Repeal/Amendment to the Smoking Ban

As an ex Publican I saw first hand the destruction of a once thriving industry. I lay 90% of the blame at the feet of the Smoking Ban. To this end I have a solution.

All pubs, bars, restaurants and anywhere that serves alcohol has to, by law, have a premises licence to trade alcohol. My solution to the smoking ban would be to do the same thing – licence it! The government could use it as a stick to beat the industry with in terms of tax generation, however that would be offset by the turnover that would undoubtedly be increased.

With the licensing would obviously come restrictions; pubs and restaurants with x% turnover on food (say for instance a pub with a 50/50 split on food against drink) would not be eligable for the licence. The scheme in my mind would be for the pubs with the greatest dangers – the drinkers pubs, or the pubs with kitchens too small to give a suitable food offering. Also, the requirements would have to mean that pubs taking part would have to have a set standard of air filtration and extraction, which would again mean investment. However, with the proposition of bringing supermarket alcohol prices in line with the rest of the industry it would offer a greater level of choice.

All my idea is, is a chance to give a bit of choice back to people, there wouldn't be a requirement for every pub to take this on as a compulsory measure, indeed, if pubs felt they were better off catering to the non smoking community then there would be no requirement for it. However, many of the smaller, drinkers pubs have found serious hardship and difficulty in maintaining revenue due to the lack of choice afforded to a large percentage of customers.

Why is this idea important?

As an ex Publican I saw first hand the destruction of a once thriving industry. I lay 90% of the blame at the feet of the Smoking Ban. To this end I have a solution.

All pubs, bars, restaurants and anywhere that serves alcohol has to, by law, have a premises licence to trade alcohol. My solution to the smoking ban would be to do the same thing – licence it! The government could use it as a stick to beat the industry with in terms of tax generation, however that would be offset by the turnover that would undoubtedly be increased.

With the licensing would obviously come restrictions; pubs and restaurants with x% turnover on food (say for instance a pub with a 50/50 split on food against drink) would not be eligable for the licence. The scheme in my mind would be for the pubs with the greatest dangers – the drinkers pubs, or the pubs with kitchens too small to give a suitable food offering. Also, the requirements would have to mean that pubs taking part would have to have a set standard of air filtration and extraction, which would again mean investment. However, with the proposition of bringing supermarket alcohol prices in line with the rest of the industry it would offer a greater level of choice.

All my idea is, is a chance to give a bit of choice back to people, there wouldn't be a requirement for every pub to take this on as a compulsory measure, indeed, if pubs felt they were better off catering to the non smoking community then there would be no requirement for it. However, many of the smaller, drinkers pubs have found serious hardship and difficulty in maintaining revenue due to the lack of choice afforded to a large percentage of customers.

Define marriage as between two adults, not man & woman

Change the part of marriage law stipulating marriage to be between a man & a woman, and make it instead between two adults.

Simultaneously, you can alter civil partnership law to the same effect, so people of any orientation can have whichever partnership they feel is best for them.

Churches can still do as they please, but civil marriages & partnerships would be for everyone.

 

(Needless to say, other restrictions to do with incest, polygamy, forced marriage, underage marriage, bigamy, etc would stay in place, before some make claims equating gay marriage with all these.)

Why is this idea important?

Change the part of marriage law stipulating marriage to be between a man & a woman, and make it instead between two adults.

Simultaneously, you can alter civil partnership law to the same effect, so people of any orientation can have whichever partnership they feel is best for them.

Churches can still do as they please, but civil marriages & partnerships would be for everyone.

 

(Needless to say, other restrictions to do with incest, polygamy, forced marriage, underage marriage, bigamy, etc would stay in place, before some make claims equating gay marriage with all these.)

Define marriage as between two adults, not man & woman

Change the part of marriage law stipulating marriage to be between a man & a woman, and make it instead between two adults.

Simultaneously, you can alter civil partnership law to the same effect, so people of any orientation can have whichever partnership they feel is best for them.

Churches can still do as they please, but civil marriages & partnerships would be for everyone.

 

(Needless to say, other restrictions to do with incest, polygamy, forced marriage, underage marriage, bigamy, etc would stay in place, before some make claims equating gay marriage with all these.)

Why is this idea important?

Change the part of marriage law stipulating marriage to be between a man & a woman, and make it instead between two adults.

Simultaneously, you can alter civil partnership law to the same effect, so people of any orientation can have whichever partnership they feel is best for them.

Churches can still do as they please, but civil marriages & partnerships would be for everyone.

 

(Needless to say, other restrictions to do with incest, polygamy, forced marriage, underage marriage, bigamy, etc would stay in place, before some make claims equating gay marriage with all these.)

Ms Ann Williamson – Smoking ban

Let everyone choose if they want  there  pubs to be smoke zones or not , but bigger ones should have seperate designated rooms for either smoking or none smoking, and for all pubs to have it clearly stated outside there premises if they are a smoking or none smoking pub, then it is up to the individual if they want to go into these premises. I do think that all pubs should  have proper venilation to take as much of the smoke as possible

Why is this idea important?

Let everyone choose if they want  there  pubs to be smoke zones or not , but bigger ones should have seperate designated rooms for either smoking or none smoking, and for all pubs to have it clearly stated outside there premises if they are a smoking or none smoking pub, then it is up to the individual if they want to go into these premises. I do think that all pubs should  have proper venilation to take as much of the smoke as possible

change health act 2006

 I believe it should be up  to pubs and restraunts, cafes and other public places whether to ban smoking.  But as long as there are places set aside for smokers and well ventillated. Its a sad day when we have to live our lives and choices through a law which can  be changed to accomodate everyone. Smokers shouldnt be treated like criminals and lepers just because they smoke. After all , the government makes enough money out of  tobacco in tax. Pubs and clubs etc have lost trade and many closed down because of this law. Give  people the free choice again.

Why is this idea important?

 I believe it should be up  to pubs and restraunts, cafes and other public places whether to ban smoking.  But as long as there are places set aside for smokers and well ventillated. Its a sad day when we have to live our lives and choices through a law which can  be changed to accomodate everyone. Smokers shouldnt be treated like criminals and lepers just because they smoke. After all , the government makes enough money out of  tobacco in tax. Pubs and clubs etc have lost trade and many closed down because of this law. Give  people the free choice again.