Jock's Place - Palace staff don't require protection from smoke... - Comments

comment

Samuel Coates — Thu, 16 Feb 2006 02:36:49 +0000

Jealous, Jock? ;)

comment

Jock Coats — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:45:57 +0000

In Portcullis House I presume? You'd have thought for the amount it added to the National Debt (and all those chimneys) they could have done proper smoke extraction.

I actually think it's not right to enforce no smoking in things like consulting rooms. What if you do have some old dear who's all nervous and wound up (I know, nicotine makes them worse, but they don't realise that). It's presumably quite a big ordeal for some coming down to see their MP.

comment

Useless Man — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:28:01 +0000

Our Useless offices have been smoke free from the beginning. Except when we're making toast.

Not so good with the toaster...

comment

Jock Coats — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:31:35 +0000

Oh - so market forces were good enough for them...why not for the rest of us?

I'll do a swap though...and gladly do without the stimulant effect of the nicotine if I can buy that old cocaine laced tonic wine at the bar:

Jock's Blog: Blair's coke crackdown cobblers

:)"

comment

Rob F — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:17:21 +0000

The palace is excluded from most (all?) laws like this, but it complies with them never the less - I'm sure they'll come in to line.

As it stands now you can only smoke in something like 3 out of the 1029843789428978349 bars on the estate anyway.

Palace staff don't require protection from smoke...

Jock — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 18:46:00 +0000

Apparently the Palace of Westminster is exempt from this draconian smoking ban.

Given that the staff already went on strike because they were being treated differently, and worse, than other public servants, I think this is appalling. If it is an argument about protecting workers' health why are they any less worthy of that protection?

Disgraceful. Abolish the lot of them, I say. We can do without Westminster.