Province seeks new deal on gaming profits -ON

Talks begin with First Nations
Peterson heading negotiations

RICHARD BRENNAN QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU February 19, 2005
PETERBOROUGH—Former Liberal premier David Peterson is being paid $1,000 a day to lead negotiations on a new deal between the province and Ontario First Nations on sharing gaming profits.

The First Nations have been receiving proceeds from gaming at Casino Rama, near Orillia, since it opened in the summer of 1996, and the arrangement expires in 2011. Indian bands have received about $500 million in net proceeds, according to local newspaper reports.

But negotiations are now under way between the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. and the First Nations to share proceeds from gaming sources across the province, not just Casino Rama.

Finance Minister Greg Sorbara said in a statement yesterday: "It's important we work closely with Ontario's First Nations to build a stable source of funding for community, economic and cultural development, health and education."

But a source told the Toronto Star that while divvying up proceeds from all gaming sites " sounds good, they (government officials) really want to give the natives less money."

Premier Dalton McGuinty, who was here to make an education funding announcement, told reporters yesterday "these discussions have been going on for quite some time ... I'm not familiar with the details."

Conservative MPP Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln) said Ontario native bands are not going to fall "for this bait and switch."

"When the McGuinty government should be turning its mind to improving health care and education, why they would dive into this complex issue is beyond me," he said.

Peterson served as Liberal premier between 1985 and 1990. He was elected as a member of the Legislature in 1975 and became the Ontario Liberal Party leader in 1982. He is now a senior partner and chairman of Cassels Brock, where he practises corporate and commercial law.

With files from Canadian Press

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=110876821180

2&call_pageid=968256289824&col=968342212737&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

---

Tobacco Company Disappointed by Ruling, Claims Lawyers the Main Winners with this Decision

    MONTREAL, Feb. 21 /CNW Telbec/ - Imperial Tobacco Canada is extremely disappointed with the Québec Superior Court's decision to certify two class actions against the three major tobacco companies in Québec.
    The decision will give rise to years of litigation as the classes include potentially more than two million members. Tobacco companies have indicated that it will result in as many individual trials in order to determine such things as the health history, lifestyle choices and smoking history of each individual who claims to be part of the class.
    "The real winners in this class action will be the legions of lawyers who will be employed for years to come trying to deal with the individual issues that are inevitable in this type of class action," said company's head of Public Affairs, Yves-Thomas Dorval.
    The tobacco company argued against certification, citing that each class member would have to separately pursue their own claim. This is because  numerous individual issues are involved and each individual claim would have to be adjudicated on its own merits.
    The company also argued that the health risks of smoking have been publicized, debated and promoted for half a century in Canada, over which period millions of people have chosen to quit smoking. Virtually the only tobacco advertising in Canada since the 1980s has been that conducted by governments, health groups and others to promote health warnings and non-smoking.
    A previous hearing in Canada resulted in the Honourable Justice Warren Winkler of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice denying the class action certification request of four plaintiffs, on February 4, 2004. He ruled that the class action did not raise "common issues" as it must in order to obtain certification as a class action. Also, courts in the United States have repeatedly refused to certify class actions against tobacco manufacturers precisely because there are many individual issues, making individual actions the only realistic option for those who wish to pursue a claim.

For further information: Yves-Thomas Dorval, Imperial Tobacco Canada,  (514) 932-6161, ext. 2113

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/February2005/21/c6766.html

---

Hundreds turn out to protest smoke ban  -SK

CBC News Last Updated Feb 21 2005 03:46 PM CST

WEYBURN – The debate over the province's smoking ban was heating up again in Weyburn Monday.

At least 500 people rallied in support of a local hotel owner who is facing thousands of dollars in fines for violating the ban on smoking in public places.

Royal Hotel owner Rob Joyal, who was in court Monday, said he will plead not guilty to the offences. His case was adjourned to August.

"People in Saskatchewan don't think this legislation is fair," Joyal said outside the courthouse. "It's not being handled right."

Joyal and some of his supporters believe the law that went into effect Jan. 1 is unconstitutional because it's applied unequally – it's enforced in most Saskatchewan venues, but does not apply to casinos owned by First Nations.

The province has been in talks with First Nations, urging them to comply with the law, but it has said little about the status of those negotiations.

The hospitality industry has suggested a possible solution would be for the government to allow separate smoking rooms in their establishments, but so far the province has rejected the idea.

The Saskatchewan Hotels Association has hired a lawyer and is trying to start mediation talks with the province and Indian-run casinos

http://sask.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=weyburn-bar050221

---

Weyburn smokers rally as ban tested in court -SK

CBC NewsLast Updated Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:55:53 EST

WEYBURN, SASK. - Where there's no smokes there's fired-up protestors, at least in Saskatchewan.

Hundreds of people chanted and waved signs in front of a courthouse in Weyburn on Monday, complaining about the province's smoking ban.

They were there to support Weyburn bar owner Rob Joyal, who faces nine charges of violating the ban at the Royal Hotel.

Joyal pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

The noise of the protesters outside was so loud that it distracted the judge.

Joyal says the law is driving business away from the hotel's bar.

Organizers of the rally also say the law is unfair because some First Nation casinos have been given an exemption from the smoking ban.

The province has been in talks with First Nations, urging them to comply with the law, but officials have said little about the status of those talks.

The hospitality industry has suggested that the law could be improved by allowing separate smoking rooms, but the province has rejected that idea.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/02/21/smoking-040221.html

---

Quebec court certifies class action suits against 3 tobacco companies -QC

CBC NewsLast Updated Mon, 21 Feb 2005 16:23:19 EST

MONTREAL - The Quebec Superior Court on Monday certified two class action lawsuits seeking billions of dollars in damages against three tobacco companies operating in Quebec.

The defendants are Rothmans and its subsidiary Benson & Hedges, Imperial Tobacco, and JTI-Macdonald.

The lawsuits allege damages on the part of millions of Quebecers as a result of addiction to tobacco products and smoking-related illnesses. The suits seek damages on the part of each class member.

One suit seeks $5,000 for each of the estimated two million Quebecers addicted to smoking.

A second suit, filed by a smoker who lost a lung to cancer, is asking for up to $100,000 for each Quebecer who suffered emphysema or cancer of the lungs, larynx or throat between 1995 and 1998.

The tobacco companies were quick to criticize the "class action" status awarded by the court.

"The real winners in this class action will be the legions of lawyers who will be employed for years to come trying to deal with the individual issues that are inevitable in this type of class action," said Imperial Tobacco's head of public affairs, Yves-Thomas Dorval.

Imperial Tobacco said the Ontario Superior Court denied a similar class action certification request last year, saying the class action did not raise "common issues", a requirement for class action certification.

"Courts in the United States have repeatedly refused to certify class actions against tobacco manufacturers precisely because there are many individual issues, making individual actions the only realistic option for those who wish to pursue a claim," an Imperial Tobacco statement said.

A statement from Rothmans said the company "intends to vigorously defend itself."

Rothmans shares fell $4.28 to $43.70, a drop of almost 9 per cent. The plunge occurred right after news of the class action certification was released.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2005/02/21/tobacco-050221.html

---

Smitherman makes Tory a campaign promise -ON

Health Minister George Smitherman is itching to campaign in the Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey by-election, given that a prominent resident of his riding is running.

"I can't wait to get up there to introduce my constituent, John Tory," says Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale).

Tory, of course, is the Conservative leader hoping to win the March 17 vote and secure a seat in the Legislature.

It won't be Smitherman's first foray into the riding. He campaigned against former Conservative premier Ernie Eves in a 2002 by-election, used to play hockey in Bolton and worked for a buddy who twice ran for mayor of Caledon. "It's fair to say I've travelled more of the dusty back roads of that riding than John Tory ever will."

