I smoke, but I do prefer it now. The only trouble with the smoking ban is there is nothing to mask peoples B.O. or beer fueled flatulence - had to vacate the Maltings on Friday for ten minutes because of one blokes rather smelly bottom burps.

So people are drinking less too? Sounds like it's had another health benefit! Win-Win!

I think the major factor here is not the no smoking bit, it's the outrageous price of the ale!!
Why is it that Sam Smiths( which in my opinion is orrible) can keep their prices realistic,yet all other breweries rip us off? They all pay the same taxes.

It would be useful if we knew if the landlord and landlady in question were smokers themselves? I wouldn't trust statements made by smokers themselves, they have an axe to grind. Put if I hear it from a non-smoking publican.......

Sam Smiths can be fantastic -- I've spent many a miserable hour in the hansom cab and the king's arms, but for a really nice surprise try the Sam Smiths pub in Bishopthorpe (can't remember its name). Don't know whether it's just the way they keep it, but it's a totally different beast...

"But 17 pubs said trade had fallen because of the ban, in many cases by 20 per cent or more"

Why not headline the story as 67% of pubs report no loss in trade due to smoking ban. Give it a bit of positive press for a change.

im a smoker going outside dosnt bother me.
Its probably the price of pub beer vs supermarket deals , who knows, glad I love sam smiths

I used to avoid certain pubs because I smelt terrible when I came out again.

But since the ban I have started going back them and probably go there more often.

I would say the cost/economy has more to do with people staying away, but luckily I like Sams too.

The smoking ban hasn't harmed the pub trade - as can be seen by previous press surveys where al teh landlords agreed that they had seen little effect.

THere is less free money about at the moment and it does not help that the government is taxing pub beers to curb drinking (since we all know its the people in pubs who cause the trouble, not the ones who down a bottle of vodka or cider before they go out) Our own government is bankrupt os they are squeezing for taxes wherever they can get them.

I think the pubs most effected by the smoking ban are those with no beer garden who are situated practically next to a pub that has one.

Petethefete - exactly. I was wondering the same myself. I cant afford to go to a pub often, but when i do i find it much more pleasant, and the regulars are still there. Prices are much more likely to be affecting trade at the moment.

Business has been lost cos of englands failure to qualify for euro2008.
The York A&E department were gutted!!!!!!

The Sam Smiths public house near Victoria station in London was selling Old Brew up to April this year at One Pound and Eighty pence a pint.
Certainly realistic considering the transportation costs from North Yorkshire.

Since the start of the year, several pubs - including the Oddfellows Arms, in Pocklington, and The Phoenix, in George Street, York, have closed.

I was sorry to see the Phoenix close - a grand little ocal - but its problems - well documented in the Press - were nothing to do with the smoking ban.

Maybe the reason the Edward is struggling is because it is known as the pub where on certain nights, a rough bird from leeds with 10 to 2 boobs strips off behind the bar. Hardly the place to take the missus for a quiet drink....

These pubs moaning about loss of trade had plenty of time to prepare by getting planning permission for beer gardens to cater for smokers. If they haven't bothered to do that its their own fault if takings are down. A lot of city centre pubs have provided outside areas with heating but plenty haven't! As a smoker I go to pubs with outside areas, and it doesn't bother me going outside.

And four unsure ???


How much have they had to drink !!

Dick Turpin wrote:
The Sam Smiths public house near Victoria station in London was selling Old Brew up to April this year at One Pound and Eighty pence a pint.
Certainly realistic considering the transportation costs from North Yorkshire.

Exactly-How do they manage to keep these prices when no-one else can, they must still be good profit on it.

a rough bird from leeds with 10 to 2 boobs strips off behind the bar.

Had to suffer that once when we were playing a darts match. NO WAY is that a bird???!??!

Surely people are simply cutting back financially where they can and it is so cheap to buy alcohol in supermarkets now. Also arent non smokers more likely to sit longer in pubs that are not full of smoke and this should make up for any smokers that no longer use the pubs.

