If the ban is worded specifically to indicate that smoking "is banned in public places", then the government officials MUST give up their indoor perk. ALL government offices are (in theory) public places - at least to the extent that smokers and non-smokers can possibly share the same air.
However, if the ban is specifically worded to indicate that smoking "is not allowed in pubs, halls, restaurants, etc" ... then they don't legally have to give up their cozy boys' club. On the other hand, they really aren't setting a good example ... so how can they expect their people to abide by it?
By the way - the Canadian federal government, situated in Ontario as it is - must abide by the "no smoking in public places" law set forth by the provincial government. Therefore, there is no smoking allowed in the halls of power, so to speak ...
2007-02-23 01:04:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by CanTexan 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course they should give up their smoking rooms. No smoking in the Scottish Parliament. The MPs in London should be setting an example just like the MSPs in Edinburgh.
The smoking ban (which began last April in Scotland) has turned out to be one of the most beneficial and popular pieces of legislation to come out of the Scottish Parliament. Smokers seem happy enough to go outside to smoke (there's even a bit of a sub-culture grown up around it - apparently a great situation for meeting the opposite sex), non-smokers are happy with the smoke free atmosphere in enclosed public spaces, pubs and clubs have tended to do better business on the whole as a result of catering more for the non-smoking majority.
Lets hope it works out just as well in England.
2007-02-23 00:55:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Spacephantom 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, I think they should be allowed their smoking rooms, just as long as the smoking is restricted to those rooms. It is only similar to pubs which, for the moment anyway, do permit smoking either in the entire pub (no food served) or in designated rooms. I'm a non-smoker and usually would challenge this government on almost anything these days. However, in this case, the picture you paint is not quite as clear as the media would have you believe.
2007-02-23 00:57:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by michael w 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Presumably, only smokers go into the Westminster smoking room, so non smokers are not being affected by their smoke. Banning it in pubs etc is because non smokers mingle with smokers. Are pubs allowed to have set aside rooms for smoking? If they are not, then yes, the Westminster smoking rooms should be banned as it's blatant hypocrisy.
2007-02-23 00:45:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dr Watson (UK) 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
On the 1st. July. So many people I know are in the process of giving up. It is now becoming completely unacceptable socially to smoke and it is only a matter of time before a complete ban is in force and the sale of tobacco is prohibited.
2016-05-24 01:53:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course if there is a ban affecting workplaces, they should not have a smoking room in the parliament – that would show contempt for the British people. However I hope they do have one as that will prove how draconian the law is and that it can't be forced on everybody else!
2007-02-25 00:15:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Belinda 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think that any smokers, when the ban comes in, whether a politician or not, should have to go outside to smoke,in fact i wish it were the case now. 2 reasons:
>there is no reason why they should be superior, just because they made the law doesnt mean they dont have to abide by it
>why should all us non smokers have to put up a smokey atmosphere when we dont want to, as we have rights as well!
2007-02-23 00:40:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
There should be no exceptions for politicians (we're talking about the people who have an indoor archery practise field in the basement of their workplace, but no permanent creche facility for employees who have small children.)
We've had no-smoking in public places in Scotland for almost a year now and guess what - not one pub in the city where I live has had to close due to lack of business, like they claimed they would....
2007-02-23 00:42:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by bonshui 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes absolutely without a doubt!! The hypocrisy of this Government is unbelievable !! They have been taking the "micky" out of the general public since they took office,and will continue to do so, all the while the public give them the vote!!
What will they pick on next.............................
beware!!!!!
2007-02-23 01:18:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
if they wish to smoke it means the law on anti smoking wont work.it will be a great test case for euro parliament.germany and bulgaria do not abide by this.and by the way,this is not a euro law,it is a voluntary one.just another scam to make the gov more money.
2007-02-23 00:44:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by earl 5
·
0⤊
0⤋