Freedom party? Don't make me laugh
Monday, March 30, 2009 Andreas Mlzer is a member of the European parliament. He's also a member of Austria's far right Freedom Party and last month he submitted a written question to the European Commission, part of which reads:
In accordance with the new law on smoking, since the beginning of 2009 a more stringent smoking ban has been in force in Austria. Under the new law, pubs and restaurants with a floor area of less than 50 square metres must be run either as non-smoking establishments or as smoking clubs, and those with a floor area of more than 50 square metres must physically separate their smoking and non-smoking areas.
Many pub and restaurant owners are complaining of a massive decline in turnover, since smokers are simply choosing establishments where they can smoke [my italics]. The physical separation of smoking and non-smoking areas calls for substantial investments which are hardly realistic in the current economic and financial climate. However, even if conditions were more favourable, fitting partitions, ventilation systems, etc would be beyond the means of many owners ...
Herr Mlzer goes on to ask what plans the EU has "to introduce an EU-wide smoking ban along the lines of those in force in Italy or Ireland". The implication is that what the hospitality industry needs in is a "level-playing field" (ie a comprehensive ban) otherwise people will continue to choose - at the expense of non-smoking bars and restaurants - an "establishment where they can smoke".
So much for the free market. So much for the "Freedom" Party.
Reader Comments (14)
When the smoking ban was introduced in Southern Ireland the pubs along the border got hammered as the southerners came north and the northerners stopped going south. The publicans in the south were squealing for a level playing field but rather than seek to amend the ban there they tried to influence the northern legislature into banning smoking here.
No doubt this Austrian will get his way just as happened here.
Good God do none of them see what is happening in the UK?
Or are they in denial.
Closing down the majority of pubs and restaurants so that what is left after the destruction has a level playing field sounds like a plan hatched in a mental hospital.
No thought for business going to the wall, the unemployed that will have to claim benefits or the loss of huge taxpayers money.
What the hell is wrong with these people.
If customers migrate to establishments in which they can smoke, then more would allow smoking, making each less profitable. Where choice is allowed, doesn't the law of supply and demand ensure that smoking and non-smoking establishments are equally profitable? Now imagine bars over 50sqm mixed with bars (which can choose their status) under 50sqm. In that neighbourhood, smoking and non-smoking bars are equally profitable, so being smoking or non-smoking makes no difference to the large bars.
Most non smokers are not anti smokers and were happy to go to well ventilated pubs.Jon, almost all bars would have to go smoking if there was a choice and the antis know this. If a group were going out for the night and only a couple smoked, most non smokers would go to a pub that allowed smoking so as not to have their friends having to go outside and breaking up the group. There are huge numbers of non smokers who have also stopped going to the pubs because there is no more atmosphere in them. The smokers who make up a large percentage of pubgoers are either staying at home or standing outside which ruins conversation. Most non smokers that I have spoken to would amend the ban because they would rather have the 'craic' back in ther pubs even if it meant having cigarettes too.
A nanny called Mary Cunningham of the National Youth council of ireland today instructed shopowners to start preparing for the removal of all cigarette advertising from their premises to meet the new legislation on 1st July, forcing them to sign a register.
And a wanker called Rossi from the Tobacco control office said that the smoking ban has been hailed a great success and that Ireland must continue to be a 'world leader' in tobacco control.
It's sad to say that a country on its knees through mismanagement, corruption and cronism and over 10% unemployment and rising, that the quangos are still with us and flourishing and pointing the finger and making it difficult for businesses and private civilians to carry on their daily lives.
For a country that is mentally and physically bankrupt our future sure looks bleak and 'the powers that be' have a lot to answer, as in the eyes of the world we have the distinction of being chancers.
But then we also have the dubious distinction of being 'world leaders' in bans and prohibitions, and worryingly that seems to keep a lot of people satisfied.
Jon.
With respect, I think you are slightly missing the point here. We don't want amendments to, or redefining of, the smoking ban. We want out of it altogether and a return to the common sense of market forces dictating what type of business an owner chooses to run. To achieve this, we need to be POLITICALLY out of the EU altogether. Our trading with Europe would continue as that is governed by market forces..
I note that the Tory’s biggest private donor ever, Stuart Wheeler, has given up in exasperation at David Cameron continuing to sit on the fence regarding the EU. He has now joined the fight that UKIP, against all odds, continues alone.
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/241204/RECORD-TORY-DONOR-TO-VOTE-UKIP.html
The Lisbon Treaty has NOT yet been ratified by all member states. Traitor Gordon Brown has signed it on behalf of the British people against their wishes. This can easily be made null and void. We can CHOOSE to stop paying them untold billions per year.
Ann.
Do not despair. You know in your heart that the doom and gloom heaped on the Irish, at the moment, is EU funded propaganda..
The Irish people had the courage to vote "No". They are a shining light to the whole of EU Europe, [which is only 27 states out of 49]. You have many money making industries and much to offer on an open market. Above all, you have the exquisite beauty of Ireland: there is no green like the Emerald green. And you have the Irish people - soft spoken with melodious voices and killer wit. You have the Leprechauns and Banshees and the unique clean clear Irish dancing. You have the ‘craic’. I am one of the privileged few to have kissed the Blarney Stone, [O.K. this probably shows!] Many more would love to do so. And your food is gorgeous!
