News RSS Feed


More pubs call for end to smoking ban

6:33am Saturday 9th February 2008

comment Comments (50)   Have your say »


A LANDLADY has spoken out against the smoking ban, which she says is stubbing out her trade.

Sandra Brown, 53, who manages The Plough, in High Street, Long Wittenham, said the future looked bleak for the village's only pub since the July 1 ban on smoking in public places came into force.

She fears for the future of traditional English pubs which she said were not being supported by villagers.

We recently reported how Sylvia Hesford, manager of The Sprat, was concerned that her trade had dropped off by a third since the ban.

Mrs Brown, who has run the pub with her husband, Melvyn, 60, for 15 years, said: "I want to support the landlady of The Sprat, in Didcot, who has been affected by the ban.

"I was hoping people would not notice the ban, but it has been horrendous.

"Our trade is down ten per cent since July.

"What frightens me is that in ten or 15 years' time, traditional pubs will not exist because they are not getting support from the villages.

"Pubs are going to close in this country if people do not use them. It is only our stead-fast regulars who are keeping us going.

"I'm just hoping to have a good summer this year, otherwise the future is very bleak for us. Last summer the bottom of the garden with the awnings for the smokers was flooded with all the rain."

She added: "Why we were not given a choice by the Government to have a smoking room, I do not know.

"Even 99 per cent of my non-smoking customers all agree it would be a better idea to have a sealed-off smoking room."

Mrs Brown said she was concerned for her pub because the punters were failing to turn up even though she serves food.

She said: "I am still waiting for all these non-smokers to flock into the pub, and now we are the only pub in the village. We even do food and I am still waiting.

"The ban has affected some of my regulars too, because they don't want to come down the pub and stand out in the cold to have a cigarette.

"One 81-year-old chap has been smoking since he was 12 and used to come down about three or four times a week, but now we're lucky if we see him once a week."

Print article » Email to a friend »

Your Say YourHerald Series

jd, oxford says...
8:28am Sat 9 Feb 08

So basically, yet again,the smoking ban is getting blamed for pubs not taking as much money? Perhaps they should think about other ways to make more revenue? The pub that we used to go to on a Thursday night held a pub quiz - busiest night of the week - and people got there early to eat too, then the brewery decided to cut entertainment budget and the quiz was cancelled - total madness - now the pub is empty on a Thursday night - but could be useful for other pubs to know....

I don't want smoking back in pubs - it is so nice to not have to breathe in other peoples horrible tobacco....

Report this post »

Kevin, Oxford says...
8:43am Sat 9 Feb 08

Agree with jd here. These pubs may want to look at attracting the three quarters of the population who don't smoke - these people will tend to have more money anyway.

Report this post »

anon, oxon says...
9:01am Sat 9 Feb 08

People generally have less disposable income.
Cost of living escalating - food; fuel ever increasing.

Report this post »

jim, Abingdon says...
9:38am Sat 9 Feb 08

Poor Mrs Brown, not being given the choice of having a smoking room by the government - what choice did she give non smokers before the ban?

Report this post »

chas, suffolk says...
9:40am Sat 9 Feb 08

I only go to my local pub once a week, since the smoking ban. When pubs start charging £4 per pint, to make up for their loses, I will stop completely.

Report this post »

mark, Leicestershire says...
11:18am Sat 9 Feb 08

The smoking ban is closing 57 pubs every month that were profitable before the ban
www.innthecold.com

Report this post »

J, oxford says...
11:52am Sat 9 Feb 08

I now go to the pub a couple of times a week since the smoking ban. If a pub carries on with the same recipe of just booze and fags (now without the fags), then of course they're going to loose trade!

They need to change with the times - quiz nights, good pub food, live music, games to play, cheaper soft drinks, juke boxes etc...

Given the increases in council tax, food, petrol etc... then people DO have less disposable income at the moment, which would explain a decrease in trade.

Report this post »

karen, Oxford says...
12:29pm Sat 9 Feb 08

If a pub was profitable before the ban and its not anymore-that is the fault of the ban.Some people don't want an all singing and all dancing pub. They want to go and have a cigarette and a drink.
Let smokers have their own pubs.

Report this post »

Frank Davis, says...
1:28pm Sat 9 Feb 08

The smoking ban has ushered in a age of tyranny.

Report this post »

John Gray, North Wales says...
1:29pm Sat 9 Feb 08

There is nothing worse than people talking nonsense about this issue as some of the posters here have done. They keep repeating the silly mantra that if only pubs were more imaginative and offered different services they would not loose business.