I am glad someone enjoys a pint in the Ebor (Sam Smiths Pub in Bishopthorpe). The last time I went in the pure brewed larger was disgusting. After informing the boorish landlord he did not even look at the beer or me and commented ‘it went on last night, people have been drinking it today and no one has complained, that’s the way it is’. I have drunk enough of the stuff to know the difference, indecorous idiots like him would not have my sympathy if takings are down

Wow. Very surprized with all the comments - no 'I told you so's' and all in favour of the ban. Amazing. How things change.

Michelle wrote:
Surely people are simply cutting back financially where they can and it is so cheap to buy alcohol in supermarkets now. Also arent non smokers more likely to sit longer in pubs that are not full of smoke and this should make up for any smokers that no longer use the pubs.

Spot on. Times are tight, they can still stand outside and do a George Michael (have a puff).

Is there more ridiculous sight that the great outdoors being heated!

I only go to the pub once a week since the smoking ban. It's time to overturn the ban and allow publicans to choose whether to be smoking or non-smoking establishments. Then everybody's happy.

"Certainly realistic considering the transportation costs from North Yorkshire."

It`s transported free of charge in train toilet slop tanks.

How many pubs closed in York in the year leading up to the smoking ban, Compared to how many closed since the smoking ban?.

The price of supermarket ale has always been alot cheaper, so it cannot be blamed for the current situation, same goes for the so called credit crunch, how many pubs in York closed their doors during the last recesion?.

The ban has had a devastating effect on pubs and especially Working mens clubs. There was no need for the total ban as the excuse for it,the effects of second hand smoke, was not and cannot be backed up by any genuine evidence. It has driven both smokers and their non smoking friends out of pubs and clubs. It is simply part of NU Labours social engineering plan.(Drink next, then food, then thought?)
The ban must be amended to allow both smoking and non smoking venues.NULabour got a hammering in both the council elections and the bye election at Crewe, a former labour stronghold. This was at least partly to do with the ban and it's negative effect on peoples social lives. I know many non smokers who do not like the ban. I also know many people who voted labour all their lives who will not do so again because of the ban.
As a footnote I was browsing the Labour party web site and came across what they listed as their 50 greatest achievements since 1997. Many were trivial things hardly worth a mention. The smoking ban was not among them. Why if is such a success?

Working mens clubs were in terminal decline long before the ban. Long rows of canteen-type tables, cr@p beer, crumby acts and the bingo! Few younsters go for that. In contrasts, there's lots of new pubs and bars in town. Life changes, move on.

Depends which part of the country you are in regarding the decline of working mens clubs,

The smoking ban only irritates me when it comes to travelling, why cant I have a quick cig on an uncovered train station platform??

said before I am not bothered about smoking in pubs, but at the same time why cant they just have a room with a decent ventilation system.

I find going to the pub much more enjoyable now. It is great waking up on a Sunday morning without all your clothes stinking of smoke.

petethefeet wrote:
Working mens clubs were in terminal decline long before the ban. Long rows of canteen-type tables, cr@p beer, crumby acts and the bingo! Few younsters go for that. In contrasts, there's lots of new pubs and bars in town. Life changes, move on.

Absolutely. Two WMC's on my side of town (Layerthorpe and The Groves) both closed well before the smoking ban was even discussed, let alone implemented. Times have changed indeed.

I'm a none smoker, but have several friends who I drink with who are. In the summer we always tend to sit outside anyway (although not in the last two years) but they do not mind popping outside for a quick smoke.

