| The EU health commissioner has said that smoking should be banned in enclosed public places such as bars and restaurants in a bid to reduce health risks from passive smoking. David Byrne also revealed that officials were developing a policy which he hoped would lead to the drafting of legislation. There are already plans for public smoking bans in Ireland. How do you think the law should regulate smoking in public places? Is a blanket ban sensible? This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:  |  Let people make their own choices |
So if you ban smoking in public places people will spend more time in bars? Oh, but then they might eat and drink more! Better legislate on that too. Idea - maybe rationing would solve that problem. For goodness sake let people make their own choices. Stop legislating, lose the nanny state!
Mats, UK I don't smoke but feel that this is a huge infringement on personal liberty. A compromise would be to allow smoking in places where ventilation is adequate or smoking areas are provided.
Clem, UK in US Yeah go on, ban smoking...we will all quit and then the government can find someone else to pick on as they do the smokers and drivers.
Sue, England The real killers of life are the people who insist on laws to force other people into obeying their ideal of perfection. There is no perfection, no pure air, no exclusive rights. It's you and me warts and all, or nothing.
Michael Harris, Cork, Ireland Smoking has been banned everywhere in my city of Kingston in Ontario. The bars, restaurants and clubs are filled to capacity with non-smokers. Now everyone, whether a smoker or not, is very comfortable and having a great time. In fact, cigarette sales are down in Ontario since non-smoking bylaws came into force. Bravo to the EU for suggesting this.
Jean, Canada Living in a smoke free state, the smokers congregate at the doorways or the patio areas. Public places are still just as busy and the wait staff appear a lot happier working in a smoke free zone. The ban has been in effect for a few years now and while there was initial outrage, it became acceptable pretty quickly.
Claire, California, USA | Our bars and restaurants are as busy as ever |
I'm from San Luis Obispo, California, USA where smoking in indoor public places has been banned for many years. It's a pleasure to be able to go to any store, restaurant, or bar and not encounter stale smoke filled air. Our bars and restaurants are as busy as ever.
Steve, USA I am a social smoker, in that I smoke in pubs and clubs, but not during the day or in restaurants (and dislike it when other people do). Why can't individual pubs and restaurants decide on their own? Why are the people saying 'ban smoking everywhere' not considering this? I don't see any good argument against it expressed here anyway.
Katherine, UK I have no objections to people who smoke. I can always move away. What I do detest about smokers is their disgusting habit of dropping their "dog ends" everywhere. This is particularly offensive when on holiday with children, to find beaches and poolside areas literally poisoned with these discarded cigarettes. Why aren't the prosecuted as "litter louts" to discourage them.
Mike L, Suffolk | The problem is that more non-smokers are likely to over-react |
I remember a couple of years ago that there was an initiative to create a totally non-smoking pub in the town where I used to live. A petition was handed out and we, as smokers, all signed it. As smokers we DO understand that non-smokers don't like to be in our smoke, so we were all for the idea. Ironically it was the non-smokers who disagreed, rather wanting the totalitarian 'Ban it everywhere' policy, as opposed to the 'one for you, one for us ... all live together happily' policy. In general most smokers and non-smokers respect each other, when they are in close proximity, and the smoker will smoke less frequently, go outside, ask politely, or move downwind. The problem is that more non-smokers are likely to over-react, and especially complain AFTER the fact, rather than ask a smoker to move, go outside, or refrain totally.
Christian Most people I know in New York have welcomed the ban with wide open arms, and the bars and restaurants are still bustling with patrons even with the ban on these Nicotine Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Brian, New York City I myself am not a smoker, but I feel that if people want to smoke then let them. I know everyone goes on about how passive smoking kills but realistically I can't see a ban happening anytime soon, can you?
Becca, Scotland We should ban smoking in ALL public places, pubs, restaurants, football grounds etc.
Alan, OZ I, as a non-smoker, can choose whether to go into a pub, bar or restaurant. If however I was an employee of such an establishment I would not have such choice. Smoking should be banned in public places, if for no other reason than to protect the non-smokers who work there.
John, England I feel that a blanket ban on smoking public places is not fair. However, I do not agree with smoking in restaurants as people are eating.
