smoking rights

Thursday, October 06, 2005

This weeks news 2

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month - One woman in nine will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. One in 27 will die from it

MONTREAL, Sept. 30 /CNW Telbec/ - October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month and the Canadian Cancer Society takes this opportunity to reiterate that many women are alive and well today because their breast cancer was detected and treated early.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/October2005/01/c6426.html

Tobacco taxes best spent on health

Top court clears way for lawsuits Sept. 30.

It's laughable that the Supreme Court of Canada has cleared the way for the British Columbia government to sue cigarette companies for the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses. How do they plan on collecting? How will they determine which of the thousands of annual cancer patients are victims of tobacco and second-hand smoke? Perhaps the government should first volunteer to redirect all sales taxes collected on the sale of tobacco products to the health-care system of that province before they initiate lawsuits. Not doing so would be enormously hypocritical since they are making money off the backs of addicts just as the tobacco giants are.

Jennifer Chalklin, Brampton

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1

&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1128117012241

Governments 'hypocritical,' say tobacco companies

Jeff Rud Times Colonist staff Friday, September 30, 2005

The Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council says the B.C. and federal governments have been like "senior partners" in their industry over the last three decades.

That means British Columbia's lawsuit to recover health-care costs related to smoking is hypocritical, council spokesman Dave Laundy said Thursday.

Laundy's comments followed a unanimous Supreme Court of Canada decision that clears the way for the B.C. government to go to trial with a multibillion-dollar civil suit against tobacco companies.

"Governments are the senior partners really in this industry,'' Laundy said, adding that last year the federal and provincial governments collected more than $9 billion in cigarette taxes.

Since 1970, governments in this country have reaped more than $150 billion in tobacco taxes -- about 13 times more than tobacco manufacturers combined have earned on their products, Laundy said. A settlement between tobacco companies and governments in the U.S. produced a $245-billion settlement in the late 1990s. But Laundy said the situation is different in Canada because governments are much more "proactive" in regulating the tobacco industry here.

"We have a right to operate as legal companies under the rules and regulations that are set by government,'' Laundy said. "It's somewhat hypocritical for governments to be setting these ground rules and then turning around and suing the industry which basically complies with the law.''

"Governments have been much more proactive in Canada in overseeing the tobacco industry,'' he added. "So the role of governments in the development and implementation of tobacco policy will be relevant to this lawsuit and will be fully explored.''

But B.C. Attorney General Wally Oppal said the lawsuit is really "about how we can attempt to hold the tobacco companies liable for their misrepresentations and all of those things that we heard about from the 1950s onward.'' However, the council believes that the B.C. legislation cleared by Thursday's ruling essentially stacks the deck against tobacco manufacturers.

"Government should not be able to change rules in advance of a lawsuit to make it easier for them to win and harder for the defendant to defend [itself,] " Laundy said.

But B.C. Health Minister George Abbott said that's not the case with this legislation.

"The Supreme Court of Canada, by a 9-0 margin, has concluded that the deck is not stacked against the tobacco industry, that there's every reason to expect that tobacco will get a fair trial in future civil action,'' he said.

The B.C. suit includes three major Canadian companies -- Imperial Tobacco, JTI-Macdonald and Rothmans, Benson and Hedges. It also names the tobacco manufacturers' council and nine foreign companies.

"We have understood from the tobacco industry themselves that the potential consequences of these type of lawsuits would put them out of business in Canada -- that it would bankrupt them,'' said Canadian Cancer Association spokeswoman Barbara Kaminsky. "I don't know if that's an exaggeration or whether it's the truth and I guess we'll just have to see what happens as the months and years go by.''

http://www.canada.com/victoria/timescolonist/news/story.html?id=06d20769-7afd-4e67-bf02-3850f46fb941

Our cartoon federal taxmen

Re "They just don't know how to quit," (Editorial, Sept. 20): You are so right when you wrote, "This is merely another attempted multi-billion-dollar cash grab by governments from the tobacco industry." Just what does the government do with the billions they already receive in taxes?

I was under the impression the ridiculous amount of tax on cigarettes was to: 1) discourage people from smoking, and; 2) help offset the cost of health care.

Guess I was wrong.

Another tax grab in the billions is the gas tax. Our highways are falling apart and something has to be done about it. Again, I was under the impression that the ridiculous amount of tax on gas, along with my yearly plate renewal, tire tax, etc., etc. was for the upkeep of our highways and roads. Guess I was wrong on this also. When it was said that $1 billion of the gas tax should be set aside for highway improvements, I heard politicians say a user fee should be implemented instead. All this makes me think back to watching cartoons where the tax man comes to the village demanding the people pay taxes to the king. When the people say they have no more to give, they are promptly held upside-down and shaken for any last coins they may have in their pockets.

Dave Podres

(Canadians have been held upside-down for a while)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/01/1243510.html

The way of government

Sue the tobacco companies for health costs with one hand, rake in taxes selling the product with the other. Hypocrisy, thy name is government.

Michael Knight Orillia

(They like to have it both ways)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/01/1243510.html

Shaky, two-faced fence

I couldn't agree more with your Sept. 30 editorial, Utterly hypocritical.

The governments are sitting on a shaky, two-faced fence. They need to finally make tobacco illegal and find new sources of revenue or just get into the business already. They're not fooling anyone -- except perhaps the Supreme Court -- with their hypocritical position. And, hey, imagine the fat surpluses we'd hear about if they cut out the middle man and became Big Tobacco.

Tom Buller Winnipeg

(Then they would have to sue themselves.)

http://www.winnipegsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/01/1243574.html

A flawed ruling on tobacco

The Gazette Saturday, October 01, 2005

The peculiarity of the British Columbia law upheld this week by the Supreme Court of Canada is that it was designed to make it as easy as possible for the government to go after a single business, the tobacco industry. The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act was passed in 2000 for the express purpose of recouping the hundreds of millions of dollars that B.C. spends every year to treat smoking-related illnesses.

The law, in other words, shamelessly stacks the deck in favour of the province. It allows the government to launch an "aggregate action," meaning it can attempt to bill 14 domestic and foreign tobacco companies for costs the health system had to absorb as a whole.

Under this legislation, the province has only to prove patients treated in B.C. suffered from smoking-related diseases. It does not have to present individual smokers' cases to try to prove its contention of fault. This is a huge advantage, to the government, over the usual course of civil lawsuits, where individual harm must be found to flow from individual fault before damages can be assessed.

The Supreme Court decided it was not a problem that B.C. would not have to abide by the customary rules of civil procedure and evidence, or that damages could be assessed retroactively.

Tobacco is, admittedly, a special case. Used as intended, it almost inevitably leads to illness and death. If it were to come on the market for the first time today, governments everywhere would not hesitate to ban it outright.

But, unfortunately for governments and the public purse, tobacco is beyond the point at which any society or nation can ban it. It has been a legal product for centuries. How could any government enforce a ban? What would happen to the millions of addicted smokers?

Still, that leaves us with a huge problem: Smoking-related illnesses take more than 47,000 lives and cost $4 billion a year in medical care in Canada. Cigarettes will end up killing one in every two smokers, according to the Canadian Cancer Society.

In Canada, governments until now have taken the route of levying high taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products. This can be seen, in a certain light, to be a sensible compromise. High cost has been shown to keep cigarette consumption down among youngsters, who tend to be the most vulnerable to forming an addiction to cigarettes.

But the truth of the matter is also that governments have played a hypocritical role: Cigarette taxes have helped swell government coffers. Governments not only benefit from the sale of cigarettes, they have refused to do the right thing medically and socially and try to ban tobacco. This makes them complicit.

B.C. has decided to let the courts do its dirty work for it. And the Supreme Court has ruled accordingly, and the result might well be to help bring an end to the scourge of tobacco-related illness. But what will be next? Products laden with fat and sugar? They, too, are harmful to health.

The principle of proving harm flows from a specific product or act should not have been jettisoned, even in this case.
http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=5d0c68e9-be18-4912-9df5-531b30c51f66

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2133

An unseemly money grab

Saturday, 1 October, 2005

Given broad public awareness of how deadly cigarette smoke is, a Supreme Court of Canada ruling giving British Columbia the go-ahead to sue tobacco companies may sit well with a majority of Canadians.

But that doesn't make it good public policy.

B.C. is suing a number of cigarette makers to recover smoking-related health-care costs going back to the 1950s. The province took the extraordinary step of passing a law that sets the ground rules for its court case. That is something like challenging someone to a duel and claiming the right to make the rules for the fight.

Neither Ontario nor any other province has said yet whether it will follow British Columbia's lead -- so far. But how likely is it that hard-pressed finance ministers will be able to resist such a tempting cash cow? They can look to the south for a precedent. Litigation in the United States led to a 1998 out-of-court settlement requiring tobacco companies to pay out $246 billion US over 25 years.

While mimicking the litigious fervour of the United States, B.C.'s attempt to extract money from tobacco reeks of hypocrisy. Dave Laundy of the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Council summed it up neatly five years ago:

"They (the government) decide it's legal, they set the rules and regulations under which the industry operates, and they collect their share of the revenues. And now they're suing us for doing what they give us a licence to do."

Indeed, governments' role in overseeing, and taxing, the sale of tobacco products makes them, in effect, willing accomplices in the distribution of a product known to be lethal.

As more than one editorialist has pointed out, British Columbia's next logical step should be to sue itself.

It must be acknowledged that government is in a bit of a no-win position with respect to the legality of cigarettes. The experience of Prohibition in the United States has shown that a ban on smokes would be unenforceable and would create a fertile ground for organized crime. To date, government has handled this conundrum by steering a middle course: regulating advertising, banning sports sponsorships, requiring manufacturers to print stark warnings on their packages, and collecting hefty taxes.

Together, taxes and public information have been doing their work. The rate of smoking in Canada stands at 20 per cent, down by about half from 1964, when a U.S. surgeon general's report definitively established tobacco smoke as a cause of death and disease, exploding the issue into the public spotlight.

The road ahead is unclear, as always, but the ruling was bad news for cigarette manufacturers, as well as for smokers concerned about the ever-rising cost of feeding their habit. There has been speculation that tobacco company losses could range into the hundreds of billions of dollars, possibly forcing makers into bankruptcy.

The essential point is that government should not conduct itself in such a two-faced manner.

"The government has made a lot of money through taxes and if they want more money through this product they can simply raises the taxes," Laundy said.

That would be a proper way of moderating corporate behaviour.

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Editorials/2005/10/01/1243506.html

Accounting needed

I agree wholeheartedly with John Day's letter, Cancer funds all seem to go down pit (Sept. 24).

I, too, have always wondered where the money from the Terry Fox runs for more than 25 years have gone. It seems to me the Cancer Society and the researchers who receive these funds have no incentive to find a cure or improve the survival rate of victims.

This is big business and the more money that is raised the further away the cure is.

Helen Van Gassen, Delaware

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Letters/

But could it break the bank at Big Tobacco?

SHARDA PRASHAD BUSINESS REPORTER Oct. 1, 2005. 10:27 AM

Tobacco manufacturers could be dealt a devastating blow by an onslaught of litigation after their setback at the Supreme Court of Canada this week.

The court's unanimous ruling paved the way for provincial governments to pursue billions of dollars in restitution for tobacco-related health-care costs.

Analysts believe tobacco companies will eventually settle out of court in Canada, and that settlements could be large. The companies, in turn, say they will defend themselves vigorously in court and that they have done nothing wrong.

In addition to Rothmans, Canadian manufacturers Imperial Tobacco Canada and JTI-MacDonald Corp. and other foreign manufacturers, including Philip Morris, were also named in the legal action.

Certainly the markets took a dim, although not devastating view, of the ruling, which allows British Columbia to sue tobacco manufacturers for related health-care costs dating back 50 years and for future related costs.

Shares of Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc., the only manufacturer with stock trading on a Canadian exchange, sank yesterday and its credit rating was put under review.

Rothmans stocked dropped $1.38, a fall of 6.0 per cent, to close at $21.62.

Dominion Bond Rating Service, meanwhile, placed the company's commercial paper and senior unsecured debt "under review with negative implications."

The ratings service indicated in a statement that litigation represented a "material risk and concern to the company." The debt review should be completed within a month, said spokesman Paul Macciacchera.

Other observers sounded similar warnings. Blackmont Capital Inc. analyst David Hartley said in a research note that a large settlement could "create tremendous financial hardship for industry participants."

The stock price of U.S. tobacco companies have recovered because of a "more favourable litigious environment and other company-specific factors," Hartley said.

Dundee Securities analyst William Chisholm lowered his stock rating to "market underperform" from "market neutral" and cut the target price by $6.50 to $20.

Hartley expects the stock price to drop to below $20. He used the $246 billion (U.S.)1998 Master Settlement Agreement in the United States with 46 states and the U.S. tobacco industry and a 1999 trial which was overturned.

In those cases, stocks plunged by 40 per cent within six months after each outcome was known.

Estimates for the B.C. claims are $10 billion.

In his note, Hartley said observers have estimated the case could take at least five years to reach a conclusion and total national claims could reach $80 billion.

Analysts, including Hartley and Marc Marzotto of Merrill Lynch, expect an out-of-court settlement will eventually be reached.

Marzotto pointed to the Master Settlement Agreement, where "not a single trial reached a jury verdict." The massive settlement is being paid out over 25 years.

Rothmans spokesperson John McDonald stated emphatically that the company would not settle out of court. Christina Dona of Imperial Tobacco Canada agreed.

Both pointed to Health Canada studies that indicate British Columbia collects more in tobacco-related revenue than it spends on related health care.

"We know the facts are on our side," said McDonald, adding the ruling found no fault or liability with the manufacturers and that "we intend to vigorously defend ourselves and challenge these allegations."

When asked about the potential impact of any payout by Imperial, Dona said answering the question would be a "presumption of guilt" and the company had done nothing wrong.

But, she said, "we don't have a hidden vault of cash."

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1

&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1128117013219

Province urged to go after tobacco money

By BILL LAYE, CALGARY SUN Sat, October 1, 2005

The husband of late anti-smoking crusader Barb Tarbox says Alberta should seek cash compensation from cigarette companies.

In a unanimous decision Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada said B.C.'s government is within its rights to sue cigarette makers to recoup the costs of treating diseases linked to smoking.

The verdict has opened the door for legal action by other jurisdictions and Alberta Health officials say they will be looking into the ruling's implications.

An while he approves of the court's decision, Pat Tarbox said his wife, the former model diagnosed with terminal cancer who spent the last months of her life convincing Alberta youth to butt out, never considered suing the tobacco firms herself.

"She was of a generation that knew it was bad for them, but there's generations before us that were told otherwise," Tarbox, himself a former smoker, said yesterday.

"But these lawsuits will straighten the companies out from all the lies they told for years ... anybody who blatantly lies to the public should be held accountable."

Meanwhile, a class-action lawsuit seeking $17.8 billion in damages against Canada's three tobacco giants has been filed by a Quebec woman on behalf of nearly 1.8 million smokers in that province. It targets Imperial Tobacco Canada, Rothmans Benson and Hedges and JTI MacDonald, and follows a February decision by a Quebec Superior Court judge that upheld Cecilia Letourneau's right to go ahead with her giant action.

The case is not related to Thursday's Supreme Court decision.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2005/10/01/1243915-sun.html

More clouds gathering over tobacco firms -AB

Sunday, October 2nd, 2005

EDMONTON -- Other provinces are considering siccing their lawyers on tobacco companies, after the Supreme Court decided this week to allow British Columbia to sue the companies for smoking-related health care costs.

Alberta Health Minister Iris Evans said the Klein government will decide by Christmas whether it too will sue the tobacco industry.

Anti-smoking lobbyists in Saskatchewan are also urging their provincial government to introduce legislation that would also allow it to sue.

Evans said smoking is related to about $1.5 billion of the province's $9 billion in annual health costs.

Lawyers for Alberta Health have been asked to quickly review B.C.'s Supreme Court win. Manitoba is also looking at the court decision.

"I hope before Christmas that we'll have something in front of caucus to talk about whether or not the justice minister and the health minister should aggressively carry it one step further," Alberta's Evans said.

Evans said Alberta law lets the province try to recover costs from tobacco makers, but admitted it has never been applied to smoking-related illness.

"This (Supreme Court) decision is a first step and a major victory for the health-care system in terms of trying to recover some of the health costs associated with smoking and exposure to second-hand smoke and for those concerned about the health of Canadians," said Alex Taylor, president of the Canadian Health Care Association and head of the Saskatchewan Association of Health Organizations (SAHO).

It would make sense and save the provinces a lot of money if they jointly sued the tobacco companies, he said.

www.winnipegfreepress.com

Lawsuit smokescreen -- Government is senior partner in tobacco industry

October 3, 2005

Let's get something straight. The government does not want Canadians to stop smoking.

If they were serious, they could ban tobacco tomorrow, just as they ban dozens of other drugs, just as they banned alcohol during Prohibition.

Such a ban would be difficult to enforce, of course, as marijuana laws are, and as Prohibition was. But Canada's three cigarette companies would be shut down, and so would tobacco farmers, and cigarettes would be taken out of convenience stores across the country. Smuggled or home-grown cigarettes would still be available, but fewer people would smoke.

That's what the government would do if they really believed their own anti-smoking rhetoric. They don't believe it, because they are actually the senior partner in the tobacco industry.

Depending on the province, 60 to 75% of the retail price of a pack of cigarettes is tax. Tobacco farmers, manufacturers, wholesalers and convenience store retailers share about $3 from each pack, and the profit for "Big Tobacco" is about 50 cents a pack. Governments get about $7 a pack -- all profit for them, or 14 times as much as all three companies combined.

There is no industry in Canada more closely regulated than cigarette companies are. They are not allowed to advertise, or even sponsor public events; their product packaging has been expropriated by the government for shock-style messages; their product development and marketing decisions must be approved by government bureaucrats. The chief remaining function of the cigarette companies themselves is to be the party to shoulder the blame. Their job is to look evil and be called "Big Tobacco" while federal and provincial governments pocket 93% of the profits.

So what should we make of last week's Supreme Court decision to permit provinces to sue tobacco companies to recover health care costs? Not much.

It will pave the way for the actual money-grabbing suits to follow. Those suits will surely be successful, just as they were in the U.S. And, just like in the U.S., the cost of those lawsuits will be passed on to smokers through higher cigarette prices. The nine provinces that sued could avoid all the lawyers' bills and simply tack on another buck a pack in taxes. The coming lawsuits will simply continue the tradition of shifting the government's dirty work to the tobacco companies.

The model being followed here is the nearly $250-billion legal settlement 46 U.S. states came to with tobacco companies in 1998.

That sounds like a back-breaking sum, but it's spread out over 25 years, so it's just a small tax-hike. It allowed 46 preening attorneys-general to declare "victory" in the press against big, bad tobacco. But it actually was the consummation of the merger between Big Tobacco and Big Government. Those 46 U.S. states now depend on smokers to keep on smoking -- for at least 25 years -- or they won't get paid.

Two years ago, a $10-billion trial victory in Illinois by private citizens threatened to bankrupt Phillip Morris.

State attorneys-general from around the U.S. intervened in court -- on behalf of the cigarette company, desperately trying to stop Phillip Morris from going under. Didn't those private litigants understand the game? Take the golden eggs, but don't kill the goose!

Canada's governments have made the same calculation that every ruler has since King James wrote his puritanical Counterblaste to Tobacco in 1604, while filling his treasury with tobacco taxes: Tell people to stop smoking, but hope by God that they don't.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1495582/posts?page=2

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2133

RE "Smoking gun for suits," (Sept. 30): What in hell is going on? The federal government and the Supreme Court of Canada are going to allow lawsuits against tobacco companies because of health issues.

The Supreme Court hasn't got a clue or an ounce of intelligence to allow this kind of lawsuit unless they include the government of the day. Why? Because the government allows the sale of cigarettes to consumers and that brings in billions of dollars, and allows our citizens to suffer from diseases such as lung cancer. Until the Liberals ban the sale of products that cause this serious problem, this issue is utter stupidity.

So what else is new?

Nick Evanoff Kanata

(It's also utter hypocrisy)

http://ottsun.canoe.ca/Comment/Letters/2005/10/03/1245768.html

Cigarettes Worse

HAVE always thought it is interesting that the federal government can make marijuana illegal, and spend a lot of time and money fighting it with police raids and so on, but they won't do the same thing with cigarettes, which are totally worse for your health than marijuana. I don't smoke cigarettes or marijuana, but that doesn't mean that I don't see the hypocrisy of government.

Matthew Alexander

(See today's editorial.)

