PUB landlords are still reeling from the smoking ban two years after it was introduced, according to one.
Hampshire Lodge Hotel licensee Peter Leigh (pictured) said businesses like his had been hit hard. ‘It was total rubbish that the pubs would see an increase in non-smokers coming in,’ he said.
‘The ban was bound to happen eventually, but I still feel the polls done before were completely biased and didn’t show the correct figures. What’s not realised is that people are now having to go home to smoke which means they are drinking unsociably, bigger measures and possibly getting drunk in front of their kids.’
But Health and Social Services minister Hunter Adam sees the ban in a different light. ‘It was implemented on medical grounds. I was supportive two years ago and I am happy with the way it is going,’ he said. ‘Pubs were cautious due to worries of a downturn in trade but most have been lucky enough to provide suitable outdoor arrangements.’
The Guernsey Press provides daily in-depth coverage of life in the Bailiwick. Subscribe here. View a demo and subscribe to our online edition here.
Loading ...
3 Article Comments
Maybe Peter is a smoker himself ? if so he might resent not being able to smoke inside his pub ?
My wife and I visit the island two or three times a year. Cancel the smoking ban and we will not be back !! I might just add, six of my family died of smoking related diseases and it is not a pretty sight seeing your loved ones gasping for air with all their body muscles in a state of cramp. Take up smoking and it is very unlikely that you will avoid this terrible condition. Regards from smoke free West Sussex.
Peter Leigh is in the same boat as Britains trade suffering from this anti-democratic health fraud (Pete I’ll pop in to see you shortly). The Brit Govt and States here peddled a lie that the trade would be full of happy smokers (Mike Torode stand up and be counted). What’s followed is 2,000 pubs, clubs and other venues shutting, Landlords losing livelihoods and over 10,000 staff out of work (the ban was going to “protect” staff - not that politician ever asked them!).
Hunter Adam says the ban was on “medical grounds”. If you’d care to look at the medical evidence it’s crystal clear. passive smoking has a 12.5 in 100,000 chance (get your microscopes out) of being a danger to public health. Even a smoke filled room with little ventilation has no more dangerous to health than outside air.
The longest study in medical history, the 39 year long Enstrom & Kabat study in California showed no dangers to public health of spouses of smokers. Also the UN’s WHO 1998 study showed exactly the same result and were so disatisfied the science didn’t match their politicised ideas they squashed the study subsequently leaked and exposed in The Telegraph.
Both studies show only one significant statistical result regards short or long term effects of passive smoking. That children of smokers show a statistical increase in immunity to smoking related disease in later life.
In short the dangers of passive smoking is not science but a political agenda. Similarly the economic assurances politicians gave to support the smoking ban are not the truth but a lie.
In short there is no good reason to extend or continue to support the smoking ban on public health grounds (ie. they are groundless) unless you’ve got a political agenda against smoking. In which case open a non-smoking venue and let the rest of Landlords decide freely what they are permitted to do on their property - its called democracy.