No general ban on smoking in bars and restaurants

Ok, we've had this discussion about banning smoking in public and tobacco ads. Suddenly, the German government has about-faced and ditched its joint law proposal based on the government's health experts' recommendations in favor of a multi-party proposal identical to a law suggested by the tobacco industry.

Norbert Röttgen, managing secretary of the CDU faction in the German parliament, said that the new proposal will consider the dangers of passive smoking while "not overdoing the correct consideration of the limits to non-smoker protection". Clear text: A general ban on smoking in restaurants, pubs and bars is not in the cards. Smoking is only to be banned in restaurants larger than 75 m2, and even these restaurants have the option of creating separate smoking rooms. This position reflects exactly the "suggestions" made by the Association of Cigarette Industry (Verband der Cigarettenindustrie, VdC).

Bärbel Höhn, vice-secretary of the Green Party, accused the CDU/CSU and the SPD of giving in to the tobacco industry under total disregard of public health. The health experts' proposal had received support from only 110 of the 222 SPD MPs, 30 Leftist and 4 CDU/CSU. The CDU/CSU are considering a proposal which contains a general smoking ban in all restaurants but permits smoking in pubs, bars and beer tents. This proposal would receive support from the anti-smoking MPs in the SPD. The two proposals are to be discussed today between the parties' managing secretaries and the government's health experts.

So the government's wishy-washy attitude once again prevails while the tobacco industry sits back on its profits, basking in the knowledge that the government needs the taxes imposed on cigarettes and therefore cannot afford a general ban of smoking in public.

Your arguments have been exchanged in the linked thread. Let's discuss the government's actions in this one.

Nice one.

Eeejits. Even Italy, a country I associate even more with smoking then Germany, has managed to pass no-smoking laws. What a sitting on the fence position to take.

Hurrah, thankfully some governments have some sense and haven't caved to the over the top bans that others have

Here, have a Lucky...

Well im a non smoker, but I am happy with this, as I do wish to one day see cannabis legalized, and well, I would just be a hypocrite if I wanted to crack down on cigarettes. At least this is a step towards people taking responsibility for their own actions, rather than the nanny state, and I am always for that. Property owners can choose whether to make their premises smoking or non-smoking, or a mix of the two, and people can always choose to go to places or not. Outright bans only take that choice away.

All I would like to see is the same that they have in Austria. Any restaurant with more than one room would have to designate one of those rooms as non-smoking.

That makes sense...outright banning like in so many other cuntries have gone far too far.

Keep 'em legal, just tax 'em more. Smokers contribute a shit load of cash to the economy in the UK and I for one don't want to pay any more than 40% income tax. PLUS all those early deaths save on pension payments.

If it was really just about the money, then why has it been passed it other countries such as Italy and Ireland? I think it's got more to do with the German government not being able to pass anything these days. With neither major parties having a clear majority, neither is prepared to take the risk of pushing through a potentially unpopular law. Looks pretty rosy for Germany: no consensus on the "Gesundheitsreform" and none on smoking. Going to be a lot of sick people with no medical care!

They are not about banning it, they are about banning it in public places where it hurts non-smokers health. You wouldn't be a hypocrite for supporting the ban, unless of course you want to be able to smoke weed in a restaurant in which case you've got a long fight on your hands.

I wanna know why they are banning it in restaurants bigger than 75m2, surely smoking effects people more in the smaller places?

Dear representatives,

How much did you receive in bribes from the tobacco companies and their pseudo-independent subsidiary and beneficiary companies? Please don't act surprised or offended at this question; it's the only possible reason such legislation wasn't passed. Not only did England and Ireland pass anti-smoking legislation, even Italy did.

You know smoking is harmful. You continue to kowtow to the tobacco companies as is clearly evidenced even on the warning labels on cigarette packs. Where every other European nation from Ireland to Iceland requires the equivalent of the clear statement, "Smoking kills", you saw fit to allow "Smoking can kill", thus mitigating the statement.

The facts were laid bare after the American trials of cigarette manufacturers. All of their research, all of their internal memos, all of their propaganda, all of their plans, everything was made public and is available through not only the US Centers for Disease Control but also through the International Tobacco Evidence Network as well as other major sources.

You are clearly in the pockets of the tobacco lobbyists. A ban on smoking in restaurants under 75m² and a requirement that any restaurant 75m² and above provide a well-ventilated non-smoking area would've actually provided a benefit to the people. Thze current provisions do nothing. Removal of cigarette vending machines from public streets -- even if allowing such machines in places of business -- would seriously reduce the availability of cigarettes to those under 18 years of age. You have chosen not to do so despite knowing that 90% of all who smoke begin prior to the age of 18.

Who paid you, how much, and does your conscience bother you even a little bit?

Sincerely,
BD

woof.

For the record - legal smoking age in Germany is 16, see Protection of Young Persons Act, page 5, §10

all I can say is 'Damn' (walks away shaking head)

was hoping for some positive movement, but well, this is Germany afterall.

