The Challenge for Community Pubs

Regulation has the effect of exacerbating the differences between strong ‘destination’ pubs and the weaker community outlets:

It is clear from this example that Pub A will survive the smoking ban rather better than pub B because:

• It serves food and can potentially increase this element of the trade if drink sales fall; Pub B cannot serve food even if there were a demand for it.

• It has relatively few smoking customers to lose; Pub B risks losing half of its customers.

• Smokers can be accommodated in the beer garden, where neighbours are less likely to get upset; in Pub B they can currently only stand outside in the street, or in the backyard, where neighbours are more likely to complain.

• As a managed house A has the backing of a highly professional team, tenant B is largely alone.

• Creation of a smoking facility can readily be afforded by Pub A; Pub B will struggle to find the resources to upgrade the back yard on his own.

Following the implementation of the ban, diparity between the two pubs will become evident. Pub A would be able to deploy its reserves more quickly, and with greater effect, than Pub B. It therefore follows that the future of pubs like Pub B, the community pubs serving disadvantaged areas and providing one of their few remaining social centres, will suffer disproportionately.

The costs of a planning application (let alone the building of the smoking facility) can represent a significant proportion of income for small operators.

Based on an average pub, open 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, operated by the publican for 70% of his/her time with spouse (5000 hours/year together), a licensee would earn approximately £4 per hour. This is significantly less than the minimum wage of £4.45/hr.