A Warm Welcome - Come in from the cold wind and rain...

..... Freedom for Private Smoking Rooms .....

Smoking for relaxation

The Sheer Pleasure of Smoking.....

"Yet, Freedom, yet thy banner torn but flying,
Streams like a thunder-storm against the wind."
- Byron

How did Britain end up with this scientifically unjustified,
unfair and socially divisive smoking ban?

How did the Anti-Smoking Crusade gain such strength?

Understand why this smoking ban is nothing to do with health.

(If you doubt this - take a Reality Check).

A fair and just solution exists which will satisfy both smokers and non-smokers.

Separate, properly ventilated private smoking rooms, with appropriate air quality standards, would protect employees from any supposed harm associated with second hand smoke.

Non-smoking rooms, or even whole non-smoking venues, would continue to exist separately, so satisfying those who dislike the smell of smoke, and allowing those, who wish to, to lead a smoke free life.

What could be more fair?

Why would any reasonable person want to prevent this?

Let's look at why the smoking ban is unjustified, unfair,
and basically, just plain vindictive


  1. Supposedly to protect the long-term health of non-smokers

  2. Force a reduction in smoking (and make it less appealing to the young) by making social smoking as difficult and uncomfortable as possible

  3. Appease those who don't like the smell of tobacco smoke


  1. Protecting the long-term health of non-smokers

    It has made no difference to the long term health of non-smokers, since despite all the rhetoric on the subject, the allegation that intermittent exposure to second hand smoke harms long term health is scientifically unjustified.

  2. Forcing a reduction in smoking and making it less appealing to the young

    Here it has failed on both counts:-

    i) In their report Statistics on Smoking 2011, the NHS admit that there was no overall reduction in reported smoking after the ban of 2007.(There was in fact a slight increase which has since levelled off).
    The Telegraph, in discussing financial investments (so no pussy-footing about here then!), also reported that cigarette consumption in Britain and France went up in 2008 by 1% and 3% respectively.
    Added to that there is an increasing and poorly quantified "black market" in imported cigarettes - after the ban many smokers now go out of their way to get cigarettes from outside Britain so as not to give any tax to a government which broke its election pledge and persecutes them.
    With the acceptance by Cancer Research UK that "recent research suggests self-reported cigarette smoking rates may underestimate true tobacco smoking prevalence by 2.8% in England" it becomes clear that the ban has failed to achieve this major objective.

    ii) Children are now more exposed to the social smoking culture in the street and at home.
    If the intention was to shield children from the culture and camaraderie of smoking, surely it would have been better for smokers to be allowed to smoke indoors in properly ventilated smoking rooms rather than being forced outside or back home?

  1. Appeasing those who don't like the smell of tobacco smoke

    Here it has been entirely successful.

    But at what cost to the social lives and businesses of many others?
    Drinking and smoking together is known to be particularly pleasurable, and has been practised for generations. It is part of our collective culture and for many supports social cohesion.

    By September 2011 over 8500 pubs had closed down. They continue to close at a rate of about 20-25 per week! The traditional British local pub (we're not talking about the "plastic eat-easies" here) has always been an important part of the social life of this once great country. Once closed, the vast bulk will never re-open.

    It is sad to see and hear the devastation this unnecessary and unfair legislation has caused by effectively dismantling part of our social heritage.

    The impact on many smokers' social lives (and those of family and friends), particularly the most vulnerable, has been devastating.

So that is what the Anti-Smoking Crusade has managed to achieve so far...

and all on misinformation and political manipulation...

Read the Reality Check below if you don't yet believe it...

A Reality Check!

* Factors not considered
* Absolute risks - Putting risk into perspective
* The case against the anti-smoking lobby
* Scientific integrity - where has it gone?
* Into deeper and deeper water for the anti-smoking crusade
* Understanding why people smoke
* Serious impact of ban on smokers lives
* How did anti-smoking crusade gain such strength?
* Health effects of Passive Smoking - a detailed evaluation of the facts


  1. The case for the ban protecting non-smokers from lung cancer and heart disease has been shown to be scientifically unjustified.
  2. Prior to the ban, when non-smoking areas were almost universal and smoking in public buildings and the workplace was a thing of the past, non-smokers, who wished to, could already lead a virtually smoke free life.
    Separate smoking rooms would have made that absolute.
  3. Proper ventilation and an air quality standard would readily protect the long term health of non-smoking employees working in smoking areas.
  4. The ban has :-
  • damaged smokers personal and social lives and those of their families and friends - especially for the most vulnerable of smokers
  • increased the visibility to children of smoking in pubs/cafes, on streets and in the home
  • increased smoking and drinking in the home
  • all but destroyed our traditional pub culture and resulted in closure of pubs, restaurants, cafes and other social venues
  • increased unemployment with all its associated misery and consequential government expenditure.
  • successfully appeased anti-smokers
Legalising separate ventilated smoking rooms would substantially resolve the above issues, while leaving non-smokers unaffected and able to lead an essentially smoke free life.



Spread the word....

E-mail this page to a friend...

(Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source)


Apologies to bona fide smoking supporters

I have provided an e-mail link here for many many years, and not received one email on the inaccuracy of what is argued above..... although I have received many of support.

However, there are many on the anti-smoking side who do their best to prevent people reading the truth and attempt to pull down this website.

So, after many years of hassle I have unfortunately decided to block this email link.

I hope this will not prevent smoking supporters from passing on this site to their colleagues and in particular their adversaries - we need as many anti-smokers as possible to realise the extent of the lies and propaganda being disseminated by the anti-smoking authorities.

As I've said many times to the smoking proponents - it's pretty pointless just "Preaching to the converted".

September 2017

- Please E-Mail any comments - If I have mis-interpreted any of the information shown on these pages, please e-mail the evidence and I will put it right

straight coloured line
Site design by IPCSmokefree; ** Page last updated Mar2013 **