UK Initiatives
Letter to the Prime Minister in support of an Approved Code of
Practice on Passive Smoking at Work
16 November 2000
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London SW1 2AA
Dear Mr Blair
PASSIVE SMOKING AT WORK
I write to urge your personal support for the proposed Approved
Code of Practise to protect employees from the health hazards of
passive smoking in the workplace.
In our comments during the consultative process, the British Medical
Association warmly welcomed the proposal, emphasising the need for
an Approved Code containing clear guidance that takes due account
of the proven health risks of passive smoking and of the benefits
of clean air policies. We remain convinced that this proposal
offers an important opportunity for long-overdue action to protect
Britain's workers from a widespread and largely unregulated environmental
health hazard.
We take this opportunity to draw your attention to the proven health
risks of passive smoking, as documented by an authoritative body
of scientific literature and evaluated by numerous independent expert
committees, including the Government's own Scientific Committee
on Tobacco and Health and the recent report of the Health Select
Committee. For more than a decade, convincing scientific evidence
has been available to demonstrate that exposure to second-hand cigarette
smoke both harms health, and worsens existing health problems. Yet
an estimated three million people are still exposed to tobacco smoke
in the course of their work. In the absence of any rational basis
for identifying individuals as immune from the harms of passive
smoking, we feel that protective measures must be extended to
all. Nevertheless, we wish to emphasise the need to ensure effective
protection for the most vulnerable workers - pregnant women, people
with existing cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, and those
with asthma and other respiratory disorders. Moreover, we note that
workers in lower socio-economic groups are currently less likely
to benefit from a smokefree work environment than those in better-off
groups.
While the main rationale behind the introduction of an Approved
Code of Practise on passive smoking in the workplace must remain
the employer's duty to protect the health of non-smokers, it is
worth noting that clean indoor air policies have also been shown
to benefit smokers. Research shows that the introduction of
restrictions on smoking in the workplace is effective in motivating
smokers to quit, in helping those attempting to stop smoking to
persevere, and in reducing overall tobacco consumption among those
who continue to smoke.
The need for measures to protect workers from involuntary exposure
to tobacco smoke is widely accepted not only by medical and health
experts, but also by the public. Clean-air policies enjoy massive
support from both smokers and non-smokers. Not only does the
public accept that second-hand smoke is harmful, restrictions on
smoking in public places are popular with both smokers and non-smokers.
Eighty-five percent are in favour of clean-air policies in the workplace,
in restaurants, and in public places such as banks and post offices.
Existing legislation (Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974) clearly
imposes an obligation on employers to ensure that all reasonable
measures are taken to ensure the health and safety of their workers.
Only a binding code of practise that provides clear guidance
to help employers fulfil their duties can be effective in protecting
workers' health from the very real dangers of passive smoking.
Not only would a voluntary arrangement fail to adequately recognise
the need to protect workers' health, it would leave businesses -
especially small businesses - open to the risk of costly civil litigation
for failing to do so.
In summary: we reiterate that a voluntary code of practise on
passive smoking would be in line with neither current expert scientific
opinion nor public opinion, and ask that you lend your personal
support to facilitate the introduction of a binding Approved Code
of Practise in the interests of both public health and sensible
regulation.
The BMA remains at your disposal for any further assistance,
Yours sincerely,
Dr Ian G. Bogel
Chairman of Council
|