Restriction on children

Press, 29 May 1981, Page 16

Restriction on children

Sir,—l cannot agree more with Mr Barnes — the manager of Scoffs lunch-bar. At last there is an eating place where children are • not allowed. without it being connected with- alcohol.. I do not see this as discrimination, merely a haven from restless youngsters. I myself am a devoted aunt but a rest from children is pure paradise.— Yours, etc.. K. COX. May 27, 1981.

Sir,—Passing a lunch-bar in Hereford Street named. Scoffs, to my surprise and anger a message was painted on the door: “No kids, no pushchairs, no prams." In frustration I went in and asked thbir reasons for this and was told it was because they found children did not like food. Noting the healthy and fresh lunches, that my child lives on, I found this a weak excuse. The manager then said that the customers found children disruptive. In a country with nondiscrimination laws [for sex, colour, and religion I wonder about "age?” I cannot take my child on the buses with a pushchair after 4.30, into most hotels, and now I cannot have lunch with him. This businessman “anti-kids” mentality is oppressive and offensive particularly for women. Kids were once “seen and not hpard,” now it appears they can’t be “heard OR seen.”—Yours, etc., MS ANNIE BOWDEN. May 26, 1981.

Sir,—lt is very encouraging to see a new restaurant in the centre of Christchurch finally recognising the real needs of its clientele. It seems such a pity to inflict our businessmen with the family atmosphere during the lunch hour. Scoffs has ensured that no such intrusion should occur. But why apologise? What a triumph for us all when a restaurant can state on its door; "No kids, no prams.” Why not exclude women . . i they’re quite a distraction too. Let’s advocate that the City i Council erect prominent signs in the city centre, along the lines of those which prohibit ’dogs, prohibit-

ing also children, mothers, those over 70 and cripples. Three cheers for the . open society!—Yours, etc., MS M. C. BRETT. May 27, 1981.

Sir,—What right does Scoffs have to prohibit women with children from its premises. Scoffs wishes to exclude those who may bring it inconvenience and no doubt inhibit the free flow of profits through the shop. To exclude children from an eating facility is a fundamental denial of what must be a basic right for everybody to eat where food is wailable. Scoffs should either tpen to all or get out of the business of providing service to the' general public. — Yours, etc.,

ANDREW PEACH. May 27, 1981.