A Section of The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter
Issue 312 – January 21, 2005
The popularity of the ban in the media has decreased. The public still has less voice, but curtailing the zealots.
Learning disabilities and the environment: What we know – and how our policies are failing children
Future Debates: “There’s Still a Long Way to Go, Baby…”
COALITION AGAINST TOBACCO TAX EVASION
Ontario facing demands for exemptions from smoking law -ON
Not breathing any easier -ON smoke
Air pollution kills people, too -ON
Saskatchewan news roundup: Jan. 12 -SK
Sask. wants Ottawa’s help on smoking ban -SK
Smoking ban: does it go too far? -SK
Quebec smoking-ban plan cheered locally -QC
News on then Tobacco Website
Pakitinâsowin: Tobacco Offerings in Exchange for Stories and The Ethic of Reciprocity in First Nations Research
Newspaper should promote positive anti-smoking stories -ON
Bylaw prediction comes true for local bar-SK
Minister undecided on extending smoking ban to reserves -SK
Butt-out battle flares-AB
Tobacco growers bemoan attack on industry -ON
Smoke and morals -ON
Indian Affairs minister conflicted over reserve smoking-SK
Smoking ban a ‘workplace safety’ issue -AB
No butts about it -AB
Ottawa treading carefully around smoking ban debate
Klein rules out province-wide smoking ban -AB
Klein says no to smoking ban -AB
Alberta Premier Klein calls smokers ‘stupid’ -AB
Smoking ban tickets might not be issued on reserves
Smoking confounds Ottawa
Reserve smoking ban creates conflict -SK
Federal Indian Affairs minister conflicted over reserve smoking rules
Smoking ban sounds good to me: bartender -AB
Smoking Ban Compliance -ON
City to still-smoky bars: Butt out or else -YK
Quebec Tobacco-Free Week 2005 – The Canadian Cancer Society: more active than ever in protecting the rights of non-smokers and in the fight against tobacco
Local farmers to join in 401 blockade Organizational meeting planned Wednesday -ON
Smoking Rates Dropping, but Lung Cancer Deaths Still Leading Cause of Cancer Death
Treherne hotelier to fight butt-ban charges in July-MB
Alberta’s Health Minister, is pushing too hard letter- AB
Ralph butts out ban plan -AB
January the worst time to start smoking ban -SK
Carry on smoking! -AB
Second-hand smoke exposure still a problem
Smoking bans enjoy wide support
Butt out, Ralphie -AB
Rising Health Risks Linked to Urban Sprawl: Family Doctors to Release Comprehensive Research Review
Consumers’ Association Launches Class Action Lawsuit Against Beverage Industry, Retailers and Encorp Pacific
National Health Organizations Participating in Pivotal Tobacco Court Case This Week
Doctors and dentists team up against tobacco
Canadian Cancer Society urges the BC Government to Support Smoke-free Legislation -BC
Blood test could pave way for better use of promising cancer treatment, new Canadian Cancer Society research shows
Evans to keep looking at smoking ban -AB
New calls to fast-track Calgary smoking bylaw -AB
Gov’t should give away nicotine patches: anti-tobacco group -MB
New calls to fast-track Calgary smoking bylaw -AB
Editorial: Get serious on Kyoto -ON
Butt-brained idea-AB
Pharmacy cig sales mixed message -MB
Province best at butting out -MB
Drug stores must butt out: anti-smoking group -MB
Gov’t criticized for not enforcing smoking ban on reserves -MB
Boutilier nixes provincewide smoking ban – AB
Butt out of city business: Rice -AB
Editorial- Smoke from a distant fire -AB
Smoking ban stays at psych facilities -ON
Ottawa allows smoking at White Bear casino -SK
Dr. Albert Schumacher, CMA President, speaks out on pivotal tobacco case before the Supreme Court of Canada
Understanding tobacco -ON
Ontario tobacco taxes rise by $1.25 a carton at midnight -ON
Promise of help for tobacco farmers unfulfilled, marketing board chairman says -ON
Scott will accept smoking bylaw for First Nations casino: report -SK
Supreme court to hear Sask tobacco law case -SK
Butt-brained idea-AB
Pharmacy cig sales mixed message -MB
Province best at butting out -MB
Learning disabilities and the environment: What we know – and how our policies are failing children
Barbara McElgunn RN December 2001, Volume 6, Number 10
Learning disabilities and related attention deficit disorders affect an estimated 10% to 15% of children. The consequences of these and other neurological, developmental and behavioural disorders are life-long, often serious for both the child and his or her family, and costly for society.
The role of toxic chemicals in the etiologies of these disorders has been largely ignored, although the evidence from both experimental animal and clinical research from the few neurotoxic chemicals that have been studied to date is compelling (1), and the possibilities for prevention are enormous.
An example of the costs of subtle deficits due to exposure to lead was demonstrated in a groundbreaking economic benefits analysis by Schwartz (1994) (2) based on calculations of the costs of lead-related reductions in intelligence quotient on years of schooling and earnings, and cardiovascular effects.
The societal benefits of reducing blood lead concentrations in the population by just 1 mg/dL were estimated at $17.2 billion/year to the American economy. Schwartz (2) noted that these benefit estimates are low, as other known effects of lead – on behavior, attention, hearing, balance and reduced stature – have not been assigned a monetary value (2). This benefit was revised upward in a subsequent economic analysis (3), based primarily on labour market changes and more recent data on the relationship of intelligence quotient with educational attainment and projected earnings gains.
Worldwide, there is growing attention to the differential vulnerability of children to environmental toxicants. Since the mid 1990s, increasing concern, legislation and policy initiatives in the United States, and a joint declaration (4) have brought children’s health and development into the forefront of the environmental agenda.
Canada signed the 1997 Declaration of the Environmental Leaders of the Eight on Children’s Environmental Health that pledged action on the following issues: risk assessment and standard-setting that take into account the specific exposure pathways and dose-response characteristics of children; children’s exposures to lead; clean water and water standards; air quality (including environmental tobacco smoke); and emerging threats to children’s health from endocrine-disrupting chemicals (such as polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxins that have been shown to have neurotoxic effects, and to alter thyroid function).
Thyroid hormone is critical to most processes involved in brain development – regulating neurite outgrowth, cellular migration, synaptogenesis, myelogenesis and the development of major neurotransmitter systems (5).
Despite the above pledges, the effects of toxic exposures on child health and development are receiving little attention in Canada in research or by other federal programs investigating the determinants of health and development. In addition, there are gaps in regulatory programs and policies that need to be revised to protect children.
By contrast, a 1997 executive order from the White House (6) acknowledged that children may suffer disproportionately from environmental health risks, and directed all American federal regulatory agencies to ensure that their policies, programs and standards address these risks. The executive order also established a high level interagency task force to recommend federal strategies and research.
The above actions have generated a number of new initiatives in the United States: eight centres for children’s environmental health and disease prevention research, and announced this year, an additional four more centres on neurodevelopmental effects; a new Office of Children’s Health Protection at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); and a major proposed study, A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Environmental Effects on Children’s Development, that will involve thousands of pregnancies from American intake sites.
The need for new approaches to government standard-setting and premarket safety evaluations to protect children was addressed in a five-year United States National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children (1993) (7). Among other findings, the report stated: “The data strongly suggest that exposure to neurotoxic compounds at levels believed to be safe for adults could result in permanent loss of brain function if it occurred during the prenatal and early childhood period of brain development”.
Many toxic agents are known to damage the developing, and unprotected, brain by interfering with those processes undergoing development at the time of the exposure (Rodier, 1995) (8). It is clear that even subtle structural or neurochemical defects can nonetheless have devastating functional consequences.
TOXICITY TESTING
The NAS report made several recommendations for changes in risk assessments and standard-setting to protect children. To assess risk, regulators need adequate toxicity data to establish a No Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) and adequate exposure data that takes into account both aggregate exposures (from all sources of the chemical, eg, water, food, carpets) and cumulative exposures (from several chemicals with a similar mode of action).
The NAS Committee stated that the need for developmental neurotoxicity testing, which is not a core data requirement for pesticides, was of particular importance, as is the need to assess the potential for toxicity to the developing immune and reproductive systems. In assessing risks to children, the NAS recommended that an additional uncertainty factor be applied to the animal data to take into account toxicity and/or exposure data gaps.
This action was mandated by Congress in the 1996 United States Food Quality Protection Act, requiring reassessments of pesticides. New EPA requirements for neurodevelopmental data have lead to some new regulations and bans on the major uses of two common pesticides.
In 1989, The Learning Disabilities Association of Canada (LDAC) and LDA America adopted resolutions titled, “The Need for Federally Mandated Developmental Neurotoxicity Testing to Protect Human Health: Central Nervous System Development” (www.ldac-taac.ca). Canada’s Minister of Health assured LDAC in 1990 that new guidelines would be issued in that year, which has not happened.
However, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency is harmonizing its re-evaluation process with the USEPA and requiring developmental neurotoxicity testing for two classes of pesticides that act on the nervous systems of pests. However, this leaves risk assessments for other pesticides, food additives and colours, drugs, cosmetics, and high volume neurotoxic chemicals without these data.
For example, an organic form of a known neurotoxicant, manganese, methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT), was approved, and reassessed as being safe for use in Canadian gasoline without developmental neurotoxicity data. Manganese exposure produces effects on neurotransmitter systems in developing animals, but not in adult animals (9), and in humans, manganese toxicity produces neuropsychiatric disorders and symptoms similar to Parkinson’s disease (10).
In the United States, the USEPA refused Ethyl Corporation’s petition to market MMT, based on unresolved health concerns; however, this was overturned in a narrow court decision that found that EPA could not ban a fuel additive based on health effects alone under the Clean Air Act.
EXPOSURE
Because children are smaller, they receive a more concentrated dose of a toxicant than adults. The fetus and the infant have immature detoxification systems, and the blood-brain barrier is not yet formed. Children also consume more of fewer foods, so a child might receive a higher exposure to a chemical contained on or in a favourite food during many meals every day. They play and breathe closer to the floor where contaminants accumulate in air and dust. Compared with adults, children consume more food and water, breathe more air on a mg/kg body weight basis and tend to absorb more toxicants.
The NAS report found that infants would consume up to seven times the amount of water on a mg/kg body weight basis than that consumed by adults. Water can be a source of exposure to toxicants for children, especially to children living in areas where groundwater is contaminated with pesticide and nitrate runoff. However, in Canada there is no federal legislation that sets enforceable standards for contaminants in drinking water; rather, the federal government, with the provinces, establishes ‘guidelines’ or nonenforceable limits for these chemicals and regulation is left to the provinces.
Unfortunately, no systematic chemical analyses with reporting and enforcement of drinking water guidelines are mandated for populations in Canada by any department, or level of government.
In a survey of well water (Ontario, 1989 [unpublished data]), atrazine, a triazine herbicide, was found in one sample at 210 parts per billion (ppb), 40 times the Canadian Maximum Acceptable Concentration (MAC) of 5 ppb. A five-year study of the effects of environmental groundwater concentrations of pesticides (aldicarb and atrazine) and nitrates on the immune, hormonal and nervous systems of mice found effects, replicated many times, in altered thyroid levels, immune system suppression, and increased aggressiveness (11).
Do drinking water guidelines, or MACs, protect children? The rationale for the MAC for each chemical in drinking water is published by Health Canada, and calculated on an adult weight and consumption pattern. For example, consider atrazine with a MAC of 0.005 mg/L or 5 ppb, and recalculate the MAC based on a 7 kg child consuming 1 L/day, instead of a 70 kg adult consuming 1.5 L/day, the MAC would need to be close to an order of magnitude lower at 0.0007 mg/L or 0.7 ppb.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Research informs both clinical management and regulatory policy. In the 1960s, a blood lead level of 60 mg/dL was considered to be toxic. Since the 1970s, epidemiological research has altered the perception of lead’s hazards, lead was banned as a gasoline additive, and the concern for lead toxicity is now 10 mg/dL. There may be no threshold for lead’s effects – a recent study by Lanphear et al (12) linked levels as low as 2.5 mg/dL with neuro- developmental effects.
Unlike mandated programs in the United States, there are virtually no lead screening programs for children at risk in Canada. A study by Valiquette and Kosatsky (13) investigated laboratory records to review care received by children in Montreal in the 1980s with elevated blood lead levels, greater than 25 mg/dL, and found inadequate follow-up, little reporting to public health authorities or management of the source of lead, which in most cases was lead-containing paint (13).
There is a voluntary agreement in Canada with the paint industry that should limit lead in paint to the United States 1977 regulated limit of 600 ppm, but Canada’s regulation under the Hazardous Products Act still permits more than eight times the 600 ppm limit for indoor paint, with no limit on outdoor paint. LDAC has urged that this regulation be updated for more than 10 years. A strategy to restrict the lead content of consumer products that was supposed to be issued for comment in 1998 is still in limbo.
The risk assessment for lead is complete, but the snail’s pace approach to regulation shows that there is a need for enhanced risk management in Canada.
PROTECTING CHILDREN
The list of what needs to be done and is known to prevent some fraction of developmental disabilities is lengthy. There is a need for action on many toxic, persistent and cumulative chemicals. The federal government must develop guidelines to ensure that Health Canada bases acceptable levels of toxicants in air, water, soil and food on adequate developmental data and risk assessment policies to protect children. Testing for developmental neurotoxicity must become a requirement for chemicals of concern in safety evaluations and in standard settings.
The precautionary principle – not waiting for years for all the evidence to be in before taking action on known or strongly suspected hazards to prevent harm – should take precedence over the calls from vested interests for ‘sound science’ (ie, ‘proof of harm’) before regulatory action can be taken. While the latter view prevails, there is an equal responsibility for government to appropriate the resources to generate this science in the public interest.
Health Canada should join the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention biomonitoring program, which has recently published the National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals (http://www. cdc.gov/nceh/dls/report/), using biomarkers for 25 toxic substances in blood and urine. There is a need for enhanced environmental health research programs, and an expanded birth defects surveillance program with the ability to detect and study clusters of neurodevelopmental disorders.
The Liberal Party 2000 Redbook (14) platform promised $750 million over four years for this type of research, and to ensure safe water, air and soil. Health professionals could become important advocates on these issues, and should also consider the possibility that environmental agents may be playing a part in the etiologies of the diseases and disorders that they are seeing in their practices or research.
http://www.pulsus.com/Paeds/06_10/mcel_ed.htm
———————
Future Debates: “There’s Still a Long Way to Go, Baby…”
This news was added to our newspaper on Thursday 10 July, 2003.
Private Homes and Vehicles
A fairly new and contentious issue regarding SHS involves the idea of restricting children’s exposure in private homes and vehicles. A recent unpublished opinion poll[2] presented at the 3rd National Conference on Tobacco or Health (2002) suggests that over a third of Canadians surveyed indicated they would support regulations to protect children from SHS in private homes and vehicles.
A bill recently proposed in Georgia, USA, would make it illegal to smoke in a private vehicle while carrying a child under the age of 4 restrained in a car seat. The facts are clear: 800, 000 Canadian children under the age of 12 are regularly exposed to SHS at home, and the adverse health risks are well established.
Dr. Noel Kerin, a spokesman for the Canadian Lung Association, recently spoke out forcefully on the issue, stating that smoking around children is tantamount to child abuse. The Moncton media then reported that Richard Bouchard, a criminal law professor at l’Université de Moncton, said that it is possible to argue such a case. Under the Criminal Code of Canada, parents are responsible for providing the “necessities of life” which include a healthy environment in which to live.
Indeed, being able to provide a healthy living environment is becoming an increasingly important issue in child custody battles. Courts are realizing that protecting children’s physical health includes their protection from SHS. Ferrence[3] found that 50% of respondents in her study either agreed or strongly agreed that parental smoking should be considered by judges determining custody.
Rob Cunningham, a lawyer and senior policy analyst with the Canadian Cancer Society, reports having seen cases where judges have ordered parents not to smoke in the presence of their children. However, to date it appears that no custody case has been decided solely on SHS, but rather is one piece of a complex decision-making process.
Where do we go from here? Is legislating smoking in private homes and vehicles possible? Is it even something that we would want to see in a civil society like Canada? It seems more likely that increased public education and awareness about SHS is the solution, not increased legislation and interference in people’s private lives. It is generally understood that every parent wishes the best for his or her child, and when given the right information, will make appropriate choices to protect children’s health and well-being.
Protection from SHS Outdoors
Restricting or even banning smoking in some outdoor environments remains another controversial issue. True, some governments have prohibited smoking around building entrances, air in-take vents and open windows. But what about outdoor stadiums, concerts, patios, beaches, playgrounds and parks? Ferrence[4] indicates that 37% of Canadians polled would support smoking restrictions on patios and in line-ups, and 17% would support bans on beaches, sidewalks and in parks.
Repace[5] reports that outdoor bans are in fact scientifically justifiable in some circumstances. He describes cigarettes as point sources of air pollution and groups of outdoor smokers as area sources. If conditions are such that there is no wind, rising smoke plumes will cool and lose upward momentum, thereby saturating the local area with SHS. The presence of wind will not necessarily clear the air of respirable particles. Thus, non-smokers may be exposed to SHS levels comparable to unrestricted indoor smoking environments.
Opponents question the relative risk of brief exposure to SHS outdoors, and query the value of a zero-tolerance approach for civil society. There is a risk of tobacco control advocates being perceived as having “gone too far” on this issue, throwing into question other important and scientifically justifiable work. No doubt the debate will continue.
—-
COALITION AGAINST TOBACCO TAX EVASION
FOR RELEASE, FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 2003
TIME IS RUNNING OUT FOR OTTAWA TO SUE ‘BIG TOBACCO’ OVER ALLEGED TOBACCO SMUGGLING FRAUD .
Billions in cigarette taxes at stake says new coalition
Minister of Justice and Attorney General Martin Cauchon’s department is not revealing any date when it believes its right to sue expires. “Those who work in tobacco control and follow this issue know that the limitations deadline is, at best, a few short weeks away,” said Garfield Mahood, Executive Director of the Non-Smokers’ Rights Association.
*shows that the date of expiration for smuggling suit has expired
http://www.nsraadnf.ca/news_info.php?cPath=0&news_id=213&PHPSESSID=848e76ab95416e65e987a95b41c34861
Ontario facing demands for exemptions from smoking law -ON
Friday, Dec 17, 2004
The McGuinty government put forward legislation this week to ban smoking in all workplaces and indoor public areas.
But just days after the bill was introduced there are numerous calls for exemptions.
Social Services Minister Sandra Pupatello has called for an exemption for Windsor and Niagara because they are border communities.
Their casinos and other entertainment venues might be badly hurt by a smoking ban, she says.
Health Minister George Smitherman says he’s willing to consider allowing smoking on stages and in film studios.
He concedes an exemption might be needed to allow smoking that is part of the action in a film or in a play. Related link: Ontario proposes strict new smoking laws
And the law won’t be applied in First Nations without their co-operation. That has triggered a debate among aboriginal leaders on whether to allow smoking.
Peter Collins, Chief of the Fort William First Nation, located just outside Thunder Bay, says smoking will be permitted in his community.
Most restaurants permit smoking, as does the community bingo hall.
“We believe in economics. A lot of smokers love to come to bingos. It’s part of our economics in Fort William,” he says.
But another aboriginal leader wants northern First Nations to voluntarily join the province-wide ban on smoking.
Stan Beardy, Grand Chief of Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, says it’s a tragedy that so many native people are dying of the effects of tobacco.
