Say No To Nanny

Smokefree Ideology


Nicotine Wars

 

40 Years of Hurt

Prejudice and Prohibition

Road To Ruin?

Search This Site
The Pleasure of Smoking

Forest Polling Report

Outdoor Smoking Bans

Share This Page
Powered by Squarespace
« Singin' in the Rain at Kilworth House | Main | From zero to heroes? The uncomfortable truth about some e-cig advocates »
Wednesday
Jul152015

Extending smoking ban to include parks and beaches unwarranted and illiberal

Do local councils really have nothing better to do?

According to Brighton and Hove News, 'Brighton and Hove could become one of the first places in the UK to ban smoking in its parks and on its beaches.'

Here's our response:

The smokers' group Forest has urged Brighton and Hove City Council to reject calls to extend smoke free zones to include beaches and parks.

Responding to news that the Council may hold a consultation on the issue, Simon Clark, director of Forest, said:

"Extending the smoking ban to parks and beaches is an unwarranted attack on people's personal freedom.

"There's no evidence that smoking in the open air is a risk to the health of anyone other than the smoker.

"Nor is there evidence that the sight of a stranger lighting up encourages children to smoke.

"Tobacco is legal product. Smokers pay over £10 billion annually in tobacco taxation, a sum that far exceeds the alleged cost of treating smoking-related diseases. This persistent attack on their habit must stop.

"Smokers should smoke responsibly, with consideration for others around them, but extending the smoking ban, even on a voluntary basis, to outdoor spaces is petty and illiberal."

The proposal for a consultation will go to committee later this month.

Update: The Brighton Argus has the story plus a very short quote from me here – Potential smoking ban for Brighton and Hove beaches and parks.

Ditto the Telegraph – Seaside resort proposes banning smoking on beaches – which uses the same quote.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (3)

There is no demonstrated risk to others from second hand smoke outdoors. Even indoors the actual health risks of second hand smoke are near zero. These draconian smoking ban proposals should be soundly rejected.

Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 0:35 | Unregistered CommenterVinny Gracchus

"These draconian smoking ban proposals should be soundly rejected."

But they wont be. Because that is the trend of the past 15 years and it will take, at least another, 5/10 before it's all confined to horrible histories. Places such as Brighton (and I've lived there at a time when it was strongly risque and libertarian) still think it's 1997.

Having said that, as a perpetual optimist, I'm ever hopeful that this Govt. may just look at the ban again as it's attitude to fox hunting.

Yeah, as I said, I'm a perpetual optimist.

Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 11:20 | Unregistered CommenterFrank J

This is why I am currently at Folkstone waiting for a train to tolerant countries where smokers are treated equally and with respect and where I will spend my hard earned years savings. Why would I waste thousands holidaying in the intolerant and bullying UK that expects smokers to keep paying more to receive a whole lot less in facilities and services year on year. Fuck Brighton.

Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 14:11 | Unregistered Commenterpat nurse

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>