Although we go out for a pint a lot less now, it isn't down to the smoking ban, just the price of a beer in the pub. A tenner can buy a round of 4 beers or a crate of 24 cans (almost 5 times as much beer). Not a difficult choice with the cost of everything so high right now !

mrandyc wrote:
I find going to the pub much more enjoyable now. It is great waking up on a Sunday morning without all your clothes stinking of smoke.

i dunno i dont sleep in mine

The smoking ban is the most vindictive and spiteful piece of legislation ever introduced by a British government. Those worst effected are the elderly, war veterans who risked their lives for freedom only to have it taken away by Britains answer to the Nazi party. There is no excuse for not allowing choice.The reason for not allowing it is obvious, if there was choice the smoking pubs would thrive and the non smoking ones close.

the whole country is on its a rse dont blame me ive never voted labour!!

scorpion wrote:
The smoking ban is the most vindictive and spiteful piece of legislation ever introduced by a British government. Those worst effected are the elderly, war veterans who risked their lives for freedom only to have it taken away by Britains answer to the Nazi party. There is no excuse for not allowing choice.The reason for not allowing it is obvious, if there was choice the smoking pubs would thrive and the non smoking ones close.

Scorpion. I know where you are coming from as we have this argument weekly with my aged Dad. Now it's not as though we're vindictive as he hasn't bought an ounce of Golden Virginia at UK prices since the seventies - his 3 kids have kept him supplied from abroad. He says the same but we try and press on him the idea that we don't want our kids (and Grandkids) to get as addicted to the weed as he did. And so, by blocking it's use in pubs, public places and at work, this should be achievable. I understand that it's tough on those already hooked, and hence the reason why we help him out, but at some point we had to stop people been able to puff away all day. We need to consign tobacco to history.

If the landlady who's takings have dropped 40% is based in Cemetery road,then its not all due to the smoking ban. A once decent local pub, it is now just an extension of york university

scorpion wrote:
The smoking ban is the most vindictive and spiteful piece of legislation ever introduced by a British government. Those worst effected are the elderly, war veterans who risked their lives for freedom only to have it taken away by Britains answer to the Nazi party. There is no excuse for not allowing choice.The reason for not allowing it is obvious, if there was choice the smoking pubs would thrive and the non smoking ones close.

scorpion are you a smoker or a non smoker,everyone knows cigarettes are full of poisons,pepole have a right to smoke,but it should not be around someone who does not smoke,pubs should not be affected you dont go there to drink a cigarette do you you go there for a drink,when i was in england in jan 2007 i was in one of the clubs in acomb and it was disgusting and i was a smoker back then,you will know that smoke turns everything yellow,what does it do to your body,i have never felt better since i quit,so if you want to smoke do it in a designated area,

Hubby non-smoker, myself smoker, will just become summer drinkers, if the pub or club is still around. Why didn't the smoke-haters invest their own money in smokefree venues? they were never banned from doing so.
Everyone knows there is arsenic and flouride and goodness knows what else in the water, strange they think we should down litres a day hmm

Google your carcinogenic perfumes and aftershaves you force down everyones throat, should we ban that too? NO, just get things into perspective.
Given this spiteful ban was based on lies and misinformation,
8th August 2006 the HSE in their document OC 255/15 article9 state
" HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to second hand smoke to the raised risk of contacting specific diseases".
9 The evidential link between individual circumstances of exposure to risk in
exempted premises will be hard to establish. In essence, HSE cannot
produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to SHS to the
raised risk of contracting specific diseases and it is therefore difficult to prove
health-related breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
http://www.ourlittle
place.com/chemicals.
html
3. BENZYL ACETATE (in: perfume, cologne, shampoo, fabric softener, stickup air freshener, dishwashing liquid and detergent, soap, hairspray, bleach, after shave, deodorants)
Carcinogenic (linked to pancreatic cancer); "From vapors: irritating to eyes and respiratory passages, exciting cough." "In mice: hyperanemia of the lungs." "Can be absorbed through the skin causing systemic effects." "Do not flush to sewer."
http://www.mamasheal
th.com/doc/cleanprod
.asp
FURNITURE POLISH: contain petroleum distillates, which are highly flammable and can cause skin and lung cancer. They contain nitrobenzene, which is easily absorbed through the skin and extremely toxic.
freedom2choose.info for tolerant non-smokers and smokers alike

I work at the edward and yes i take my top off on a thursday.
i cant believe people say i have boobalooes like spaniels ears,or ten to two boobs.
Im dismayed!!!

