and artistes, the bar staff, even the glass collectors who are there to just collect their pocket money.
They could do something tomorrow if they wished to safeguard their jobs, but they won't.
HMG know that if a change was made to the ban that customers would return immediately and safeguard jobs. They're not interested in this country. They're only interested in a 'utopia' that they have created within their own heads.
Get the publicans behind you - that's a good start. But the main agenda has to be to get this gov't out of office. They refuse to listen to anyone because they're living in their own little made-up 'bubble' of protection.
Yes, well, better late than never.
Please see my comment below on the Brussels Blog and keep this campaign crisp and business-like.
I've seen your post now on the last blog - a good one too.
How many times have you said that though Margot, and yet we still hear the same thing?
I agree entirely. I can't remember the last time I used the NHS, or any of it's products - yet I smoke 30+ a day. I've only ever used medical help with my 3 pregnancies - I'm an unknown to my doctor, and so are my kids - and I smoke all over the house (horror on horror in this day and age!)
Perhaps I'm not lining their pockets enough and that's why they don't like me, and so see me as 'disposable' in their crusade for greed.
I too don't visit the doctors or dentist for that matter. Nor do I touch many pharmecutical products ( if any ) or that hippy crap either. And I feel a hell of a lot better for not doing so. Any time I have the flu I can shake it off within a couple of days or even in a day, because my immune system is so used to fighting bacteria without any aides.
More to the point, I would have fully recovered if I spent all my time just WAITING to see a doctor!
Carl
Advocate civil disobedience. Several pubs in the UK have freedom-loving landlords that permit a crafty fag or two. With sufficient numbers of people ignoring the ban it will be unenforceable.
There should also be a war fund to help publicans slapped with a fine.
Cicero.
With respect, I disagree. Risking fines just helps line HMG's pockets. We have shown the way forward. We have voted with our feet.. Reinstatement of smoking rooms is the only way to save the traditional British pub. Anything less would be defeatist.
On a recent visit to a cafe in France, I was amused to be served by a waiter with a fag in his mouth.....
Thats what we need now, more publicans like Paul Lofthouse. If a good proportion of publicans get together and ignore the law, like they do on the continent, they will not be prosecuted as there is strength in numbers.
Because if Publicans dont trust each other enough to see out such an action sooner rather than later, they will end up like Ireland, where the publicans were like sheep and layed down without a bleep and where today some wanker from the WHO added insult to injury and described ireland of having a smoking epidemic and would need to clean up its act.
In these recessionery times with jobs going to the wall left right and centre, it says a lot when govts dont even think about cutting back on these quangos.
I would love if some investigative journalist, who in these recessionery times must be desperate for a good story, would follow the money trail and see where it all goes. Does it go into govt coffers for junkets or is it poured straight back into the frontline of the health service or WHAT!
The publicans in Ireland withdrew their oblections to the smoking ban in return for the Irish government dropping plans to introduce 'cafe style' licenses so popular on the Continent. They were more afraid of losing their yuppie customers than their smokers but backed the wrong horse.
Same thing happened in the UK in that publicans believed the lies and could not care less about their smoking punters as they were promised hoards of asthmatic families gobbling up overpriced frozen food washed down with highly profitable wines and soft drinks. Thet still do not care about smokers and only because they are getting it in the neck do they push for an amendment.
I do not agree with a few landlords making a stand as that happened and only those few suffered. Smokers should continue to boycott pubs and sit at home drinking cheap beer. Put the pubs out of business and eventually when it is really hurting the Exchequer a change may be made.
As a quick aside, the recession and credit crunch are being worsened by the smoking ban. About a quarter of the adult population had their spending patterns changed overnight which has impacted on pubs, restaurants, taxi drivers, entertainers, babysitters etc. Clothes sales are down as people are less inclined to buy something new if they are just going to stay at home and the overall impact is a domino effect. I cannot say that people were not warned.
Simon,
Just remind the MPs that every time one of the nine million smokers is standing outside in the pouring rain having a smoke, they are thinking "Which bastard forced me to stand outside in order to do something which is otherwise perfectly legal?".
I would take Michael Peoples' apt comments a step further. and say that the smoking ban has been a major cause of the worldwide recession. It has not just affected it.
I also believe the original estimate that one-third of the world population are smokers, is nearer the truth than the one-quarter which is the official figure.
If one third of the world population has withdrawn itself from social interactivity, the result would be as it now is.
The only statistics I believe in are those created by till receipts. The smoking ban has failed on all counts. In the UK, smoking patterns have scarcely changed. Published figures show that smoking has increased in men by 1% and has remained unchanged in women. In Canada and Ireland, who have had the ban longer, smoking has increased.
