Irish Smoking Ban To Be Extended Outdoors

Hat tip to Smoking Lamp for this:

James Reilly, Irish Fine Gael deputy leader and medical doctor

Smoking ban to be extended to outdoor areas where food served
Fine Gael Senators have called on the Minister for Health to change legislation

The Government is to extend the ban on smoking where food is served to include outdoor areas.

Fine Gael Senators have tabled a private members motion calling on the Minister for Health Simon Harris to change legislation or issue directions via a statutory instrument to address the gap in current legislation.

Mr Harris is to ask for Cabinet approval at Tuesday’s meeting to accept the proposal.

The initiative was spearheaded by former minister for health James Reilly, who has said it should no longer be acceptable for people to smoke where others are eating.

An unintended consequence of the smoking ban has been the prevalence of smokers in the outdoor areas of bars, cafés and restaurants, Mr Reilly said.

“This means that nobody can enjoy a meal outdoors on a sunny day in this country, without having to inhale other people’s smoke.

“Anyone spending their hard-earned money in a restaurant or café should be entitled to enjoy their meal in a smoke-free environment.”

Ireland has set a target of being tobacco free by 2025. Currently smoking is prohibited in the workplace as well as restaurants, bars, education facilities and public transport.

The ban was recently extended to smoking in cars where young children are present.

So, having been driven out of Ireland’s pubs, smokers are now going to be driven out of its pub gardens too.

The only people being considered here are antismokers who can’t stand the faintest whiff of tobacco smoke. Smokers get zero consideration.

And from the headline, it would seem that it’s pretty much a done deal. All the Fine Gael senators need do is ask, and the current legislation will be extended to block the current ‘loophole’.

And if Ireland is to be “tobacco free” by 2025, I can only suppose that the sale and use of tobacco anywhere by anyone will be have been banned sometime in the next 7 years.

Gráinne O’Reilly, Smoky Drinky Bar regular, who lives in Ireland, is not going to like this one bit. She’s just opened a new restaurant, and this legislation might well kill it.

Who voted for these Fine Gael senators? Nobody, it would seem:

Unlike Dáil Éireann, it [the Senate] is not directly elected but consists of a mixture of members chosen by various methods. Its powers are much weaker than those of the Dáil and it can only delay laws with which it disagrees, rather than veto them outright.

Fine Gael currently number 19 out of a total of 60 senators

The current Taoiseach is Enda Kelly of Fine Gael, which is a minority party in the Dáil:

An agreement was finally reached for a Fine Gael-led minority government on 29 April, 63 days after the [2016] election, and the Dáil formally re-elected Kenny as Taoiseach on 6 May. Kenny is the first Taoiseach from Fine Gael to win re-election.

More on Reilly:

Reilly has called the tobacco industry “evil”,[38] claimed that they “target our children”[39] and declared “war” on them.[40] Both his father and brother died from smoking related illnesses.[41] He received cabinet approval to aim to make Ireland a tobacco free country – defined as a smoking rate below 5% – by 2025.[42] Ireland became the second country in the world to commit to introducing plain tobacco packaging.[43] He has taken a defiant attitude to threats of legal action from the tobacco industry.[44] During the Irish Presidency of the European Union, Reilly prioritised the Tobacco Products Directive. He secured the agreement of the European Council within just six months. Health Commissioner Tonio Borg praised his ability in securing this agreement.[45][46] When the Tobacco Directive’s future became doubtful because of tobacco industry lobbying in the European Parliament, Reilly arranged for letters supporting the directive to be sent to MEPs from himself, the Taoiseach, 16 European Health ministers and the World Health Organisation.[47][48][49] In an unusual move in Irish politics, Reilly accepted a Bill proposed by independent Senators which aims to ban smoking in cars where children are present.[50]

Grandad doesn’t like it at all.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Irish Smoking Ban To Be Extended Outdoors

  1. Timothy Goodacre says:

    James Reilly looks really unwell to me. Probably a heavy drinker and certainly a piggy. How dare he try and inpose his bigoted views on smokers. Smoking bans do not apply to anywhere outside and should be opposed, flouted, and ignored.

  2. beobrigitte says:

    Smoking ban to be extended to outdoor areas where food served
    Is there a problem with the height of the ceiling?

