Pity poor big tobacco
STEVE MAICH July 12, 2005
Cigarette makers are an easy target. But these lawsuits are still wrong.
There is no industry so reviled in North America as tobacco. The oil barons? The global mining conglomerates? The multinational banking cartels? They all look positively cuddly when compared to the guys in the cancer stick business. The industry is now practically synonymous with corporate misconduct. Not only do tobacco companies peddle a dangerous product, they've known about the risks for decades. Not only did they refuse to make smoking safer, they seem to have made it more dangerous and addictive for the sake of higher profits. Now and forever, tobacco wears the scarlet letter of ugly capitalism.
No surprise then, that when the industry trudged off to the Supreme Court of Canada a few weeks back, in a fight against the province of British Columbia, there was little sympathy for Big Tobacco. At issue is B.C.'s attempt to sue three major cigarette makers to recoup an estimated $10 billion in health care costs to treat smokers. The province says the industry's past misconduct makes it liable for costs to the system.
The B.C. law allowing tobacco suits was passed in 2000, declared unconstitutional by a provincial court in 2003, and reinstated by the B.C. Court of Appeal last year. Now it's up to the country's highest court, and there's an awful lot riding on its verdict. Newfoundland has already passed a copycat law, and every other province except Prince Edward Island has lined up in support of B.C.'s case. If the cigarette makers lose this appeal, the legal floodgates will open across the country.
So far, it's not looking good. The justices peppered industry lawyers with questions throughout their presentation, but let the government present its case almost uninterrupted. For the court, the easiest choice is to let the lawsuits go ahead, and that's likely what will happen. The justices will step aside, the government will gleefully raid the tobacco coffers again, and the public will be comforted by the idea that what's bad for cigarette makers must be good for the rest of us.
It'll be a real shame.
B.C. and the other provinces defend their lawsuits on the grounds that they're defending public health, but really they're chasing a court-ordered jackpot. In 1998, they watched as Big Tobacco agreed to pay US$246 billion over 27 years to 47 U.S. states, to compensate for years of misleading claims about the health risks associated with smoking. B.C. lawmakers took one look at that settlement and saw a potential solution for the government's chronic money troubles.
What the provinces conveniently ignore is the fact that Canada began extracting billions from the tobacco industry long before the U.S. did. While the Americans relied on slow and costly litigation, Canada opted for a more elegant approach: punitive taxation. According to a 2002 study, almost 72 per cent of the cost of a carton of cigarettes in Canada goes to various taxes. In the U.S., the tax portion ranged between 17 and 38 per cent, depending on the state. Most Canadians support these taxes because of the habit's obvious social costs. But by pouring litigation on top of taxation, governments are demanding the industry and its consumers pay twice for their freedom to puff.
This naked money grab is justified by one central myth: that the industry gets a free ride on public health care. The facts say otherwise. A 2000 study estimated that Canada's direct health care costs due to tobacco are about $2.68 billion a year. A similar 1991 federal government study reached roughly the same conclusion. By comparison, the federal and provincial governments reaped about $7.69 billion in tobacco taxes last year, up 57 per cent from a decade earlier. Some free ride. If anything, smokers help subsidize health care for the rest of us.
So, if the government is so desperate to wring more money out of smokers, why don't they just raise taxes again? Well, because governments learned in the early '90s that when taxes get too high, smugglers start doing big business. It's actually possible to raise taxes to the point that government ends up with less revenue.
Rather than risk it, B.C. wrote a law that virtually guarantees a windfall at the expense of consumers and shareholders. The province doesn't need to prove that any particular person's illness was caused by tobacco. It doesn't even have to itemize the cost to the medical system of treating any specific patients. Government simply estimates its costs, and demands restitution. In Vegas, that would be called a rigged game.
Business leaders have been all but silent on this so far -- nobody wants to stand up for the cancer industry. But all those executives might want to think hard about the implications should Big Tobacco lose this fight. Are they ready to accept a future in which car companies are held liable for smog-related health problems? Are fast-food chains ready to pay for heart and weight-related ailments? Are liquor companies prepared to fund liver transplants for their best customers? Tobacco isn't the only legal product known to cause health problems, and you don't have to be a legal scholar to see the logical extensions of such a precedent.
Cigarette makers are easy targets. We've gotten so used to casting them as villains and ourselves as helpless victims that we've created a legal double standard for this one, nasty business. But that's the tough thing about law: a travesty is still a travesty, even when you don't like the defendant.
http://www.macleans.ca/switchboard/columnists/article.jsp?content=20050718_109113_109113
Anti-smoking crusade needs to cool it a bit -BC
The Province Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Few people now dispute the fact that smoking tobacco is harmful to those who do it -- and to those who happen to be nearby them when they do.
However, the proposal by the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority to ban smoking on restaurant patios, at beaches and in other public places is much too restrictive.
Ours is a society that prides itself on our ability to tolerate minorities. Then, why can't we tolerate the minority of people who use what is, after all, a legal product?
As Barwatch chairman John Teti notes: "We're providing a space for people to use heroin, but we can't have a place for people to smoke cigarettes."
Vancouver bar and restaurant owners have already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to accommodate the last round of non-smoking legislation.
From now on, let them decide how best to run their premises. And let the rest of us just take a deep breath.
http://www.canada.com/vancouver/theprovince/news/editorial/story.html?id=b525f9eb-406c-4307-b181-3ca424299658
Manitoba fines are going up -MB
Friday August 12, 2005
Altona Red River Valley Echo — The provincial government claims public health and safety will be enhanced with several new regulations including new set fines for violating display, advertising and promotion provisions under the Non-Smokers Health Protection Act.
Fines from $235 to $535 for individuals and $385 to $1,035 for businesses have been established for displaying, advertising or promoting tobacco or tobacco-related products under the Non-Smokers Health Protection Act (NSHPA). Additional fines starting at $2,035 for a first offence have been established for corporations advertising or promoting tobacco or tobacco-related products.
Effective Aug. 15, retailers will need to ensure tobacco displays and signage are consistent with provisions under the NSHPA which prohibit retailers from displaying, advertising and promoting tobacco products in any place where children are allowed. The purpose of the act is to help
reduce tobacco use among children and help prevent them from starting to smoke.