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1108942809818

---

Thompson Said Not One to Die in Hospital  -CO

By ROBERT WELLER Associated Press Writer Monday, February 21, 2005 6:16 p.m. ET

ASPEN, Colo. (AP) -- While Hunter S. Thompson's suicide shocked many in his out-of-the-way neighborhood, one of his closest friends said Monday the writer had been in a lot of pain after a broken leg and hip surgery.

"I wasn't surprised," said George Stranahan, a former owner of the Woody Creek Tavern, one of Thompson's favorite hangouts. "I never expected Hunter to die in a hospital bed with tubes coming out of him."

Thompson was found dead in his home Sunday night from a gunshot wound that appeared to be self-inflicted, said Joe DiSalvo, a spokesman for the Pitkin County Sheriff's Department.

Authorities refused to say whether a note was found, but a family statement said Thompson had taken his own life. His adult son, Juan, found his body Sunday evening.

Investigators recovered the weapon, a .45-caliber handgun. An autopsy was planned. DiSalvo said the investigation was continuing but declined to elaborate.

Neighbors in Thompson's Woody Creek neighborhood said a broken leg had kept him from getting out as often as in the past, including to the tavern.

But Shep Harris, who now owns the tavern, said Thompson would sometimes slip in for a drink and a smoke if no one else was there.

Patrons normally are not allowed to light up because the tavern does not have a separate smoking area, but if Thompson were the only customer, he got a waiver.

"We called it the Hunter Rule," Harris said.

Mike Cleverly, a neighbor and longtime friend, spent Friday night watching a basketball game on TV with Thompson. He said Thompson was clearly hobbled by the broken leg. "Medically speaking, he's had a rotten year," he said.

But he added that "he's the last person in the world I would have expected to kill himself. I would have been less surprised if he had shot me."

Thompson was legendary for his love of firearms.

"He had a thing about guns," said Mary Eshbaugh Hayes, an acquaintance and a former editor of the Aspen Times. "I was always very worried he was going to shoot someone."

He did, at least once. In 2000, he accidentally slightly wounded his assistant trying to chase a bear off his property.

Hayes said she was present when a drunken Thompson fired three shots into a copy of one of his books and gave it to a friend, saying, "This is your autographed copy."

Despite the gunfire and the wild, drug-addled image he projected in his writing, Thompson was on good terms with the sheriff's department and was friends with Sheriff Bob Braudis and with DiSalvo, the sheriff's director of investigations.

"I would definitely call him a friend," DiSalvo said. "This was not the way I expected Hunter to die."

http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=993959&tw=wn_wire_story

* Hunter S. Thompson, gonzo journalist creator

---

Smoking ban heads for Senate floor vote -MN

by Tim Pugmire, Minnesota Public Radio February 21, 2005

A proposed indoor smoking ban for Minnesota bars and restaurants has cleared another legislative hurdle. The Senate Commerce Committee approved the measure Monday on a 9-to-7 vote. The issue is now headed for a vote by the full Senate.

St. Paul, Minn. — The legislation would prevent smoking inside public places throughout the state. The debate has pitted clean indoor air advocates against bar and restaurant owners. It's also raised numerous concerns about government's role in restricting personal behavior.

Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, says he's out to protect waiters and waitresses who have to work in smokey environments.

"Secondhand smoke is classified as a Type A toxin, which is the worst by the EPA. And most recently, we've learned that the health consequences are even more immediate, quite rapid with compromised health situations," according to Dibble.

To stress that point, Dibble brought along physicians, researchers and hospitality workers to testify in support of the smoking ban.

Zachary Barnes, 11, from Virginia, also wants an end to smoking in bars and restaurants. Barnes, who suffers from cystic fibrosis, says secondhand smoke makes it hard to breathe.

"I look forward to the day that I can walk into any restaurant, hotel, bowling alley, grocery store and any other establishment and not have to worry about secondhand smoke and how it will affect my health. I'll be able to work in four years, and I'd like to choose my job based on what I'm good at, not whether a place is smoke free," he said.

But the owners of the kind of businesses affected by the proposed ban see the issue as an attack on their rights. Tom Day of the group Hospitality Minnesota says many bars and restaurants have already gone smoke-free on their own. He says a government mandate will only hurt small business owners.

"We can all agree that as a result of this legislation, some restaurants will close, some employees will lose their jobs. So, while concern is shown in the area of employees not having a choice of where they work, I'd be more concerned that they even have a place to work after their employer closes the doors," Day said.

A smoking ban bill is also moving through the Minnesota House, but it exempts bars that sell more drinks than meals. Restaurants could construct separate smoking rooms.

Sen. Daniel Sparks, R-Austin, tried unsuccessfully to amend Dibble's bill to more closely match the House version.

"I do agree with Senator Dibble, and I commend his hard work when it comes to smoking ban in restaurants. But I also agree with small-business owners and constituents in my district that want bars and places not serving food to have a choice on this issue. If they want to have their establishment smoke free, they should be able to do so, and I respect their right to decide," Sparks said.

The committee approved one amendment which would exempt tobacco shops that allow product sampling on the premises. This was the second Senate panel to approve the bill. The measure now moves to the full Senate, where numerous amendments are expected to surface during the floor debate.

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/02/21_pugmiret_smokingban/

---

Group aims to win anti-smoking grant -LA

BOGALUSA — A public forum on the hazards of second-hand tobacco smoke will be held Tuesday from 9-10 a.m. at the YWCA. The public is invited to stop by and sign a Petition of Support sponsored by Prevention Connection, which is seeking a $10,000 community grant from The Louisiana Campaign for Tobacco-Free Living program.

Meeting organizers said Danielle Magee, prevention educator, will present her proposal and encourage comments from our local citizens. Several local schools will send student leaders to form a Youth Advocacy Council.
The American Cancer Association, Louisiana Pubic Health Institute and Louisiana Health 2010 will be present to assist with the presentation.

The forum is supported by the Washington Parish Commission on Human Services officers Merlin Duke, Marilyn Baily-Crews, Betty Bienvenu, Aleta J. Spears and Leon Sampere; officers of ADAPT, Inc. Sandy Bloom, Dorothy Young, Patsy Ritchie, Michelle Knight, Jane Rester and Charlette Fornea; Prevention Connection steering committee members Drew Lehmann, Cheryl Klein, Sue Kennedy, the Rev. Atwood Luter, Barbara Brown, Eddie Ratcliff and Pat Sullivan along with Across Ages mentors Laura Davis, Clemintine Morris and Robert Taylor.

http://www.edailynews.info/articles/2005/02/21/news/news12.txt

---

Smoking ban hurts casino -NZ

By SUE ALLEN 22 February 2005

Shares in Sky City Entertainment group fell by nearly 3 per cent on news that last year's smoking ban had led to a reining in of net profit growth to 4 per cent in the six months to December.

Managing director Evan Davies said yesterday that last December's ban on smoking and other legal changes had significantly affected the results.

Sky City had estimated the ban would knock $10 million off revenue in the 2005 financial year.

A $20-note limit on pokie machines had also reduced revenues in Auckland from gaming machines by 1.2 per cent on the same period a year earlier.

"We accept that those impacts will continue through the second half of the current year, but we are of the view that growth will resume in the 2006 financial year," Mr Davies said.

Sky City shares finished down 6 cents at $5.17, having traded as low as $5.08.

Sky City Group now has casinos in Auckland, Queenstown and Hamilton and a 40 per cent stake in the Christchurch casino.

It also has operations in Adelaide and Darwin in Australia.

Mr Davies said it was now hoping to target "higher-value customers" from New Zealand and overseas.

"We have some customers who have shown a real loyalty over the years and we know they have alternative destinations and some of those destinations are extremely grand."