“We have major cases, huge numbers of my people having cancer, lung cancer, heart disease. I think a lot of these can be connected directly to smoking.”
He says health concerns should outweigh any economic factors.
A spokesperson from the Ministry of Health says the province recognizes First Nation communities don’t have to accept the anti-smoking ban, if and when it becomes law.
But the ministry plans to work with native leaders to address the issue of smoking as part of a culturally appropriate aboriginal health strategy.
http://toronto.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/PrintStory?filename=tor-smoking-law-041217®ion=Toronto
—
Not breathing any easier -ON
Dec 23, 2004
When he announced the Province’s tough new smoking legislation last week, Health Minister George Smitherman triumphantly stated that, “unless Ontarians want to be exposed to cigarette smoke, they won’t be.”
The fact that smoking will soon be banned in casinos, legion halls and enclosed patios, in addition to bars, restaurants and all other indoor public places, means this is probably true.
But as someone who regularly loses her breath to asthma and allergies, I have to say that this doesn’t offer me much peace of mind. Despite hysterical accounts of second-hand smoke invading people’s lungs as they eat dinner, enjoy a pint or gamble the night away, cigarettes have always been the last thing to leave me breathless.
In the distant smoke-filled past, if I wanted to avoid the ominous blue haze, I made sure to frequent restaurants with good ventilation and sit as far away from the smoking section as possible. I avoided tiny cramped pubs, sat on open patios in the summer, and asked friends and acquaintances to roll the windows down when smoking in a car.
Yes, I’m sure there were trace amounts of smoke attacking my lungs all the while, but for the most part, unless I wanted to be exposed to cigarette smoke, I wasn’t.
As it turns out, avoiding car exhaust fumes and deadly industrial emissions, isn’t as easy. On smoggy summer days, there is no bylaw-enforced refuge from the dense brown smog that often leaves me gasping for air. Whether inside or outside, at a bar or in a car, there is no escape.
But this, according to the government, is something we can live with. Cigarette smoke is not.
Is it because bar owners, convenience store owners and legion members are a little easier to bully than the industry big shots behind the factories? Is it more convenient to make an example of smokers, stupidly jeopardizing their own health, than car owners, who make up the vast majority of the population?
The next time I’m forced to catch my breath while taking a summer stroll, I guarantee you that the sight of smokers banished to patios and doorways, won’t make me breathe any easier.
Reporter Jillian Follert’s column appears every other Friday.
http://www.durhamregion.com/dr/voices/column/story/2445563p-2832466c.html
—-
Air pollution kills people, too -ON
Editorials Tuesday, January 11, 2005 .
National anthem serves to exclude many Canadians
While we applaud the efforts of the various levels of government and our local health unit to provide incentives to help people quit smoking, we wonder at the logic of using a gas-guzzling muscle car as the prize in Ontario Quit Smoking 2005.
Participants must go smoke-free from Feb. 1 to March 1 to be eligible to win.
Cars not only encourage people to be less active and, therefore, less healthy, they pollute the air we all breathe.
This opportunity could have been used not only to promote the health benefits of going smoke-free but also to promote the benefits to all Ontarians of using less polluting means of transportation by at least making the prize a fuel-efficient vehicle (or, better yet, a bicycle).
There are cars with internal combustion engines on the market that use as little as 6.7 litres of fuel per 100 kilometres in the city and 5.2 litres/100 kilometres on the highway. On average, a vehicle with this kind of fuel efficiency would produce 2,880 kilograms of carbon-dioxide emissions annually.
In fact, the hybrid vehicles on the market that combine electric and internal combustion engines are twice as efficient as other cars their size.
The muscle car being given away in the stop smoking contest has a 4.6-litre, V8 engine and uses 13.3 litres/100 kilometres in the city and 9.2 litres/100 kilometres on the highway and produces 5,471 kilograms of carbon-dioxide emissions per year.
Granted, the natural North American appeal of a muscle car makes for an attractive prize, but organizers should realize even North American automakers have discovered that the public wants green cars. In fact, a hybrid SUV garnered the award as 2004 North American Truck of the Year at the North American auto show in Detroit this week.
As vehicles are a contributing factor in the poor quality of our air, it reminds us that air pollution, like smoking, kills people, too.
According to the government of Ontario, smoking-related illnesses kill about 16,000 people a year and patients with tobacco-related diseases occupy more than 500,000 hospital days each year at a cost of $1.7 billion to our health-care system and $2.6 billion in lost productivity annually.
Health Canada, the Ontario Health Ministry and local health units tell us that air pollution is becoming increasingly dangerous to our health, especially in heavily populated southern Ontario.
The Ontario Medical Association estimates that air pollution leads to nearly 1,900 premature deaths in the province, 10,000 hospital admissions, 13,000 emergency room visits and 47 million sick days for employees in the province each year and costs Ontario citizens roughly $1 billion dollars per year due to hospital admissions, emergency room visits and absenteeism.
All levels of governments, from municipal to federal, work towards getting people to butt out and are slowly waking up to the dire realities of air pollution and the effects it has on our health and the health of environment, which makes the choice of the muscle car in lieu of something much more green seem curious and more than a little ironic.
Ultimately, in a publicly funded health-care system, any efforts to get people to quit smoking benefit us all, but perhaps a little more thought should have gone into the message sent by the prize. http://stratfordbeaconherald.com/
—–
Saskatchewan news roundup: -SK
Sonntag urges Ottawa to reject weaker bylaws Jan. 12
The federal government is being urged to reject First Nations smoking bylaws that are not as tough as the provincewide ban on smoking in public places.
Band councils can pass their own bylaws under the Indian Act, but the federal minister of Indian Affairs has the power to veto them.
Maynard Sonntag, minister for First Nations and Metis Relations, says the federal government should not approve the weaker bylaws when they are submitted.
The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations indicated in December that First Nations would be unlikely to follow the smoking ban in native-run casinos. (The StarPhoenix)
—–
Sask. wants Ottawa’s help on smoking ban -SK
CBC News Last Updated Jan 12 2005 08:18 AM CST REGINA – Saskatchewan’s Minister of First Nations and Metis Relations is looking for Ottawa to back him up on the provincial smoking ban.
Maynard Sonntag said he’d like federal Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Andy Scott to say no to bylaws that would allow smoking on First Nations’ casinos in Saskatchewan.
The provincial government has banned smoking in all public places, beginning Jan. 1.
However, aboriginal leaders say that law doesn’t apply in casinos on their land. The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations has said bands will write their own laws, but it won’t necessarily mean total smoking bans.
Sonntag said because band bylaws need approval from the federal minister, he’s counting on Ottawa to refuse.
“Absolutely. I mean, I’ve been of that view for quite some time,” Sonntag said. “It would be the honourable thing to do on a important health issue like this.”
Sonntag wouldn’t speculate on what might happen if First Nations’ casinos do allow smoking.
But he did say he would prefer the same rules for all Saskatchewan businesses.
Indian leaders say the smoking ban infringes on their jurisdiction
The Saskatchewan hotel industry says if smoking is allowed in casinos, it wants the government to reconsider the use of ventilated smoking rooms in their businesses.
http://sask.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/first-nations-smoking050112.html
—-
Smoking ban: does it go too far? -SK
SELDOM, IF EVER, do you see a government placing full-page advertisements in newspapers large and small. Yet that was what happened in the Christmas issues of Ontario’s papers.
In case you missed it (and it’s hard to believe anyone did) the ad included a green logo, Smoke Free Ontario, and the catchy heading, STOPPING THE NUMBER ONE KILLER IN ONTARIO.
Those who didn’t read further might have suspected it was all about cancer or heart disease. Although it could be argued that both are involved, the reality is that the ad dealt with the McGuinty government’s plan to introduce a single law that would replace the current hodge podge of municipal laws designed to reduce or eliminate smoking in public places.
As matters stand, some municipalities have come a long way in this regard, Dufferin among them. Gone are the days when the first question patrons faced on entering their favourite eatery was, “Smoking or non-smoking,” and on saying “Non-smoking, please,” being advised that unfortunately none was available. (Actually, before Dufferin finally moved on the issue, there were still some restaurants where ashtrays adorned every table!)
Unusual as it was for the government to spend so much on informational advertising, it was doubly unusual to see that the message conveyed dealt with legislation which has not yet been enacted, and may never be in its present form.
In the circumstances, it’s pretty clear that the ad was designed, among other things, to stimulate public discussion of the issue.
That has already begun to happen, our check of an Internet database confirming that there has indeed been a deluge of letters to the editor on the subject, and even the occasional editorial.
Take for example, the one published in The Toronto Sun, which struck us as amazingly balanced for the Grit-trashing tabloid.
“We laughed when they tried to ban sushi,” it began. “But this time they’re serious.
“The Ontario Liberals campaigned on a promise to ban smoking virtually everywhere in the great indoors, and by George (Smitherman), they’re going to do it.
“In case you missed it in the pre-Christmas rush, the Liberals have indeed acted on their promise and launched legislation just over a week ago that will ban smoking everywhere but in private homes – and in some cases, such as in homes that house daycare operations, they’ll ban it there, too.
“Health Minister Smitherman reminds us it’s all for the good of our health – more Ontarians die each year from smoking than AIDS, traffic accidents and alcohol combined, etc. Fine – we don’t dispute that (although given the enormous tax revenue the province rakes in on smokes, it could do more to help smokers quit).
“In fact, we don’t even dispute the strict measures wiping out smoking in all workplaces – after all, no one should be forced to risk lung cancer at work.
“But two areas of Smitherman’s law go too far.
“First, it will ban smoking even in separately ventilated smoking rooms – which many bars and restaurants built expressly to conform to previous legislation, at considerable cost.
“This hardly seems fair. After all, these are places where adult smokers go voluntarily to partake in a legal product. No one’s forced to be there. So what’s the problem?
“Second, there’s the related proposal to ban smoking in Legions. Sorry, George, but that’s where we draw the line. If our war veterans want to smoke in their private clubs, who are you to tell them they can’t?
“Let the vets use the freedom they fought for to decide their own policy.
“In fact, the Ontario Provincial Command of the Royal Canadian Legion isn’t even asking for a full exemption from the ban – only that they be allowed to have separate, ventilated smoking rooms (in those Legions that can afford to build them). That’s more than reasonable.
“But then, ‘reasonable’ and Smitherman are two words that rarely appear in the same sentence. In a government rapidly becoming known for nannying, he’s Mary Poppins. Still, he did see reason on the sushi thing, eventually.
“Is smoking ‘stupid,’ as the government’s trendy new campaign puts it? Sure – but we can’t say much better for this unwarranted bullying of businesses and veterans.”
For once, the Sun was fairly close to the mark, zeroing in on two areas where there’s bound to be a lot of controversy.
We would be inclined to go part way, and suspect the government may, too.
Clearly, restaurants and bars that have spent a lot on establishing separately ventilated smoking areas ought to get special treatment, perhaps by giving them several years to comply with the total ban.
However, we still have a problem with the resultant requirement for staff in such places to enter these smoke-filled areas to serve the patrons. Clearly, they will be facing a lot more second-hand smoke than they encountered when part of the place was designated as non-smoking.
And the same could be said of the Sun”s “solution” for Legion halls. Concentrating all the smoke in one area will certainly make the air safer for the non-smoking Legionaires, but not for a staff member required to enter the smoking room.
Whatever the case, we’ve come a long way and it’s interesting to see an Ontario government moving almost as far as the NDP regime in Saskatchewan, which is trying to ban even brand-name advertising displays on tobacco counters.
Now, what’s really needed is some action in Hollywood, in the form of an end to the practice of having the big-name stars routinely indulging in the nicotine habit on screen – a practice so clearly aimed at the younger generation.
http://www.citizen.on.ca/editorial.html
—-
Quebec smoking-ban plan cheered locally -QC
CBC News Last Updated Jan 12 2005 01:31 PM EST GATINEAU – There’s rejoicing at Gatineau City Hall about Quebec’s decision to ban smoking in all public places in the province within a year.
Making Gatineau a smoke-free city has been a goal of Mayor Yves Ducharme for several years. But he has always maintained it was up to the province to take a stand.
Ducharme says Quebec’s announcement is good news for the entire province.
About one in four people over the age of 15 smokes in Quebec. In the rest of Canada, it’s one in five.
Right now, Quebec allows unlimited smoking in bars.
Health Minister Philippe Couillard wants to ban smoking from bars, restaurants, school grounds, and government buildings.
http://ottawa.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/ot-que-smoking20050112.html
—
News on then Tobacco Website
January 12, 2005
Progressing toward a tobacco free Québec; Developing Québec Anti-Tobacco Legislation; Consultation document
Quebec Health Minister is launching a consultation process on how they can strengthen the tobacco law. For this he is proposing a consultation document that includes smoking restrictions in all public places, school properties, multi-dwelling buildings (2 to 12), point of sales, and other issues. You will find below the press release and a sample of the media coverage of this announcement. http://ftp.msss.gouv.qc.ca/publications/acrobat/f/documentation/2004/04-006-07a.pdf
—
January 11, 2005
Health experts to ask Federal Court to compel the Competition Bureau to act http://www.nsra-adnf.ca/…
A group of health officials announced that they will take legal action to force the federal Competition Bureau to deal with their 18-month-old complaint about the ‘light’ and ‘mild’ cigarette consumer fraud. The group, including medical officers and professors of public health, filed a two-volume, 600-page complaint with the Bureau in June of 2003. To date, the agency has failed to act in response to the group’s concerns.
—
Pakitinâsowin: Tobacco Offerings in Exchange for Stories and The Ethic of Reciprocity in First Nations Research
Herman Michell
Conclusion and Recommendations
In conclusion, I have demonstrated the cultural and spiritual significance of tobacco in Cree and other indigenous cultures in this paper. More importantly, I have highlighted the error made by University of British Columbia Ethics Review Committee in their decision not to allow me to use it as part of my research methodology.
Offering tobacco in exchange for stories is a recognized and legitimate Cree cultural protocol that expresses and adheres to the Ethic of Reciprocity and value of respect. The error made by the Ethics Review Committee appears racist as it mirrors a time when First Nations cultural practices were prohibited in Canada.
According to University of British Columbia professor and co-director of the Ts”Kel graduate program, Dr. Calliou (1995), “racism is physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually draining to both sender and receiver” and that it “legitimates military, political, social, legislative, individual, or other acts of dehumanization” (p.57).
http://simonraven.nuit.ca/tobacco-2.shtml
—
Newspaper should promote positive anti-smoking stories -ON
Jan 5, 2005
On behalf of the Halton Council on Smoking or Health, a group of health professionals, parents and community members in Halton, we are writing to express our disappointment with the Oakville Beaver, our local newspaper, for an article that appeared on Dec. 10, 2004 titled Smokers’ rights group makes noise with Web site with quotes from the president of the smokers’ rights association.
We appreciate that you provided both sides of the story however, from the reader’s perspective, it appears as if the Oakville Beaver is supporting the mychoice.ca Web site. Why promote a group that supports tobacco use and second-hand smoke exposure, which causes over 45,000 people each year to die in Canada?
The article stated that having a zero exposure level to cigarette smoke is “ridiculous”. When tobacco remains the No. 1 cause of preventable death in Canada, how can one argue that it is OK to be exposed to cigarette smoke? Nothing about being exposed to cigarette smoke is funny. The fact is, that there is no safe level of exposure to smoke set anywhere in the world. According to Health Canada (2004) tobacco use kills more than 16,000 people each year in Ontario alone.
Mychoice.ca is a Web site that claims to support the rights of smokers, when in fact it does nothing more than promote the agenda of big tobacco manufacturing companies. Groups such as these are shifting the debate about second-hand smoke exposure away from the real health issue. This should not be a debate about rights and freedoms — the paramount reason why restrictions are being enacted is to protect the health of the people who live in Ontario.
With Ontario introducing a province-wide ban on smoking, including all workplaces, public places, bars, restaurants, casinos and legion halls, the government is finally doing the right thing and taking our health seriously. Hopefully our local newspaper then, will follow suit by continuing to promote positive ways to help smokers quit, and continue to support smokers who want to quit rather than promoting the agenda of a group of people who manufacture tobacco products that are killing members of our communities.
HALTON COUNCIL ON SMOKING OR HEALTH
MICKIE DANIELS
http://www.haltonsearch.com/hr/ob/opinion/letter/story/2459822p-2849887c.html
—
Bylaw prediction comes true for local bar-SK
Just as predicted by management, business is suffering badly at one local bar ever since the smoking ban came into effect on January 1.
By Colin McGarrigle of the Journal Tuesday January 11, 2005
Just as predicted by management, business is suffering badly at one local bar ever since the smoking ban came into effect on January 1. Waneta Goldstein, manager of Chances R Motor Hotel said that her bottom line has taken a drastic and sudden drop now that previously loyal customers are spending more time at home. “Business is very noticeably down. In such a short time, that’s very scary,” said Goldstein.
“They (customers) pop in quick, have a beer and leave. They’re not sitting for two, three, four beer, or for the evening any more,” said Goldstein on the pattern she has seen since Jan. 1. “If they smoke, they go outside. But most of the time they just guzzle a beer and leave,” she added. In December, Goldstein was forced to lay off two bar staff because of her prediction that her business would take a turn for the worst with the smoking ban.
She added that they are enforcing the smoking ban at Chances R even though many bars in the province have been allowing their customers to smoke since the government announced there would be a two-month transition period.
However, Health Minister John Nilson clarified his position last week on the transition period and stated that bars would be ticketed if they do not enforce the smoking ban. “During this initial 60-day period, we want to give everyone the opportunity to comply.
This period does not mean, however, that smoking in public places can continue until March 1, 2005,” said Nilson. “If, after information, education and verbal or written warning, establishments or individuals remain in flagrant non-compliance they may well face tickets or charges,” Nilson added.
Goldstein said that even though there are no tickets being handed out, she fears that non-compliance over the two-month period could hurt her chances of renewing her liquor license. “They won’t ticket us or the patrons for the two months, but they will write us up and send it off to the Liquor Control Board. “Then it could be held against you when your liquor license has to be renewed,” said Goldstein on the chance she is not willing to take.
—-
Minister undecided on extending smoking ban to reserves -SK
Broadcast News Thursday, January 13, 2005
REGINA – The federal Indian Affairs minister says he’s in a bind when it comes to approving a First Nations’ bylaw that would do an end run around provincial anti-smoking legislation.
Andy Scott says there are health issues with smoking but there’s also the belief that First Nations should have the right to run their own communities.
Scott was speaking today in Regina about the situation on the White Bear First Nation in Saskatchewan.
While smoking is now banned inside all public places across the province, the reserve has passed its own bylaw that allows residents to light up in bingo halls and the local casino.
Under the Indian Act, Ottawa must approve the bylaw but the province has asked Scott to reject it.
The minister says he wants to consult all parties involved in the issue, including his cabinet colleagues, before he decides.
A decision must be made within the next week.
http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/story.html?id=7f94bfcb-6074-47a4-9264-b8c5e4d41920
—-
Butt-out battle flares-AB
Complete public smoking ban plan will be presented to MLAs by April
By JERRY WARD AND ANDREA SANDS, SUN MEDIA Thu, January 13, 2005
EDMONTON — Health Minister Iris Evans wants a complete public smoking ban in Alberta and plans to present a proposal by April. “I’m going to see how far we can pursue that,” Evans said yesterday. “If we can make sure that in every public place, every workplace, every place possible that is either in the public domain, or in a workplace we can reduce or eliminate the use of tobacco, then I think we’ll make a significant stride towards it (a blanket ban).
