Google analytics

Tuesday, 8 February 2011

Why are publicans supposed to subsidise the law?

Just had an E mail from Freedom to Choose and one thing that caught my eye was.


Ohio; USA:  Keith and Pam Parker are among a group of bar-owners who, since August last year, have been invoicing their Health Department for the cost of policing the ban.
Pam admits she doesn't expect the Health Dept to cough up but explains:

"If they want to put in writing that it's THEIR job, not ours, then our reply will be to have one of their inspectors report to work at our tavern every day at noon.  They can't have it both ways."

So far there has been NO response from the authorities - so a 10% penalty has been added to the outstanding bill.
Ohio has spent $4m dollars enforcing the ban, and penalised some 939  businesses, the vast majority of which are family-run establishments and private clubs.  The bar-owners are seeking an exemption for licensed bars, which traditionally cater to smokers and are, in any case, strictly off-limits to under-21s.

It might be an idea if pubs over here got together and billed their local authority for having the affront for putting the onus on them to police this odious, divisive, fascist law.

If nothing else it would tie up your local smoking enforcement department so that they would spend more time in rebutting the claims, than actually being able to spy on pubs, bars, and social clubs, etc.


  1. I agree .. a fabulous idea & as you say, even if it goes nowhere it will tie them in knots for months, possibly years ..

    I also love the notion that as (in this case) the local Health Dept has failed to respond an additional financial penalty has been added to the bill .. just as they would do to anyone else ..

    They can dish it out well enough .. but they can't abide it when they get some back ..

  2. Agreed - what a brilliant idea. I dont expect them to win but the more pain they can cause, the better.


Say what you like. I try to reply. Comments are not moderated. The author of this blog is not liable for any defamatory or illegal comments.