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/02/1245565.html

Teens not sold on butt law: Study -ON

By SHARON LEM, CP Mon, October 3, 2005

The laws dealing with selling cigarettes in Ontario to underaged teens aren't effective at preventing them from buying smokes, says a recent study.

Ontario minors are easily able to buy cigarettes by themselves or through a friend, a study of 737 occasional smoking teenagers and 2,050 regular smoking teens under the legal age of 19 indicates.

The study suggests a more comprehensive approach to restricting access may be required, including upping the price of cigarettes to discourage teen use, said Dr. Terry Sullivan, president and CEO of Cancer Care Ontario.

The study found the majority of occasional smokers (69%) and regular smokers (64%) say they were asked their age less than half of the time when trying to buy cigarettes.

The paper said occasional smokers usually buy their own cigarettes from a friend (60%) whereas the majority of regular smokers said they usually buy their own cigarettes (60%).

http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/Health/2005/10/03/1245868-sun.html

Point taken

So the thrust of your argument in your Sept. 30 editorial "They just don't know how to quit," is: If the government really cared about the effects of tobacco, then like marijuana, it would ban the sale of tobacco thus stopping its effects. Additionally, anyone seen smoking a tobacco product must be using an illegal substance. No government has the balls to do that! But your reasoning is valid.

Scott Ellison Bowmanville

(Let's not even get into which is more dangerous, pot or tobacco ...)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's the next target?

As a non-smoker, I applaud the government for going after the legally operating entities of Big Tobacco through big lawsuits. How dare this legally produced, legally distributed, legally consumed and legally taxed product be so bad for us? What is the governments' timetable to go after Molson's, Seagram's, McDonald's, Pepsi and Frito-Lay? Will these industries be deemed illegal and shut down because they are all so bad for us? It's very clear that government is rapidly spinning out of control. How long before you or your business land in their sights?

G. Williams Toronto

(We predict the next step will be junk food taxes)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/03/1245763.html

Very dangerous precedent

Re: Utterly hypocritical (Sept. 30 editorial).

If the government is genuinely concerned about the ill-effects of smoking on the public's health -- taxes be damned -- they should just make tobacco use illegal. Period.

As your editorial points out, the ruling in B.C. sets a very dangerous precedent for other legitimate companies selling legal products, such as alcohol.

I made a personal choice to smoke and I am certainly not going to sue the tobacco company for a decision I made and I really don't see any reason why the government should do so -- I would think that the taxes I have spent (and continue to spend) on cigarettes would cover any health issues I may suffer in the future.

Mrs C. McLeod Winnipeg

And then some.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Make smokers pay, too

I agree that the tobacco companies should be held financially responsible for health-care costs associated with smoking (first hand as well as second hand). But they should not be totally responsible financially. Why not charge the client (smoker) for part of the costs as well, as they are ultimately responsible for putting that cigarette in their mouth and inhaling and exhaling? If adults can say, "Oh, the tobacco company made me smoke so make them pay for my health care," then how are we to teach our children about being responsible for everything they do?

Stacey Derkson Winnipeg

Smokers are paying through their teeth.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/02/1245597.html

Big Tobacco doesn't owe a penny

National Post Monday, October 03, 2005

The Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in a major tobacco case, decided Thursday, is not so much a victory for governments, patients and anti-smoking crusaders as it is a vindication of the right of legislatures to make public policy.

The justices, who were unanimous, did not pass judgment on the merits of British Columbia's planned litigation against tobacco companies to recover the health care costs of smokers. They merely said that if the B.C. government wanted to pass a law giving itself the right to sue, it was within Victoria's constitutional power to do so. The court did not presume to prejudge what the outcome of such suits would be.

Now it will be up to the B.C. government -- which initiated this court case four years ago, and which has been trying for nine years to win the right to sue tobacco manufacturers -- to prove successfully to a court that cigarette companies deceived British Columbians into smoking and that, as a result, the province incurred at least $10-billion in additional health costs for duped smokers.

Proving that case will be no easy task. Unlike B.C.'s first tobacco lawsuit act, which was struck down nearly five years ago, the one upheld on Thursday does not stack the deck against the tobacco companies. Under the current law, the rules of evidence have not been changed -- as they had been in the first version -- to make it harder for cigarette makers to defend themselves. The most recent version does not attempt to extend the B.C. government's grasp beyond provincial boundaries, nor does it permit suits on behalf of people the government cannot demonstrate had been made ill by smoking or second-hand smoke, as its first law did.

Other provincial governments have rushed to line up behind B.C. with plans of their own to sue for billions, now that the Supreme Court has spoken. But like the B.C. government, they are being disingenuous.

In the United States, where tobacco taxes have traditionally been low, state governments may have been justified in seeking compensation from tobacco companies for past health costs -- as they did successfully in the 1990s. But in Canada, governments have always made more money from the sale of cigarettes than the tobacco manufacturers themselves -- many times more. Last year, for instance, Ottawa and the provinces took in more than $9-billion in taxes on smokes; the combined profits of Canada's cigarette companies were just over $1-billion. (Most years, the ratio is on the order of eight-to-one.)

In other words, Canadian governments are already the biggest beneficiaries of Canadian smokers' addiction. And if they directed their excise and sales taxes on tobacco to health care, instead of general revenues, they would already have recouped any additional costs to the health system imposed by smoking-related illnesses. The B.C. government claims it is out of pocket $10-billion in health costs over the past 50 years. But in the past 35, Canadian governments have collected more than $170-billion in tobacco taxes. B.C.'s share of that is more than $25-billion, far more than it claims it's owed. It is not the tobacco companies' fault that successive B.C. governments have spent that windfall on other programs.

The Supreme Court of Canada was correct to uphold the principle of legislative primacy in policy-making. It will now fall to B.C.'s judges to deal fairly with tobacco companies in the litigation now set to follow. As we see it, those companies don't owe Victoria, or anyone else, a penny.

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/comment/story.html?id=4e0bdee9-683f-4576-bcee-06020fd96af1

Lawsuit smokescreen

Government is senior partner in tobacco industry

By Ezra Levant Mon, October 3, 2005

Let's get something straight. The government does not want Canadians to stop smoking.

If they were serious, they could ban tobacco tomorrow, just as they ban dozens of other drugs, just as they banned alcohol during Prohibition.

That's what the government would do if they really believed their own anti-smoking rhetoric. They don't believe it, because they are actually the senior partner in the tobacco industry.

So what should we make of last week's Supreme Court decision to permit provinces to sue tobacco companies to recover health care costs? Not much.

The model being followed here is the nearly $250-billion legal settlement 46 U.S. states came to with tobacco companies in 1998.

Two years ago, a $10-billion trial victory in Illinois by private citizens threatened to bankrupt Phillip Morris.

Levant is Publisher of the Western Standard

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Levant_Ezra/2005/10/02/1245555.html

SP stance champions government intrusion -SK

Monday October 3, 2005

"A recent SP (StarPhoenix) editorial commenting on the Dakota Dunes casino agreement could not resist chastising the government for not taking the opportunity to bludgeon SIGA (Sask. Indian Gaming Authority) into abiding by the province's smoking ban.

The SP has shown itself to be an unrelenting apologist for the smoking ban and an unabashed cheerleader for government in its role as nanny. However, advocating government to take on the additional role of bully simply is wrong.

SIGA obviously has not been impressed by the exaggerated and largely unproven claims that secondhand smoke is a serious health concern and, judging by the success of its casinos, a large portion of the population remains similarly unimpressed.

The FSIN (Federation of Sask. Indian Nations) and SIGA have taken the position that most, if not all, bars and bingo halls would take, if only given the opportunity. In age-restricted venues, allow adults to make their own choices without intrusive government legislation.

The FSIN has made it quite clear that it has chosen to resist the wave of anti-smoking hysteria and will continue to do so.

Get over it!"

http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/letters/story.html?id=9bc46b5f-a035-4745-aac7-ea7ae6dae1b2

Your own choices

The Supreme Court of Canada has cleared the way for people to sue tobacco companies because of the damaging effects. What's next? Lawsuits against liquor companies because of the hangovers and missed work time? Or, lawsuits against potato chip companies because their products make people fat? Unbelievable. If you make the choice to consume products that are bad for you, you live with the consequences.

M. Berry

(Governments are addicted to tobacco money)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close the factories

My suggestion to the tobacco companies in Canada would be to simply stop the production and distribution of cigarettes. It can't possibly be a violation of the law to halt the sale of a legal product and it would be difficult to sue a company that has willfully withdrawn a substance that upsets so many people by its mere presence. The money saved by not having to pay the lawsuit(s) could be used in part to compensate employees until they find new jobs or subscribe to government assistance. As well, farmers have been exploring alternative crops for years so they shouldn't pose a problem. What could possibly go wrong?

Brian Marshall Pickering

(Why would they shut down when there's little chance of government suits succeeding?)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/03/1246946.html

McGuinty Government Helping Students Kick The Habit -ON

Leave The Pack Behind Program Builds On Proven Results

Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson today announced the McGuinty government is expanding the fight against smoking among post-secondary students by providing $600,000 to further support the Leave The Pack Behind program.

Thirteen per cent of smokers using the program have quit, -- twice the rate of five to seven per cent of smokers who quit unaided.

http://www.mhp.gov.on.ca/english/news100305.asp

If Government Cared

RE: "UTTER hypocrisy," editorial, Oct. 3. Well said. If governments truly cared about the health of the citizens they would have banned smoking years and years ago. What's next? The Big Liquor companies? When will governments take Big Liquor to court? After all, is it not the liquor industry's fault that there are drunk drivers?

D. McTavish

(Drunk drivers are to blame.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE MOST recent study estimates the cost of treating smoking-related disease at $4 billion this year. This year the federal and provincial governments' combined take from tobacco taxes will be over $7.5 billion. So the myth of smokers being a huge drain on the heath-care budget can be replaced with the truth that smokers actually subsidize the system. The difference could pay for the patch or nicotine gum for every smoker in Canada with enough left over to fund increased educational programs.

Eric Harvey

(Coughing up cash.)

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/03/1246931.html

Smokers get prod from Capital Health -AB

Tue, October 4, 2005

Capital Health is taking a "gentle" approach to enforcing a sweeping smoking ban that went into effect at all its properties yesterday, a spokesman said.

"Any individuals who continue to smoke on Capital Health properties are encouraged to review the Capital Health policy," Mark Dixon said.

"We don't have the ability to assign special staff to police that. It's very much an honour type of process."

Staff and security who notice people smoking are asked to point out the new smoke-free rules.

At the Royal Alexandra Hospital, which in July was the first health centre to go smoke-free, patient Joshua Damstrom yesterday said he has no plans to butt out on hospital grounds.

"I won't. I will keep coming outside for cigarettes," he said.

The 22-year-old was attached to an IV and wasn't able to walk off hospital property.

Damstrom ventured outside a few times for cigarettes yesterday, but by late afternoon had not been asked by hospital staff to butt out.

Dixon said response to the new smoke-free rules has largely been positive.

The policy bans patients, visitors and staff from lighting up outside on the grounds and in the parkades in the Capital Health Region's 16 hospitals, 34 continuing-care facilities and 22 public and community health centres.

Smoking rooms used by palliative care and psychiatric patients in some facilities will be phased out by the spring.

Free nicotine gum, patches and other smoking cessation aids are on hand for patients. Help is also available for hospital workers who want to quit smoking.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonton/2005/10/04/1247625-sun.html

Family defends tobacco crown -ON

Chris Thomas & Daniel Pearce - Times-Reformer Tuesday October 04, 2005

Rick and Nellie Verbruggen have the honour of being the Ontario Tobacco Champions in the 50th year of the competition.

The Verbruggens successfully defended the title they won last year during judging at the Norfolk County Fair. But it wasn�t easy.

The Tillsonburg area couple edged out former winners Brenda and Randy Godelie by a single point to retain their title.

�That was very close,� Nellie said. �My face is warm (from the tension).�

Although the competition was tougher, Rick said the result was even more satisfying. For their efforts, the Verbruggens won more than $1,500 in prize money.

Because the tobacco harvest is still going on, there were only seven entries.

But judge Mark DeVos of the Canadian Tobacco Research Foundation said the competition was close.

The Verbruggens grew a total of 93 acres, their largest crop ever. It was Nellie�s job to set aside promising looking tobacco during grading. Then it took Rick about 12 hours to pick out the samples for display.

�It was more difficult this year because we were so busy doing other things,� he said.

However, the Verbruggens said the competition is worthwhile.

�With the way things are going in our industry, this is the only place to show off something you enjoy doing,� Rick said.

A second-generation grower for the past 19 seasons, he acknowledged the uncertainty in tobacco growing. However, his sons want to follow in his footsteps.

�As long as there is a tobacco industry, I want to grow,� said the Verbruggens� 19-year-old son Dennis.

The junior tobacco champion was Brad Deleye, RR 2 Delhi.

Tara Tanchak of Townsend Fruit Farm was named apple champion for the second year in a row.

The 30-year-old walked through her father�s 400-acre orchard northeast of Simcoe to select the best apples to put on display.

Growing a good crop wasn�t easy this year, Tanchak told the Reformer, because of the hot, dry weather and �a bit of hail� the farm received.

Fruit chairperson Lorraine Vogel said judges look for uniformity in size, shape, and colour. Apples, Vogel said, should also �be true to type� and without blemishes.

Entrants are also judged on the attractiveness of their display. Tanchak created a harvest scene using a human-sized doll she created and a bushel basket.

�It�s a lot of hours� to enter fruit in the fair, said Vogel, who has been a contestant in the past. �You have to keep disease and insects off the apples.�

Tanchak wins almost $900 for finishing first in all eight sections and second in two of those.

She was one of two adult competitors.

Winning in the junior categories were Brooke McKay, 12, of Waterford and Brad Vogel, 12 (Lorraine Vogel�s son).

http://www.simcoereformer.ca/story.php?id=188049

I'm ready to sue

I will watch with interest the outcome of the provincial claims against Big Tobacco. I sincerely hope they win huge amounts of cash through the courts by proving the "manufacturers and their lobby" deliberately and knowingly sold us on a product that was both harmful and addictive, so that I in turn can sue the provincial and federal goverments for a ton of money for keeping such a deadly product legally on sale -- even though, as per their own argument, this product was pushing the health care system to the brink of bankruptcy. As a non-smoker now, but one who was hooked on this dangerous product (kept legal by both governments) for over 30 years, I should be in for a bundle. Anyone care to join me?

Gerry Daniels Ajax

(Go for it)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/05/1248867.html

Depressing options

WHEN ALL the lawsuits go through and the people who freely damaged their health put the tobacco companies out of business with multibillion-dollar settlements, are the smokers who can't find any more cancer sticks going to sue the newly rich upper class of hacking ex-smokers for robbing them of their right to hurt themselves? Or will they just be mad because they didn't get sick soon enough to cash in?

C. Cary

(Depressing options.)

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/10/05/1248845.html

Deaths from diabetes expected to soar 44%

By Melissa Leong Wednesday, October 5th, 2005

Of the 388 million who will die from chronic diseases over the next 10 years, about half will suffer needless deaths because they've smoked too much, exercised too little and ate unhealthily, according to a ground-breaking new report by the World Health Organization.

The analysis released today projects that in the next decade, deaths in Canada from chronic diseases will increase by 15 per cent to more than two million, and most strikingly, deaths from diabetes will soar by 44 per cent.

"The area that is changing the most and the most quickly is diabetes," said Dr. JoAnne Epping-Jordan, senior program adviser, chronic diseases and health promotion for the WHO.

"Diabetes is very closely related to (being) overweight and obesity and we are seeing in many countries including Canada, that despite the public health's successes, rates of overweight are continuing to rise."

The report entitled Preventing Chronic Diseases: a vital investment featured nine countries, including high-income nations such as Canada and the United Kingdom, and low-income countries like Nigeria.

Its purpose, Epping-Jordan said, was to urge global action to prevent chronic disease which could save the lives of 36 million people who would otherwise be dead by 2015.

It showed how chronic disease hinders economic growth and reduces the development potential of countries.

"At the global level, we are undergoing a rapid transition," she said in an interview from Geneva.

"In many low- and middle-income countries, they are on the cusp of an explosion of chronic disease. We're seeing in the future, their health systems will be overwhelmed."

In China, for example, the country is projected to lose 80 million people to chronic diseases over the next decade and $558 billion in hindered economic growth from premature deaths due to heart disease, stroke and diabetes.

The report said Canada stands to lose $9 billion from premature deaths.

The WHO report acknowledged Canada has already made important gains in reducing chronic disease death rates. It estimates that from 1970 to 2000, more than a million cardiovascular disease deaths were averted in Canada.

"(Canada) is thought to be a sort of role model for many countries," Epping-Jordan said.

-- CanWest News Service

Chronic diseases around the world

Here are some facts about chronic diseases around the world.

Each year at least:

* 4.9 million people die from tobacco use.

* 2.6 million people die as a result of being overweight or obese.

* 4.4 million people die due to raised cholesterol levels.

* 7.1 million people die because of high blood pressure.

www.winnipegfreepress.com

Both legal and lethal

SO FAR this year, Canadians have smoked almost 26 billion cigarettes. That�s what the running counter says on the Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada website. For tobacco companies, the smoke-o-meter is a testament to galloping sales figures. For governments already alarmed by galloping health-care costs, the counter doubles as a doomsday clock.

Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada gave the government of British Columbia � and by extension, other provinces � the constitutional clearance to try to recoup some of those costs from tobacco manufacturers. In a sweeping piece of legislation first drafted in 1998, B.C. declared open season on Big Tobacco, not only enabling a lawsuit but setting the ground rules for it. The companies appealed the legislation and now they have lost. This does not mean B.C. has won the fundamental argument; it has merely won the case that it has a case at all. So the real litigation is yet to begin in earnest.

The court decision has raised all kinds of questions of principle. Purists will argue governments are in no position to point the finger, since they, too, make a mint (in tax revenue) off smokers� addictions. Besides, tobacco companies are selling a legal product and it�s not as if people haven�t had fair warning that cigarettes are bad for them. Banning the product, as opposed to bankrupting the suppliers, would seem to be the more principled stand.

Of course, we all know prohibition would be a bonanza for smugglers and no panacea at all for smokers. Keeping smoking legal � hypocritical as it may be � is by far the better course of action. The practical question is: How do we control the damage and the costs, and who should be responsible for them?

Arguably, smokers are already forking over a health premium of sorts by paying taxes through the nose every time they buy a pack. But that revenue comes nowhere near covering the cost of lung cancer and heart disease, just to name a couple of ailments linked to this bad habit. Hiking cigarette taxes is not an option. They are already as high as they can go without driving the lion�s share of the business into the arms of smugglers.

Governments � i.e. taxpayers, including the majority who don�t smoke � are paying through the nose, too. Between chronic care and critical care for smokers and former smokers, not to mention the lost productivity along the way, the bill is in the billions.

So is it fair that a third party � i.e. the manufacturer � should be held liable, as a matter of tort law, for some of the damage done by this product? Ultimately, that�s what this case is all about.

Naysayers like to draw comparisons between cigarettes and alcohol, both of which are legally sold, heavily taxed and the source of untold ravages in our society. Shall we sue breweries next for abetting alcoholism? What about the fast-food industry? Will governments go after it as well to recoup the enormous health costs incurred by obesity? Whatever happened to personal responsibility in all this?

These are all fair questions. Yet, in our view, cigarettes belong in a league of their own. They have no health benefits whatsoever, even consumed in moderation. There is no safe level of smoking. The same cannot be said of alcohol. As for food, it is a necessity � unlike booze or smokes � although it, too, should be consumed in moderation. User error, or excess, is what makes alcohol and food deadly.

But in and of itself, the cigarette is a lethal product. That�s the difference. You might still argue that people already know this when they first take up smoking. Nobody makes them smoke. This is true, and smokers will pay all their lives, if not with their lives, for this decision.

Yet if smokers know the dangers of smoking, does it not follow that tobacco firms also know the perils of selling? Nobody makes them sell cigarettes. Shouldn�t they, too, have to pay the consequences? Or at the very least, expect lawsuits as an occupational hazard?

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Editorial/457427.html

Let's sue everyone! -ON

Wed October 5, 2005

The decision by the Supreme Court to allow the B.C. government to sue tobacco companies to recover tobacco-related health costs sets a precedent that could generate tidal waves for many industries.

How long will it take until some health ministry sues the fast food and snack food industries to recover the cost of treating obesity-related problems? Burger, fries, doughnut, sandwich, cola and candy providers, beware!

