It is widely being reported that government ministers are facing huge calls by peers this week to put a ban on smoking outside pubs, bars and restaurants.
Ministers are being urged to address outdoor smoking and the uses of designated smoking areas in the interest of public health as “pavement drinks”, alfresco dining and outdoor socialising continues to be widely embraced by many hospitality establishments after post-lockdown reopenings amid the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
A group of cross-party peers are believed to be set to challenge ministers in Parliament today during a debate on emergency planning legislation and are set to force a vote on the issue next week.
According to The i, the peers are to table an amendment to the Business and Planning Bill which stipulates that pavement licences should only be granted by a local authority subject to the condition that smoking is banned.
Deborah Arnott, the Chief Executive of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), said: “Making smoke-free status a condition for all pavement licences sets a level playing field for business and the public, and has strong public support, which will make it easy to enforce.”
Alison Cox, Director of Prevention at Cancer Research UK, added that: “The pandemic has changed the way we live and most of us are spending more time outside, but being stuck in a queue or outside a café, escaping second hand smoke isn’t an easy option anymore.”
“Second-hand smoke is harmful and can be unpleasant to those nearby and smoke-free environments are important in protecting people and denormalising smoking in society.”
As many streets in Manchester city centre, primarily in the Northern Quarter and surrounding areas, have become temporarily pedestrianised to allow for additional al-fresco dining/drinking tables in the name of social distancing, and with similar set-ups seen throughout the boroughs too, is outdoor smoking becoming something of a growing concern to patrons in our county?
Here at The Manc, we always want to know where you stand.
Ahead of a parliamentary decision, we were keen to find out whether a ban would be be supported, or viewed as unnecessary in Greater Manchester, so we took to our audience of loyal Mancunians on Facebook and Twitter to ask – ‘Do you think smoking should be banned outside restaurants/bars?’
Here’s what you said:
___
Facebook
Over on Facebook, we put the question to our 500,000+ followers and invited all manner of response.
We received an overwhelmingly active response from our audience to this question and therefore haven’t been able to include every single comment in this article. Instead, we chose to feature a range of responses which seemed to resonate best with others and amass the most interactions overall.
If you are keen to have a read of the rest of the responses and have your say, you can head on over to the post on our Facebook page here.
___
Twitter
When it came to Twitter, we chose to ask the simple ‘yes/no’ question, and in the two-hour time frame to which the poll was running for, we received a total of 1,034 votes.
According to the standings, voting appeared closer than ever.
Whilst results were running neck and neck throughout the majority of the two-hour period, they finally edged over and signalled that voters feel a ban on smoking outside of pubs, bars and restaurants in England is not necessary and should not take effect.
51% of voters felt a ban would not be needed under current circumstances, whereas only 49% indicated they would like to see one put in place.
Follow-up responses to this poll were also invited and can be viewed here.
Are you keen to have your say?
If you’ve not yet had the chance to respond our poll, then there is still time to head on over to @TheMancUK on Twitter to take part, leave your thoughts and discuss matters with other Mancunians in the same, or different positions to you.
Do you think smoking should be banned outside of pubs and restaurants?
The Manc is helping local businesses and venues get back on their feet after lockdown with our #BuzzingToBeBack campaign – offering as much support and exposure for Manchester hospitality as possible.
Read more about what we’re doing for the industry here.
___
For the latest information, guidance and support during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in the UK, please do refer to the gov.uk website here.
#StaySafeSaveLives
Trending
Stockport County issue statement condemning ‘deeply concerning imagery’ featuring club crest
Danny Jones
Stockport County have issued a statement addressing inappropriate and divisive political imagery featuring the club crest recently shared online.
The Greater Manchester side was alerted to the situation this week and quickly released a decisive comment condemning the content that appeared on social media.
Updating the fan base on Monday afternoon, 29 July, the League One team shared the important and well-received response across their official channels, reminding their fan base that not only are they a non-political entity but that the beautiful game is for everyone.
It reads as follows: “Stockport County has been made aware of instances where our club crest has been used without permission on political propaganda, including deeply concerning imagery that promotes hate and division, such as the unauthorised display of our crest alongside anti-LGBTQ+ symbols.
“We want to be unequivocally clear: Stockport County Football Club is, and always will be, a politically neutral organisation. We do not endorse, support, or affiliate with any political party, candidate [referring to one specific individual in this instance], or ideology.
“Our club crest is a registered trademark and a symbol of unity, community, and the collective passion for football at Edgeley Park.
“It represents all our fans, staff, players, and the wider Stockport community, regardless of their individual political beliefs, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, religion, or any other characteristic.”
