Residential homes are where people live and have their home. We felt that, as long as there was a smoking policy in such places, people would have the right to smoke where it was deemed to be their home, just as others in the community have that right. There were obvious humanitarian and other reasons for that exemption.Local MSP Helen Eadie has protested against the home's plans. It seems that some Labour MSPs did not realise what a Pandora's box they were opening by supporting the smoking legislation.
Note that this policy is introduced to a home that currently accommodates only two smokers. Among the reasons given is that they want the room to be available to more people. This goes beyond the requirements of the law, which allows designated smoking areas in exempted premises. Devoting resources to the construction of a legal smoking shelter is an appalling use of resources, including fees, whether privately or publicly paid to the parent company.
There are methods for dealing with secondary smoke exposure.
This is a frankly an abuse of power over vulnerable people who depend on others for their daily needs. The relatives of the residents involved protest in the article, but they are clearly open to the suggestion that their elderly relatives would be much better off not smoking: a hypothesis that is clearly irrelevant to the absolute certainty that smoking in a warm room endangers health far less than smoking in a bus shelter that is 50 per cent enclosed.
The web site for the organisation is here. There are contact details if you wish to formally protest this decision. Incidentally I note that the section of their page entitled News Articles does not include any stories at all ... what a shame they will really have to kick off with a story about allowing the elderly to freeze.
Press release, Freedom2Choose.