To view the regulations, visit http://www.gov.mb.ca/chc/statpub/.
http://www.altonaecho.com/story.php?id=178190
Ban keeps people from getting help. -BC
Quitting crystal meth or other street drugs is tough enough, but simultaneously giving up smoking is too much for some Vancouver Island teens.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1965
New AADAC staff understands addicts -AB
Ed Moore Leader staff Monday August 15, 2005
Two new Edson AADAC employees will try their best to snuff out drugs and tobacco.
AADAC didn’t have to go too far to find their new staffers, as Heather McFadzen, the new addictions counsellor and Bonnie Randall, the half-time tobacco reduction counsellor, just worked down the hall, at the Child and Family Services office, as child protection workers.
The women, who both have 20 years experience between them in child welfare and protection, welcome the change and are excited about their new positions.
As far as AADAC Edson office supervisor Edith Zuidhof-Knoop is concerned, it’s a perfect fit.
“From AADAC’s perspective we’re really happy to be able to tap into their knowledge of resources in the community. They’re both in the learning phase but they bring a strong set of personal skills.”
On the job
McFadzen’s first day was Aug. 2, while Randall’s was last Monday.
Randall figures the battle against smoking cessation is being won.
“There’s definitely steps being made. Just look at the restaurants in town.”
Over the last two years most Edson and area restaurants have decided to go smoke-free and the trend continues.
McFadzen will split her time between counselling and education.
Both will make an appearance at the Edson and District Drug Coalition booth at this week’s Edson and District Chamber of Commerce Sidewalk Jamboree.
Both have been touched personally by tobacco or alcohol use in their respective families.
Personally affected
“My mother had a stroke due to the fact that she was a heavy smoker,” said Randall, who was once a smoker herself, but quit eight years ago.
McFadzen was affected by addictions use within her family.
Being affected personally by alcohol or drugs will help to reinforce and strengthen her new personnel’s beliefs and the ways they can help other people, said Zuidhof-Knoop.
“It creates empathy and gives understanding.”
Both McFadzen and Randall are pleased that they’re working with people who are willing to make changes in their lives.
New AADAC staff understands addicts
Youths to tackle smokers -ON
By Carl Clutchey - The Chronicle-Journal August 16, 2005
Can teens convince other teens that smoking isn’t cool?
Thunder Bay District Health Unit is going to spend nearly $400,000 trying to find out with a Youth Adviser program that kicks off this fall in Thunder Bay, Marathon and Geraldton.
“By getting youths talking to youths, we’re going to try to change their attitudes and perceptions about smoking,” Ken Ranta, manager of the health unit’s tobacco control unit, said Monday.
Under the program, full-time youth advisers are to supervise a network of “peer leaders” — selected teens who demonstrate the skills to form and lead small focus groups.
The funding will pay for the salaries of four adult supervisors as well as support materials.
Though smoking has been on the decline among Canadians for 30 years, Ranta said, the downward trend is not as strong among young people.
And Northwestern Ontario continues to be home to a higher percentage of smokers compared to the rest of the province, he added.
Ranta said it will be up to the focus groups to decide how they want to function, but they’ll be encouraged to operate informally and not tout any particular quitting method.
“We’re not going to be the tobacco police and say, ‘You should quit,’ and hand out business cards.’’
Peer leaders, who will receive about $10 per hour, are to be 16-20 years old, Ranta said.
Though the groups will devise their own ways of approaching people about quitting smoking, any strategies they embark on will first be reviewed by adult advisers and public health nurses.
“We don’t have medical training, but we can communicate the dangers of smoking,” Ranta said. “This is about changing attitudes.”
The program was made possible by extra funding from the Ministry of Health.
Ranta, who believes it’s modeled on a similar program in the United States, said it’s to run indefinitely.
Of the four advisers to be hired, one is to concentrate on aboriginal communities.
http://www.chroniclejournal.com/story.shtml?id=28499
Businesses plead guilty to violating smoking bylaw -ON
By Brian Cleeve Wednesday August 17, 2005
Representatives of two Chatham businesses have pleaded guilty to violating the municipal smoking bylaw.
JR’s Tavern and Olympic Billiards and Pro Shop Inc., were scheduled for trial in provincial offences court last Thursday and Friday, but a deal was reached in court Thursday.
JR’s and its owner will have 30 days to pay almost $2,000 in fines in connection to incidents dating back to 2003.
Deb King of Olympic was fined $255, while the company was levied a fine of $1,530 relating to a number of charges.
Jim Wickett, who prosecuted both companies on behalf of Chatham-Kent, withdrew a number of charges as part of the deal.
At Wickett’s request, orders were issued against both companies prohibiting them from committing the offences again.
Wickett explains that if they violate that order, they could face the maximum fine of up to $5,000.
Wickett told the court that on five separate occasions between Nov. 13, 2003 and Dec. 1, 2004, bylaw enforcement officers had caught people smoking at JR’s on Queen Street in Chatham.
A joint submission by Wickett and Mathew Juba, lawyer for JR’s and its owner Nick Pelekis, called for the $2,000 fine.
King, who represented herself, pleaded guilty in connection with a charge in December 2003. She also pleaded guilty as proprietor of the company to offences between Dec. 19, 2003 and Sept. 4, 2004.
Charges against her husband Greg King, who died June 1, and other charges against the company, were withdrawn at the request of Wickett.
Wickett says there are other charges to be dealt with in October concerning businesses in Blenheim and Ridge-town.
Charges against Papa Luigi’s in Chat-ham and Blenheim and the Cadillac Hotel in Blenheim, were to be dealt with on Tuesday (Aug. 16).
Wickett says the convictions last week help the municipality gain “compliance with the bylaw.”
“A fine of $2,000 should act as a deterrent,” says Wickett. “We’re not out to put anyone out of business.”
The smoking bylaw was passed in October 2002 but wasn’t enforced until the summer of 2003.
A number of people have already pleaded guilty to charges of allowing smoking on their premises, and paid the minimum fines of $255.
