The DoH has issued a scathing attack on the industry's Smoking Charter success - so where does this unexpected outburst leave pubs? Adam Withrington takes a look.
Last month, Alan Milburn, the secretary of state for health, appeared on BBC's Frost on Sunday. When asked about the smoking debate in pubs and bars, the minister's message was clear: the government believed self-regulation was the way forward.
So when the Department of Health (DoH) gave a negative response to the achievement in exceeding government set targets, it came as something of a shock (The Publican Newspaper, June 2).
Despite a close relationship with the industry's Charter Group, which promotes self-regulation on smoking in pubs and bars through the use of signage, good ventilation and no-smoking areas where possible, the DoH has poured scorn over the results.
Commenting on the research that showed 63 per cent of pubs were Charter compliant, a spokesman said: "Around half of pubs that were Charter compliant still allowed smoking throughout, and only a handful of premises were entirely smoke-free. More must be done and rapidly."
This negative response comes even though the industry exceeded the government's 50 per cent minimum requirement agreed when the Charter was launched back in 1999.
Caroline Nodder, spokeswoman for the British Institute of Innkeeping, cannot understand why the DoH has ignored many of the positive aspects of the Charter Group's results: "We are disappointed that the DoH has chosen to take such a negative angle. It has not recognised the sheer number of publicans who have signed up for the programme."
Nick Bish, chairman of the Charter Group, is also confused: "I am slightly mystified as to the response. It must be deeply disappointing for operators who have invested so much time and money into compliance with the Charter."
The DoH has ignored the 63 per cent sign-up level and has instead chosen to focus on the fact that only 43 per cent of those signed up to the Charter had a formal written policy. It recognised that 53 per cent of pubs were compliant with good practice, which means they have met the objectives set out by the Charter to deal with second-hand smoke. However, the DoH complained that this meant around half of the pubs that are compliant still allowed smoking throughout. If ever a view was "glass half empty"...
Ms Nodder says there is a bigger picture. "The letter of the law says those who have not provided a formal written policy are guilty of non-compliance. It is just a piece of paper. It is more important to us that people are aware of the role of the Charter."
No one is saying the job has been done - there is still much more to do. However, important steps have been taken to ensure effective self-regulation of smoking in pubs, rather than unwanted government action.So what is the way forward now for the Charter Group? Mark Hastings, spokesman for the British Beer and Pub Association, says there needs to be continuing dialogue between government and trade. "The key is continuing our close working relationship with the DoH. We must focus on what the secretary of state originally said - that self-regulation is the way forward for the industry."
Mr Bish agrees: "The government's position needs clarification. It has said "more must be done and rapidly". It must define how much more and discuss a timescale with us."
What does the public think?
Colin Williams
"You just have to see what has happened in Norway since it banned smoking there. The takings in pubs are well down.
"I think a pub should be well ventilated, but I don't think that you can rely on ventilation systems to work properly. What pubs really need to do is clean up better - like clean the curtains and carpets, because they just stink of smoke.
"The problem is that you are not going to satisfy everyone. If the government was serious about smoking it would ban it. But instead it is trying to please everyone.
The government needs people to keep smoking because of the revenue it raises. It also wants people to smoke so they will die early so they don't have to pay them their pension. Call me cynical if you like!"
Kate Finbow
"There should be designated no-smoking areas - particularly in an eating area. I think a total ban would be discriminatory against smokers. You couldn't ban smoking in pubs completely. I used to be very anti-smoking, but that didn't mean that I would go up to smokers and ask them to put their cigarette out. If you banned smoking in a pub, I know that my friends who are smokers would just go somewhere else."
Neil Rawlins
"Smoking should always be allowed in pubs - just have non-smoking areas. If you smoke it is impossible to have a drink without a cigarette. Of the solutions that the Charter Group has put forward, I would prefer ventilation with separate areas. You have to compromise. If you go into any pub, at least half the people in there smoke."
Louise Rawlins
"The best thing would be to make some pubs non-smoking and stick all the non-smokers in there! Everyone talks about the rights of the non-smokers. The fact is that everyone also has a right to smoke."We'd be interested to see how many people would actually go into a non-smoking pub. One of us smokes and a lot of our friends do as well, which means we will always go into smoking areas, which we're happy to do."