“We have to take a look at pushing it as far we can. We may not be able to accomplish or reach our targets … but I think we will make some gains this time.”
All previous efforts to enact such a law have failed when voted on by Tory MLAs.
Evans is more hopeful now, thanks to a new set of cabinet ministers following the provincial election. She plans to present an all-encompassing, Alberta-wide no-smoking proposal to a Tory government policy committee in March or April to get the ball rolling.
If adopted at that level, the proposal would then go before the government cabinet and caucus for consideration.
“I don’t have a magic bullet for this,” Evans said. “What I do have is a ministry with costs rising, particularly for drugs and emerging technologies, services and so on.”
Evans said she will consult chambers of commerce, health groups, municipalities and others to form the legislation.
New Democratic party Leader Brian Mason said it would be “great” if Evans could round up support to implement a province-wide smoking ban.
“The problem is that municipalities are doing different things and it creates and uneven playing field for small businesses and we’re developing a kind of patchwork approach,” Mason said.
Even the heavy-smoking province of Quebec intends to establish new provincial rules to curb smoking in public, said Les Hagen of Action on Smoking and Health.
“We’re talking about the backyard of tobacco country,” Hagen said. “If they can get away with this in Quebec, surely we can get away with this in Alberta, especially when the Alberta government seems so committed to health reform.
“If you’re going to talk seriously about health reform, you have to talk about smoking.”
Every year, 3,400 Albertans die from smoke-related illnesses, Hagen said.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/News/2005/01/13/897021-sun.html
—
Tabacco growers bemoan attack on industry -ON
Thursday January 13, 2005
By Times-Journal Staff Tobacco growers in Ontario want governments to be accountable for their “attack” on producers’ livelihood, says the chairman of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board. “We are not looking for a short-term fix,” said Fred Neukamm, responding to comments made by the chairman of the Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association.
Murray Porteous, maintained the way the federal and provincial governments are handling relief for tobacco farmers might ruin small-volume markets for fruits and vegetables. “Government payouts, direct subsidies are the answers to short-term situations, but fail to achieve long-term economic sustainability, particularly for agriculture,” Porteous said.
Neukamm responded tobacco growers are the victims of a war waged on the industry where quantities of imported leaf tobacco have increased and contraband and counterfeit activity have increased.
“We have lost our ability to supply the Canadian consumer,” Neukamm said. Porteous suggested more government funding should be directed at market research and development, “because growers will likely move into horticultural production, causing an imbalance of supply and demand and shrinking already-dwindling prices to the point of no return.”
“Pouring more money into the fruit and vegetable industry may help those farmers that Mr. Porteous represents, but will do little to help beleaguered tobacco farmers,” Neukamm responded.
Neukamm added he believed it was unlikely additional research would result in enough new crops to support production on the more than 100,000 acres tobacco farmers cultivate. “It has been said before and it will be said again — the only alternative crop to tobacco is tobacco,” Neukamm said. Neukamm said the government has declared war on tobacco, not on strawberries or apples, and he urged Porteous to support tobacco farmers.
http://www.stthomastimesjournal.com/story.php?id=137308
—
Smoke and morals -ON
Father Raymond J. de Souza National Post Jan. 14/05
Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman introduced his new anti-smoking legislation last month, striking a presumed note of moderation: “And so we’re saying to Ontarians, if you want to smoke at home, we’re not going to stop you.”
That’s generous. But just about everywhere else, smoking will be forbidden — even in private clubs, Legion halls and yes, parking garages, where loiterers presumably might be afflicted by “deadly second-hand smoke”. Three months ago, the Ontario Medical Association asked the government to ban smoking in private cars if children were present. So far that is not on the agenda, but otherwise Ontario has embraced the full zealotry of the anti-smoking program.
That’s not new. But what is striking is how passionate the Ontario government is about providing moral instruction to its citizens when it comes to matters of health.
The anti-smoking strategy includes a government-funded Web site entitled stupid.ca. It assures us that it is not “meant to be an insult to smokers” because “smokers aren’t stupid.” Rather it offers “social commentary on the choice to smoke or not to smoke.” Oh. Browse the Web site and the only possible conclusion is that if smokers aren’t stupid — meaning that they don’t know better — then they are deliberately making bad choices. That is to say, they are morally inferior.
Governments have been in the “social commentary” business for a long while. Historically, they may have used their coercive powers to build up the moral character of their citizens — one thinks of prohibition or movie ratings or gambling restrictions. Now, government energy is focused on health. If you wish to let your soul rot in hell, the government will affirm your right to do so — but don’t try it with your body.
So we have the rather ironic situation that the government of Ontario operates casinos, but now won’t let you smoke in them. The government of Ontario — like other provinces — will entice the public to gamble, but as you are wagering away the grocery money, don’t think about lighting a cigarette.
Our universities promote condoms to new students with great enthusiasm to avoid disease; nary a word is offered that might question promiscuity as a bad moral choice. Public health authorities will facilitate your drug habit with free needles but are not so keen about telling you that it is simply wrong to shoot yourself up.
On health matters, the government is a veritable church lady. On other matters, it is the permissive mother on the block whose house the other children are forbidden from playing at.
The anti-smoking legislation caps a rather remarkable year on the health front. A private member’s bill sailed through Queen’s Park making helmets mandatory for adults when cycling, rollerblading or skateboarding. My colleague Andrew Coyne demolished the evidentiary case for mandatory bike helmets in November in these pages, but no matter. The initiative is a moral one: There exists a moral imperative to minimize all health risk, and should you dissent, the law will bind you.
More examples? Last September, the government moved to ban fresh sushi, insisting upon frozen instead because it would be safer. That proved a stretch too far, so the ban did not go through.
What apparently cannot be rescinded is the mentality that free citizens cannot be trusted to manage their own health. When it comes to thorny social issues, those advocating the abandonment of traditional mores insist on the supremacy of individual consciences. But not when it comes to health. Our public policy will not vigorously discourage someone from bearing children out of wedlock, with all its attendant pathologies, but it will do its best to make sure those children’s bathwater is the right temperature.
Bathwater? Perhaps you are unfamiliar with a recent public campaign by Toronto Public Health, aimed at getting parents not to burn their children in the bath.
A full campaign, complete with posters, brochures and flyers all over Toronto’s transit system, funded fully by the Ontario taxpayer, telling parents to check the temperature of their hot water, lest the little ones scald themselves. What kind of mentality spends public health dollars to tell parents what every 14-year-old babysitter knows — that you check the water temperature before plunging Junior in the tub?
The safety and smoking fanatics operate on the assumption that people are not responsible enough to be trusted with their freedom. So they must be harassed and nagged about bike helmets and bathwater, and if they don’t comply, then good habits simply must be legislated. We will be healthy, whether we like it or not.
—
Indian Affairs minister conflicted over reserve smoking-SK
Tim Cook Canadian Press Friday, January 14, 2005
REGINA (CP) – The federal Indian Affairs minister acknowledged he’s in a dilemma when it comes to dealing with smoking bylaws enacted by First Nations that attempt to do an end run around provincial rules.
Speaking in Regina on Thursday, Andy Scott said there are two conflicting issues at play – health and aboriginal self-government. “We would wish that communities have more authority over decisions,” Scott said. “At the same time I believe strongly that we should do what we can to mitigate the health risks associated with smoking.”
Scott made the comments when he was asked about the problems Saskatchewan is having with its tough new anti-smoking law.
Effective Jan. 1, smokers have had to butt out in all public buildings in the province or face fines. The law was meant to apply across the board, both on reserve and off.
But under the Indian Act, if a band were to pass a bylaw that conflicts with the provincial law, the band bylaw would prevail. For a bylaw to come into force, however, it must be first forwarded to the federal minister, who has 40 days to object.
Earlier this week, the Saskatchewan government came forward asking Scott to quash any bylaws that are weaker than the provincial anti-smoking legislation.
Scott said that he wants to consult with all of the stakeholders as well as his cabinet colleagues before he makes a decision.
But that will have to be done quickly.
The White Bear First Nation in the southeast corner of the province submitted a bylaw for approval on Dec. 9. It would allow smoking in bingo halls and casinos.
That means Scott’s decision will have to come within a week.
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations vice-chief Morley Watson said it should be up to native people to decide what is best for their health.
He said there are some bands in the province that came forward with anti-smoking bylaws before the province’s rule came into effect.
“We’re fully aware of making the best decision in our own lives,” Watson said. “We cannot continue to have governements come along with very paternalistic attitudes that they have shown all along.”
Saskatchewan Aboriginal Affairs Minister Maynard Sonntag got a chance to press the province’s case with Scott on Thursday afternoon.
After the meeting, Sonntag told reporters that the Saskatchewan government respects First Nation self-governance, however, the province feels strongly about the health issues related to smoking.
“I don’t think we are forcing anything on the federal minister at all,” Sonntag said. “We are stating to him what we think is just a critically important health issue and want him to be aware of that.”
Two other provinces, New Brunswick and Manitoba, have public smoking bans similar to the one in Saskatchewan. Quebec, Ontario and Newfoundland all have laws on the way and just this week Alberta’s health minister mused publicly about getting on board.
New Brunswick is in the same situation as Saskatchewan in that politicians there have asked First Nations to respect the new rules, but can do little should a bylaw be passed.
Manitoba avoided the issue by making reserves exempt from its smoking ban. The exemption has created controversy, however, with non-reserve business owners claiming it’s a two-tier system.
http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=2d8246af-c276-422d-a9da-f5a4b562da9b
Smoking ban a ‘workplace safety’ issue -AB
Health minister seeks tougher smoking laws while premier says: ‘If you’re stupid, smoke’
James Baxter; With files from Jason Fekete Thursday, January 13, 2005
EDMONTON – Health Minister Iris Evans will push for a provincewide ban on smoking in the workplace as a cornerstone of the government’s latest wellness strategy.
The patchwork of municipal bylaws across the province isn’t working, so the government needs to take a leadership role by launching a new tobacco-control campaign, complete with new laws, said Evans, who took over the portfolio from Gary Mar after the November election.
“This is a question of public health and it is a question of workplace safety for employees,” said Evans. “A lot of municipalities would like to hear whether or not this caucus, and this government, and this health minister would support a tobacco reduction policy and an elimination in public places. Frankly, I would.”
On Tuesday, Premier Ralph Klein said he would like to put up billboards along the province’s highways that say: “If you’re stupid, smoke.”
Evans said Wednesday she plans to ask a government committee to come up with new ways to curb tobacco use in the workplace.
“I would like to see how far we are able to go on this health issue, this workplace issue, of reducing smoking or eliminating smoking in the workplace and in public places.”
The news was greeted with cautious optimism by anti-smoking groups, who noted that Mar championed similar legislation and failed to get it by caucus.
“Hopefully this is more than just a trial balloon,” said Les Hagen, executive director of Action on Smoking and Health. “For us, any time the premier talks about health reform, that’s good news, because you can’t seriously talk about reform without addressing the leading avoidable cost of illness and premature death in the province, which is tobacco use.”
Evans agreed that curbing smoking is a critical component of any serious effort to reform health care and cut costs to the publicly funded system.
“If we can (cut smoking in the workplace), we’ll do a lot, I think, to help young people and people of every age to stay healthier … ,” she said.
Liberal health and wellness critic Laurie Blakeman said she supports efforts to cut smoking from the workplace, adding that she believes a majority of Albertans, even smokers, support tougher restrictions on smoking in public places.
“It’s a good idea and I’m right there,” said Blakeman.
But she too wonders whether Evans will be any more successful than Mar in garnering caucus support.
“I think what the government needs most is intestinal fortitude,” she said.
Hagen believes any legislation will be a good test of the influence Rod Love, Klein’s chief of staff, has on government policy. Before returning to government service in November, he said, Love worked as a lobbyist for a major cigarette maker.
“I think the chances (of the legislation passing) are good, but depend largely on the resolve of the health minister and of the premier,” Hagen said.
“It all comes back to health care reform. If they’re serious about reforming health care, then banning tobacco in the workplace is a no-brainer. If you aren’t, then obviously other influences are at play.”
Love, who was travelling with Klein in Ontario on Wednesday, could not be reached for comment. He has insisted that in cases of potential conflict between government policy and his former clients he will recuse himself from discussions on those issues.
No butts about it -AB
JERRY WARD and ANDREA SANDS, EDMONTON SUN
Health Minister Iris Evans wants a complete public smoking ban in Alberta and plans to present a proposal by April. “I’m going to see how far we can pursue that,” Evans said yesterday. “If we can make sure that in every public place, every workplace, every place possible that is either in the public domain or in a workplace, we can reduce or eliminate the use of tobacco then I think we’ll make a significant stride towards it (a blanket ban).
“We have to take a look at pushing it as far we can. We may not be able to accomplish or reach our targets … but I think we will make some gains this time.”
All previous efforts to enact such a law have failed when voted on by Tory MLAs. But a new set of cabinet ministers following November’s provincial election has given Evans fresh hope.
She plans to present an all-encompassing, provincewide no-smoking proposal to a government policy committee in March or April. If adopted at that level, the government cabinet and caucus would consider the proposal.
Evans said she will consult chambers of commerce, health groups, municipalities and others to form the legislation.
New Democratic Party Leader Brian Mason hopes Evans can round up support for a provincewide ban.
“The problem is that municipalities are doing different things and it creates an uneven playing field for small businesses. We’re developing a kind of patchwork approach.”
Even the heavy-smoking province of Quebec intends to establish new rules to curb smoking in public places, noted Les Hagen of Action on Smoking and Health.
“We’re talking about the backyard of tobacco country,” Hagen said. “If they can get away with this in Quebec, surely we can get away with this in Alberta, especially when the Alberta government seems so committed to health reform.
“If you’re going to talk seriously about health reform, you have to talk about smoking.”
But Premier Ralph Klein has said repeatedly his government won’t force no-smoking laws on businesses that can make their own decisions.
In March 2002, Klein told reporters he wasn’t about to order “old timers” in places like Crossfield’s Oliver hotel to butt out.
“What are you going to do? Have a whole bunch of smoke cops saying, ‘C’mon old-timer, put that cigarette out?’ “
The manager of the Oliver in the town 260 km south of Edmonton agreed yesterday that the government shouldn’t stick its nose into smoking at the “working man’s” bar.
“I think people are getting to the point where they’re told quite a bit what they can and can’t do, and it’s taking away a bit of our freedom,” said reformed smoker Delores Wood.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/News/2005/01/13/896938-sun.html
—
Ottawa treading carefully around smoking ban debate
CBC News Last Updated Jan 13 2005 02:23 PM CST REGINA – The federal Indian Affairs minister appears to be in no hurry to get involved in Saskatchewan’s smoking-ban debate.
Under a provincewide ban that went into effect Jan. 1, smoking is not permitted in bars, restaurants and other enclosed public places.
The provincial government contends the law extends to casinos, including those on Indian property. But the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN), says the province doesn’t have the jurisdiction to impose smoking rules on band property.
The FSIN has said bands will write their own smoking bylaws, although it won’t necessarily mean total smoking bans.
In response, Saskatchewan’s Minister of First Nations and Métis Relations Maynard Sonntag noted that band bylaws need approval from the federal minister.
He said earlier this week he was counting on Ottawa to refuse.
Asked what he’s going to do, federal Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott, who was in Regina Thursday, said he still hasn’t made up his mind.
“We would wish that communities have more authority over decisions,” Scott said. “At the same time I believe strongly that we should do what we can to mitigate the health risks associated with smoking.”
Scott said he’d have to discuss things with his colleagues, “the community and others” before deciding what to do. He said he’ll make a decision next week.
http://sask.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/smoking050113.html
—-
Klein rules out province-wide smoking ban -AB
Broadcast News January 14, 2005
MONTREAL – Premier Ralph Klein says Alberta will not have a province-wide ban on smoking.
Klein says municipalities should be free to set their own rules on smoking.
The premier’s comments came during a news conference in Montreal today following an address to the city’s Board of Trade.
He calls smokers — quote — “stupid,” but says he doesn’t believe it’s his job to impose a smoking ban in his province.
He also says he’d prefer to see family restaurants where children dine with their parents to be smoke-free.
Earlier this week, Health Minister Iris Evans said she was going to revisit the debate that started a few years ago on a smoking ban.
The initiative was later shot down by the government caucus but Evans said she believed the caucus and premier were now more willing to take another look at regulating smoking.
http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=5ac15fbe-1d76-43da-8244-f89cda4997eb
—
Klein says no to smoking ban -AB
Last Updated Jan 14 2005 03:51 PM MST CBC News CALGARY – Premier Ralph Klein says there will not be a provincewide ban on smoking.
Earlier this week, Health Minister Iris Evans said she was going to revisit the debate that started a few years ago. That initiative was eventually shot down by the government caucus.
Evans said she believed that this time the caucus and premier were more willing to take another look at regulating smoking.
But during a news conference in Montreal Friday, Klein rejected the idea saying that municipalities should be free to set their own rules on smoking.
“I’ve never called for a smoking ban,” he said. “But I think that if you smoke you’re stupid. Everyone knows the harms of smoking so we will leave it to the municipalities. Here’s the problem: smoking is still legal in this country.”
But that has municipalities and union leaders upset. Bob Hawksworth, head of the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association, says it’s not fair to leave bans up to individual cities and towns because of the costs involved.
Dan McLennan, president of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, says cancer is an equal opportunity killer, no matter where you live.
“You have to do a total ban – there is no other way,” he says. “We’re setting a horrific example for our kids in lagging behind on this legislation.”
Meanwhile, an Alberta member of a Canadian restaurant group says some local businesses would suffer under a smoking ban.
The Canadian Restaurant Association’s Al Brown says a provincial smoking policy isn’t a bad idea, because it sets up a level playing field for all businesses.
However, he says that other than bars, nightclubs and casinos, there are some businesses that would be at a distinct disadvantage.
He points to Manitoba, which has banned smoking in all public places, as an example. “We know now with the numbers we’re getting out of Manitoba […] that their business decreases anywhere between 15 to 25 per cent.”
Browne says his group prefers the B.C. model, which requires strict filtration and separation systems for any public place that allows smoking.
http://calgary.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/ca-smoking-ban20050114.html
Alberta Premier Klein calls smokers ‘stupid’ -AB
Canadian Press
MONTREAL — Alberta Premier Ralph Klein, a longtime smoker who has tried many times to quit, called smokers “stupid” on Friday but said he doesn’t believe it’s his job to impose a ban on lighting up in his province.
While other provinces are cracking down on smoking in public places such as malls, bars and restaurants, Klein said he believes municipalities should make their own decisions.
“Smoking is still legal in Canada,” he told a news conference after giving a speech to the Montreal Board of Trade. “I’ve never called for a smoking ban and never will. But I think if you smoke, you’re stupid.”
That comment came despite the fact that Klein himself, an aide said Friday from Edmonton, is a smoker who has tried frequently and unsuccessfully to kick the habit.
Instead of an Alberta-wide smoking ban, Klein said he’d prefer to see family restaurants where children dine with their parents to be smoke-free.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1105746444254_2/?hub=Health
* the Premier smokes
—
Smoking ban tickets might not be issued on reserves
CBC News Last Updated Jan 14 2005 09:07 AM CST REGINA – A Saskatchewan cabinet minister says the government won’t ticket people who smoke on Indian property if the band allows smoking.