King said outside the court that she pleaded guilty because she “just wanted this over with.”
The issue of the violation of the smoking violations has been in the courts for at least 18 months.
Greg Elliott, Juba’s partner and former lawyer for King and a number of other accused, had argued originally that the municipality didn’t have the right to pass legislation dealing with health.
Matters had been delayed while a constitutional challenge was carried out in Toronto.
Elliott had also argued it was unfair that the municipality, not the proprietor of a business, should be enforcing the bylaw.
http://www.chathamthisweek.com/index.php?id=227
Retailers reminded that it’s illegal to sell tobacco to kids under 19-ON
By Larissa Barlow Wednesday August 17, 2005
The smoking rate in Canada has dropped to 20 per cent, down from 21 per cent in 2003 and 24 per cent in 2000 Statistics Canada reported, but work is still being done locally to combat smoking rates.
The Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit is participating in the Not To Kids campaign, that targets retailers -- reminding them that it’s illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone under 19.
The campaign also focuses members of the community that might supply cigarettes to teens by buying the tobacco for them.
“What happens is you or I could go to a store and a kid outside could ask you to buy cigarettes for them,” said health educator Michelle Bogaert. “The message we want to give is that it’s illegal to sell and supply to teens.”
Helping in promoting this program is Chatham Cinema 6, which is playing a Not To Kids: Think About It advertisement throughout August.
Theatre staff members are also wearing Not To Kids T-shirts and are supplying customers with information material.
Bogaert said new tobacco legislation coming into effect in Ontario in May 2006 will make the sale of cigarettes to teens much more restrictive. But she notes that Chatham-Kent’s existing bylaws are already strong in this regard.
She said because of this, the municipality will hire test shoppers to try and buy cigarettes from local retailers to determine if they’ll sell to someone under 19.
“For the most part, when someone is not compliant (with the law) we discuss the issue with them and they’re very appreciative of us bringing it up to them,” she said.
Chatham-Kent’s retailer compliance rate is about 95 per cent, compared to the provincial average of 85 per cent.
The Public Health Unit is also looking into other campaigns to inform teens about smoking, including putting up signs in arenas throughout the municipality and hosting another teen tobacco summit
Retailers reminded that it’s illegal to sell tobacco to kids under 19
Cigarettes covered up at stores -MB
BY JENNIFER ASHDOWN Wednesday August 17, 2005
Provincial legislation now in effect to hide tobacco products from youthful eyes
PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE — Portage la Prairie retailers are reluctantly obeying legislation which requires them to hide tobacco products from minors.
“I don’t think it’s really fair,” said Ida Miller, owner of Northside Market on Eighth Street N.W.
On Monday, the province began to enforce provisions in Non-Smokers Health Protection Act (NSHPA) which require retailers to hide tobacco product displays. The legislation also places restrictions on signs displaying tobacco prices. The legislation is intended to help prevent youngsters from becoming smokers.
The act was passed in January of 2004, but the province waited for results of a legal challenge to a similar law in Saskatchewan and had consultations with retailers before moving to enforce it.
Last week, Miller erected a blue cover in front of her store’s tobacco products. She uses tiny, yellow circular stickers on the cover to indicate where the brands are located.
Unlike some of her peers who paid for curtains and cupboards, Miller received a cover from a tobacco company to conceal the cigarette display.
She declined to disclose the name of the tobacco company, but said her store received the cover because of the volume of cigarettes it sells.
Mike Stiegler, owner of Mike’s 5th Avenue Grocery, is waiting for a $300 vertical blinds he ordered to conceal the store’s cigarettes. In the meantime, he’s hiding his tobacco products behind a brown security enclosure he uses to lock up products after hours.
“I think that’s an awful lot when it’s just a straight loss for me, really,” said Stiegler of the blinds which he suspects will hurt the store’s sales.
Stiegler’s employee, Alice Unrau, said the enclosure has caused a number of customers to wonder if the store sells cigarettes at all.
“They see the blinds and look at it and they figure, ‘Oh, we can’t sell cigarettes anymore?’”
The director of provincial affairs for Canadian Federation of Independent Business said NSHPA is placing an unfair burden on small business owners. What’s more, it doesn’t make sense.
“It’s typical government hypocrisy,” said Shannon Martin. “You’ve got a government that advertises gambling and advertises liquor and yet forgets tobacco is a legal product.”
The executive director of Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance says NSHPA will reduce the number of Manitoba smokers with the help of existing measures such as using the media to educate consumers about the effects of tobacco. This is a chance for retailers to help ensure young people don’t smoke, Murray Gibson said.
“I think if we’re going to have an impact on tobacco use, it’s going to be society at large that has to each individually do their part,” he said.
Provincial Healthy Living Minister Theresa Oswald defended the legislation, citing a recent Health Canada survey which found the number of young smokers in Manitoba has dropped. The survey found smokers in Manitoba aged 15 to 19 dropped from 29 per cent in 1999 to 21 per cent in 2004.
The eight-point drop means the province, which had the highest percentage of young smokers a few years ago, is now the province with the second lowest percentage, said Oswald, proving its efforts to discourage youths from smoking are working.
“There are people who say to me, perhaps in jest, why do you think that hiding cigarettes will make any difference?” she said. “Well, the fact is that any one of these initiatives on their own may not. But together, we are making a difference and the numbers prove it.”
http://www.portagedailygraphic.com/story.php?id=179189
Smoker-friendly casino set to open -MB
Broadcast News Wednesday, August 17, 2005
ROSEAU RIVER, Manitoba -- A Manitoba native reserve is set to open a new gambling hall that is smoker-friendly.
The Roseau River First Nation will open its $1 million operation Friday
It's hoping to lure gamblers from as far away as Winnipeg, 100 kilometres to the north.
Chief Terrance Nelson says the reserve is taking advantage of the fact that the province's anti-smoking law does not apply to native reserves.
Nelson says there are plans to offer bus rides to Winnipeg residents who want to smoke while they gamble.
