This week, 20 years ago, Ireland banned smoking in pubs

Hard to believe it’s 20 years since the introduction of the public smoking ban in Ireland.

The ban was the first of its type anywhere in the world - something Irish politicians have never stopped boasting about - and it led directly to the ban in Scotland in 2006, followed by England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2007.

When the idea was first suggested, in 2001, I think, I proposed that Forest launch a group in Ireland to fight it but we couldn’t get funding to make it happen.

In my view there was a great deal of complacency that the legislation wouldn’t happen or, if it did, the famously rebellious Irish would ignore it, in pubs at least.

As a result there was very little opposition. A couple of groups emerged in Waterford but Smokers Against Discrimination (SAD) and European Smokers Against Discrimination (ESAD) had a whiff of the Judean People’s Front and the People’s Front of Judea about them.

Also, few people over here seemed to recognise that if Ireland introduced a public smoking ban, the UK - with its very similar pub tradition - would be ideally placed, geographically and culturally, to be next.

We nevertheless did what we could. We met representatives of SAD (or was it ESAD?) in Waterford. We lobbied the Irish government and Forest spokesmen were interviewed on Irish radio and, occasionally, TV, but at that time we didn't have a dedicated spokesman in Ireland so it was difficult.

We also tried, without much success, to engage with the Licensed Vintners Association (LVA) who represent publicans in Dublin, and the Vintners' Federation of Ireland who represent the trade throughout the rest of Ireland.

Historically the trade had always been well represented in the Dáil where a number of TDs were former publicans.

Unfortunately, as we were to discover during a raucous debate at University College Dublin in 2003, there was surprisingly strong opposition to the vintners who were perceived to be running something of a cartel and the smoking ban was an opportunity to give the trade a long overdue kicking.

Another factor that came into play that was also outside our control concerned the obvious tension in Irish society between those who wanted to create a modern Ireland (with smoke free pubs an emblem of that process) and those more wedded to the past.

The irony that Forest, a UK-based smokers’ rights group, was one of the main voices opposed to the ban wasn’t lost on me, and as for the traditional portrayal of Ireland as a nation of rebels, the smoking ban showed that to be a complete illusion.

Anyway, the ban finally came into effect on March 29, 2024, and this is how I described the days leading up its enforcement.

Wednesday March 24, 2004

To Ireland, courtesy of Sky News who want me to appear on Richard Littlejohn’s show (live from Dublin) to take part in a debate about the Irish smoking ban.

I decided to travel a couple of days early in order to experience the traditional smoker-friendly Irish bar for possibly the last time. Personally I have my doubts that the ban can be enforced and I intend to come back in six months to find out how ‘successful' it has been.

In the meantime my arrival is delayed because I managed to miss the plane!! I blame the BBC with whom I got into an argument after they published the results of an 'interactive' poll that suggested that 73 per cent of people want a ban on smoking in public.

According to the small print in the BBC's own press release it was a 'consultation' not a scientific poll. Needless to say this didn't come across in the way it was reported nor did it deter them from promoting it as a 'top story' on both BBC Online and Ceefax. Top story, my arse. This was a publicly gimmick, pure and simple, for a BBC programme about the NHS to be broadcast tonight.

Curiously the producers contacted Forest last week to see if we could suggest someone to take part in the studio debate. I offered to do it myself, even though it would have meant delaying my departure to Dublin by a day, only to be told that “We want an ordinary member of the general public.”

Oh well, I'm in Dublin now. Tonight I shall watch the Arsenal-Chelsea [Champions League] match in the comfort of an Irish pub and tomorrow I’m visiting a pub once frequented by Sir Walter Raleigh, the man who 400 odd years ago provoked the entire smoking debate. Well done, Walter, see the trouble you’ve caused!

Thursday March 25, 2004

To Johnnie Fox's, the highest and possibly the most famous pub in County Dublin. Founded in 1798, this traditional if slightly kitsch pub has played host to presidents, ambassadors, royalty, sports stars, tourists, "chatty locals" and even Salman Rushdie.