Please do your best to let this letter of mine be published elsewhere It may help to show the people of Ireland that they are held in very high esteem by the rest of the crushed population of EU Europe.
It won't be forever, folks!
Hi Michael. I think that now, given the choice, there would be a substantial market for non-smoking pubs. Before the ban, the number of non-smoking pubs was increasing. Indeed, this was a major worry to the anti-smoking groups who knew that they would have to get a ban implemented before a state of happy equilibrium was reached. I accept that group drinking causes many non-smokers to go to smoking establishments but, these days, there are groups of friends, none of whom smoke. I don't think my sisters know any smokers socially.
Margot, I wasn't suggesting a redefinition of, or amendments to the smoking ban, although I will do below. I was trying to make the economic argument that, with total freedom for small bars, no bar can gain an advantage from its smoking status. If Austrian bar owners stubbornly remain non-smoking and watch their customers leave, they should be in a different business. I was pointing out that Herr Mlzer's criticism of Austria's current arrangements doesn't hold water; partly because I think a similar arrangement here would be a good result. It's just not realistic to expect a return to total freedom of choice for bar owners. You can't have the total humiliation and defeat of all the non-smokers who have got used to walking into any bulding in England and not detecting even the faintest whiff of tobacco smoke. It would be a massive vote loser. The law depending on floor area has been adopted by other countries and seems to be a good compromise.
On a different point, nothing has been heard of the G20 smoking rooms. It's a pity more couldn't be made of this. We were told that people in the hospitality industry were being killed by passive smoking, and the Gov. is planning to resume the carnage. Security is no excuse. Plenty of people cannot now smoke at work, even during breaks. Can't the politicians and their entourages wait until they are back in their hotel rooms where they can legally smoke? Anyway, what's going on? Being a world leader or a high ranking civil servant would,in most people's eyes, be a top job. How did sad loser nicotine addicts end up in those positions? If anyone has information about these smoking rooms, send Simon an email. The Gov is already reeling from the porn film scandal.
Jon.
Eh. What? What porn film scandal?
Jon.
It is not "too late" to let market forces decide regarding smoking or non-smoking pubs. That is what it means. Let the landlord decide which he wants it to be. A wise landlord would probably have a non-smoking area - that is what was happening anyway.
The Principality of Liechtenstein http://www.liechtenstein.li/en had a total smoking ban imposed in July 2008 by the government. Last week the smoking ban was overturned in a popular vote with 52% of the voters. The participation rate at the vote was 80% of the voting population. That makes it roughly 40% of the total adult population, approx. twice the number of smokers (at 20% smoking rate) in the country.The popular vote was requested by the association of publicans.
"You can't have the total humiliation and defeat of all the non-smokers who have got used to walking into any bulding in England and not detecting even the faintest whiff of tobacco smoke."
You have GOT to be joking, Jon! What about the total humiliation of we smokers being turned out onto the street? At least the non-smokers would have a choice. We never had.
I'm not keen on the talk of level playing fields either. This is not a game. This is our one and only lives.
Regarding the porn films, I've just caught up with the news about Jacqui Smith renting adult videos on her parliamentary expenses. Our govt. has "clearly" explained that it was not her, it was her husband. And she is very cross with him. So that's alright then.
Interesting to hear that Liechenstein has voted to overturn the smoking ban. How lovely to be a compact self-governing country with freedom of speech and the right to vote. We were like that once. And we could be again.
Jon wrote: On a different point, nothing has been heard of the G20 smoking rooms.
I got passed this earlier today:
Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to allow smoking booths to be provided at the venue for the G20 summit in April; and, if so, whether they will amend the law to allow public houses, clubs, restaurants and employers to provide separate smoking rooms for their customers and employees. [HL2228]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Darzi of Denham): Smoking booths will not be provided. The Government have no plans to amend the smokefree legislation. (HL Deb 24 March 2009 c111WA)
But then, of course they're not going to have pokey little booths, are they? They're going to have spacious smoking rooms with carpets and sofas and armchairs and humidors and whisky and champagne and caviare.and uniformed flunkies holding trays of snacks and gateaux and little bits of cheese with toothpicks sticking out of them.
After over a year of experience here in Chicago, now that the fanfare has worn off and the lobbyists have moved on to other states, it's clearly obvious that trying to ban smoking in small neighborhood "shot and beer" bars is pretty useless. Many small bars in my area ignore the ban to keep their customers, neighbors, and local police (many are patrons when off duty) satisfied. In areas where real crime is an issue, the problem of undesirables being attracted by groups of people outside the bars and causing disturbances on the PUBLIC street, property that the owner has no control over, far outweighs the issue of people peacefully smoking inside a bar, bothering absolutly no one, All of the complaints are from neighbors of bars that comply. It's fading into history in many small neighborhood bars. The only places it becomes an issue seems to be in rural areas where local police have little to do except visit local bars and monitor their parking lots.