Car crashes kill hundreds and injure thousands, so the auto industry must be added. Beer, wine and whisky cause many medical conditions, so add the booze makers to the must-sue list. Why not go after the illegal drug trade while you're at it?

I do not dispute that tobacco products are a health hazard, but I think that the user (or abuser) of a product should bear some responsibility. The proof of tobacco's danger has been there for enough years that no one can say that they didn't know what they were doing.

He who diggeth his own grave should not feel that others are obligated to pull him out at no cost when he falleth in.

Robert Drummond Exeter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Truth is pesticides hazardous to health

In response to the letter, Pesticide Untruths (Sept. 23), by Henry Valkenburg, president of Great Lakes Lawn Care, Inc:

The truth is the Ontario College of Family Physicians (not exactly a pressure group of malcontent activists) recently conducted a thorough review of more than 250 in-depth studies around the world on the effects of pesticides and concluded that pesticides are linked to prostate, brain and pancreatic cancer, leukemia, non-Hodgkins lymphoma and many other ailments.

The truth is pesticide use for cosmetic purposes has already been banned in more progressive municipalities.

The truth is children are most vulnerable to health problems caused by pesticides.

The truth is government regulatory agencies rely on studies provided by the pesticide industry.

The truth is it's only common sense that spraying and spreading tonnes of these poisons throughout our neighbourhoods year after year can't possibly benefit any life form, except maybe lawn care company presidents.

Vic Roschkov London

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Opinion/Letters/

No sympathy for tobacco companies

The Woodstock Sentinel-Review Brad Needham Tuesday October 04, 2005

Tobacco companies must be choking

Posted at 3:09 pm by looped_ca
Make a comment

Thursday, September 22, 2005

In the World news

Charities pay to work bingo�s -AB

In the second month of the smoking bylaw some of Edmonton's charities are being asked to pay back the losses in their pooling. This is how this works. Bingo associations are the medium with which charities do business. If the association closes all charities within must pay losses or reap the benefits. Because of the smoking bylaw many associations pools are in trouble as customers are not coming to play bingo and if they do they come just before the regular games begin and go outside to smoke when a break comes. The result is less sales of early bird, bonanza, odd even, satellite and other extra games, various associations may have. These extra games are a large part of where the money going to the charities comes from. This situation is only going to get worse as winter comes on and the few customers we have don�t come because they don�t want to smoke outdoors. A.G.L.C. has bingo on a fixed fee which covers the expenses, the remainder is the amount going to the pool to be divided at the end of each month. Even a look at association books says things are o.k. but the pool (return to charities) is not. The only thing that will help the charities is if city council pays us for our losses or the smoking bylaw is amended to allow a closed off non-smoking room as a number of halls already have. My charity has already stopped donations to children�s programs. I know of one charity in my association that has already pulled out, many more to come I think. This will result in more bingo hall closures, job losses and more charities not being able to meet the needs of the community, higher costs to the consumer of children�s programs therefore less children in programs as parents wrestle with rising costs. Charities do not have and may not use charitable monies to hire lawyers and do battle with governments, we need big time help.

Jerry Deboer

President Edmonton Block Parent Association

V.P. Edmonton West Bingo Association (Palms Bingo)

Smoking petition falls short -AB

By lana michelin Advocate staff Sep 10 2005

A summertime slump in bar business has fizzled a petition launched by smoking advocates trying to stop Red Deer's no-smoking bylaw.

The Central Alberta Business for Choice group managed to gather 4,852 signatures against a bylaw that will prohibit smoking in all public places, including bars, bingo halls, casinos, taxis, restaurants, and private clubs - even those with outdoor patios.

The petition was presented to the municipality last month.

But the number of signatures fell well short of the 10 per cent of the city's population required by the terms of the Municipal Government Act.

As a result, the Smoke free bylaw will proceed as previously approved, taking effect on June 1, 2006, said city manager Norbert Van Wyk.

Sheree Davies, spokesperson for Central Alberta Business for Choice, said the group predicted it would have a hard time raising signatures during the summer months. "The majority of our patrons are not there."

Bar business drops off during July and August, and charitable groups that fundraise through bingos are less available because of vacations, Davies added.

She predicted the drive would have been successful if done in October. But the group's petition drive couldn't wait for the fall because provincial rules require the petition to be presented within 60 days of when the bylaw was passed last June.

While this is a setback for the group, Davies said "we're still fighting the bylaw."

Group members are consulting with experts to see what other options are available to defeat the legislation.

More information on the city's Smoke Free Bylaw is available from the Inspections and Licensing Department or online at www.reddeer.ca

http://www.reddeeradvocate.com/portals-code/searchd.cgi

Is tourism in crisis?-NS

By ROGER TAYLOR Business Columnist

HAS TOURISM increased or declined this year? Apparently, the answer depends on a number of factors, including who you ask.

While it is based on anecdotal evidence, there are few in the tourist business who would dispute the widely held belief that tourist activity in Nova Scotia has declined this year. But numbers released by the province's Tourism Department seem to indicate the number of visitors has actually risen two per cent this year over last.

That apparent conflict has a lot of people scratching their heads and led some to openly question the accuracy of the official figures. In fact, some people are wondering if there shouldn't be an official investigation of how the government comes up with the tourist numbers it reports.

On Monday, I received a five-page letter from an anonymous reader who claims to own and operate a business that has catered to the tourism sector for the past 18 years. Never in all that time has the writer seen tourism in such terrible shape.

The writer is by no means alone in his or her analysis of this year's tourist season.

Based on the writer's personal experience, the tourist industry was off by 10 to 15 per cent last year. And this year things are worse, the writer claims, off more than 10 per cent from "the disastrous year in 2004."

"Quite frankly, few in the (tourist) industry believe the Department of Tourism . . . numbers."

To help back up that point, the writer points to tourism revenue figures published in the media that suggested revenue was down 30 to 50 per cent in the Yarmouth area. Using the Tourism Department's own figures, the writer says that visits to Fortress Louisbourg have declined by 25 per cent since 2002. From 2002 to June 2005, tourist visits were down 17 per cent at the Halifax Citadel. The Bell Museum in Baddeck has experienced a 23 per cent decline in visits from 2002 to 2004 and a further six per cent decline this year. Visits to the Cape Breton Highlands Park, according to the provincial government numbers, were down last year and down an additional 11 per cent this year.

"I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to hear my customers tell me that their business is down 10, 20 even 30 per cent and then read � that the Department of Tourism reports that tourism is off only five per cent. Speak to motel and business owners in Baddeck, Cheticamp, Yarmouth and Lunenburg. They'll give you a far truer picture of the state of the tourism industry than the . . . spin issued by the Department of Tourism," my unnamed correspondent wrote.

Although I don't know this person, I tend to believe what they have to say because it backs up some of what I have been hearing from others across the province.

"Clearly things have to change or else the tourism industry will go the same way as the Atlantic fishing industry, 15 years ago. This is an industry in crisis," the letter said.

And things could get worse, the writer said, pointing out that in the coming years, U.S. citizens will require a U.S. passport if they want to re-enter their country and that little bit of inconvenience may be enough to discourage a significant number of American visitors from venturing across the border.

The letter writer blames several factors for the poor season, including fuel prices and the rise of the Canadian dollar. But there are some other factors over which the province has a little more control.

For instance, the writer says, roads must be upgraded as soon as possible, especially those leading to tourist destinations. Nova Scotia has "one of the most poorly maintained road system in the country, if not the worst," the letter says, a familiar refrain from tourism operators in Cape Breton about the Cabot Trail being dotted with potholes and road sags, which discourage anyone from driving their car or RV over the famous highway.

The writer also says there are too many motels and hotels outside of metro stuck in the 1960s.

They offer outdated accommodation, which fails to meet the expectations of modern travellers.

"Through its lack of new investment, the industry has clearly signalled that it does not have confidence in the future of the tourism sector."

The writer suggests there could be tax relief for new construction or modernization of motels across the province.

As a final note, the writer has stopped investing in his or her.

"If the tourism numbers do not improve next year, then I will have no choice but to close my business.

""You cannot grow a business in an industry that is shrinking eight per cent or more per year."

Write to me with your own views on Nova Scotia tourism and let me know if you believe the tourism glass is half-empty or half-full.

rtaylor@herald.ca

http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2005/09/13/fBusiness248.raw.html

Heavy Drinking, Levels of Stress High Among University Students - Canadian Campus Survey

TORONTO, Sept. 15 /CNW/ - Rates of cigarette smoking are in decline among university students but rates of binge drinking and psychological distress remain high according to the results of the 2004 Canadian Campus Survey released today by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH).

The 2004 survey shows that rates of cigarette smoking and the use of hallucinogens have declined since the survey was last conducted in 1998 (4% and 3%, respectively) but as these behaviours have declined, results also show that some problematic trends still prevail. Results of the survey show that 32% of undergraduates reported patterns of harmful drinking. Though this rate has not increased since the survey was last conducted, these numbers are high and only tell part of the story. Consequences such as alcohol-related harms were evident in the survey with 10% of those surveyed reporting alcohol- related assault, 9.8% reporting alcohol-related sexual harassment and 14.1% reporting that they had experienced unplanned sexual relations due to alcohol. According to Dr. Adlaf, research scientist at CAMH and associate professor, Department of Public Health Sciences and Psychiatry, University of Toronto, who conducted the study along with colleagues across Canada, "Reports of alcohol-related harms are not trivial. Indeed, the 10% of students who report such consequences represent some 64,000 students."

Another troubling outcome in the survey involves the mental health of Canadian students. Rates of students reporting psychological stress have remained high at 30%. Indicators in the survey show that respondents reported that they experienced lack of sleep, were under constant stress and exhibited feelings of unhappiness and depression.

These feelings may have negative consequences on the health and academic success of students. According to co-investigator Dr. Andr�e Demers, professor, Department of Sociology Universit� de Montr�al, "Students living under these conditions tend to exhibit lack of concentration, absenteeism and many leave school before they graduate," she says. In addition, the rates of psychological distress were found to be higher among women than men (33.5% vs. 23.9%).Other Survey highlights include:

- 31.6% of undergraduates reported at least one indicator of dependent drinking such as being unable to stop, failing to perform normal everyday activities or needing a drink first thing in the morning.

- The most commonly used illicit drug was cannabis, used by 51.4% of students during their lifetime, 32.1% during the past 12 months, and 16.7% during the 30 days before the survey.

- 61.5% of undergraduates have bet or spent money on at least one gambling activity since the beginning of the school year.

Results of the survey may indicate that universities themselves may have a role in the behaviour of students. One-quarter of students surveyed said that they had taken advantage of low priced promotions at campus bars and believe that alcohol policies on their campus are not enforced.

According to co-investigator Dr. Louis Gliksman, Director of Social, Prevention and Health Policy Research at CAMH and Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, universities have to assume a larger role in the presence of alcohol on their campuses, "While we are aware that some universities prohibit alcohol in residences and that many have begun 'dry frosh week,' the numbers show that more needs to be done on the part of universities together with the communities of which the universities are part."

The Canadian Campus Survey surveyed 6,282 full-time students from 40 universities across Canada. Funded by the Canadian Institute of Health Research, the survey aims to understand the social and environmental determinants of hazardous drinking, drug use and psychological well-being among students.

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health is a Pan American Health Organization and World Health Organization Collaborating Centre and a teaching hospital fully affiliated with the University of Toronto.

For further information: or to schedule interviews with survey investigators, please contact Michael Torres, media relations CAMH, at (416) 595-6015.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/15/c0138.html

Trampling rights wrong course for smoking ban -AB

Smoking - Re: Let's ban smoking now and save lives, Naomi Lakritz, Sept. 8

Bruce Korol For The Calgary Herald Thursday, September 15, 2005

After appealing to emotion by citing numbers and painting alarming pictures of smoke-filled restaurants and pubs Naomi Lakritz asks: "Why should we wait even one more day to stop poisoning these people."

However, instead of wondering whether the 2008 date was politically expedient for city hall or if it should be moved up at all we should be asking if this popular smoking ban is appropriate in the first place.

For most people, including smokers, this smoking-ban debate has been over for a while so why rehash something already long decided?

In his famous vindication of moral liberty Lysander Spooner explained that "vices are not crimes" and in the current age of politically correct crusades his words couldn't be more prescient.

If we are talking about the continuing failed war on drugs, the impending war on obesity or the current smoking bans the common thread is state coercion and people's unwavering faith in the benevolence of government.

Robyn Hefferton refers to the fact that 90 per cent of people she approaches sign her petition but this should have little bearing on whether this ban is right or wrong. As history has shown us, the majority frequently errs. So why trust their will even if it is something as seemingly innocuous as a trendy smoking ban?

Because other municipalities are hopping on the bandwagon and we could be stuck in the middle of two provinces that ban tobacco shouldn't play a part in what we do and it certainly shouldn't be the raison d'etre of the smoking ban.

The story of Hefferton's friend who quit her job is touching but unfortunately for her the fact remains that a privately owned and operated business should be free to choose whether to be smoking or non-smoking.

While open to the public it is not a "public place" where democratic rule or government laws should govern smoking policies. The employees can choose to work there or elsewhere and the patrons have no right to force their agenda on the establishment.

Ergo, contrary to what Hefferton says this is, intentionally or unintentionally, about property rights versus state control. When the state can dictate how you run your business or what patrons can or can not do by force, then it inevitably becomes about state control.

The fact that 75 per cent of Calgarians are non-smokers is a moot point but if they really wanted non-smoking venues then it should follow that restaurants and bars would cater to this demand and thus this legislation isn't needed.

Robyn Hefferton and Naomi Lakritz may have an earnest desire to see people kick the smoking habit, but using legalized force to trample on private property rights is the wrong course to take.

As the Speaker of the House of Representatives in 1886, Thomas Reed, said, "one of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."

So cry for Heather Crowe and others affected by tobacco but cry harder for the loss of liberty and freedom.

Bruce Korol is a recent law graduate from the University of Alberta.

http://www.canada.com/search/story.html?id=72987cb3-9c76-4127-b58b-f5b75daaffb8

Smoking leads to the morgue -AB

September 16, 2005

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Dear Editor, The debate continues and those who care to do so share their opinions about smoking rules and regulations with the rest of us so I thought I'd add my bit.

As I was reading the pros and cons about the smoking bans in today's (Sept. 9)Saint City letters section I had what I call an oxymoronic moment as I couldn't decide to laugh or cry.

I had just returned home from the Cross Cancer Institute where I (a non- smoker) had taken my husband (another non- smoker) to have his 48-hour intravenous chemotherapy treatment discontinued for this particular session. The last breath of rain cleansed "fresh air" we both had as we entered the Cross was heavily tinged with someone else's left over cigarette smoke. We held our breath as we moved, as quickly as he could, through the entrance of the hospital and our next breath was then of hospital odor.

With the thought of "never mind" when we leave the odor of cigarette smoke will have waived off and the fresh rain scent would then be in the air and we would be able to cleanse ourselves of hospital aroma. Hope soon faded, as guess what? The first "fresh breath" we experienced as we left the Cross was "perfumed" with another benefactor's cigarette smoke.

Not to be daunted, I was still able to maintain my "sick" sense of "black humor" as I remembered that the patient's of one Edmonton hospital actually sign off the units to the "morgue." That means that they have gone outside for a smoke.

Maybe that is an indication that the hospital administration is cost conscious and has learned that if they provide a demanded smoking area and use the morgue entrance area for that purpose then they won't have far to move some people when the cigarette smoking finally gets them.

Helen Dempsey-Simmons St. Albert

http://saintcitynews.advancedpublishing.com/

Groups making alternative plans for bingo hall closure Sept. 28 -ON

Published in Section A, page 3 in the Friday, September 16, 2005

By DEREK ABMA Staff Writer

Organizations that have been using Johnstown's Bingo International to raise money are making alternative plans in light of the facility's pending closure after September 28.

The South Grenville Minor Hockey Association was making about $23,000 a year from holding events at Bingo International, said association president Mike Spencer.

Spencer said parents had already paid their $250 registration fee for the coming season, plus a $50 deposit that would have been returned if the parent worked two bingo sessions over the year.

He said that deposit is now non-refundable, essentially increasing the overall fee to $300. Spencer said he does not think this will pose a major problem for most parents, the majority of whom didn't end up working the bingos to get their money back.

"There might be a couple (parents) that really, truly went and worked the bingos because they needed the $50 back," Spencer said. "But for the most part, I think they understand the situation."

Spencer said next year's registration fee could increase beyond $300, but he said South Grenville currently has the lowest minor hockey fees in the region.

Girls Incorporated of Upper Canada, which provides various leadership and skills-development programs for girls aged six to 18, cut back its budget for the rest of the year because of the bingo's closure.

Donna Perrin, executive director of the group, said about $4,500 has been cut, which is what it stands to lose from not having its twice-a-month bingos during the last three months of this year.

She said there were budget reductions made to things such as marketing and travel, but programs for girls this year will remain intact and no staff reductions were necessary.

"The impact on our programs (this year) will be negligible," Perrin said.

She said next year's budget is more uncertain, but she hopes to tap various agencies and foundations to make up any funding shortfall.

Perrin said the United Way of Leeds and Grenville was not willing to waive the provision that affiliated members like Girls Incorporated not campaign for funds during the United Way's annual campaign, ongoing until December 2.

Judi Baril, executive director of the United Way of Leeds and Grenville, said the agency does not conduct bingos itself, but some of the service clubs that make donations to the United Way do.

She said it's unknown at this time what kind of impact Bingo International's closing will have on the United Way's fundraising.

Steve MacArthur, owner of Bingoland Brockville, said he's been contacted by about 15 agencies that were using Bingo International and now want to conduct bingos at his facility.

"If things work out, we may be able to accommodate almost all of them that have come in to see us," MacArthur said.

Perrin said Girls Incorporated is hoping to put on bingos at the Brockville facility, but she has been told there's a lengthy waiting list.

Spencer said the South Grenville Minor Hockey Association has requested some spots at Bingoland but has not received a response.

MacArthur said some of his existing clients have offered to give up time slots to provide time for agencies that were using Bingo International.

MacArthur said he's also been in touch with officials from the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation about making changes that could help the bingo squeeze in more participants. He would not say exactly what he had in mind.

The Bingoland owner said while the demise of Bingo International is unfortunate, it makes it easier for Bingoland Brockville to survive the provincewide smoking ban, affecting indoor public places and coming into effect next May.

"With the smoking ban coming up, what we probably would've lost in clientele and volume through the business for the current charities, we'll probably be stabilized from Bingo International closing down," he said.

John Goodwin, owner of Bingo International, has said the coming smoking ban is one of the reasons that facility is closing.

http://newsfeed.recorder.ca/cgi-bin/LiveIQue.acgi$rec=15050

Smoke-free -QC

Letter Friday, September 16, 2005

Montreal bar owners who object to the planned smoking ban should consider this: There are many places in Montreal where I and people like me will not go because of the smoke.

We will start going to these establishments when the ban comes into force. These business owners are short-sighted. This is a matter of health and safety.

Roy Eappen Montreal

http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/letters/story.html?id=8bc24636-ceab-4239-a418-03466cb76ec2

Smoking remains burning issue -MB

By Marc Zienkiewicz Friday September 16, 2005

Lac du Bonnet Leader � Smoking may now be banned in all indoor public places and tobacco is more expensive than ever in Manitoba, but smoking continues to be a problem for the Town of Lac du Bonnet.

CAO Colleen Johnson told the Leader last week that LdB Senior School students smoking on the sidewalk in front of the school is once again a concern now that the 2005/06 school year has begun.

�We�ll be meeting with (Senior School officials) to discuss it,� Johnson said at the Sept. 8 meeting of council.

�Maybe if we work together as a team, rather than just talking about it, we can get something accomplished.�

The smoking issue began back in August 2004, when the Sunrise School Division decided to ban smoking on all school property.

As a result, students who smoke have been forced onto public property if they want to light up.

Many students at the Senior School have chosen the sidewalk along Fifth Street -- right in front of several houses -- as their location to smoke during their respective break times.

Johnson said she was told by school officials last year that the problem would be dealt with, after residents complained about students hanging around their driveways and leaving cigarette butts and other litter behind.

List of smokers

Bob Hummelt, the school�s new principal, told the Leader the school developed an initiative last year to help curb the number of students smoking on the sidewalk in front of the school.

�They developed a list of parents who acknowledge their kids may be smoking during breaks,� he said.