I have news for these posters, many, many pubs have bent over
backwards to offer new or different options and they are still going broke because the much promised; "there will be lots of new, non-smoking customers", never happens.

This phenomenon is not unique to Britain. It's universal and one only has to take a look at the scale of the economic losses following smoking bans in the USA and Canada to see that.
Since the implementation of it's smoking ban, California alone is estimated to have lost $100 billion dollars in revenue.

Report this post »

Tim Clarke, Lancs, England says...
2:38pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Innovation is insufficient to offset the loss of smoking customers. A Publican survey found that the in 2007 the average amount spent on food by customers was almost unchanged from 2006. Every major Pub company has lost revenue, and ALL have seen their share value slashed, some by almost 50%. These companies have the revenue and infrastructure to 'move with the times'- yet they've lost business since the ban too. Wetherspoons said it would have been worse if they hadn't been able to concentrate on food - but despite this fact, they have seen a decline in profits.

The cost of living hasn't changed so markedly in the last few months to be attributable to the loss of revenue. Before the ban, 50 pubs were closing a month. Yet now, 56 are closing a week (figures courtesy of CAMRA - who, by the way, supported the ban).

The phenomenon is not unique to pubs. Any google search, or browsing of the nationals will inform you of the trouble the Rank Group (owners of Grosvenor Casinos and Mecca Bingo Halls) are having. It is estimated that the situation as regards bingo halls is so bad that 1/3 are facing closure. The fact that most bingo players are / were smokers is irrelevant I suppose?

Report this post »

M Hill, Wantage says...
3:40pm Sat 9 Feb 08

I have not been to my local since the start of the smoking ban. A loss to their trade on three nights per week. I am better off though!

Report this post »

Mrs Miffed, says...
5:00pm Sat 9 Feb 08

I think some of the comments made are a bit unfair to Mrs Brown. She has run her pub for 15 years and obviously knows her customer base, especially as it's the only pub in her village. Possibly she knows that juke boxes, games etc. may not bring in more custom.... large pubs that already have many of the suggestions above are also losing profit. In my village the Quiz Night has been stopped (it was very popular) as the smokers are not going - and neither are their non-smoking friends or team mates.
If three quarters of the population who don't smoke were put off by the 'horrible tobacco'smell in pubs before the ban where are they now? Not in Mrs Brown's establishment...or in my local for that matter!

Report this post »

Ed, Oxford says...
5:26pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Smokers and pubs with yellow walls have had their day. Smoking is a relic of the past and yes the ban might close pubs but it'll save a hell of a lot of lives. Smokers really are pathetic if they think standing outside for a few minutes will kill them. When Summer comes, they'll all be in the beer garden as usual.

Report this post »

Jon, Oxford says...
6:48pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Ed
How will the ban "save a hell of a lot of lives"?
Tobacco sales haven't dipped so no change re smokers. And as for non-smokers there never was any danger from SHS - I think you need to do your homework on this!

Report this post »

natasha, Leicestershire says...
7:01pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Ed,the smoking ban is closing pubs,no smoking ban and these pubs would still be open.The ban is not saving lives but is causing misery for many landlords,millions of customers,especially the elderly who smoke.
www.innthecold.com

Report this post »

Tim Clarke, Lancs, England says...
7:15pm Sat 9 Feb 08

I want figures for the number of lives saved by this ban.

It shouldn't be too difficult to compile a figure for the number of people who have joined the dole queue because of it.

When summer comes, I hope all non-smokers will be banned from the beer gardens. Alright ... maybe not all non-smokers. That's unfair, given that most of them didn't want a total ban on smoking in public places. All fanatical anti-smokers. They can be identified by the pointed, pathetic coughs they make when they even witness someone who has the temerity to have a cig outdoors.

Report this post »

Jo, Essex says...
7:50pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Well done! Jon from Oxford. YOU'VE got it right. What a load of codswallop from JD, J and Ed from Oxford (the same person, I suspect). You seem to have no idea whatsoever about what the smoking culture is all about. There are many aspects to it. But just try this one for now:- Purchase your favourite drink accompanied by something tasty to eat - a sandwich maybe, or a hot pie or sausage roll or a pastry. Settle down somewhere cosy with your drink (you may be on your own or with friends having a laugh and a chat)and then place your food on a table outside in the cold. Then every five minutes pop outside for a nibble. How do you like that???!! Oh! and by the way, in some circumstances smoking a cigarette can be very sexy and seductive. In fact, it can be many different things to many people. Comforting is one.

