smoking ban

[ralphchadkirk]

If there is a sign indicating that there is no smoking allowed, then it is a byelaw offence to smoke (or indeed to light anything!)

 

[IanPooleTrains]

Perhaps someone should say that to steam engines then :roll:

 

[Cherry_Picker]

There is a true story about a famous guitar player (I can't remember his name) who went around pubs and clubs to do his performances. He never smoked a cigarette in his life. But he died from smoking. Why? Because of the smoke he had inhaled in the pubs.

That would have been Roy Castle. Non smoker who died of lung cancer he got from other people's smoke. He played the trumpet, not the guitar but several generations of British people will know him best as the presenter of Record Breakers on Childrens BBC.

A lung cancer charity runs in his name to this day: http://www.roycastle.org/

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Perhaps someone should say that to steam engines then :roll:

Knew there would be a smarty-pants along to say that! The byelaw is quite clear though:

No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.

 

[IanPooleTrains]

Isn't there a class 47 named after him as well?

And by him I mean Roy Castle and not ralphchadkirk.

 

[sprinterguy]

Isn't there a class 47 named after him as well?

47786 "Roy Castle O.B.E." Named in it's RES days.

 

[Lincoln]

self enforcement is the best way,the authorities know the difficulties, it is only obvious continuous blatant non compliance that is not tolerated, the signs should be sufficient, just point to them, not worth an argument in my opinion.

Anyhow one station owned by Stena & worked by ATW is exempt from the smoking ban, Fishguard.

Fishguard isn't exempt as such, as the Railway Byelaws will apply at this station as indeed on any other area of railway property, such as Lincoln.

Smoking in itself on a station doesn't break common law at all, unless it is within an enclosed space such as a waiting room. It is smoking in an area where signs/notices forbid it that places someone in breach of railway byelaws. See section 3 "Conduct and Behaviour" of the byelaws.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/regs/railwaysbyelaws.pdf

Fishguard has no signs displaying no smoking, and so smoking tobacco on the station is fine. The same could be said of any other station, in that if the signs are removed then so is the offence. Except of course where it is illegal under common law.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

If I see somebody smoking at a station or on a train I tell them to put it out. If they want to get lung cancer and heart disease they can get it in their own space. The Government have clearly said that smoking is not to be carried out in public places as it seriously harms the health of the people around them. There is a true story about a famous guitar player (I can't remember his name) who went around pubs and clubs to do his performances. He never smoked a cigarette in his life. But he died from smoking. Why? Because of the smoke he had inhaled in the pubs.
You've got to credit both the previous Governments and the NHS, as I feel that they've done a great job in hammering home the message that smoking kills and that there are plenty of opportunities for people who want to quit.

Not forgetting Roy Castle.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All Merseyrail stations permit smoking so long as they are above ground, (bar Chester). (Where would the staff go?)

It is not against the Smoking Ban law to smoke at a railway station, just not in an enclosed shelter/building etc. It could be a byelaw offence though if there was a sign indicating it was not permitted.

Yes it is. Railway Bylaw 3.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Fishguard isn't except as such, as the Railway Byelaws will apply at this station as indeed on any other area of railway property, such as Lincoln.

Smoking in itself on a station doesn't break common law at all, unless it is within an enclosed space such as a waiting room. It is smoking in an area where signs/notices forbid it that places someone in breach of railway byelaws. See section 3 "Conduct and Behaviour" of the byelaws.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/regs/railwaysbyelaws.pdf

Fishguard has no signs displaying no smoking, and so smoking tobacco on the station is fine. The same could be said of any other station, in that if the signs are removed then so is the offence. Except of course where it is illegal under common law.

The offence, is not to display a sign, of at least 70mm diamiter.

 

[Lincoln]

The offence, is not to display a sign, of at least 70mm diamiter.

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean. If it is in reference to an enclosed space then the person responsible for the premises will be committing an offence by not displaying the sign at the entrance.

However the spirit of my original reply was in reference to an unenclosed area such as an open platform. The same could be said of a car park under the control of a railway operator, that if a no-smoking sign is displayed then it is unlawful under railway byelaws, the opposite being true if there was no sign present.

 

[Deerfold]

Unfortunately at Keighley there's rarely not people smoking. They had some signs up a year or so ago about having had a police crackdown and nothing else since. The ban seems to be far less well enforced up North (or do more people just break it?). Plenty of people who think "outside" means "near the door" especially if it's not sunny.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This explains it quite well:

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?storyCode=54248

Where, in that article, does it give the people in charge the same powers of arrest to enforce the law as a Police Officer.

This was the only legalistic point that I sought to convey and I gave examples of Police Community Support Officers and SIA trained security officers as NOT having the same powers IN LAW as the police.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean. If it is in reference to an enclosed space then the person responsible for the premises will be committing an offence by not displaying the sign at the entrance.

However the spirit of my original reply was in reference to an unenclosed area such as an open platform. The same could be said of a car park under the control of a railway operator, that if a no-smoking sign is displayed then it is unlawful under railway byelaws, the opposite being true if there was no sign present.

