The political and administrative muddle surrounding the introduction of a ban on smoking in the workplace has reached the level of farce. The Minister for Health, Mr Martin, promised a ban on smoking from the beginning of January and introduced the necessary legislation in a fanfare of publicity.
But, in the face of resistance from the hospitality sector, concessions were made. The start-by date began to slip. In the latest development, last week, Mr Martin revoked his own regulations which would have brought the smoking dispensation into effect today.
The order of revocation will rescind the Tobacco Smoking (Prohibition) Regulations of 2003, details of which were published last October. They proposed a ban on smoking in all workplaces, including pubs, restaurants and hotels. But a series of amendments were then introduced by the Minister, in November, exempting hotel bedrooms, B&Bs, nursing homes, hospices, psychiatric hospitals and prisons from the ban. The changes were notified to the EU Commission, as required, and member-states were allowed a three-month period in which objections could be made. The final deadline is February 16th and Mr Martin is then expected to announce a new date - possibly in March - for initiating the smoking ban.
Two years ago, the Minister published regulations banning the advertising of tobacco products and he introduced various measures controlling their sale. They were immediately challenged by the tobacco industry and were struck down by the High Court. This time, publicans and the hospitality sector are threatening to seek a judicial review of the proposed ban. Any such legal challenge could delay the introduction of the ban into the summer months.
There are many backbenchers within Fianna Fáil who are quietly enjoying Mr Martin's difficulties. They supported the publicans in opposing the ban. And they were annoyed by the Minister's unwillingness to accept amendments that would have allowed for smoking in certain parts of licensed premises. Time, however, and the publication of a succession of medical reports on the lethal impact passive smoking can have on human health, has altered public perceptions. The Minister is now supported by 60 per cent of the public for his approach.
By failing to take legislative action, the Government would have become vulnerable to claims for compensation from the victims of passive smoking. But the muddle and ineptitude displayed in protecting public health and effecting popular change is deeply worrying. In such circumstances, what hope is there for contentious medical and hospital reforms?