A stone-flagged floor ("daily strewn with sawdust"), ancient bric-a-brac, old dressers, open fireplace and crackling logs are just some of the attractions of this wonderful place. Investigate further and you'll find a penny farthing on one wall and, outside, a feeding pot said to have been used by up to 800 people daily during the potato famine.

Smoker-friendly? A simple glance at walls adorned with advertisements for long gone brands and slogans will tell you all you need to know: Craven 'A' ('smooth to the lips'), Gold Flake ('chosen by Aer Lingus'), Will's Flag, Capstan Navy Cut, 'Wild Woodbine', 'Player's Please' and, my favourite, 'Smoke Clarke's Perfect Plug'.

Next week, thanks to Ireland's ambitious, uncompromising health minister Michael Martin, smoking will be banned in Johnnie Fox's. With its reputation for great food, numerous beers and a good selection of wines and spirits, I can't imagine that business will be much affected. But it will be different, and in my view the poorer for it.

The good news is that Johnny Fox's is not abandoning smokers altogether. While other bars are busy erecting canopies and awnings with outside heaters so people can still smoke in relative comfort, JF has acquired an original 1952 double-decker bus, refurbished it, and renamed it the Happy Smoking Bus.

On Monday it will tour the streets of Dublin before returning to its final resting place outside the pub where it will provide a peaceful sanctuary for the pub’s many smokers. Effervescent business manager Fred Rainert tells me customers can smoke on the bus as long as it's not staffed. And the number plate? FU 2.

Friday March 26, 2004

To Dublin, via Kilcoole, to appear on Littlejohn (Sky News). Why Kilcoole? It's a long story. Suffice to say I was distracted by a radio producer who rang to ask if I would appear on Five Live on Sunday evening. I was on the platform at Greystones, a small town south of Dublin, and we were still talking when a train – the wrong train, as it turns out – pulled in to the station and I climbed aboard.

Ten minutes after the train set off a kindly ticket inspector confirmed my error but couldn't have been more helpful. "I'll tell you what," he said. "This is a non-stop train to Wicklow but I'll have a word with the driver and we'll stop at Kilcoole and you can get the bus back."

With hindsight it would have been quicker to stay on the train and travel back to Dublin from Wicklow. "You'll be waiting there at least two hours," a friendly voice called out to me as I stood at the first bus stop I encountered. "Keep walking till you find the main road. A bus should be along in an hour or so."

It was only lunchtime so I still had five hours to get back to Dublin via bus, train and taxi, check in to my hotel, shower and change clothes, but in the end I only just made it, arriving at the Shelbourne Hotel, where Littlejohn was being broadcast, with five minutes to spare.

Saturday March 27, 2004

Dublin is awash with kilted Scotsmen. According to the papers, 10,000 are in town for this afternoon's Six Nations rugby match against Ireland. What a pity the smoking ban wasn't implemented a few weeks earlier. The chances of it being enforced on big match day would have been nil. I look forward to 2005 when thousands of Galloise-smoking French supporters descend en masse on Dublin's bars and restaurants.

To read the papers and reflect on last night’s programme, I find a small coffee shop liberally sprinkled with soon to be redundant ashtrays. (The smoking ban is to be enforced from 6.00am tomorrow.) Littlejohn was a hoot. Broadcast live from the Shelbourne, one of Dublin's most historic hotels, the hour-long show featured over a dozen commentators providing a wide range of opinion about the smoking ban. Presenter (and Sun columnist) Richard Littlejohn made no secret of his views (a non-smoker, he's an outspoken opponent of blanket bans), but the programme as a whole was well balanced.

Split into groups of three, guests were seated on stools beside small round tables trembling under the weight of alcohol. To the disappointment of production staff, very few people were actually smoking. My contribution was limited to a brief verbal spat with Professor Luke Clancy, the genial spokesman for ASH Ireland, after which I retired to the bar for another pint of Guinness.