Sorry, but what do You not understand?

The law stands, whether there is a sign or not.

Ignorance of the Law, is No Defense.

 

[Mojo]

Sorry, but what do You not understand?

The law stands, whether there is a sign or not.

Ignorance of the Law, is No Defense.

This is incorrect in the case of railway platforms out in the open. Under railway byelaw 3, smoking is only prohibited if there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

This is incorrect in the case of railway platforms out in the open. Under railway byelaw 3, smoking is only prohibited if there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.

How can You have a law that only applies if You display a sign.

The Smoking ban is not a Civil Offense, like Wheel Clamping on an wrongly parked Vehicle.

The Smoking ban is a criminal Offense.

That's why it is a Criminal Offense, not to display a No Smoking Sign of 70mm or more.

There are very few no stabbing / mugging signs, but it's still Illegal.

 

[Mojo]

The Smoking ban is a criminal Offense.

That's why it is a Criminal Offense, not to display a No Smoking Sign of 70mm or more.

There are very few no stabbing / mugging signs, but it's still Illegal.

You are confusing a number of different issues here.

We are discussing the ban of smoking on railway stations (to avoid confusion I will just say English stations as I am not familiar with the laws in Scotland and Wales).

As mentioned by ralphchadkirk earlier, the byelaw specifically says:

No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.

The law on stabbings/murders does not only apply where a sign says so, so it's irrelevant!

It is against the law to smoke in a smoke-free place, regardless of a presence (or not) of a sign. It is a defence if a person did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that it was a smoke-free place. As you say it is the law to display a no-smoking sign in a smoke-free place.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

AJN, you are clearly misunderstanding this.

The Railway Byelaws make it a criminal offence to smoke on a platform IF a No Smoking sign is provided. If there is no No Smoking Sign on the platform then you can legally smoke.

The smoking ban is not a criminal offence. It is far more complex than saying public place, smoking, illegal. I suggest you read Sections 2 and 3 of the Health Act 2006.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

.... (Where would the staff go?).

Rail staff are expected to follow the same byelaws/laws that passengers are expected to follow.

.... Plenty of people who think "outside" means "near the door" especially if it's not sunny.

To my knowledge there is no law (or byelaw) specifically banning smoking outside an enclosed space near a doorway on the railway (unless there is a no smoking sign nearby.

....The law stands, whether there is a sign or not....

The law was set for enclosed and significantly enclosed spaces, the railway deemed that as many stations have open platforms with enclosed or significantly enclosed buildings/shelters on them, Railway byelaw 3 would be used to avoid any confusion. Railway byelaw 3 states there must be a sign.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

Rail staff are expected to follow the same byelaws/laws that passengers are expected to follow.



To my knowledge there is no law (or byelaw) specifically banning smoking outside an enclosed space near a doorway on the railway (unless there is a no smoking sign nearby.



The law was set for enclosed and significantly enclosed spaces, the railway deemed that as many stations have open platforms with enclosed or significantly enclosed buildings/shelters on them, Railway byelaw 3 would be used to avoid any confusion. Railway byelaw 3 states there must be a sign.

Yes, that's fine, what I meant to convey, is that whether or not there is a sign, it is Illegal to smoke.

As also the Offense is to NOT DISPLAY a sign.

You can't have either, just both.

The Law is for ALL Transport interchanges, this includes, harbors, and Bus Stations. Tram Stops et al.

Signs are a pleasantry. (Legal Term). In other words, the sign, or lack of, nether makes it Legal, or Illegal.

It just IS. The Law simply doesn't work that way. (Otherwise, what is to stop sombody just removing the signs?).

In Some Countries (Rep of Ireland for instance) It is an offense to smoke within 10ft of a place where smoking is banned. I think this is a good idea, as then, the vast majority of people, who are non-smokers, don't have to walk through the fugg.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

As also the Offense is to NOT DISPLAY a sign.

Not as clear cut as that. It is an offence not to display a sign in a smoke-free area, which has to be substantially or entirely enclosed or as laid down by the national authority. Railway platforms (generally NOT being substantially or entirely enclosed) are therefore NOT smoke-free areas so we must look to the byelaws which makes it an offence to smoke IF a no smoking sign is displayed.

The Law is for ALL Transport interchanges, this includes, harbors, and Bus Stations. Tram Stops et al.

Can you show me where it says that in the Health Act 2006 (the act that prohibited smoking in certain areas)?

Signs are a pleasantry. (Legal Term). In other words, the sign, or lack of, nether makes it Legal, or Illegal.

Yes it does. Read the Byelaws!!
By the way putting (Legal term) next to various words doesn't make your point any more valid. In any case 'pleasantry' isn't a legal term in any legal dictionary I can find.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There is certainly some confusion in this thread's posts, as ralphchadkirk has identified; but they seem to persist:

. . . . whether or not there is a sign, it is Illegal to smoke.

It would be very helpful if you would kindly clarify that interpretation by quoting any authorities..