Though Sky City could not compete with gambling venues such as Las Vegas, it could improve the environment and make it more welcoming, he said.

Net profits for the first half of the year were up 4 per cent to $57.1 million from $55.1 million a year earlier.

Group revenues for the half year rose 19 per cent to $351.1 million, from $295.8 million.

New Zealand operations contributed 71 per cent of total revenues, and Australian operations 29 per cent.

Sky City's biggest New Zealand property, Sky City Auckland, increased revenues by 4 per cent to $206 million.

Mr Davies said he was comfortable with analyst expectations of a full-year profit of $114 million to $119 million, provided the pre-December predictions for the impact of smoking bans in New Zealand were accurate.

ABN Amro analyst James Miller said the results were as expected.

"You really aren't going to talk growth this year. My view is that this stock gets to be quite interesting in 2006 from an earnings perspective."

That was when the benefits of projects such as the Auckland convention centre would be felt, and the negative effects of the smoking ban and harmonisation would dissipate.

"Sky is doing all it can do," he said.

"It's had a pretty aggressive acquisition programme and has been active in the consolidation of the industry, particularly with peripheral players."

The group announced the reintroduction of a dividend reinvestment plan, which will apply to the interim dividend announced yesterday.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3195011a13,00.html

---

Inventories: Drinking more, smoking more -NZ

21-Feb-2005

There's more alchohol on hand in New Zealand these days, and more tobacco -- but fewer cigarettes.
According to Statistics New Zealand -- which measures amounts of alcohol and tobacco "available for consumption" rather than volumes actually consumed -- inventories of beer decreased by 0.2 per cent compared with 2003, while wine increased by 5.9 per cent and spirits increased by 9.4 per cent.
Cigarette supplies were down 2 per cent from the previous year but loose tobacco supplies ballooned.
Have a tipple
SNZ said overall alcohol inventories grew by 1.9 per cent in the December 2004 year.
Beer declined substantially as a share of the liquor cabinet, as well.
While it provided 70 per cent of the alcoholic beverages available for consumption in the December 2004 year, that was down from 83 per cent in the December 1994 year.
It was small beer, as well.
Beer with a strength of 4.35 per cent or less, the most common strength of beer available in New Zealand, accounted for 74 per cent of the beer available, down from 92 per cent in the December 1994 year.
Bottled beer made up nearly half of domestically produced beer in 2004, returning to a level last seen in 1982, from which it had fallen to a low of 21 per cent in 1992.
Tap beer accounted for almost half of the beer produced in 1991 but now accounts for less than a third.
Canned beer has fallen from a peak of 32 per cent of domestic production in 1992 to 21 per cent in the 2004 year.
And no matter how it gets packaged, almost all of it is locally brewed -- domestic production provided 93 per cent of the beer available for consumption in New Zealand.
The softness in the beer inventory is offset by other types of spirit inventories.
It might be the finding that a few tipples a day have such beneficial side effects -- or that we just need something stiffer than a beer -- but inventories of wine have grown five per cent in the last decade (up to 19 per cent of the alcohol available in 2004 from 14 per cent in 1994) and spirit inventories jumped by an astonishing16.9 per cent in the December 2004 year.
SNZ said that this reversed a slowing growth rate in spirits consumption and was the the largest increase in spirits inventories since 1995.
The demand for spirit-based drinks has risen every year since 1995, SNZ said, but the rate of growth had been slowing since 2000 -- until last year.
Spirits and spirit-based drinks represented 11 per cent of the beverage available for consumption in 2004. The share of spirits and spirit-based drinks has increased steadily from 3 per cent in 1996.
But Jim Anderton's poisonous tax on the fortified wines favoured by retired tipplers has almost killed that niche product.
Consumption of fortified wines like sherries and ports dropped from nearly 20 per cent of the wine supply in 1984 to 1.3 per cent in 2004.
Domestic production provided 73 percent of the wine available in New Zealand in 2004, a tribute to the supply and price -- if not always the quality -- of New Zealand wines.
Wine provided 19 per cent of the alcohol available in 2004, up from 14 per cent in 1994.
Roll 'em if you've got 'em
During the December 2004 year, the number of cigarettes available for consumption was 2,320 million, down 2 per cent from the previous year.
The number of cigarettes available for consumption peaked at 6,346 million in 1977, and levels were generally above 6,000 million until 1984.
Since then, as taxes increased, cigarette consumption has generally been decreasing, and for the past four years the number of cigarettes available for consumption has remained below 3,000 million.
But smokers may simply be turning away from heavily taxed cigarettes to other forms of tobacco consumption.
Tobacco available for consumption rose to 841 tonnes in the 2004 year, up 5.8 per cent from 2003.
Loose tobacco for pipe or cigarette smoking made up approximately 27 per cent of the cigarette and tobacco products available for consumption.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=11401&cid=4&cname=Business+Today

*98 results since 2001 , seems to archive

---

Smoking ban would light up my life -PA

By MARY SHAW Posted on Mon, Feb. 21, 2005

I LIKE TO visit New York City.

I enjoy the hustle and bustle, the interesting people, the sights, the food, the night life.

Philadelphia offers a similar degree of fun, excitement, good food and intrigue, but with one notable difference:

I can't hang out at a Philly bar without leaving there smelling like a dirty ashtray.

The smoking ban in New York was introduced in March 2003. It affects bars, restaurants and other establishments such as pool halls and bingo parlors.

Now Philly is considering a similar ban. I say let's go for it.

Let me hang out at the Copabanana on South Street with my friends on a Saturday night, or hear a live band at the North Star Bar in Fairmount, without having to shower as soon as I get home to remove the stench from my hair and skin.

Let me enjoy an evening out in the City of Brotherly Love without the scratchy throat and the itching eyes. Give me a break from the exorbitant dry-cleaning bills that I pay to get the smoke odors out of my suits, sweaters and coats.

But enough about me.

After all, I'm just a customer, and I can choose to stay away from smoky bars. But consider the plight of restaurant and bar workers who have to endure a smoke-filled environment for every shift.

If a factory had the air quality of a Philadelphia bar on a Saturday night, OSHA would shut it down in an instant - and rightly so.

Isn't it unethical to expose employees to such an unhealthy environment? We see class-action lawsuits being filed all the time on behalf of employees whose health has suffered from working in asbestos-laden buildings. When will hospitality workers be similarly compensated for their forced exposure to dangerous cigarette, cigar and pipe smoke? Better yet, let's just give them a break.

Smokers who oppose the ban often claim that they have a right to smoke. Excuse me, but their rights end where the next person's rights begin. Smokers have every right to smell bad if they want to. They have a right to destroy their own lungs, and they have a right to yellow fingers and teeth.

But they do not have a right to force me to ingest their smoke, and they do not have the right to endanger the health of the bartenders and waiters who serve them. It is rude at best, perhaps reckless endangerment at worst.

Local bar and restaurant owners who oppose the ban fear that they'll lose customers if their patrons are not allowed to smoke. However, similar fears by their New York counterparts have proven to be unfounded.

An analysis of the New York smoking ban by that city's health department showed that business and tax receipts in bars and restaurants were up by almost 9 percent after the first year of the ban. In addition, it showed that employment in such establishments had increased by over 10,000 jobs (the highest such increase in more than 10 years), along with an increase in on-premises alcohol licenses. This is undeniably great economic news for New York's hospitality industry.

The study also found that New Yorkers are now breathing significantly cleaner air. One year after the ban took effect, levels of cotinine, a by-product of nicotine used to determine exposure to second-hand smoke, had decreased by 85 percent in nonsmoking bars and restaurants.

A Philadelphia smoking ban is vitally important in terms of our health. Also, as demonstrated by the New York study, it will likely also boost business by attracting customers who, like me, prefer to avoid smoke-filled venues.