They assure that the club, which is made up of all kinds of ethnicities, genders and sexualities, is “no place for hate, discrimination, or exclusion of any kind at Edgeley Park or within our community“, adding that they are “committed to fostering an inclusive environment where everyone feels welcome and safe.”
For context, below you’ll find just one example of the unsanctioned and potentially inflammatory iconography exposed via Facebook marketplace, which features the Stockport County badge alongside an image of former UKIP leader and Reform UK MP, Nigel Farage.
The statement goes on to reinforce that “any unauthorised use of our crest, particularly in a political or hateful context, is a misuse of our intellectual property and fundamentally goes against the inclusive values we uphold.”
“We will take all necessary steps, including legal action where appropriate, to prevent such unauthorised use of our club crest and protect our brand integrity.”
They sign off by stating, simply: “We urge all supporters to respect the Club’s neutrality and help us maintain an environment where everyone feels welcome and united by their love for County.”
On the upside, the defiant Stockport County stance was met with plenty of praise and support, with Hatters and football lovers in general commenting, “My community club”, “Not a fan but well done county”, “Keep politics out of football, especially that lot. Top club statement”, just to quote a few replies.
SCFC seem to be getting lots of things right at the moment.
Manchester United are reportedly weighing up two different strikers this summer
Danny Jones
Manchester United are now said to be weighing up two main options when it comes to strikers this summer, having seemingly narrowed their search with just over a month left of the transfer window.
With The Athletic‘s David Ornstein having already intimated that there’s a “very good chance” current number nine Rasmus Højlund could “move on” as head coach Ruben Amorim looks to install his desired talents, it’s already been well publicised that more new arrivals will likely depend on sales.
That being said, the outlet’s Laurie Whitwell now reports that Man United are homing in on two specific names: Aston Villa striker Ollie Watkins and Slovenian rising star, Benjamin Šeško.
Which one they decide to go and fully pursue remains to be seen.
#MUFC narrow striker search to Ollie Watkins + Benjamin Sesko. Club in touch on both players to figure out suitability + cost.
Nicolas Jackson ruled out due to Chelsea demands.
Watkins is Premier League proven, Sesko has high potential ceiling.
At present, it’s believed that the club is beginning the process of assessing which of the forwards – both of whom are well-favoured by various English suitors and, indeed, across the continent – is not only the best fit on paper but the most viable option.
Besides the prospective cost of each player, one of the big differences between the two talented attackers is their age profile, with Watkins now well within his peak at 29 and Šeško still just 22 and already showing plenty of promise and a tall ceiling.
According to Whitwell, “No decision has yet been made on which target to advance, but United are in contact on both Watkins and Sesko to establish the potential costs of each deal.” Their suitability for the Portuguese manager’s system is also important.
Stat-wise, Watkins registered 17 goals and 14 assists last season and was one of the most prolific goal threats in Europe the previous term (27G 15A), while RB Leipzig’s Šeško notched 27 involvements in 44 appearances during the 2024/25 campaign, plus five more at international level.
It’s also worth noting that the former is already Premier League proven, having also scored big goals in major tournaments, not to mention having been on United’s radar for a few years now; journalist Samuel Luckhurst and other sources have also claimed that Watkins is “open” to Old Trafford.
Manchester United exploring both Benjamin Sesko and Ollie Watkins. Efforts currently framed around those two, as @lauriewhitwell called.
As reported, Ollie Watkins talks have already taken place. Villa prefer to keep and won’t entertain a sale without a replacement. They value… pic.twitter.com/DotKmEniHI
Once again, however, a key stumbling block for either would be the transfers themselves, with Villa and Leipzig thought to be looking for something in the region of £60 million and £70 million, respectively.
Returning to Whitwell, the Stockport-born Man United correspondent adds that Villa “might look to find an agreement at £40m to £45m” given their Arsenal were unwilling to patch their asking price back in the January window.
United are also said to have quickly moved on from Chelsea’s Nichola Jackson for the very same reason: all three individuals will inevitably come with big fees and wages.
On the other hand, were the Red Devils able to sell the likes of Alejandro Garnacho, Jadon Sancho, Antony – having quoted £50m to Al-Nassr for the currently ousted Brazilian – and quite possibly even Hojlund, they may be able to stretch their budget to afford the likes of highly sought-after Šeško.
He’s been big linked with big money moves since he burst onto the scene at Salzburg.
Obviously, Hojlund and Joshua Zirkzee remain in the squad and are still relatively early in their careers full-stop, but it’s fair to say that neither have quite hit the ground running in red.
Emily Sergeant -
13th July 2020 