Karen J Johnstone, Scotland | Many places in the UK have the means to have separate smoking and non smoking sections |
In Florida smoking has just been banned in bars if their income is more than 10% food sales. One bar has cut its food prices and limited it's kitchen hours so as not to go over the 10% and you can never get a seat in there where it is so busy. In comparison, another bar just up the road has banned smoking and they are lucky if they get six customers a night; business is so bad that some of the staff are in fear of losing their jobs. I think it should be up to the individual business if they want to allow smoking. Many places in the UK have the means to have separate smoking and non smoking sections with doors and walls in between and keep everybody happy.
G Lewis, USA formally UK I believe many customers wouldn't want to go to pubs or bars or restaurants if the owners forbid them to smoke. Therefore, a blanket ban on smoking is, in my opinion, impractical.
Arina Gultyaeva, Germany This double edged argument and "intended action" from the government always amuses me. For as much as they want to "have people cut down their smoking", it's also the government single best source of tax income.
Sanchia, UK Smokers always seem to go on about their rights and suggest "non-smoking" areas. They have such areas on trains but...don't have a door between the smoking and non-smoking areas would you believe! Another time on a busy train, I had to stand in the corridor near to the smoking carriage. Upon closing the carriage door to keep away from the stench, it was opened by a smoker. I said that I wanted it closed but apparently, he wanted "some fresh air" - he'd clearly chosen the wrong habit!
Marie, UK Smoking in public places should be a crime. People are physically harming others when they smoke so therefore it should be a crime and hence, illegal! If people want to smoke they can do it in their own home, not in everyone else's faces.
Mayoui, England Can smokers refrain from smoking when this is a burden to the people sitting next to them? If so, then no ban is necessary. But how realistic is that? Are we civilized enough to make respect a priority so that law enforcement would not be necessary? As a non-smoker I often despair when I face smokers. I find that too often I am supposed to be the tolerant one, and need to justify myself when I don't see why I should (why oblige a person to publicly state that he has asthma, or sensitive eyes or that he cannot stand the smell of it? Isn't it enough to say I'm annoyed?). Well tolerance should be both ways - I should tolerate a cigarette and he should tolerate not to light a second one for a while. For me it's more a question of respect and politeness rather than a health issue.
Maria, Greece | It should be up to the pubs and bars as to whether they want their customers smoking |
If you walk into a bar and you don't like the music you leave and go to one that best suites you. Same can be said with smoking, if you don't like the smoke go to one where there isn't any. It should be up to the pubs and bars as to whether they want their customers smoking.
Chris, UK Banning smoking in all public places makes good sense, but what about the cigarette adverts that are allowed to run in public places? I would say ban all adverts in the first place then filter down to banning smoking in public areas.
Kabwe, Zambia I can't help find it amusing, the idea of the smoking minority offending the non-smoking majority. In my local pub, the majority of the regulars and nearly all of the staff smoke. I smoke a pipe, and I get more complaints from cigarette smokers than I do from non-smokers. My one real query about banning smoking in public places is the obvious one, how do you define a public place? Is it somewhere where the public has a right to access? Would the "enclosed public places" include, for instance, canal towpaths through tunnels? How on earth would you enforce it?
Rufus Trotman, Oxford, UK I admit it, I'm one of the walking health hazards that will be banned from bars and restaurants. The idea of the EU banning smoking in public places is hilarious. There would be literally no one in the bars or restaurants here! The Spanish though would simply ignore the EU like they do with any legislation they don't like. They smoke on the Metro, in the supermarkets, anywhere the want - who is going to stop them? The policeman with a fag in his mouth?
Nigel Thornley, Spain Yes, it should be banned. Waiting at a bus stop or on a bench at a train station and getting someone else's smoke in your face is not very pleasant!
Savio, UK As the largest and longest study of passive smoking carried out in the US showed no harmful effects for non smokers living with smokers there is clearly no reason to ban smoking.
Chad Morritt, Spain | It is unfortunate we need laws to enforce what should be common sense and courtesy |
If smokers wish to kill themselves through their own ignorance and denial, they are more than welcome to do it. Just don't force others to breath it in. Ban it and ban it now! It is unfortunate we need laws to enforce what should be common sense and courtesy. I doubt this will happen though because of the billions it generates for Blair and co. to waste.
Matt, UK I do believe that in the old days, and not that too long ago, there used to be a room in pubs where people, mainly women, used to go where smoking wasn't allowed. It was called the saloon bar or sometimes the snug. As more and more people smoked these areas became redundant. These days a lot of pubs have a separate area for non-smokers, it's generally called the eating area. I am a non-smoker but find the whole banning debate ridiculous. If someone wants to kill themselves that's fine, but trying to segregate and prohibit will never ever work.