The centre will include bingo halls and 20 video lottery terminals to start, but Nelson says he's hoping for an expansion in the near future.
http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=65001bec-e838-4a38-92b9-1c1b2860f6c6
Emphasis on smoking minimizes other issues -ON
Letter August 17, 2005
Re: The Deadly Impact Of Smoking, letters, Aug. 13. I thought the backbone of a true democracy was a media that reports on issues with fairness and without bias.
If this is the case, then why does the GLOBALink News and Information Service have a tobacco control editor and co-editor?
The letter goes on to state: "Both men (Peter Gzowski and Peter Jennings), however, unwittingly and tragically became part of the great under-reported story of our day." You've got to be kidding. Is there a person on this continent that would agree with that statement?
In a related article, you reported that 67 per cent of the population are against banning smoking in bars. If this is a democracy, then why are we passing this law? How much are we going to spend trying to convince the 67 per cent that they are wrong and are we convincing them or brainwashing them?
Why isn't the fact that 27,000 children starve to death on this planet every day, that our nuclear waste will be radioactive for 10,000 years or the fact that there are enough weapons on this planet to destroy every living thing (a reality only a few countries are willing to face) ever make it to the front page or even the letter of the day?
The answer to this question is, because there isn't any money in it. Do we really still live in a democracy? Or have we let it slip away, one law at a time?
Douglas Davis Windsor
http://www.canada.com/windsor/windsorstar/news/letters/story.html?id=bbc16590-3d5d-45c3-9e58-4a387e8b3476
Smoking ban diminishes democracy in Ontario -ON
Letter Thursday, August 18, 2005
Kudos to Lynda Duguay and James H. Dunbar for some well-written letters. They, like any thinking individual, do not swallow the pap the anti-smoking lobbyists dish out.
There has never been a definitive study showing second-hand smoke causes all the damage it is accused of. If it is so horrendous, why, when asked, can no one name three people who have contracted lung cancer from second-hand smoke?
Even the EPA and the WHO are backpedalling from their so-called studies that showed this to be true as they have been caught up in their own lies of forcing conclusions to fit what they wanted to hear.
A basic question would be that if second-hand smoke was so addictive, why aren't more people addicted? The answer simply belies the anti-smoking propaganda.
As reported in The Windsor Star, the Lung Association estimates that 7,500 Ontarians will be diagnosed with lung cancer this year.
While it does not say these cases will be from smoking or second-hand smoke, it is a far cry from the 17,500 that Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Smitherman would have us believe. In all of Canada there were only 21,700 diagnoses in 2004, again not all from smoking or second-hand smoke. And not all died.
What does this tell you about the anti-smoking lobby?
What does this tell you about Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Smitherman?
A great deal has been made about Ernest "Smoky" Smith, an icon to Canada as he was the last surviving recipient of the Victoria Cross. A true hero, but no more a hero than any of the veterans who fought for our freedom. And they fought for our freedom of choice.
Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Smitherman would spit on them and tell them they can no longer smoke in their own private legion halls.
Ontario's democracy is spelled d-i-c-t-a-t-o-r-s-h-i-p. As my husband said, If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank a vet.
Jean Winter Windsor
http://www.canada.com/windsor/windsorstar/news/letters/story.html?id=54705006-d22b-4a21-9c78-7ad3c4e257cc
Countdown on for tobacco queen contest -ON
Vicki Hartlen - Delhi News-Record Thursday August 18, 2005
This year’s tobacco queen competition is “shaping up nicely” says organizer Susie Huyge.
“So far everything is going great this year,” said Huyge. “Everything is falling into place nicely.”
Huyge has organized the tobacco queen contest for more than 10 years and said she has already had an interest shown this year.
Last year there were so few applicants for the contest Huyge was forced to delay the deadline for competitors.
“We’re not going to have to do that this year,” said Huyge.
Single women 18 years and older, who are from a tobacco community, are invited to compete.
“Contrary to what people think, (prospective competitors) have to know that they don’t have to come from a tobacco farm,” she said. “As long as you’re from a tobacco community or area, that is sufficient.”
While some awareness of tobacco is preferred, Huyge said most tobacco community residents have knowledge of the crop.
Advertisements have already been posted in many publications for the contest, which advises an Aug. 25 deadline.
“I don’t know why some girls wait until the bitter end to get their registrations in, but the sooner the better,” said Huyge.
Once an applicant enters, Huyge said they are given a questionnaire to fill and are asked to provide more details.
“It’s just so much better for them to get applications in early so there’s more time for them to go over the information,” she said.
Competition will begin Sept. 7 with the preliminary judging, which accounts for 40 per cent of their final mark. Final judging will be held during the Harvestfest Wine & Cheese Opening ceremonies, set for Sept. 14 at the Delhi German Hall.
“Win, lose or draw this is a wonderful opportunity for local area girls to meet other girls with similar interests and possibly be crowned tobacco queen.”
The tobacco queen and other contestants are then a part of the Harvestfest celebrations, including the parade.
“Aside from Harvestfest the tobacco queen is asked to attend many other events,” she explained. “You can talk to any former queen and they will tell you how much the experience added to their lives.”
Countdown on for tobacco queen contest
Smokers welcome at new bingo hall -MB
By Alexandra Paul Thursday, August 18th, 2005
WINNIPEG smokers will get another choice of gaming hall where they can light up as they play the odds.
A Manitoba First Nation 100 kilometres south of Winnipeg is opening a new bingo hall with 20 video display terminals -- and it's betting that giving players the freedom to smoke cigarettes will give it the edge it needs to succeed in the province's competitive gambling sector.
The Roseau River First Nation will open its bingo hall Friday, Chief Terry Nelson said yesterday.
At the grand opening, Nelson said, the community will make a firm offer to buy a parcel of land in Winnipeg with the intention of creating an urban reserve in the city.
"On Friday, chief and council will be signing the letter of offer to the city of Winnipeg for the urban reserve. That's part of the (grand opening) celebration. We are committing $2.2 million. We can sign the cheque ourselves here at Roseau River. We don't have to depend on anybody else. It's our own money," the chief said.