Hopefully our government must now take a hard look at the amount of taxpayers' money being wasted in the public sector. The likes of ASH serve no useful purpose whatsoever. Neither do the myriad bureaucrats who waste valuable police time insisting they be fed with endless paperwork. Neither do the majority of statisticians. The list of these quasi-autonomous non-productive bureaucracies is endless. .
.
I agree with Cicero. There is effectively no hunting ban because of the lengths protesters were prepared to go. What keeps the smoking ban going is the threat to the landlord of a £2500 fine and possible shutting of his business. Many individuals would risk the small chance of a £50 fine. One feasible protest would be for a number of people to buy a venue in their joint names and form a smoking club, serving non-alcoholic refreshments and carefully not contravening food safety, or any other laws.
Simon
At last! For the first time since this unreasonable ban was forced upon us, I feel the tide is just starting to turn towards favouring a much needed amendment.
Although most of the time I feel Cicero and would love to break all the rules and, just for once, light up in the middle of a pub out of pure mischief and delight.
However, I must agree with Margot Johnson that the only way forward is the one that has already begun. We have indeed voted with our feet and it has caused misery for those within the hospitality trade and for all smokers like myself who feel socially excluded.
I believe the time is ripe to embark upon a campaign route to save our clubs and pubs but we do need the collective support of all publicans/hoteliers across the UK.
It is a great start and I am very grateful to all of you who are trying to overturn this spiteful blanket ban.
Thank you...
May I add a further consideration?
By withdrawing the beneficial healing properties of nicotine from all enclosed spaces, ill health has greatly increased. We now have the fairly new risk of deep vein thrombosis during long haul flights. Our hospitals are known to be high risk venues as germs circulate endlessly and mutate. All large enclosed spaces like airports have stuffy unhealthy atmospheres. Chemical air fresheners add to the dangers. Such venues save money by believing that as smoking has been banned there is no necessity to introduce fresh air into their air conditioning systems.
Many people are aware of all this and avoid such venues like the plague.
All this applies also, of course, to pubs and restaurants. Proprietors should now have freedom to assess market forces and be allowed to run their businesses as they see fit. Non-smokers would still have freedom of choice as to where they wish to spend their leisure time and money. Smokers do not have this choice - and so they stay away.
I don't know whether it's to the British people's credit or not that they're so law abiding they tolerate this interference in their civil liberties.
Perhaps we need to find a passage in the Koran that permits smoking in pubs.
I noticed a change in the UK when this ban was introduced. The pub now stinks of BO and is boring as hell. Europe just ignores the ban.
Those that passed this 'Law' are still allowed to smoke in the palace of Westminster.
Govt. is there by our authority. Authority only exists if the individual gives it - basic no?
The following demonstrates what the 'pub experience' is like in today's current climate:
Recently, my husband suggested we take a drive out and revisit a pub we used to go to many years ago. "Great idea!" thought I, conjuring up happy memories of old oak beams, brass work and log fires blazing (apparently they can smoke!)
However, we were in for a shock when we arrived. The old oak door was bolted and the new brickwork entrance was now located around the side. The inside had been completely sterilized with parque flooring and bland square tables, aligned restaurant style, and all spotlighted with downlighters (very atmospheric!)
Where was the bar?
Anyway, we were greeted by two young ladies who enthusiastically asked us if we would like a table (in my mind I was screaming "NO, I would like a pint and and ashtray, please").
We declined their offer and said we would just like a drink at the bar we'd spotted in the far distance...and would they mind if I smoked?
Stunned silence!
I quickly produced my new electronic cigarette and assured them that this was completely legal and that I always ask out of courtesy as the device is very realistic. I assured them that I would be vapourising not smoking.
After a full demonstration on how this device worked and after they had inspected the inside to make sure that it did not contain any tobacco we were escorted to the bar (phew!)
We sat down to enjoy our drinks and realised just how empty the place was. At the very far end a couple sat reading together, another isolated soul was working on his laptop.
Would we have stayed for another drink?
No, we decided to head home for a bottle of wine and... my ashtray!
Michael suggested above that when the Exchequer feels the bite of pub closures, it might feel ready to consider an amendment.
It has acknowledged the crisis and a working group is already in existence. The MP involved continues to deny that the ban is a factor (despite, I've no doubt, knowing that it would be - why else introduce it in the height of summer?).
I think that the only way forward is for those of us who know the truth to keep publicising it to garner more grassroots support and to urge people to write to their MPs and tell them that the ban and its ramifications (the demonisation of decent people and all that has ensued from it such as employment and adoption discrimination) are sufficient grounds not to vote for them. It's by no means certain that NuLabour will be replaced by the Tories in the next GE so both parties will want every vote. If the cultural tide is changing (and I think it is) it would be wonderful if UK publicans. like those in Holland, formed an informal union and, en masse, simply defied the ban. It's absolutely useless for a few to do so - they're simply prosecuted out of business. Every pub needs to do it and the court system would simply collapse under the strain if every publican refused to pay the fine and if every one of their loyal customers physically supported them inside and outside the courts.