As kza says, it just the state nannying in cases like the UK & Ireland. Let the market decide

I know about the Jugendschutzgesetz. It needs changing. Alcohol isn't nearly as addictive as tobacco. My comment above concerning age of addiction comes directly from the tobacco companies. They need kids to start before they reach 18. Once they hit 18 there's only a 5% chance that they'll start and continue smoking.

woof.

The "nannying state" theory is a load of bollocks. If everyone were left to their own devices, we'd have chaos. Why do we illegalise child pornography? Why don't we just let the kids decide for themselves? Or even the adults for that matter who sponsor it and keep it going? Why are there so many people who smoke when they know it will kill them? Surely, they still need a nanny?

The debate though here is why the German government is not introducing an anti-smoking bill. It probably is due to bribery like everything else. But then one has to ask oneself why the tobacco industry was incapable of bribing the Italian government? Far more likelihood there if you ask me! I personally believe the German government just can't pass anything these days. All Merkel does is try and keep them together. The only law they'll probably pass is to increase the VAT. But then again, the Germans are good at that!

What exactly is the definition of a "restaurant"? The definition between a pub and a restaurant isn't as clear-cut in Germany as it is in the UK. If they are saying that any establishment serving food is a restaurant, then this sounds like an enormous step forward, at least by German standards. Most pubs serve food, so I would just have to avoid small pubs, which is certainly something I can live with.

If, on the other hand, there is some poncy cop-out clause (for example, a restaurant is defined as an establishment that has table cloths, waiters with bow ties, and which uses French words on the menu), then this is indeed further proof that the German government is in the hands of the tobacco industry. Whether pro- or anti-smoking, I think everyone can agree that the tobacco industry is on a similar Scum Level as weapons manufacturers.

As BD pointed out, action needs to be taken to reduce smoking amongst teenagers. Providing non-smoking areas in the corner of some pubs will do nothing to reduce Germany's ridiculously high smoking rate. It is patently ludicrous that an age-restricted product is available for sale from vending machines on every street corner.

Deutsche Welle: Government Accused of Bowing to Tobacco Lobby

The tobacco lobby should has a voice like any other industry lobby. Whether they are successful in a democracy should depend on the public opinion and unless I'm mistaken there is not a majority of people in favor of a complete ban. So, it's successful democracy functioning as intended.

Unlike with the tax increase that was passed against the will of the vast majority of people while they were distracted with the World Cup, this was announced and debated in advance.

Just because you disagree with the outcome does not mean that bribery was the cause. Maybe, for once, the representatives are actually doing what people want.

Agreed , tax the shit out of alcohol as well , increase it to the level required to fund entire health service. Also kill old people as they're not much use. Amen. Ok ok , let old people live but they have to go to work and not die alone and miserable.

The problem with cigarettes is that they damage other people in the vicinity's health as well. Lately I've come to view that on average the same could be said for alochol (domestic bs, drunken fighting). As for heroin users , well those fuckers should be on hard labour with all the crime they cause.

Increasing taxes will just mean more smokers/smugglers crossing borders to buy cigarettes. France had the same idea, once adding 20% to the price of ciggies, but there was no noticeable difference in smoke-filled cafés.

Talking of France, they are curently in the process of trying to pass a law as of January 2007 banning smoking in all public places, except bar-tabacs, casinos and discos. If France does it you can only hope Germany will follow...

http://tinyurl.com/flxlm

@ pike
Sure more peeps will break the law - but that shouldn't stop the govt doing the right thing - so long as tax revenue is increasing somewhere towards the damage that smoking is doing towards a population then it makes sense. Oh yeh , smugglers for hard labour 2.

The original wording is "Speiserestaurant". That would include e.g. your local Indian, providing his room is larger than 75m2, as well as any three star restaurant that you don't drop into for a casual drink.

My husband and I always request a non-smoking table, even though we no most restaurants don't have them. It lets the business know that this is something the customers want. Our favorite rest. now has a non-smoking section, and we would like to think our perpetual pestering had something to do with it.

As for "the majority didn't support this" and therefore this is Democracy in action. Might be true if we all lived in "pure" Democracies, but that is not the case. The Government has to balance what is the "right" thing to do over what the majority want at times. When we know that smoking kills people and drives up health care costs, that has to be part of the decision making.

I had to laugh that the greens are now for the ban. When they were part of the majority, they were not supporting this legislation at all. They wrote my husband back this wishy washy piece when he wrote supporting smoking bans 3 years ago, now they are the great proponents.

But people get locked up for domestic abuse and drunken fighting, because this is unacceptable behaviour. People do not get locked up for blowing smoke in other people's faces. As such, we need to ban smoking in public.

@ hutcho - I'll bet you dollars to donuts the vast vast majority of drunken misbehaviour does unreported or even when it is underpunished - as an example my brother was almost killed by a drunken driver who escaped without jail time.

Your input is greatly appreciated, but this is about the indecisive stance of the German government. Thank you.

Wish they'd ban smoking in beer tents. Or rather, I wish they'd ban me from smoking in beer tents.
Although the proposed ban is better than nothing, I like the idea of smoking rooms, particularly if it means more cigar rooms. A smoking lounge with big wing-backed chairs for whisky and conversation after a fine meal would be lovely, there are a few about but not nearly enough. A roaring fire in winter would be a fine addition. Hang on, I'll have to take up pipe smoking at this rate...