It’s the clearest indication yet from the government about how it will apply – or won’t apply – its province-wide smoking ban on reserves.
For weeks, the government has said the law applies across the province, but has been vague about whether it would enforce it on Indian land.
The ban that prohibits smoking in bars, restaurants, bingos and other public enclosed places has been in effect since Jan. 1.
Some Indian bands are still letting people light up in certain parts of their casinos – including off-reserve casinos.
On Thursday, First Nations and Metis Relations Minister Maynard Sonntag said the province will “respect” different smoking bylaws on First Nations.
He said if those people are smoking with the band’s blessing, inspectors will not issue tickets.
The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations says it’s a jurisdictional issue – the province has no right to impose a smoking law on Indian property.
The FSIN says bands will have their own smoking bylaws, but that won’t necessarily mean a total ban.
Sonntag said his government should have done more to get bands onside in the first place.
“We received no indication that there would not be compliance,” he said.
“Had we known more earlier, certainly we would have been in discussions that were centred around this issue for a longer period of time.”
Sonntag hopes further talks with First Nations leaders will convince them to ban smoking altogether.
Earlier this week, Sonntag said Ottawa shouldn’t approve bylaws that would allow smoking on reserves. However, federal Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott said he hasn’t made a decision on that yet.
http://sask.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/smoking-reserves050114.html
Smoking confounds Ottawa
Minister weighs weaker First Nations’ smoking bylaw
Tim Switzer Saskatchewan News Network; with files from Canadian Press January 14, 2005
REGINA — Canada’s Indian and northern affairs minister said he is conflicted about whether to approve a smoking bylaw proposed by a Saskatchewan First Nation that the provincial government considers weaker than its own legislation.
Andy Scott said Thursday he will consult with cabinet colleagues, affected First Nations, Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) leadership and the provincial government before making a decision next week.
“I am conflicted by my strong support for doing anything we can to minimize the health risks associated with smoking and, at the same time, my genuine belief in the policy and the fact that (First Nations) communities should be making decisions on their own,” he said.
After the FSIN said in December it was unlikely to follow the provincial smoking ban in Native-run casinos, the NDP indicated it must respect First Nations’ jurisdiction on the issue. But earlier this week the province urged Scott to reject any bylaw weaker than the provincial law.
The bylaw, proposed by the White Bear First Nation on Dec. 9, would ban smoking in enclosed spaces but would allow bingo halls, accommodation units and the Bear Claw Casino to set aside up to 40 per cent of their business as a smoking area.
Under the Indian Act, band councils can pass their own bylaws but they must be sent to the federal Indian affairs minister, who can disallow them. Provincial law applies unless it is inconsistent with the Indian Act or an order, rule, regulation or bylaw made under the act.
Scott has 40 days to respond to the resolution. If he disallows the bylaw, provincial law prevails. If he approves it or doesn’t respond at all, the bylaw goes into effect.
FSIN vice-chief Morley Watson said it should be up to Native people to decide what is best for their health.
He said some bands in the province came forward with anti-smoking bylaws before the province’s rule came into effect.
“We’re fully aware of making the best decision in our own lives,” Watson said. “We cannot continue to have governments come along with very paternalistic attitudes that they have shown all along.”
After meeting with Scott late Thursday afternoon, Saskatchewan First Nations and Metis Relations Minister Maynard Sonntag said the province isn’t trying to force Scott into a decision but rather make him aware of what they feel is a critical health issue.
“The province has also been clear in saying we respect the inherent rights of First Nations people and we will respect the bylaws if approved,” he said. “Again, we have not wanted this to evolve into an issue of authorities because we don’t think this is an issue where you should have the discussion about who has the authority.”
Sonntag also admitted the province could have done more prior to initiating the ban to avoid such problems.
“We certainly could have had more discussions with the First Nations than we did — hindsight is 20/20,” he said. “Having said that, if you look back a couple of months ago, the casinos like (where a city-wide smoking ban was implemented) were complying. We received no indication that there would not be compliance.”
Other provinces are having similar problems with their new smoking bans.
New Brunswick is in the same position as Saskatchewan where the ban was applied to all areas but politicians can do little if First Nations bylaws are passed while Manitoba did not include First Nations in their ban but now face pressure from non-reserve businesses.
http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=31446629-9da5-4853-b4cc-b7d80b678d1a
—
Reserve smoking ban creates conflict -SK
Tim Cook January 14, 2005
REGINA (CP) – The federal Indian Affairs minister acknowledged he’s in a dilemma when it comes to dealing with smoking bylaws enacted by First Nations that attempt to do an end run around provincial rules.
Speaking in Regina on Thursday, Andy Scott said there are two conflicting issues at play – health and aboriginal self-government. “We would wish that communities have more authority over decisions,” Scott said. “At the same time I believe strongly that we should do what we can to mitigate the health risks associated with smoking.”
Scott made the comments when he was asked about the problems Saskatchewan is having with its tough new anti-smoking law.
Effective Jan. 1, smokers have had to butt out in all public buildings in the province or face fines. The law was meant to apply across the board, both on reserve and off.
But under the Indian Act, if a band were to pass a bylaw that conflicts with the provincial law, the band bylaw would prevail. For a bylaw to come into force, however, it must be first forwarded to the federal minister, who has 40 days to object.
Earlier this week, the Saskatchewan government came forward asking Scott to quash any bylaws that are weaker than the provincial anti-smoking legislation.
Scott said that he wants to consult with all of the stakeholders as well as his cabinet colleagues before he makes a decision.
But that will have to be done quickly.
The White Bear First Nation in the southeast corner of the province submitted a bylaw for approval on Dec. 9. It would allow smoking in bingo halls and casinos.
That means Scott’s decision will have to come within a week.
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations vice-chief Morley Watson said it should be up to native people to decide what is best for their health.
He said there are some bands in the province that came forward with anti-smoking bylaws before the province’s rule came into effect.
“We’re fully aware of making the best decision in our own lives,” Watson said. “We cannot continue to have governements come along with very paternalistic attitudes that they have shown all along.”
Saskatchewan Aboriginal Affairs Minister Maynard Sonntag got a chance to press the province’s case with Scott on Thursday afternoon.
After the meeting, Sonntag told reporters that the Saskatchewan government respects First Nation self-governance, however, the province feels strongly about the health issues related to smoking.
“I don’t think we are forcing anything on the federal minister at all,” Sonntag said. “We are stating to him what we think is just a critically important health issue and want him to be aware of that.”
Two other provinces, New Brunswick and Manitoba, have public smoking bans similar to the one in Saskatchewan. Quebec, Ontario and Newfoundland all have laws on the way and just this week Alberta’s health minister mused publicly about getting on board.
New Brunswick is in the same situation as Saskatchewan in that politicians there have asked First Nations to respect the new rules, but can do little should a bylaw be passed
Manitoba avoided the issue by making reserves exempt from its smoking ban. The exemption has created controversy, however, with non-reserve business owners claiming it’s a two-tier system.
http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=2d8246af-c276-422d-a9da-f5a4b562da9b
—
Federal Indian Affairs minister conflicted over reserve smoking rules
Tim Cook Canadian Press Friday, January 14, 2005
REGINA (CP) – The federal Indian Affairs minister acknowledged he’s in a dilemma when it comes to dealing with smoking bylaws enacted by First Nations that attempt to do an end run around provincial rules.
Speaking in Regina on Thursday, Andy Scott said there are two conflicting issues at play – health and aboriginal self-government. “We would wish that communities have more authority over decisions,” Scott said. “At the same time I believe strongly that we should do what we can to mitigate the health risks associated with smoking.”
Scott made the comments when he was asked about the problems Saskatchewan is having with its tough new anti-smoking law.
Effective Jan. 1, smokers have had to butt out in all public buildings in the province or face fines. The law was meant to apply across the board, both on reserve and off.
But under the Indian Act, if a band were to pass a bylaw that conflicts with the provincial law, the band bylaw would prevail. For a bylaw to come into force, however, it must be first forwarded to the federal minister, who has 40 days to object.
Earlier this week, the Saskatchewan government came forward asking Scott to quash any bylaws that are weaker than the provincial anti-smoking legislation.
Scott said that he wants to consult with all of the stakeholders as well as his cabinet colleagues before he makes a decision.
But that will have to be done quickly.
The White Bear First Nation in the southeast corner of the province submitted a bylaw for approval on Dec. 9. It would allow smoking in bingo halls and casinos.
That means Scott’s decision will have to come within a week.
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations vice-chief Morley Watson said it should be up to native people to decide what is best for their health.
He said there are some bands in the province that came forward with anti-smoking bylaws before the province’s rule came into effect.
“We’re fully aware of making the best decision in our own lives,” Watson said. “We cannot continue to have governements come along with very paternalistic attitudes that they have shown all along.”
Saskatchewan Aboriginal Affairs Minister Maynard Sonntag got a chance to press the province’s case with Scott on Thursday afternoon.
After the meeting, Sonntag told reporters that the Saskatchewan government respects First Nation self-governance, however, the province feels strongly about the health issues related to smoking.
“I don’t think we are forcing anything on the federal minister at all,” Sonntag said. “We are stating to him what we think is just a critically important health issue and want him to be aware of that.”
Two other provinces, New Brunswick and Manitoba, have public smoking bans similar to the one in Saskatchewan. Quebec, Ontario and Newfoundland all have laws on the way and just this week Alberta’s health minister mused publicly about getting on board.
New Brunswick is in the same situation as Saskatchewan in that politicians there have asked First Nations to respect the new rules, but can do little should a bylaw be passed.
Manitoba avoided the issue by making reserves exempt from its smoking ban. The exemption has created controversy, however, with non-reserve business owners claiming it’s a two-tier system
http://www.canada.com/health/story.html?id=c7812b45-0082-4e3b-870c-2ea718f737b2
—
Smoking ban sounds good to me: bartender -AB
KATE DUBINSKI, EDMONTON SUN
A couple of years ago, Justin Derush ended his bartending shifts tight-chested, a little wheezy and reeking of smoke. “There was constant smoke coming from all directions. It was like having an eight-hour cigarette,” Derush, 32, said yesterday.
“You don’t even realize until it’s not there. Even the people who smoke (in the restaurant) noticed the difference.”
Health Minister Iris Evans said she plans to table a provincewide smoking ban in public places by April, but similar efforts have been quashed in the past by Tory MLAs.
Derush said after an eight-hour bar shift, he would feel like he was coming down with a cold. Since a bylaw forced his employer to go smoke-free in July 2003, the relief is incredible, Derush said. And a sweeping ban on smoking in public places can only help.
For Amber Suchy, who fronts the band King Mustafa, singing in smoky bars is more than just annoying.
“It literally takes away my voice. I want to keep my voice healthy, but I have that smoker’s cough even though I’m not a smoker,” Suchy said.
“Even that cough can be rough on the vocal cords.”
Suchy said she hasn’t seen attendance decline in venues that have gone smoke-free.
Anti-smoking advocates yesterday applauded Evans’s move, but aren’t about to start holding their breath.
“We’ve seen it before. I can’t tell if this batch (of MLAs) will pass it,” said Doug Baker, the regional director for the Canadian Cancer Society, admitting that the minister’s push could be just for show.
“Mr. Klein and the government he’s led – it’s always been consistently hands-off – and he knows about the ravages of smoking and about personal choice, personal decision,” Baker said.
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut have all passed provincewide bans. Ontario and Quebec are in the process of passing such legislation.
“It takes a longer time to have a lasting impact on Albertans’ health because we have to go jurisdiction-to-jurisdiction” to lobby for smoking laws, Baker said.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/News/2005/01/14/898213-sun.html
—
Smoking Ban Compliance -ON
Tb News Source Web Posted: 1/14/2005 7:43:51 PM
It appears compliance with the City’s no-smoking by-law has been strong. As of January 1st, city officials said they would stop handing out warnings to violators of the ban. But two weeks into the new year, there still have not been any fines issued.
Licensing and Enforcement manager Ron Bourret says so far, every local workplace has been complying voluntarily after being caught in violation of the smoking ban. The city hired a special smoking bylaw officer last summer to inspect local businesses, and provide information along with a warning.
Bourret says that officer will now be doing more undercover surveillance work over the next few months, and he expects some fines will be issued as a result. The charge for smoking in a public place or workplace ranges from 75 to 150 dollars, with a maximum fine of 5000 dollars.
http://www.tbsource.com/Localnews/index.asp?cid=72512
City to still-smoky bars: Butt out or else -YK CBC News Web Posted Jan 14 2005 07:24 AM MST
WHITEHORSE – Whitehorse’s head of bylaw enforcement says bar owners flouting the no-smoking bylaw will pay the price.
John Taylor says the city has received complaints about a number of bars violating the smoking ban that took effect Jan. 1.
He says that’s not fair to the bars that are doing their best to implement the bylaw – and he promises the city will step up its enforcement by laying charges as early as the end of the month.
“It’s not going to go away,” Taylor says. “The bylaw was passed by a duly elected council of the City of Whitehorse. The majority of the people wanted it, it’s passed, so let’s work together, let’s see how we can implement it and make it the best we can.”
Taylor says four bar operators have been spoken to about violating the bylaw, and follow-up letters were also sent.
He says if they keep flouting the law, the letters will be used in court to show that the operators were given an opportunity to comply with the law.
http://north.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/smoking-bylaw-01132005.html
Local farmers to join in 401 blockade Organizational meeting planned Wednesday -ON BLOCKADE: Early support overwhelming
Jeff Helsdon – Staff Writer Friday January 14, 2005
Tillsonburg News — It may be the middle of winter but local farmers will soon be firing up tractors that have sat idle since fall plowing. Although there are no firm numbers, plans are for several local farmers to join the Lanark Landowners’ Association (LLA) in a provincewide series of blockades of the 400 highways. The blockades will start Jan. 21 at the 401’s Culloden Road cutoff near Ingersoll. “Anyone involved with agriculture or rural land issues is asked to come and show support,” said Frank Schonberger, one of the local organizers. “Tractor dealers, fertilizer dealers and any businesses connected to agriculture are invited. We have to let government know there is a serious crisis taking place here.” LLA is the spearhead organization behind the Rural Revolution, which is a movement of landowners against government policies it believes make it difficult to lead a rural lifestyle. More than a dozen groups from across the province, including the LLA, are part of the revolution. Members of the LLA and associated organizations supported tobacco farmers at a rally outside the tobacco board office last week. To that end, an organization meeting is planned for Wednesday night (Jan. 19) at 7:30 p.m. Randy Hillier, president of LLA, will be explaining the logistics of the rally. John VanDaele, one of the organizers, said he has been getting non-stop calls about the rally from farmers and landowners across the province. He would like to see the auction exchange closed down for the day so all farmers can attend and encouraged all farmers to phone the board to request closure. “It is imperative that farmers call and do it immediately,” he said. Plans are to line up tractors at the Culloden Road interchange to completely shut down the 401 at that point. He said motorists would need to exit the 401 at Highway 19 and get back on the highway at Putnam Road. The blockade will start at 6 a.m. and continue until 4 p.m. Hillier said the demonstration only came about after repeated attempts to get the Ontario government to deal with rural problems failed. He has talked to the OPP about how the blockade can be executed safely. Hillier says the police asked him how the blockade could be averted and he told them the Ontario government needs to meet with his organization to solve their problems. “The only response I get from this McGuinty government is from the OPP,” he said. “They feel police and intimidation are better suited to deal with rural problems then they are.” Schonberger said tobacco farmers were pushed to the protest by McGuinty declaring war on tobacco. “As a tobacco farmer, I feel he declared war on all tobacco, including tobacco farmers,” he said. “I have to stand up and protect myself.” Blockades will continue on successive Fridays at different locations across the province until March 9 when a blockade will be planned for the Queen’s Park. That is the day legislation to deal with the Green Belt, one of the provincial policies the association disagrees with, will be before the Legislature. Hillier’s original intention was not for the blockades to start in this part of Ontario, but closer to their main support base in eastern Ontario. However, when he saw the hardships suffered by farmers in the tobacco belt and the support for a rally, plans were changed. “I think the growers realized they can achieve success if they stand up and demand it,” Hillier said. Oxford MPP and agriculture critic Ernie Hardeman sympathized with their plight, noting he too disagrees with how the Ontario government has carried forward with legislation that hurts farmers. “The government is not representing the interests of rural Ontario,” Hardeman said. “It’s quite true in terms of a number of initiatives they’ve taken. “Having said that, I’m not one for that type of demonstration,” he said. “They may not get the public support they’re looking for … but that type of action is what gets the premier’s attention. … Maybe it’s the right approach.” He noted most commuters and businesses who would be deeply impacted by a shutdown of Highway 401 also aren’t the decision makers who can advocate for the desired changes. Nancy Walther, Ontario Federation of Agriculture representative for Oxford South, said she hopes the provincial farm organization would consider doing something to support the rally. She intends to ask the OFA how she should respond to farmers in her area in dire straits and how the organization intends on dealing with it. Beyond that, Walther said it was difficult to comment on the rally as she wasn’t aware of many details of the safety aspects of the blockade. Walther did note the OFA had rallies in the past and if something was done by the organization it would be provincewide. “The OFA has done their part in the past and will in the future,” she said. Fred Neukamm, chairman of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board, said if growers want to participate in the event that was fine. “From our perspective there’s no question government policies are affecting us,” he said. “There’s definitely a lack of focus on rural Canada and that’s a concern for all farmers. We support all farmers in their efforts to ensure their concerns aren’t ignored by policy makers.” Neukamm and board members traveled to Ottawa today (Friday) to take the concerns raised by tobacco producers during the rally at the board office to officials overseeing the file in Ottawa. At the top of the list was concern with the reverse auction and the mood it has created in the tobacco belt. “If we don’t get an answer we may have to lead our own rally,” Neukamm said. For more information on the blockade or meeting, contact VanDaele at 842-2537, Schonberger at 875-2988 or Dave Vandepoele at 875-4549. – With files from The Sentinel-Review
http://www.tillsonburgnews.com/story.php?id=137508
—-Smoking Rates Dropping, but Lung Cancer Deaths Still Leading Cause of Cancer Death
January 16 to 22 is National Non-Smoking Week
TORONTO, Jan. 13 /CNW/ – Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death for both men and women. Almost 19,000 Canadians died last year from lung cancer and over 16,000 of these deaths were due to cigarette smoking, according to the Canadian Cancer Society.
“These statistics are sobering,” says Cheryl Moyer, Director, Cancer Control Programs, Canadian Cancer Society. “This means that on average about 300 Canadians die each week from lung cancer caused by smoking.
While recent statistics show that smoking rates have declined substantially, lung cancer continues to take a huge toll on Canadians. The Society is committed to ensuring that smoking rates continue to drop so that fewer Canadians die from this disease.”
Moyer says several factors have contributed to the decline in smoking rates.
These include: – higher tobacco taxes; – curbs on tobacco advertising and promotion; – smoking restrictions in workplaces and public places; – larger picture-based health warnings on cigarette packages; – providing support for people who wish to quit; – government programming initiatives, including mass media campaigns.
“A comprehensive approach is the best approach to reducing tobacco use in Canada,” says Moyer.
Society involved in pivotal tobacco court case next week The Canadian Cancer Society will contribute to the fight against tobacco next week – National Non-Smoking Week – through its participation in a pivotal tobacco court case being heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
A media advisory will be distributed via Canada Newswire on Monday, January 17, 9 a.m.
