Smoking should be banned in council housing, public health chief says

[LurkingHusband]

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/smoking-banned-council-housing-faculty-of-public-health-a7722726.html

Smoking should be banned in all new council houses to protect children from harmful second-hand smoke, a public health chief has said.

Anti-smoking campaigners consider smoke-free housing to be the next major frontier in reducing the harmful effects of passive smoking.

In 2015, the Government introduced a ban on smoking in all vehicles carrying children.

“Housing associations and councils are looking at smoke-free housing buildings. Where children are involved I think there is a real case for it,” Dr John Middleton, president of the Faculty of Public Health, told The Sunday Times.

Dr Middleton said he believed housing association residents should sign contracts which would make non-smoking a condition of their tenancy.

“You wouldn’t evict a load of tenants for smoking. Where you have got new premises, you could have smoke-free agreements from the start," he said.

In the United States, the Obama administration passed a federal law which banned smoking in all public housing - the equivalent to UK social housing - in November last year.

The legislation, which will come into effect in August 2018, will affect more than million homes. In New York alone, which has the largest public housing agency in the country, 400,000 people will be bound by non-smoking agreements.

Pro-smoking campaign Forest said the proposed policy “would penalise unfairly those who can’t afford to buy their own homes”.

Everyone should be able to enjoy their home as they like. That bit is bang on, so as a landlord I want my property to be enjoyed by me, in the future, as smoke free.

I wonder of the people arguing the rights of the smokers are smokers themselves, because the stench and it is a lingering smell that gets into the woodwork and everything, lingers for YEARS. Smokers would not even notice. Some of the kids come into school absolutely stinking of smoke, it is heartbreaking to think how little regard for their health the parents have. If banning smoking in council houses helps just one child, I'm all for it.

My neighbours aren't allowed to smoke inside Instasista, it is against their tenancy agreement - that is why they smoke outside and it drifts in our windows. I don't think that is unusual these days.

Don't rent it out then empire. It's a business, you don't get to control your clients

what would happen if they smoked inside though? Nothing! Good for them if they're happy to comply but the landlord couldn't stop them doing it. All they could do is start the very long process of evicting them. But those fags have still been smoked (and many more will've been by the time the eviction is granted)

Don't rent it out then empire. It's a business, you don't get to control your client don't rent why? Its perfectly acceptable to rent a property and stipulate terms at the beginning of the lease. Or are you suggesting us landlords should be accepting of tenants who will trash the shit out of our houses be it by smoking or knocking fuck out of the walls?

what would happen if they smoked inside though? Nothing! Good for them if they're happy to comply but the landlord couldn't stop them doing it. All they could do is start the very long process of evicting them.. I would evict. Absolutely. Regardless of how much smoking took place in the interim, an eviction or not renewing the tenancy would certainly be damage limitation.

I expect a certain level of respect for my property.

I imagine they would be evicted, lose their deposit to get the place fixed and of course their reference. The same as if they damaged the house in any other way. If they want to smoke in the house then they shouldn't sign a contract that prohibits it.

But that's ok. It's up to them to decide whether smoking is worth a potential future eviction and losing a deposit/ reference. You still can't stop them doing it. It's not illegal, as you suggest.

I've never known of a private rental agreement to allow smoking and for sure you'd have the agreement be cancelled and lost your deposit if you were caught doing it.

I think this is an interesting idea.

If you're renting it out then it's your asset, Empire, not your home.

Smoking really isn't the same as knocking out a wall or wantonly damaging a property. Lots of landlords do allow smoking.

(Non-smoker here.)

I think this is a good idea. My boyfriend smokes, and I do occasionally but we smoke outside and would never dream of smoking inside our private rental with our 6 year old. Who smokes indoors anyway nowadays?!

if you're renting it out then it's your asset, Empire, not your home.. Actually I said my home in the future, which is exactly what it is.

It's not illegal, as you suggest. Please don't attempt to put word in my mouth. I never suggested anything of the sort.

Yes, but it isn't your home at the moment, and I think that's the important thing. I do think it's important that people have "full enjoyment" of their own homes, be they rented or owned.

It is pretty easy to reverse smoking damage.

Then why bring it up? It's been made illegal, under federal law in the US and that's what the article is talking about implementing in the uk. The fact you don't want your tenant to smoke- although they can- is neither here nor there then us it?

(In a house I mean - not in your lungs, obviously.)

instasista are you always so obtuse the whole thread is a conversation about various rental types BECAUSE of the OP. That's how these things work. Someone posts, thread evolves.

Yes, but it isn't your home at the moment not relevant. If I choose to rent to non smokers with lots of children but no furry animals, that's MY choice.

Surely the difference is the starting point of the "rule/suggestion" - for those in private rented sector who are subject to the "no smokers, no pets etc" advert this is due to the feelings of the property owner who doesn't want to have to deal with any impacts on property at void times. But PHE saying this are coming at it from a health point of view which suggests that either smoking is more prevalent in council/social stock (not seen figures either way so can't comment) or that smokers living in council/social housing are less inclined to be aware of the health impacts of smoking around others. If its a PH issue then surely the argument would be - don't smoke in your home (whether rented, owned or borrowed) - the same argument was made in putting forward the rule change about smoking in cars with under 16s - that wasn't put forward on the basis of the socio-economic status of the car owner/driver rather it was a protective measure for children who have no say in the air quality around them....

No empire you're being deliberately obtuse and trying to maje a big and important topic all about you

Most rentals have a non smoking clause.

Council housing is a rental, so if the cancel wants it banned, then that's fine.

Well it's not, because it will require a change in the law

Add to that neither councils or housing associations want to ban smoking in their properties because their over riding social purpose is to provide homes people want to live in

Smoking kills and stinks up the properties.

That's social aware enough.

It's not their property , smoking damages it so totally not unreasonable to say stop doing it. Your wasting the governments money and ruining the place for the next person.

Why do people with mortgages think they 'own' the house? The bank does. Probably best not to smoke in a mortgaged home too then in case you can't afford mortgage and need to sell or it gets repossessed and stinks of cigs.