I haven't had any data on New York, but I understand from recent visitors and contractors I know who have worked over there that the smoking ban in California is flagrantly ignored and not enforced in many establishments. They had no trouble finding many a bar, cafe or restaurant they could sit in and light up without being told to extinguish the cigaratte or be the only smokers in that particular establishment.Originally Posted by rodgerd
There was a recent BBC news article on the effects of the smoking ban in Ireland.
Walk-in type boulevard pubs in the major centres noticed little difference in business - they usually have enough foot traffic going past to get the customers. The general consensus in this area was positive support of the smoking ban.
Unfortunately the law appears to have started the demise of the small-town country pub. Something like 80% (can't remember the exact figure they quoted) of small-town pub owners have cancelled or put on hold indefinately plans they had to develop their businesses (property increases/improvements). Not a single pub owner surveyed had hired more staff since the changes. 'Many' (they didn't specify _how_ many) were reported to have not replaced staff members who had left.
It's quite a shame to hear the second part. Small-town pubs all over Europe are an integral part of the community, and are not just places yobbos go to to get 'wankered' on a Friday night. They also have a character the 'franchise' pubs in the cities sadly lack.
We don't have the same kind of small-town pub culture in New Zealand, although I wouldn't be surprised if they were more adversely effected than pubs in the cities - they don't have the same pool of casual clientele.
The issue I have with the change is existing law allowed for a proprietor to run a completely smoke-free pub or restaurant. Why should all proprietors be forced to run a completely smoke-free environment in their establishment? It is their private business. Non-smokers do not have to go to their establishment if they don't like it.
The true test will be if the non-smoking lobby follows through with their promise to return to pubs. If pub business increases as a direct result and maintains a higher level (rather than just a few months as the fad comes and goes) then I guess it will be a good thing. If pubs lose business long term, that would be...well a bloody typical result - would the non-smoking lobby then like to raise some money to bail out businesses that directly suffered form a draconian law?
bleh, end waffle...
Bookmarks