God, I'm turning into a revolutionary (!) but I'm not convinced that a union of publicans lobbying Government will have much success. This is a Government that doesn't admit to mistakes no matter how blatant and serious. A government which is adept at spin, if it wanted to, could use the working group to amend the ban yet it refuses to do so.
PS Might I just add that I think that the more prongs in the pitchfork used to attack, the better and, therefore, the greater the collaboration between organised groups, the better. The 'I want a Referendum' people are not only angry because we didn't get one, they're angry because the Government rides roughshod over promises, as we are - so apparently disparate groups might find that they want to work together.
I am torn on this. On the one hand many pub landlords turned their backs on their customers and on the other pubs are a place of social interaction where smoking should be part of that.
The hardline approach by landlords (except a notable few) to support the ban doesn't help their cause. They do not even seem to want to attempt to 'turn a blind eye'.
Yet the freedom and choice aspect bothers me, so reluctantly this initiative gets support.
My concern is, do the landlords really want smoking or are they happy for the support until they get lower beer taxes? Why are they not more vocal specifically on wanting smoking back in pubs? If they get the lower taxes will they again shun the customer who enjoys a smoke?
Indeed, why ahould the (ex)-customers that they shunned for fool's gold, support them?
Why not campaign for private clubs run by people who smoke (or tolerant non-smokers) for people who smoke (or tolerant non-smokers)?
west
----
Going back to Michael People's point. Spending has certainly reduced since the smoking ban. I am one individual in a country of millions and this is what I have stopped spending on since the ban:
new clothes/shoes/handbags
make-up/perfume
taxis
restaurants
pubs
clubs
donating to charities
late-night suppers
entrance fees
holidays in the UK
holidays on cruise liners
pharmaceutical products
my gym membership
That's just off the top of my head, there's probably more as well. I know several people who have done the same, and I am only 1 person.
I really wonder how much this ban is actually costing? Not just in promoting and staffing it, but the consequences of it.
To be honest, I don't really care anymore. I've lost all faith in all the major parties. They must be blind if they can't see exactly what's going on.
Mary, you said "I've lost all faith in all the major parties. They must be blind if they can't see exactly what's going on."
For years us smokers have been accused of being in denial if we try to say that the harm to ourselves and non smokers in close proximity is blown way out of proportion. Well, I wonder if the Government and other perpetrators and supporters of this ban are the ones who are in denial now.
west2, you said "Why not campaign for private clubs run by people who smoke (or tolerant non-smokers) for people who smoke (or tolerant non-smokers)?"
Although this ban was an attempt to get the smoking rate (the official one according to retail index, not the real one) down to 21% by 2010 (John Reid and Julian Le Grand both said it), there needed to be some 'overwhelming scientific evidence' about the second hand smoke obsession to justify it. Well, they got their 'overwhelming scientific evidence', we know it is a big manipulated unscientific numbers game, but many MPs and councillors and the general public (including landlords) don't know what we know. Many journalists don't know the truth either. Until this fraud can be exposed to the masses, this pathetic SHS myth will be used to justify more inhumane actions and no reasonable amendment.
I can see what you are saying Timbone, but surely, with regard to journalists, it is their job to investigate fully these stories and not just accept what they are told? Are there no real, conscientious journalists out there any more? What has happened to the journalistic champions who would go undercover to expose lies and extortian (sorry can't spell at this time of the morning!)? It seems that journalists today are happy to just be spoon fed and are not interested in the other side of stories any more. It does make me wonder if they are as corrupt as many government officials appear to be, so long as they get enough money or prestige, or whatever they are after!
It is time that journalism as a whole went back to the days when they did proper research and stood up to the 'big boys' on behalf of the 'little people' and exposed liars and fraudsters for what they are!
Mary.
Your list is not even exhaustive. Sports venues are clearly affected. Premiership football matches are being played in half empty stadia because the clubs banned smoking in the ground even though the seats are outside. Try and light a cigarette and you will be immediately ejected but if you shout racial/homophobic abuse and throw coins or bottles it takes months for anything to be done about it. Who wants to pay £50 a ticket when you have to leave the ground at half time for a puff. It takes that long to get out na din that some of the football has been missed. Better watching the football on Sky or waiting for Match of the Day.
However, if the declining is spectators is blamed on the recession and credit crunch why is horse racing thriving? Is it because you can have a smoke outside with your beer and really enjoy your day?