And, perhaps best of all, it will give smokers another incentive to kick the habit and improve their own lives.

Come on, City Hall - let's give it a try. What do we have to lose but the soot in our lungs?

Mary Shaw is a local writer and activist. E-mail maryATmaryshawonline.com.

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/opinion/10953526.htm?1c

*doesn't archive

---

Liberals violating ad ban, PCs say

By ANTONELLA ARTUSO, QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU CHIEF Fri, February 18, 2005

BROCHURE UNDER ATTACK

PROVINCIAL TORIES are accusing the Liberal government of violating its own ban on partisan advertising even before it has become law. PC interim leader Bob Runciman said a government brochure with a message from Health Minister George Smitherman flies in the face of the ban which has already passed in the legislature.

"They're clearly violating their own law," Runciman said. "The Act hasn't been proclaimed (into law) so I guess that's their out in terms of legality."

Tory MPPs caused a ruckus in the legislature yesterday when they brought in boxes of the brochures and placed them on Liberal MPPs' desks.

The brochure, Highlights of Ontario's Health System Performance Report, includes a message from Smitherman which says, "We have laid out a bold vision for Ontario's health system ... we have a plan of action to get there by 2007."

Runciman said it reads like a Liberal election document and contravenes the ban on self-promotional material.

But Smitherman said the report provides valuable health information to Ontarians, and is required under a health accord reached with the federal government. He said his document was approved by the provincial auditor.

The Liberals spent $130,000 to produce 765,000 copies of the report in English and 135,000 copies in French.

The Liberals brought in the partisan advertising ban after accusing the previous Tory government of using tax dollars for advertising campaigns promoting their own political spin.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/02/18/934877-sun.html

---

Supreme Court to rule on host liability  ON

Canadian Press Thursday, February 17, 2005

Ottawa — The country's highest court has agreed to decide whether an Ottawa-area woman can sue the hosts of a New Year's Eve party after a drunken guest left her paralyzed in a car crash.

Zoë Childs was a passenger in a car that was rammed head-on Jan. 1, 1999, by a vehicle driven by Desmond Desormeaux, a self-described alcoholic who had been convicted twice before of impaired driving.

Ms. Childs, then 18, was rendered a paraplegic and her 17-year-old boyfriend Derek Dupré was killed. Mr. Desormeaux was found guilty of several charges, including impaired driving causing death, and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Ms. Childs, of Kemptville, Ont., filed a $6-million civil suit against the party hosts, Julie Zimmerman and Dwight Courrier, saying they were partly liable for the crash because they let Mr. Desormeaux get behind the wheel to drive home.

The suit was rejected by the lower courts, but the Supreme Court of Canada, in a decision released without comment Thursday, agreed to review the matter.

No date has been set for a hearing.

There was conflicting evidence at trial about how drunk Mr. Desormeaux appeared to be when he left the party, whether the hosts offered to let him stay the night, and other key facts.

Also at issue was whether judges or legislators should decide to what extent party hosts should be responsible for the actions of their guests.

The Ontario Superior Court judge who heard the civil suit in 2002 dismissed the damage claim by Ms. Childs. He said it should be up to the province to determine whether so-called social hosts – as opposed to commercial hosts such as bar owners – are liable for damages.

Ontario Court of Appeal turned Ms. Childs down in 2004 on different legal grounds, saying the hosts were not liable in this case but that others could be held responsible in different circumstances.

“This judgment should not be interpreted to mean that social hosts are immune from liability,” Justice Karen Weiler wrote then for the appeal court.

She suggested that the key questions were whether the hosts knew an obviously intoxicated guest was going to drive home and whether they did nothing to prevent it.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050217.wscoc0217/BNStory/National/

---

Fight lung cancer, insult a smoker

By G.E. mortimore Wednesday, Feb 16, 2005

Maybe I should apologize for this. I steer clear of smokers. Whenever I see cigarette-smoke rising from a group of tobacco refugees who have slipped out for a nicotine interlude, I take evasive action.

I swing away in a 20-foot arc, to avoid coming near them. An urgent throat-tickle forces me to cough out loud.

Yes, I used to be a smoker. When I dodge people on a tobacco break, I am really escaping from my old self. That's the reason I should apologize for the avoidance manoeuvre, if the tobacco refugees cared.

In that bygone smoking phase of my life, I was scared into quitting by yellow-stained fingers from slovenly cigarette-handling habits, plus a genuine cough and maybe some help from blackened-lung propaganda.

With reverse nostalgia, I look back to a now-extinguished tobacco habit that took a bizarre form for a while, because addiction was blended with a desire to keep expenses down.

Those sidewalk smokers would sneer at my occasional practice of carrying a one-pound tin of tobacco to the pub and rolling cigarettes with Zig Zag papers above the crowded glasses of suds - another habit now luckily abandoned.

And today's sneak-a-smoke people would guffaw out loud at the strange cigarette-rolling machine I used during one part of my career as an addict. If I ever find it in some forgotten storage cupboard, I will take it to the Antiques Road Show.

This machine produced a cigarette 18 inches long, which I sliced into five smaller cigarettes with a sharp blade - booking myself for future lung cancer at a bargain price. The date with lung cancer was retracted, I hope, when I took the no-tobacco pledge. Experts thought I still had some time.

Long-term benefits often are not enough to psych people into laying off an activity that hooks them with present-day compulsive pleasure. To a teenaged puffer, delighting in the added joy of doing something his elders advise him not to do, freedom from lung cancer in old age has only a dim and abstract meaning - if the advice conveys any message beyond defiance of the adult world, and membership in the Young Contrarian club.

So the standard political strategy is to offer both short-term and long-term rewards. The hope is that today's carrot will taste good like a carrot should, even though the long-term threat of disease and death may fail to frighten and impress.

I was long past teen years when I quit smoking, driven by both the short-term satisfactions and the visualized postponement of death. Those short-term non-smoking improvements were real. They included the ability to trot or swim a short distance without panting, and a recovered sense of smell.

Since then, time has done worse olefactory damage than tobacco used to do. My sense of smell has about 75 per cent faded, unless an inventor should produce a set of nostril-glasses that would bring back smell-power, with all the memories a fully operational nose can invoke.

Among the lost odours is the fragrance of my dad's pipe as he sat in his armchair scanning the paper and reaching into his memories of life in far corners of the world.

Smoking was considered an OK grown-up thing to do in those days, although the young were discouraged from taking it up. My dad told me how his father had tried to use aversion therapy to immunize him against smoking after he was caught as a prep-school boy taking illicit puffs. As I remember it, my grandfather pressured my father to pull on a cigar. He recovered and later became a smoker.

My dad was too kind and gentle a fellow to administer the same treatment, but he left the impression that an ugly sick-making smoke was a rite of passage, a ritual that every lad must go through. Once it was over, and a sufficient time had elapsed, there was no problem. You had joined the nicotine brotherhood.

Former U.S. Surgeon-General David Satcher, in a paper published in year 2000, told how the smoking norm - the rule of social approval for tobacco - had stayed fixed in place for a time and had then melted away under a variety of pressures.

The early minority attacks on the smoking norm were moral and sanitary, without much hard evidence or much success. Then circumstances began to undermine the norm, and the attackers brought up some heavier guns. Science showed a statistical link between tobacco and lung cancer, heart disease and other ills. More precise number-keeping strengthened the message. Louder mass communication carried it faster and wider.

Moral exhortation melted into awareness of cost control and social and fleshly benefit. As the smoking norm began to collapse, then-Surgeon-General C. Everett Koop delivered a knockout blow with a memorable report and propaganda campaign.

Later science found tissue damage at the molecular level. Tobacco control took off from the stage of trusting to accidental market forces, and flew into the realm of management by the method that old-fashioned Liberal-Conservatives hate so much - calculated social action.