Report this post »

Smokey Jo!, says...
8:16pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Sorry I've got to say this... HOW SAD are the people who dont go out anymore because they cant smoke!!!!!! Is it not possible to go for a few hours without sucking on a cancer stick?!

It is so much nicer not having to breathe it in all the time! And healthier! I do however sympathise with the businesses losing trade, its a big shame but it emphasises how pathetic some smokers are if they would prefer to sit at home on their own and smoke than nip down the pub for a few cheeky ones with their mates!!!

Report this post »

Smokey Jo!, says...
8:18pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Forgot to say - I would support the sealed smoking room Idea - that way there is choice!

Report this post »

Jo, Essex says...
8:27pm Sat 9 Feb 08

I agree, Tim. That pathetic cough, even BEFORE you've lit the end of the cigarette!! Just goes to show, it's all in the mind. The power of suggestion, eh?! And the asthmatics. They like to play on it too. In yet I have known asthmatics who smoke cigarettes themselves!... I totally agree, Natasha, its misery all the way for everyone.

Report this post »

JD, oxford says...
8:27pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Jo wrote:
Well done! Jon from Oxford. YOU'VE got it right. What a load of codswallop from JD, J and Ed from Oxford (the same person, I suspect). You seem to have no idea whatsoever about what the smoking culture is all about. There are many aspects to it. But just try this one for now:- Purchase your favourite drink accompanied by something tasty to eat - a sandwich maybe, or a hot pie or sausage roll or a pastry. Settle down somewhere cosy with your drink (you may be on your own or with friends having a laugh and a chat)and then place your food on a table outside in the cold. Then every five minutes pop outside for a nibble. How do you like that???!! Oh! and by the way, in some circumstances smoking a cigarette can be very sexy and seductive. In fact, it can be many different things to many people. Comforting is one.
I can assure you Jo - that I am not the same person as J, or Ed, you sad sad person if you can not take that separate people have the same opinion.....
And as for saying that smoking a cigarette can be very sexy and seductive - how seductive is having emphaseima or lung cancer? Or smelling like a second hand ashtray - nice!?
I do not think that I as a non smoker should have to go into a pub and end up smelling of somebody elses smoke.

And I will say again, what I said before, I think that if pubs were a bit more inventive they would find that they would be able to get more people through the doors - they have to work a little harder for their money - so what? We all have to in the end/

Report this post »

chas, suffolk says...
8:48pm Sat 9 Feb 08

Pubs are losing money because many smokers are no longer going in them. All non-smokers should unite and get their friends to go to the pubs and organise events. The landlords will be pleased to help with such ideas to keep them in business.

Report this post »

Tim Clarke, Lancs, England says...
2:06am Sun 10 Feb 08

JD - I take it you've never watched any of the old classics, with the likes of Bogart (for the ladies), Bergman, Bacall, and later on, even Uma Thurman. Some people - admittedly, fewer and fewer people nowadays - do find smoking sexy.

You're not really offering any viable options as to how greater inventiveness will get more people in the doors. Don't you think that the pubcos, with the revenue and infrastructure to 'move with the times' would have offset the crippling effects of the ban if they could?

Besides Smokey Jo, it is not just us relatively young smokers who are inconvenienced. Or ostracised, as perhaps is the more correct term. What about pensioners? People who fought in the Second World War? What's the danger to others from SHS - negligible, and therefore not measurable. What's the danger to them of catching pneumonia - unacceptable.

Report this post »

JD, oxford says...
5:57am Sun 10 Feb 08

so Tim, you are saying that all non- smokers should have to put up with having to breathe in other people's cigarette smoke and risk getting ill from it?
I saw somebody very close to me die of emphasemia - nothing glamourous about that I can assure you - they ended their life needing oxygen 24 hours a day and coughing up huge amounts of phlegm - very sexy I am sure you would agree - and all for the sake of a nasty habit that stinks.

Report this post »

Al, Nottingham says...
10:46am Sun 10 Feb 08

As much as I appreciate the points of Jim, Kevin and jd here, I feel a sensible compromise is the answer. One of my favourite pubs in Nottingham has already closed permanently, and another is under threat. Both offered innovative incentives that jd discusses.

If this trend continues, both smokers and non-smokers alike will suffer. There won’t be any pubs to go to, full stop.