�Any kids out there smoking who can�t verify to me they�re on the list, I tell them �I have to phone your parents to see if you smoke or not.��

Hummelt said the system is working well at deterring students from smoking during school hours, and stressed the current approach to the problem should not be mistaken as a soft stance on the student smoking issue.

He noted he has read town council minutes from the past two years to bring himself up to speed about local concerns regarding smoking at the school.

�Obviously, I�d much rather none of them be smoking at all,� he said. �But if I had to rate how it�s working so far out of 10, I�d give it an 8.5.�

Hummelt said he looks forward to meeting with town council to introduce himself, and welcomes any ideas as to how to discourage students from smoking.

Under the school division�s Smoke Free Environment Policy, students caught smoking on school property can face suspension, and the policy encourages students to respect private property when smoking off of school grounds.

The policy also encourages schools to work with property owners to address littering and loitering concerns that arise from students smoking on public property.

http://www.lacdubonnetleader.com/story.php?id=184623

RHA moves closer to butting out smoking -MB

By Gene Still Friday September 16, 2005

�The culture�s changing out there and communities are ready for this kind of change.� � Dr. Shelley Buchan

Carman Valley Leader � The Central Region RHA took another step towards becoming a smoke-free environment.

The RHA�s chief medical officer of health, Dr. Shelley Buchan, said effective Oct. 1, the main entrances to authority offices and facilities in the region, will be smoke-free. In addition, distance requirements have been established for all other entrances/opening windows.

�We�ve actually been working on this for several years,� Buchan said. �And now we�re ready to move forward with it.�

The doctor, who is co-ordinating the smoke-free initiative for the authority, said while they are taking steps to curb smoking, they�re also trying to help those who want to quit the habit.

�We�re making a greater effort to have more counseling available and helping with smoking cessation efforts,� Buchan explained. �The culture�s changing out there and communities are ready for this kind of change.

�(But) we recognize that smoking is an addictive behaviour and it�s hard to stop for many of the people who do smoke.�

Part of those efforts include offering �appropriate therapies/counseling methods� for staff and clients along with continuing to promote wellness initiatives in the central region via the RHA.

This latest step by the authority follows a similar move in April 2004 when smoking was banned inside RHA offices and facilities, by the public, residents, RHA employees and patients. It also keeps in line with an RHA board resolution in 2003 to work towards eliminating second-hand smoke.

�We want to maintain the most safe and effective environment possible in which to deliver health care services,� Buchan said. �These efforts and in keeping with the region�s statement of purpose so that people in our region are as healthy as they can be at a reasonable cost to the community.�

http://www.carmanvalleyleader.com/story.php?id=184725

Flue board hires consultant to help with exit strategy -ON

EXIT: Producers to be consulted

By Jeff Helsdon Staff Writer Friday September 16, 2005

Tillsonburg News � The Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers� Marketing Board is consulting with outside professionals in a bid to complete a long-term exit plan for growers and to restructure the board.

Deloitte has been retained by the board to guide it through the strategic planning process for its future and to help the board refocus its priorities. The second part of the study will look at board governance.

�We want to relaunch a push towards a long-term exit strategy for tobacco farmers as well as some things that can help maintain tobacco growing as viable for as long as possible,� said board general manager Jason Lietaer.

He said the plan will be presented to the manufacturers and used to communicate the farmers� position to government. The strategic planning exercise will be used to set long-term and short-term priorities for the board.

�It�s essentially a business plan for the tobacco industry in Canada,� Lietaer said.

The intent is to consult producers on what�s being proposed in early October. It�s public launch will be sometime this fall.

Part 2 of the Deloitte consultant�s work is a review of the governance structure of the board. The goal is to instil best management practices into the board�s system.

�We want to ensure it�s the right operation to ensure board members can get their job done effectively,� Lietaer said.

A questionnaire to gain producer input into the various suggestions will be mailed out to producers in the next week. Information sessions will be held for producers in the near future.

Lietaer said one thing up for discussion is a reduction in the number of tobacco board directors. A faction of producers have been pushing for a cut in the number of directors to accompany the reduction in the number flue growers.

The general manager said there has been been a move towards moving from a working-type board to a governance model board.

�The objective of the board is to continue to move to that type of governance where the board sets policy and staff implements policy,� he said.

Lietaer was clear that if there is a recommendation to reduce the size of the board, and the board accepts it, there won�t be a reduction in the number of directors in this fall�s board election. He has already talked to Farm Products Marketing Commission and was told with the necessary regulatory red tape any potential changes to the board size won�t be implemented until next fall.

�We want to relaunch a push towards a long-term exit strategy for tobacco farmers as well as some things that can help maintain tobacco growing as viable for as long as possible.�

http://www.tillsonburgnews.com/story.php?id=184652

Fire verdict due next month-BC

By CP September 17, 2005

KAMLOOPS, B.C. -- The man accused of sparking the wildfires that devastated the B.C. interior in 2003 will learn Oct. 18 if a judge thinks he is guilty.

Lawyers fixed the date in provincial court yesterday for Judge William Sundhu's decision.

Mike Barre is charged with dropping a burning substance within 1 km of a forest.

The judge reserved his verdict against Barre after a trial earlier this month. The Crown says Barre dropped a burning cigarette on a trail behind his McLure house and failed to properly stub it out, causing a blaze that consumed more than 35,000 hectares of forest and 75 homes.

Barre told many people, including investigators, in the days after the July 30, 2003, fire he was responsible.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/National/2005/09/17/1221147-sun.html

Cda's tobacco farmers battle debt, depression as industry hits hard times -ON

Tara Brautigam Canadian Press Saturday, September 17, 2005

DELHI, Ont. (CP) - A faint cinnamon-like aroma wafts from the barns and kilns of this southwestern Ontario town, the heart of Canada's tobacco belt.

It's harvest, and the country's tobacco farmers are reaping the rewards of four months in the fields.

But bankruptcy and depression are taking their toll on the growers, many of whom have left the family business after decades of tilling. Farmers say alcoholism and drug abuse are on the rise because of the crushing debt.

"Ask the local doctors around what kind of anxiety level farmers and their wives and their children are under," says Brian Edwards, a tobacco grower of 30 years who sold his business last year.

"There's lots of depression. Suicide is a very last resort for people . . . that's a real fear."

Mark Bannister, a tobacco farmer in nearby Vanessa, Ont., since 1980, speaks of one farmer "hitting the bottle pretty hard" and another under close watch because his family is worried he might take his life.

"This is a man now that's on 24-hour a day surveillance by his family. He's depressed. He's on antidepressants, day in, day out," he says, looking to the ground.

"People are scared."

There were more than 4,500 tobacco farms throughout Canada in the 1960s. A decade ago there were about 1,650 growers.

Today there are 680, virtually all toiling in a small stretch of land north of Lake Erie known for its natural irrigation and fertile soils that provide Canadian tobacco a distinct flavour unlike any other in the world.

"This could be our last year," says Joe Stachura, a tobacco farmer of 25 years in Delhi, a quiet town of 16,000.

"We have no idea what our future holds for us."

While the agricultural industry overall has hit hard times in recent years, tobacco farmers find themselves in an unusual dilemma all their own - growing a product that, albeit legal, has been blamed for the premature deaths of 45,000 Canadians annually.

Every province except Alberta has passed some form of smoking ban in public places such as bars and restaurants.

"What we are trying very hard to convince government of is that, as they pursue these types of aggressive policies, there has to be a balance in addressing the needs of the farmers that those types of policies are really displacing," says Fred Neukamm, chairman of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board.

As farmers turned away from tobacco, accordingly, tobacco crops have steadily declined. In 1998, 151 million pounds were produced. This year the crop target is set for just over 85 million pounds.

Tobacco farmers in 1990 earned an average income of $79,062, according to Statistics Canada. That dropped to $57,876 in 2000.

"The bills are just getting paid," says Jason McElhone, a relatively young tobacco farmer at 32.

"It's bad when you have to take it out on your own family at home at night and then take it out on your own employees."

Aggressive federal and provincial government policies to dissuade smoking have indirectly yet increasingly encouraged tobacco companies to use cheaper foreign leaf in Canadian-made cigarettes, Bannister says.

Six years ago, six per cent of the shreds of tobacco in your typical du Maurier cigarette came from other countries such as Brazil. In 2003, that figure rose to 30 per cent.

"These companies are allowed to bring in foreign leaf which is substandard to Canadian leaf, and that's being smoked by people here," says Bannister, who has lobbied both levels of government to increase Canadian content in cigarettes sold here.

"If Canadians are going to smoke, they should be smoking only Canadian blends of tobacco."

He says tobacco grown abroad isn't as rigorously inspected as domestic tobacco, possibly exposing smokers to chemicals such as DDT, a toxic insecticide fully banned in Canada since 1989.

Currently, all Canadian tobacco farmers are required to document their use of fertilizers and the volume and type of pesticides they use.

"You can be sure that in countries like Brazil and India, there may be guidelines in place, but they're not being followed as strictly as they are here," Bannister says.

In March, Ontario set aside $50 million in a transition fund for tobacco farmers looking to get out of the business and pursue alternative crops such as beans and sweet potatoes.

But the farmers say much of the infrastructure designed for tobacco farming - namely the kilns, which cure, or essentially heat the tobacco, can't be used for any other crops.

Ontario Agriculture Minister Leona Dombrowsky says there are farmers making strides in adapting to cultivating different and viable crops, pointing to some who have taken up sweet potato farming.

"There are really going to be two benefits," she said in an interview.

"There will be the production of sweet potatoes for consumption, and then those lower-grade potatoes will be used for the production of ethanol."

The province is pushing gas companies to ensure all gasoline contains five per cent of ethanol by 2007 to reduce greenhouse gases.

But Bannister says trying to get tobacco farmers to grow other crops will only saturate other markets.

"If, say, 400 acres of strawberries were planted here, we would ruin the strawberry industry for Canadians," he says.

"We can't be planting 10,000 more acres of tomatoes or peppers or sweet corns. Nobody makes money then."

To cope, one farmer tried his hand at a marijuana grow-operation but was quickly busted, Bannister says.

"It's come down to where if you got no way to pay the bills, you get tempted to do something illegally," Edwards says.

Bannister has discouraged his 20-year-old son Wes from taking up the family trade, given the grim outlook he has for Canada's tobacco farming business.

"The tobacco industry is the Titanic," he says, gazing out at row upon row of tobacco crops as he lights a smoke.

Here is the annual quota of tobacco crops grown in Ontario since 1998:

1998: 151 million pounds

1999: 143.3 million pounds

2000: 124 million pounds

2001: 117.1 million pounds

2002: 108.1 million pounds

2003: 94.1 million pounds

2004: 87.9 million pounds

2005: 85.3 million pounds

(Source: The Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board)

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=cfb12fa9-390d-4fad-a359-36bd030e95ec

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2083

Adults turn to youths in bid to curb smoking -ON

By Libby Peters Times-Journal staff Saturday September 17, 2005

It�s an invaluable employment opportunity for seven to 10 local youths, positive change for the community, and potentially life-saving to other teens.

As part of the Smoke Free Ontario Strategy�s Youth Development Program, a new community-based project is set to launch in St. Thomas with help from the Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit, the St. Thomas-Elgin Youth Centre and the local YWCA. Up to 10 young people will lead an aggressive new campaign to change public perception of smoking among youths.

Youth Action Alliance is an initiative funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health whose aim is to involve middle and high school students in tobacco control activities. The young people hired to lead the program will plan strategies to counter tobacco industry marketing and try to denormalize smoking among youth.

St. Thomas is one of four areas in southwestern Ontario to receive funding for this initiative. The city has received $110,000 to start the project.

Laurie Benner, youth advisor for St. Thomas�s Youth Action Alliance, said peer leaders could plan projects such as rallies, posters, or dances.

Benner pointed to the extreme, but effective, Ottawa-based anti-smoking campaign known as Expose. It is the model Youth Action Alliance was built on.

�This gives youth another outlet to rebel against (instead of adults) -- the tobacco industry.�

�The kids� job is to empower their peers to stop smoking, or not to start smoking,� said Lindsay Grondin of the YWCA.

Grondin, Benner, and Jackie VanRyswyk, of the health unit, said the project is a �great opportunity� for youth who want to get involved and promote change.

Peer leaders who are hired for the project will be paid for their work and receive training in media advocacy, community mobilization and policy change. They will also have the opportunity to attend a leaders� summit being planned for next March.

http://www.stthomastimesjournal.com/story.php?id=184802

NDP's taxapalooza -MB

By TOM BRODBECK Sat, September 17, 2005

Soaring transfer payments from Ottawa and healthy gambling profits aren't the only reason why the Doer government is sitting on a big surplus.

The NDP took in $301 million more in taxes last year -- income taxes, sales taxes, corporate taxes, you name it -- than it did the year before, according to the province's public accounts released last week.

And part of the reason is that the NDP has been quietly jacking up your taxes over the years.

It doesn't get a lot of media attention because the NDP's strategy is to spread it out among many different types of taxes. But when you look at the overall numbers, the tax windfall is staggering.

Let's start with the big stuff. For the second time in five years, Premier Gary Doer expanded the provincial sales tax last year, this time to include professional services such as lawyers, accountants and engineers.

Manitobans paid $59 million more in PST last year than in 2003.

If you bought a house, you probably paid more in the little-known "house tax" called a land transfer tax. Doer jacked that one up last year, too. He took in $5 million more in 2004 in land transfer taxes compared with the previous year.

Diesel fuel taxes went up last year. The rate jumped to 11.5 cents a litre from 10.9 cents a litre. Doesn't sound like much, but the province took in $9 million more in diesel fuel taxes than it did the year before.

If you smoke, you got hit hard again last year. Cigarette taxes go up almost every year, and 2004 was no exception. Doer collected $13 million more in smoke taxes last year than the year before, despite the public-smoking ban. In fact, cigarette taxes have become one of the most important sources of revenue for the province, generating $203 million last year. That's more than the province collects in gas taxes, which yielded $154 million.

Doer talks a great deal about the modest cuts he's made to individual income taxes since taking office in 1999. But what he doesn't tell you is that unlike most governments, he's refused to index tax brackets.

That means workers who get cost-of-living wage increases move into higher tax rates because the tax brackets aren't indexed to inflation. It's called bracket creep and it's one of Doer's greatest revenue generators.

Big money

Last year the province took in $67 million more in individual income taxes than it did the year before. It's big money.

Business also took a hit last year. Doer changed how the capital tax -- a tax on companies' capital -- is calculated for banks, trust and loan corporations.

The province collected $27 million more in corporate capital tax compared to the previous year.

All told, tax revenue soared $301 million last year, enough to run the entire department of justice -- courts, jails, rural policing, legal aid and all.

But that's not all. The NDP has been jacking up fees and fines, too.

Vehicle registration fees, for example, went up last year, netting Doer $10 million more than the previous year. Driver's licence fees also rose last year, yielding $4.2 million in extra dough. And liquor taxes went up, lining provincial coffers with almost $11 million in new revenue.

All told, the NDP took in $126 million more in fees, fines and other revenues in 2004 compared with the previous year.

Between taxes, fees, fines and other revenues, the NDP hauled in a stunning $427 million more last year than it did in 2003. That's on top of the more than $400 million the NDP got from Ottawa in extra transfer payments last year.

At least you know where your money is going.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Brodbeck_Tom/2005/09/17/1220725.html

Mounties probing 'unexpected' death of hospital patient while outside smoking-BC

Darah Hansen Vancouver Sun Saturday, September 17, 2005

SURREY - A police investigation has been launched into the death of a Surrey Memorial Hospital patient after the body of a man in his 50s was discovered Friday afternoon in the smoking area outside the Shirley Dean Pavilion.

Authorities are saying little about how the man died, though Don Bower, Fraser Health Authority spokesman, confirmed two people were involved. He said there were no witnesses to what happened.

Bower referred to the man's death as "unexpected."

He said both the victim and the second man were patients in the hospital's extended care facility, but refused to identify either man, citing privacy act regulations.

No charges have been laid in the matter. It remains under investigation by Surrey RCMP and the B.C. Coroners' Office.

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=1053d729-4a46-4562-b1d9-b8e64a58bc1a

The toil and trouble in our tobacco fields -ON

Debt-ridden farm families battle social ills along with bankruptcy and the foreign leaf

By TARA BRAUTIGAM Canadian Press Saturday, September 17, 2005 Page A17

DELHI, ONT. -- A faint cinnamon-like aroma wafts from the barns and kilns of this Southwestern Ontario town, the heart of Canada's tobacco belt.

It's harvest, and the country's tobacco farmers are reaping the rewards of four months in the fields.

"Ask the local doctors around what kind of anxiety level farmers and their wives and their children are under," says Brian Edwards, a tobacco grower of 30 years who sold his business last year.

"There's lots of depression. Suicide is a very last resort for people . . . that's a real fear."

Mark Bannister, a tobacco farmer in nearby Vanessa since 1980, speaks of one farmer "hitting the bottle pretty hard" and another under close watch because his family is worried he might take his life.

"This is a man now that's on 24-hour a day surveillance by his family. He's depressed. He's on antidepressants, day in, day out," he says, looking to the ground.

"People are scared."

There were more than 4,500 tobacco farms throughout Canada in the 1960s. A decade ago there were about 1,650 growers.

Today, there are 680, virtually all toiling in a small stretch of land north of Lake Erie known for its natural irrigation and fertile soils that provide Canadian tobacco a flavour unlike any other in the world.

"This could be our last year," says Joe Stachura, a tobacco farmer of 25 years in Delhi, a quiet town of 16,000. "We have no idea what our future holds for us."

While the agriculture industry overall has hit hard times in recent years, tobacco farmers find themselves in an unusual dilemma all their own -- growing a product that, albeit legal, has been blamed for the premature deaths of 45,000 Canadians annually.

Every province except Alberta has passed some form of smoking ban in public places such as bars and restaurants.

As farmers turned away from tobacco, accordingly, tobacco crops have steadily declined. In 1998, 151 million pounds were produced. This year the crop target is set for a little more than 85 million pounds.

Tobacco farmers in 1990 earned an average income of $79,062, according to Statistics Canada. That dropped to $57,876 in 2000.

"The bills are just getting paid," says Jason McElhone, a relatively young tobacco farmer at 32.

"It's bad when you have to take it out on your own family at home at night and then take it out on your own employees."

Six years ago, 6 per cent of the shreds of tobacco in your typical du Maurier cigarette came from other countries, such as Brazil. In 2003, that figure rose to 30 per cent.

"These companies are allowed to bring in foreign leaf, which is substandard to Canadian leaf, and that's being smoked by people here," says Mr. Bannister, who has lobbied both levels of government to increase Canadian content in cigarettes sold here.

"If Canadians are going to smoke, they should be smoking only Canadian blends of tobacco."

He says tobacco grown abroad isn't as rigorously inspected as domestic tobacco, possibly exposing smokers to chemicals such as DDT, a toxic insecticide banned in Canada since 1989.

All Canadian tobacco farmers are required to document their use of fertilizers and the volume and type of pesticides they use.

"You can be sure that in countries like Brazil and India, there may be guidelines in place, but they're not being followed as strictly as they are here," Mr. Bannister says.

In March, Ontario set aside $50-million in a transition fund for tobacco farmers looking to get out of the business and pursue alternative crops such as beans and sweet potatoes.

But the farmers say much of the infrastructure designed for tobacco farming -- namely the kilns, which cure or essentially heat the tobacco, can't be used for any other crops.

Ontario Agriculture Minister Leona Dombrowsky says there are farmers making strides in adapting to cultivating different and viable crops, pointing to some who have taken up sweet potato farming.

"There are really going to be two benefits," she said in an interview. "There will be the production of sweet potatoes for consumption, and then those lower-grade potatoes will be used for the production of ethanol."

The province is pushing gas companies to ensure all gasoline contains 5 per cent ethanol by 2007 to reduce greenhouse gases.

But Mr. Bannister says trying to get tobacco farmers to grow other crops will only saturate other markets.

"If, say, 400 acres of strawberries were planted here, we would ruin the strawberry industry for Canadians," he says.

"We can't be planting 10,000 more acres of tomatoes or peppers or sweet corns. Nobody makes money then."

To cope, one farmer tried his hand at growing marijuana but was quickly busted, Mr. Bannister says.

"It's come down to where if you got no way to pay the bills, you get tempted to do something illegally," Mr. Edwards says.

Mr. Bannister has discouraged his 20-year-old son, Wes, from taking up the family trade, given the grim outlook he has for Canada's tobacco farming business.