It just IS. The Law simply doesn't work that way.

Again, could you please clarify that for us?
Thank you.

 

[moonrakerz]

There is NOTHING more sanctimonious than an ex-smoker - I am an ex-smoker !

BUT, I must confess to feeling a bit sorry nowadays for the poor old smoker. No, I don't want to share his smoke at my restaurant table - but I really don't mind if he lights up on platform 7 of Little Burblington on Sea. (as long as he is down wind )

I have a hatred of all the stupid "Elf & Safety" signs that pollute everywhere you go; so why, instead of a good old fashioned "NO SMOKING" sign, do we get: "Thank you for not polluting the environment on our filthy, dirty station, which has not seen a cleaner for 10 years, by smoking".

Perhaps the reason that the "law" is not enforced is that these idiotic signs are not actually legal ??

 

[Andrew Nelson]

There is NOTHING more sanctimonious than an ex-smoker - I am an ex-smoker !

BUT, I must confess to feeling a bit sorry nowadays for the poor old smoker. No, I don't want to share his smoke at my restaurant table - but I really don't mind if he lights up on platform 7 of Little Burblington on Sea. (as long as he is down wind )

I have a hatred of all the stupid "Elf & Safety" signs that pollute everywhere you go; so why, instead of a good old fashioned "NO SMOKING" sign, do we get: "Thank you for not polluting the environment on our filthy, dirty station, which has not seen a cleaner for 10 years, by smoking".

Perhaps the reason that the "law" is not enforced is that these idiotic signs are not actually legal ??

A sign dosn't make the Law, legislation, and Legal Statutes make the Law.

You do not need a sign to make somthing Illigal.

 

[merlodlliw]

Fishguard isn't exempt as such, as the Railway Byelaws will apply at this station as indeed on any other area of railway property, such as Lincoln.

Smoking in itself on a station doesn't break common law at all, unless it is within an enclosed space such as a waiting room. It is smoking in an area where signs/notices forbid it that places someone in breach of railway byelaws. See section 3 "Conduct and Behaviour" of the byelaws.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/legislation/regs/railwaysbyelaws.pdf

Fishguard has no signs displaying no smoking, and so smoking tobacco on the station is fine. The same could be said of any other station, in that if the signs are removed then so is the offence. Except of course where it is illegal under common law.

Fishguard is not a railway asset, Station owners Stena Line permit smoking on the platform and has dispensation on safety grounds due to the proximity of the level crossing to the platform.
. The dispensation was granted by Pembroke County Council,the enforcing authority.

Bob

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....You do not need a sign to make somthing Illigal.

In most cases I think we all agree on that, but there are offences that require signs to be present (some motoring offences for example). Railway Byelaw 3 is specific in that regard and that is what is prohibiting smoking on open platforms.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

In most cases I think we all agree on that, but there are offences that require signs to be present (some motoring offences for example). Railway Byelaw 3 is specific in that regard and that is what is prohibiting smoking on open platforms.

Motoring offences, by which I presume You mean Parking or Speeding Offences, which are not Criminal any longer. That's the Difference. They are Civil Offences. That's why a Police Officer cannot give You a Parking Ticket nowadays.

(Well, at least not in Yorkshire anyway.)

 

[moonrakerz]

A sign dosn't make the Law, legislation, and Legal Statutes make the Law.

You do not need a sign to make somthing Illigal.

You DO need the correct signs to make a Law enactable. (Obviously, this depends on the Law in question)


Practically every day you read in the papers that all those "done" for speeding on the A999 (or somewhere) are entitled to have these convictions wiped because the speed limit signs were not at the correct spacing or something.
This happened very near me on a section of the busy A303.

My secondary point, that flows from the first, was that the "flowery" wording on these (stupid!) signs might give the impression that it was not compulsory not to smoke, but just a polite request not to.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Speeding offences most certainly are criminal. Dangerous Parking is also an offence. I imagine the rest of parking offences are covered by byelaws so making then criminal as well.

And yes, you do need the correct signs as has been said many times.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

Speeding offences most certainly are criminal. Dangerous Parking is also an offence. I imagine the rest of parking offences are covered by byelaws so making then criminal as well.

And yes, you do need the correct signs as has been said many times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalised_parking_enforcement

http://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/TendringDC/Transport/Roads+and+Parking/whatisdpefaq.htm

Parking is not a criminal matter, it is a Civil one.

 

[Mojo]

On street parking is criminal by default, but local authorities can apply for an order for decriminalised parking enforcement. Search Google "decriminalised parking enforcement" for more info. I'm not sure how many places still have it; I'm not sure but I think in England and Wales Cardiff was the last major place to get rid of this, in July last year.

This is why Traffic Wardens these days are quite rare. There are still quite a few in London for red route enforcement.

But this is all quite irrelevant; the bylaw clearly says the need for a sign on smoking!

 

[Greenback]

If there is legislation making smoking in an open (not enclosed) public place illegal, please let me know what it is, as I am unaware of any.