Proceeding contribution from Lord Skidelsky (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 20 April 2006. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Health Bill.
Health Bill
There is a system at airports whereby smoking rooms are set aside. They are public buildings; that would not be possible any longer under the Bill. Is it being alleged that all the people outside those smoking areas are subject to such damage—or, indeed, any damage at all—as to be a serious health hazard? I deny it. I think it is verging on the fanatical in view of the actual risk, as statistically established, to argue that if you have adequate spaces for smokers which are set apart from non-smokers, as in the example I have just given, you would be causing health risks. I think it verges on the fanatical—that is my opinion.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 680 c591-2GC
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Clubs Business Employment Housing Health Human rights Health hazards Exemptions Food Licensed premises Public places Public opinion Public houses Passive smoking Ventilation Tobacco Working conditions Smoking Vehicles
- Legislation
- Health Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-04-15 10:42:11 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316189
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316189
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316189