Yet deterrrence didn't always work. Satcher pointed out that no single program or measure could succeed on its own. A combination of measures was required.

These might include soft-sell in-school anti-tobacco persuasion and contests with prizes, anti-tobacco advertising, medical help, a ban on tobacco ads, dramatic warnings on packages, extra taxation, lawsuits against tobacco companies, possible help to diversify companies out of tobacco, aggressive speeches and examples, anti-tobacco chats by athletes and showbiz celebrities, possible ways to bonus farmers for moving into non-tobacco crops.

Even such "free-market" disciples as the followers of Gordon Campbell (after cutbacks that arguably cost some smokers' lives) agreed to nearly full-scale co-ordinated pressure against tobacco.

Satcher's evidence suggests that government is the only agency that can do an all-out job on smoke-prevention and on health care in general. Maybe my kind of walk-around avoidance of smokers does help, but I'm not sure.

http://www.goldstreamgazette.com/

---

Smoking ban? -BC

Jan, 17 2005 - 6:00 PM
VICTORIA(CKNW/AM980) -- BC's Minister Responsible for Addiction Services is considering a call for more restrictions on smoking in BC and the closure of all ventilated smoking rooms in pubs and restaurants.

Minister of State for Addiction Services Brenda Locke says she's not ruling anything out but she's also making no promises.
Locke says there will need to be a lot of discussion around the call by the Canadian Cancer Society for a provincial ban on smoking in public places and eliminating smoking rooms in bars and restaurants.

Locke says she is concerned about the possibility that smoking room ventilation systems do not adequately protect workers and patrons from second-hand smoke.

http://www.cknw.com/news/news_local.cfm?cat=7428327912&rem=1036&red=80132723aPBIny&wids=410&gi=1&gm=news_local.cfm

---

Two men nabbed in tobacco bust -NB

Broadcast NewsFebruary 18, 2005

TRACADIE-SHEILA, N.B. -- Two men will appear in court Friday to face Excise Act charges after a contraband tobacco bust on New Brunswick's Acadian Peninsula.

The suspects were arrested Thursday in the Brantville area.

The Mounties say they seized 133 cartons of cigarettes.

Both accused are from Quebec and are in their early 30's

http://www.canada.com/search/story.html?id=77696456-3192-4313-b4ad-fd9bec199b07

---

Ontario tobacco farmers claim they’re “protecting health” -ON

TOM SpearsOttawa Citizen Thursday, February 17, 2005

First, my bias. Two of my family members have had lung cancer. Both were in their forties. Both smoked. And I don't admire anyone who sells lethal, addictive drugs.

With that in the open, let’s head into the strangest press release of the week, from a group in Simcoe, Ontario, that represents family-owned tobacco farms.

This area near Lake Erie is the heart of the tobacco industry in Canada. It’s warm and has the right kind of soil for tobacco, though I understand it’s not great for a lot of other types of farming.

The farm families - and I went to school with two members of one such family - work hard. Many were Dutch immigrants after World War II. They established a livelihood in a new country, and then, a couple of decades or even generations later, everyone finds out that this stuff is killing tens of thousands of Canadians a year. (The current Canadian Medical Association figure is 46,000 annual deaths in Canada from tobacco.) Hot news in the 1960s, but no longer today.

The market for their crop has shrunk as smoking numbers decline. Now the farmers are condemning the Ontario government, saying it’s supporting foreign or smuggled tobacco over Ontario’s legal crop. They say the farm families are in crisis.

Maybe they’re right, maybe not. Dark Matter won’t judge the economics here. But the farmers are now arguing, astonishingly, that protecting their farms against foreign competition would protect public health.

What on Earth...?

“There is an inextricable linkage between protecting the family tobacco farmer and protecting health,” they say. And they ask to let farmers be “an integral part of a truly comprehensive and successful tobacco control strategy.” Tobacco farmers, they add “are not the culprits.”

It’s sad all around. These folks probably are stuck in financial ruination. But trying to shift blame never changes this single central fact: Their product kills people, including my family and friends. Which doesn’t sound like protecting anyone’s health to me.

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=741185be-0dcc-44fe-907c-e1cc5428e450

---

Lack of hockey hurting bars, wages -ON

By KEVIN CONNOR, TORONTO SUN, Sat, February 19, 2005

THE CANCELLATION of the hockey season will cause a landslide of bankruptcies, trustees say. Businesses and individuals are already jamming debt hotlines and the official end of the season isn't even a week old, said Douglas Hoyes, a bankruptcy trustee with Hoyes, Michalos and Associates.

"Calls to our debt hotline are up significantly this year and unless employees in the NHL-dependent jobs find other employment, those people will suffer some hardship in 2005," Hoyes said.

BEER SALES DRY UP

"We are starting to hear stories from our clients who work in the service industry that hours are being cut and income is dropping.

"If you work as a bartender at a sports bar, a significant part of your income may depend on Saturday night beer sales, which are drying up with no NHL hockey."

Consumer bankruptcy filings are expected to increase 5% to 8% this year because of the lockout, said Benny Mendlowitz, another bankruptcy trustee.

"In February, March and April, trustee receivers will see a lot of people who can't get out from under their debt load," he said.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/02/19/935787-sun.html

---

Pro-smokers use same tired old arguments-ON

JIM TAYLOR, For the London Free Press 2005-02-19

 

ST. THOMAS - If there was ever an argument for a provincewide ban on smoking in public places, look no farther than St. Thomas.

The battle over the butt has almost pushed even same-sex marriage aside as those who want to feed their habit and those who want to feed their bank accounts blow smoke over a proposed smoking smack-down.

That would be no surprise to Londoners, of course, who have already gone through such a war of words. But it may be just a little more intense in this Elgin County city, which at one time counted tobacco farms among its closest neighbours.

For those who have been through it, the arguments are just as tired, just as empty and just as dangerous.

You have the usual bar and restaurant owners who claim they will be left on welfare rolls if the law is passed. As if that were worse than a person dying from rotting lungs.

In St. Thomas you have the mandatory bar owner, a spokesperson for other bar owners no less, who says the law is wrong and he simply wouldn't obey it.

It's kind of like: "Whatya mean 250 is too fast on the 401, officer? I'm a great driver; I'm not hurting anyone. I don't have to obey that stupid limit."

So what price do you put on a citizen's health?

St. Thomas Ald. Cliff Barwick has an answer. He wants bingo halls to be exempt from the butt ban. He apparently feels people who play bingo and those who work in bingo halls should be able to risk their lives or charities will suffer.

Makes you wonder: If illegal drug pushers donated a percentage of their profits to charity, should we let them keep dealing?

Barwick's proposed exemption could derail the city's smoking ban when it comes up for a vote on Monday.

To be fair to Barwick -- fairer than he's being to the lungs of the citizens of St. Thomas -- he insists he's taking his stand because smoking should be a provincial and not a local issue.

He's right. Queen's Park should have stepped in long ago with a provincewide ban; a ban the province finally promised would be introduced in May 2006.

Why the delay? A case of addiction to tax dollars trumping the fight against addiction to smoking, perhaps?

And yet, Health Canada estimates that social costs attributed to smoking in 1993 were about $11 billion, with $3 billion of that going to direct health-care costs and the rest to lost productivity. At the same time it was estimated tax revenue from cigarettes was $2.6 billion.

Do the math.

These empty debates are getting as tiresome as the debates between the "wets" and "drys" back in the '50s and '60s, when we were told allowing the sale of booze in bars would destroy our society. We're still waiting on that one.

But it seems Canadians are catching on. A Health Canada website notes that in 2003, more than five million, or 21 per cent, of Canadians were smokers and the number is dropping. It was 38 per cent 20 years ago.