Support for smokers available
The Canadian Cancer Society’s self-help program to help smokers quit -One Step at a Time – offers help for smokers and the people who care about them. For more information about One Step at a Time, or to locate a smoking quit line in your community, call the Society’s Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.
The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is to eradicate cancer and to enhance the quality of life of people living with cancer.
When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website at www.cancer.ca or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.
Smoking rates dropping: Statistics Canada information
According to a June 2004 Statistics Canada report (the Canadian Community Health Survey), in 1994, 29 per cent of the Canadian population aged 12 and over smoked either daily or occasionally – by 2003, this had declined to 23 per cent.
The proportion of the population that smoked daily fell significantly between 1994 and 2003 – from 24 per cent in 1994 to 18 per cent in 2004. For more information: http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040615/d040615b.htm
Media backgrounder: Lung cancer and smoking research
The Canadian Cancer Society currently funds more than $1.3 million in research looking at different aspects of smoking and lung cancer.
In addition to the $1.3 million, the Society was a founding partner of the Canadian Tobacco Control Research Initiative, which funds tobacco control research in Canada. The Society provides $500,000 annually to this initiative.
Below are examples of some of the research underway:
Some teens easily hooked on smoking: Finding out why Smoking just one or two cigarettes a day may be all it takes for some adolescents to become addicted to nicotine, according to Dr. Jennifer O’Loughlin.
In her six-year study, Dr. O’Loughlin, a professor at McGill University in Montreal, followed a group of over 1,300 Montreal teens. She found that one-third of the teens who smoked only once or twice reported symptoms of nicotine dependence, including difficulty not smoking when friends smoke and feeling a real need to smoke.
Following up on this research, Dr. O’Loughlin recently found a genetic link between nicotine dependence and a variation in a single gene – called CYP2A6 – that controls how quickly people metabolize nicotine.
In her study, she found that teens with this genetic variation were more likely to become nicotine dependent, even though they smoked fewer cigarettes per week than those with the normal gene.
Dr. O’Loughlin’s findings open the door for more effective smoking cessation programs that offer targeted messages tailored to each person’s individual needs.
Smoking restrictions in outdoor spaces:
Finding out more Dr. Roberta Ferrence is conducting research into how the physical and social factors of outdoor environments affect smokers.
While many indoor public places have smoking restrictions, few restrictions exist for outdoor public places. Smoking in outdoor spaces can result in high levels of second-hand smoke, which is a hazard to non-smokers.
Dr. Ferrence will determine which factors affect when and where people smoke, how they react to smoking restrictions, and how smokers and non-smokers interact.
For this research, Dr. Ferrence’s team, based at the University of Toronto, is collecting information from smokers and non-smokers in six outdoor public places in downtown Toronto about their attitudes and experiences regarding smoking in outdoor areas.
Their results will help in the development of design recommendations and guidelines aimed at reducing smoking in outdoor spaces.
Finding the best ways to help people quit smoking In the past five years, Smokers’ Help Lines, which provide telephone support for people wishing to quit smoking, have spread across Canada. Making sure people who call receive the best advice and information is the focus of Dr. Sharon Campbell’s research.
Dr. Campbell is the Director of Evaluation Studies at the Canadian Cancer Society-funded Centre for Behavioural Research Studies and Program Evaluation, based at the University of Waterloo in Waterloo, Ontario.
Dr. Campbell has helped create standard ways to evaluate smoking cessation quitlines, giving quitlines across the country or around the world a common way to determine who uses quitlines, what services are delivered and what smokers do after they call the quitline.
This information allows quitlines, policy makers and researchers to better understand which programs work well, who uses them and ways to share best practices across the country.
Dr. Campbell’s other work includes a survey of Canadian and international quit lines that has identified characteristics of different quit lines and what factors increase the likelihood of a person successfully quitting.
This survey was adapted for use in the United States and Europe. Dr. Campbell also played a key role in developing the Canadian Smoker’s Helpline Network.
Garlic: Finding out if it can fight lung cancer
Diallyl sulfone is a chemical produced when garlic is cooked or eaten. It appears that this chemical may protect against some kinds of cancer.
Dr. Poh-Gek Forkert and her team, based at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, are trying to determine if this chemical can be used to protect against the development of lung cancer. Their results will confirm whether consuming this garlic derivative can protect against the effects associated with exposure to naturally-occurring carcinogens found in foods.
Note to editors/writers: The researchers are available for interviews. Media backgrounder: The Facts and What We’re Doing
In 2004, approximately 21,700 Canadians were diagnosed with lung cancer and about 18,900 died of the disease.
On average (in 2004), 417 Canadians were diagnosed with lung cancer every week and 363 Canadians died of the disease.
– Lung cancer, the most preventable of all cancers, is the leading cause of cancer death for both sexes. Almost one-third of the cancer deaths in men and almost one-quarter of the cancer deaths in women are due to lung cancer.
– Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable disease, disability and death in Canada. It is responsible for more than 47,500 deaths per year in Canada. – Cigarette smoking causes about 30 per cent of cancers in Canada and more than 85 per cent of lung cancers.
– Second-hand smoke is linked to the deaths of more than 1,000 Canadians every year.
How the Canadian Cancer Society is leading the fight against tobacco Advocacy: Our advocacy efforts help ensures the implementation of strong, effective tobacco control legislation and policies at all levels of government.
One Step at a Time self-help program for smokers: The Canadian Cancer Society’s self-help program to help smokers quit
One Step at a Time – offers help for smokers and the people who care about them.
Research: Every year, the Canadian Cancer Society encourages and funds research that helps control tobacco use. The Society is currently funding close to $2 million in research looking at various aspects of smoking and lung cancer.
Information: We provide Canadians with up-to-date comprehensive information about tobacco, smoking, lung cancer prevention and treatment.
We supply this information through print material, our website and our Cancer Information Service.
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/13/c2233.html
Treherne hotelier to fight butt-ban charges in July-MB
Saturday, January 15th, 2005
TREHERNE hotel owner Robert Jenkinson will go to court in mid-July to fight the charges laid against him under the province’s new anti-smoking legislation.
Jenkinson’s lawyer, Art Stacey, said three days beginning July 18 have been set aside for the trial, which will be held in Portage la Prairie.
Jenkinson faces 13 charges under the new law, including failure to have proper signage, allowing ashtrays to be on tables, and failing to prevent customers from smoking.
Under the law, individuals can be fined $500, and businesses face a maximum fine of $3,000.
Stacey said he decided to forego a separate constitutional challenge of the new law, adding he will make those arguments as part of Jenkinson’s defence.
More than $15,000 in cash and an equal amount in pledges has been raised by the Rural Hotel Owners, a provincewide group of business people opposed to the law, to help Jenkinson with his legal bills.
winnipegpress.com
Alberta’s Health Minister, is pushing too hard letter– AB
IRIS EVANS, Alberta’s Health Minister, is pushing too hard for banning smoking, along with anti-smoking activist Les Hagen, just so they can get their names in the history pages. Welcome to Communist Canada. Considering the revenue received from smokers, it will put quite a dent in the government’s cash-flow if we all butt out. I find it very ironic that these people are so against smoking and I’ve never heard of anyone hurting, killing or having a vehicle accident due to smoking. How about getting rid of alcohol instead? Or would this be stepping on political toes? Carol Koellmel Redcliff, Alta. (Klein has backed off on a province-wide ban.)
http://www.canoe.ca/CalgarySun/editorial.html#letters
Ralph butts out ban plan -AB
By JERRY WARD, LEGISLATURE BUREAU Sat, January 15, 2005
Premier wants to leave public smoking decision to municipalities
EDMONTON — Premier Ralph Klein yesterday snuffed out a plan by his health minister to start discussions on invoking a complete public smoking ban in Alberta. After a speech in Montreal, Klein said his government is not looking to implement a blanket ban on butts in public places, instead leaving that decision up to individual municipalities.
“I’ve never called for a smoking ban and never will. But I think if you smoke, you’re stupid,” said Klein.
Provincial Health Minister Iris Evans said Wednesday in Edmonton she’d be bringing up the idea of a blanket public smoking ban for Alberta in the legislature by April.
“No, she wasn’t presumptuous,” said Klein’s communications director Marisa Etmanski, who was travelling with the premier yesterday.
Etmanski said Klein and Evans, “haven’t had a chance to talk” since he left the province for Eastern Canada on Tuesday.
Evans said she will still put forward a plan to a Tory MLA policy committee to look at ways of reducing smoking among young people to protect their wellness.
“I will clearly pay attention to the fact that the premier does not want a provincewide blanket over everything so that people who are legionnaires or people who have their favourite space to smoke can still enjoy those privileges,” she said.
“I will bring forward some things that talk about the workplace, for the caucus’ information, and I hear the premier clearly on this.”
Klein has repeatedly said his government will not force no-smoking laws on businesses that can make their own decisions.
Les Hagen of Action on Smoking and Health described Klein’s comments as “terrible news.
“I’m disappointed,” he said.
Meanwhile, a Calgary alderman who’s been pushing for a similar ban in this city said she’s sure Evans will have no trouble gaining support for her plans.
“I know that the minister is very persuasive (and) she has a very strong voice on cabinet — cabinet is more than one vote,” said Ward 13 Ald. Diane Colley-Urquhart. “I have a lot of confidence in her ability … you always know where you stand with Iris Evans.”
— with files from Bill Laye
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/News/2005/01/15/899353-sun.html
January the worst time to start smoking ban -SK
The Leader-Post January 15, 2005
I am writing with a question for the Saskatchewan government: does it know one end of profitable business management from another?
The decision to make all public places, including bars and restaurants, smoke- free on Jan. 1, was totally flawed in its timing. January and February are traditionally the coldest months of the year, which in turn are the lowest months for revenue for small restaurant owners in Saskatchewan due to the inclement weather. People who would ordinarily enjoy a stroll for coffee or for lunch are naturally more inclined to remain at work. This keeps their pennies in their pockets while reducing income for the local coffee shops. It’s understandable, but the loss is recoverable later on in the year through increased traffic when the weather becomes nicer.
The anti-smoking law could NOT have come at a worse time. Not only is my income reduced as expected due to the cold weather, but it is also further drastically reduced due to the new law. If my customers can’t smoke at the restaurant, why should they brave the cold? My estimated losses for January are $2,800. This is roughly equivalent to my gross income. Considering I have bills to pay at home and a family to support, what does the government suggest I do? Work for free? Get another job on top of the 12-hour days I now work just to keep the restaurant in business? Would government members work 20-hour days?
Would it not have been a better plan to bring this into law during the summer months when people could still smoke outside on decks and patios and get accustomed to a non-smoking environment slowly? Other provinces did it.
I agree that smoking is bad for everyone’s health and I will never argue that the cost to my business due to burns in the carpet and inconsiderate smokers butting out on anything handy is not substantial. However, this anti-smoking law was brought into effect at the worst time of the year.
I may not be able to recover from this loss. Further, I am not alone in this.
Other restaurant owners with whom I have discussed this issue are feeling unseasonably high losses as well and are also considering the feasibility of remaining in business. To open my restaurant five years ago, I invested approximately $30,000 of my own money and went into a debt from which I am still trying to recover — and there was no offer of assistance to me to open up a business, unlike the offers and tax breaks given to large chain stores to bring their big-box stores to this area. Consider that if 100 restaurants in Saskatchewan go out of business, and if each of those businesses employs at least five people, you will not only have 500 former employees of those businesses either swelling the welfare rolls or collecting Employment Insurance (EI) benefits, you will also have an additional 100 former business owners looking for employment who do NOT qualify for EI. If we can’t find jobs, what do you suggest we do . . . leave the province? All of this because government members can’t think further than the end of their collective noses. Will that look good come next election?
This leads me to wonder . . . has any one in the government ever run a restaurant, or been self-employed to the point where government decisions could make or break them in one fell swoop? Have any of them learned how NOT to immediately give in to the demands of whatever group is pressuring them at any given moment?
I didn’t think so.
Paul Perreault
Perreault is owner of Pavlo’s Eatery
Regina
Carry on smoking! -AB
JERRY WARD, LEGISLATURE BUREAU Sat, January 15, 2005
Premier Ralph Klein yesterday snuffed out a plan by his health minister to start discussions on invoking a complete public smoking ban in Alberta. That left advocates “mystified” and “disappointed.”
After a speech in Montreal, Klein, a longtime smoker, said his government is not looking to implement a blanket ban on butts in public places, instead leaving that decision up to individual municipalities.
“Smoking is still legal in Canada,” Klein told a news conference after giving a speech to the Montreal board of trade.
“I’ve never called for a smoking ban and never will. But I think if you smoke, you’re stupid.”
That comment came despite the fact that Klein himself has tried frequently – and unsuccessfully – to kick the habit.
“I think the focus is going to be better spent on trying to get kids not to start, that kind of thing,” said Klein’s communications director Marisa Etmanski, who was travelling with the premier yesterday.
“You know, it’s not an illegal thing, right? And some municipalities feel differently than others about it.”
Etmanski said the premier and Health Minister Iris Evans, “haven’t had a chance to talk” since he left the province for Eastern Canada on Tuesday.
“No, she wasn’t presumptuous,” Etmanski said.
Evans said she will still put forward a plan to a Tory MLA policy committee to look at ways of reducing smoking among young people to protect their wellness.
“I will clearly pay attention to the fact that the premier does not want a provincewide blanket over everything so that people who are legionnaires or people who have their favourite space to smoke can still enjoy those privileges,” she said.
“I will bring forward some things that talk about the workplace, for the caucus’s information, and I hear the premier clearly on this.”
Klein has repeatedly said his government will not force no-smoking laws on businesses that can make their own decisions.
In March 2002, Klein said he wasn’t about to order “old timers” in places like Crossfield’s Oliver hotel to butt out.
“What are you going to do? Have a whole bunch of smoke cops saying, ‘C’mon old-timer, put that cigarette out?'”
Les Hagen of Action on Smoking and Health described Klein’s comments as “terrible news.
“I’m disappointed. They were on to a good thing,” he said.
Dan MacLennan, president of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, said the issue is about health, not right-wing or left-wing ideology. “Cancer is an equal opportunity killer so let’s reduce its opportunity,” he said. “I’m hopeful he’ll change his mind.”
D’Arcy Lanovaz, president of CUPE Alberta, said Klein is going against the grain. “I think it’s a regressive move on the premier’s behalf,” he said.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/News/2005/01/15/899454-sun.html
Second-hand smoke exposure still a problem Study shows threat to non-puffers By Norma Greenaway Sunday, January 16th, 2005 OTTAWA — Almost all Canadians consider the effects of second-hand smoke as harmful to their health, but that hasn’t ended their exposure to it, says a new analysis of 2003 health data. Despite a growing prevalence of bans on smoking in public places, the analysis says one-in-five non-smokers were still exposed to smoke in bars, restaurants, offices, and other public spots. By contrast, only one-in-10 was exposed to smoke in vehicles or homes. The analysis also says male non-smokers were more likely than their female counterparts to be exposed to second-hand smoke in all circumstances, be it in public or in the privacy of automobiles or homes. The report was prepared by Jack Jedwab, executive director of the Association for Canadian Studies, to coincide with the opening today of national anti-smoking week in Canada. It’s based on data from Statistics Canada’s 2003 Community Health Survey, and findings of Gallup poll surveys conducted last fall in Canada and the United States. The surveys said 93 per cent of Canadians and 85 per cent of Americans see second-hand smoke as a health danger. Jedwab said the findings show a majority in both countries supported bans on smoking in all workplaces, bars and restaurants. In the U.S., 58 per cent supported such bans. Among smokers, however, 66 per cent were opposed. In Canada, the percentage favouring bans was a whopping 75 per cent. On top of that, a solid majority of Canadian smokers supported making it illegal to smoke in public places, according to the surveys. About one-in-four adults in both the United States and Canada are smokers, according to Jedwab’s report. Among smokers, only 31 per cent of Canadians said they felt discriminated against by growing restrictions on smoking, compared with 39 per cent among their American counterparts. Jedwab says the survey’s findings bode well for ongoing efforts to broaden anti-smoking laws in Canada. “Clearly if the tobacco industry hopes to counteract the increasing bans on smoking in work places, restaurants and bars, it will have its work cut out for it,” he says. The Liberal government of Jean Charest in Quebec is the latest of several to announce plans to introduce legislation to restrict where people can smoke. Similar smoking bans are in effect in New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan and are pending in Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador. Several municipalities, among them Ottawa and Victoria, have brought in anti-smoking bylaws. Jedwab’s analysis said Quebec was the province with the highest rate of non-smokers exposure to second-hand smoke. It came in at 27 per cent, followed by Saskatchewan at 24 per cent, Alberta at 21 per cent and Manitoba and New Brunswick at about 19 per cent. British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland had the lowest exposure rates at 12 per cent, 13 per cent and almost 14 per cent respectively. Young people between the ages of 12 and 19 were more exposed to smoke in public places than other age groups. Their rate was almost 28 per cent compared to 20 per cent for all age groups.
winnipegfreepress.com
Smoking bans enjoy wide support -QC
Charest liberals plan restrictions; National study says people in Quebec are most exposed to second-hand smoke
NORMA GREENAWAY CanWest News Service Sunday, January 16, 2005
Nearly all Canadians consider the effects of second-hand smoke to be harmful to their health, but that hasn’t ended their exposure to it, says a new analysis of 2003 health data.
Despite a growing prevalence of bans on smoking in public places, the analysis says one in five nonsmokers were still exposed to smoke in bars, restaurants, offices, and other public spots. By contrast, only one in 10 was exposed to smoke in vehicles or homes.
The analysis also says male nonsmokers were more likely than their female counterparts to be exposed to second-hand smoke in all circumstances, be it in public or in the privacy of automobiles or homes.
The report was prepared by Jack Jedwab, executive director of the Association for Canadian Studies, to coincide with national anti-smoking week in Canada. It’s based on data from Statistics Canada’s 2003 Community Health Survey, and findings of Gallup poll surveys conducted last fall in Canada and the United States.
The surveys said 93 per cent of Canadians and 85 per cent of Americans see second-hand smoke as a health danger.
Jedwab said the findings show a majority in both countries supported bans on smoking in all workplaces, bars and restaurants. In the United States, 58 per cent supported such bans. Among smokers, however, 66 per cent were opposed.
In Canada, the percentage favouring bans was a whopping 75 per cent. On top of that, a solid majority of Canadian smokers supported making it illegal to smoke in public places, according to the surveys.
About one in four adults in both the United States and Canada are smokers, according to Jedwab’s report.
Among smokers, 31 per cent of Canadians said they felt discriminated against by growing restrictions on smoking, compared with 39 per cent among their U.S. counterparts.
Jedwab says the survey’s findings bode well for continuing efforts to broaden anti-smoking laws in Canada.
“Clearly, if the tobacco industry hopes to counteract the increasing bans on smoking in workplaces, restaurants and bars, it will have its work cut out for it,” he says.
Quebec’s Liberal government is the latest of several to announce plans to introduce legislation to restrict where people can smoke. Similar smoking bans are in effect in New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan and are pending in Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador. Several municipalities, among them Ottawa and Victoria, have brought in anti-smoking bylaws.
Jedwab’s analysis said Quebec was the province with the highest rate of nonsmokers exposure to second-hand smoke. It came in at 27 per cent, followed by Saskatchewan at 24 per cent, Alberta at 21 per cent and Manitoba and New Brunswick at about 19 per cent.
British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland had the lowest exposure rates at 12 per cent, 13 per cent and almost 14 per cent respectively.