After the programme Tadg O'Sullivan, chief executive of the Vintners Federation of Ireland, told me he thought 'our' side had won. I thought we escaped with a draw, thanks to Littlejohn himself and an extraordinary performance by an anti-smoking columnist with the Irish Sunday Mirror that was so melodramatic I thought she must be auditioning for the part of pantomime dame. Someone whispered in my ear that this was no act - apparently she's like this all the time. “God help her husband,” said another voice.

The antis scored a further own goal when a good looking young restaurateur said he supported a general ban because if he prohibited smoking and others didn't he would lose customers. Doh! Of course similar views have been expressed by some restaurateurs in Britain. The free market, they seem to be saying, is a wonderful thing unless it adversely affects their business, at which point they demand regulations to create a 'level playing field'.

Sunday March 28, 2004

Returning to the UK from Ireland I can't help noticing that Dublin Airport now has severe warnings by every entrance: 'NO SMOKING ANYWHERE IN THIS BUILDING: The Tobacco Smoking (Prohibition) Regulation 2003'. It's all rather intimidating, as if smoking poses as great a threat as terrorism or weapons of mass destruction.

Far more civilised and welcoming are the designated smoking areas at Stansted and all major UK airports. If you're a nervous flyer who desperately needs a fag before or after a flight, airport smoking areas provide an oasis in the desert. Anyone who can't see that is not just being politically correct, they're being mean-spirited and vindictive, words that accurately describe today's obsessive anti-smokers.

Postscript: A few months later I returned to Ireland for what can best be described as a working holiday.

The aim was to investigate the impact of the ban on pubs in Ireland so I took my family on a driving tour that took us to Westport, in Co Mayo, Galway, Kilkenny, Waterford, and Dublin.

I discovered that in smaller towns with an ageing population (Waterford being the best example), pubs that were previously open at lunchtime were now opening later, at 5.00pm.

That was because their lunchtime trade was almost exclusively older men, usually retired, who would previously pop in for a drink and a smoke.

Some might stay all afternoon, propping up the bar with a pint in one hand and a pipe in the other. Prohibited from lighting up inside, they were staying at home.

Elsewhere I discovered the most ingenious methods to get around the ban. In Kilkenny, for example, I found a pub with a designated ‘smoking room’ that had been built as an extension on an upper floor.

It had its own bar, comfortable seating, and was almost completely enclosed apart from two narrow gaps in the roof.

Likewise in Dublin I visited a bar with a smoking room that was less comfortable than the one in Kilkenny but was equally sheltered from the elements. Instead, high above our heads at the top of what looked like an industrial chimney was a hole, and through the hole you could see daylight.

The ‘room’ was separated from the main bar by a glass door and walls so you didn’t feel too disconnected from the rest of the pub.

Subsequent visits - to Cork, for example - introduced me to similar feats of ingenuity that clearly stretched the regulations to infinity and beyond but were wisely overlooked by the authorities.

In the UK that has rarely been the case. Here, local authorities seemed determined to act to the letter of the law when common sense might have led to better outcomes for everyone.

Anyway, if I have to listen to one more person saying, “No-one wants to go back to smoking in pubs”, I shall scream and point out that, as a non-smoker, I would positively welcome it, and I know that most of you would too.

Indeed, as late as 2017 (the last time we polled the public on the subject), a clear majority supported designated smoking rooms in pubs and clubs.

I’m not saying all pubs should allow smoking indoors. That wouldn’t happen, anyway, even if the government amended the law. Society has moved on, but the decision should rest with the proprietor, not the government.

What I didn’t envisage, when we were fighting the smoking ban 20 years ago, is that within a generation the sale of tobacco to adults would also be under threat.

But that’s what happens when you give an inch, and what’s happening in the UK today has its roots in the introduction of the smoking ban in Ireland on March 29, 2004.