Tim, UK Where I live almost everyone smokes. If they bring this bill in, it will either be totally ignored or all the pubs are going to close very quickly. We will not be dictated to by a bunch of bleeding heart human rights campaigners.
Bob, UK If smoking is such an incredible health risk then why not ban cigarettes altogether - oh of course the revenue it generates. So Mr Blair wants to stop us smoking but not stop us buying cigarettes.
Carolyne , UK Clubs, pubs and restaurants should choose their own policy. Either open to all, open to non smokers or open to smokers only. Then everybody knows where they can go and take their choice. I accept the no smoking rule on public transport, cinemas and theatres etc. but I happen to enjoy a fine cigar with my cognac after a fine lunch. If the establishment will not permit it then fine I go where I can. I don't elect my government to bring in draconian laws based, in the main , on the shriekings of a ill-informed bunch of control freaks.
Johnde | "Passive smoking" has absolutely no basis in science |
Oh, for heaven's sakes, leave people alone! I'm not a smoker, but if a room's properly ventilated, I can tolerate other people smoking. "Passive smoking" has absolutely no basis in science. Why aren't people up in arms over bossy governments who constantly exceed their remit? Why are people tolerating the government slipping out of its role of public servant and stepping up to the role of master?
Beth, France Smoking is not the only factor that kills us. There are so many others which endanger us. Alcohol can kill you. Aging can kill you too.
D Yoshida, Japan To Beth, France: Passive smoking not dangerous? As a scientist I can tell you this is nonsense and illogical. There is a lot of research proving the opposite. Smoke contains particles which are absorbed by lung tissue. Passive smoking leaves you with the worst effects of smoking, without the "benefits", as you just inhale the dirt and do not get the nicotine buzz smokers are addicted to. To say it once and for all: smoking in public places is a nuisance, it is dangerous for non-smokers, it makes your lungs burn and your clothes stink. My father, who was a heavy smoker, died from lung cancer three years ago in a long and painful agony that left our family bereaved and traumatised. That people willingly would put their children and fellow humans to such a risk and honestly call it "a freedom of choice" is an unbelievable impertinence.
Conny, UK/Germany If you're looking to ban anything in bars, it should be the alcohol. I can walk away from a smoky environment if I chose to do so, and avoid harm to my health. It's a lot harder walking away from a group of drunken agro boys looking to cause trouble.
Sam Coleman, | Smoking is not something you need to do, and if banning will help reduce pollution then I'm all for it |
I wish that smokers would stop whining and accept that their idea of a fun pass-time is damaging the health of many others around them. You cannot compare smoking to drinking, young children or driving. You are not directly harmed by someone having a glass of wine, or by a child eating lunch. Driving, although produce lots of pollution, is necessary for many people until our government can come up with a viable solution on public transport or a safe hydrogen fuel cell. Smoking is not something you need to do, and if banning will help reduce pollution then I'm all for it. I hate going into smoky bars - my eyes hurt, my lovely clean clothes always need to be washed afterwards, and I feel physically sick then and quite frequently the morning after too (yes, without even touching alcohol). Let people kill themselves in their own homes!
Siobhan, Scotland If the law changed to say that "any bar or restaurant must provide a totally separate, physically segregated smoking area if it wishes to allow smoking on its premises" then I may have some sympathy with it. As it stands, this idea is fundamentally stupid. Yes, it may be true that passive smoking is harmful, but to simply say that you're not even allowed to provide a segregated smoking area inside an establishment that you own and manage is just knee-jerk rubbish. It's a bit like saying "pedestrians can get killed by cars, therefore nobody is allowed to drive anymore".
Simon Moore, EU | This is not about the rights of the smoker, but about the rights of those around them |
'Smokers rights'? This is not about the rights of the smoker, but about the rights of those around them. If someone comes up with a smoke-free ciggie, then we'd all be happy for smokers to sit quietly killing themselves - but why should the rest of us join them!
Phil, UK Segregation does not work. I always ask to be seated in the no-smoking area of a restaurant (if there is one) and even if you are at the furthest point away from the smokers, the fumes still drift. It has to be a ban. As for JK's suggestion that everyone would give up smoking - I don't think so. Smokers are so ignorant they would just carry on.