There are currently anti-smoking laws in many parts of Canada, including New Brunswick, Manitoba, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Ottawa, Victoria and London . . . the list keeps growing. Not to mention various bans in countries such as Ireland, Israel, Egypt and Italy, among many others.

In other words, we have long since reached the point where most of us see arguments against anti-smoking bylaws as self-serving at best and downright deceitful at worst.

The owner of two busy local bars agreed anti-smoking laws would see some bars go under, but said they are generally bars that were operating on a razor-thin margin in the first place. He said well-run bars and restaurants would survive. He's been proven right.

Don't forget the bylaws don't stop anyone from smoking, they stop them from smoking in places where their addiction is a threat to everyone in a room, smokers and non-smokers alike.

Let's hope St. Thomas doesn't pass the buck to the provincial government and wait another 15 months as Central Elgin council has already done.

What's that old saying . . . it's a matter of life and breath?

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/London/Across_County_Lines/Jim_Taylor/2005/02/19/935571.html

---

Which is easier?  -MB

Letter to the Editor, February 19/05
I agree with smokers who argue that their human rights are infringed by laws that ban smoking.

I also feel that my human rights are infringed when I am compelled to breathe second-hand smoke that has the potential to affect my health.

So it boils down to: Which makes more sense?

Is it easier for smokers to stop smoking or for me to stop breathing?

WILLIAM DASCAVICH
Vegreville, Alta

www.winnepegfreepress.com

---

Bingo player believes smokers will adapt to bylaw

Saturday February 19, 2005

Editor:
I enjoy an occasional game of bingo. I go a few times a month. My sister, on the other hand, is a weekly regular. We are both ex-smokers.
While I realize that the bingo hall in St. Thomas has a non-smoking section, I rarely use it. That may sound strange, but I’ve always felt as if I’m being shut away in a small quiet room of the library when I sit in there. It doesn’t feel as if I’m part of the action. Besides, I have to enter the smoke-filled room when I first enter the hall or to visit the snackbar or use the washroom anyway.
A few of our friends and family still smoke, so most of the time, I sit on the main smoking floor with them. I have noticed other groups of people in the smoking area also have non-smokers among them. It seems I’m not the only non-smoker who has conceded defeat to the smokers of the world. There was a time when I believed it would never change.
Then I visited my chain smoking friends in North Bay. I used to be just like them. If I couldn’t go to a public place and smoke, I just wouldn’t go. Period.
So, it was no surprise to me that when I suggested to my friends that we should all go to the bingo hall in North Bay, I heard them exclaim, “But they went smoke-free!”
After some persuasive coaxing, I finally convinced them that it wouldn’t be so hard to go a few hours without smoking! We were soon sitting in a fully smoke-free bingo establishment!
My friends went outside during break to smoke and again, during a special game while I played their cards for them. At first, I didn’t notice a difference in the atmosphere of the hall. Same crowds, noise level and snackbar odours. But slowly, as the night progressed, I noticed I wasn’t sneezing or clearing my throat or feeling stuffed up. My eyes weren’t burning. I felt great! My friends, (and other smokers) simply went outside to smoke every hour or so; a big step for people who normally light up every 20 minutes! What a sacrifice they made! For a change, the non-smokers were the majority!
It didn’t seem to me that the bingo hall in North Bay was lacking customers. As a matter of fact, it was hard to find a table. St. Thomas city council and those in the bingo hall business would do well to consider the number of non-smokers who have never gone to bingo because they can’t stand the smoke, or the ones who do go to bingo and suffer through it for the sake of family or friends who still smoke, or the ones like me, who sit through the smoke anyway because they don’t like being corralled into a small quiet room in the corner and made to feel separated from the whole experience.
Sixteen more months of smoking isn’t going to change the finality of the fact that smoking is on its way out. Why not be brave enough to face it head on and show some initiative? Come up with some mini-breaks during the program to allow smokers to step outside for a puff. I think bingo hall operators might find that their loyal, addicted smoking customers are also addicted to bingo and they will adapt. Just as surely as North Bay and many other Ontario communities already have.
Cathy Dadson
Talbotville

http://www.stthomastimesjournal.com/index.php?id=850

---

Bars face stiffer smoking penalties

Province says breaking ban could mean losing licence

BY KATHY KAUFIELD Telegraph-Journal
New Brunswick bars and restaurants that openly defy the province's new anti-smoking law will soon risk losing their liquor licences and their video lottery terminals.
Acting Public Safety Minister Rose May Poirier announced Friday new measures to crack down on bar owners that allow people to smoke in defiance the the Smoke-Free Places Act that bans smoking in public places.
Ms. Poirier said the province will introduce legislative amendments this spring to ensure compliance with the anti-smoking law, including changes to the Liquor Control Act that would allow the province to revoke the liquor licences of bar owners who allow smoking on their premises.
Since bar or restaurant owners can't have VLTs without a liquor licence, bar owners who fail to comply with the anti-smoking law also run the risk of losing their VLT machines.
The minister also announced that all existing liquor licences, which expire on March 31, will not be renewed automatically. She said the department will review each licence application on a case-by-case basis and each establishment's record on compliance with the Smoke Free Places Act will be taken into account in determining if the licence will be renewed.
"We are sending a very clear message to bar owners," Ms. Poirier said. "If bar owners want to stay in business, they need to comply with the Smoke Free Places Act."
The new act, which came into force Oct. 1, bans smoking in all public places, including bars, restaurants, nightclubs,
pubs and most workplaces. Bar owners around the province fought against the law, saying it had the potential to drive away customers. Under the legislation, a person found smoking in a public place or workplace can be fined between $140 and $570 for a first offence. An employer or owner who doesn't ensure their premises are smoke-free can be fined between $240 to $2,620 for a first offence.
Ms. Poirier said that while most bar owners are complying with the law, a small number - about six - are failing to comply. She said over the past few weeks, Public Safety officials have inspected a number of establishments and issued compliance orders. She said charges will be laid next week against a number of establishments.
She added that compliance inspectors will continue to visit liquor establishments to ensure the law is being enforced.
Both she and Premier Bernard Lord said Friday that the smoking ban applies to First Nations communities and establishments on reserves will run the risk - like all other licensed establishments - of losing their liquor licence if they fail to comply with the law.
"Unless they get an exemption from the federal government, the law applies in New Brunswick," Premier Lord said.
Details of the legislative changes won't be unveiled until they are introduced in the legislature this spring but a bar owner would have to be convicted of contravening the smoking law before the liquor license could be pulled, said the premier.
To date, no one has been convicted of failing to comply with the anti-smoking law but the health department's smoke-free hot-line has received 111 complaints of violations.
Mr. Lord said the existing legislation has teeth in it but "it's clear that some bar owners have decided that they don't want to respect the law."
"We want to make sure the signal is clear: This law must be respected, will be enforced by the government," he said.
Mr. Lord added that he has heard from bar owners who are respecting the law that they are being placed at a disadvantage because some establishments are allowing smoking.
Kim Hunter, vice-president of Saint John's Three Mile Entertainment Complex and spokeswoman for the 1,500-member New Brunswick Licensees'Association, welcomed tougher enforcement of the smoking ban.
Ms. Hunter, who wasn't familiar with the details of Friday's announcement when reached by phone, said her association has been pushing government to enforce the smoking ban since it came into effect. She said a lack of enforcement has caused "tremendous frustration" for law-abiding owners.
"What has developed over the last four months is a very unlevel playing field across the province because some bars were enforcing the bylaw, trying to be law-abiding, and other bars were flagrantly ignoring the bylaw," she said. "This whole unlevel playing field has been making a mockery of the smoking bylaw."
She said she hoped a bar would only lose its licence as a last resort.
"We hate to see anyone lose their licence without a warning system in place. We hope all business owners would be given an opportunity to comply first," she said.
Heather Campbell, manager of Callahan's Sports Bar in Saint John, also applauded tougher enforcement, although she said removing liquor licences might be a little excessive.
"It's good they're finally going after the people who have been breaking the law, at the expense of those of us who aren't. We're losing business to them," she said. "You either have the law or you don't.
Ms. Campbell said business has been down significantly since the ban came into effect. She admitted that on at least one occasion, customers have been allowed to smoke inside her bar since the ban.
Gerry Lingley, owner of the Twenty/20 Club/The Right Spot in Fredericton, said it seems like the province is determined to put all clubs and bars out of business.
"(The initial law) put half the bars out of business, they might as well put them all out of business," Mr. Lingley said, pointing out he has not seen the new regulations and is only offering his initial reaction.
Mr. Lingley, who said his bar strictly enforces the anti-smoking law, said bars in the Saint John-Fredericton-Moncton region are reporting a 35 to 40 per cent drop in sales since the smoking bylaw took effect last fall.
Mr. Lingley said the new regulations seem overly strict and he wondered how they will be enforced. As an example, he said he has a 500-seat club and 15 to 18 staff on a Friday night, who regularly tell patrons to smoke outside if they light up.
"Where do you draw the line?" he asked.
Kenneth Maybee, executive director of the New Brunswick Lung Association, welcomed the new measures but said they are more of a threat mechanism.
"I think the majority of the business establishments, the restaurants and bars have really taken it to heart and have already complied," he said. "There is always a few renegades and I think that their bluff is being called . . .They have tested the system and the government is standing firm and they are just putting the necessary next steps in place in the event that one or two need to be disciplined because of their lack of cooperation."

