« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Smoking in Public Places
A Consultation on Reducing Exposure to Second Hand Smoke
Report of Regional and Area Events
LIVINGSTON, 25 AUGUST 2004
Approximately 25 people attended the event from a wide section of the community. There was some representation from SLTA membership, not all of them from the West Lothian Area. There was also some health board staff present. Other participants were members of the general public, including two young people (12 and 14 years approx.) who were interested in voicing their opinion on this subject. Most of the participants had never attended a Scottish Civic Forum debate before. A Hearing loop system was used to support one participant who had hearing impairment. A public meeting, organised by the Lothian NHS Trust, kept the numbers low. This meeting was being held the following evening on possible closures of wards and services at the local hospital.
The meeting started with an input from two speakers; one was a representative from the SLTA and the other from ASH. Both speakers gave a 7-minute presentation on what they thought the main issues of the consultation to be. A debate then followed in one group, which was facilitated by Angela Moohan of the Scottish Civic Forum.
The meeting did not have the task of coming to a consensus and would not have been able to do so as there were definite opinions for and against a ban.
There was however a general opinion that smoking should not be permitted where food is served or where children are permitted. Questions were raised about why the current Health and Safety Legislation does not cover secondary smoking as it covers other hazards and risks. Those who did support a ban seemed to suggest that the Government should intervene where the health of the nation is concerned. It was generally agreed that the Government should put more money into education with young people and the risks to your health if you smoke. There was some agreement that if a ban is introduced then there should be some exceptions i.e. residential care homes and prisons. However this then raises issues of the staff working in these settings. The meeting did agree that it would not be a positive move to give local authorities the responsibility. It was believed that this would create a patchwork effect and confusion, so any ban should be nationwide and Government should make the decision.
The group stayed together in one room and the discussion was varied and interesting. The following comments were made: (* denotes that more than one person made this comment)
Any ban should definitely include restrictions. *
Some establishments are too small to have an effective smoking and non-smoking area
The Government should work with the Licence Trade on the issue of bans in pubs and clubs
There is peer pressure in pubs and clubs so if someone has stopped then there would be pressure here for them to start again
There should be a choice in the workplace for all not just smokers. *
The priority should be health over profit. *
The License Trade will gain customers as well as losing some.
Examples of Canada - License trade is doing OK and there is a ban there
Issues of 16 year olds smoking - age limits and selling of tobacco in general.
Health and safety at work legislation should cover issues of secondary smoke.
People working in smoking environment do not have option to leave so any ban would address this issue.
Voluntary access of premises should remain as is with separate areas for non-smokers.
There could be tax incentives for non-smoking areas. *
There should not be a ban on a place where someone is receiving long-term medical treatment - particularly psychiatric units - as not smoking could hinder their mental recovery.
Non-smoking employees of care establishments should have the option to remove themselves. *
Should be some exemptions if ban is introduced e.g. residential care homes in both the voluntary and private sector. *
Community centres/leisure centres and social activity centres should all be included in ban. *
Giving local authorities the responsibility would create patchwork effect and confusion so any ban should be nationwide and Government should make the decision. *
There should be more education for young people on the hazards of smoking. *
More should be placed on education/giving choice. *
Government have responsibility to protect health of population when they know that there is a risk. *
Smokers have rights too - we are all citizens. *
There is too much control from Government on our lifestyle choices.
Environmental issues in general should be addressed e.g. pollution levels at Haymarket.
Some choices don't have an affect on others e.g. drinking/drugs etc
Who should have responsibility for enforcement? E.g. shops, pubs, schools
The manager/owner/head of establishment have responsibility
ventilation systems do not work, while they do remove some of the irritants they do not remove the carcinogens and toxins which are harmful to health.
« Previous | Contents | Next »