"The tobacco industry is the Titanic," he says, gazing out at row upon row of tobacco crops as he lights a smoke

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050917/TOBACCON17/TPNational/TopStories

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2083

Last year for Canada's tobacco farmers? -ON

CBC News Last Updated Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:15:03 EDT

Canada's last remaining tobacco farmers are in trouble, and some say this could be their last year.

Canadian tobacco farmers have found themselves in an unusual dilemma over the past several years. They grow a product that is legal, but is blamed for the premature cancer-related deaths of 45,000 Canadians every year.

Every province except Alberta has passed some form of smoking ban in public places such as bars and restaurants. With more laws restricting smoking and promotion of smoking, there are fewer tobacco farmers.

While there were more than 4,500 tobacco farms in Canada in the 1960s, today there are only 680 -- grouped north of Lake Erie, near Delhi, Ont.

As farmers turned away from tobacco, tobacco crops declined. In 1998, 151 million pounds were produced in Canada. This year the crop target is set for just over 85 million pounds.

Tobacco farmers in 1990 earned an average income of $79,062. According to Statistics Canada that dropped to $57,876 in 2000.

"This could be our last year," said Joe Stachura, a tobacco farmer of 25 years in Delhi. "We have no idea what our future holds for us."

Fred Neukamm, chairman of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board said: "What we are trying very hard to convince government of is that, as they pursue these types of aggressive (anti-smoking) policies, there has to be a balance in addressing the needs of the farmers that those types of policies are really displacing."

In March, Ontario set aside $50 million in a transition fund for tobacco farmers looking to get out of the business and pursue alternative crops such as beans and sweet potatoes. But the farmers say much of the infrastructure designed for tobacco farming -- such as the kilns which cure the tobacco -- can't be used for any other crops.

Ontario Agriculture Minister Leona Dombrowsky said some farmers are adapting to cultivating different crops, such as sweet potatoes. Dombrowsky said there will be two benefits: "There will be the production of sweet potatoes for consumption, and... lower-grade potatoes will be used for the production of ethanol."

The province is pushing gas companies to ensure all gasoline contains five per cent of ethanol by 2007 to reduce greenhouse gases and to support agriculture.

Bankruptcy and depression are taking their toll on the growers, many of whom have left the family business after decades of tilling. Mark Bannister, a tobacco farmer in Vanessa, Ont., since 1980, said: "People are scared."

Bannister, vice-chairman of the Tobacco Farmers in Crisis association, said trying to get tobacco farmers to grow other crops will only saturate other markets.

"If, say, 400 acres of strawberries were planted here, we would ruin the strawberry industry for Canadians," he said. "We can't be planting 10,000 more acres of tomatoes or peppers or sweet corns. Nobody makes money then."

Gazing out at row upon row of tobacco crops, Bannister said: "The tobacco industry is the Titanic."

http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2005/09/17/tobacco_farmers20050917.html

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2083

Bell Centre to become smoke-free environment Sept. 18 -QC

PRESS RELEASE (09/17/2005)

MONTREAL � In an ongoing effort to provide a healthy environment for all its visitors, the Bell Centre, as of September 18, 2005, will become an entirely non-smoking facility.

The Bell Centre initiative is being instituted prior to the Quebec government�s implementation of its new regulations on the usage of tobacco. The law states that smoking inside all public buildings is strictly prohibited, and that no designated smoking areas inside the buildings will be allowed. This policy will apply for every single event held in the Bell Centre, starting on Sept. 18, when the Canadiens play their first preseason game of the year against the Atlanta Thrashers. The only areas that will accommodate smokers will be outside of the Bell Centre, near the de La Gauchetiere, Lucien L�Allier and Windsor Court entrances. Consequently, as of Sept. 18, existing designated areas for smokers will be closed.

Since December 17, 1999, in accordance with governmental laws on the usage of tobacco in the workplace and most public areas, the management of the Bell Centre had offered their clients and employees designated areas for the usage of tobacco.

http://www.canadiens.com/eng/news/redirect.cfm?sectionID=habsNewsDetails.cfm&newsItemID=4354

Posted at 2:12 pm by looped_ca
Make a comment

In the World news 2

Romanow fears `end of medicare'

TRACEY TYLER LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER Sep. 17, 2005. 08:19 AM

Romanow fears `end of medicare'

Says buying health care violates Charter Court ruling is `body blow' to Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada's 4-3 decision to strike down Quebec's ban on private health insurance could be "the end of medicare as we know it" and a "serious body blow" to the future of Canada, Roy Romanow says.

In a hard-hitting speech in Toronto yesterday, the former Saskatchewan premier, who headed a royal commission into the future of health care, accused the four-judge majority in the Chaoulli case � which many see as opening the door to two-tier health care � of meddling in social policy decisions better left to elected politicians.

"The net legal effect of the Chaoulli decision is that, in grappling with medicare, the court has ventured beyond constitutional and legal principles and into complex social policy, an area that has traditionally been in the domain of elected lawmakers," said Romanow, who was speaking at a legal forum on the implications of the June ruling, organized by the University of Toronto's faculty of law.

The court's "somewhat startling" decision showed a "remarkable" level of judicial activism, he said. Romanow questioned whether some judges in the majority were looking for a "mandate" to venture into the world of politics.

"Seems so, and they did it in such a thunderous way," he said.

By allowing privileged Canadians to buy health care, the court has used the Charter, and in particular its guarantees of life, liberty and security of the person, to protect the economic rights of citizens, something that was never intended when the Charter was drawn up nearly 25 years ago, Romanow said. He helped draft a 1981 compromise agreement that led to the Charter's enactment and the patriation of the Constitution.

The most charitable interpretation of the decision is that it was an "aberration," said Romanow, who said he hopes the court will "recalibrate" its approach in future cases.

If not, it will "radically alter Canada" and could lead to the dismantling of other social programs, he warned.

"Without sounding too apocalyptic about it, I think it could sound the end of medicare as we know it and (deliver) a very serious body blow to Canada as we know it," he told reporters later.

Last month, without providing reasons, the court suspended its judgment until June, 2006.

Romanow said he finds it difficult to be so harshly critical of the court but said there are larger issues at stake.

The ruling flies in the face of what Canadians told him they want in their health-care system, he said.

"The implied conclusion that timely access to health-care services will be improved with the establishment of a parallel private scheme flies in the face of all the evidence with which I grappled for 18 months as a royal commissioner," he said.

Until yesterday, Romanow, now a public policy expert at two Canadian universities, has said very little publicly about the decision, which found in favour of Jacques Chaoulli, a physician who wants to operate a private hospital, and George Zeliotis, a patient who was left on a waiting list for a hip operation.

Four of the court's judges said there was ample evidence that some Canadians have suffered grave consequences while on waiting lists and the public health system's failure to deliver medical care in a timely, reliable way had jeopardized their liberty, health and psychological well-being.

Justice Marie Deschamps, in the majority decision, said that banning private health-care options was a violation of the Quebec Charter.

The remaining six judges were evenly split on whether such a ban also violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

As a result, the decision only applies in Quebec.

But Romanow said yesterday the "clear implication" is that it's a violation of the Canadian Charter, as well.

"The court basically said that the prohibition of private health insurance enacted by a democratically elected provincial government was bad public policy," he said.

While the court based its decision on the evidence it had before it, that evidence wasn't from the millions of Canadians who receive "great health care" and continue to support it, despite their concerns about the future of the system, he said.

Instead, it was from the Canadian Medical Association, individual doctors unhappy with the constraints of a publicly funded system and senators who were oddly granted intervenor status, Romanow said.

Although privately funded health care would be a radical step for Canada, Allan Hutchinson, a professor at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, challenged Romanow's claim that the Chaoulli decision is an "aberration."

The Supreme Court has used the Charter repeatedly to uphold conservative principles, he said.

Despite all the talk by Romanow and his political counterparts in the early 1980s of it being a "people's Charter," the court has used it to protect tobacco companies and deny treatment to autistic children, Hutchinson said.

"It's turned out to be a very strange group of people who have benefited by the Charter," he added. "There's nothing new about the Chaoulli decision. Nothing new. This is a case where all the conservative chickens have come home to roost."

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_

Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1126907414361

Smoking ban burns clubs -AB

Vernon Clement Jones The Edmonton Journal Sunday, September 18, 2005

Bingo parlour dropoff cuts into fundraising for charities, athletics

EDMONTON -- Last year bingo brought in $91,000 for the Association of Evergreen Youth.

"It's huge for us," says Alice Hobbins, executive director of the not-for-profit organization.

"At least it was huge."

So far this year, Hobbins' organization has taken in slightly more than $30,000 from its bingo nights. She blames the drop, in part, on Edmonton's smoking ban, which took effect on July 1, 2005.

She is not alone.

While the bylaw has lifted the blue cloud of cigarette smoke hanging in the city's bingo halls, it has lowered the takings of the civic organizations and charities using them to raise money.

Edmonton's 15 parlours are reporting drops in attendance from 10 to 40 per cent.

"City councillors didn't listen to us then and I doubt they will listen to us now, but we have got to voice our concerns," she says.

Like other clubs, Evergreen -- devoted to providing after-school programs to youths -- sends out a team of volunteers to work bingo events each month. Those workers spend two to five hours handing out cards and attending to patrons, all eager to yell "bingo!"

The clubs then share the profits each month, after deductions for prize money and hall expenses.

Last week, Hobbins joined officials from other civic clubs in a letter-writing campaign to the mayor and council, calling for an end to the smoking ban, at least in bingo halls.

Action couldn't come soon enough, says one volunteer who has seen profits for all three of the organizations she works decline. But the ban has brought positive change as well, says Melissa Webb, 24.

Before, "if you were working and walking around the hall, you felt like you had smoked a thousand cigarettes," she says, while volunteering at Parkway Bingo. "It's now easier to get volunteers to come out. The air is fine now."

There are about 120 playing and paying customers out for Parkway's afternoon event. That's only about 20 to 30 fewer than would likely have come before the smoking ban, bingo manager Susan Moore says.

"But when you lose 20 people in attendance you lose an awful lot more in profits," she says, pointing to the multiple cards most players purchase.

Edmonton halls also lose money when those patrons go for cigarette breaks.

"When they're outside that means they're not inside buying Bonanza and satellite cards -- money that goes to the charities," she says.

But that may be the least of Moore's worries. Bingo halls in neighbouring Spruce Grove and Wetaskiwin still allow smoking. In fact, they have been smokier than ever since the change in Edmonton.

"Our increase is about a 23-per-cent increase since the ban," says John Wanless, manager of Spruce Grove Bingo, pointing to a growing number of players from Edmonton. "Travelling the 20 minutes to Spruce Grove is no worse than driving 20 minutes to a hall in Edmonton.

"When the cold weather hits and going outside for a cigarette break at an Edmonton bingo hall becomes even less

attractive, we will probably go up more."

About 37 non-profit clubs share profits at Wanless's bingo parlour. Those groups, ranging from Spruce Grove

Minor Hockey to the community's Kinsmen centre, have seen a 40-per-cent increase in their monthly takes since the ban took effect.

The hall isn't looking to take on any more charities. Even if it were, he said Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission rules prevent him from considering clubs from the city of Edmonton.

"From a compassionate point of view, it's a shame that our gain is at the expense of other bingo halls," he said.

Local bingo parlours are likely experiencing temporary pain, says Doug Baker, a regional services director for the Canadian Cancer Society. "Within a year, revenue levels will likely be back to where they were before the smoking ban."

He points to studies in other Canadian cities that have stamped out smoking in public places.

"We have to look beyond the short-term losses of charities to the long-term health of Albertans, especially those working in bingo halls," he says.

As a charity, the Cancer Society does not use bingo halls as a vehicle for raising cash, but relies on a diversified fundraising strategy. It's an approach other charities will have to adopt, says one bingo volunteer.

"They have to be more creative to keep the customers if they want to keep on making it," Hector Labbe says, outside an east-end hall. A cigarette dangles from his mouth.

"I'm not sure they were making it before."

vjones@thejournal.canwest.com

http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=85cf2164-5cc3-452d-bf9f-fb6f3be8cac0

Warning: Smoking is a Leading Cause of Vision Loss

Global survey shows low awareness of link TORONTO, Sept. 19 /CNW/ - Smoking, well known to cause lung cancer and heart disease, is also a major contributor to blindness. According to an international report, however, global awareness of the causal link between smoking and vision loss is alarmingly low.

The report also documents scientifically proven studies showing that smokers are two to four time more likely to develop AMD as compared to non-smokers. AMD is recognized as the leading cause of blindness in developed countries by the World Health Organization.

"Smoking is the only proven and preventable risk factor for the development of AMD, a disease that affects more than 25 million people around the world," said Dr. Patricia Harvey, Retina Specialist, University Health Network, Toronto. "The AMD Alliance International report clearly shows a dire need for more AMD education, along with the need to increase knowledge that smoking is as harmful to eye health as it is to one's overall health."

References     -------------------------
(1) Klein, R. et al. Prevalence of age-related Maculopathy: the Beaver Dam Study. Ophthalmology 1992; 99:933-43 and Vingerling JR, et al. Epidemiology of Age-related Maculopathy. Epidemiol Rev 1995;17(2):347-360 and Statistics Canada
(2) Cost of Blindness Symposium Committee. A CLEAR VISION: Solutions to Canada's Vision Loss Crisis. Available from www.costofblindness.org .
(3) CNIB. National Consultation of the Crisis of Vision Loss. Toronto: Oct 2 - Oct 5, 1998. Available from         www.cnib.ca/eng/publications/pamphlets/nccvl/chapter2.htm .

****For further information: to arrange an interview with Dr. Harvey or Gerrard Grace, or for a copy of the "AMD Campaign Report 2005" please contact: Andrew Leopold, John Elias, Weber Shandwick Worldwide, (416) 642-7949, (416) 642-7965, aleopold@webershandwick.com , jelias@webershandwick.com ; Wanda Hamilton, Executive Director, AMD Alliance International, (416) 486-2500 ext. 7505, executivedirector@amdalliance.org

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/19/c0749.html

Welcome to mini Cali -AB

Sept 20, 2005

FIRST, WE have to alienate smokers, then banning certain breeds of dogs becomes an issue, and now city council is considering banning firepits? Thank goodness there is always someone around to save me from myself. Welcome to mini-California.

C. McLachlan

(The firepit plan got panned.)

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/09/19/1226611.html

Doctor urges trustees to reconsider butt-ban vote

By STAFF September 20, 2005

School divisions can't expect students to take anti-smoking campaigns seriously when they're still allowed to light up on school property, according to one parent and advocate.

"Teens are extremely sensitive to hypocrisy on the part of adults," Dr. Mark Taylor told Winnipeg School Division trustees last night. "For them to be learning about the dangers of tobacco in class and then see that the school provides a special place for them to smoke outside, demonstrates hypocrisy."

Taylor spoke last night at a special meeting of the province's largest school division, offering a response to a recent decision by trustees to not implement an all-out smoking ban at its 77 schools.

A motion for a ban was defeated 5-4 several weeks ago. Last night. Taylor encouraged trustees to reconsider.

He cited extensive studies showing educational campaigns have had "disappointing results" when not coupled with non-smoking policies and reminded them smoking is already banned in many public and private spaces in Manitoba and North America.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2005/09/20/1226926-sun.html

Federal grant targets youth smoking -AB

By DAVE BREAKENRIDGE, CALGARY SUN Sept 20, 2005

Young people are starting to get the message about smoking but more needs to be done to curb tobacco addiction, says Canada's health minister.

To that end, Ujjal Dosanjh yesterday announced a $250,000 Health Canada contribution to the Calgary Health Region's project aimed at a mass media campaign designed to change how tobacco is viewed by youth between the ages of 12 and 18.

The content of the ads will be designed with input from people in that age group.

"I think it's important to let them decide and design print, radio and television messages for the people we're trying to aim at," Dosanjh said.

He said smoking rates among young people have dropped from 22% in 2002 to 18% this year.

The money will go toward the production of ads, which a CHR youth co-ordinator said will be released in early 2006.

The project is partnered with Lord Beaverbrook high school, the Canadian Cancer Society, Calgary Urban Vibe and AADAC.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/National/2005/09/20/1226992-sun.html

WORKPLACE ETHICS 101

Wednesday, September 21, 2005 Page C6

Ethics: A set of principles of right conduct; a theory or a system of moral values.- Canadian Dictionary

Every day, people are faced with moral dilemmas at work. Here's a chance to put your two cents into the ethical pot. Please include your full name and address. Responses may be edited for clarity and brevity.

Last week's question You're trying hard not to sound like a reformed smoker, having quit a couple of years ago, but even you are becoming miffed at how a couple of co-workers with whom you share responsibilities are taking several smoke breaks every day at times that are problematic for you from a work standpoint. Do you raise it with them without sounding like a hypocrite?

One side

I see no quandary here. Whether it is smoking or coffee breaks, excessive time away from work, which affects productivity, should be confronted and resolved.

Paul Henry, New Jersey

Presuming that smoke breaks are allowed by company policy, speak directly to your immediate supervisor and inform him/her that you want a memo sent regarding the minimum people needed at all times in the work area.

Brian Pease, Scarborough

The issue here is not whether they are smoking; the issue is the effect their repeated absences are having on my performance, and ultimately the business. Perhaps this habit has been allowed to go on for some time, so my co-workers think nothing of it. I would approach my co-workers in a non-judgmental manner, and focus my communication on ways we can all take a reasonable amount of break time throughout the day and not inconvenience our co-workers as a result.

Richard Williams, Morinville, Alta.

I would talk to the co-workers but focus on how their availability is impacting my ability to work. I would see if there is some sort of agreement we could come to.

Darrell Grainger, Toronto

There is nothing hypocritical about wanting to get the work done. Early in the work period, prior to their usual smoke breaks, talk to your co-workers about scheduling your work time together. Follow up at the end of the work day with a brief review of how matters went. Maybe more co-ordination is needed. Your focus is your shared work task. How they handle their smoke breaks is their business.

Mary Valentich, Calgary

Your status as a reformed smoker is irrelevant in this problem. As you well know, a smoker is unlikely to quit to please someone else. Your co-workers' apparent neglect of work responsibilities is similar to the effect of a worker who has to take frequent breaks due to a medical condition. Your goal should be to work out a schedule that shares the break times so there is less difficulty for you, as you would try to do for a medical problem. If a co-operative approach along those lines fails to reduce the problem, you would be within your rights to ask your superior for help in seeing that the work responsibilities are being shared fairly.

Dave Prebble, Fredericton, N.B.

You sure do raise your concern with them. Two choices: sound like a hypocrite or do their work for them. . . . I'll take hypocrite.

Tim Brooke, Guelph Ont.

I would raise this issue with the co-worker from a health standpoint. I would explain to them how I was a heavy smoker myself previously and how I went about changing my habits. I would then tell them indirectly that it causes a lot of work to be built up as well. But I would definitely approach this issue by showing them that I am concerned about their health rather than the workload that builds up for me.

Anjum Sajjad, Mississauga

I wouldn't say anything to them directly, but I would tell my company because this problem should be solved by the company. It's not fair for non-smokers and smokers to have different working times. Don't you think we can compromise with each other?

Kiyomi Fuji , Wakayama, Japan

Absolutely raise the issue of timing of smoke breaks. All breaks are subject to operational requirements and should be scheduled at times that are convenient for the business, not the individual. In practice of course, one would try to accommodate the individual, but the business provides for their employment and must be considered first. In addition, smoke breaks should not be in addition to legislated coffee breaks or lunch; if they are taken in addition, then that person is stealing time from their employer.

Shery Yoner, Vancouver

The other side

Reformed smokers are the worst. It's like working with your mother-in-law or a Toronto Maple Leafs fan, but worse. Lighten up. I am sure the chains to the desk can be unlocked for a few minutes for those others who have yet to become reformed smokers like you. Your shared responsibilities will get done. If the three of you are so interlinked that when one is not there nothing gets done, what do you do during summer holidays, when one is sick, or when one is in the washroom? Yes, you are being a hypocrite, and reformed smokers are the best doing just that.

Norm Greenfield, Calgary

Everyone needs a break once in a while. While some smoke, others just need to stretch. Suggest to the team that irregular breaks are hampering your work efforts. Find what can be done in terms of your and their schedules to make things work better. If someone brings up your past, demonstrate how you have moved on and for their own health, you wish they would too.

Tom Breuer, Ottawa

Having been a smoker, you must realize how your co-workers enjoy their smoke breaks. Since you all share responsibility for the work, and you are all paid to do it as quickly as possible, you should pick a time that is agreeable to all and take a break then. No one should be allowed to wander off whenever he/she feels like it. Work comes first.

