More Top Notch Laws From NuLabour

[Fungus]

Someone probably pointed out to them that the "working classes" and "benefit-claiming classes" are more likely to smoke (source: former health minister John Reid) and they were more likely to be NewLie voters, so they wanted to minimise the potential vote damage. I would interpret this legislation as: bingo halls and working mens clubs are exempt.

Typical New Lier. Neither or nor down, but stuck at the end of a bungee cable, bobbing up and down for all eternity.

Fungus

[Mordac]

I thought the no-smoking act applied to premises with "cooked or prepared" food, so that it didn't include crisps, peanuts and, up north, mountains of pork scratchings.

It's a stupid distinction anyway. If the government believes that staff are in danger from smokey diseases, which they do because it is the very reason for the ban, do they therefore believe that not serving food makes staff immune? Absolutely stupid, and absolutely typical of this lot. They cannot think their way out of a paper bag. They couldn't draft a teletubbies script properly, let alone national legislation.

Someone probably pointed out to them that the "working classes" and "benefit-claiming classes" are more likely to smoke (source: former health minister John Reid) and they were more likely to be NewLie voters, so they wanted to minimise the potential vote damage. I would interpret this legislation as: bingo halls and working mens clubs are exempt.

[Scaroth of the Jagaroth]

I thought the no-smoking act applied to premises with "cooked or prepared" food, so that it didn't include crisps, peanuts and, up north, mountains of pork scratchings.

It's a stupid distinction anyway. If the government believes that staff are in danger from smokey diseases, which they do because it is the very reason for the ban, do they therefore believe that not serving food makes staff immune? Absolutely stupid, and absolutely typical of this lot. They cannot think their way out of a paper bag. They couldn't draft a teletubbies script properly, let alone national legislation.

Totally agree, Stackers. You either ban smoking in all workplaces or not at all. Anyways, England will some come into line when smoking in public places is banned in Jockland, Taffland and Paddyland.

[stackpole]

Don't you just love the law of unintended consequences?

As we all know, there are moves afoot to ban smoking in licensed premises with the exception of those that sell food. Well, the good/bad news (depending on your smoking stance) is that the legislation as proposed will not make a blind bit of difference. Why, I hear you ask? Well, according to the Food Safety Act 1990 (c.16), drink is defined as "food"...



Or maybe it isn't an unintended conquence at all?

I thought the no-smoking act applied to premises with "cooked or prepared" food, so that it didn't include crisps, peanuts and, up north, mountains of pork scratchings.

It's a stupid distinction anyway. If the government believes that staff are in danger from smokey diseases, which they do because it is the very reason for the ban, do they therefore believe that not serving food makes staff immune? Absolutely stupid, and absolutely typical of this lot. They cannot think their way out of a paper bag. They couldn't draft a teletubbies script properly, let alone national legislation.

[Scaroth of the Jagaroth]

Don't you just love the law of unintended consequences?

As we all know, there are moves afoot to ban smoking in licensed premises with the exception of those that sell food. Well, the good/bad news (depending on your smoking stance) is that the legislation as proposed will not make a blind bit of difference. Why, I hear you ask? Well, according to the Food Safety Act 1990 (c.16), drink is defined as "food"...

Food Safety Act 1990 (c. 16)

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

Part I

PRELIMINARY

Meaning of "food" and other basic expressions.

1.—(1) "Food" includes—

(a) drink;

(b) articles and substances of no nutritional value which are used for human consumption;

(c) chewing gum and other products of a like nature and use; and

(d) articles and substances used as ingredients in the preparation of food or anything falling within this subsection.

Or maybe it isn't an unintended conquence at all?