« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Smoking in Public Places
A Consultation on Reducing Exposure to Second Hand Smoke
Report of Regional and Area Events
GRANTON, EDINBURGH 6 AUGUST 2004
This meeting was attended by 24 people. Many from the health professions, some from local authority, others as individuals. The meeting was publicised both locally, via SCF and in the Edinburgh Evening News. There was a presence from Edinburgh Evening News and North Edinburgh News.
The briefing paper produced by SCF was used as a starting point for discussion.
Points from the discussion follow:
Unanimous agreement from those present that second hand smoke was an issue which needed to be addressed.
Voluntary code :
Did not protect workers.
This was making a difference and could have a greater effect given time.
Non-smoking areas which are not completely separate do not work.
This was market driven as opposed to public health driven.
Many pubs paid only lip-service (if that) to the Code.
It was felt that smokers would only go to smoke allowed pubs therefore this would be seen as a disadvantage - not a level playing field.
Filtration systems - questionable whether they are effective in reducing harm although may provide fresher atmosphere.
General points
Society needs to send a message to young people and children - create a low-smoke culture.
Support needs to be offered to smokers to break habit or else we will just drive smokers into homes.
Need to dis-associate smoking environments from fun.
What about other pollutants in atmosphere which are more toxic.
Stopping smoking can lead to other health problems e.g. obesity.
View that the ban in Ireland seems to have helped people stop smoking or try to stop.
Need to make smoking so difficult in public places that smokers will not bother at all.
Mandatory Voluntary Code -
Needs to be 'beefed up' if it is to be used at all.
Still will not address issues for staff.
Could have set-aside 'smoking areas' - completely separate.
Legislation -
Workplace ban encourages smokers to smoke less.
Ban may have effect of helping people to quit altogether.
Ban would reduce triggers for smokers e.g. many people will only smoke when they drink or go to certain places - if these are not available to them then they are not triggered into the smoking habit.
Most workplaces have a policy on smoking - this could be made mandatory.
What about long-stay institutions - prisons?,
Could legislation be phased in?
Realistic lead in time - similar to the model for drink driving.
Need for good available information about what is going to happen and public awareness/education campaign.
Could provide a new business opportunity for the hospitality industry.
Public Health needs to be the paramount argument in this discussion rather than economic/business or even protection of staff.
Will eventually benefit the economy by less being spent on health needs related to smoking diseases.
Exceptions to legislation -
In any exceptions we need to keep in mind the health of staff involved.
Perhaps provision of smoking areas (as some businesses do at present).
Smoking rooms in bars (like New York?).
Employers have a duty of care.
Could we have pubs which were licensed to have smoking in them?
Additional powers to Local Authorities in addition to legislation for local bylaws for smoking in non-enclosed public places e.g. certain places like stadia, specific events (Edinburgh Hogmanay).
Similar to by laws around drinking in public places.
Who will enforce this legislation? - resource issue for local authorities - suggestions were Environmental Wardens.
What about enforcement in shops which sell food?
Summary
There was general agreement that smoking in public places should be controlled. 85% of the meeting agreed that legislation was the route which was necessary but around 50% felt that some sort of lead in time to legislation was needed accompanied by good available information and support for smokers. So far as exceptions to any legislation was concerned we talked about prisons, home helps, those visiting clients in own homes, care workers, residential homes and felt that a line needed to be drawn somewhere. However there was some discussion that other countries had rules about these types of exceptions and that we should look at what was being done elsewhere and what had worked.
All present were given a response form and encouraged to return them to the Executive as soon as possible.
« Previous | Contents | Next »