Surely it would be a good thing for Scotland if alcohol sales dropped significantly, since we as a society suffer more the more alcohol is consumed?

#1 Duncan, it's not general alcohol sales which are down but those from pubs; the off-trade is booming since the ban as more people stay home.

It will take much longer than spring 2007 to see the effect of the smoking ban: we're looking at 10 year mortality rates, not a theoretical (as yet) dip in pub profits.
I recall the scare merchants with their "pubs are doomed" stories prior to the ban. Well, that didn't happen, so it seems we've a new 'seasonally adjusted' argument to take its place.

What do you mean "...but we have yet to see the effect that it has had on trading during a cold, wet and windy Scottish winter" (Smoking Ban)

If you think that this rediculous piece of Nazi legislation hasn't had an effect on our pubs then I suggest you try visiting some pubs apart from trendy city venues.

Go to pubs in Gorgie, Wester Hailes, Leith, Pilton, Corstorphine etc. and speak to some of the locals. Most of these pubs were "smokers" pubs this time last year and because of this ban have seen their customers gradually dwindle away.

People who smoke now prefer to drink at home for obvious reasons. Moreover, the non-smokers who used to drink in the pub with them now choose to still be with their friends at their homes. As a consequence, local pubs loose out.

I go out to pubs a LOT less now, because of this ban. I still drink the same amount and with the same frequency. I just do it at home now instead of at the pub because at home, no-one is going to have a go at me if I choose to enjoy a cigarette or cigar with my beer.

To pretend that the licenced trade isn't suffering as a result of this stupid ban is very short-sighted. It needs to be scrapped. Segregated areas or designated smoking/non-smoking pubs are the way to go. That way everyone is happy. Except perhaps the tiny minority who get offended if they see someone smoking inside a bar that they DONT wish to go into anyway. For every other normal person this would be an acceptable situation.

We dont have to wait to know effects of the no smoking ban... air that is smoke free.

Its a dreadful shame that the traditional pub is to be destroyed and I sympathise with the struggling landlord of the wetlead pub.
It's even more salient when one realises that it is a consequence of the influence on public opinion of inaccurate and sensationalised media campaigning.
However the effects of smoking bans on the hospitality trade pale into insignificance when it is appreciated that misinformation or downright lies have resulted in social change being manipulated by legislation.
The power of misguided individuals at the head of global organisations and charities have knowingly and admittedly forced on society social change using false claims of health protection.
These false claims when examined in detail are fraudulent and the bodies involved are blatantly riddled with vested financial interests.
Now to cap it all we are being guided into gambling. This most evil of uncontrollable addictions which tears families apart with devastating consequences has been sanctioned by government purely because it will feed the treasury.
No clearer evidence could be visible that we are being governed by dangerous , sanctimonious, dishonest and probably corrupt imbeciles.

Big Pubcos in Tourist areas may not feel the pinch, but wetled pubs outside the tourist ares surely will.
I have not been to one of my locals since they went non-smoking before the ban. Which should be up to the landlord or landlady to make this choice.
Not goverments forcing it upon them with no mention of compensation should they go under.
Non- smoking pubs, or ventilation should have been the way forward, there are NOT that many Anti smokers to fill the pubs, clubs ect.
A blanket ban was NOT wanted by the majority
If you think this ban is wrong and you would like a voice,
Please go to http://www.freedom2choose.co.uk/
The new sister site to http://www.thebigdebate.org/
Online petition, download petitions,
Debates, links so you can make your own judgment,
WE NEED TO FIGHT THIS TOGETHER
The media is more than a little biased.
Please join us, tolerant non-smokers and smokers welcome,
If you would like to make a voluntary contribution
Towards a judicial review that would be most welcome too

Also if you agree with this please sign it
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/smokers-united/

The air may be smoke free, but in the light of Phil Button's post above, it is still rank – now it is not unethical to shove the vulnerable outside when not twelve months ago we would have been warning them about the risks of hypothermia. From this the Treasury still gets its duties from and sales tax from rising tobacco sales, excise from drink (selling like hot cakes in the offlicences) and now sales tax from the smoking cessation market – and claims that this is all about health. Believe if you will.

In addition to Mandy's comments, if you are fed up with the smoking ban, fed up with small-minded politicians micro-managing every aspect of your life (supposely for your own good), then make sure Labour are kicked out at the May Elections in Scotland.

A healthy lifestyle is not acheved through state bullying, cohersion or out and out lies about the effects of passive smoking. Vote wisely.

That phrase 'smoke-free' really jars with me.

Better Free Than Smoke Free.

Labours philosophy, open the pubs 24 hours a day, drink yourself to death, gamble your shirt away in casinos and end up in the gutter, but dont dont have a smoke it is dangerous to your health. Ah and lets not forget if you are prepared to give a large donation to Labour you will be given a peerage. This must be the most two faced hypocritical control freak government that ever was. They are a disgrace and should come with a public health warning vote Labour lose your freedom. Since when did governments decide that private places where people are invited in become public property - they are not!

#11 Eddie-don't get me wrong, I want to see the back of these scoundrels more than anyone, but who's there to vote for? The ban was passed with a unanimous vote, and it was an SNP member who came up with the blasted idea in the first place!

That said I totally agree with Eddie on the staffing issue. Whatever happened to individual responsibility? There are many occupational hazards: http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/insurance/insight/article...

Who exactly are you going to vote FOR if you are going to vote AGAINST the smoking ban in May? The only party to oppose the ban was the Tories. So anyone promoting an independence-oriented party on the back of this is a hypocrite - the SNP, SSP and Greens all supported the smoking ban.

It is lazy politics to say "Labour out" over something you disagree with. You have to say who you want IN, and why. You simply can't square the circle of support for the SNP on the back of opposition to the smoking ban.

Our provincial ban started in 2004.
Businesses have reported losses of
up to 80%.The hardest hit seem to be rural hotels (pubs),though they're hardly the only ones recording losses.Even some fairly large city pub/restaurant chains are now in danger of closing. There have been quite a few closures.The main reason that keep many of the survivors going is that the smoking ban is in serious legal difficulty.They
hope to last until the smoking ban is over turned.They also know that the value of their property is alot less than what they paid for it.Why would anyone buy a bankrupt business that had a hard time attracting flies?

Meanwhile,the places that allow smoking are thriving.At least one of these was even turning away customers.Here native lands are exempt from the smoking ban.Also booze cans (illegal bars) are doing very well.Obviously they do not follow any laws that they don't like.
As has been noted,off sales have also increased as people either just have house parties,go home or anywhere there isn't a smoking ban.

An exerpt from an editorial from our main daily newspaper;
"The NDP government is in a bind because the law was imposed to appease a noisy anti-smoking lobby, not to protect health."

By the way,the politician that originally proposed the provincial smoking ban has been ousted.This was also the fate of the mayor that installed the city smoking ban.

Remember the words of Sir Richard Doll,the man credited with proving the causal link between active smoking and lung cancer."The effect of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me."(2001)

Yes Lordsid, not just a noisy, bullying, lying, exaggeration group of Antis, they fooled everyone into believing how well all the bans were doing in other Countries.
No matter, they are responsible for sending the elderly, the disabled out in the freezing cold for smoking something that is still legal.
No matter, that they remove foster children with their exaggerated claims of passive smoking.
No matter, they have created intolerance and hatred, in the USA, which is spilling over here.
No matter, in some States you cannot smoke in your own home, or garden, if your neighbor gets a whiff of it.
No matter, the Media is very biased.
No matter, it is only another freedom being taken away!