Frances Jeaurond, St. Catharines, Ont.

Studies show that 45 per cent of all productivity losses at work are related to "water cooler" chit-chat and socializing, followed closely by unauthorized use of the Internet and personal phone calls. In terms of productivity losses, unauthorized smoke breaks are only sixth or seventh down the list. Before broaching the issue with others, it might be wise to examine your own motivation to ensure that you are not, in fact, irked by their choices as opposed to the so-called "extra work" imposed on you. Who does your work when you stop to chat with other workers or take time for that personal phone call? Is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black?

As an employee, it is not your place to complain about the working ethics of others. Worry first about your performance and let the supervisors and managers worry about the bigger picture.

Remember, most people don't get fired because of incompetence but rather, because of a difficulty in fitting into the existing corporate culture.

Michelle Gervais, London, Ont.

As a former smoker, you should be the most sympathetic of all toward your co-workers still in the clutches of a tobacco addiction. If there is an important project under way at work, try to get the group to agree beforehand on convenient times to take breaks. On routine workdays, try to ignore the smoke breaks. Focus instead on being an inspiring example of a person who has successfully overcome the addiction.

Carolyn Tytler, St. Catharines, Ont.

Reformed smokers (of whom I am one) must be the most paranoid of zealots. This week's question is not a moral dilemma -- it is not really an ethical issue -- and actually has nothing to do with smoking. Employees have a right to take breaks -- what they do while on those breaks is their own business (as long as it's legal). The issue here is the timing of the breaks. If timing is interfering with work flow, surely the response should be to simply say: "Now is really not a good time; why don't we finish this task , and then we can all take our break?"

Dr. Basil W. Johnston, Peterborough, Ont.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050921/CAETHICS21/TPBusiness/

Using the media for advocacy: http://strategyguides.globalink.org/guide01_10.htm

Italy

Film gets flak from anti-smokers

Award-winning movie under fire over cigarette-hooked cast (ANSA) - Rome, September 19 - An Italian film which scooped a prize at the Venice Film Festival has come under fire from the anti-smoking lobby because of its cigarette-hooked cast . La Bestia nel Cuore (The Beast in the Heart) stars acclaimed Italian actress Giovanna Mezzogiorno as chain-smoking Sabina, a woman whose happy existence is torn apart when buried memories of abuse return to haunt her . Mezzogiorno's performance bagged her the top acting award for a woman at the Venice fest earlier this month . But consumer group Codacons was less impressed and has asked magistrates to investigate the Cristina Comencini-directed film for alleged "indirect advertising for smoking products" . "Too often directors opt to heighten moments of tension or unease with a cigarette. That's something we do not agree with because it is too simplistic and harmful," said Codacons President Marco Donzelli . "As for this film, it's excessive. The actors smoke one cigarette after another," Donzelli said . There have been growing calls to limit smoking in films and on TV as part of a general crackdown on cigarettes . Former Health Minister Girolamo Sirchia, who spearheaded a ban on public smoking, recently resurrected his proposal that health warnings accompany old films on TV in which movie icons are seen puffing away on cigarettes . The minister maintained that Hollywood legends like Humphrey Bogart, the smoker supreme, set a dangerous example for youngsters, making cigarettes look sexy and glamorous . Italy's smoking law, which came into effect in January, is one of the toughest in Europe and has virtually ended smoking in cafes, restaurants, bars and clubs . Any establishment wishing to cater to smokers - and there is no obligation to do this - must have separate rooms for them with automatically closing doors and smoke extractors . Smoking is also banned from all work places . The Health Ministry insisted there was nothing prohibitionist about the new measures, which came on top of a 1975 law banning smoking from public places such as cinemas, schools, libraries, hospitals and underground trains. Cigarette sales have dropped some 10% since the new law .

http://ansa.it/main/notizie/awnplus/english/news/2005-09-19_1313344.html

Mayor Wants Truce, Ads For Smoke-free Bars

The Capital Times :: METRO :: 1B

Saturday, September 17, 2005 By Bill Novak The Capital Times

Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz is willing to put up $10,000 in room tax revenue to help promote Madison bars, but only if the anti-smoking and pro-smoking forces also kick in some cash.

The mayor issued a challenge Friday to both sides in the smoldering fight, urging the combatants to put down their rattling sabers and come together to see what can be done about the financial loss some Madison bars have reported since the smoking ban took effect on July 1.

"I'm concerned about the relatively small number of tavern owners, especially on Madison's periphery, who say our smoke-free ordinance is hurting their business," Cieslewicz said in letters sent to smoking ban supporters SmokeFree Wisconsin and the Tobacco-Free Dane County Coalition, and to smoking ban protesters including the Coalition to Save Madison Jobs and the Dane County Tavern League.

SmokeFree Wisconsin accepted Cieslewicz's challenge and urged the others to do likewise.

"We accept the mayor's challenge and commit up to $10,000 to this effort," said Maureen Busalacchi of SmokeFree Wisconsin. "A positive promotional campaign to benefit Madison's hospitality industry is far more beneficial to the industry and the community than a prolonged and heated debate."

Cieslewicz is committing the $10,000 from room tax revenues, which are earmarked to be spent on helping promote Madison business. Property tax revenues won't be used for the challenge.

"I am willing to commit city resources to help taverns gain new customers to replace those who may have left because of the (smoking) ban," the mayor said. "But this needs to be a partnership with tavern owners and smoke-free advocates."

Tavern owners are hoping to be allowed to show they've suffered a hardship because of the smoking ban so that patrons can light up once again while enjoying a beer.

Some bar owners and others against the ban want a referendum but the mayor prefers the challenge route.

"This is a far better option than a referendum," Cieslewicz said.

The council is scheduled to vote Tuesday on whether to hold an advisory referendum in April.

Cieslewicz said it's far more beneficial to have opposing groups come together and try to promote the city's bars, instead of seeing if the smoking ban can be done away with. Repealing the ban, which was attempted once but failed this summer, again has little chance of being rescinded by the City Council.

"Tavern owners and smoke-free advocates have two choices," the mayor said. "They can both spend substantial amounts of money battling each other for the next seven months for the public's support of their respective positions, or they can pool their resources and join together to help taverns thrive under the ban so they both win."

There was no word Friday from the Dane County Tavern League if it would accepting Cieslewicz's challenge.

\ E-mail: bnovak@madison.com

http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=tct:2005:09:17:514805:METRO

Painkiller use, hypertension linked?

Published: Sunday, Sep. 18, 2005

The question: Consider that nearly one in three adults in the United States has high blood pressure and that painkillers are the medication taken most often by Americans. Might the two be connected? The latest: This study analyzed data on 5,123 female nurses participating in two long-term studies on chronic diseases. None of the women had high blood pressure at the start of the study. In a three- to four-year period, those who regularly took more than 500 milligrams a day of acetaminophen were nearly twice as likely to develop high blood pressure as those who took none. Women who took more than 400 milligrams daily of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (mainly ibuprofen) had a 60 percent to 78 percent greater chance of developing high blood pressure than those who never took NSAIDs, with the likelihood increasing with age. Taking aspirin did not affect blood pressure readings. Who may be affected by these findings? Women who take sizable doses of painkillers regularly. Caveats: The findings were based on self-reporting of hypertension, but the authors considered the reports reliable because all participants were registered nurses. The study did not determine whether the risk of high blood pressure varied for ibuprofen, naproxen or other NSAIDs. The study considered participants� family history, physical activity and use of such products as caffeine, alcohol and tobacco; whether participants� health problems might have affected their blood pressure was unclear. Find this study: Aug. 15 online issue of Hypertension; abstract available at www.hypertensionaha.org . Learn more about high blood pressure at www.americanheart.org and www.mayoclinic.com.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050918/HEALTH/50917059

Non-Narcotic Analgesic Dose and Risk of Incident Hypertension in US Women

John P. Forman; Meir J. Stampfer; Gary C. Curhan

From the Renal Division (J.P.F., G.C.C.), Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass; Channing Laboratory (J.P.F., M.J.S., G.C.C.), Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; and Department of Epidemiology (J.P.F., M.J.S., G.C.C.), Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass.

Correspondence to John P. Forman, Channing Laboratory, Third Floor, 181 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail jforman@partners.org

Acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and aspirin are the most commonly used drugs in the United States. Although the frequency of their use has been associated with hypertension, prospective data examining the dose of these drugs and risk of hypertension are lacking. Furthermore, whether certain indications for analgesic use, particularly headache, mediate the association is unclear. We conducted 2 prospective cohort studies among older women 51 to 77 years of age (n=1903) from the Nurses� Health Study I and younger women 34 to 53 years of age (n=3220) from the Nurses� Health Study II who completed detailed supplemental questionnaires pertaining to their analgesic use and who did not have hypertension at baseline. We analyzed incident hypertension according to categories of average daily dose of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and aspirin. Information on indications for analgesic use as well as relevant confounders was also gathered prospectively. Compared with women who did not use acetaminophen, the multivariable adjusted relative risk for those who took >500 mg per day was 1.93 (1.30 to 2.88) among older women and 1.99 (1.39 to 2.85) among younger women. For nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, similar comparisons yielded multivariable relative risks of 1.78 (1.21 to 2.61) among older women and 1.60 (1.10 to 2.32) among younger women. These associations remained significant among women who did not report headache. Aspirin dose was not significantly associated with hypertension. Higher daily doses of acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs independently increase the risk of hypertension in women. Because acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are commonly used, they may contribute to the high prevalence of hypertension in the United States.

http://hyper.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/46/3/500

Posted at 2:11 pm by looped_ca
Make a comment

Saturday, September 17, 2005

what the papers said

Few male babies born in Chemical Valley community, study finds -ON

Canadian Press Tuesday, September 06, 2005

SARNIA, Ont. (CP) - The people living among a notorious cluster of chemical plants in southwestern Ontario want to know where the boys are.

A recent review of Aamjiwnaang First Nation birth records found there aren't very many boys being born in the Chemical Valley community, and Sarnia-area residents can't help but point the finger at the toxic industry that surrounds them.

According to the study, published in the American journal Environmental Health Perspectives, only about a third of babies born on the reserve between 1999 and 2003 were male. Going back to include another five years, only 41 per cent of babies born in the decade were boys. The ratio is normally something closer to 50:50.

"Is it what we're breathing in on a daily basis? Is it where we played as kids? Is it something our parents did? Is it these small exposures or is it because we've been living here our whole lives?" asked Ada Lockridge, a member of the band's environmental committee who also sits on the band council.

Residents of the 850-member native community started asking questions in 2003 when they realized there were three all-girl softball teams and only one for boys.

Lockridge was charged with the task of going through the birth records for the study. The lifelong resident of the area was stunned to realize her findings were far from normal.

"I felt like I wanted to throw up," she said. "I did a lot of crying."

Then she took a second look at her own family. She and her two sisters have nine kids between them. There is only one boy.

The Sarnia area is home to Canada's largest cluster of chemical, allied manufacturing and research and development facilities. Out of the 10 largest chemical companies in the world, eight have operations in Ontario. Lockridge can see the smokestacks of many of them just by stepping outside her front door.

While researchers are reluctant to point the finger at any one chemical being manufactured and processed in the area, some say it is difficult to think the industry is unrelated to the decline.

"It's a pretty significant decline," said Constanze Mackenzie, the fourth-year medical student at the University of Ottawa who led the study.

"The implications of this are that there appears to be some sort of influence on their reproductive ability," she said. "We're not sure what this influence is."

The sex of a human embryo is determined at conception, but it is thought factors including stress, chemical exposure and hormones can play a part.

"The community is located right in the centre of a number of large petrochemical and chemical industrial plants, so it is suspected they do have multiple exposures to environmental contaminants," said MacKenzie.

She added there is ongoing research in the area that shows similar changes in sex ratios and the reproductive ability of local wildlife.

The Canadian Chemical Producers' Association said Thursday it was aware of the study, but a spokesman said further research was needed.

"We would encourage more investigation by scientists to better identify reasons for the apparent change in sex ratios," said Michael Bourque, association spokesman.

Lockridge said even though studies like these raise questions about the safety of her home, she isn't planning to leave.

"It just depends which way the wind's blowing. This is our home, all our family is here and our friends we've grown up with all our lives."

http://www.canada.com/health/story.html?id=82c7a0bf-3169-4feb-916a-091bccd7141f

Two years after fire, suspect's court case splits town -BC

By PETTI FONG Wednesday, September 7, 2005 Page A5

'This has destroyed Mike,' resident says

VANCOUVER -- To the people of Barriere, Mike Barre is neither villain nor hero.

Like his neighbours in the town of 2,000, Mr. Barre's life changed when a forest fire ripped through the outskirts of Barriere two years ago.

The McLure-Barriere fire that destroyed 19,000 hectares and 39 homes and led to millions of dollars in losses left few untouched and was started, police allege, by a careless cigarette dropped on dry ground by Mr. Barre one hot summer evening.

Now, two years later, the town has been rebuilt and Mr. Barre has found redemption among his neighbours.

In court today, Mr. Barre will seek the same redemption.

He is charged with dropping a burning substance within one kilometre of a forest and if convicted, could face a maximum sentence of one year in jail and a fine of $500,000.

Mr. Barre has pleaded not guilty to the charge.

"This has destroyed Mike and just about destroyed his family for no reason other than to make him a scapegoat and to have someone to hang out to dry," said Jill Hayward, editor of the North Thompson Star Journal in Barriere and a fire victim who lost her house and cattle ranch.

Ms. Hayward said no one she knows is happy about seeing Mr. Barre charged under B.C.'s Forest Practices Code and even though a civil suit has been filed against him by some homeowners, residents are firmly on the side of their neighbour.

Barriere residents worried that Mr. Barre, who has a young daughter, was so distraught about the fire that he was suicidal. A petition started by neighbours showing their support for him now has more than 1,400 signatures.

Volunteer firefighter Rob Linnea said people have moved on, houses have been rebuilt and residents of Barriere consider the charge against Mr. Barre an attack on all of them.

"It feels like the court is picking on one of us," he said. ". . . The feeling is it's like kicking a dog when he's down."

Mr. Linnea said watching the footage in recent days of the devastation in New Orleans has convinced him and other Barriere residents that natural disasters happen and they consider themselves fortunate for having survived.

Changes in the town, which had largely relied on employment from a mill in Louis Creek that was also destroyed in the 2003 fire, have become permanently embedded.

Fear of more fires has made the town's residents cautious and wary, Mr. Linnea said. In Barriere, residents see fire wherever there's smoke. Not one fire in the past two years has been started by a cigarette.

Crown counsel Jonathan Oliphant said there is no possibility that, if convicted, Mr. Barre would face the maximum penalty.

In May, Kenneth Weaver of Kamloops pleaded guilty to starting a fire during the wildfires of two years ago. Mr. Weaver set off a flare to frighten away a bear, but the flare ignited a fire that burned nearly 18 hectares of land and cost $58,000 to put out. He was ordered to pay the Forest Ministry $10,000 and was fined $1,500.

The McLure-Barriere fire cost $31-million to extinguish. Mr. Barre has told people in Barriere and a reporter that he started the blaze and tried to put it out when it flared. When he couldn't contain it, he said, he ran to alert neighbours.

In total, the fire resulted in more than 3,500 people fleeing from Barriere and nearby McLure and Louis Creek.

Mr. Barre's remorse is evident and should be taken into account during his trial, said John Ranta, who was chair of the North Thompson Recovery Plan Task Force set up after the fire.

"We have laws in order that they act as a deterrent for people. If you are to turn a blind eye to someone who committed an offence, you're contributing to the potential that others may commit the same offence, with some degree of expectation that it would not be pursued by courts," Mr. Ranta said.

"The fire caused a lot of damage and hardship for an awful lot of people in the province, but I would hope the courts would be much more harsh on someone else."

It will take a long time for Mr. Barre to forgive himself, regardless of how the residents feel about him, said Bill Kershaw, a long-time resident and vice-chair of the Thompson Nicola Regional District.

"This spring, we had flooding in McLure and Mike was there, helping, sandbagging. He's part of the community, but this is something that he's carrying on his own and none of us can help him with that," Mr. Kershaw said.

"We've all had a loss, but he's bearing all of our losses."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/freeheadlines/LAC/20050907/BCFIR

E07/national/National

"Sleepwalking into disaster": small business delivers wake up call on proposed changes to the Ontario Municipal Act

TORONTO, Sept. 7 /CNW/ - Ontario's small business community wants a say in any changes to the Province's Municipal Act and overwhelmingly rejects the ideas of new powers of taxation and regulation for municipalities that are being proposed by mayors and their supporters. These are the key findings of a new survey released today about proposed changes to Ontario's Municipal Act by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB).

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/07/c6716.html

Gun-toting youths to appear in court -NS

Two Dartmouth youths will be charged in Halifax provincial court today after an armed robbery on Erskine Street Wednesday night.

Halifax Regional Police Sgt. Wayne Grantham said two male youths walked into Habib's Grocery just after 8 p.m., pointed a gun at the clerk and asked for cigarettes.

http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2005/09/08/fMetro.html

Finally, the right call -MB

By TOM BRODBECK September 8, 2005

NDP to nix charge to small-time bingo games

Gaming Control Minister Dave Chomiak has nipped Manitoba's Bingogate in the bud.

The minister says the practice of charging nickel-and-dime bingo operations licence fees, and burdening them with financial reporting, will end.

The news comes on the heels of a Winnipeg Sun story yesterday that exposed how the provincial Gaming Control Commission was cracking down on small bingo operations in private seniors homes, some with pots as little as $10 a game.

"The intention of the Gaming Control Commission was not to gouge," Chomiak told The Sun yesterday. "They're going to have a board meeting in about two weeks, and they're going to take another look at it because that was not their intention."

Under changes made by the commission in April, bingo operations that generate $5,000 or more a year in revenues had to start paying a licence fee and submit quarterly financial reports to the GCC.

That meant small bingo operations in seniors' homes and elsewhere with weekly payouts of $96 and up found themselves having to pay a licence fee and submit several pages of financial reporting every three months, including who won prizes and how much.

"There was no intention to jeopardize or to go after seniors and other groups that are doing this," said Chomiak. "I suspect that (the GCC) will probably find a way to exempt places like seniors centres where they have bingos because that certainly wasn't the intention."

Tory lotteries critic Ron Schuler, who raised the issue this week, said government has obviously come to its senses.

"We wanted them to stay out of seniors apartment blocks and private residences," said Schuler. "I don't think government belongs there at all."

Kate Kehler and 20 to 25 of her tenant friends at Edgewood Estates -- who play bingo in the basement of their East Kildonan complex every Tuesday night -- said she's happy with the changes.

"It's good news," said Kehler, 71. "We may go back to our $10 pot."

The Edgewood Estates group say they were told by GCC officials that their licence fee would be $500 a year.

SIGN OF RELIEF

But officials in Chomiak's office say that's an error, adding the fee would only have been 1.5% of revenue, or $75 a year on $5,000 of payouts, which is still ridiculous.

It's all moot now, anyway.

Small bingo operations like the one at Edgewood Estates will pay nothing to government, as they've done for years. And they won't have to fill out four pages of financial reporting every three months, either.

So, bingo players, you can all breath a sigh of relief.

And you can thank Dave Chomiak for fixing the problem in a timely manner.

Not everything that happens in government bureaucracies are known to ministers -- although they are ultimately responsible and often ought to know when they don't.

Nevertheless, the changes the GCC made were at the board level, so they didn't make it to Chomiak's desk.

What's important is that ministers fix a problem swiftly when it comes to their attention, which Chomiak did.

Even more critical, it's important for the public to speak up when something's wrong.

Which they did this week when they flooded Chomiak's office with calls about Bingogate.

A little democracy in action. It's nice to see.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Manitoba/2005/09/08/1206859-sun.html

Ottawa Routinely Breaks the Law in Treatment of Media Requests under Access to Information, Newspapers Claim

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/08/c7245.html

McGuinty government continues fight against smoking and for a healthier Ontario -ON

OTTAWA, Sept. 8 /CNW/ - The McGuinty government is continuing its fight against smoking by providing $1.68 million this year to support local groups engaged in tobacco-control initiatives, Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson announced today.

Today's funding announcement will mean $686,000 in funding for Ottawa Public Health and $992,000 for Region of Waterloo Public Health.

This year, the McGuinty government will invest $50 million in its Smoke-Free Ontario Campaign - the largest anti-smoking investment in the province's history.