Comments

[Pat Nurse]

The reason I was against the total blanket smoking ban was because it was obvious it would never stop there. It was the beginning of the war on smokers, and not just smoking, by the anti smoker industry and their paid for junk science designed to stigmatise, dehumanise and promote intolerance against anyone who challenged their agenda.

I remember telling people that one day they would be taking kids from parents who smoke and few believed it would ever happen but it wasn't long after the pub smoking ban that smokers were banned from being foster parents and I still believe that the state will come for the kids of smokers as the generational ban takes hold.

I did hope, initially, however, that when the politicians saw the economic and cultural carnage caused to the pub industry that they would relax it a bit to allow for choice but then in later years Pat Hewitt said on radio that such destruction of business and people's livelihoods was "a price worth paying" for the ideological aim of a "smoke free world."

Look where we are now. Ban, after ban, including jobs where bosses boast about paying smokers less, or not employing them at all, the promotion of incompassion at hospitals when dealing with smokers, and it was always clear that ultimately the constant barrage of abuse and dehumanisation would ultimately lead to the criminalisation of smoking one day which is the end game the anti smoker industry always wanted when it set its sights on that first slice of the cake - the pub ban.

I believe that culturally we have lost a lot since the smoking ban and this once tolerant, fair, and inclusive country that catered for all tastes, opinions, and quirks is now a totalitarian state where dissent of opinion on many issues is verboden if you want to keep your job, your, home, and your good reputation.

[Marcus J. Swift]

Sadly, it was the very ingenuity of Irish publicans, that led the more draconian British governments to define precisely (and ridiculously) what constituted an enclosed space, so that such ingenuity would not be allowed here.

Legally, one can still smoke in hotel bedrooms, if the proprietor wishes to allow it, but the British bans created a climate where being anti-smoker became legitimate, and gave license to anti-smoker hoteliers, so there are hardly any hotel bedrooms for smokers left. I use the term anti-smoker deliberately, rather than anti-smoking, because the end goal is for all smokers to stop smoking, effectively to root us out of society.

The UK is a victim of the wave of social puritanism that has swept the planet. Do what we say is good for you, not what you want to do, is the 21st century mantra, and it hasn't stopped with smoking either.

Smokers were the canaries in the coal mine, and we warned everyone, back in the early part of the century, that if you let them come for us, everyone else will be next; so it is coming to pass.

[Misty]

I know it sounds overly dramatic, but I really do think that the whole anti-smoking movement kind of started the rot in our society once it got the bit between its teeth. As Marcus points out, we (smokers and tolerant non-smokers, that is) very much “told you so” as soon as anti-smoking attitudes got enshrined in law in the form of the smoking ban; the inevitable consequential intolerant attitudes towards anyone who doesn’t agree with one’s particular preferences and viewpoints are now evident in so, so many areas of life – and not just “naughty” lifestyles choices, either. It’s almost as if there were several dozen little soapbox-carriers waiting in the wings to see whether the UK Parliament would take that one, final step to confirm that “intolerance is OK and legislation can help to enforce it” and then, when they did, they were: “Woah! If they can do it – so can we!”

Look at any potentially restrictive, liberty-snatching, controlling, biased demand/legislation/rule or campaign-group’s stated aims and you’ll see shadows and hear echoes of the whole anti-smoking template lurking in there somewhere. Not identical, but definitely there and definitely unmistakeable. There’s a reason why “anti-smokism” and “wokeism” rhyme with each other – the latter is the begotten child of the other, and offspring, as we know, carry many of the characteristics of their creators. You’ll never find woke people or woke groups or woke campaigners who aren’t already fully paid-up passengers on the anti-smoking bandwagon, even if it isn’t their main focus right now. They can’t help themselves – it’s in their DNA.

And that was the most serious harm that the smoking ban legislation did. Never mind the closure of our pubs and clubs and other social meeting-places – that was bad enough, but through enacting such a spiteful, divisive and unfair piece of legislation our own elected representatives, in their droves and with almost childlike glee, changed the whole nature of British society - and not for the better, either. Quite, quite the opposite.
Shame on them.