An urban reserve would require a First Nation to acquire a piece of land in the city and then have it designated as reserve land by the federal government. On urban reserves, First Nations can operate businesses free of many taxes and invest much of the $1.2 billion federal dollars that flow annually to reserves, not to mention settlements for treaty land entitlements and hydro agreements.
Informal discussions centre on a 30-acre parcel of land in St. Boniface that used to be a Canada Packers site. It would be Winnipeg's first urban reserve.
The Roseau River bingo hall -- with 14 full-time and part-time jobs to offer -- and the urban reserve commitment represent a fiscal turn-around for the community, which just 2 1/2 years ago was in such dire financial straits that its accounts had to be taken over by third-party management.
The reserve cut a $5-million deficit down to $400,000 by hiring a good accounting service, negotiating closely with Indian Affairs and by going on an austerity regime, Nelson said. No new houses were built and infrastructure maintenance, including road repair, was dumped to clean up the bottom line, he said.
Now with the community's books off to a clean start and the fiscal future looking up, Nelson expressed confidence in the community's financial independence.
The chief said the reserve is among a handful of First Nation communities in Manitoba that are taking advantage of the fact the province's anti-smoking laws do not apply to native reserves to make money on gambling enterprises.
Nelson said there are also plans to expand the reach of the bingo hall by offering bus service to Winnipeg smokers who want to light up as they gamble.
South Beach Casino, a gleaming 25,000 square-foot gaming facility on Brokenhead Ojibway First Nation, 45 kilometres north of Winnipeg on Hwy 59, is proving wildly successful for the seven First Nations with the South East Tribal Council that opened it this summer.
Meanwhile, smaller gaming halls are also starting to dot the landscape in southern Manitoba.
"Right now the Canupawakpa Dakota Reserve near Oak Lake, they just had a grand opening for their gaming facility and Long Plains just did one near Portage La Prairie for 600 seats. Ours is 250," Nelson said.
"The DOTC chiefs," said Nelson, referring to the Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council of eight First Nations that his reserve belongs to, "as a group we see that we definitely have got to be into economic development."
Nelson said he is proud of the fact that the bingo hall at Roseau, located on Highway 201 off the main Canada-US. artery Hwy 75, was built without government funds.
"The Bank of Nova Scotia (gave us) a fairly extensive loan and we did it ourselves. There's no Indian Affairs, no government of Canada money. It's all us," Nelson said.
The facility will run seven days a week with games scheduled from 11 a.m. to 2 a.m. It also hosts a restaurant, featuring snacks and meals, including hamburgers, fries, chicken and pizza.
In the mid-1990s, Nelson was arrested and charged with smuggling cigarettes and operating illegal gaming equipment. The cigarette charges were stayed, but Nelson was convicted of illegally keeping gaming devices and fined $5,000.
This time, the gaming enterprise is starting small and is being run strictly by the book, the chief said. "With a good plan, we definitely know this is viable," Nelson said.
www.winnipegfreepress.com
Butt out of our homes -AB
Calgary Herald Thursday, August 18, 2005
In the zeal to address the public health threat posed by smoking, there are always a few advocates who get their priorities mixed up.
Consider Kristen Cleary, addiction therapist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto. Lauding a recent study on teen smoking, she said she hopes more research will encourage government to consider "smoking bans on school property, smoking in the home, doing more prevention."
That's right, banning a legal activity on one's private property.
A study in this month's Canadian Medical Association Journal found that adult smoking in the home may influence whether children smoke.
Researchers tested 191 children aged five to 12, to confirm they had been exposed to second-hand smoke, then checked back a few years later to see whether they started smoking: 84 out of 191, or 44 per cent, had.
Only 20 said they smoked 10 cigarettes or more a week -- or 10 per cent, which is less than the general rate of smoking. Kids were asked, "Have you ever smoked as much as one cigarette a week for a month?" If researchers are going to define smoking this loosely, they should have also had a group of children who did not come from smoking homes to compare with. Since the single greatest factor influencing smoking was found to be the onset of puberty, it seems just as likely simple teenage rebellion is causing experimentation.
Although the authors say the study results must be "interpreted with caution," Cleary wants to expand government control to private homes.
How would such a ban be policed? Would the government install surveillance cameras?
Undertake random checks? Set up a neighbourhood snitch line?
Whatever legal vices a person engages in at home are none of the state's business, nor of nosy do-gooders.
Advocacy groups should concentrate on convincing people to quit smoking, not asking government to strip away cherished freedoms
http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=9174dd97-02f8-4faa-9530-a456d548f719
New program targets youth tobacco use -ON
Nancy Boutin - Staff Writer Friday August 19, 2005
PROGRAM: A part of Smoke-Free Ontario
The Tillsonburg News — A new initiative is targeting Oxford’s young smokers.
Called the Youth Action Alliance, the program is part of the Smoke-Free Ontario initiative, and will see a team of 10 paid peer leaders, a youth advisor and volunteers working collaboratively to develop programming to help young people quit smoking, to deter youth smoking, to denormalize tobacco use, to change social norms supporting youth tobacco use, and to counter tobacco industry marketing practices.
In an area built largely by tobacco funding, you might wonder how well such a program will be received.
But Sharon Sabourin, Ontario Tobacco Strategy supervisor, said the Youth Action Alliance is different from other programs targeting youth tobacco use. Instead of launching an attack on youth who smoke, YAA focuses on finding out why young people start smoking, on understanding the mechanics of addiction, and on developing initiatives to address youth tobacco use.
“We have special sensitivity because of tobacco being grown in the area,” said Sabourin.
To that end, Sabourin said the youth leaders and volunteers will be touring an area tobacco farm in an effort to understand others’ perspectives on the tobacco industry, including the role tobacco dollars play in sending local youth to college and university.
So far, six of the program’s 10 paid youth leaders have been hired. Sabourin said others interested in applying for the positions, which will require about 10 hours of work per week - mainly on weekends and evenings - can contact her directly at 539-9800, extension 210.
Youth leaders must be between the ages of 14 and 18, have a thirst for learning and a passion about the topic at hand, and be willing to learn how to engage others. Two youth leaders are needed to represent the Tillsonburg area.