http://www.canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050219/TPEBRIEF/302190162

---

N.B. to deny licences to bars that allow smoking -NB

Canadian Press Friday, February 18, 2005

FREDERICTON (CP) -- Licence renewals will be denied to bars that continue to openly ignore the province's Smoke-free Places Act, the New Brunswick government announced Friday.

The Tory government said it will make changes to its Liquor Control Act so that any establishment in violation will be denied its license renewal on April 1 if they allow smoking.

A number of licensed establishments have been refusing to abide by the province's Smoke-free Places Act, which came into effect last October.

It outlaws smoking in public places.

Provincial officials said they're prepared to take a number of licensed bars and restaurants to court as well if they don't obey the law.

Having a liquor license is a requirement for any establishment with video lottery terminals.

http://www.canada.com/search/story.html?id=c829d049-d0bd-472e-95d0-d1f615de6b54

---

Preem hire OK -ON

Antolla Artusso Queens Park Chief,  February 19, 2005

Premier Dolton McGuinty yesterday defended his government's decision to appoint former Liberal Premier David Peterson to a $1,000-a-day position, pointing out he's hired other Ex Peems.

If you take at a look at who I have deployed - I have got Bill Davis working for m, I've had Bob Rae working for me," McGuinty said.

I happen to have David Petterson doing something for us at the present time.  We tend to avail ourselves of expertise, regardless of political stripe."

Rae and Davis produced a report on post-secondary education.

Peterson has been appointed for an unspecified period as the province's representative in discussions with First nations on a new shared gaming revenue framework. 

McGuinty said he was not familiar with the details of the discussions.

Sean Hamilton, a spoke person for the Finance Minister Greg Sorbara, said the province's 133 First Nations bands, currently share the revenue from Casino Rama.

Under the proposed framework, they would share a portion of all casino revenues in the province.  Hamilton said the idea is to provide stable and secure funding to First Nations.

It is unclear if the First Nations Bands would end up with a bigger share of the revenue.

* In print version only

---

Needing answers to a variety of questions

I'VE BEEN trying to come up with the answers to a few questions for a while now, to no avail! Perhaps someone can supply the answers for me, so that I might sleep better! What is the point of "Baby On Board" signs? Aren't we all supposed to follow the same laws regardless of who is on-board? Why do I have to help pay for others post-secondary education? I had to pay for my own. What, besides the bill, do I get out of this deal? Are all of these same people who are trying to save me from myself by banning smoking going to go along with being saved from the ravages of alcohol? Alcohol is far more dangerous and has caused more death, grief and heartache than tobacco ever could. Alcoholic spirits cannot be used safely, either! Why can't drivers be banned from using cellphones in a moving vehicle? How come nothing is being done about bicycles being ridden on sidewalks? Aren't bike riders supposed to follow the same laws that apply to motor vehicles? What day is the government going to set aside for "straight pride day"?

Neil A. MacDonald

(Are those rhetorical questions?)

http://canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/Letters/

---

Famous Players cuts same-sex ads after threats

CTV.ca News Staff

Canada's largest movie-theatre chain will no longer run ads supporting same-sex marriage after opposing groups boycotted its theatres.

Famous Players will no longer run any "issue-driven advertising" in its 79 theatres, The Globe and Mail reported, after staff received death threats and movements against same-sex unions boycotted theatres for running ads in support of same-sex marriage.

The two pre-film 15-second ads that were sponsored by Canadians for Equal Marriage will not be running as of this weekend, said Nuria Bronfman, the Toronto-based vice-president of corporate affairs for Famous Players.

"We were starting to get e-mails that were threatening to our staff," Bronfman told The Globe.

"The phone calls were starting to get abusive," explained Bronfman, "so we thought it's not fair for our staff to have to go through that sort of thing."

Famous Players Media President Salah Bachir paid for the ads as an individual, which cost close to $15,000.

One ad says: "'I do' means the same thing, whether you're straight or gay. Let your MP know you support our Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

The other says: "Marriage is a fundamental human right, whether you're straight or gay ... ."

But Calgary-based Canadian Family Action Coalition is threatening a continued boycott unless the chain runs a similar anti-same-sex marriage ad.

Brian Rushfeldt, the coalition's executive director, told The Globe that the chain only dropped the ads when they were set to run out anyway.

Bronfman says the chain is not succumbing to threats or boycotts from the opposing groups but that "we've definitely had some learnings from this situation and others," she said.

She noting that anti-smoking messages and ads for furriers have also incited complaints from patrons.

"We've definitely learned that people have definite opinions about their movie-going experience and what they want and don't want and we've heard it loud and clear."

From now on, advertising shown before screenings "will focus on consumer products and services and stay out of issue-driven advertising altogether," she said.

Some of the opposing groups believed the ads were free public service notices at first, and asked for free airtime to air their own positions, Bronfman said.

But when they found out the advertising was paid-for, "but no one pulled out a chequebook" she said.

Bachir told The Globe he would not have done any thing differently.

"That kind of reaction the ad got only serves to strengthen me further. In fact, I sent a cheque yesterday to Egale (a national organization supporting gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans-identified people)."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1108830692002_6?hub=Entertainment

---

Discussin of the science called epidemiology

http://www.facsnet.org/tools/ref_tutor/risk/ch4epidem.php3

---

Detectives Bust Crew Of Criminals Blamed For 27 Store Burglaries -FL

February 8, 2005

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Detectives say a crew of criminals was after cigarettes and cigars to sell on the black market. At least 27 businesses across Central Florida were targeted. The group of eight men was called The International Crew.

Orange County detectives say the thieves, from all over the world, spent hours planning and rehearsing the crimes. Detectives say the Discount Tobacco Outlet is just one of the businesses the criminals are responsible for hitting. At the Goldenrod Road business, they stole $55,000 worth of cigarettes.

They made their way in after cutting the telephone lines and alarm systems and then cut right through the roof. In one of the more elaborate burglary rings seen locally, the burglar dropped in through the ceiling.

