LETTERs

Unite to reverse smoking ban

I write regarding Dave Daly's comments on the smoking ban (The Guv'nor, Morning Advertiser, 7 September). At last, professional comment on the taking of positive action against the ban.

Like Mr Daly, I am a non-smoker, but support emphatically the right of businessmen in the licensed and restaurant trade to make their own decision on a matter of such importance to their financial stability.

Time is short. I believe the current decision can be reversed but the struggle has to be led by the industry big guns; a concerted effort led by the British Beer & Pub Association, the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers and the BII, fully supported by the National Parliamentary Committee and joined by the Guild of Master Victuallers, the Federation of Licensed Victuallers Associations and licensed victuallers associations of England and Wales.

Industry leaders should bombard the Department of Culture Media & Sport with the views of the industry, with constituency MPs being contacted at local level. I am sure the trade press will support a campaign.

This action to be supported by the collection of a nationwide petition supporting the view that licensed premises and restaurants should have the right to make their own decision with regards operating smoking or non-smoking premises. The petition would need to be correlated to ensure maximum effect. Support by a majority of licensees and restaurateurs, attracting as little as 25 signatures each, would result in a petition of several million.

The legislation is a life-changing matter with regard to the very character of the pubs and restaurants of England and Wales.

With strong pro-active action by the major industry players I believe it possible to get Government to look again at the legislation.

The final decision with regards smoking must be reached by the premises operator and the customer; certainly not by nanny state civil servants or minority groups intent on dictating their lifestyle on all of us.

J O'Riordan

Past chairman, The Guild of Master Victuallers,

Secretary, 1066 LVA

Stop profits going up in smoke

I read with interest David Elliott's proffered solutions to the industry's problems (My Shout, Morning Advertiser, 24 August). Perhaps he has a solution to our problem.

On re-application for a trading licence, conditions agreed to by his barrister, but not ourselves, led us to leaving the hearing with

less of a licence than we went in with.

The subsequent two botched appeals have lead to restrictions such as:

no-one on our patio

after 10.30pm with entertainment, or 11pm ordinarily. But we have a licence to trade until 12.30am, applied for in order to compete with other late licences in the area.

With the coming

no-smoking restriction, I wonder if Mr Elliott could explain how we are to trade under these restrictions.

If customers can't smoke inside or outside, what sort of trade are we left with?

We have already seen a downturn in trade of around 30% due to existing restrictions. How can we now provide a no-smoking area if customers aren't allowed to use it?

How do we tell customers, with the power to take their money elsewhere, they can only smoke outside our premises until 10.30pm or 11pm at the latest?

As it is, we must try to compete with other premises in the area that have late licences. Additionally as the premises are listed, any structure to provide a non-smoking area outside would probably be refused planning consent. Considering the 10.30pm curfew, would the additional cost make it a viable proposition anyway?

We have been in the trade for more than 20 years, the last 15 with Greene King, but frankly this has us beat.

Perhaps as managing director of Greene King, Mr Elliott can see a way around this, to enable us to continue to make a living.

Any suggestion would be extremely helpful - perhaps a cunning plan we don't know about. We look forward to hearing from Mr Elliott.

Mike Bedson

The Ossory Arms

Ampthill

Bedfordshire

Cool dispense bad for environment

Super-cold beer dispense (Trade demands a chiller revolution, Morning Advertiser, 7 September) seems to go against the

environmental aspects of reducing energy and CO2 emissions, especially when the heat generated by the chilling units behind the bar, is requiring more energy for air-conditioning to make the working area acceptable.

Better siting of the units would be an improvement but despite this, the overall effect is to increase the energy hence CO2 emissions associated with the product.

PA Kidger

Via email from

paulkidger@aol.com