Salsa City Forum » News and Chat » Smoking Ban Goes Live Summer 2007

My own personal point of view is that I can’t wait for smoking to be banned in pubs, clubs etc. But this is only because my business takes me into an environment where passive smoking is unavoidable. And I personally find it unpleasant.

I agree with Steve in that the princible of freedom should allow us to make the choice over where we indulge in our pleasures. And goverment should not be allowed to blanket ban a legal pastime.

However the area that is difficult to appease everyone is employees rights. As a non smoking employee of a club I do not have a choice over passive smoking. I can exercise my right not to work there but then my business will suffer. And finding a non smoking venue is not currently a realistic option.

In Cardiff there are two non smoking city centre venues that I am aware of one of which has just closed due to lack of trade.

Smoking in office workplaces used to be considered normal and now no longer is. I personally feel that banning smoking in Pubs etc is a natural extension of this.

I do however feel that having the right to smoke should be protected and if venues can provide both options and provide protection for their staff that would be a good thing.

Perhaps cigarette manufactures could be persuaded to effectively filter their products to make us all happy. Until the big hole in the sky gets us all...

With regards to being a Salsa teacher a smoking ban would have no effect on us, as evidenced by the many classes that have a no smoking policy in place all ready. Running a latin night club would be an interesting difference as many spanish smoke like their lungs have a genetic requirement for it. Having recently been to a non smoking latin club in Florida though it didn’t seem to effect them. But then they could have a quickie outside without having their knackers frozen off...

El Diablito’s free-market solution doesn’t work, at least round here: the majority of salsa dancers I know don’t smoke, but if I want a smoke-free night’s salsa I’ve got the choice of one night, fifty miles away, once a month.

There’s nothing morally superior about leaving it to the market. Smoking isn’t a harmless vice and minor inconvenience: it’s a way for a few people to make a great deal of money out of inflicting an agonising premature death on large numbers of people, and chronic ill-health on many more.

It would be nice if people could get as worked up about defending freedoms that really matter.

I’ll try not to go on at an inordinate length Tom but it’ll be difficult as I feel I must respond!

You say that my free-market solution doesn’t work but then that’s because few are trying it... my point is that if it were as a condition of obtaining a license as in the case of obtaining a license to sell alcohol or entertain or serve food etc then venue owners could use the law to allow customers to smoke or not at their discretion, providing of course it was clearly signed at the point of entrance. But because there would be alternative places to go, most people would find somewhere that suited them.

You stated it doesn’t work and then in the same sentence submit evidence that it clearly does... albeit fifty miles away and once a month. If Phil can run a successful night and attract non-smokers (and smokers presumably who in this case refrain) on a monthly basis then why couldn’t someone such as Andy (the voice of reason so far in the non-smoking camp) run a night in a non-smoking venue... in Cardiff for instance? Besides, promoters usually do have some power to decide policy in venues on the nights they run; have you even lobbied for a non-smoking night?

I think you may be getting a little confused about my view, morality, the market and smoking. My reference to the market place was about allowing the market to provide an equivalent amount (proportionally) of venues for smokers and non-smokers. I wish non-smokers would put as much energy into creating them as wishing away the freedoms of others. In my opinion all freedoms are precious and worthy of defending... and I would not characterise myself as being worked up about this, no more than (it’s fair to say) anyone with an opposing view.

To answer the point you make about smoking not being a harmless vice and minor inconvenience I think you’ll find that most smokers are well aware of the dangers of smoking as are people who drink alcohol, people who eat high fat diets, people who take part in dangerous sports etc. But they are lifestyle choices and should be dealt with by discouraging people from harming themselves through evidence-based education as befits a liberal, democratic and civilised society. The Law should never impose on people what is said to be good for them... I’m sure you are well aware of the resulting mayhem during the prohibition in America...

In a previous post I asked Hugh what his position was about driving past school children in a vehicle spewing out benzene and other pollutants and as yet he hasn’t given a definitive answer and so I’ll ask you the same question! What is your view on this considering there is a proven correlation between the rise in child asthma in this country and the number of cars on the road? I think it’s a fair question to ask... I await a response!

Failing to answer suggests to me that people who argue for a complete ban on smoking in public places do so, not on principle or on moral grounds but, simply out of self-interest.

Finally there will always be some greedy capitalist attempting to maximise profit from our indulgences. But that is another topic Tom (possibly one on which we may agree) but it has little to do with Salsa!

I’d also prefer to keep politics out of this but in this case it’s unavoidable.

I won’t go on at length because I think everyone here has made their positions clear and there’s not a lot of point in repeating myself. I accept that there is a civil liberties case for not banning smoking (my ‘getting worked up’ comment was a bit out of order) but I think that it’s outweighed by (a) the rights of non-smokers. Particulary employees, and (b) the thousands of lives that I hope this law will save. And smokers can always nip outside for a fag.

In answer to your question, I do take environmental matters seriously myself. I’ve flown for non-work reasons just three times in the last ten years, I deliberately bought a car with low emissions for its size and I try to cycle or use public transport when I can. (There aren’t a lot of schoolchildren around when I’m driving to La Tasca at 10.30pm on a Saturday night). And I think this is also somewhere where the Government should be regulating more through city centre traffic bans, lower speed limits and taxes on aviation fuel.

Sorry if this makes me sound even more self-righteous than I did in my prevous post (you can tell I hadn’t had a dance since Monday when I wrote it - I’m feeling much more relaxed now) but you did ask.

JD Wetherspoon delays smoking ban

It’s hard for non-smoking pubs when there are smoking-pubs still around because if, say, four friends went out, if even one of them smoked the group would probably go to a smoking-pub to forestall the smoker moaning about not being able to have a fag. Smoking-policy is not the most important thing about a bar. For instance, I would choose a smoking-bar with salsa over a non-smoking bar without.