---

Smoke-free (Penalties and Discounted Amounts) Regulations 2007

I, too, thank the noble Baroness, Lady Royall of Blaisdon, for explaining the orders, although she will not expect me, a libertarian and a sceptic about scientific claims that are unsupported by empirical evidence, to be enthusiastic about them. I shall start off on a slightly carping note: the phrase ““smoke-free”” is used frequently throughout the regulations, but they really mean ““tobacco smoke-free”” and ““herbal cigarette smoke-free””, herbal cigarettes containing no tobacco. There is no freedom from the smoke from bonfires, which can be extremely noxious, with people burning plastics and all sorts of dangerous things. Nor is there any freedom from traffic pollution or industrial pollution. The Minister will remember that no less a person than the Deputy Prime Minister told the House of Commons not long ago that 40,000 people a year died from traffic pollution and industrial pollution, a figure vastly in excess of the most extreme number of people who were said to have died from passive smoking. I shall go through the orders in turn. First, I will deal with the penalties. I find the fine of £1,000, albeit with the option of a fixed penalty, in relation to the display of ““No smoking”” signs rather alarming. How widespread do the ““No smoking”” signs have to be? I read in the paper—yesterday, I think, or perhaps today—that clergymen in Wales were being told that they had to put up ““No smoking”” signs in churches. That is extraordinary, although it does not apply to England. I have never—