Smoke shame

I WAS dismayed to read that Huntingdonshire District Council is spending £3,505 on a building to accommodate smokers. This may be a relatively small amount of money, but nevertheless, it is my council tax that is paying for it and I am sure there are more

I WAS dismayed to read that Huntingdonshire District Council is spending £3,505 on a building to accommodate smokers. This may be a relatively small amount of money, but nevertheless, it is my council tax that is paying for it and I am sure there are more worthy causes for that amount of money.

I thought the idea of non-smoking offices and public places was to discourage smokers from their unhealthy habit, as well as to protect people who have the right to breathe clean air.

Yet, here is the council giving these addicts a nice warm, comfortable area to smoke in. Surely, it would be more of an incentive not to smoke if they had to go out into the cold and wet to do it. As it is, this can only encourage these people to continue with their habit.

I would also like to know if smokers are allowed time from their work stations to indulge. If so, are the non-smokers also allowed some time out to indulge in their particular preference? I think not.


You may also want to watch:


I found it rather ironic that the article in your paper ended with the news that the council had won a National Clean Air Award from the Roy Castle Foundation. Maybe their representatives should be invited to spend some time in the smokers' hut when it is full of employees puffing on their cigarettes. Not a lot of clean air in there then, I suspect.

MARGARET FAULKNER

Most Read

Fairey Avenue

Godmanchester

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter
Comments powered by Disqus