Young people between age 12 and 19 were more exposed to smoke in public places than other age groups. Their rate was almost 28 per cent compared with 20 per cent for all age groups. Quebec again had the worst record at 38 per cent of young nonsmokers, followed by Saskatchewan at almost 31 per cent, Alberta at about 28 per cent and Ontario at 27 per cent.
Butt out, Ralphie -AB
For Klein to lecture Albertans on health is bizarre
By Ezra Levant — Calgary Sun Mon, January 17, 2005
Premier Ralph Klein had said he wanted to put up billboards saying “if you’re stupid, smoke”.
Did he mean that only stupid people smoke? Surely not. Because he smokes himself. And Klein isn’t stupid. Many intelligent people smoke. Einstein was a chimney.
So maybe Klein meant that while stupid people smoke, some smart people, like himself, smoke too, for reasons that are stupid. Perhaps there are some stupid reasons to smoke. But how about the main reason people smoke? They like the taste, and the unique feeling that nicotine gives its users: Simultaneous relaxation and stimulation.
Liking that sensation isn’t stupid, even though it may be unhealthy. The premier and his health minister, Iris Evans, are both overweight, too.
That’s just as unhealthy as smoking — but is it stupid? Would Klein and Evans put up billboards saying: “If you’re stupid, eat dessert?” Everyone who smokes knows it may be unhealthy, just as anyone does who eats hollandaise sauce or cheesecake. But we don’t call that stupid. We call that a personal choice, because enjoying life is a part of living. At least it still is, for now.
Perhaps by stupid, Klein and Evans mean that smoking costs the government money in health care.
Could be — but smokers more than make up for it through high taxes and, frankly, by dying a few years earlier than the rest of us. Which means they take less pension money. It’s a ghoulish calculation, but if cost to the taxpayer is a reason not to be “stupid,” then dying the day one stops working is the new definition of “smart”.
Smokers know smoking may not be healthy. They do it anyway, because it’s a free country. For the government to tax, and condemn, and regulate, and ban, and eventually criminalize smoking is the government’s way of saying that you no longer own your body — they do.
Klein changed his mind on banning smoking province-wide late Friday and one has to wonder who or what got to him. Perhaps common sense. Maybe his hypocrisy, since obviously he and Evans can’t govern their own appetites, yet wanted to govern yours.
But how about those other unhealthy appetites? Klein has admitted to a problem with alcohol. Evans, before she was elected to public office, had a habit that could only be described as bizarre — her “occupation” was entering contests and draws. I don’t know if that’s a gambling addiction, but it’s odd. Yet these two were ready to cast the first stone at tobacco sinners.
They failed, of course. People don’t smoke because Klein and Evans, or the government, approve or disapprove. They didn’t start because of Klein’s bad example, and they won’t stop because he’s now holier than them.
It’s another sign of Klein’s drift. There are real problems out there — a socialist health-care system, a renewed Kyoto threat, Ottawa disparaging our elected senators, an energy tax grab against Newfoundland that looks like a dry run for a swipe at Alberta. But instead of dealing with any of these real issues, Klein and his red Tories are focusing their laws and our tax dollars on being busybodies, nannies and nags.
Sorry. Free men wouldn’t listen to such preaching even from a lean, fit abstainer. Coming from Klein and Evans, a mixture of curses and jeers is in order.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Calgary/Ezra_Levant/2005/01/16/900586.html
Rising Health Risks Linked to Urban Sprawl: Family Doctors to Release Comprehensive Research Review
Attention News/Health/Environmental/Assignment Editors:
On Wednesday, join us for the results of a comprehensive review of research on the links between urban sprawl and public health TORONTO, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – On Wednesday, January 19th, the Ontario College of Family Physicians (OCFP) will release an exhaustive review of research on the relationship between urban sprawl and public health. A group of distinguished family doctors authored the study in order to provide policy makers with the clearest research summary on the topic of urban sprawl and public health – critical for planning our communities – and to help educate Ontarians about the choices we make as a society. The results of this review cover selected studies and describe the findings regarding major adverse health effects associated with urban sprawl. Come to find out more about the study’s findings, which include: – Longer commuting distances mean increased traffic fatalities (one of our populations leading causes of death); – Greater travel distances lead to increased air pollution, which is worsening in Ontario and contributing to rising incidences of respiratory and cardiovascular disease; – Sprawl makes public transit less financially feasible; – People in car-dependent neighbourhoods walk less, weigh more, have higher blood pressure, and more incidences of diabetes and cardiovascular disease; and, – People in sprawling communities are more likely to suffer mental health problems. Who: Jan Kasperski, RN, MHSc, CHE, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, OCFP; Riina Bray, BASc, MSc, MD, CCFP, Physician – Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Chair OCFP’s Environmental Health Committee; Cathy Vakil, MD, CCFP, Lecturer – Queen’s University, Member OCFP’s Environmental Health Committee. When: Wednesday, January 19, 2005- 11 a.m. Where: Media Studio Queen’s Park, Main Legislature Building Toronto, ON
For further information: Mike Van Soelen, Environics Communications, (416) 969-2717
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c3498.html
Consumers’ Association Launches Class Action Lawsuit Against Beverage Industry, Retailers and Encorp Pacific
VANCOUVER, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – The Consumers’ Association of Canada today announced that on behalf of all consumers in British Columbia it has filed a major class action lawsuit against the beverage industry, retailers and Encorp Pacific. The focus of the lawsuit is the illegal use of consumer deposits collected under BC’s Beverage Container Stewardship Program Regulation. Dozens of companies such as Coca-Cola Bottling, Save-On Foods, Wal-Mart and London Drugs are named in the lawsuit. Encorp Pacific is the beverage container agency, the authorized steward approved by the BC Government under the regulation. “The BC beverage container regulation is very clear,” said Mr. Bruce Cran, President of the Consumers’ Association of Canada, “deposits collected from consumers can only be used for one purpose – paying refunds to consumers when containers are returned. Since 1998 the industry has collected and used over $70 million in consumer deposits for purposes that are not authorized under the regulation.” For example, consumer deposits were used to pay damages awarded as a result of a lawsuit against the beverage container agency for improper conduct in the operation of its stewardship plan. When the Beverage Container legislation was introduced the Government made clear that this legislation was based on an industry stewardship model reflecting the polluter pay principle. “At the time beverage containers were filling up landfills and costing municipalities millions of dollars each year to manage,” said Mr. Cran. “The purpose of the legislation was to have industry assume responsibility for its polluting product by putting into place a recycling system and paying the costs of this system,” said Mr. Cran. “The consumers’ role was to pay the deposit, incur the costs of returning the container and then obtain a refund when the container was returned. To date, consumers have carried out their responsibility to a high level and recycling is a major success in the province.” Not only did the beverage industry use consumer deposits for purposes not authorized by the regulation they also imposed an additional unauthorised recycling fee on top of the deposit. Since 1999 the beverage industry has collected about $60 million from its Container Recycling Fee without having any legislative authority for this levy. “Simply stated, it’s an illegal fee,” said Mr. Cran. “The industry shifted all its polluter pay costs onto the backs of consumers and did so without any legislative authority,” said Mr. Cran. “It’s time the industry started paying its fair share of the costs for managing its product.”
For further information: Contact Mr. Bruce Cran, Tel. (604) 418-8359
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c3388.html
National Health Organizations Participating in Pivotal Tobacco Court Case This Week
Young People Should Not Be Exposed to Tobacco Promotion OTTAWA, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – The Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Lung Association, Canadian Medical Association and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada will be contributing to the fight against tobacco on Wednesday, January 19 through their participation in a pivotal tobacco court case being heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court will be considering the validity of Saskatchewan legislation prohibiting tobacco displays and signage in premises accessible to minors. The four national health organizations have intervener status in the case. The groups have submitted their written argument to the Supreme Court in support of the Saskatchewan legislation. The health groups believe that young people should not be exposed to promotional displays of tobacco products as these products are addictive and lethal. “The tobacco industry is fighting the Saskatchewan legislation to protect their sales and profits,” says Rob Cunningham, lawyer for the Canadian Cancer Society. “The tobacco industry spends the largest portion of its marketing budget on point of purchase promotion of tobacco products. In 2002, the industry spent $77 million across Canada in payments to retailers.” In March 2002, Saskatchewan legislation came into force to ban tobacco displays in premises accessible by minors. In an effort to strike down this legislation, Rothmans, Benson & Hedges filed a constitutional challenge with the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench. In September 2002, this Court upheld the legislation, but a year later this decision was overturned on appeal. In October 2003, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruled that the ban on retail displays was in conflict with the federal Tobacco Act and, as a result, was inoperative. The Saskatchewan government appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Canada. Manitoba and Nunavut have adopted legislation similar to that in Saskatchewan. In addition, Ontario introduced anti-tobacco legislation in December that would, among other things, curb displays of cigarettes in stores. “Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable lung disease and the leading cause of preventable death in Canada,” says Deirdre Freiheit, President and CEO of the Canadian Lung Association. “Retail displays have been used by the tobacco industry to target and manipulate youth. We must protect Canadians, especially our children, from inducements to consume this deadly product.” “We know that the point of advertising is to increase consumption of products, and tobacco is no exception,” says Sally Brown, CEO, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. “This is why it is so critical to uphold Saskatchewan’s attempts to ban the retail promotion of tobacco. Thislegislation will make a difference and will keep our children from being exposed to promotions of a harmful product.” “Canada’s doctors are involved because tobacco kills our patients,” says Dr. Albert Schumacher, President, Canadian Medical Association. “Initiatives restricting the promotion of tobacco products to our kids are critical to ensure they are not seduced into this life-threatening addiction.” January 16 to 22 is National Non-Smoking Week; Wednesday, January 19 is Weedless Wednesday. The hearing, which starts at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, January 19, will take place at: The Supreme Court of Canada 301 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario The four national health groups are entitled to submit written argument (but not oral argument) to the Supreme Court. To view the written submission of the four health groups to the Supreme Court of Canada go to www.cancer.ca Six provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) and the federal government have also intervened in support of the Saskatchewan legislation. The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is to eradicate cancer and to enhance the quality of life of people living with cancer. When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website at www.cancer.ca or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333. The Lung Association is a national not-for-profit organization dedicated to improving the lung health of Canadians through research, prevention and education. With a focus on the prevention and control of lung diseases such as asthma and COPD, The Lung Association also offers help in the area of smoking prevention, cessation and air quality. The Lung Association offers a toll-free line at 1-888-566-5864 (LUNG) and our website at www.lung.ca. The Heart and Stroke Foundation (www.heartandstroke.ca) is a leading funder of heart and stroke research in Canada. Our mission is to improve the health of Canadians by preventing and reducing disability and death from heart disease and stroke through research, health promotion and advocacy. The Canadian Medical Association is the national voice of physicians in Canada. Representing 59,000 physicians across the country, the CMA’s mission is to serve and unite the physicians of Canada and be the national advocate, in partnership with the people of Canada for the highest standards of health and health care.
For further information: Canadian Cancer Society, Rob Cunningham, (613) 565-2522, ext. 305; Canadian Lung Association, Mary-Pat Shaw, Director, National Programs and Administration, (613) 569-6411, ext. 227; Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Heather Rourke, Communications, (613) 569-4361, ext. 318, hrourke@hsf.ca; Canadian Medical Association, Carole Lavigne, Manager, Media Relations, (613) 731-8610/1, 1-800-663-7336, ext. 1266
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c2668.html
Doctors and dentists team up against tobacco
Attention News/Health Editors:
HALIFAX, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – Health-care providers are continuing to line up against tobacco use. Nova Scotia’s doctors and dentists, who see the effects of smoking on their patients every day, have joined forces to talk to their patients about the health impacts of tobacco. “Talking about smoking is the first step on the road to quitting,” said Dr. Maria Alexiadis, President of Doctors Nova Scotia. “We want to open the dialogue between us, the health-care providers, and our patients.” Opening that dialogue is easier with a new Why You Want to Quit Smoking information card produced jointly by the Nova Scotia Dental Association and Doctors Nova Scotia. “Tobacco cessation is an important initiative for dentistry,” said Dr. Heather Carr, a practicing dentist and Tobacco Cessation Representative for the dental association. “From periodontal disease to oral cancer, tobacco frequently causes significant damage in a person’s mouth.” Statistics show that smokers are between four to 15 times more likely to contract oral cancer. Why You Want to Quit Smoking is being distributed to physician and dental offices across Nova Scotia during National Non-Smoking Week, Jan. 16 to 22. The information is also available on the Doctors Nova Scotia website,www.doctorsNS.com. This tool represents the latest in a series of cooperative tobacco-cessation initiatives between the two organizations. The information card is aimed at making smokers think about their own personal reasons to quit smoking to help them see how they could benefit from quitting. “Together, the membership of our two organizations reaches the majority of Nova Scotians at some point during the year,” said Dr. Alexiadis, “and its important that we use that opportunity to help our patients who smoke realize how their habit is affecting their health.” Doctors Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Dental Association want to ensure all Nova Scotians know there is support for anyone who is thinking about quitting smoking. “Talking with a health-care provider about your reasons to quit,” said Dr. Alexiadis, “is an excellent way to start.”
FOR BROADCAST USE: Doctors and dentists across Nova Scotia have teamed up against tobacco use. Doctors Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Dental Association have jointly produced a new information card, Why you want to quit smoking. This tool is aimed at opening dialogue between patients and their health-care providers. The province’s doctors and dentists want Nova Scotians to know there is support for tobacco users who want to quit. Talking with a health-care provider is an excellent way to start. Doctors Nova Scotia is the professional association that represents over 3,000 physicians, medical students and residents in the province of Nova Scotia. The association works in partnership with other health-care organizations to enhance the quality of medical care for Nova Scotians. This is achieved through health promotion, development of health-care policies, peer review, medical education and negotiations with government on behalf of physicians. The Nova Scotia Dental Association is the professional membership organization representing this province’s 460+ dentists. The Association is engaged in member advocacy, the advancement of the profession of dentistry and the promotion of the benefits of good oral health to all Nova Scotians. Dentistry’s award-winning children’s web site, www.healthyteeth.org, features tobacco cessation information aimed at the province’s school children.
For further information: Karla Gimby, Health Promotions/Issues Coordinator, Doctors Nova Scotia, (902) 468-1866 ext. 239, karla.gimby@doctorsns.com; Steve Jennex, APR, Communications Director, Nova Scotia Dental Association, (902) 420-0088, nsda@hfx.eastlink.ca
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c2675.html
Canadian Cancer Society urges the BC Government to Support Smoke-free Legislation
VANCOUVER, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – The Canadian Cancer Society believes that the British Columbia government must make curbing tobacco a priority. Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable disease, disability, and death in Canada. More than 47,000 Canadians, including 5,600 British Columbians, die each year from tobacco related illness, including lung cancer, throat and oral cancer, heart disease, stroke, and emphysema. Further, each year more than 500 British Columbians die from exposure to second-hand smoke. Cigarette smoking is responsible for 30% of all cancer deaths and more than 85% of lung cancers. “Given these sobering statistics, it is startling that British Columbia’s existing second-hand smoke regulation allows smoking in enclosed rooms in restaurants and bars,” said Barbara Kaminsky, CEO of the Canadian Cancer Society, BC and Yukon Division. The regulation, which states that rooms must be separately ventilated and workers can not spend more than 20% of their shift in these rooms, is more cosmetic than real. There is little enforcement of the law and businesses are not held accountable. Research has shown that the designated smoking rooms do not protect workers and patrons to the dangerous effects of second-hand smoke. Something must be done about this. The Canadian Cancer Society, BC and Yukon Division, believes that the government of British Columbia must enact legislation that would restrict smoking in all public places and workplaces, including restaurants and bars. In Canada, British Columbia was once a leader in tobacco control. Today, six provinces (Quebec, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick and Newfoundland) and two territories (Northwest Territories, Nunavut) have adopted or announced 100% smoke-free legislation. Several US States (California, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine, and Rhode Island) have already implemented smoking bans in restaurants and bars. Internationally, in 2004, Ireland, Norway, and New Zealand all implemented nation-wide smoke-free legislation. If Ireland, with its pub culture, can ban smoking in all bars, British Columbia can certainly do the same. “Strong non-smoking legislation protects workers and patrons from the dangerous effects of second-hand smoke,” said Kaminsky. “Further, non-smoking legislation helps smokers to quit or smoke less, thus reducing smoking rates. The Canadian Cancer Society would like you to take steps to tell government that British Columbians want smoke-free public places.” The BC government’s own Tobacco Control Strategy makes no commitment towards announcing or adopting province-wide smoke-free legislation. In November 2004, the Select Standing Committee on Health issued a report entitled, The Path to Health and Wellness: Making British Columbians Healthier by 2010. While the report contained many good recommendations to government, it fell short of recommending a province-wide smoking ban. The Canadian Cancer Society knows first hand the harm and devastation tobacco related disease can cause, and is committed to curbing the tobacco epidemic. National Non-Smoking Week is the perfect time for you to call on your government to protect the health of all BC workers. Let your voices be heard. This election year, ask your MLA his or her position on smoking bans in public places and workplaces. Ask candidates from other parties where they stand on the issue. Together, we must let the government of British Columbia know that it needs to act now, to protect all BC workers from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke, and to showcase a smoke-free BC at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. In 2004, 8,500 British Columbians were expected to die from cancer. Imagine if this number were reduced by 30%!
For further information: Heather Lochner, Communications Manager, Canadian Cancer Society, (604) 675-7340, hlochner@bc.cancer.ca
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c3344.html
Blood test could pave way for better use of promising cancer treatment, new Canadian Cancer Society research shows
Canadian anti-angiogenesis expert leads exciting new study TORONTO, Jan. 17 /CNW/ – Canadian Cancer Society researcher Dr. Robert Kerbel has new evidence that a blood test could provide doctors with the first effective way to evaluate a promising experimental cancer therapy in patients. Dr. Kerbel’s findings are published in the January 17, 2005 issue of Cancer Cell. “Anti-angiogenesis is an exciting treatment concept, but a major hurdle to its success in clinical development has been the lack of a valid tool to measure its effectiveness in patients,” says Dr. Kerbel, a scientist at Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute and the University of Toronto. “Our research has found that a blood test that measures levels of certain cells circulating in the blood stream is a strikingly accurate way to monitor anti-angiogenic treatments. Moving forward, we now may have a better way to reliably determine optimal dosing for patients, which could be the key piece of the puzzle for bringing anti-angiogenic treatments into standard use.” Dr. Kerbel is recognized internationally for his pioneering work in the field of anti-angiogenic therapy. This treatment approach – currently being tested on patients in many clinical trials, including trials in Canada – works by interfering with tumour angiogenesis, the process whereby tumours form new blood vessels. By blocking a tumour’s access to blood vessels, this treatment aims to starve the cancer of the oxygen and nutrients in its blood supply, slowing its growth and perhaps even causing it to wither away. Canadian Cancer Society research spokesperson, Dr. Michael Wosnick, says, “This research is a true made-in-Canada success story. Anti-angiogenic therapy is a prime example of Canadian research helping lead the way towards more selective cancer treatments that target biological processes associated with tumour development and minimize side effects for patients. “Anti-angiogenic treatments hold great promise for patients with cancers including prostate, colorectal, lung and breast cancer. With further research in this area, we may see an exciting improvement in the outlook for many of these patients worldwide,” adds Dr. Wosnick, who is executive director of the National Cancer Institute of Canada, the research partner of the Canadian Cancer Society. In this study, Dr. Kerbel and his research team – including lead author Yuval Shaked, a post-doctoral fellow in Dr. Kerbel’s lab – used a number of mice models to investigate properties of certain blood vessel cells circulating in the blood stream. Their findings show that the levels of these circulating cells correspond remarkably well with new blood vessel formation in tumours as well as blood vessel response to anti-angiogenic therapy. More importantly, treatment with anti-angiogenic drugs caused a dose-dependant reduction in the circulating cells that precisely parallel the anti-tumour activity established in animal models of these drugs. The researchers suggest the blood test could therefore be a way to better determine the optimal dosage of anti-angiogenic therapies for patients. One of Canada’s foremost cancer researchers, Dr. Kerbel is highly regarded for discoveries that are helping to improve cancer therapies and the lives of cancer patients. He is this year’s recipient of the Robert L. Noble Prize, the most prestigious research award sponsored by the Canadian Cancer Society for outstanding achievements in cancer research. His research, and in particular his development of anti-angiogenic therapy, has been supported with funds from the Canadian Cancer Society throughout his career. The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is to eradicate cancer and to enhance the quality of life of people living with cancer. When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website at www.cancer.ca or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.