Together, the YAA team will work to develop an action plan to combat youth tobacco use, and will work collaboratively with Oxford’s Upper Deck Youth Centres, whose clients are at high risk of tobacco use. Sabourin said the plan is to co-ordinate cessation services through the Upper Deck Youth Centres, or perhaps to start a competition with prizes for youth who quit successfully.
In the fall, Sabourin hopes to communicate with school nurses throughout Oxford about the YAA program, and to pull additional youth volunteers from local school populations.
Becoming familiar to local teens will help the team as they brainstorm ways to combat youth tobacco use.
“That’s been a big challenge,” said Sabourin. “The fact is that young people think there’s no immediate effects to smoking, so therefore it’s not important. Also the fact that smoking is seen as normal.”
While getting an initiative such as this up and running is never easy, and while funding will ultimately dictate whether the program lasts past the end of the contract in December of this year, Sabourin said she's anxious to see what direction the team will take.
“I’m most looking forward to seeing the progression of understanding the students will go through,” she said. “I'd like to think that those who smoke and those who are involved in tobacco don’t want kids to start smoking. I think the program will probably be received better around here.”
For information on the Youth Action Alliance or to apply to be a paid youth leader or a volunteer, call Sabourin at 539-9800, ext. 210.
http://www.tillsonburgnews.com/story.php?id=179359
Do-gooders rejoice: you can sneer even more now -ON
(Aug 19, 2005)
Editor- HARVEY TAYLOR
Gird yourselves, my chubby friends, looks like you're next.
Remember when it was OK to be a smoker?
Sure, no one was pinning medals on them just because they liked to light up now and again, but they weren't necessarily Jack the Rippers either.
Well, I don't need to tell you those days are long gone.
Even as I type this, I worry about my personal safety, should I be mistaken for someone who has even the least smidgen of tolerance, let alone sympathy, for smokers.
Just for the record, let me make it perfectly clear that I don't need to be sent away for re-education.
Smokers are very, very, very, very bad people.
Even though some of the brightest, funniest, most interesting people I know smoke, that doesn't mean I think they should be treated with basic respect and dignity.
Just because I list one smoker -- a fabulous lady with a piercing intellect and blue eyes to match -- among a handful of those closest to my heart, doesn't mean she should be accorded common decency.
Pick on these people, I say, at every opportunity.
Sneer at them as they stand outside restaurants guiltily grabbing a puff. Cough exaggeratedly as you pass them walking their dogs in the park. Tell them they smell bad, even if they don't.
And, most importantly, blame them.
Blame them for making the rest of us sick with second-hand smoke, for making themselves sick, even, if you like, for the steady rise of tensions in the Middle East.
It's OK. Somehow all this blaming and rude behaviour is for their own good.
And pretty soon, it's going to be open season on heavy folks, too.
Of course, it's been building a long time.
Fat kids have always been teased. Fashion favours the thin. Ballpark seats are built for the narrow-hinded.
But it seems the level of hysteria has kicked up a notch over the past few years.
Few would doubt the correlation between obesity and health problems.
A wealth of statistics and studies points to a very real need to encourage folks -- children especially -- to reduce their weight by eating better and exercising more.
Now, Michael Decter, the head of the Health Council of Canada, is calling for a national assault on obesity similar to the anti-smoking campaigns.
When commenting this week on a study that showed overweight people were twice as likely to need joint replacement, Decter suggested it makes more sense to get people to lose weight now, rather than spend more on costly surgical procedures 10 to 20 years from now.
Hard to argue with that kind of logic. Just as it was hard to argue with the anti-smoking activists.
I just hope, this time, the do-good, anti-obesity activists manage to come up with a feel-good campaign, rather than another negative, blame-heavy one.
I don't want to reach for a bag of chips a few years from now while trying to avert my eyes from a warning label showing a graphic illustration of a joint replacement procedure.
www.therecord.com
An ode to cigarettes -AB
page 8 -August-19-2005
You know, as a non-smoker, I kind of miss smoking.
St.Albert and Edmonton have both been smoke-free for a month and a half now, and I'm noticing a lack where there wasn't one before.
I don't so much miss the haze, or the smell. Overall, the ban ought to ease our troubled healthcare system a bit, and will probably encourage non-smokers to pursue activities they couldn't reasonably pursue before, like attending bingo halls. But now, what do we blame for our troubles?
As the months pass, smoking will gradually, slowly, sink from our collective consciousness. Those of us who've lobbied a long time for this sort of change will forget about that effort, and come to expect the smoke-free nature of our community. Those of us opposed to the ban will adjust, eventually, and probably buy heavier winter coats. Fewer people will light up while they drink. Angry smokers will visit the bingo halls again. Our personal universes will align themselves in the same lopsided ways they always have.
And then trouble will strike. Something happens: maybe too many kids start doing crystal meth. Maybe drunk driving increases. Perhaps aliens will rob us of our oil and Alberta will, overnight, transform into a starving socialist state. There will be a crisis.
And we will have nothing to blame. Oh, sure. By then, whenever Then is, we will have adopted a new kind of scapegoat. Something beyond smoking that we can collectively sneer at, and hate, and use our energies to surpress and choke so that we can, together, vaguely align ourselves toward some hazy objective. Some unifying Object that will make us smile every so often at strangers. A thing to bring us together and build our society.
But until that happens, we are left with a void. Yes, there is plenty wrong with our world, plenty we can unite against and fight. But the presence that smoking filled hasn't been immediately filled.
For a time, we will feel empty. So, on behalf of the entire staff of the Saint City News, I am proposing the following. I am prosposing that, for a limited time, citizens of all ages be able to drive motor vehicles, wherever they want.
By the time the ridiculousness of that scenario fades, we will have found something new to unite against and destroy. To bring us together.
http://saintcitynews.advancedpublishing.com/
New law would allow Net spying
By Tim Naumetz Friday, August 19th, 2005
Police able to intercept e-mails, get into password-secure websites
OTTAWA -- The federal cabinet will review new legislation this fall that would give police and security agencies vast powers to begin surveillance of the Internet without court authority.