Emma, UK I am a smoker. An increasing number of public places no longer support smoking, and I either avoid these places or if I chose to go to one, I respect their decision and go outside. Now don't quote me in a court of law, but I am fairly sure that there is no legislation which forces non-smoking people to physically attend smoking enabled venues, so non-smokers, before you write in and complain about smoky environments, remember, you chose to go to them. If you really don't like it and consider it a risk to your health, don't go there.
Richard Pearce, UK I'm looking forward to this finally happening. I predict that I will spend a great deal more time in bars if I don't have to wake up feeling like someone has sandpapered my lungs afterwards. The only reason that such a high percentage of people in pubs and clubs are smokers is that the rest of us stay away.
Paula, UK | If you don't like smoke, don't go into a smoky pub if it disgusts you that much |
All I've read on this page is non-smokers moaning about smokers, smokers moaning about non-smokers, people without kids moaning about people with kids in restaurants. Come on people learn to live together. If you don't like smoke, don't go into a smoky pub if it disgusts you that much. If you smoke and they don't allow smoking in that particular building, step outside or have the courage to hold back until you leave, you probably spent a good 16 years without one in your hand I'm sure you can last a few hours.
Steve, UK Smoking should be banned in all public places and all workplaces. A person's right to smoke end where my nose and lungs start! No smoking areas do not work - the poisons in the smoke get everywhere, and some people are particularly at risk.
Cecilia Farren, UK Why should people be banned from smoking in restaurants? You can at least chose to go to that restaurant or bar. On the other hand how much air pollution is spewed out each day so as someone can look cool in an SUV, or other obnoxious type of gas guzzling vehicle. That is the air we all have to breathe, yet nobody wants to make laws curtailing vehicle emissions or size of vehicle. I am no expert but I have just a sneaking suspicion that the emissions caused by Suvs and cars and the like are more harmful to more people and animals than any cigarette smoke in a bar, that can be cleaned again with proper ventilation systems.
Josh Forquer, USA Having lived in a society where smoking in public places was banned, I am all for it. However, it should be a national decision and certainly not one imposed upon us by the European Union.
Paul, Gloucester, England Fine, ban it. BUT make sure you also provide places for people to smoke and enjoy their drink/food.
Is that not fair too?
Steve, California Smoking - what is not smoke - motor bikes, buses, trains, aircrafts all emit smoke in some form or the other. Industries belch smoke from their chimneys... our environment is still getting clogged, so why stop people smoking? It doesn't make sense.
Megh, India. Second-hand smoking is not a choice. Nor is it benign. The law should definitely regulate enclosed public spaces because some people are too selfish to understand that their right to smoke should not infringe on other's right to clean air. I am not nervous about an occasional person smoking by me but repeated and concentrated exposures such as in a restaurant or a bar couldn't be good for anyone.
Meltem Birken, USA EU health commissioner has taken the right decision in public health concern. Smokers should understand that it's a indirect massive killing of non-smokers. Any alcohol affects only the person who drinks it. But 68% of the non-smokers are affected by the smoker's environment according to WHO report. I request the smokers to excogitate again about their practice and save the pollution free world.
Ilango Jayaprabha, India | In my 30 years of smoking I've more than adequately paid for in taxes any costs I might need from health care |
For many years now, smoking has been banned in workplaces in Newfoundland. No restaurants allow smoking and as a smoker I am now used to that but sorely miss my cigarette after a good meal and glass of wine. The pubs and bars still allow smoking but there are now talks about eliminating smoking there. That, I think would be a real shame. Instead, why not put regulations in place for non-smoking areas and proper ventilation. That way smokers and non-smokers alike can enjoy an evening out with friends at the pub. As for smokers costing the health systems a fortune, I would say that in my 30 years of smoking I've more than adequately paid for in taxes, any costs I might need from health care should my smoking cause me to become ill.
Marian Atkinson, Canada It is about time that smokers give up the argument that smoking is about freedom of choice. Smoking hurts other people (i.e., non-smokers). If one takes this argument to its logical conclusion, one can argue that murder is a question of free choice on the part of the murderer.
Ben Tahyar, France How about a designated smokers area as opposed to a designated no-smoking area. This area could be in a different room so those who want to smoke can, while those (myself included) who prefer a smoke-free environment can. Remember freedom of choice anyone?
John B, UK I'll stop smoking public places when parents are banned from bringing their offensive, screaming and badly behaved children out as well.