For further information: contact: Carmen Kinniburgh, Communications, Canadian Cancer Society, (416) 934-5684; Fiona Taylor, Public Affairs, Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute, (416) 480-4040
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/17/c3345.html
Evans to keep looking at smoking ban -AB
CBC News Last Updated Jan 17 2005 04:31 PM MST
EDMONTON – Health Minister Iris Evans says she will proceed carefully with her proposed province-wide smoking ban, after Premier Ralph Klein said he would never support it.
But she’s getting backing from at least one cabinet colleague and the opposition.
Evans has raised the possibility of no smoking in workplaces across the province, which would essentially make restaurants and bars smoke-free.
Klein said he would never support such a ban, and that municipalities should be able to make that decision on their own.
Evans says the premier cautioned her to consult with all interested groups before moving ahead.
“I’ll pay attention to that caution, where communities or neighbourhoods or individuals in communities share a different opinion, and many of those people have contacted me already, we’ll see how we can look at some of the leadership in other jurisdictions and come up with the very best possible beginning of a better policy relative to smoking in public places in Alberta,” she said.
Former Health minister Gary Mar, who tried to get a similar ban approved a few years ago, says Evans is doing the right thing. Mar, now minister of Community Development, says Klein has said he will respect the will of caucus, even if he doesn’t agree with it.
“I think that everybody’s entitled to their view and perspective, but if the Minister of Health and Wellness Iris Evans wants to bring it forward, I’ll support her and I think there’s many people that would support her, both within our government, but outside of government as well,” Mar said.
NDP Leader Brian Mason says Klein is preventing Evans from doing her job.
“I think it would be very difficult for his Health minister to actually proceed with this approach now that he’s undercut her,” Mason said. “And that’s really the problem, is that the premier seems to encourage his ministers to show some initiative and then when they do, he undermines them, cuts them off at the ankles and leaves them with egg on their face.”
Mason said Klein’s stance is contrary to his talk about creating a healthier Alberta that places fewer demands on its health-care system.
http://calgary.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/ca-evans-smoking20050117.html
New calls to fast-track Calgary smoking bylaw -AB
CFCN.ca POSTED AT 5:21 PM Monday, January 17
Some Calgary aldermen say they will try to push city council to move up the public ban on smoking.
The ban is set to go in effect in all public places in 2008.
But anti-smoking activists say three years is too long to wait.
They pushing council to re-open the debate and speed up the implementation of the bylaw.
Ward 13 alderman Diane Colley-Urquhart agrees the ban should be brought in sooner.
“Now is the time,” she says. “All of the research tells us that we have a responsibility to ensure the public health of the citizens of Calgary.”
Colley-Urquhart says she will wait until after the Ward 10 by-election in February before bringing up the smoking bylaw again.
Gov’t should give away nicotine patches: anti-tobacco group -MB
Broadcast News January 17, 2005
WINNIPEG — The Manitoba government is being urged to hand out free nicotine patches to people who can’t quit smoking.
A group called the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance gives the province high marks for increasing tobacco taxes and banning smoking in all indoor public places.
But the alliance says the government should be spending more of its tobacco tax money on helping smokers quit.
Spokesman Murray Gibson says free nicotine patches should be offered to people on low incomes or the mentally ill.
Gibson recommends patches should also be given to anyone employed by Manitoba Health because health-care workers set an example for everyone.
He says the province should pay the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba to offer counselling to people addicted to smoking.
The group also wants the province to enforce legislation prohibiting retail displays of tobacco products.
http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=fcdadbe1-8b1a-4a1f-81dc-6779cff3a638
New calls to fast-track Calgary smoking bylaw -AB
CFCN.ca POSTED AT 5:21 PM Monday, January 17
Some Calgary aldermen say they will try to push city council to move up the public ban on smoking.
The ban is set to go in effect in all public places in 2008.
But anti-smoking activists say three years is too long to wait.
They pushing council to re-open the debate and speed up the implementation of the bylaw.
Ward 13 alderman Diane Colley-Urquhart agrees the ban should be brought in sooner.
“Now is the time,” she says. “All of the research tells us that we have a responsibility to ensure the public health of the citizens of Calgary.”
Colley-Urquhart says she will wait until after the Ward 10 by-election in February before bringing up the smoking bylaw again.
Editorial: Get serious on Kyoto -ON
Jan. 17, 2005. 01:00 AM
When Ottawa and the provinces finally got serious about getting Canadians to butt out, they augmented their television and newspaper ads telling us that smoking is bad for our health with regulatory and tax changes that were far more effective in getting people to quit.
Bans on smoking in public places, stiff penalties for retailers who sell tobacco to minors, and a big increase in cigarette taxes accomplished far more than gratuitous advice.
As a result, smoking across Canada is on the decline.
Now Ottawa wants us to curb another bad habit, our wasteful use of energy, which is contributing to climate change. Canada’s obligations under the Kyoto agreement call for us to cut our emissions of greenhouse gases by 240 million tonnes over the next seven years.
But just as it did with smoking, the federal government started out taking the easy road. They did it by encouraging business and consumers alike to reduce their energy usage because it is the right thing to do.
Everyone has seen Rick Mercer on TV asking Canadians to take “the one-tonne challenge” — to take public transit, buy energy efficient appliances, turn down the thermostat, do the things we already know we ought to do, but don’t.
Like smokers, we are all creatures of habit, and habits are hard to break.
And so, as with smoking, Ottawa has come to the realization that if it doesn’t introduce carrots and sticks that push us to change our behaviour, we will continue to let our cars, appliances, homes, offices and factories just keep on smoking, as it were.
As part of the budget preparations currently underway, Ottawa is reportedly considering billions of dollars in new spending on inducements to encourage Canadians to reduce their emissions. Under discussion are a wide range of incentives to help consumers make the switch to energy-efficient appliances, hybrid cars, solar power and other environmentally friendly technologies as well as tax credits for businesses that reduce their energy use.
The degree to which such measures survive the finance minister’s axe will provide the clearest signal yet as to how serious the government is about meeting its commitments under the Kyoto accord.
If Ottawa is serious, it should also consider big-picture initiatives that could pay substantial dividends, including major investments in big-city transit and in a national power grid to move clean renewable energy from Manitoba, Quebec and Labrador to areas of the country that currently rely on coal.
The Kyoto agreement comes into force on Feb. 16. With the clock starting to tick on that day, Ottawa must move beyond jawboning, and get on with a serious action plan.
8&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
Butt-brained idea-AB
Smoking ban only first move for those who wish to control us
By Paul Jackson Calgary Sun Tue, January 18, 2005
We true conservatives find it somewhat exhilarating that Premier Ralph Klein has finally awoken from his slumbers and slapped down provincial Health Minister Iris Evans.
After sleepwalking through the past election — and handing a stack of seats over to the Liberals — and making a yawning speech last week in which he talked about a “third way” to reform the mess in health care — without saying what that “third way” was — I had again pondered whether our premier had become feeble-minded.
Then, suddenly, he seems to have a grasp of reality again.
Evans caused an uproar when she declared she intended to push for legislation this spring to ban smoking in every public place province-wide.
Since this has basically been achieved — smoking in bars and restaurants in Calgary will be banned absolutely as of Jan. 1, 2008 — and other cities have already either done this or have it on the books for dates in the near future, Evans’ action seems pointless.
Now this is not a pro-smoking column.
Personally, the only time I smoke is at a regimental dinner when I have a fine cigar in one hand, a superb glass of port in the other, and await the coming of a sniff of snuff.
I tried smoking as a teenager — didn’t we all — but thankfully, didn’t get hooked.
When Sean Connery played a smooth James Bond, unlike his silly successors, I tried it again.
Once more, thankfully, I didn’t get hooked.
But each person to their own poison.
To me, VLTs in bars are a menace.
I’ve never put $5 in them.
Yet, if as a conservative, you believe in an individual’s right to choose, you have to allow them.
So, no, this is not a pro-smoking column, but it is a column against the tiresome meddling busybodies who would regiment every aspect of our lives: Thoughts, words and deeds.
I name two who one might regrettably say are now starting to only masquerade as true conservatives, the aforementioned Evans and Calgary Ald. Diane Colley-Urquhart.
Both appear more to be CINOS (Conservatives in Name Only) who have been waylaid and duped by the Lib-Lefters.
Wake up, Iris and Diane — and get back on the straight and narrow.
Why would Colley-Urquhart be a cheerleader for Evans when she had already won her battle on city council?
It simply doesn’t make sense.
Klein, for the first time in a long time, did make sense.
He told Evans to back off.
Yet never forget this: The Lib-Left set is never satisfied.
This or that victory is never enough.
Lib-Lefters have to push on, and on, and on.
That’s why the anti-smoking brigade, having already won this victory, is moving to get junk food banned, fast-food restaurants restricted, pushing a vegetarian agenda, and, in the animal rights movement, planning to forbid people to own pets. To them, owning pets is the enslavement of animals.
Just let them try and take my Shih-Tzu puppy “Muffin” away.
Now, I do not say either Evans or Colley-Urquhart belong to this bunch of fanatics, but they should be aware Lib-Lefters know how to manipulate and deal with the gullible.
By the way, Ralph, I suggest Evans may soon make you wish you had never defrocked ex-health minister — and prominent CINO — Gary Mar.
If Evans can go off on a tangent like this even before she has her new portfolio files in order, what will she do when she feels she has a real angle on the job?
A point Lib-Left zealots forget is a bar or a restaurant is not, in actuality, a public place.
The owner can allow you to enter, or forbid you to enter.
If you disobey his rules, he can kick you out on your rear end.
I know this because in my more raucous days, I was ejected from a bar or two myself.
When I see the Lib-Left set trying to engineer society, I always think of George Orwell’s frightening novel, 1984, and wonder if, rather than seeing Winston Smith as the hero, they think Big Brother and the interrogator O’Brien are quite OK.
All who fear the regimentation of society should read 1984 — or see one of the two movie versions of Orwell’s harrowing novel of a society under absolute state control: The 1955 version with Michael Redgrave and Jan Sterling, or the “commemorative” 1984 version with John Hurt and Richard Burton.
Freedom must not slowly and insidiously be chipped away.
Either by the dictatorial types or the naive types.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Calgary/Paul_Jackson/2005/01/18/901594.html
Pharmacy cig sales mixed message -MB
Tops anti-smoking group’s report card
By FRANK LANDRY, LEGISLATURE REPORTER Tue, January 18, 2005
An anti-smoking group is urging the province to crack down on the sale of cigarettes in pharmacies. Dr. Mark Taylor, chairman of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance (MANTRA), said yesterday it sends the wrong message to allow pharmacies to sell tobacco products.
“Kids hear how dangerous tobacco is, then they go to the pharmacy to get medications to make them better and at the front of the pharmacy, in full view, are mountains of cigarettes,” said Taylor, whose group yesterday released its third annual Manitoba tobacco control report card. “It’s clearly a hypocritical message.”
Taylor said all provinces east of Manitoba prohibit pharmacies from selling cigarettes, and we should do the same.
Healthy Living Minister Theresa Oswald would not commit to a ban but said she’s in favour of anything that would discourage teens from trying tobacco in the first place.
“The whole issue of placement of cigarettes … the whole issue of availability of cigarettes, all of those issues are things that I’m prepared to examine,” Oswald said.
In its report card, MANTRA gave the provincial government passing marks for its Manitoba-wide smoking ban and legislation that will one day outlaw tobacco displays in retail stores where children are permitted.
FREE QUIT-SMOKING AIDS
MANTRA failed the province for continuing to allow the sale of smokes in pharmacies.
The anti-puffing group also urged the Doer government to give quit-smoking aids such as the nicotine patch free to low-income Manitobans and prohibit smoking in aboriginal casinos and gambling halls. Unlike smoke bans in other provinces, First Nations are exempt under Manitoba’s Non-Smokers Health Protection Act.
Oswald said there are no plans to alter the way the smoking ban is written.
Despite his group’s criticisms, Murray Gibson, MANTRA’s executive director, said a national tobacco report card being released today will rank Manitoba second best only to Nunavut when it comes to cracking down on smokers.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/WinnipegSun/News/2005/01/18/901765-sun.html
Province best at butting out -MB
But, report criticizes natives exclusion from smoking laws
By Mia Rabson Tuesday, January 18th, 2005
A coalition of Manitoba’s anti-smoking activists says the province could — and should — have included First Nations when it banned smoking indoors in public last October.
The Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance (MANTRA) kicked off national non-smoking week yesterday by releasing its annual report card on provincial tobacco control efforts.
MANTRA’s report card said overall Manitoba is doing well in its efforts to reduce smoking.
In fact, a national report card to be released today will rank Manitoba first among the provinces for its efforts to curb smoking.
Overall MANTRA was pleased with the province’s performance, particularly with the smoking ban, which prohibits smoking in all indoor public places, workplaces, and partially enclosed public patios.
But the group’s chairman, Dr. Mark Taylor, said the failure to enforce the ban on First Nations is a black mark on the province’s mostly good record.
When it introduced the smoking ban legislation, the provincial government indicated First Nations fell under federal jurisdiction and therefore could challenge the bill if it was enforced there.
But Taylor said all other provinces that have or are working on a provincewide ban included First Nations.
“It’s very difficult for us to understand why Manitoba felt they did not have jurisdiction,” Taylor said.
MANTRA executive director Murray Gibson said at the very least the province should refuse to grant a gaming license to First Nations casinos if the casino won’t ban smoking.
“How can you license something that is an unhealthy workplace,” Gibson said.
The exclusion of First Nations was a main criticism of the ban by the provincial Progressive Conservative party, the first party out of the blocks to call for a provincewide ban. Tory Leader Stuart Murray said yesterday he hopes the additional pressure may convince the NDP to expand the bill.
“I think everyone should be treated equally,” Murray said.
But Healthy Living Minister Theresa Oswald stuck by the provincial line yesterday saying enforcing the bill on First Nations could spark a court challenge, and that wasn’t something the province was willing to undergo.
“At this time we’re not choosing to make any amendments to the legislation,” she said.
MANTRA’s report also calls for Manitoba to increase the amount of money it spends on smoking cessation programs. Gibson said Manitoba has one of the higher cigarette taxes but one of the lowest expenditures on anti-smoking programs in Canada.
Manitoba’s 2004-05 budget for anti-smoking programs was equal to 58 cents per person. Gibson wants it to be at least $3 per person.
One provincial campaign, a television advertisement selected by 31,000 Grade 6 to Senior 4 students, will air in March. The graphic ad shows a teenage girl’s skin rotting and tar oozing out of her mouth in an attempt to make smoking look as gross as possible.
Winnipeg Free Press
Drug stores must butt out: anti-smoking group -MB
By DIANA PEREIRA Globe and Mail Update
Western Canadian pharmacies still sell cigarettes, and an anti-smoking group in Manitoba wants that to change.
Manitoba should join eastern Canada and ban tobacco sales in pharmacies, said Murray Gibson, executive director of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance (Mantra).
According to the national report card on tobacco control, released Tuesday, most provinces still allow cigarette sales in pharmacies. Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Northwest Territories, Saskatchewan and the Yukon have no laws banning the practice.
In Prince Edward Island, which still allows the sale from pharmacies, a ban comes into effect on June 1.
The report was published by the National Clearinghouse on Tobacco and Health Program, managed by the Canadian Council for Tobacco Control.
The national report used five factors in its calculations: provincial/territorial tobacco-tax rates, percentage of smoke-free workplaces, percentage of smoke-free public places, bans on retail displays and bans on sales from pharmacies.
In the category of tax rates, the Northwest Territories ranked first, receiving a grade of A+ for its territorial tax rate of $42 per cartons of 200 cigarettes. The report states that several studies show that a 10-per-cent increase in price decreases smoking by about 4 per cent and will curb youth smoking as well. British Columbia received an A for its tax rate of $35.80.
In the category of keeping workplaces smoke free, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Yukon all failed. British Columbia, Newfoundland, Ontario, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Quebec achieved incomplete grades because they still have designated-smoking rooms in some workplaces.
When it comes to 100 per cent smoke-free public places, Alberta, British Columbia, Northwest Territories, Quebec and Yukon all failed. Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario and PEI received incomplete grades because of various designated-smoking rooms.
Most provinces and territories failed when it came to retail display bans, with the exception of Manitoba, Nunavut and Saskatchewan. PEI received an incomplete grade because the Supreme Court of Canada is deciding whether to move ahead on banning the ads.
The Manitoba association released its third provincial report card on tobacco control in the province on Monday.
An additional problem area identified by the Manitoba report is government support for programs and services that promote quitting smoking.
“We are encouraging the government to support cessation programs,” Mr. Gibson told globeandmail.com.
The Manitoba report also noted that 17 per cent of children in the province aged 17 and under are subjected to second-hand smoke in their homes on a regular basis.
According to Mr. Gibson, a 2004 report released by Environics Canada prepared for Health Canada that said 96 per cent of smokers surveyed said children should be protected from second-hand smoke. At the same time, 64 per cent of smokers said they smoke at home.
Mantra is planning on co-ordinating a committee to come up with recommendations to increase people’s understanding of second-hand smoke.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050118.wsmoke0118/BNStory/National/
Gov’t criticized for not enforcing smoking ban on reserves -MB
Broadcast News January 18, 2005
The Manitoba government is being criticised for not enforcing its provincewide smoking ban on reserves.
Dr. Mark Taylor, of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance, says all other provinces that have or are working on provincewide bans included reserves.
When it introduced the legislation, the provincial government indicated First Nations fell under federal jurisdiction and therefore could challenge the bill if it was enforced on reserves.
Healthy Living Minister Theresa Oswald says enforcing the bill on reserves could cause a court challenge — similar to one that is underway in New Brunswick — and that’s not something the province is willing to do.
The Manitoba government is being criticized for not enforcing its provincewide smoking ban on reserves.
Dr. Mark Taylor, of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance, says all other provinces that have or are working on provincewide bans included reserves.
When it introduced the legislation, the provincial government indicated First Nations fell under federal jurisdiction and therefore could challenge the bill if it was enforced on reserves.