    Fine Gael Senators have tabled a private members motion calling on the Minister for Health Simon Harris to change legislation or issue directions via a statutory instrument to address the gap in current legislation.
    Is outdoors an enclosed space?
    We need to point out that the ONLY REASON smoking bans IN ENCLOSED SPACES were dictated was the anti-smoker conjured up “second-hand-smoke-danger”. No such problem outdoors. The anti-smokers wanted the indoors to themselves – they can drink their coffee and eat their meals THERE. Nobody is stopping them

    “Anyone spending their hard-earned money in a restaurant or café should be entitled to enjoy their meal in a smoke-free environment.”
    Smokers, too, spend their hard earned money in restaurants and cafes – they should be entitled to be treated like other guests and be served an ashtray if they wish to smoke. The anti-smokers wanted the indoors to themselves – they can drink their coffee and eat their meals THERE. Nobody is stopping them

    Who voted for these Fine Gael senators? Nobody, it would seem:
    Nobody would vote for them?

    More on Reilly:

    Reilly has called the tobacco industry “evil”,[38] claimed that they “target our children”[39] and declared “war” on them.
    Here we go again…. Anti-smoker child abuse in progress. Whenever these hateful and vindictive people WANT something, they screech: “”the poor chiiiiiildren, our future…”

    Isn’t Ireland a predominantly catholic country? What happened to:
    …Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
    Reilly and the other anti-smokers may not like it that we smokers are thy neighbours. If they do, I can only guess that the anti-smokers REALLY do hate themselves.

    Both his father and brother died from smoking related illnesses.
    The “smoking-related illnesses” that occur in people over 50 years of age? REALLY?

    Regardless of how often and how loudly the anti-smokers repeat their lies they are still LIES.

  3. legiron says:

    Simple. Don’t serve food outdoors.

    Otherwise, be prepared to lose a big chunk of your customers who now have nowhere to sit.

    • No, the Outdoor Smoking ban will be such a success that businesses in the UK will be clamouring for one here.

    • jaxthefirst says:

      You beat me to it, Leggy! Quite a lot will depend on how publicans (that serve food) or restaurants react to this legislation, if it gets through. Given how puppy-like they all capitulated over the indoor smoking ban, I wouldn’t hold out much hope for a spirited resistance, but then, given how all those promises their pubs being packed to the rafters with happy non-smokers worked out, they might just be able to muster something of a backbone and adopt precisely the policy you suggest – with outdoor areas simply being re-assigned as smoking areas and nothing else.

  4. None of this is about health. It is just another salami slice against smokers for the sake of further discrimination. Reilly hates all smokers with a venom. It’s as simple as that.

  5. RdM says:

    “Anyone spending their hard-earned money in a restaurant or café should be entitled to enjoy their meal in a smoke-free environment.”

    It’s always “hard-earned” money with these expletive adjectival types, isn’t it?

    • Note that it’s never “hard-earned” when they take from it in taxes?

    • Joe L. says:

      James Reilly appears to believe that only non-smokers’ money is “hard-earned.”

      As a smoker, when I spend my hard-earned money in a restaurant or café, I don’t feel entitled to anything except the food or coffee I paid for. I only ask for the freedom to choose to spend my money at a restaurant or café or bar which allows me to enjoy tobacco.

      Also note that Reilly shamelessly uses the word “entitled.” All these Antismoking bigots exude entitlement. Their motives clearly have nothing to do with “health.” It’s all about self-righteousness, power and control.

  6. Rose says:

    The initiative was spearheaded by former minister for health James Reilly, who has said it should no longer be acceptable for people to smoke where others are eating

    They’ve already got them in Australia and Canada, so he wants one too.

    As of Tomorrow, Smoking in Outdoor Dining Areas is Banned in Victoria
    31 July 2017

    “From August 1, smoking in outdoor areas where food is consumed will be banned. The new law applies to restaurants, cafes, pubs and beers gardens, as well as footpath dining where food (other than snacks such as chip packets) is being served. The smoking ban also extends to fairs and organised events such as festivals, and sporting events where there are food stalls.”

    “Victoria is the last state in the country to implement these restrictions on smoking in outdoor areas, and according to Lockyear, they’ve been a long time coming.
    “There are negative effects in terms of potential loss of revenue but putting those things aside, we all have a duty of care to look after the whole of society,” he says.

    “For those who have allergies to passive smoke and those who have addictions they can’t beat, if there’s an additional incentive for them to quit, then why shouldn’t we back it?”
    https://www.broadsheet.com.au/melbourne/city-file/smoking-outdoor-dining-areas-banned

    “Dylan Lockyear is the venue manager at Bimbo Deluxe in Fitzroy, which has a large rooftop that can be sectioned off.”

    Winnipeg bans smoking on all restaurant and bar patios | CBC News

    25 Jan 2018 – Winnipeg was the last major city in Canada that allow smoking on patios. Coun. Mike Pagtakhan (Point Douglas) said once the rule comes into force, it will prohibit both tobacco and cannabis smoking on patios.

