I doubt if anyone could accuse this government of being too clear sighted without applying more than a smidgeon of irony, but on one of the most pressing health issues it seems capable of such collective obfuscation that it’s a wonder that any of our ministers manage to make their way to the office each morning without falling down an open manhole.

And as the inexorable calamity that is the proposed partial ban on smoking lurches from one miniature cataclysm to the next, would we be in a worse position if one or two or all of them did?

Of course we would. But only just…

This week it was the turn of the government’s chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, to come out in opposition to the proposal, who told MPs at the meeting of the Commons Health Committee last week that he almost resigned over the Cabinet’s decision not to impose a blanket ban, adding he only decided to stay in place so he could push for smoking in all enclosed public places to be outlawed.

This week the Health Bill returns to the Commons on Tuesday for its second reading. Cross-party support among MPs appears to be growing for an amendment which would remove the smoking ban exemption offered to licensed premises which do not serve food.

However, health secretary Patricia Hewitt has again reiterated her belief that a total ban will come in to effect in the next few years, despite the fact that the proposed ban is patently unworkable and likely to cause more problems outside of the timescale Ms Hewitt envisages.

I was among a number of industry representatives invited to present evidence to the Health Select Committee last week, where I told MPs that under these proposals an employer could be perceived to be exercising a duty of care to some employees but not to others, especially in the instance of cancer-related illnesses among bar workers in non-food pubs where smoking is still permitted.

The crux matter at the heart of the smoking ban is not consumer-focused, but instead one which addresses the health and safety of our employees, and how we must protect their health as much as the health of the consumer. It is not nanny-statism per se, but part of a wider move to improve the health of the nation, and should be linked into those issues in a holistic way, rather than be treated as a singular segment.

To have proposed a blanket ban on smoking would have been cleaner cut and less nonsensical; cleaner for staff and cleaner for the industry.

Instead, years of government dithering, blithering, dozing and droning on has produced an unhealthy compromise. Will our MPs be able to see through the government’s smoke-screen? I sincerely hope so.