Healthy Living Minister Theresa Oswald says enforcing the bill on reserves could cause a court challenge — similar to one that is underway in New Brunswick — and that’s not something the province is willing to do.
http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=8e631e0f-c608-4ce1-a50b-eabade4d15dc
Boutilier nixes provincewide smoking ban – AB
By JACQUIE MCFARLANE Today staff and The Canadian Press Quitting smoking is the responsibility of individuals and should be handled by municipalities, said Wood Buffalo MLA Guy Boutilier, when asked about the government’s flip-flop on a province wide smoking ban last week. He ruled out support for a provincewide ban. “The ideal situation is as a New Year’s resolution is for people to consider giving up smoking and then what’s done by the municipality or the province doesn’t matter because everyone is working towards the goal of giving up smoking,” said Boutilier. Putting a smoking ban in place, said Boutilier, falls under municipal jurisdiction, which is the best way to handle it. “We’ve given municipalities that authority rather than going provincewide where one rule fits all,” said Boutilier. Health Minister Iris Evans announced last week she was taking the first step in what she hoped will lead to a provincewide ban on smoking in the workplace. At the time Evans was optimistic, saying “I think the premier indicated he’s very willing to take another look at how we regulate smoking or restrict tobacco use in Alberta.’’ However, Ralph Klein, speaking in Montreal Friday, said his government is not looking to implement a blanket ban on butts in public places, instead leaving that decision up to individual municipalities. Evans retreated from her stand after Klein’s remarks. It was the second time the premier has shut down a health minister’s attempt to restrict smoking provincewide. Gary Mar broached the subject in 2001, suggesting higher cigarette taxes at that time. Wood Buffalo Mayor Melissa Blake said dealing with an anti-smoking bylaw in the municipality was challenging when it was passed in 2000. Now she’d like to see the province take a leading role in making legislation that’s equal across Alberta. “I think the province should take some initiative and make it a provincewide issue. It would take all of the uncertainty out of the jurisdictions that haven’t gone as far as we have,” said Blake. Municipalities have been pushing the government for a provincewide ban, passing a resolution at their Alberta Urban Municipalities Association meetings in 2001 and 2003. Blake noted that most of the municipalities were in support of those resolutions. Boutilier acknowledged that health was a provincial issue but wouldn’t commit to whether that made the government responsible for regulating smoking. Sunday marked the first day of National Non-Smoking Week, Jan. 16-22. Health Canada is working with Wal-Mart stores to get out information about quitting smoking.
http://www.fortmcmurraytoday.com/daily/pages/news2.html
Butt out of city business: Rice -AB
Provincial legislation restricting smoking unwarranted: Alderman
By KEVIN CRUSH Herald-Tribune staff Januar
Premier Ralph Klein appears to have nixed any plans for a comprehensive provincial smoking ban for now, but the debate still burns on.
After a speech in Montreal, the premier insisted his government will not be imposing a provincewide smoking ban, preferring instead to leave it up to municipalities to decide for themselves what they want to do.
That comes the same week that Health Minister Iris Evans said she would seek some form of provincial smoking legislation and it is believed she will still be drafting legislation for a Tory policy committee.
Governments should not be butting into what should be a business decision, said Ald. Helen Rice.
“I believe that government has no business putting in place what I call oppressive legislation that inhibits businesses from operating in a manner that they feel most meets the needs of their customer,” said Rice.
“Businesses, if they’re going to stay in business, will meet the needs of their customers, and if they don’t they won’t have customers and will close, and they don’t need government telling them that.”
Grande Prairie’s smoking bylaw allows smoking in any public place or workplace that doesn’t allow entrance to minors. That allows some businesses to create walled-off smoking sections, to allow all smoking, or to be smoke-free. Since the bylaw came into place, Mayor Wayne Ayling said the city has received many requests from residents and non-residents to extend the bylaw to all public and workplaces. While he wants to see what Evans has in mind for legislation first, Ayling said provincial guidelines of any sort would be helpful.
“We welcome any initiative by the health minister to reduce the negative impact on second-hand smoke on people in the workplace or in other public places.”
Ayling rejected arguments that a provincial smoking ban would hurt businesses.
“Every province or state that has imposed a jurisdiction-wide no smoking legislation has been able to show that the no-smoking legislation does not negatively impact business and does positively impact health.”
The Alberta Urban Municipalities Association came out last week in support of a provincial smoking ban on the grounds that second-hand smoke is unhealthy in the working place. In 2001 and 2003, the association’s members passed resolutions calling for provincial laws to prohibit or regulate smoking in the workplace.
Grande Prairie-Wapiti MLA Gordon Graydon hasn’t made up his mind on whether he would support a smoking ban or not as he believes both sides have valid points.
“I’m kind of torn. I hear from constituents on certainly both sides of the issue,” said Graydon.
“As the former chair of the South Peace Health Unit, I’m very conscious of the health costs of smoking, so with my health hat on I’m in favour of a provincewide ban. But generally I don’t like the government to interfere in every single aspect of my life. You can have too much government.”
The biggest problem in Alberta right now is the patchwork of municipal policies on smoking. Without any provincial guidelines, towns and cities have had to deal with smoking in their own way – if they deal with it at all. That can cause confusion from one place to the next.
“As a smoker, I guess you need to know what community you are in today and what are the rules today, which isn’t good,” said Graydon. “Uniformity across the province would solve that.”
But Rice says uniformity can’t exist from municipality to municipality on any matter.
“There’s a patchwork of bylaws in terms of snow removal standards, and dog control bylaws. Each municipality has different ones of those things because they’re different places,” said Rice.
“It’s absurd to think that everyone should have the same bylaws. I mean, people move from Edmonton to Grande Prairie fully recognizing there will be different rules and different ways.”
Rice suggested a better option is for the province to force all municipalities to draft smoking legislation and then let them deal with the issue as they see fit, something Graydon said could be an option.
The Peace Country Health medical officer of health would welcome a provincial smoking ban.
“If we can get all workplaces – that’s all office buildings, that’s all restaurants, all bars, all schools, everywhere… We’ll do whatever we can do as Peace Country Health to support the province in going in that direction, because it’s been long overdue we think,” said Dr. Albert de Villiers.
He said the province is lacking when compared to other provinces who have instituted smoking bans. Similar smoking bans are in effect in New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan and are pending in Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador.
http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/Z03_00asmoking0117.lasso
Editorial- Smoke from a distant fire -AB
Mixed messages out of Edmonton on provincial smoking ban
The very contentious issue of smoking bans and how far they should reach is gearing up again, thanks to conflicting commentary out of the Klein government last week. Pro-smoking-ban proponents were happy to hear Health Minister Iris Evans suggest that a province wide ban of smoking in the workplace was a very real possibility. The announcement was met by optimism from the anti-smoking lobby; disappointment and disdain from the laissez faire and pro- smoking-choice camp. However, Premier Klein seemed to pooh-pooh the whole notion with comments late last week, saying the government would not be implementing such a wide-reaching ban. His justification was that community dynamics are so different across the province, it was not right for Big Brother government to impose operational restrictions on municipalities, rather, if the municipalities chose to do so – fine. Blue Tory Ralph Klein has found an unlikely local ally in Red Liberal Helen Rice – longtime city alderman and manager of the DownTown Association. First, Rice is a longtime smoker – that’s no secret. But her tack on the issue comes from a business perspective, arguably in support of businesses involved in her workings with the association. Rice, like Klein, believes that businesses can make and/or break their own fortunes without the help of the provincial government. With respect to the premier, one wonders how much of his decision on the issue is politically motivated and how much is simply buck passing. While the message of government keeping its fingers out of the day to day operations of Alberta’s small businesses resonates with many in the province, the health issue surround smoking and its societal costs continues to bear pressure. Many governments in Canada – provincially – have adopted restrictive smoking legislation – the latest being Saskatchewan. And if a case study in socio-economic integration of policy and practice needs a model, Lloydminster is a good one as Saskatchewan businesses complain they are losing their business to the Alberta side where smoking is still allowed. This game of political ping pong can continue ad nauseum. What is required is the courage of leadership and a direct attempt to solicit the views of Albertans – including Grande Prairians – on how restrictive or widespread they want smoking bans to be. Medical evidence speaks for itself on smoking and its effects. It’s a no-brainer. What is at issue is freedom of choice and individual rights. Should society have the right to prevent a person from smoking themselves to an early grave? It seems to have made it clear second-hand smoke is unacceptable and now most places in Canada where minors can be do not allow smoking. But how far do we go? Governments – both provincial and municipal – have a duty to find out what their constituents want and then have the courage to implement that wish and then damn the torpedoes. It’s as simple as that.
http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/1editorial1.lasso
Smoking ban stays at psych facilities -ON
MARY-JANE EGAN, Free Press City Hall Reporter 2005-01-18
A bid to allow smoking in psychiatric facilities gained sympathy but insufficient support at a city committee last night. Kathleen Gillard made an emotional pitch to the community and protection services committee to exempt psychiatric facilities from the no-smoking bylaw, arguing the ban discriminates against the mentally ill who can’t deal with the stress of nicotine withdrawal while trying to cope with their illnesses.
Most mental illness patients smoke, Gillard said. And her sister, Janet, who suffers from schizophrenia, has escaped needed care at London psychiatric facilities when she’s been allowed out of lockdown to smoke outside.
“Who is going to pay for the two police officers who are called when my sister goes AWOL? This is her home. Why shouldn’t she be able to smoke in her home?” she said of her sister’s stints at St. Joseph’s Regional Health Care’s former London Psychiatric Hospital.
When London’s smoking ban went into effect in 2003, a one-year moratorium was placed on psychiatric facilities because nicotine withdrawal can affect patients’ medical regimen.
Coun. Joni Baechler said although she understands Gillard’s concerns, the bylaw is designed to protect workers from second-hand smoke.
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2005/01/18/901716-sun.html
Ottawa allows smoking at White Bear casino -SK
CBC News Last Updated Jan 18 2005 01:56 PM CST
REGINA – There are now officially two sets of laws when it comes to where people can smoke in Saskatchewan.
On Tuesday, the federal government decided it wouldn’t block a First Nations bylaw which allows smoking areas in the Bear Claw casino at White Bear First Nation near Carlyle.
It’s a significant setback for the Saskatchewan government, which has been trying to impose a province-wide smoking ban in all enclosed public places, including bars, restaurants and casinos.
Maynard Sonntag, Saskatchewan’s Minister of First Nations and Metis Relations said he is hopeful that he can still reach some kind of deal with aboriginal leaders.
Sonntag said the province is willing to be flexible on other rights for aboriginal people, if the two sides can reach an agreement on the smoking issue.
“The discussions I’ve been having is essentially to determine whether or not there is room for movement from the FSIN (Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations) and from the chief to determine whether or not they’re interested in trying to advance the causes of inherent rights with the province,” Sonntag said.
Sonntag would not be more specific about which rights the province is willing to negotiate on with aboriginal people. He said if he gave details, he might jeopardize the talks.
Last week, federal Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott said he’d need some time to think about whether or not to approve the White Bear smoking bylaw.
http://sask.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/casino050118.html
Dr. Albert Schumacher, CMA President, speaks out on pivotal tobacco case before the Supreme Court of Canada
MEDIA ALERT – Attention Assignment Editors:
OTTAWA, Jan. 18 /CNW Telbec/ – The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) is proud that during National Non-Smoking Week a critical tobacco court case will be heard by the Supreme Court. The case involves the tobacco industry’s challenge of Saskatchewan’s ban on tobacco displays in premises accessible by minors. The Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Lung Association, the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Cancer Society have made a written submission to the Court in support of the ban. The case will be heard January 19 – Weedless Wednesday. CMA President, Dr. Albert Schumacher will be available by phone to discuss the importance of the case.
For further information: Carole Lavigne, (613) 731-8610 or 1-800-663-7336 ext. 1266 http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/18/c4178.html
Understanding tobacco -ON
By PETER SELBY head of the Nicotine Dependence Clinic Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto Tuesday, January 18, 2005 – Page A18
Toronto — Re No Smoking Ban Planned In Alberta, Klein Says (Jan. 15): I was alarmed by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s conclusion that smokers are stupid. It’s disconcerting that there continues to be a serious lack of understanding of Canada’s No. 1 public health problem.
Like other addictions, the drive to smoke can be too powerful for a person to resist. In fact, 50 to 60 per cent of smoking behaviour is genetically determined. The addiction to tobacco is a real disease, classified as such by the World Health Organization and the American Psychiatric Association.
Just like any other chronic disease, tobacco dependence has biological, social and environmental determinants characterized by remission (stopping) and relapse (starting again). Many smokers relapse because their brains have been seriously affected by tobacco, and studies show that these abnormalities can persist for years after a smoker stops. We know that comprehensive strategies, including smoke-free environments, help smokers quit for good.
Mr. Klein should consider educating himself about how he could help Albertans by realizing that quitting smoking is a process and not an event.
Ontario tobacco taxes rise by $1.25 a carton at midnight -ON
Canadian Press
Toronto — Smokers in Ontario will have to pay $1.25 more per carton as of midnight Tuesday as the provincial Liberal government raises tobacco taxes for the third time since coming to office.
“With this increase, Ontario comes one step closer to its plan to raise tobacco taxes to the national average,” Finance Minister Greg Sorbara said Tuesday.
The current national average is about $30 in provincial tobacco taxes. This increase boosts Ontario to $23.45, a spokeswoman for Mr. Sorbara said.
Since the Liberals were elected in October 2003, they have raised provincial tobacco taxes by $6.25, including this increase.
Mr. Sorbara said this move “is part of our comprehensive strategy to eliminate tobacco consumption, especially among young people.”
The higher tax means the cost of a pack of 20 cigarettes will rise by about 13 cents and a pack of 25 cigarettes will be up by about 16 cents.
Mr. Sorbara said this is part of the province’s Smoke-Free Ontario campaign, which aims to reduce the number of smokers in the province and ties in with National Non-Smoking Week.
“Smoking is the No. 1 preventable cause of premature death and illness in Ontario, and it costs an estimated $1.7-billion a year in health-care spending to treat diseases directly caused by tobacco,” Mr. Sorbara said.
When the Liberals came into office they boosted provincial tobacco taxes by $2.50 a carton as part of other tax hikes, then raised them by $2.50 in last May’s budget.
As part of its efforts to curtail smoking, the government has also introduced legislation to ban smoking in all workplaces and all public places, and aims to prevent young people from picking up the habit.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050118.wonta0118/BNStory/National
Promise of help for tobacco farmers unfulfilled, marketing board chairman says -ON
Fred Neukamm appears before the Ontario Legislature’s standing committee of finance and economic affairs
By Patrick Brennan Times-Journal Staff Tuesday January 18, 2005 LONDON, Ont. — Fred Neukamm is a man running short on patience. The chairman of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board appeared Monday before the Ontario Legislature’s standing committee of finance and economic affairs and pleaded the case for the government to live up to its promises. “We need a fulfillment of the promise for immediate assistance,” Neukamm said. That promise was made by the Liberals as they campaigned in the provincial election. “As of yet, we’ve not seen that promise fulfilled,” Neukamm said outside the room at the Four Points Sheraton where the committee heard him and a long list of groups appearing to make their point before the budget is handed down. Neukamm said the tobacco growers are looking for assurances from the provincial government on whether they are prepared to sustain the tobacco industry as long there is consumption. If the answer to that is issue is yes, Neukamm said long-term strategies are needed. “Right now, we are in crisis management,” he said, referring to the tobacco board which represents 1,000 farm families, many of them in east Elgin, the Tillsonburg area, and Norfolk county. If the government does not want to support sustainability, there is a need for more money to address growers’ needs, said Neukamm. “We need immediate help right now because policies have driven the market down faster than any decline in consumption,” he said. High taxes are only one issue, he said. That is having the net effect of forcing smokers to look for black market cigarettes. Cigarette manufacturers, in turn, are looking to import cheap tobacco to keep their costs down and protect their share of the market, Neukamm said. Overall, he said, compound problems are forcing about 100 growers out of business a year. Neukamm said growers know the industry is in decline because of fewer smokers and need government help to manage a drop in consumption. He said he took advantage of the opportunity to address the committee because of the issues are much broader than the provincial agriculture portfolio. “Every opportunity we have to talk about this, we will take,” he said.
http://www.stthomastimesjournal.com/story.php?id=137975
Scott will accept smoking bylaw for First Nations casino: report -SK
Broadcast News January 18, 2005
REGINA — A media report says the federal Indian Affairs minister will not intervene in a bylaw that allows smoking at a First Nations casino in southeastern Saskatchewan, despite a province-wide ban on smoking in public places.
The report on CBC says minister Andy Scott told his Saskatchewan counterpart of his decision last night.
The province outlawed smoking in all enclosed public places on Jan. 1, but aboriginal leaders argued that the law doesn’t apply on their land.
The White Bear First Nation passed the bylaw last month that allows smoking in its Bear Claw casino and bingo halls on the reserve near Carlyle.
Under the Indian Act, if a band has a bylaw that conflicts with provincial legislation, the bylaw prevails unless the federal minister objects.
Saskatchewan’s aboriginal affairs minister, Maynard Sonntag had asked Scott to quash the bylaw.
Sonntag says he’ll continue pressing to get the same set of rules for all businesses in the province.
He also says he will continue to talk to First Nations officials in an effort to reach an agreement on the smoking issue.
http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/news/story.html?id=c72f4e1b-04cf-44fa-8f82-1d805b4132f6
Supreme court to hear Sask tobacco law case -SK
Dan Dugas Canadian Press January 18, 2005
OTTAWA (CP) — As Canadians mark Weedless Wednesday, the country’s highest court will be the scene of a high-stakes tobacco showdown.
Supreme Court justices will hear arguments on a Saskatchewan law barring cigarette promotional displays in stores accessible by children.
The Saskatchewan law was struck down by a lower court as butting into federal jurisdiction — a ruling that could eventually quash similar laws in other provinces — and the provincial government is appealing.
The federal government, six provinces, the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Lung Society, the Canadian Medical Association and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada are intervenors.
On the other side of the argument is Rothmans, Benson and Hedges Inc.
The company will argue that Saskatchewan cannot enact legislation that goes further than the federal Tobacco Control Act, which already places severe restrictions on cigarette advertising.
Health groups say it’s a pivotal case.
“Obviously, (the industry is) looking at any argument it can to strike down legislation that’s having an impact on its sales and profits,” said lawyer Rob Cunningham of the cancer society.
“Ultimately, what’s driving the decision making at Rothmans, Benson and Hedges is its desire to maximize profits and sales.”
Health groups estimate the tobacco industry paid $90 million to retailers in Canada in 2003 for promotional displays as a marketing tool to boost sales.
They say young people should not be exposed to displays of addictive and potentially lethal tobacco products.
“Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable lung disease and the leading cause of preventable death in Canada,” said Deirdre Freiheit, president of the Canadian Lung Association.
“Retail displays have been used by the tobacco industry to target and manipulate youth. We must protect Canadians, especially our children, from inducements to consume this deadly product.”
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruled in 2003 that the ban on retail displays was in conflict with the federal Tobacco Act.
Manitoba and Nunavut have adopted legislation similar to that in Saskatchewan and Ontario introduced anti-tobacco legislation late last year that would, among other things, curb displays of cigarettes in stores.
Sally Brown of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada said it’s critical to uphold the Saskatchewan legislation because of its affect on other provinces.
On Tuesday, Ontario hiked tobacco taxes by $1.25 a carton — the third increase since the Liberals took office in 2003.
Finance Minister Greg Sorbara said the move “is part of our comprehensive strategy to eliminate tobacco consumption, especially among young people.”
http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/news/story.html?id=4b8d7a94-ebe3-4b72-9dfa-577935ee7970