Paul R, UK The question is not whether this will be good for people who don't smoke, but whether it is enforceable. The best approach is to start with the most important and symbolic public places and work your way down to the everyday places like bars and restaurants.
Roger Wang, USA | Shouldn't this be left up to business owners? |
Shouldn't this be left up to business owners? While they might loose customers by allowing smoking, that is their right and this isn't something for government to legislate. Many restaurants here that could allow smoking choose not to. If someone chooses not to be around smoking, then go to a place that doesn't allow it. I'm sure all non-smokers are for a ban but it is only a matter of time until government chooses to regulate something that effects you.
John, US I've been strongly opposed to smoking all my life, so I think imposing a ban on smoking in public places is extremely sensible. It's bad enough that I have to walk to class breathing in rank cigarette smoke from people in front of me.
Samia, USA I live in a city in the US where smoking is banned. To me it seems like instead of banning smoking the bars or clubs should be allowed to install ventilation systems to remove the smoke. This way an bar could stay the way they are, and loose the smoking customers, or pay to upgrade their building so that they can tap into a market that other businesses don't have access to.
matt, US Smoking, drinking and eating should be banned from public places; they each kill many millions of people a year.
Steve, UK . I believe most smokers would be happy to comply with a public ban provided there were (sealed) dedicated areas for them to smoke when needed.
JohnM, LyneMeads,UK | How can one exercise consideration for smokers when they are disrupting the air that non smokers breathe? |
How can one exercise consideration for smokers when they are disrupting the air that non smokers breathe? Is there any fairness in that? Is this acceptable for asthmatics who are forced to move to some other place where they can at least begin to breathe?
B, UK Trouble is, if we ban smoking in all public places, these smokers might actually give up, and the rest of us would have to pay an estimated 8-10p in the � of tax. We would lose the valuable cigarette tax revenue, and while a small proportion of that income is spent on treating smoking-related illnesses, there is an offset against future pension payments and the cost of treating the inevitable alternative illnesses from which they would later die instead. Segregation would protect both our health and our purses, while having the additional benefit of allowing you to feel virtuous for being so tolerant of the civil liberties of others (while driving your exhaust-ridden vehicle and lighting your back-yard barbecue!).
JK, London In California where I live, they have banned smoking in pubs and I never knew how nice it was until I went to pubs in Europe and left with burning lungs, bad-smelling clothing, and needing to take a bath from the reeking tar smell on my body and in my hair. I promise you won't miss it much.
Gordon Silliker, USA I'm not a smoker. And never tried but I believe that smoking - among other bad things going around -is least harmful. As for pubs and restaurants I think mandatory ventilation is a must. Non-smoking areas are very good idea too. As of streets - should be done something I believe. But just prohibiting - that is too way too draconian. I respect the right of others to harm their own health as they want to. If one day I will dislike inhaling smoke - I will just try to avoid smoking places, I see no problems.
Ihar Filipau, Germany | I would certainly go out a *lot* more if I could do so without getting smoke in my eyes, lungs, and clothes |
Smoking should be prohibited in public places, except for designated areas. Bar and restaurant owners are free to designate their entire establishment as a smoking area, if they really think they'll make more money that way (and as long as they have a warning sign *outside* the entrance). I for one would certainly go out a *lot* more if I could do so without getting smoke in my eyes, lungs, and clothes (ick!).
Nici, Switzerland Boston has just implemented a smoking ban in all the bars and restaurants. That helped me to quit smoking and I haven't smoked for almost 3 months! I think it's a good idea-it will help people to quit.
ALN, USA Why do I have to inhale tobacco every time I go to have a meal or drink? The divisions between smokers and non smokers simply doesn't work.
Lu�s de Sousa, Portugal I can understand people not wanting to breathe in people's smoke in an enclosed area, but a quick whiff in the street. I mean come on, it's not a disaster is it? Perhaps they also could enforce a law where people are forced to wear deodorant in confined areas such as tubes etc.
Claire, England Well, even in the US, smoking is permitted in bars. Restaurants have smoking and non-smoking sections to accommodate those who don't want to be exposed to smoke. I think going from smoking everywhere in public to smoking nowhere in public is too drastic. What the US has done is a good idea.
Jane, UK Why on earth should I be made to inhale cancer causing fumes whilst out to have a drink or eat a meal. Smokers claim an infringement on their rights. What about non-smokers right to breathe clean air? Ban it and let smokers kill themselves in the seclusion of their own homes.