The Smoke-Free Ontario Act, which received third and final reading on June 8, 2005, will prohibit smoking in all enclosed workplaces and public places in the province beginning May 31, 2006, and will toughen laws on tobacco sales to minors, with a complete ban on the display of tobacco products by May 31, 2008.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/08/c7561.html

Ban urged for all workplaces -SK

Heather Polischuk Leader-Post Thursday, September 08, 2005

Heather Crowe is packing up her belongings, trying to decide what to keep and what to give away as she prepares to move into a care home.

Crowe, 60, from Ottawa was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer three years ago, which has since spread to her liver and spine. That means another round of chemotherapy, more medication to ease constant pain and a need for 24-hour care.

Crowe -- who was told she has just three months to a year left to live -- was awarded compensation for lung cancer caused by occupational exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke. The non-smoker had spent 40 years working as a waitress in restaurants, bars and banquet halls.

"The only reason I'm in this condition is because I went to work every day and this really is what happens to the unprotected worker," said Crowe. "I don't want to take (smokers') rights away from them, I just want legislation that states when you go to work, you're going to be protected."

And that legislation is too long in coming, argued June Blau, president of the Saskatchewan Coalition for Tobacco Reduction, saying such regulations have been under review for more than a year. According to Statistics Canada figures, in 2004 Saskatchewan had the lowest number of workers protected from second-hand smoke at 62 per cent.

"We don't see any light at the end of the tunnel," said Blau. "Meanwhile people continue to be exposed to second-hand smoke and our death and disease toll is continuing to accumulate."

Health Canada statistics show up to 7,800 Canadians die each year because of second-hand smoke.

"I think the point is we can prevent it, so even one death is too many," said Blau. "This is a totally preventable situation and it's in our power to do that and to do it immediately, so why wouldn't we just do it?"

Labour Minister Deb Higgins said Saskatchewan is doing something about it. She said the province has taken some big steps in the last few years to cut down on smoking in the workplace.

"I mean, to go from wide-open smoking to 60 per cent in a couple of years to zero in public places, we have made some pretty significant moves," said Higgins.

However, she admitted those smoking bans do not carry over to all workplaces, just those where the public may go.*

Blau said that is not good enough. She said she wants legislation that makes all workplaces smoke-free, as has been done in several other Canadian provinces like Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba.

"For those of us who know about Heather Crowe and other people who have died or will die from second-hand smoke, it's an issue of some urgency to just get it done," she said. "And we think that there's really nothing to stop the government from going ahead with legislation."

Higgins said the matter is not yet in the hands of legislators. She said an Occupational Health and Safety council is currently completing a legislative review that may address the issue of workplace smoking. That report is due in by the end of the year, said Higgins.

In the meantime, Crowe continues to speak out against workplace smoking and said she will continue to do so as long as she can.

"They should really consider doing the right thing and making all workplaces smoke-free right across Canada," she said. "And I doubt that I'll live to see it happen but I'm hoping I will."

*to clarify the issue they would consider anywhere that you work (including home) a workplace, whether public goes there or not

http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/news/city_province/story.html?id=e055cdab-8751-4f25-b608-ea0404bbdbc0

Sarnia still smoke-free -ON

By Barry Wright | Sarnia this week Sept 9, 2005

Lambton County has just marked its first anniversary as a smoke-free community.

One-year anniversary of by-law sparkss mixed reactions within the community of Sarnia Lambton

The controversial bylaw was enacted on September 4, 2004.

�Residents and visitors have welcomed and embraced the opportunity to enjoy smoke-free restaurants, bars, bingo halls, casinos, apartment lobbies, bowling alleys and taxis, not to mention a smoke-free work environment,� says Dr. Christopher Greensmith, acting medical officer of health for Lambton County.

�Exposure to toxic second-hand smoke in workplaces and public places is a problem of the past,� Greensmith added.

But, not everyone agrees. A challenge to the local legislation, by Andrew Falby and Patrick Forget, is still before the court.

They claim the county�s public consultation process was flawed and a referendum should have been held before the bylaw was passed.

Earlier this year, the county was unsuccessful in trying to have those objections quashed altogether.

Public health officials say 30 complaints have been investigated since the bylaw came into being last year, with 12 warnings issued and two businesses charged.

�There is a need to reverse the impression that smoking is normal,� says John Hitchins of the Council for a Tobacco-Free Lambton.

He says the council�s goals of prevention, cessation and protection have been furthered by the year-old bylaw.

�Now every man, woman and child in Lambton County has the opportunity to enjoy smoke-free public places and workplaces.�.

http://www.sarniathisweek.com/

Smokers vent opposition to ban -ON

Neil Bowen The Sarnia Observer - September 9, 2005

Ontario's ruled by a nanny government intent on bypassing personal rights because the government knows best, according to opponents of the province's smoking ban.

"I am allowed to sell it (tobacco) but I can't let you smoke it. It's asinine," said Ralph MacIntosh, owner of the Georgian Shop on Mitton Street, during Thursday's local hearing organized by a tobacco lobby group.

Under the nanny state, smokers are treated as social outcasts, communities have been hit by negative economic impacts and personal freedom has been removed, said Nancy Daigneault, president of Mychoice.ca.

The non-profit group funded by the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council has 23,000 members, including 200 to 300 in Sarnia-Lambton, dedicated to changing Ontario's smoking ban.

"There's no problem with the government advocating a healthy lifestyle but adults don't have to adopt the lifestyle. They're coming into your kitchen. Canadians don't want that," she told the hearing being presided over by Conservative MPP Toby Barrett from the tobacco farming region of Haldlimand-Norfolk.

None of the hearing's speakers disputed the negative health impacts of smoking, but it was suggested air quality standards could be set for second-hand smoke.

Lambton's acting medical officer of health, Dr. Chris Greensmith, has stated the local ban has made exposure to second-hand smoke at work and public places a problem of the past.

Andrew Falby, a local resident, said the "nanny state has taken over," and people need to educate themselves about the meaning of freedom.

He has challenged the Lambton smoking ban in court and that case will continue this month or October.

John Mallon, co-owner of the Ups N' Downs pub in Sarnia, told the hearing "there's a whole lot of big brother in this."

He wants patios to be allowed under the province's ban as they are in the Lambton bylaw.

Barrett also heard an estimate that the local smoking ban has cost charities $1 million through reductions in bingo revenues during the year the ban has been in effect. It began last September.

"We're all hurting. . . We've lost the American trade," said Shirley Pettit, president of the association of 85 charities using Bingo Country as a fundraising venue.

When the ban started, she said charities were told a drop in business would be temporary but "that didn't happen," she said.

She handles the Sertoma Club bingos where revenue dropped from $43,000 per year to $18,000.

Many bingo players are smokers and charities should have a say about the laws, she said.

Barrett said the province-wide ban is "pretty well a done deal" with implementation set for next May, but ideas for changing the legislation came through the Sarnia hearing and one in Windsor.

Karen Bodirsky of the Fair Air Association wants Ontario to follow British Columbia's lead. It stipulates only 25 per cent of an establishment's floor space can be a designated smoking room equipped with a separate ventilation system.

Air in that room must match the exterior air quality and workers can only spend 25 per cent of the shift inside the room.

Smoking patios should be allowed that go beyond an area completely open to the elements.

"Standing out there (in the open) like a bunch of cattle is quite scary," she said.

Barrett said it might require a court action against the ban as was done in British Columbia.

"There's a challenge for the Ontario hospitality industry," he said.

http://www.mychoice.ca/display_page.asp?page_id=450

Ontario Youth Group Presses 18A Rating for Tobacco at Toronto International Film Festival -ON

TORONTO, Sept. 9 /CNW Telbec/ - Wide Awake, a youth movement against tobacco marketing, will attempt to buttonhole film producers at the Toronto International Film Festival and urge them to keep future films rated G, PG and 14A tobacco-free.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/09/c8046.html

Reports on tobacco crop varied -ON

Jeff Helsdon - Staff Writer The Tillsonburg News Friday September 09, 2005

The bulk of the 2005 tobacco crop is off and there are varying reports on the quality.

�The crop appears to be of excellent quality,� Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers� Marketing Board chairman Fred Neukamm said of the tobacco in the Aylmer area where he lives. �We�ve had an exceptionally warm season that�s allowed the crop to reach its potential. It�s starting to get cooler at night, which allows the leaves to ripen.�

He said when the crop grows quickly it results in robust tobacco. However, Neukamm had heard of curing problems with the lower leaves.

Denise Beaton of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food said the progress of harvest varies from farm to farm and even field to field on the same farm. Some fields are being stripped while others are in the fourth pulling. Most of the calls she received about cooling problems in the lower leaves were in regard to bacterial soft rot. Beaton said it is too early to tell how the upper pullings will cure out.

A Tillsonburg-area grower wasn�t as satisfied with his crop, saying rain didn�t come in the area at the right times, resulting in a lighter crop.

http://www.tillsonburgnews.com/story.php?id=183259

Accused describes events on day of fatal fire -BC

By PETTI FONG Friday, September 9, 2005 Page S1

KAMLOOPS, B.C. -- By his own calculations, Mike Barre has smoked 350,000 cigarettes in his lifetime and his process for butting out each one was as much a habit as his addiction, he told a Kamloops courtroom yesterday.

For the first time since the devastating McLure-Barriere fire of 2003, which he is accused of starting, Mr. Barre explained in detail what happened the afternoon of July 30, when he smoked a cigarette and dropped it on the ground.

The 52-year-old, who has pleaded not guilty, testified that since he began smoking at the age of 15 or 16, he always used a four-step process to extinguish a cigarette: he dropped it on the ground, put his foot on it, stomped it and then twisted the butt.

The final two steps were to make sure the ashes were dispersed, he told the court, adding that he always double-checked to make sure the cigarette was out.

Mr. Barre, a volunteer firefighter who was working on construction jobs that summer, is charged under the B.C. Forest Practice Code with dropping a lighted substance within one kilometre of a forest. Though the act has since been repealed -- Mr. Barre was the last person to be charged under it -- he faces a maximum penalty of a year in jail and a fine of up to $500,000 if convicted.

Mr. Barre told the court that he was so familiar with butting out his cigarette that it was second nature, like walking out a door.

On that July afternoon, Mr. Barre was on a hillside behind his property with a satellite-installation technician. He said he was smoking as the two men looked around for a suitable site.

When he finished a cigarette, he discarded the butt on the ground. He said he first thought of throwing it into a pit, but when he saw the hole was filled with garbage he decided that was too dangerous and he butted out the cigarette instead.

Mr. Barre initially told the 911 emergency dispatcher, his neighbours and fire investigators, that he was responsible for the wildfire, which eventually burned through 26,000 hectares, but he and his lawyer, John Hogg, are now raising doubts about that claim.

Mr. Hogg told the court that a marijuana grow operation, 150 metres from the site where the wildfire allegedly began, could have brought people in and out of the area.

In addition to the criminal charge, Mr. Barre is being sued by a number of businesses, including the Tolko mill, one of the region's major employers.

The mill, in neighbouring Louis Creek, burned down, as did nearly 100 other buildings between McLure and Barriere. More than 3,000 people were forced out of their homes as the blaze spread in the province's worst forest-fire season in 50 years.

Mr. Barre told the court that after noticing smoke on his hill, he ran for assistance and brought back two men to help fight the fire. But within minutes it was out of control.

He testified that when he talked to people during and after the fire, he was overwhelmed.

"It was just devastating. Tolko burned down. People losing their homes. One person was suicidal. There was a helicopter pilot who died," he said.

"People lost their possessions. I was so emotionally distraught. I never thought about it, I came forward and I said my piece and I just carried on."

In earlier testimony yesterday, Joel Birkeland, the satellite technician, and Stephen Grimaldi, a ministry of forests investigator, testified that the ground covering where the cigarette was discarded contained pine needles.

But Mr. Barre disputed that, saying he extinguished his cigarette on ground that was sandy, with no vegetation nearby.

In a brief interview outside the court, Mr. Barre said he always had doubts that his cigarette was what ignited the massive wildfire, but in the first days after it started, he was consumed with a range of emotions. "I can't explain what it felt like. There was so much going on around," he said.

"In the end, it doesn't matter whether I win or lose, no one won in this at all."

Mr. Barre still smokes, but used an ashtray during breaks in the trial.

The judge is to hear final submissions today, and is expected to render a written decision within the next two weeks.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050909/BCFIRE09/TPNational/Canada

Does this non smoker not get my point? -AB

On: That Smoking Bylaw Sept 9, 2005 Page 11, 12

Reader Response The Things Our Readers See, and Hear, and Think

Dear Mr. Sinclair: I would like to respond to the article that you wrote regarding the smoking issue on August 12.

St. Albert council did the absolute, totally correct thing by banning all smoking! It is unfortunate that Mr. Klein, our premier, with his total lack of wisdom, did not make this a complete province wide ban.

You stated that servers are claiming "severe financial distress as tips have dried up." This is a totally unrelated cause for lack of tips.You should suggest that the "smoking" patrons should increase theirs tips (sic) for the servers for being in some clean, unpolluted air.

You also stated the (sic) there is "the stress of small female servers being forced to reprimand large male patrons. "Are all these female servers "small"? Perhaps the bar owners should be dealing with these patrons, not the "small" servers.

You stated that 90 per cent of bar patrons smoke. Did you ever consider the health related issues that face the workers who work in bars? Obviously not. How many of these servers may get lung cancer from second hand smoke I have no problem with people who want to smoke, as long as they are smoking in their own air space and are polluting their own lungs.

St. Albert council was definitely not on a power trip when they imposed this ban. They had considerations of the health benefits to the general public.

Your analogy of the 20 hotels in Sask. (sic) That (sic) have closed directly "as a result of the province wide ban" is not entirely correct. Many small towns in Sask. are losing their population to larger cities as are many towns in Alberta. The closing of these hotels may not be related to the smoking ban. Regarding your legion issue, if they want to stay home and smoke, that is good. At least, they will be polluting their own lungs. They have to abide by the same rules as every one else.

There is no reason or excuse for anyone who worked in a bar and "lost" their job, not to find another. Are these bar workers no capable of doing something else? There are lots of jobs available in St. Albert and Edmonton. There are many signs asking for workers. Do not even use this as an excuse.

You obviously need to focus on the health issue and not on the rights issue. Everyone who chooses to can still smoke, but they do not have the right to pollute someone else's (sic) air space!

If the smokers need to take their business elsewhere, then they should. However, it would be better for them to butt out and face reality and not complain. It is a done deal. Live with it. I have included some articles that I am passing on to you. Please read them. You may actually learn something from them.

I can not put my name down because I do not want the irate smokers phoning me.

No Name Supplied Hand Delivered

Sinc Says: Where to start? Another none smoker who just doesn't get it.

All smokers want is the right to congregate in a smoking establishment where no one under 18 is allowed. As for your rant on bar workers health, take a look the next time you pass a bar. The servers are out on the sidewalk with the patrons during their break. Want to guess what they are doing? As a side note, you won't name yourself, but expect me to do so and take calls or mail from people like you?

www.saintcitynews.com

Businesses suffer under smoking ban, says owners -AB

Agnieszka Wyka Sept. 9,2005. page 43

Nello Saporito opened his doors eight months ago and says business has dropped dramatically since the smoking ban came into effect.

The next time you walk into the St. Albert Inn you may notice something a little different and you can blame it on the city's smoking ban. Michael Mazepa, who began operating the business in 1976, says that since the non smoking law in bars and lounges came into effect on July 1st of this year, he has seen a dramatic drop in business.

"Over the years the cocktail lounge has supported itself and made profit and these days it's not, so I'm making the business decision now" says Mazepa, who has seen a 65 per cent drop in revenue in just the last two months.

The common opinion many business owners, including Mazepa, have heard over and over again of course is that, while they may experience an initial drop in clientele, too disgruntled or perhaps pissed off to come in because they can't smoke, traffic will eventually pick up as people get used to being told they have to interrupt their evening out at a pub to go outside to feed their cravings. Mazepa doesn't buy it for a second.

"Smoking is a stupid habit but it's also a personal choice" he says, stressing that the same logic should apply to the business owner. "If a non- smoking customer comes into the lounge and later complains to me about the stink, it is up to me as a businessman to make a decision whether I should cater to the smoker or to the non-smoker. It's my decision to make".

Rather than seeing it legislated and imposed, Mazepa like so many others, would have preferred to make the call to go smoke-free based on the demand from clients---not legislators or the non-smoking majority.

I heard the same tune from the owner of a delightful Italian eatery in St. Albert. Nello Saporito opened his restaurant just eight months ago and catered to adult clientele only; allowing people to have the choice to smoke inside his establishment.

"They came to Nello's for the food, dropped a couple of hundred dollars on a fine bottle of wine, smoked and drank and business was good---it's not the case now" says Saporito as we sit at a crisply dressed table at the front of his empty restaurant---it's 6:30 on a weeknight and only three tables are being used.

But what really gets this restaurateur, is again that despite the fact he owns the place and pays considerable taxes he is being told what to do and how to do it.

"The City has no right to tell me how to deal with my customers. Non smokers can find non-smoking places and I should be able to serve who I want to. It's my business so where is the freedom?"

That attitude seems vaguely familiar? When the province imposed seatbelt laws many Albertans were disgruntled about being told what to do inside their vehicles. After all, it seems like a personal choice to buckle up. But it's not.

"It's not because at one point the safety, health and preservation of life outweigh to a certain extent personal freedom" says St.Albert's Mayor Paul Chalifoux

He agrees some establishments are hurting because of the smoking ban but adds that the secret to a successful business is the ability to keep up with the trends as the playing-field changes.

"You don't operate in a vacuum---you operate in a context of societal laws". It is some of these societal laws, and the trend to put limits on how people chose to lead their lives and, as in this case who businesses can cater to, that have some concerned.

"What are they going to ban next?" asks Mazepa, who is by the way laying-off four full-time employees from the Inn's cocktail lounge as a result of the smoking ban.

He thinks smoking is flat out "stupid and unhealthy" but, he adds, "so are fatty foods." Same sentiments from Saporito, as he expresses his disappointment and disillusionment.

"I came to this country years and years ago because there was freedom -- but where is the freedom now?" I looked this fifty-something Italian in the eye and asked---"what about the freedom of your employees to work in an environment that won't put them at risk of lung cancer"?

He smirks, "all of my employees---every single one---smokes. They don't care".

Smoking is an unhealthy and potentially deadly habit but we return to the human rights issue---it is a choice. Am I sympathetic to the rights of smokers? Absolutely, I indulge myself. Am I against the smoking ban? No. I enjoy the clean air in pubs and bars these days. It's refreshing to come home and not reek like an ashtray that has been left sitting unattended for days.

But the fact remains that if a smoker dishes out an average of $10 per pack, with much of it going into provincial and federal coffers, he should have access to restaurants or pubs that have the choice to cater to smokers only. The only way to make the smoking ban--- and the cited reasons for it--- fair, is if cigarettes are outlawed all together, say many of the people I talked to for this series.

So far that has officially happened in only one place in the entire world--- Bhutan. The Himalayan kingdom made history in December of 2004 when it banned all tobacco sales and smoking in public in an effort to become a smoke- free nation. Simple and genuine.

Smoking in our society A special two-part series in Saint City News Freelance writer, and admitted smoker, Agnieszka Wyka delves into society's perception of smoking and how it has evolved. Today, in part two of the series,Wyka talks with some business owners at the end of the busy summer season to find out what impact the smoking ban had.

We encourage feedback on the series at editor@saintcitynews.com

www.saintcitynews.com http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2040

Bear Ban would stop danger -ON

September 10 2005

Dalton McGuinty, when are you and the rest of the morons in your provincial Fiberal party going to ban black bears? Two attacks in Ontario -- this is obviously an epidemic and these black bears, or anything that looks like a black bear, should be banned!

Rob Ferguson Woodville

(How about a bear registry?)

http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/09/10/1210406.html

Judge reserves wildfire case ruling -BC

By ROBERT KOOPMANS Canadian Press Saturday, September 10, 2005 Page A5

KAMLOOPS, B.C. -- The man accused of starting a devastating wildfire in the B.C. Interior in 2003 took the blame too early, his lawyer told a Provincial Court judge yesterday.

Defence lawyer John Hogg said that Mike Barre is "a good guy" who was forthright and honest in the days after the fire started, but he talked too much.

"If he had followed my advice from the start, we wouldn't be here today," Mr. Hogg said.

Mr. Barre, 52, pleaded not guilty to dropping a burning substance within one kilometre of a forest on July 30, 2003, in contravention of British Columbia's Forest Practices Code.