The group of suspects would use skill saws, picks and sledgehammers to break through the roofs of local businesses and then steal as many cigars and cigarettes as possible, often so many, detectives say, they'd bring along U-Haul trucks to carry it all off and sell on the black market.

"It's an extensive organization. They were well organized, but I guess we were a little better than they were, at least, this time," says Chief Ron Stucker, Orange County Sheriff's Office.

 

Detectives labeled them The International Crew because the eight members are from all over, including Lebanon, Mexico, California and Israel, where one of the men has since been deported to. They would use disguises, two-way radios, listen to police frequencies and plan and rehearse the burglaries with detail.

In all, detectives say the group was responsible for at least 27 burglaries, resulting in $600,000 in theft and $180,000 in damage, and, in most cases these arrests, it was hardly their first.

The cigarettes were sold to convenience stores in Tampa and Miami.

http://www.wftv.com/news/4177811/detail.html

---

Shops clear shelves after dye warning -UK

SUPERMARKET shelves nationwide were today short of more than 350 food products after a full-scale alert over the discovery of a potentially cancer-causing dye.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) raised the alarm when the dye - called Sudan 1 - was found to have illegally contaminated a batch of chilli powder.
By then the powder had already been used to make a large consignment of Crosse and Blackwell Worcester Sauce which, in turn, was added as an ingredients in a host of other products.

Sudan 1 is a red dye normally used as a colouring in solvents, oils, waxes, petrol, and shoe polish.
Experts warn it could contribute to an increased risk of cancer although they add there is unlikely to be an immediate risk to health.
The product at the centre of the alert is entirely separate from the better known Lea and Perrins Worcestershire Sauce.
The FSA published a list of 359 ready-made meals, sauces or other processed foods which may have used the sauce in question and advised the public not to eat them.

http://business.scotsman.com/agriculture.cfm?id=190772005

 

---

Sudan 1 Q & A -UK

February 18/05
By Graham Hiscott, PA Consumer Affairs Correspondent 
 Food chiefs today issued an alert over a forbidden dye in products. Here the Food Standards Agency outlines the facts:
 . What is Sudan I ?
A. Sudan I is a red dye that is used for colouring solvents, oils, waxes, petrol, and shoe and floor polishes. It is not allowed to be added to food in the UK and the rest of the EU.
However, inadvertent contamination of some food products has been uncovered.
 Q. What is being done to tackle the problem ?
A. The Food Standards Agency is working with the food industry and local authorities to make sure that all the affected products are removed from the shelves and is tracing any foods that may be contaminated.
 Q. What is the health risk of Sudan 1?
A. Sudan 1 could contribute to an increased risk of cancer and it is not possible to identify a safe level or to quantify the risk.
  However, at the levels present in these food products the risk is likely to be very small.
 Q. If I have eaten an affected product, has my health been damaged ?
A. There is no risk of immediate illness. If you have eaten these products the risk is likely to be very small, and not eating them any more is a sensible thing to do.
Being exposed to a substance that could contribute to the development of cancer does not necessarily mean that you will develop cancer. There are many causes of cancer, including lifestyle and environment.
 Q. If the risk is very small why remove the foods ?
A. Sudan 1 is thought to contribute to cancer, and consumers should not be exposed to it unnecessarily.
  Experts advise that exposure should be as low as practical. It is also illegal in foods.
 Q. Could restaurant meals or takeaways be affected?
A. Some restaurants and takeaways have been using products containing Sudan 1. These products are being withdrawn.
 Q. What measures are in place to stop this happening again?
A. All dried and crushed or ground chilli coming into any EU Member State must be accompanied by a certificate showing it has been tested and found to be free of Sudan 1. Any consignment that does not have a certificate is detained for sampling and analysis

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4150076

 * the 117 links that relate to this topic! http://news.google.ca/news?hl=en&lr=&output=search&ie=UTF-8&ncl=http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm%3Fid%3D4150076

 

---

Indians and taxes: Many Native Americans do pay property, payroll and sales taxes

2005-02-20
by RAUL VASQUEZ
 

One of the criticisms Native American leaders on the North Olympic Peninsula say they often hear from non-Natives is that they don't pay any taxes.

But they do.

Dennis ``Sully'' Sullivan, vice chairman of the Lower Elwha Klallam tribe, says that's something the public should know.

``It's just disturbing when you read that all tribes are labeled as tax-free -- that we never pay taxes and everything is given to us for free,'' Sullivan said.

He was reacting recently to statements he's read in newspapers and heard publicly from critics, most notably linked to the former state graving yard project in Port Angeles.

``Those statements are humiliating and degrading,'' Sullivan said.

Ron Allen, chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam tribe, agrees that a lot of people apparently aren't aware that Native Americans pay taxes.

``There's a common misunderstanding by the general public regarding what tribes and [tribal] individuals do and don't pay,'' Allen said.

``Our individual tribe members definitely pay federal income taxes, and a majority of Indian people who live off of reservations pay property taxes and all the other taxes associated with non-Indian citizens.''

While a sometimes-complex maze of regulations governs when and whether Native American tribes and members are required to pay taxes, some practices are fairly simple to follow.

Payroll, income taxes

Almost all tribal businesses and their employees are required to pay federal payroll and income taxes that pay into funds like Social Security and Medicare, tribal representatives said.

``We pay all of our income tax for wages,'' said Ben Johnson, chairman of the Makah tribe.

``We do that for all our employees.''

Native Americans employed by non-treaty tribal businesses -- which include tribal casinos, gas stations and general stores -- pay federal income taxes regardless of whether the labor is done on or off of reservation land.

In addition, almost all tribal members who don't live on a reservation are required to pay property taxes, including local school district tax levy rates.

Native American tribes that purchase non-reservation land and use it for commercial purposes must pay property taxes on that land.

``The statement that `Indians don't pay taxes' is flat false,'' said Gabriel Galanda, a Native American lawyer based in Seattle who was born and raised in Port Angeles.

Galanda said that in addition to payroll and property taxes, all Native Americans pay sales taxes when buying from a business not on reservation land.

``Tribal members pay state retail taxes for off-reservation purchases, which is where the overwhelming majority of their buying occurs,'' he said.

What they do, don't pay

Mike Gowrylow, spokesman for the state Department of Revenue, said the public is sometimes confused about what taxes Native Americans are required to pay.

He said the state's 29 registered tribes do enjoy certain tax exemptions that stem from the 19th century treaties they signed with the federal government.

Thanks to the tribes' sovereign-nation status, members of the Makah, Quileute, Lower Elwha Klallam and Jamestown S'Klallam tribes are exempt from paying some taxes that non-tribal citizens must ante up.

But most of those tax exemptions work only when a tribal member works, buys or lives on reservation land.

Native Americans who live on tribal reservations, for example, don't pay state or federal property taxes, Gowrylow said.

They also don't pay sales taxes on goods or services purchased on tribal reservation land -- or when what they buy is delivered to the reservation, Gowrylow added.

Also exempt from taxation are profits produced by tribal businesses on reservation land -- including casinos.

Tax base for reservations

According to Allen of Jamestown S'Klallam, the reason these exemptions are fair is that most tribes rely on their tribal businesses to produce their only real tax base.

``Tribal businesses don't produce profit in the normal sense of profit,'' Allen said.

``They are essentially producing a tribe's tax base, because tribes generally don't have a tax base.''

Allen said while a few tribes tax their members, it's still a small percentage.

Even though tribal business and casino profits can't be taxed, several tribal officials said they contribute back to nontribal society by providing jobs and by offering voluntary donations to the state.

According to figures provided Linda Ruffcorn of Jamestown S'Klallam's 7 Cedars Casino, the casino has paid out more than $46 million to employees -- most of them nontribal workers -- since opening nine years ago.

Federal income taxes were taken out of all these wages pa