One step forward ...
Thursday, June 11, 2009 
Despite the Tube strike, yesterday turned out to be a good day. But first, some background information. The Save Our Pubs & Clubs campaign has been in development for a while. The best way to describe progress would be "two steps forward, one step back" - or should that be "one step forward, two steps back".
The good news is that prior to launch and without any publicity whatsoever over 250 pubs have signed up. They include pubs in London, Essex, Hertfordshire, Hampshire, Sussex, Surrey and Derbyshire.
The bad news is that we've had meetings with two pub trade associations and while they are sympathetic they're not going to support the campaign because, officially, they have "accepted" the ban and a significant number of their members welcome it. One body also told us that they don't like the name of the campaign because "it's too negative and we don't want to promote a negative view of the industry."
None of this came as any surprise. We've done our research and our straw polls and we are well aware that many publicans (and pubcos and breweries) welcome the ban. Nevertheless, that still leaves thousands of publicans and countless customers who remain vehemently opposed to it and they deserve to have a voice.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, we suffered further frustration recently when our request to launch the campaign in a well-known pub close to the Palace of Westminster was rejected by the owners, a leading pub operator. According to the company's head of PR:
I can understand your reasons for wanting to use the [venue] as it is such an iconic pub. However, our public position on smoke-free pubs is that they are a benefit and by hosting such a launch we feel the immediate association is that the landlord/pub and/or the brewery is in support of the campaign.
I'm sorry that I couldn't be the bearer of better news but I do hope you can understand our decision.
Yesterday however brought better news and I am pleased to report that the campaign will be launched at another pub in Westminster, a short walk from Parliament Square. (And it's perfect - my kind of pub!) Full details next week.
Reader Comments (6)
Proves the point that the big pub companies and brewers do not want us smokers back. Let them go bust.
You say the two pub associations you had meeting with Simon, were "sympathetic".
Sympathetic to who? Certainly not the general public, and certainly not to their licensees.
They say they have "accepted" the ban. What exactly do they mean by that? We have all "accepted" it, for the sole reason that it is now law, and there is little else we can do but accept it. But surely the main issues at stake here are is the ban good for business, and is the ban fair to an enormous percentage of the population of this country. The answers of course to both questions, are NO!
Their other argument in opposing the suggestions, is that "a significant number of their members welcome it (the ban)" Is there any way, this "significant number" could be seen I wonder? I would hazard a guess that there is a much more "significant number" of their members who oppose the ban than those that are for it, and in order to preserve any sort of democracy on this issue, a vote should be taken amongst publicans throughout Britain.
As for the campaign being "too negative", I wonder how they categorise 37 pubs closing every day in the UK in the negativity stakes?
The pubcos and brewers have accepted the ban as part of a deal with MPs and in particular the All Party Parliamentary Beer Group. Do not fight the ban and and in return MPs will not refer the system of tied pubs and tenancies to the monopolies commission.
None of these people care about the tenants or their customers and clearly the pubcos are making more from the tied system than they lose as a result of the smoking ban. It is the ordinary tenants who are getting it all ways.
Simon, I assume the pub you asked was run by a manager employed by the pubco. Is there a clause in the contract a tenant has which stops him campaigning for particular causes? What proportion of pubs have managers and what proportion are tennanted or freehouses?
This is so frustrating. I can understand some publicans preferring to be able to offer a smoke-free pub. I would imagine some prefer to work in a smoke-free atmosphere and like not having to empty ash trays, and that's their right.
But many more would welcome a return to smoking.
So why don't the trade associations support ALL of their members by promoting choice, instead of siding with one group (possibly the minority) over the other? I just don't get it.
Possibly a lot of them just want to appear PC, since not doing so is a hanging offense in, ahem, 'modern' society.