Society will not be changed by law

Following the discussion about the new non-smoking regulations in bars and restaurants I did my own research on the internet. I discovered, that the EPA/600/6-90/006F (1993) analysis, which is mentioned so often by the non-smoking lobby, was declared null and void by the US Judge Osteen in 1998. The reason was the way the EPA "cherry picked" the data. Also for changing the standard confidence level from 95 per cent to 90 per cent in the process of the analysis, to reach the figures of 3,000 second hand smoking related deaths a year, which they pre-announced before the analysis was completed.

The appeals court ruling in 2002 focused only on the issue whether the lower federal court had jurisdiction to review EPA actions in this matter and found that it did not. On the issue whether the analysis is correct it did not rule: "We do not decide the other questions raised in this case".

Did the anti-smoking league know this? If yes, why still use this study to justify drastic steps. Also, when people mention how many children suffer from asthma in Malta, I wonder how these children became sufferers. Did they hang around in bars and restaurants with their parents?

Please stick to the topic. Since a lot of people stopped smoking and smoking bans where introduced in a lot of public areas already, do statistics show that the health of non-smokers has improved? If yes, please also show us the figures. If not, then I conclude that the danger is somewhere else and not in the bars and restaurants.

Has anybody asked the employees and guests of bars and restaurants whether they wanted to be "protected" by the government? Why did The Netherlands not put in force their loudly announced non-smoking policy which should have started this January? Why did Ireland postpone their non-smoking policy again?

All these are mostly not mentioned in a single report or letter of the non-smoking lobby because it does not fit their concept. Hiding or not mentioning information is also a way of misleading people. If there is such a great demand for non-smoking bars and restaurants, let the owners decide which customers they want to attract.

I can understand that smoke annoys some non-smokers because some are more sensitive than others. But there are also a lot of non-smokers who do not have a problem with this. I just read that Mount Carmel will be exempted from the ban! But measures will be taken to protect employees. It would be interesting to know how. I hope that the non-smoking patients will be protected as well.

Since this is all in the name of health, please protect everybody and not just staff. While drafting my letter, events overtook me, as the government decided to postpone the smoking ban in the case of pubs and restaurants. Whether this is enough to help the business to adapt to the new regulations will show in the future. Especially since construction works have first to be approved before being carried out.

The decision of the health minister to postpone the ban was not giving in to the minority, it was made to give the industry a chance to come in line with the new law and also to amend maybe the law, where necessary. The minister has a great chance to observe the situation in Ireland. Maybe we can learn something from their experience before making the same mistakes of pre-announcing and then postponing.

What I also would like to know from non-smokers is whether they really want a Malta where smoking is forbidden in all pubs, band clubs, during wedding receptions etc. Should we get to a stage whereby all people who visit Malta can only smoke outside? I assume even in hotel rooms it will be forbidden because the chamber maids have to enter the rooms. Eighty per cent of the Maltese population are non-smokers; this does not mean automatically that 80 per cent agree with the new law. May I suggest that everybody who has an interest in this topic should do research on the internet to find out for themselves what is going on in other states and continents.

Then they will be able to judge for themselves whether Malta needs such a drastic non-smoking policy. In the US, at least, some people have the chance to cross the "border" and go to a "smoking" area or even get the ban waived for their bar. Please bear in mind that twice the population of Malta is coming for a holiday here, so we should also know what they think about this new law. We are here on an island! "Smokers", whether Maltese or tourists, cannot go anywhere. Was a survey among tourists held regarding this new law? And if yes when was this held? From where can the results be obtained in full, not only partly? I would appreciate to get some answers. And if this exercise was not held, I will not comment! I will leave this to the people who earn their livelihood from the tourists.

It is not only the restaurants and bars, which will suffer if these tourists go somewhere else to relax. All the tourist related industries, such as taxi drivers, souvenir shops, hotels, etc. will feel the drop. Or do you believe that Malta will be invaded by non-smokers?

If yes, than go ahead without further delay. If not, then please think twice and assess the impact this will have on the whole country. Yesterday not a single seat was reserved for non-smokers in a bar but today it will be all seats non-smoking. Be realistic, it is simply impossible to change lifestyles and society by merely passing a law!