    City council passed a bylaw Thursday to ban patrons of bars and restaurants from smoking or vaping where food and alcohol is served outside.”
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/smoking-ban-winnipeg-1.4504662

    It was only to be expected when people who smoke voluntarily moved outside instead boycotting these places entirely.
    When your own government declares war on you your life can never be the same or even close.

  7. garyk30 says:

    Social Justice Warriors will, I predict, soon be demanding the banning of outdoor, open to public viewing, consumption of alcoholic drinks.
    After all, teens and children might get the impression that booze is fun and socially acceptable.

    Also, imagine the pain such sights cause recovering alcoholics. Compassion for our fellow man mandates such sights be banned.

    The sight of people enjoying eating must be a terrible burden for those on diets or those poor impoverished people that can not afford such luxuries.

    For the sake of mankind and out of the kindness of our hearts, outdoor dining areas must be banned.

  8. waltc says:

    I have never understood what it is about food that makes tobacco smoke deadly.

    • Rose says:

      Perhaps they think it’s risky to mix your nightshade varieties.

    • Joe L. says:

      I was writing this in reply to legiron’s comment
      above, but figured it’s more appropriate here:

      I find it very interesting that smoking bans in the UK are still shaped by whether or not food is served somewhere. Most, if not all, smoking bans here in the States never took food service into consideration.

      Smoking bans, both indoor and outdoor, in almost all the states I’ve lived in and visited are comprehensive blanket bans, with no exceptions for bars simply because they do not serve food.

      A few states like Pennsylvania and Florida, I believe, permit smoking in bars of which no more than X% of their revenue comes from food sales, which is even more bizarre. Nevada originally allowed smoking in bars as long as they didn’t serve food but, believe it or not, amended their law a few years back to allow smoking in bars that do serve food, as long as they don’t allow entrance to minors. This amendment also allowed restaurants to once again have separate smoking sections.

      If smoking bans are implemented under the auspices of protecting innocent non-smokers from the most dangerous substance known to man–secondary tobacco smoke–why is it that some people want to ban smoking everywhere while others want to ban smoking everywhere except bars that don’t serve food? There are only two possible answers:

      1. Secondary smoke is only dangerous around food
      2. It’s all complete bullshit

    • RdM says:

      Strangely though… while I have long thought, and may have said or written, I think tobacco needs to be rehabilitated as the useful agricultural crop it is, to which humankind have developed an art in manufacture to a pleasurable, luxurious everyday ingestable product, like wine, whiskey, beer, even chocolate – when your hear or see radio or TV hosts and guests discussing food matching with wines, even craft beers, maybe whisky – I have thought of appropriate tobaccos for the time of day and situation, and perhaps drinks being consumed.

      But more to the point – I have noticed that tobacco smoke doesn’t interact well with some foods, if you light up directly afterward, without cleaning your teeth after the meal.

      Peanut butter I certainly think has bad reaction with the smoke – and that’s also good real peanut butter, not just the hydrolysed homogenised smooth crap.

      And a few nights ago I noticed an unpleasant sensation directly related to having a roll-up after a meal, but I can’t remember what the main food ingredient was – it was strong enough to make me immediately want to brush my teeth though, and rinse, after which the cigarette was enjoyable again!

      Normally I will clean my teeth fairly soon after a meal – particularly if jammed food particles need flossing or etc. – but sometimes one is out, there is not that opportunity.

      Anybody else noticed food interactions with tobacco smoke?

      Some sort of chemical reaction with the residues in the mouth and on the teeth, I think.

      On the other hand, I can imagine a cigar going nicely with some oysters and stout, not that I have either of the last to check it out!

    • Frank Davis says:

      I have never understood what it is about food that makes tobacco smoke deadly.

      Perhaps it’s just that people usually don’t smoke while they’re eating? They are mutually exclusive behaviours. You’re either doing one or the other, not both at the same time.

      And if you do try to do both at the same time, you’ll end up choking. And that’s what’s deadly.

  9. Smoking Lamp says:

    James Reilly is a tyrant. he seeks to impose his own antismoking bias on others and allow no choice. he uses health as the rationale but the research on second =hand smoke does not actually support his extremist view — that’s why the antismokers suppressed the Boffeta study and brutally attacked the Enstrom and Kabat study. The tobacco control lies must be exposed. Beyond that, the persecution of smokers must be resisted and strongly.

