SIR - We write to express our concern about the proposal to ban smoking in public places. The debate is being conducted to condition the public into thinking that a ban is inevitable. We make the following points:
The argument that a ban would benefit the hospitality industry as non-smokers would be more comfortable is not true. In New York, trade is down 40 per cent in bars and clubs.
In Liverpool, licensees have called the proposed ban 'horrendous' and are rightly worried by the implications to their trade.
We fear if a ban was introduced in Oxford, the only winners would be off-licences as more people would drink at home, pubs would close and meeting places lost.
We agree that public places of entertainment should provide non-smoking areas. Improved ventilation would minimise any risk to staff and non-smokers.
We would declare an interest that we are smokers. We are concerned that the way this debate is going, we may be re-classified as social lepers.
This would appear to be some people's motives, judging by David Scott's letter (Oxford Mail, March 23) suggesting a ban in public parks and bus queues.
CHRIS FOSTER
DONNA DIXON
Hugh Allen Crescent
New Marston
Oxford
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article