Is it fair that non-smokers like Roy Castle should be made to pay for someone else's habit?
Simon W, UK | I hope that if a ban is put in place that it is sooner rather than later |
We have smoking bans in many parts of the US. For me it's very nice to be able to go into a restaurant, bar, or other public establishment and not have to inhale toxic chemicals that are contained in cigarette and cigar smoke. I know that when I have visited different countries in Europe my wife and I had to leave some places that we visited due to the level of smoke in the air. It makes good sense to reduce the amount of smoke that people are exposed to, especially children who are the unknowing victims of adult smoking. I hope that if a ban is put in place that it is sooner rather than later. For those of you who feel you have to smoke you can do so at home or in an area designated for smokers. The world is a much nicer place to be in when there is not smoke around.
Tom, USA I am sick and tired of the government telling private businesses what they can or cannot do in their own establishments. If I don't want smoking, I can eat in the dining room; if I do want smoking, I can eat at the bar. If the entire restaurant allows smoking, I can go elsewhere. Smoking is not illegal and people are able to make choices. It really aggravates me that the government tries to regulate every aspect of everyone's lives, including private business owners.
TM Caron, USA Of course it's sensible - smoking is a disgusting habit that kills thousands of people a year and costs the taxpayer millions. But is a ban enforceable? Probably not, considering that most other forms of crime are rife and more or less un-policed (except speeding, of course).
Edward, UK Yes, it should be banned in public places. Why should the minority have the right to inflict this revolting habit on the majority?
Jane, London, UK I have been a smoker for about 5 years now. I would encourage this ban. It would stop me, and people like myself who want to quit, from being tempted to smoke when it is most pleasurable to do so - i.e. in bars, in the evening over a couple of drinks. It would definitely help me cut down...
Simon McCartney, UK The common complaint of all the bars and restaurants is that they will lose business as smokers wouldn't be coming. Did the bar owners ever think of how many non-smoking customers they could win back if the air in the bars gets finally clean?
Ivana, Denmark Yes, without a doubt. Smokers are people who choose to injure their lungs. I am asthmatic; I was born with bad lungs. Why should I have to breathe in their filth and suffer as a consequence?
Richard, UK I've tried smoking a long time ago. I found that it was a dirty, nauseating, antisocial and health endangering habit. It's also addictive and a bad example to those as young as 3 years old as they tend to imitate, especially their parents. Ban by all means.
Gopalan Narayanan, Malaysia We have a smoking ban in our city in Ontario, but I think bars should be exempt. Children aren't allowed there anyway, and most of the people that go to bars also smoke. I play in a pub pool league and everybody still smokes there anyway.
Jill, Canada I don't think that the British in general smoke all that much. I live in Spain and here the people smoke like chimneys: often flouting any regulations there might be to protect non-smokers. I'm asthmatic and although I do exercise to try and combat my condition I usually try to avoid smoky bars etc. A law banning smoking would make my life easier. On the whole tobacco has got to be one of the worst drugs around, although I know people are a little sceptical of the "passive smoke" argument. Personally, I'd support a ban.
Patrick Hankin, Spain My Canadian brother-in-laws local bar in Ottawa had to close through lack of business after no smoking in bars was introduced. The same would happen to my local if smoking was banned as 80 percent of the regulars are smokers.
Rob, UK Being a smoker myself, I believe banning smoking in all public places would not be reasonable. There should be separated areas in bars, restaurants and places alike, where people are allowed to smoke. Example of banning smoking NYC has not proven convincing enough, since polls show people don't cut smoking because of that. It might be a preventive action, though, for those haven't engaged in the habit, and indeed a respectful decision towards those who are not likely to smoke and don't want to be exposed to passive smoking. However, those with the bad habit should be allowed some place in public areas anyway.
Janis, Estonia | What about smoker's rights? |
Banning smoking everywhere seems draconian - what about smoker's rights? Smokers are intelligent adults who know the risks of their habit - this will be just another loss of freedom. And before anyone says, 'What about my freedom to have a pint without breathing someone else's smoke?', I would love to have children banned from pubs because they reduce my enjoyment of a pint by running around and screaming, but I'll bet all the parents who are anti-smoking wouldn't agree with me! PS I'm an ex-smoker.
Jo, UK Yes. It'll make places more child friendly, family orientated and pleasant for non-smokers. People who don't smoke shouldn't have to experience passive smoking and the discomfort of breathing in second hand smoke just to accommodate the few selfish smokers who insist on smoking in public.