    Letters, emails, phone calls to legislators and business associations everywhere not just at the current battleground are critical to preserving freedom. One potential message is “I hear they are seeking to impose outdoor smoking bans in Ireland, I hope they won’t try that here. I am opposed and will boycott kA businesses that support such a move and vote for legislators [mayors, councilors, etc.] that opposes smoking bans too!’ BTW it wouldn’t hurt to demand rolling back existing bans other…

  10. Smoking Lamp says:

    There is a poll on the Irish outdoor smoking ban at the Irish Mirror: “Call for smoking ban to be extended to outdoor areas that serve food” (At time of this post 55% AGAINST.)
    https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/health-news/call-smoking-ban-extended-outdoor-12418297

    • Joe L. says:

      Now 63% against the outdoor ban.

      • Vlad says:

        The fact that it’s not at 95-100% against the ban says a lot to me. We live in a deranged world, and that fat pig Reilly is just a reflection of it – he’s not the problem but only a symptom of it. If he keels over and die tomorrow, nothing much will change, because as that poll shows, there are plenty of deranged individuals to take his place.

      • RdM says:

        On my vote, up to 66%.

      • Frank Davis says:

        68%

        From the Irish Mirror:

        The Royal College of Physicians of Ireland’s Policy Group on Tobacco said it strongly supports the proposed bill.

        Dr Des Cox, Chair of the Policy Group and Consultant in Paediatric Respiratory Medicine, said that this is an important development.

        He added: “Any level of exposure to tobacco smoke is unacceptable and there is robust research demonstrating a significant risk from second hand smoke in an outdoor setting where smokers are present.

        “The developing lungs of children are particularly susceptible to damage from second hand smoke.

        “The health impacts are not limited to smokers; exposure to secondhand smoke results in many of the same health risks.

        Health. Children. Risk.

        Blah, blah, blah..

        • RdM says:

          “The developing lungs of children are particularly susceptible to damage from second hand smoke.”

          Yeah that’s one I’ve seen applied to arguments on smoking in cars too.
          It seems twisted nonsense, deliberately playing on fears (as always).

          Originally it seemed to mean that children’s lungs were small(er), hence somehow more susceptible to the (incredibly already dilute) ‘concentration of the ambient smoke in the air.

          Yet it doesn’t matter what the lung volume is. The proportion is the same.

          And there are windows, ventilation, possibilities in cars and pubs (no children in pubs!).

          And as for

          “and there is robust research demonstrating a significant risk from second hand smoke”

          We know that that’s nonsense.

          https://www.tctactics.org/index.php?title=Critical_Scientists
          http://www.nycclash.com/CaseAgainstBans/OSHA.html

          But does he, do they?
          Evidently no-one has written him with any updated information to the contrary.

          He looks like an apoplectic alcoholic anyway.
          Clinging to importance, power, need to be seen to be “doing something”?
          Someone needs to set him straight!

        • Vlad says:

          He added: “Any level of exposure to tobacco smoke is unacceptable and there is robust research demonstrating a significant risk from second hand smoke in an outdoor setting where smokers are present.

          That’s how people have been losing trust in medicine…and they wonder why people begin questioning medical ‘holly grails’ like vaccines. If no level of tobacco exposure is acceptable in an outdoor setting, then how come all the toxic vaccine adjuvants like aluminum are acceptable to be injected in a baby’s bloodstream?
          Fuckin’ morons.

        • beobrigitte says:

          He added: “Any level of exposure to tobacco smoke is unacceptable and there is robust research demonstrating a significant risk from second hand smoke in an outdoor setting where smokers are present.
          The anti-smokers have got themselves into a right mess here: on one hand a slight whiff of tobacco smoke OUTDOORS is ultra-hyper-super-duper-dangerous and on the other hand the baby-boomer generation has been proven to be living longer, hence the increased state pension age to 67 years.

          “The developing lungs of children are particularly susceptible to damage from second hand smoke.
          “The-poor-chiiiiildren – our future” abuse in full swing again…..

        • smokingscot says:

          Kid in pram.

          Exactly the correct height to inhale diesel fumes from vehicles. And 2 stroke and old petrol.

          Person with fag, smoke goes up and sprog’s below waist level.

          But logic doesn’t hack it with this lot. Newspaper doesn’t allow comments, so fat, hairy git gets his cutting to frame and hang on wall of office.

        • Rose says:

          New proposal to ban smoking in outdoor food areas will ‘denormalise’ cigarette use
          April 25, 2018

          “A proposal to ban smoking in outdoor areas where food is served will ‘denormalise’ the use of cigarettes, former health minister, James Reilly, has said.”
          https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/–469859.html

          The truth at last, it’s all about appearances.

  11. Pingback: Organised Crime | Frank Davis

  12. Pingback: I Heard It On The Grapevine | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s