mandy vincent wrote:
Hubby non-smoker, myself smoker, will just become summer drinkers, if the pub or club is still around. Why didn't the smoke-haters invest their own money in smokefree venues? they were never banned from doing so. Everyone knows there is arsenic and flouride and goodness knows what else in the water, strange they think we should down litres a day hmm Google your carcinogenic perfumes and aftershaves you force down everyones throat, should we ban that too? NO, just get things into perspective. Given this spiteful ban was based on lies and misinformation, 8th August 2006 the HSE in their document OC 255/15 article9 state " HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to second hand smoke to the raised risk of contacting specific diseases". 9 The evidential link between individual circumstances of exposure to risk in exempted premises will be hard to establish. In essence, HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to SHS to the raised risk of contracting specific diseases and it is therefore difficult to prove health-related breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act. http://www.ourlittle place.com/chemicals. html 3. BENZYL ACETATE (in: perfume, cologne, shampoo, fabric softener, stickup air freshener, dishwashing liquid and detergent, soap, hairspray, bleach, after shave, deodorants) Carcinogenic (linked to pancreatic cancer); "From vapors: irritating to eyes and respiratory passages, exciting cough." "In mice: hyperanemia of the lungs." "Can be absorbed through the skin causing systemic effects." "Do not flush to sewer." http://www.mamasheal th.com/doc/cleanprod .asp FURNITURE POLISH: contain petroleum distillates, which are highly flammable and can cause skin and lung cancer. They contain nitrobenzene, which is easily absorbed through the skin and extremely toxic. freedom2choose.info for tolerant non-smokers and smokers alike

Thank you for that informative, well balanced comment Mandy. I shall cease spraying other drinkers with Furniture Polish forthwith!

The British Beer and Pub Association certainly think that the ban has harmed the pub trade to the tune of a 7.3% decline in profits. Similarly, the Licensed Victuallers Association in Wales thinks some traditional, wet led pubs, especially those with no room to cater for smokers, have had their business cut by up 20% or more. 27 pubs are now closing per week as compared with 4 last year. We've had recessions in this country before - worse than the current economic climate - and never has the rate of pub closures jumped like this. The primary factor to blame is the ill conceived smoking ban.

According to a survey by the Publican, the amount spent on food this year is almost identical to last year. So non-smokers are not plugging the shortfall by buying food. Nor are they buying more beer, as beer sales this year have decreased.

Petethefeet - I understand where you are coming from, but if Ireland is anything to go by, prohibition simply doesn't work. In fact, the 'mystique' added to smoking and the newly illicit nature of the activity only serve to increase tobacco consumption. In 2002, before the ban was introduced in Ireland, smoker prevalence was at 27%. According to figures released recently by the Irish DoH, it is now 29%. Years of downward trends in tobacco usage have actually been reversed by the smoking ban!

Similarly, the government's proposed ban on 10 packs has also been tried in Ireland, with similar results - smoking rates increasing because people buy more.

The current anti-smoking climate is only serving to bolster the popularity of smoking.

langy wrote:

mandy vincent wrote: Hubby non-smoker, myself smoker, will just become summer drinkers, if the pub or club is still around. Why didn't the smoke-haters invest their own money in smokefree venues? they were never banned from doing so. Everyone knows there is arsenic and flouride and goodness knows what else in the water, strange they think we should down litres a day hmm Google your carcinogenic perfumes and aftershaves you force down everyones throat, should we ban that too? NO, just get things into perspective. Given this spiteful ban was based on lies and misinformation, 8th August 2006 the HSE in their document OC 255/15 article9 state " HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to second hand smoke to the raised risk of contacting specific diseases". 9 The evidential link between individual circumstances of exposure to risk in exempted premises will be hard to establish. In essence, HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to SHS to the raised risk of contracting specific diseases and it is therefore difficult to prove health-related breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act. http://www.ourlittle place.com/chemicals. html 3. BENZYL ACETATE (in: perfume, cologne, shampoo, fabric softener, stickup air freshener, dishwashing liquid and detergent, soap, hairspray, bleach, after shave, deodorants) Carcinogenic (linked to pancreatic cancer); "From vapors: irritating to eyes and respiratory passages, exciting cough." "In mice: hyperanemia of the lungs." "Can be absorbed through the skin causing systemic effects." "Do not flush to sewer." http://www.mamasheal th.com/doc/cleanprod .asp FURNITURE POLISH: contain petroleum distillates, which are highly flammable and can cause skin and lung cancer. They contain nitrobenzene, which is easily absorbed through the skin and extremely toxic. freedom2choose.info for tolerant non-smokers and smokers alike

