cc2=true;cc3=true;cc5=false;cc8=true;cc10=true;cc9=true;cc6=true;cc7=true;cc11=true;cc12=true;cc14=false;cc15=true;cc4=true;
Regulations that restrict or ban smoking in some or most public places are commonplace in many countries today. Over the past decade, the scope of public place smoking restrictions has increased as countries have reduced the number of public places where smoking is permitted. In the European Union, for example, Italy, Ireland, the U.K., France, Finland and Sweden have banned virtually all indoor public smoking.
Public health authorities have concluded that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (also called second-hand smoke) causes serious diseases in non-smokers and, as a result, regulators have prohibited smoking in public places such as government office buildings, shopping centers, movie theaters, airplanes, public transportation and the workplace. Many countries have also banned smoking in hospitality venues such as restaurants, nightclubs, bars and discos. Some public health groups have called for, and some municipalities have adopted or proposed, bans on smoking in outdoor places. Some tobacco control groups have advocated banning smoking in cars when minors are present.
The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control requires parties to the treaty to adopt restrictions on public smoking, and the Conference of the Parties has adopted guidelines 
on public smoking bans. The guidelines call for total bans in all indoor public places, and reject any exemptions based on the type of venue (such as nightclubs). On smoking in private places such as cars and homes, the guidelines recommend increased education on the health effects of second-hand smoke.
Our View
We believe that the conclusions of public health officials on the health effects of second-hand smoke warrant restrictions on public place smoking, including bans in many locations. A balance should be struck, however, between the desire to protect non-smokers, especially minors, from exposure to second-hand smoke, and allowing the millions of people who smoke to do so in some public places.
Clearly, smoking should be prohibited in hospitals and health institutions, as well as in schools and other facilities for youth. In addition, smoking should be prohibited in public places where people must go, such as public transportation vehicles and businesses offering general public services (e.g., supermarkets, banks, and post offices). In such places, signs should be posted clearly stating that smoking is not permitted.
In restaurants, bars, cafes, discos and other entertainment establishments, proprietors should be free to decide whether to permit, restrict, or prohibit smoking. If signage is posted communicating the smoking policy, and includes the public health view that exposure to smoke is harmful to non-smokers, then an individual can make an informed decision about whether or not to enter an establishment.
We do not believe that banning smoking in outdoor public places or in private places such as cars and homes is the right approach. We believe smoking should be allowed in outdoor public spaces, except areas intended primarily for children or where smoking could be dangerous. For private places, we believe that education, rather than legislation, is a more appropriate way forward.
As governments continue to consider regulation of public place smoking, future rules should not lose sight of the fact that tobacco products continue to evolve, and that future products may produce minimal or no second-hand smoke. Thus, any regulatory frameworks should provide an option to exempt these products, subject to approval from appropriate regulatory authorities.