Report this post »

Tim Clarke, Lancs, England says...
12:53pm Sun 10 Feb 08

No JD, I'm not saying that non-smokers should have to breathe in smoke (although quite how you were forced to go to a smoking pub before the ban is beyond me). Ventilated smoking rooms should be granted an exemption.

Please inform me of 3 people killed by passive smoking.

Report this post »

dbwb, lincoln says...
1:54pm Sun 10 Feb 08

Karen writes - 'If a pub was profitable before the ban and its not anymore-that is the fault of the ban.'

There's nothing like stating the obvious, although some people can't seem to make this connection.

The antis seem to think the pub trade is going from strength to strength. How come then, that all the feedback reports a failing industry?

Not only are most of the antis intolerant (by default usually) but most are also delusional. Arrogant as well - Apparently pubs should try even harder to please them.




Report this post »

JD, oxford says...
6:44pm Sun 10 Feb 08

Tim Clarke wrote:
No JD, I'm not saying that non-smokers should have to breathe in smoke (although quite how you were forced to go to a smoking pub before the ban is beyond me). Ventilated smoking rooms should be granted an exemption. Please inform me of 3 people killed by passive smoking.
Nobody forced me to go to a smoking pub, but why should I not be able to go into a pub without coming out smelling of cigarettes and then the next morning having my very own smokers cough?

I don't have the facts to give you the names of 3 people killed by passive smoking - however I will cite one very famous case - Roy Castle.....


Report this post »

chas, suffolk says...
7:32pm Sun 10 Feb 08

JD. It is now well known that Roy Castle was a cigar smoker. Also, Roy like millions of us, wrongly thought that lung cancer was only caused by smoking. We all now differently now.

Report this post »

Truthteller, UK says...
8:01pm Sun 10 Feb 08

It is now recognised Worldwide that Second Hand Smoke does NOT kill.This ban should be repealed before the hospitality industry is destroyed totally. The bigots of ASH organised themselves before the vote in Parliament and used a mass lobby to get their own way.

Report this post »

Truthteller, UK says...
8:25pm Sun 10 Feb 08

How many pubs and clubs have been affected by the smoking ban?.
Visit http://www.Innthecol
d.com and find out the truth.

Report this post »

Carlos, London says...
8:50pm Sun 10 Feb 08

Id like to add pubs will close every second the smoking ban is in place. Look how many boarded up places one sees now since July 1st whereas before they were few and far between. How many bar workers corpses who died of SHS did one see in plastic bags before July 1?? Err zero. JD typical of you fake caugh antismokers you cant mention 3 people who are proven to have died of SHS and you are so blinded by your views as well you cant see the facts.

Report this post »

Carlos, London says...
8:54pm Sun 10 Feb 08

PS Im sure you are the same ASH worker who also posts on the other names. SO now ill call you JD/J/Ed.

Report this post »

jd - also known as Simone- not J not Ed, oxford says...
9:26pm Sun 10 Feb 08

I have no idea why you seem to think I work for ASH - I don't - I also do not know why you insist that I am J or Ed - their opinions are nothing to do with me - What is it? Just because a few people have the same opinion they must be one and the same person?
To be honest I find that perfectly insulting.....
And Carlos - how do I know that you do not use other names? I can swear on my life that I do not - can you?

The fact is that smoking is a disgusting habit, it stinks, causes illness and is revolting - I am glad that it has been banned - and I wish they would ban it in pub gardens too - so there!

Report this post »

Tim Clarke, Lancs, England says...
9:48pm Sun 10 Feb 08

JD wrote:
Tim Clarke wrote:
No JD, I'm not saying that non-smokers should have to breathe in smoke (although quite how you were forced to go to a smoking pub before the ban is beyond me). Ventilated smoking rooms should be granted an exemption. Please inform me of 3 people killed by passive smoking.
Nobody forced me to go to a smoking pub, but why should I not be able to go into a pub without coming out smelling of cigarettes and then the next morning having my very own smokers cough?

I don't have the facts to give you the names of 3 people killed by passive smoking - however I will cite one very famous case - Roy Castle.....

You should be able to. I don't want every single pub to be a smoking venue. Just don't go to those which are. You always had this choice.

There is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that Castle did indeed enjoy the odd cigar. He himself thought that his cancer was either caused by passive smoking or the cleaning fluid he used on his trumpet which contained known carcinogens. Factor in the fact that he worked on film and tv sets containing asbestos, and a markedly more complex picture emerges than the one which anti-smokers like to paint. He directly, rather than passively, inhaled the vapour from the cleaning fluid while playing his trumpet, and I can actually name 3 people killed by asbestos. So what seems more likely to have killed him?