The new measures would allow law-enforcement agents to intercept personal e-mails, text messages and possibly even password-secure websites used for purchasing and financial transactions.
A law professor and privacy expert involved in consultations over the bill said a draft version of the legislation circulated earlier this year did not require court authority for police to intercept communications or demand information from Internet servers.
"I think it's the kind of legislation that is literally going to shock millions of Canadians," said University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist.
Justice Minister Irwin Cotler disclosed the plan during a speech to a conference of police boards from across the country. He told reporters he and Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan are preparing a memorandum to cabinet following months of discussions with police, privacy experts and the Internet industry.
Cotler said law-enforcement agencies have lagged behind as use of the worldwide web exploded over the past decade.
An internal briefing note for the head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service last February said it has become increasingly difficult for the agency to intercept communications for surveillance purposes and supported legislation to give law agencies more powers.
Cotler says the government wants to put police and security forces on a "level playing field."
"Criminals and terrorists are making use of the most sophisticated technology," said Cotler. "They have become experts, frankly, in transborder communications and transportation technology."
Cotler said the government is aware of objections around the impact on privacy as well as the affect the surveillance could have on the legal rights of citizens. Under current law, it is illegal to intercept and open letter mail, but it is unclear whether e-mails are in the same legal category.
The Defence Department's Communications Security Establishment has the ability to intercept all telephone communications within Canada and calls across the border, but must obtain ministerial permission to intercept and record telephone calls in which at least one Canadian citizen is involved.
And police need court permission to eavesdrop on telephone conversations.
Conservative MP Vic Toews, while supporting expanded powers for police surveillance of the Internet, said collection and storage of information and records should not be allowed unless the agents are able to prove to a judge there is justifiable reason to intercept the communications and gather the data.
www.winnipegfreepress.com
Residents miss dining and puffing -AB
Don Sinclair August 19, 2005
The Things I See, and Hear, and Think Page 9
I think people who oppose the smoking bylaw are staying away from local bars is based on fact. For example, this SCN reader had this to say after reading last week's column:
Hi Don, I read your August 12th column with interest.
As a smoker, I miss visiting my regular restaurants and bars in St.Albert, and now take my business elsewhere.
Perhaps you could suggest to your readers that there are other towns that appreciate St. Albert's smoking bylaw. Leduc, Spruce Grove, Morinville and patios in Sherwood Park all allow smoking and are enjoying an increase in business.
I think that the restaurant and bar owners in St. Albert should hold back a portion of their business taxes (relevant to lost business dollars) until this city council either comes to their senses or a new council is voted in. Robin, St. Albert, Via E-Mail.
So there you have it folks. Local businesses suffer while local residents take their cash elsewhere where laws are less repressive.
http://saintcitynews.advancedpublishing.com/
Wrong Place Wrong Time -AB
The Things Our Readers See, and Hear, and Think August 19, 2005
Reader Response On: That Smoking Bylaw Page 9
Hi Don: I just read your editorial in the SCN and I disagree with much of your argument against the smoking bylaw. I do see the difficulty many bars[and their staff] are having, however.
There are some very important points many people simply don't understand or they forget about: They are demographics and economic growth. As a food service business owner myself, I see there is a huge section of the population over the age of 55 in St.Albert getting older, along with a much younger[and much smaller] section under the age of 25.
When was the last time you saw a huge amount of people around the age of 40? That is my age and I am constantly running into people more than 10-15 years younger than me or 10-15 years older than me.
Many of those people close to my age are involved in activities that might take them away from the bar scene. Think second marriages, babies born a later age, and child- centered home lives. In 2005, it is not a hard concept. I don't think the impact you speak of has so much to do with the smoking bylaw.
I think it has to do with not as many older people drinking as much combined with not as many younger people available to spend money on drinks. Do we really need that many bars?
Add to this, the latest information from Statistics Canada, with yet more people under the age of 25 refusing to light up than ever before.
Why is it that most drugstore chains have to offer so much else to its customers? Because they are not selling as many cigarettes. My wife and I counted at least 28 sit-down restaurants in St. Albert with the capacity to serve drinks under the conditions you describe. There are far too many businesses competing for the same staff and customers in St.Albert.
The reintroduction of the "15/25-cent Chicken Wings" and loads of "Help Wanted Ads" are symptoms of the problem. Many businesses fail as a result of people not understanding the "when" of things.
When you and everyone else are born and when your business exists accounts for so much, yet many people continue to do things because "that's how it is always done". Yet they fail and do not understand why.
In my opinion, there may still be room for lounges and bars, but many are in the wrong place at the wrong time. The many customers [and staff, for that matter] are waiting for have not yet grown up to the legal age or time in their lives where they can make this a consistent activity.
Unfortunately, the result is the pressure put on those depending on this way of life for a living. Thanks for the opportunity to respond. Chad Jenkins St. Albert, Via E-Mail
Sinc Says: My bet is that there will be some restaurant owners who will disagree with you big time.
http://saintcitynews.advancedpublishing.com/
Obesity tops smoking as health issue, poll finds
Only cancer is a more worrisome problem, Canadians say
Glen McGregor The Ottawa Citizen Saturday, August 20, 2005
Canadians are becoming keenly aware of the dangers of obesity and now rank it among their most serious health concerns, a new poll shows.
The study conducted by GPC Research suggests a growing understanding of the risks of carrying extra weight and the role obesity plays in other diseases.
Cancer remains the leading health concern for Canadians, with 88 per cent of those polled ranking it as a "serious health issue," followed by obesity at 75 per cent, smoking at 74 per cent, heart disease at 72 per cent and HIV/AIDS at 55 per cent.
"If acceptance is the first step towards recovery, then Canadians are on their way to slimming down," said Jim Roche, president of GPC Research.
"This is good news."
He said the strong recognition of obesity as health issue, and not a matter of esthetics, is all the more remarkable given the long history of public education about other ailments on the list of health concerns, such as smoking.
"Whether that's now going to translate into action is the question a lot of public health officials and, frankly, a lot of Canadians should be wondering."