Can I assume you are joking here. Medical care of smoking related illnesses consumes far more tax dollars than generated by tobacco taxes.

Or, as my girlfriend (working in the medical field) says, "The problem is that the smokers aren't dying quickly enough."

Apparently the cancer numbers have dropped statistically since NY banned smoking at work/restuarants (sorry didn't save the article)

That is not true. The only figures I could find were from 2000 but this is the quote:


Being a smoker of course I don't want to ban smoking in restaurants etc. It comes into play in Wales in April 2007 so at that time I will use that as an opportunity to give up.

And so would lots of other people. There are no downsides to this legislation. Its time it happened here in Germany.

This is quite a coup for the tobacco industry. Where before there was an agreement to get 50% non-smoking sections in all restaurants (link), now there will be no non-smoking sections in the vast majority of restaurants and pubs (those under 75 sqmeter floor space). Brilliant. If this passes, then the EU will have more motivation to pass a general ban.

The magic word is choice. Even if weed gets legalized I wouldnt expect to be able to smoke anywhere I like as a right, but I would expect resturant and cafe owners to decide for themselves whether it should be allowed or not. Exactly the same as it should be for tobacco. Theres clearly a market for non-smoking places, or sections of places, and its better to allow places to cater for that as they see fit.

Hmm wonder what happens if Holland introduces a no smoking in public places policy too, how would that affect the coffee shops? Do these things specifically refer to tobacco? In which case all the baccy mixers would be out of luck, or is it smoking anything, in which case the cafes will basically have to rip their walls off and turn themselves into outdoor patio areas or something.

Its a stupid law. No matter which dried up plant we are talking about.

Here's a link specific to Germany:


That was based on 1996 figures.

I have no problem with people lighting up whatever friggen dried up plant they want. In their own home, where I do not have to participate if I don't want. That is the freedom of choice, I choose not to breathe tobacco smoke. So apparently, in Germany, I may not go outside of my own home to have this choice.

And how much tax do you think the government collects because of people smoking?

In germany it's all about lobby politics:
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/deutschland/artikel/91/87004/

Was CDU und CSU nicht sagen: Dieser Vorschlag stammt direkt aus den Federn der Tabaklobbyisten. Der Verband der Cigarettenindustrie (VdC) „empfiehlt“ in einem Positionspapier, das an ausgewählte Bundestagsabgeordnete geschickt wurde und sueddeutsche.de vorliegt, genau diese 75-Quadratmeter-Regelung.

I'm not disagreeing that smokers cost the health system money, I'm saying that compared to what is received in taxes from cigarettes, the costs to the health service are paid for and then some. Your link only showed the costs and not the income received.

Related, but slightly off-topic, question: Are Germans less politically active as a whole than Americans or Brits?

Are people here less upset about the lobbyists' involvement because they're ok with the outcome or because they just don't care?

Most are saying that you should have the choice. But the choice should be there for everyone, smokers and non-smokers. There should be smoking and non-smoking establishments. It seems to me that it's non-smokers who want to take away the freedom of choice altogether.

At the end of the day we all contribute to pollution etc it some shape or form. Do non-smokers ever think about their contribution and stop whatever it is because it's not fair on other people as you're not giving them the choice!

What is stupid about this decision, is that it isn't a decision - as Ulysses stresses.

This lack of decision, denies any recognition of the fact that smoking is harmful to all people. Why not, at a very least, require bars/restaurants to have air filtration systems? This would permit the smokers to continue their death march while alleviating those health nuts who protest against them. Everyone wins!

I was in Virginia a few weeks ago, home of the evil tobacco industry – smoking is still publically permitted there and doubts exist if it will ever be banned. But at least when you go out to a bar/club, you don’t come home smelling like smoke – they have air cleaners in most bars.

People claim that restaurants in Germany have non-smoking sections? Where? Maybe .01% of them do whereas in Boston as a kid they were already ubiquitous. German bars don’t even have working air filtration systems to alleviate potential health hazards to their patrons and as an attempt at mitigation against radical banning laws. In so doing, they are being complicit with non-smokers health.

Having spent a couple of days at the wiesn I have now developed a smokers cough! I hope it goes away soon! Can't see a smoking ban at the wiesn being at all enforcable though, mores the pity!

How on earth do you know it's a smokers cough? Couldn't it just be a cough?

Because I used to smoke, and know what it feels like.

I don't think so.
Here is the dictionary definition of Conservative:


I think that describes most germans regardless of actual political orientation. The other thing you have to realise is that on the scale of Freedom / Freiheit to Fairness / Gerechtigkeit, the germans stand firmly at the Gerechtigkeit pole. Any reform has to either not hurt at all, or hurt everybody equally.
Both of these factory have their positive and negative sides but I reckon it is a reason why by and large germans are (despite their jammern) a pretty content bunch, but it certainly leads to a stagnation of the political system.

I think I remember reading 14,4 billion, but I didn't find it on the net. (the search engine I was using rolled over on me).

All talk, no action. Smokers scream freedom of choice; some say let's have a balance. Is there either yet?