Indeed, you seem unconvinced by the 'evidence' of passive smoking being harmful. Or at least, you're quickly changing the subject rather than addressing it.

Of course, it boils down to the fact that you don't like smoking, you don't like the smell, so you believe every venue in the country should cater to your whims, even to the extent of outdoor areas because you are morally offended by even seeing people smoke. I could direct a few choice insults at you, but Godwin's Law would doubtless be invoked.

Report this post »

mandyv, cambs says...
10:13pm Sun 10 Feb 08

This ban is based on lies and the majority did not want an outright ban. The antis were NEVER banned from opening their own smokefree venues were they.
This ban is about control and power.
For those who have open minds, please read the Enstrom?Kabat study.
8th August 2006 the HSE in the document OC 255/15 article9 state
for some strange reason hmm it has been changed to OC 255/16 Paragraph
14
" HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to second hand smoke to the raised risk of contacting specific diseases".
We need to get this ban amended to include ventilation,
freedom2choose.info -- need your support
Warning: Anti-tobacco activism may be hazardous to epidemiologic science
http://www.epi-persp
ectives.com/content/
4/1/13

http://petitions.pm.
gov.uk/smokinglicens
es/ ends in October 2008
These could do with some support please,

http://www.innthecol
d.com 1000 Pubs in 90 days, can you help with this one?

http://uk.youtube.co
m/watch?v=Bn6zye0nh8
w

http://uk.youtube.co
m/watch?v=mN-xDlsNXI
I Hamish Howitt Publican

Report this post »

Carlos, London says...
10:41pm Sun 10 Feb 08

jd - also known as Simone- not J not Ed wrote:
I have no idea why you seem to think I work for ASH - I don't - I also do not know why you insist that I am J or Ed - their opinions are nothing to do with me - What is it? Just because a few people have the same opinion they must be one and the same person? To be honest I find that perfectly insulting..... And Carlos - how do I know that you do not use other names? I can swear on my life that I do not - can you? The fact is that smoking is a disgusting habit, it stinks, causes illness and is revolting - I am glad that it has been banned - and I wish they would ban it in pub gardens too - so there!
OK Simone Carlos is my real name. Its not that just your opinions look too similar! You spout ASH garbge thats why Im asking whether you work for that thieving organisation.
Last paragraph opinions NOT facts you antis seem to describe the latter as the former.

Report this post »

JD, oxford says...
6:04am Mon 11 Feb 08

The reason I spout what you call garbage - is that I saw somebody I love die of a horrible horrible lung disease caused by these horrible cigarettes - maybe when it happens to somebody close to you you will understand - although I doubt it - you seem to think that you have the right to inflict your nasty little habit on everybody else.

Report this post »

anon, Wallingford says...
10:18am Mon 11 Feb 08

It's always someone elses fault. That's what we hear all the time. I'm glad the smoking ban came in....the stench was terrible before and health risks to non-smokers causes by smokers just isnt right. Pubs saying it's the smoking ban that's ruining their business should take a long hard look as to why people arent in their pub but are in others? Many pubs near us have been refurbished, repainted and are now reeling in the customers. The older pubs VERY occasionaly just stink of stale beer, old nicotine stained walls and furniture and toilet cleaner.

Nice

Report this post »

NoBanJan, Manchester says...
10:46am Mon 11 Feb 08

Pubs should be given the choice to allow smoking in their pubs.As 1 in 4 adults smoke then 1 in 4 pubs should be for smokers.If people don't want to be around smoke then they would still have 3 out of 4 pubs to choose from.
freedom2choosedotinf
o

Report this post »

anon, Wallingford says...
11:13am Mon 11 Feb 08

freedom2choosedotinf
o

Typical.....you say it's your right to smoke anywhere you want.....where as it's not our right to not breathe in second hand smoke whereever we want? oh the irony of single minded selfish people.

Report this post »

chas, suffolk says...
12:27pm Mon 11 Feb 08

anon. I haven't heard anybody say it's their right to smoke 'anywhere' they want. You are just showing how selfish you are. Wouldn't the unselfish thing to do, be to have some smoking pubs and some non-smoking pubs?

Report this post »

Truth Teller, UK says...
1:15pm Mon 11 Feb 08

It is obvious from the comments posted here that the smoking ban has achieved one thing--it has divided society in the whole of the UK.
WHY in the pursuit of meeting the needs of both the Anti-Smokers and those against the ban can we not have SEPARATE smoking and non-smoking pubs and clubs where both sides would NEVER come together. It is a simple matter of CHOICE.