Dr. Beth Abramson, a Toronto cardiologist and spokeswoman for the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, credits the public's increased awareness to education campaigns by organizations like hers and the emergence of obesity issues in the popular culture.
"It's even in mainstream entertainment and movies such as Super Size Me," she said, referring to the 2004 documentary that follows a filmmaker who eats nothing but meals from McDonald's for one month.
She called the recognition of obesity as a health problem an important step to combating an "epidemic."
A growing body of research points to obesity as a key factor in a range of deadly illnesses, including heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, Type-2 diabetes and cancers.
Ontario Minister of Health Promotion Jim Watson says the study shows people are seeing the evidence of the obesity problem right before their eyes.
"You can walk down any street or shopping mall and see more and more people who are obese," he said.
"And they're starting to see the impact on their own health. We don't have to go around telling people it's a problem."
He cited a recent Statistics Canada report that shows a dramatic increase in obesity levels among children over the past 25 years as well as a study released this week that suggests obesity is causing a rising level of joint problems among people who carry extra weight.
Mr. Watson is referenced in the GPC study, which reports that 69 per cent of those polled agree with his well-publicized statement that "Fat is the new tobacco."
But Canadians would still prefer that politicians like Mr. Watson mind their own waistlines. Of those polled, 65 per cent said individuals should be responsible for dealing with obesity and only 18 per cent believe governments would be effective in curbing the problem, suggesting dramatic moves like banning trans fats might not be welcomed.
"No one wants big governments telling them what they can and can't do," Mr. Watson said, but he noted that people agree with Ontario's moves to ban junk food from elementary schools and push to provide healthier school meals.
"You can't go around telling kids not to eat french fries, but at least if you give them healthy choices it's better than no choice."
Indeed, according to the GPC poll, 41 per cent believe schools and school boards should take action, and 67 per cent would like to see vending machines that sell chocolate bars, soft drinks and potato chips banned from high schools. Only 42 per cent would be willing to paying higher education taxes to make up the lost revenues caused by pulling vending out, however.
For the poll, GPC conducted phone interviews with 1,202 Canadians over five days this month. The poll is considered accurate within 2.9 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
It also shows some regional difference in Canadians' attitudes toward healthy living. People in Quebec, Ontario and the Maritimes are more likely to go on a diet to lose weight than exercise, but those in Alberta, Saskatchewan and B.C. believe exercise is just as important as diet.
Women are more likely than men to favour dieting, with 59 per cent rating it as the most important factor in a healthy lifestyle, while 49 per cent of men said exercise was most important.
Concern about obesity was the highest in Atlantic provinces, where it is also the most common. Eighty-two per cent of Atlantic Canadians called it a serious issue, compared to 80 per cent in Alberta, 78 per cent in Ontario, 72 per cent in Quebec and 71 per cent in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and B.C.
Canadians may understand the risks of obesity, but the population is still becoming fatter. The Statistics Canada study released this summer found that 23 per cent of Canadian adults -- about 5.5 million people -- were considered obese in 2005, up from 14 per cent in 1978-79.
Children are also getting fatter, with eight per cent considered obese in 2004 compared to just three per cent 25 years ago.
Anyone with a body-mass index of 25 or higher is considered overweight and above 30 is obese. BMI is calculated by dividing weight in kilograms by the square of height in metres. Using this formula, a 5-foot-11 male (1.8 metres) would be considered overweight at 179 pounds (81 kilograms) or more and obese at 215 pounds (97.5 kilograms).
Obesity rates are still lower in Canada than in the U.S., where 64 per cent of adult are overweight or obese, according to the American Obesity Association. Obesity claims 300,000 lives in the U.S. every year, and costs the U.S. health-care system $100 billion, the AOA estimates.
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=d712ad17-bf72-4899-82ac-d9956935496d
Bylaw creating clouds of smoke on the streets -AB
I hope all the anti-smoking people are happy. So, now instead of having a smoking area or have smoking just in adult-only places they are forced to smoke outside.
I recently went to a restaurant and had to wade through a large group of people in a cloud of smoke just to get to the entrance. I found myself feeling annoyed and glad I wasn’t the family of seven doing the same thing. Before people could make a choice to be around smoke or not. Now, it’s everywhere. Walk down Whyte Ave. at the end of the night or any bar for that matter and see the garbage left behind.
The streets are now littered with butts and empty packages. So now what is the solution.
Patricia Russell, St. Albert
http://www.stalbertgazette.com/news/2005/0820/letters.htm
Injustice continues -MB
By TOM BRODBECK August 20, 2005
Public Trustee keeps grip on veteran's private affairs
It's been almost three months since the government took over the life of Thomas Hanaway, 80, and there's still no sign it's prepared to give the Second World War veteran his freedom back.
Manitoba's Public Trustee, who took over Hanaway's life on June 6, continues to confiscate Hanaway's pension cheques, open his mail and pay his bills.
Hanaway, who lives with his wife and son in the North End home where he was born, is not allowed out of the city without permission from the Public Trustee.
And if he requires any medical attention, it must be approved by the Public Trustee.
"This is bullshit," said a frustrated Thomas Hanaway, whom I visited yesterday. "This is causing a lot of hardship around here."
No doubt. How would you like to have your life taken over by the government and told whether you can leave town?
How would you like the government to confiscate your mail and open it?
SEIZING AND OPENING MAIL
It even seizes copies of Hanaway's Legion magazine, which he gets in the mail.
His son, Tom Hanaway Jr., has to drive to the Public Trustee office downtown to pick up the mail when they call.
And because he has the same name as his father, it's been seizing and opening his mail, too.
"What they can do is just unreal," said Grace Hanaway. "I don't know where all this is going to end up."
Justice Minister Gord Mackintosh said on June 30 that the Hanaway case would be reviewed and completed within a month.
Nearly two months later, nothing has happened.
A letter sent to Grace Hanaway this week from deputy justice minister Bruce MacFarlane said the investigation of their case is still ongoing.
The government is alleging Hanaway's money is not being handled properly.
It's accusing the family of mismanaging his affairs, although its correspondence doesn't specifically state how.
"There is concern, as you have been told, that significant sums of money have been expended without authorization fr
