Ah Bollocks

[liadnan]

And there was I thinking I'd finally get around to joining Soho House, or The Academy or something.

Since the point of which most is being made (rightly, given it's the strongest) is the benefit to employees, it's interesting to note that the Bill as it currently stands (link will expire when it moves on) deals only with the creation of a number of criminal offences punishable by fines. There is no explicit reference to civil liability whatsoever and no clear indication that it will make any difference to the ability of any employee or customer to sue licensees for breach of any duty to them.

Won't apply in the Palace of Westminster I suspect, and if members do smoke there the issue is not justiciable by any court short of Parliament: see R. v. Sir R.F. Graham-Campbell & Ors ex. p. Herbert [1935] 1 KB 594 (Div. Ct) and A.P Herbert's own observations on the point in Uncommon Law. Meanwhile the Treasury probably continues to have a certain awareness of the difference between £1.5Bn ("Economics of Smoking Cessation" BMJ 2004, 1st page of article (pdf)) and £8.1Bn (Treasury report on the last financial year, table 3.3: forecast and "outturn" of receipts for 2004-5, 11th item under HMRC (pdf)).