Thank you for that informative, well balanced comment Mandy. I shall cease spraying other drinkers with Furniture Polish forthwith!

Langy, that's hilarious !

I knew the freedom2choose lot would appear on this thread - mention fags and they start appearing (through the fug of smoke complete with stinky breath of course).
Smokers wil never accept their habit is just plain wrong and non smokers will always think it is.
If they want to continue smoking their cancer sticks, frankly I couldn't care less... just as long as it's not near me.

bjc - don't try and associate yourself with all non-smokers, the majority of whom are tolerant. You are an anti-smoker, and your zealotry, exemplified by your assertion that smoking is 'just plain wrong', is reminiscent of prohibition campaigns of the past.

The amount of anti-smokers stinking to high heaven must have increased since the ban. After all, anti-smokers positively balk at the prospect of washing their clothes.

This government must be the most hypocritical two faced ever. They condone the sale of cigarettes from which they take £4 out of every £5 spent in tax. They then tell the owners of private property that they cannot allow the use of this legal product that they make billions out of on their PRIVATE premises. The government is not losing one penny, pubs are closing at the rate of 27 a week as smokers buy in alcohol and stay at home to entertain. they say tobacco smells well this government stinks.

Tim Clarke wrote:
bjc - don't try and associate yourself with all non-smokers, the majority of whom are tolerant. You are an anti-smoker, and your zealotry, exemplified by your assertion that smoking is 'just plain wrong', is reminiscent of prohibition campaigns of the past. The amount of anti-smokers stinking to high heaven must have increased since the ban. After all, anti-smokers positively balk at the prospect of washing their clothes.

Utter tosh... go and have a fag and calm down.

Anti-smokers also visit the Freedom to Choose website, so that they can make their anti-smoking comments on these sites.

I have just looked on the Freedom to Choose website and there is no mention of this story.

Alan Jacko, said, Of the ban, he said: "I think there should have been freedom of choice, perhaps keeping one room open for smoking."

Yeah Freedom to choose to go to a non smoking pub or not, its that simple, a CHOICE. The person who owns or rents the pub should choose which way they want to go with the ban. the customers can please themselves, which pub they go to.

petethefeet wrote:

scorpion wrote:
The smoking ban is the most vindictive and spiteful piece of legislation ever introduced by a British government. Those worst effected are the elderly, war veterans who risked their lives for freedom only to have it taken away by Britains answer to the Nazi party. There is no excuse for not allowing choice.The reason for not allowing it is obvious, if there was choice the smoking pubs would thrive and the non smoking ones close.

Scorpion. I know where you are coming from as we have this argument weekly with my aged Dad. Now it's not as though we're vindictive as he hasn't bought an ounce of Golden Virginia at UK prices since the seventies - his 3 kids have kept him supplied from abroad. He says the same but we try and press on him the idea that we don't want our kids (and Grandkids) to get as addicted to the weed as he did. And so, by blocking it's use in pubs, public places and at work, this should be achievable. I understand that it's tough on those already hooked, and hence the reason why we help him out, but at some point we had to stop people been able to puff away all day. We need to consign tobacco to history.

Then you should rethink your support of the ban. One of the consequences of the ban is an increase in teenage smoking. And why wouldn't it, the unintended consequence of a smoking ban is that smoking becomes MORE visible. You can't walk down the street these days without seeing people standing outside the pub having a fag.
Obviously, you don't see that in winter, but then in those months the pubs are empty on the inside as well.