Wasting police time....

  realist 21:22 07 Feb 08

Is this an Orwellian vision of a future Britain as might have been met with total disbelief in the fifties?

Two police officers accompany a local council official on visits to dozens of pubs in a Kent town to check if anyone is smoking on licensed premises. No-one is caught until the last pub where the landlord is discovered having a quiet smoke behind the bar. He, the landlord, now faces a fine of up to £2,500.

Ye gods.

  lisa02 21:27 07 Feb 08

£2,500 not a wasted day then...

  Legolas 21:30 07 Feb 08

Meanwhile the local neds are drinking, fighting, swearing and generally making everyones life a misery, but they are not smoking in a prohibited area so thats all right then ;)

  wiz-king 21:32 07 Feb 08

I cant blame the police for this one, the anti-smoking law is not yet in the psyche of the people of this island and the council official may have thought that he/she was in danger when trying to uphold the law and do their job. As for the landlord he knows the law, there has been enough pub-licity.
So - no not at least Orwellian.

  newman35 21:34 07 Feb 08

To be fair, the landlord , of all people, should have been aware of the law. The fine is "up to" £2500 - might only be a caution.

  ashdav 22:28 07 Feb 08

Leave now whilst there's still time !

  Bapou 22:33 07 Feb 08

Even before the total ban smoking behind the bar of any pub was taboo. Maybe not by any Government, more rules of employment or a health hazard when serving.

The landlord deserves his punishment.

  Forum Editor 22:34 07 Feb 08

is all I can say.

Smoking behind the bar of a pub has been a public health offence for over 40 years, long before the recent law against smoking, and the landlord deserved to be fined.

  Totally-braindead 22:35 07 Feb 08

The fine is one thing but the ultimate cost for a landlord is refusal of a licence when it comes up for renewal. I can't see them doing this but it could happen if they decided to make an example of him.

I'm afraid the landlord must be a bit of an idiot to think he could keep smoking and no one would catch him at it eventually.

And correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't smoking behind the bar not allowed even before the ban came into place?

  Totally-braindead 22:35 07 Feb 08

Ah the FE answered my query before I had even posted it.

  WhiteTruckMan 00:38 08 Feb 08

who just simply cannot resist a quick smoke, no matter what the consequences. Thats why airplane toilets have smoke detectors. And also why I was asked, on visits to oil and chemical refineries when I used to drive tankers, I had to hand in not only all sources of ignition, but any smoking materials as well. And why a council official and two police officers have to be paid for to carry out these checks.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Sony Xperia XZ Premium review: Hands-on with the new 4K HDR phone with Motion Eye camera and Snapdr5…

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

Best laptop for design and art 2017: we test Apple, Dell, HP, Lenovo and Microsoft's best models…

CarPlay tips & troubleshooting guide: CarPlay tips & troubleshooting guide: Get the most from…