Bars will benefit from ban: experts
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Hurriyet Daily News
OluÅŸturulma Tarihi: Haziran 26, 2009 00:00
ISTANBUL - French and American anti-smoking campaigners say smoking bans in their countries have improved business as more non-smokers are drawn to them. Turkish cafe and bar owners fear a big drop in revenue after the final stage of the smoking ban is implemented on July 19.
Smoking bans in bars, restaurants and cafes do not cause these establishments to lose business but actually increase their income, experts from the U.S. and France said yesterday. Â
The experts shared their countries’ experiences with implementing smoking bans at a press meeting held in advance of the implementation of a similar ban in Turkey on July 19.
Turkey’s National Committee on Cigarettes and Health, or SSUK, hosted Stephen Hamill from the World Lung Foundation and Sylviane Ratte from the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases to talk about the American and French cases.
One of the tobacco-sector arguments against the ban that Hamill and Ratte sought to counter is the claim that it would cause the hospitality sector to lose money.
In fact, business-tax receipts in restaurants and bars in New York went up 8.7 percent within a year after the Smoke-Free Air Act went into effect in March 2003, according to data from three different government units of the City of New York.
30 percent revenue loss
The tobacco sector has argued that the ban would create a 30 percent loss in business for the hospitality sector, a number that is not supported by any scientific data, Ratte said. "The bankrupt businesses are the ones that were not well-prepared for the smoking ban."
According to Ratte, the bans change the clientele in the sector, attracting families who had previously avoided restaurants where smoking was allowed. Ratte emphasized that families go to restaurants to eat, not just to drink.
There is no benefit to violating the smoke ban, Ratte said. "If everyone obeys the law, there will be no competition between the bars, restaurants or cafes," she said, noting that there was only one example in the French city of Lyon that did not obey the law, and that the establishment was closed down.
The number of tourists coming to New York increased, rather than decreased, after the ban was instituted, Hamill said. Additionally, according to the New York State Department of Labor, the number of New York City bars and restaurants remained essentially unchanged a year after the ban. "This is an improvement compared with the same period in 2002, during which 280 more bars and restaurants closed than opened," stated a one-year review of the New York ban.
Furthermore, the New York State Liquor Authority issued 1,416 new liquor licenses to New York City bars and restaurants in 2003, compared with 1,361 issued in 2002, prior to the passage of the Smoke-Free Air Act, the report stated. Elif Dağlı, president of SSUK, said the group expects a similar positive trend for Turkey as well, adding that since 50 million people in Turkey are non-smokers, the hospitality business will gain rather than lose.
The experts shared their countries’ experiences with implementing smoking bans at a press meeting held in advance of the implementation of a similar ban in Turkey on July 19.
Turkey’s National Committee on Cigarettes and Health, or SSUK, hosted Stephen Hamill from the World Lung Foundation and Sylviane Ratte from the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases to talk about the American and French cases.
One of the tobacco-sector arguments against the ban that Hamill and Ratte sought to counter is the claim that it would cause the hospitality sector to lose money.
In fact, business-tax receipts in restaurants and bars in New York went up 8.7 percent within a year after the Smoke-Free Air Act went into effect in March 2003, according to data from three different government units of the City of New York.
30 percent revenue loss
The tobacco sector has argued that the ban would create a 30 percent loss in business for the hospitality sector, a number that is not supported by any scientific data, Ratte said. "The bankrupt businesses are the ones that were not well-prepared for the smoking ban."
According to Ratte, the bans change the clientele in the sector, attracting families who had previously avoided restaurants where smoking was allowed. Ratte emphasized that families go to restaurants to eat, not just to drink.
There is no benefit to violating the smoke ban, Ratte said. "If everyone obeys the law, there will be no competition between the bars, restaurants or cafes," she said, noting that there was only one example in the French city of Lyon that did not obey the law, and that the establishment was closed down.
The number of tourists coming to New York increased, rather than decreased, after the ban was instituted, Hamill said. Additionally, according to the New York State Department of Labor, the number of New York City bars and restaurants remained essentially unchanged a year after the ban. "This is an improvement compared with the same period in 2002, during which 280 more bars and restaurants closed than opened," stated a one-year review of the New York ban.
Furthermore, the New York State Liquor Authority issued 1,416 new liquor licenses to New York City bars and restaurants in 2003, compared with 1,361 issued in 2002, prior to the passage of the Smoke-Free Air Act, the report stated. Elif Dağlı, president of SSUK, said the group expects a similar positive trend for Turkey as well, adding that since 50 million people in Turkey are non-smokers, the hospitality business will gain rather than lose.