Lyn, the journalistic equivalents of, say, Rumpole, have been largely bred out of the system. Perhaps the turning point was when - according to reports at the time - smoking was banned at the BBC about 25 years ago. Also, school-leaver, copy-boy entry to the trade is very rare now. With the departure from Fleet Street, Tudor Street, Shoe Lane and Chancery Lane, the habitats are, I suspect, less friendly to the drifting, free thinking, often-drinking hard up rebels who were in debt only to their bank managers and occupied the middle ranks of the business. Entry now is via university and various post-graduate hoops. As far as I can see local reporters, whose give-away newspapers do not rely on people actually reading their reports - are lucky if they can get away from their computers to meet and talk to people. I used to believe - yes I am an ex hack - that the main qualification for a journalist was to like people. I fear that with honourable exceptions, the further up the hierarchy you get the more rare will be the contact between the scribe and that fabled being well-known I'm sure to Rumpole, the man on the Clapham omnibus.
Freedom2Choose has been contacting pubs/clubs for the past 18 months! They all moan they are struggling and see no hope for their futures but where are they when we offer a fighting resistance to this ban? The people of this country have got to band together to take this government on head first.
No fight-no win, simple as that
freedom2choose.info.....it's all there!
I went to Brussels (TICAP) last week and found that the pubs there were packed, even though a pint cost £5plus. Why? Because smoking was allowed.
Chas.
Oh how I wish I had been able to afford to go to Brussels. Dick Puddlecote, [may God bless him forever], made it possible for us in exile to be with you in spirit.
Had I have been able to go, not only would I have taken those interested to the many happy smoking pubs I know, I'd also have introduced you to Everard de Siecle. He is a reclining statue to the left side of the Town Hall in the main square. If you rub his arm, you will have good luck for the rest of your life. [Guaranteed, apparently.]
More to the point, he was a great freedom fighter of the middle ages against the tyranny of the ruling French Counts of Flanders. Smoking had entered Europe and was becoming very fashionable because of its health-giving properties. He wrote a lovely book extolling all its virtues. According to Everard it was the greatest healing and health-giving discovery that mankind had ever created.
Don't ask me for a link. This is lost in my mist of time. Perhaps someone else can research it?
The public and publicans must be made aware that they have been brainwashed. Keep our message simple and compelling. People have smoked for centuries and if there was any truth in the smoking myth we would all be dead by now.
Point out that nicotine is a natural substance with many healing properties. The medical profession is very aware of this. They have always used it as the basis of their prescription drugs.
Smokers tend to live longer, healthier, happier lives. Even people who chose not to smoke benefited from the nicotine filled atmosphere in enclosed public places. People had little need of the medical profession aside from the repair of broken bones and other injuries. We give due deference to those dedicated scientists of the past who found ways to irradiate plagues, etc., and invented penicillin and aspirin. Knowledge of hygiene and the necessity for warm comfortable living conditions and good food did the rest.
We were set fair to live long happy lives with little need of the medical profession. So they encouraged us to make sure by going for regular medical check-ups. [I will not digress by going along THAT road!]
Smokers were of no use to the pharmaceutical companies. If smoking could be eradicated, only prescription drugs could administer the healing benefits of nicotine.
The rest is history – living history – and pharmaceutical companies are now the wealthiest in the world.
Let your message be simple. If smoking were harmful, we would all be dead by now.
'Everard de Siecle. He is a reclining statue to the left side of the Town Hall in the main square. If you rub his arm, you will have good luck for the rest of your life. [Guaranteed, apparently.]'
Margot. Why didn't you tell us that before we went.
We all learned a lot and had a good time. Well worth the cost.
Chas.
Because, up to the last minute, I hoped to go myself. Looking at hotel prices convinced me I couldn't - plus the ones I knew had turned non-smoking.
It crossed my mind to write a Tour Guide's Guide to Brussels, but first I had to find a thread suitable. It also would have been too long to be acceptable.
"Keep it brief" says Simon. "If I'd have had more time I'd have written a shorter letter", said Bernard Shaw.
Try though I might, I just don't have the knack.
Regards.
I have just ridden my bike in a freezing east wind past two ancient pubs, both of which would have plenty of room for separate smoking rooms. Outside both there were people forced there by law to have a cigarette.. When will people, perhaps above all non smokers, speak out against this persecution of decent, tax paying citizens? Those so far safe and unstigmatised by governmental disapproval of any of their habits might even need smokers to stand up for them one day.When will politicians of all parties speak out against this manifest cruelty?
Thanks for that insight Norman. Some of what you say rang bells for me as my late husband always said the workers that were a liability, for whatever reason, were often promoted up out of harms way!
With regard to your last post about smokers being outside in freezing conditions - my own view is if instead of being degraded and freezing in this manner, they stayed at home with some cheap supermarket booze and had friends and acquaintances round, the pubs would be suffering even more and might just be more than ready to stand up to all this nannying and interference! I realise it is freedom of choice, but the more smokers continue to patronise public places and are prepared to stand outside in the wet and cold, then the longer it will take for the message to really hit home, I fear.