Report this post »

JD, oxford says...
3:48pm Mon 11 Feb 08

Have to say that although I totally agree with the smoking ban, I do think that the suggestions of having a few (a small few, but a few nonetheless) smoking pubs might be a good idea, however, I do not see how that could be implemented as if you agree to one pub allowing smoking, others will just think that they should too.

Have to agree with the person who said about the pubs that have not bothered to be refurbished - they do still smell of stale tobacco - and that is what puts people off....
The pubs that I go in never seem to have much difficulty attracting customers - so it can be done - landlords just need to be a bit smarter and stop blaming lack of sales on the smoking ban.

Report this post »

Truthteller, UK says...
6:37pm Mon 11 Feb 08

How many pubs and clubs have been affected by the smoking ban?.
Visit http://www.Innthecol

d.com and find out the truth.

Report this post »

RTS, UK says...
9:51am Tue 12 Feb 08

Smokey Jo! wrote:
Sorry I\'ve got to say this... HOW SAD are the people who dont go out anymore because they cant smoke!!!!!! Is it not possible to go for a few hours without sucking on a cancer stick?!

It is so much nicer not having to breathe it in all the time! And healthier! I do however sympathise with the businesses losing trade, its a big shame but it emphasises how pathetic some smokers are if they would prefer to sit at home on their own and smoke than nip down the pub for a few cheeky ones with their mates!!!
Allow me to explain something that should be self evident.
When you make something less fun, people do it less.
Not being able to smoke whilst having a drink makes visiting the pub less fun for those who smoke, consequently, they do it less.
I have little doubt that in 5-10 years time, when there's talk of banning alcohol in public (alcohol is a class A carcinogen that evaporates rapidly into the air - remember THAT next time you're having a drink) that someone just like you will be accusing people who want to have a drink of wine with their meal whilst at a restaurant are sad, pathetic losers for staying at home instead of paying a premium for an experience that isn't to their satisfaction.

Report this post »

Pottie the non smoker, Long Wittenham says...
6:57pm Mon 18 Feb 08

anon wrote:
It\\\'s always someone elses fault. That\\\'s what we hear all the time. I\\\'m glad the smoking ban came in....the stench was terrible before and health risks to non-smokers causes by smokers just isnt right. Pubs saying it\\\'s the smoking ban that\\\'s ruining their business should take a long hard look as to why people arent in their pub but are in others? Many pubs near us have been refurbished, repainted and are now reeling in the customers. The older pubs VERY occasionaly just stink of stale beer, old nicotine stained walls and furniture and toilet cleaner. Nice
Can you name 6 pubs in the Wallingford area that are "reeling in the customers"???? If so how often do you use them, Saturday night, Sunday lunch?? What about Tuesday evening & Thursday lunchtime?? For every one pub in the area you say is doing well £10.00 says I can name 3 that are in trouble.

Old pubs are part of our culture and history, they shouldn't need to be refurbished to attract custom and before last summer they didn't need to.

What will be the next freedom Europe and this clutch of clowns who "run" this country take from us?

20 years ago I was a free man in a free country, no more. Our lives are being taken from us by people who refuse to give their names.

Report this post »

simon fairhead, london says...
5:12pm Mon 3 Mar 08

Hello everyone, don't know about you but I'm rather bored with the ban. Here's an idea, if 25% of the population is a smoker, can we have 25% of the pubs to ourselves please? It's only fair!

Report this post »

Roderick Jackson, London says...
3:23pm Wed 5 Mar 08

I feel very sorry for the landlady concerned,in my local the best pub for miles;once teeming every saturday night,managed five or six customers last weekend ,two of whom were in pushchairs.Why are 25% of the population who smoke so compliant.In a democracy minorities have their rights protected.This ban has impacted on my liberty in a way no other law has done in my life.Why do we have no power to restore a balance that will leave all parties happy. We have the technology,doors and extractor fans,why do we not have the belief that our rights are essential to our pursuit of happiness.To smoke.When will doctors decide that drinking is an unacceptable social evil? Then it really will be "last orders"

Report this post »

Comments are closed on this article.

Sandra Brown, at The Plough, says trade has suffered following the smoking ban Slowdown: Sandra Brown, at The Plough, says trade has suffered following the smoking ban

In this section

Sponsored Links



UK Debt Help and Advice | IVA help and advice | What is an IVA |

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »