Simon Eldon-Edington: California dreaming - about the smoking ban
11 September, 2009
So how did California, the world’s most health-conscious society, implement smoking legislation that ensured virtually no bar closures, protected bar staff and non-smokers from second hand smoke, while still making it pleasurable for smokers to enjoy a night out?
I’m knocking back my third vodka at mid-night inside the packed Tiki Bar in Los Angeles, and my British accent is dismally failing to pull. In the state where the world’s first comprehensive indoor smoking ban came into effect in 1998, I resort to lighting a cigarette, yet neither myself, nor the bar owner, are breaking the law. And while the pretty young blonde girl sitting next to me doesn’t seem especially interested in why all of us are allowed to smoke inside this particular bar, you should be...
Six months earlier, I’m outside the Pig and Whistle pub in Wimbledon, sitting under a flimsy umbrella, in the pouring rain, and legally smoking a cigarette too. But strangely, it’s not quite as much fun.
So how did California, the world’s most health-conscious society, implement smoking legislation that ensured virtually no bar closures, protected bar staff and non-smokers from second hand smoke, while still making it pleasurable for smokers to enjoy a night out?
And why did the UK smoking legislation sadly not accomplish the same?
The pretty blonde girl next to me mysteriously continues to ignore me when I ask for her opinion on this complex subject, but, as I now speak American, here’s my two cents worth.
Firstly, when the ban was first proposed in California, the Pub and Tavern Association immediately took on the powerful health lobby, and insisted on exemptions for certain bars. Whereas in the UK, most pub trade groups supported the proposed outright indoor ban legislation as written, and simply went along with it.
Secondly, the population of mostly non-smokers in California backed up their Pub Association on the bar exemptions in a state refurendum, based on the core American belief that individuals, not the government, should be free to make decisions about how they lead their lives, once the majority are protected.
In the UK, the population of mostly non-smokers, seemingly blinded by their dislike of smoke, failed to grasp the implications of allowing their government to comprehensively dictate to all bar owners and every smoker how they lead their lives, and went along with a zero exemptions outright indoor ban.
But with new proposals on wine glass sizes, and what a pint glass can be made of, Sir Liam Donaldson, the Government Minister for Health - who wrote the smoking legislation and the above future proposals - will ensure that eventually non-smokers too, grasp the implications of allowing the government to dictate how we lead our lives.
Most of us think that the UK smoking legislation is pretty much the same as the rest of the world's. But in reality, it’s not. All US states (even New York), and most of Europe, have some exemptions to permit cigarette smoking inside certain bars, under certain conditions. The UK has zero.
All US states, and most of Europe, permit fully-enclosed outside smoking areas. The UK permits a roof, and two sides. Less than a pig sty.
The current UK smoking legislation therefore gives us the dubious honor of having the most draconian smoking legislation in the world. Should we be proud that we’re still the best in the world at something?
Any debate on this subject is usually hindered by most people believing the rest of the world has committed to banning smoking indoors, so the UK ban will never be amended anyway. But again, the reality is, both Holland and Germany, along with eight cities in the US this year alone, have either amended or completely thrown out their indoor smoking ban legislation.
The debate then further deteriorates into a back and forth shouting match about selfish smokers, intolerant non-smokers, whether the smoking ban is causing massive pub closures or not, or the proof or lack thereof of the dangers of second hand smoke.
And while these are all points to debate, at its core, this debate is really about the freedom for all of us to live our lives as we choose.
None of us should accept the current UK legislation, because it’s unnecessarily restrictive to accomplish the stated goal of protecting bar staff, whether you hate cigarette smoke or not. After all, if you could go to a smoke-free bar, why would it bother you if smokers could also go to a bar where they could smoke too?
A sensible compromise can, and should be found, as in most of the rest of the free world, where both smokers and non-smokers can enjoy a night out in a pub, without the smokers having to stand out in the rain like naughty children, and without non-smokers and bar staff having to breath in smoke should they not wish to.
And unless you really want your government dictating to you soon, that your pint must be served in a plastic glass, we should all agree that the freedom to live our lives as we choose trumps everything else. Yes, even any annoyance you might personally hold against cigarette smoke and smokers.
Back in the Tiki bar, it’s now one in the morning, and after gulping down her seventh cocktail, the pretty blonde girl next to me suddenly decides she will now give me her much sought-after opinion on this complex subject; by helpfully pointing out she’s twenty-two, I’m not, and though California is a state of mind, I’ve clearly lost mine in the sunshine.
I reply that I still dream that one day soon, back in the UK, when non-smokers finally grasp the implications of supporting the government over unnecessarily draconian restrictions on how smokers and publicans lead their lives, and when the proposed restrictions on alcohol effect them too, things will change and the freedom to smoke inside certain UK pubs will be allowed once again.
But she’s not impressed by my British dream, and simply replies “And your accent totally doesn’t make up for you being grey-haired and balding either”.
So I beg you all back home in the UK, hurry up and work to change the indoor smoking legislation please. Otherwise, I’ll be forever stuck inside this LA bar, freely smoking and drinking, next to an unimpressed blonde girl called Taylor, writing to The Publican, a drunken mix of British, California dreaming...
Simon Eldon-Edington is a British screenwriter, based in Los Angeles.
Readers' comments
Dubya - You're missing out on 'smirting', not to mention a helluva lot of desirable women. Audrey Tautou, Kate Winslet, Britney Spears, Charlotte Church, Lilly Allen, Kate Moss, Jennifer Aniston, Drew Barrimore, Jennifer Lopez, Gwyneth Paltrow, in fact most of Hollywood babes. The only famous anti-smoker I can think of is Anthea Turner, and if you can bring yourself to kiss that you're welcome to the avaricious harpy. There's always Debbie Arnott of ASH. Kiss her and you'll turn to stone! :-)
Hey Pete, I'd take a mouthful of garlic over a tongue coated with the odour of cigarette smoke, etc, anytime. Good for your heart too, unlike smokes, though you gotta make sure your date has had some too. Not sure what Marmite is though!
Dubya - So on that basis you would also ban all spicy foods, Marmite and anything containing garlic. Or you could simply tell her you're not interested in kissing her if she smokes. Even if she's a non-smoker she'd reply: "Sorry, I smoke 60-a-day!" :-)
Bill - interesting, and maybe you could share your knowledge on how much such things as "air cutrtains" cost to install and maintain?
Pete - I mention other countries only because other's (including you) quite often use them as 'evidence' of how smoking bans are crumbling around the world - how else am I supposed to counter-act such arguments?
Daniel - RE: the point about Italy, that's typical of the dross that is stated on here by little-researched comments. What Pete really means is that he's found one or two safe havens where another bunch of smokers flout the law, and he then expands that to the whole country. You could find that in any country, and also in many places in the UK. Anyone can state anything on here and make it look official. I could write "USA now considering overturning the whole smoking ban and making it illegal to discriminate against smokers", and so many people would believe it that it would forward my arguments no-end...
"if you're a non-smoker and you kiss a girl who smokes anything more than the occasional cigarette it's like shoving a load of fag butts in your mouth in one go. She's gotta be real pretty to get past that hurdle, believe me." - Dubya. Dubya. How would you know? Have you shoved a load of fag butts in you mouth in one go? I would think it's a bit of a silly thing to do. How do you expect to attract pretty ladies with fag butts for teeth? It makes no sense. Would it not be better to smoke them one at a time like sensible people do?
Never mind the anti-ban types droning on and on about ventilation, air extraction techniques and how their human rights have been assailed by the ban's undemocratic introduction, if you're a non-smoker and you kiss a girl who smokes anything more than the occasional cigarette it's like shoving a load of fag butts in your mouth in one go. She's gotta be real pretty to get past that hurdle, believe me.
Wow, that was refreshing, thank you Simon and some great comments, Pete, Spain is another country where normality reigns, you look for the ashtrays, not the smoke. They have some superb ventilation/air filtration, they were all full of customers, smokers and non-smokers alike. David, educating the children is great and I am sure you do not use the anti propaganda, Michael Siegel is another man who now has much to say about TC. http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2009/09/tricks-of-trade.html snip~ Incidentally, Dr Michael Siegel has, as usual, some interesting things to say about the 10% claim. He concludes his analysis by saying: The scientific integrity of the tobacco control movement is imploding before my very eyes. Jred, we all know this is nothing to do with health now, this "new temperance movement" do not like the word "compromise" at all. http://www.wgme.com/template/inews_wire/wires.regional.me/23c10665-www.wgme.com.shtml Snip~ And it's now against the law to smoke in all outdoor public dining areas, such as patios and decks outside restaurants and bars. Simon is right about where this is going - http://www.democracyinstitute.org/pdfs/DI%20Denormalisation%20Study.pdf snip~ In practise, denormalisation means that the government attempts to shame adults into changing their behaviour. For the government’s denormalisation campaign to succeed these adults must be stigmatised,II that is, they will be placed apart from the rest of civilised society until and unless they learn to behave in the approved manner.1 Denormalisation pushes gamblers, drinkers, smokers, and the obese from being a health hazard to being a moral hazard, nothing less than blots on the nation’s moral landscape. freedom2choose.info for smokers and non-smokers alike, fighting for CHOICE and TRUTH
Regarding the speration of smoking and non smoking areas within a venue the solution is very simple. A standard exists that allows for the creation of ETS and ETS free areas withi a venue. I refer to the ASRAE Standard 62.1 - 2007 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality Section 5:18 http://www.ashrae.org/pressroom/detail/16298 In addition technology exists which is used within the hospital environment globally to seperate different levels of clean areas .. Air Curtains. Oh and they are already in use throughout the world in retain venues to maintain air temperature and eliminate pollution fromentering the building. http://www.bsee.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/3984/Air_curtains_for_air_quality.html
Pete - You are wrong there. I have family in Italy and travel there twice a year - and I've been amazed at how well respected the smoking ban is there. And re: Florence, I think you may be getting confused with Florence in Alabama...
Steve wrote - "why are so many countries around the world initiating smoking bans"? Good question. Many of us are aware that this has very little to do with SHS, other than as a means to an end (profit mainly). The onslaught on tobacco is substantially funded by manufacturers of NRT, which (a) doesn't work (b) generates huge profits. (b) relies on (a) by ensuring that each customer (yes, customer - that is how pharmacheutical companies refer to users) repeatably attempts t quit. Do you know that only 1.6% (UK official figures) of smokers will be totally smoke free after a year of NRT? Smoking bans play a major role, because they are designed to denormalise smokers, thus placing more pressure on them to 'conform' and take the useless medicines. The true risks associated with SHS are statistically insignificant - the goal posts were moved in order to increase risk. This is unique in epidemiology and makes a mockery of science and fools of the majority of the public, health workers, and anyone else gullible enough not to see through the smokescreen. There is another side to the story, but one that TC and the MSM (no longer funded by tobacco advertising) do not want in the public domain. Having said that, it is becoming apparent that some newspapers are starting to ask questions, a sign that a collapse of the TC house of cards is a real possibility. These lies cannot be sustained indefinitely. It is no coincidence that this is linked to the current downturn, The public are increasingly getting fed up of being bullied by the healthists. The government and its pet quangos have now turned on the drinkers and the drinks industry. This will, indeed, be a step too far. Most people drink, its one of the few remaining pleasures in life.
Steve W - You always bleat that what goes on abroad is irrelevant to the UK's ban, yet here you are citing Italy as an example. I've travelled the length and breadth of Italy over the last few years and seen no evidence they even have a smoking ban. The local police smoke in bars. Some Italian cities, Florence for example, have legally thrown out the national ban.
The UK Trade's leaders didn't merely go along with the ban. They lobbied and fought for the 'level playing field' - i.e. no exemptions whatsoever (for clubs, shisha cafes, etc). To ASH's delight this resulted in a ban so watertight it's gonna take a lot of hard work to get a fair amendment. With this industry's head still firmly buried in the sand I can't see much chance of breaking that apathy until we've lost a quarter of our pubs. We should pass that milestone as early as 2012, with the 50% mark arriving in late 2015. If the Trade hasn't woken up from it's inertia by then it'll probably be too late. We'll have become a nation of JDWs and soulless licenced dining halls.
David Goerlitz. It's good news to know that somebody who worked for Tobacco Control could see their lies and is able tell us. I'm sure that educating children about smoking without the lies will produce better results.
Steve W You are at it again. Self closing doors and good ventilation would not be prohibitively expensive for most pubs and social clubs. The cost would soon be covered by regaining the trade lost by this bad legislation.
Great article:-) Tiki bar is in my neighborhood; it is largely the exception to the rule. While it's good to see such an exception, the impact of the ban on business has been much tougher on bands trying to draw crowds in clubs, business owners and anyone looking for a bartending job...trust me on that one. Still though......at least it's not as bad as my hometown Chicago has become. The weather helps with regards to the outdoor patio portion of the service industry (if you are lucky enough to have the space and money to build one). Just don't go to many of the suburbs of Los Angeles (Beverly Hills, Pasadena, Santa Monica Promenade, Burbank); they have gone off of their rockers with anti-smoking legislation with outside bans. One Hollywood actor even had a warrant out for his arrest for failing to pay a $250 fine for smoking OUTSIDE on a SIDEWALK in Burbank of all places. Bernard Parks, and people like Wendy Gruel on the L.A. City Council wanted to make Los Angeles as inhospitable to smokers as possible. Mr. Parks wanted to make it a misdemeanor offense for smoking on a sidewalk. Luckily, it did not pass. It was Councilman LaBonge (I believe) that was one voice of reason that stepped in to stop the madness. With that said, there are many patios and some indoor places to smoke in L.A.. ..I know of at least one downtown (it's new); it has a separate smoking room (inside). A new restaurant in W. Hollywood that allows smoking of cigars and cigarettes inside...two places in Silverlake..and some in K-town too. Again, great article. Things here in SoCal could be a lot better though.
Well said, and better yet HONEST. Finally a voice of reason. My name is David Goerlitz and I am the former Winston Man. I have severed all ties with the tobacco control movement I was associated with up until 12 years ago and then went independent for the very reasons you bring forth. There is no reason in the world with all our technology and brainpower that we have not been able to come up with something more reasonable, fair and logical than the crap and junk science the anti-smoking power hungry zealots are throwing at us . The media has to be held accountable as well, as more and more evidence has been uncovered showing the lies and corruption being used by tobacco control as we know it. The attitude that ,...just because your eyes see it....the ears hear it....does not mean that the mind has to believe it. Keep up the good work Simon and thanks for keeping me angry enough to help change these draconian laws and bans. Looking forward to working with TICAP, Freedom 2 Choose, and Forces International to help make the changes necessary so that dignity and respect can once again replace control, prohibition and coercion. David Goerlitz (former Winston Man)
very well put, having spent far to many hours outside in the cold looking into an empty but smoke free Pub this shows the Smoking Ban for what it is, ludicrous, invasive, nanny state governing. Thank you Mr E.E. for talking such sense...however having seen your photo I can't blame the blonde for leaving alone!
Good article, but the point you all seem to miss is this, "why are so many countries around the world initiating smoking bans"? Just ask yourself that the next time you light up. And a quote from BBC news website regarding one of the countries where they're allowed to have seperate areas (Italy) but with strict regulations on air quality (just as we would have in the UK if the ban was amended); "The new rules allow smoking in special sealed-off areas fitted with smoke extractors; however many bar owners say fitting the automatic doors and forced ventilation systems required by law is too expensive". You have been warned...
What an AMAZING article! Simon is truly a magnificent writer and this is the best thing I have read about smoking in ages.
Nice article Simon! Tiki bar is in my neighborhood. Still, with the ban, business has been much tougher on bands and anyone looking for a bartender job...trust me on that one. Still though......at least it's not as bad as my hometown Chicago has become. The weather helps. Just don't go to many of the suburbs (Beverly Hills, Pasadena, Santa Monica Promenade, Burbank); they have gone off of their rockers with anti-smoking legislation with outside bans. One Hollywood actor even had a warrant out for his arrest for failing to pay a $250 fine for smoking OUTSIDE on a SIDEWALK in Burbank of all places. Bernard Parks, and people like Wendy Gruel on the L.A. City Council wanted to make Los Angeles as inhospitable to smokers as possible. Mr. Parks wanted to make it a misdemeanor offense for smoking on a sidewalk. Luckily, it did not pass. It was Councilman LaBonge (I believe) that was one voice of reason that stepped in to stop the madness. With that said, there are many patios and some indoor places to smoke in L.A.. ..I know of at least one downtown (it's new); it has a separate smoking room (inside). A new restaurant in W. Hollywood that allows smoking of cigars and cigarettes inside...two places in Silverlake..and some in K-town too I hope that some common sense returns to the U.K., as well as to many places in the U.S.
Well said Simon. I agree that the majority think that smoking bans like ours are in place all over the world. This is definitely not the case. Most governments have managed to ensure that they have catered for all their citizens. Shame on our pathetic government which is so blinkered, weak and under the thumb of the anti-smoking organisations.
Simon E, good one! However, I spent 3 months in Truckee, California in 2004 and I could not smoke (with a roof over my head) the entire time. I suppose Truckee is a bit worzely, in the sticks, compared to LA but it did mean I spent most of my time not going out. I could not wait for the wheels of the plane to touch down in blighty and be back in a free country again, I went to more than one Pub that very evening to smoke like a chimney and drink like a fish. Marvelous! As soon as I got back I started going out as before - pretty much every night (~300 nights a year). Since the smoking ban in the UK I now go out about ~80 nights a year and mostly restaurants (in winter) not pubs. But on the subject of compromise, I could never understand why anyone could complain about the first or last coach on trains bieng set aside for smoking. One coach for smoking and three smoke free ones - fair enough. Can you smoke in them now? No. You can't even smoke out in the open on the platforms. The big difference was that trains did not come off the tracks.
Well said! One of the best articles on the smoking ban i have read in years. maybe now more people will realise that the bans on smoking and drinking are one and the same thing. prohibition all round.
At last, a commonsense editorial.....croatia and the netherlands have basically repealed their smoking bans........this week and the fall out is going worldwide. While some places like nanny ridden australia still seeks to criminalize you for smoking commonsense is starting to trickle in around the world........if I was A TOBACCO CONTROL employee, I would start looking for a new career........your prohibitinist lobbying efforts are comming to an end along with your psuedo-science propaganda studies........smoke em if ya got 'em and remember second hand smoke is a joke.