H. Stiles, England Great idea! But could smoking in streets also be banned please? I have to hold my breath when I walk to work past the huddle of smokers outside office buildings, or just coming out of tube stations and are desperate to light up. It's disgusting, it's unhealthy and it makes me feel sick!
Petruska, UK Yes, smoking should be banned in all public places - including open spaces. It is a life-threatening habit and should therefore be confined solely to the homes of the smokers.
Brennig, England I think if they also put a blanket ban on public car travel and drinking that'll be a fair ban. Otherwise, I object to being vilified more than the drunken morons who cause so much grief every night and the constant threat of large lumps of metal flying around at high speeds belching poisonous fumes into the air.
Marie Colwell, England | I find this idea silly and counterproductive |
As an ex-smoker I find this idea silly and counterproductive. Introducing mandatory minimal requirements for ventilation as well as mandatory maximum smoke levels in public places makes much more sense.
Anton Ivanov, UK It's time that the rights and health of non-smokers was also taken into consideration. I'm fed up of having to wash my clothes after every visit to a pub because they smell awful, through no fault of my own. Here in Switzerland it's even worse! Almost everybody smokes.
Andy Ballard, UK, working in Switzerland As a smoker I don't mind it being banned in restaurants, but banning it in pubs is pathetic. You might as well ban drinking to go with it, as it is just as bad!
Kye, England Definitely! Smoking in public places creates a serious problem for people like me who just cannot stand the smell of cigarette smoke. 10 years ago, when smoking was not yet banned on international flights, I had to be given oxygen on a plane from India to the USA because I could not breathe while cigarette smoke was drifting my way from the smokers' section. Even now I have to leave a public place if there is a smoker around.
Gurpreet Singh, USA Here we go, US nanny politics all over again, but in the EU. Ban smoking in places where you can also ban drinking. Each is a socially acceptable pastime. Time, gentlemen, to go back to the old style Smoke Room and Lounge.
Paul Williams, UK | What could be a solution is if pubs/restaurants have none smoking areas that are separate from the smoking area |
I wouldn't mind having a smoking ban itself in public place, i.e. shopping centres, BUT I would think that a smoking ban in pubs would lose jobs same as in restaurants due to the reason that a smoke and a drink or after a nice meal go together. What could be a solution is if pubs/restaurants have none smoking areas that are separate from the smoking area. Okay I am a smoker but this would be the only solution that I could think of.
Levi, UK Why don't they just have more no smoking areas in pubs. That would keep everyone happy, and not spoil anybody's fun in the process...
Dave R, UK It shouldn't have to be banned - people shouldn't smoke in public places out of common decency.
Colin, uk Can't the EU just get their act together and admit that they wish to restrict the use of tobacco. This should be done by regulating the product, not everything else.
Spencer, UK Vancouver passed strict legislation outlawing smoking in all public places. There is no shortage of patrons in restaurants or bars in that busy, cosmopolitan city. Patronage profits have actually increased thanks to a smoke free environment.
Linda, Canada What ought to be banned is being obnoxious, conceited and self righteous in public. David Byrne - guilty on all counts.
Robert, Switzerland | We need to respect and honour our fellow human beings |
It is a well proven fact that smoking damages the health of not only the smoker but also the people around him/her. Therefore, it is high time to ban smoking from all public places. No-one has any right to damage or hurt other people. We need to respect and honour our fellow human beings.
Ahmeed Roulston, UK As the Big Brother net closes yet another civil liberty bites the dust. This is a moral issue, legislation should in no way be used for such issues. It seems we're all too happy to throw our freedoms away on the advice of dodgy political scientific findings.
Justin, UK If a private pub wants to allow smoking, then as long as it's clear on the door that it's a smoking pub I won't go in. I'll go to a non-smoking pub. Smoking in public-funded places (parks, the street, libraries etc) should be banned though. I don't like walking down the street and getting a face full of someone's smoke and I don't like wading through cigarette butts on the pavement.
Paul Weaver, UK Calling bars and restaurants public places is a bit misleading. They are NOT public places, they are privately owned businesses. These businesses should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to ban smoking in their establishments or not. Let the marketplace decide. If businesses lose money by allowing smoking they will change their policy and vice-versa.
Stephan, Belgium
|
One-Minute World News 
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
BBC News
Bookmark with:
What are these?