After the defence and Crown wrapped up their cases, Judge William Sundhu said he will give a written decision some time in the coming weeks. A date for the verdict will be fixed Friday.

If convicted, Mr. Barre could face a maximum fine of $1-million and a sentence of three years in prison. The code doesn't specify a minimum.

Mr. Hogg told the judge there are other possible explanations for the wildfire than Mr. Barre's discarded cigarette.

A marijuana grow operation discovered by investigators near where it is believed the fire started suggests the likelihood that other people were roaming about the hillside.

"[A grow-op] brings human activity; it causes people to go up the hill and be there more than they normally would. And not hikers, not mountain bikers," Mr. Hogg said.

"Do people who run grow operations smoke? You bet. There is an industry up there."

Mr. Hogg said there is no question his client dropped a cigarette as he walked up a trail behind his house. However, Mr. Barre is adamant that he stomped the cigarette out in bare dirt, as was his usual practise.

Mr. Barre testified Thursday that he has probably smoked 350,000 cigarettes in his life and butted out 25 per cent of them in the outdoors.

He always did the same thing with them -- dropped them and twisted them into the dirt with his toe, he said. "Everyone knows putting a cigarette into dirt is the proper way to put it out," Mr. Hogg said.

It is for that reason, the lawyer said, that hotels and government buildings supply ashtrays with sand in them.

"With the tools he had, it was good enough," Mr. Hogg said.

Prosecutor Jonathan Oliphant said, however, that because of the conditions of the day, Mr. Barre should have done more. He could have taken his spent cigarette out with him or, more simply, he could have made the decision to not smoke as he walked up the path into the pines.

"He didn't have to smoke in the tinder-dry woods, he could have chosen to wait," Mr. Oliphant said. "That was a very easy alternative. He was only going up there for 15 or 20 minutes."

Mr. Oliphant said the Crown is not required to prove that Mr. Barre started the fire, only that he dropped a burning cigarette in the forest. "This case is about whether Mr. Barre dropped a lit substance within a kilometre of a forest. He did that. He dropped a lit cigarette in a forest."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050910/FIRE10/TPNational/

Killed for a smoke? -ON

By CHRIS DOUCETTE, TORONTO SUN Sat, September 10, 2005

ONE MINUTE Rommel Molina was chilling with his buddies at a North York park, the next the 21-year-old was dying on the ground with a bullet in his chest.

Friends and family remembered the city's 52nd murder victim of the year -- gunned down Thursday afternoon near Jane St. and Lawrence Ave. W.-- as a "great guy" who had never been in trouble. His only mistake was standing up to the wrong two guys.

"He didn't do anything wrong and he didn't deserve to die like this," said Rene Molina, 19, who along with his mom, dad, 17-year-old sister and about 20 of Rommel's friends, stopped by Upwood Park on Marshlynn Ave. yesterday to see where his brother was killed.

BRIEF ARGUMENT

Homicide Det.-Sgt. Gary Giroux said Rommel was "smoking and talking" with three friends in the park bocce court when two young men approached them at 5 p.m.

An "extremely brief" argument ensued and one man pulled out a pistol and shot Rommel at close range.

Giroux said he didn't know what the fight was about, but family and friends had some idea what happened.

"Rommel was just minding his own business," Rene Molina said. "This guy came up to him and asked for a smoke and he said no, so the guy ripped my brother's cigarette out of his mouth and shot him."

Friends recounted a different story, saying Rommel and his pals were actually smoking marijuana.

The group left the park frustrated when they saw it still cordoned off.

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/TorontoAndGTA/2005/09/10/1210542-sun.html

Contraband cigarettes, pot seized -QC

Dan Rosenburg posted September 10, 2005

Contraband cigarettes and marijuana were confiscated by Chateauguay police in a raid at 15 Julien street in Beauharnois on Labor Day.

According to police constable Michel Roy, confreres acting on a tip from an anonymous source raided the house at 3:30 p.m. with warrant in hand.

They seized 20 marijuana plants; 2.5 kilos of marijuana in plastic bags; 19 cases of contraband cigarettes, and six cases of tobacco emanating from the U.S. Police estimate the value of the entire haul at $90,000.

Mario Boisvert, 37, the owner of the house, was arrested and appeared in Valleyfield court last Tuesday where he was charged with production of cannabis and possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking. The cigarette dossier was referred to the RCMP for further action.

According to police, Boisvert had no previous record for this type of crime. Anyone with information about the case is urged to call Det-Sgt. Benoit Perron at 698-3223 or Info-Confidentielle at 698-3229.

http://www.hebdos.net/lsc/edition372005/articles.asp?article_id=101982

Tobacco ads now outside of stores -ON

Has anyone noticed the increasing number of gasoline stations and convenience store retailers who are advertising the sale of cigarettes on the outside of their stores?

It's my understanding that federal law limits inside-store point-of-sale displays of tobacco products. But by the size of these signs, outside of their stores, there appear to be no limits.

This kind of smoking promotion certainly flies in the face of the good work of the Canadian Lung Association, whose programs include smoking prevention for young people.

Perhaps a made-in-London municipal bylaw can put a stop to this. Our young people deserve this protection.

Rob Allen London

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/Letters/

Jail's no smoking policy now includes tea bags -MB

Tuesday, September 13th, 2005

A Manitoba jail has stopped serving tea because some inmates were using tea bags to make cigarettes.

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2059

Concert security -AB

Sept 13, 2005

In response to Ron Hewton's Sept. 4 letter, "Concert security grates on rock fan," how can he justify smoking in a non-smoking building just because he paid good money? News flash, Ron, there are thousands of fans who also paid good money and are sick of having to breathe your smoke. Do us all a favour. Before the concert, choke down a pack of your cigarettes or whatever you smoke and let us enjoy the concert.

Cory Kohlenberg

(That might even prompt him to quit.)

http://calsun.canoe.ca/Comment/Letters/2005/09/13/1214785.html

Montreal bar owners to challenge Quebec smoking ban -QC

CBC News Last Updated Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:12:44 EDT

Two bar owners in Montreal are launching a legal battle against Quebec's anti-smoking legislation. They say the law will cause job losses because more patrons will stay home.

Peter Sergakis said Quebec's anti-tobacco legislation will put him and other bar owners out of business.

"I'm working all my life to build my businesses. In Ottawa, 210 bars - 60 of them closed - 25 per cent reductions in sales. We don't want to lose our businesses and we don't want to put people out of work."

Sergakis and another Montreal bar owner are heading to Quebec Superior Court to fight the law.

Quebec has passed legislation that will outlaw smoking in all public spaces next June.

The bar owners have hired constitutional lawyer Julius Grey who will argue that prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants infringes on smokers constitutional rights.

"The problem is that tobacco is not outlawed," Grey said. "The problem is how far can the government regulate the everyday choices of people is there a limit." "And so what we are going to ask the court is to determine the very delicate limits of intervention with respect to lawful behaviour."

Grey said bar patrons are adults and they should be able to have a choice to smoke in a well-ventilated area.

Effective May 31, 2006, Quebec's Bill 112 will prohibit smoking:

-In pubs, restaurants, taverns, bars and bingo halls

-In enclosed spaces where the activities held are reserved for persons invited or authorized to attend by the host

-Under big tops

-In shelters and other similar facilities that are open to the public

-On school grounds

Within nine meters from any exterior door leading to a facility of a health and social services institution, to a building of a general and vocational college or a university or to a facility of a childcare centre

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/09/14/smoking_challenge_20050914.html

Quebec lawyer to challenge smoking ban -QC

By INGRID PERITZ Wednesday, September 14, 2005 Page A9

Restrictions 'an example of Big Brother going too far,' constitutional expert says

MONTREAL -- One of Quebec's leading constitutional experts is filing a legal challenge to the province's new smoking ban, which he described as an unacceptable, Big Brother-style infringement on individual freedoms.

Julius Grey, a lawyer known for championing high-profile civil-rights causes, is going to Quebec Superior Court on behalf of two Montreal bar owners to try to block the new provincial legislation.

He says the anti-smoking campaign belongs in the same basket as Canadian anti-terrorism laws -- well-intentioned actions that have gone overboard.

"It's a civil liberties issue. The [anti-smoking] campaign cannot be allowed to overcome all other rights."

The Quebec government's full ban on smoking in restaurants and bars, which comes into effect next May, has so far generated little opposition in the province.

But Mr. Grey said the restrictions violate freedoms guaranteed in the Canadian and Quebec Charters, and he wants the courts to rule on how far the state can go in curtailing a legal habit.

"There is a limit to how much can be imposed for your own good," the non-smoking lawyer told a press conference at a smoky Montreal bar.

"This is an example of Big Brother going too far."

Mr. Grey viewed the restrictions as an example of "paternalism" and said the problem of second-hand smoke can be solved with ventilation in separate smoking rooms.

"We have to constantly be vigilant to protect liberty, and liberty is particularly in danger when the cause is popular."

Anti-tobacco legislation has faced numerous legal challenges in Canada.

While all have been unsuccessful, their result has been to delay the law's implementation, an anti-smoking group says.

"These laws are holding almost everywhere -- the science has developed to the point where it's unassailable," said Francis Thompson, a policy analyst in Ottawa for the Toronto-based Non-Smokers' Rights Association.

"We accept all other limits on behaviour. Behaviour that imposes a risk to third parties is fair game."

Anti-smoking groups also challenge bar owners' contention that smoking bans are bad for business. They say that jurisdictions that have brought in bans, including Ireland, Ontario and New York, have seen little or no negative effects.

"Instead of fearing an eventual loss of clientele of some smokers, they should be happy to gain a new clientele of non-smokers who avoided bars on principle solely because of smoke," said Flory Doucas, a political analyst in Montreal with a non-smoking rights group.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050914/SMOKE14/TPNational/

Posted at 3:44 pm by looped_ca
Make a comment

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

baffling news

Canadian bar owners to defy law -NL

by Rosie Gillingham The St. John's Telegram - August 31, 2005

October 10, 2005. And this time, they intend to make government take notice. "The civil disobedience that will come into play ... is something that will be tested here, he said.

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2021

Smoke less (but drink more if you must) -ON

By The Georgetown Independent Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Much is made of the ironic life of the college student. While we necessarily possess uncommon intelligence and aptitude, we are also remarkably prone to make exceedingly ill-informed decisions and to participate in reckless, often destructive behavior. We devote a seemingly immeasurable amount of time and effort to our academic pursuits with a brand of passion matched only by our desire to unwind by over-indulging in alcohol, pizza and the like. These activities reside on opposing poles of the spectrum of quality decisions, yet they are routinely performed by sensible beings with a disregard for logic only a college student can appreciate or understand. Smoking cigarettes also happens to fit neatly into this paradigm.

When the end goal of an evening is to, among other things, alter one's state of mind, a cigarette or two or eighteen seems a natural choice. The buzz provided by the nicotine entering the bloodstream is, to many, a welcome complement to the alcohol already there. However, a parallel between these two should not be drawn, as one does not exist. This is not an instance of 'pick your poison' in which all options are equally destructive. While alcohol indeed destroys brain cells, causes undue liver stress, and can, obviously, lead to further, um, unwise decisions, it is most often a poison that can be successfully abandoned once the days of Village A rooftops, the Tombs, and Wagner's are nothing but memories.

Routinely smoking cigarettes as a college student, however, is akin to signing a contract with the cancer devil that will ultimately be cashed in against decades of your life. If ever there were a slippery slope, tobacco consumption is it. Smoking just four cigarettes a day leads to a ninety percent chance of becoming addicted. Social smoking turns into smoking alone outside the library turns into buying a carton or two a week before you can say, "Joe Cool." Then you're likely stuck with a lifetime habit that is not only unhygienic and unattractive, but also life-threatening. Talk about playing with fire. You will rue the day, as a forty year old embarrassment to your family, that you thought holding a burning cancer stick was a good idea.

So, the next time you feel like stepping outside for a quick cigarette, ask yourself if you want to be lurking in the parking lot at your kid's little league games, ashamed to smoke in plain sight of the other parents because, odds are good that if you smoke now, you'll still be addicted in a couple of decades. The days of smoking to look cool are over, as are those of stealing beer out of your parents' fridge; this is for real now. As you strive to form your identity and uncover your future self, decide whether or not you really want that cowboy or camel guy hanging out with you.

In our profoundly unscientific opinion, when then opportunity presents itself, we recommend that you ditch the cigarette and have another beer instead - hell, have two. If you really need the flame, light your shot of 151, and leave the smoking to, oh, I don't know, the French.

http://www.thegeorgetownindependent.com/media/paper136/news/2005/08/31/Editorials/Smoke.Less.but.Drink.More.If.You.Must-972493.shtml

Landmark hypertension study shows reductions in mortality and strokes

- Clinical study provides new evidence for optimal treatment of Canadians with high blood pressure -

LONDON, ON, Sept. 4 /CNW/ - Results from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT), a landmark hypertension study, were presented today at the European Society of Cardiology meeting in Stockholm, Sweden. The results of ASCOT show that patients taking a calcium channel blocker-based treatment regimen (amlodipine besylate) experienced significant reductions in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and incidence of strokes.

Study participants were required to have hypertension and at least three other cardiovascular risk factors, such as being 55 years of age or older, smoking or having diabetes. Additionally, more than half of the patients with mildly elevated cholesterol received either a cholesterol lowering medication (atorvastatin) or placebo to determine whether decreasing cholesterol provides additional cardiovascular benefits.

"ASCOT offers an important insight into a simple treatment solution for patients at risk of heart attack or stroke. It provides physicians with new evidence to assist them in helping their patients lower their blood pressure. The novelty of the study is that it looks at the 'real-world' hypertensive patient scenario

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/04/c5706.html

Smoking policy baffles -MB

Mon, September 5, 2005

I am completely perplexed by this whole issue of allowing smoking in Winnipeg School Division.

Walk into any convenience store, cigarettes are hidden from view. The logic being that kids will see them and want to buy them of course. Tobacco companies can no longer advertise and sponsor major sporting events -- kids will, of course, see this and, therefore, want to smoke.

There is constant talk that we need to educate our kids against the dangers of smoking. We keep putting the onus on society and businesses to teach children right from wrong. Yet, in the one place where they get their education, where we teach them life skills and give them the tools to succeed, we aren't doing that.

Are we really saying that convenience stores and sporting events do a better job of teaching our children than schools? And if so, perhaps we should move some of our classes to those places -- at least they won't be able smoke.

Michelle Baines Winnipeg

(Might be a good way for the students to learn some basic arithmetic, too.)

http://www.winnipegsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/09/05/1202349.html

New law targets allergy risk -ON

SANDY NAIMAN, AND PETER GEIGEN-MILLER, Free Press Reporter 2005-09-05

Schools must have a plan to protect staff and students with severe allergies.

Back-to-school time can be stressful enough for parents, children and educators, what with new classrooms, new friends, new challenges.

But this year in Ontario, you can add a controversial new law to safeguard kids with severe, potentially life-threatening food allergies.

The precedent-setting guidelines must go into effect at all publicly funded Ontario schools on Jan. 1, 2006.

The law -- also known as Sabrina's Law -- is a first in North America.

It requires all publicly funded schools to educate staff and students about a severe allergic reaction known as anaphylaxis and to have response procedures in place.

The legislation will affect entire schools, from principals and teachers to parents and children.

Everyone, whether they want to or not, will share the responsibility of ensuring the safety of the minority for whom certain foods can be deadly.

It might mean no peanut-butter sandwiches for lunch or a segregated "peanut table" in the cafeteria.

Some parents may be infuriated by that.

But the law is welcomed by Kim Chinnick of Chatham, whose daughter, Kelly, 9, died in 1987 while sharing a potluck lunch with classmates at Ecole Ste. Catherine in Pain Court.

Kelly mistakenly ingested a small bit of peanut butter icing and died 45 minutes later of anaphylaxis.

Chinnick and husband Dave have campaigned ever since to prevent similar deaths.

Kim Chinnick said it's too easy for kids to be exposed accidentally to nuts and other allergens at school. The problem was pretty much off the public radar when Kelly died, but the number of kids experiencing severe food allergies at school has since multiplied, she said.

"Something needed to be done, for sure," she said.

The new law is named for Sabrina Shannon, 13, a Pembroke student who died in 2003 after eating french fries in her school cafeteria.

Because of severe allergies to peanuts, milk products and soy, she'd checked that the potatoes were not fried in peanut oil, but it's believed they were cross-contaminated by tongs used to serve poutine, which contains cheese.

The law might mean a steep learning curve for staff and a change in school culture.

For Laurie Harada, whose son Julian, 11, has a long list of potentially life-threatening food allergies, it will mean less stress while he is at school.

"When Julian was younger, the first days of school made me very nervous. My heart was always skipping a beat," says Harada, executive director of Anaphylaxis Canada.

If Julian ingests even a trace of peanuts, tree nuts, chickpeas, split peas, shrimp or soy, he might have an anaphylactic reaction.

His symptoms may include tingling in his mouth, swelling of his tongue and throat, itchy skin, hives, abdominal cramps, breathing difficulty, wheezing, vomiting, faintness because of a sudden drop in blood pressure and -- in a severe reaction -- loss of consciousness and death.

Such a reaction can be instantaneous. And terrifying.

Many people with severe allergies carry EpiPens, devices used to inject epinephrine to counter the reaction.

But the law is not welcomed by all parents.

"Where do you draw the line?" asks Charles Greene, father of a 12-year-old boy who loves peanut butter, but can't take it to school.

"What else is dangerous to kids that they'll start banning? These kids shouldn't be allowed to go into cafeterias or to restaurants. It's the responsibility of the allergic kids and their parents. The onus is on them."

Brant Liberal MPP Dave Levac, a former high school principal, proposed the law as a private member's bill.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2005/09/05/1202611-sun.html

YM BioSciences to present results of Norelin(TM) study at Cancer Vaccines/Adjuvants/Delivery 2005 Congress in Lisbon

MISSISSAUGA, ON, Sept. 5 /CNW/ - YM BioSciences Inc. (AMEX:YMI, TSX:YM, AIM:YMBA), the cancer product development company, today announced that it will present positive clinical trial results for its anti-GnRH prostate cancer vaccine, Norelin(TM), at the "Cancer Vaccines/Adjuvants/Delivery for the Next Decade" conference in Lisbon, Portugal September 5-7, 2005.

Norelin(TM) is a unique, biological approach to the management of hormone levels in sex-hormone driven cancers and is initially targeting early stage, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). The drug is a fusion protein that combines a proprietary protein sequence in a potent adjuvant formulation. The formulation could represent a well-tolerated and long-lasting control of testosterone and PSA in hormone-dependent patients with prostate cancer thereby affording treatment to a larger population of HSPC patients. That would include those subject to "watchful waiting".

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/05/c5855.html

Beaten by butt bummer -MB

By DAVID SCHMEICHEL, STAFF REPORTER September 6, 2005

Confronted again while at hospital

They say that cigarettes will kill you, but what about the people who panhandle a little too aggressively for free smokes?

They can be pretty dangerous too, as downtown resident Leonard Hogg found out over the weekend.

A Health Sciences Centre employee, Hogg had finished grocery shopping Saturday afternoon when he was accosted on the corner of Graham Avenue and Vaughan Street by a man who wanted a cigarette.

Hogg -- who deals with a constant stream of such requests every day -- said no.

"And I guess I was a little abrupt when I said no," said Hogg. "The next thing I knew he had backhanded me ... and knocked me to the ground."

While Hogg lay on the ground, his assailant kicked him twice in the back before fleeing east on Graham.

A crowd soon gathered to help get Hogg back on his feet, but no one was in much of a hurry to chase the attacker down, he said.

'CHOKE-HOLD'

"Everyone was concerned, but because this guy was so big, they didn't really do anything," he said. "I can't really say I blame them."

Later the same night, Hogg was awakened by a persistent pain in his ribs, so he went to Health Sciences Centre to have some X-rays taken.

Hogg was told it would be a while before he was seen, so he ducked outside onto McDermot Avenue for a quick smoke. Again, he was confronted by a man who demanded a cigarette, but this time, he was ready.

"He got right up in my face," Hogg said of the man. "I put a choke-hold on him and pushed him away, and he ended up slipping off the curb."

Hogg's would-be assailant took off, but not before he was caught on the hospital's surveillance tape.

The assailant was arrested when he returned to be treated for injuries he'd received in an earlier dispute at the McLaren Hotel, police Staff Sgt. Gord Friesen told The Sun.

A 52-year-old man is in police custody, and charges of robbery are pending, Friesen said.

Hogg still has a sore back and swollen lip, but said he's more worried about panhandlers who get too aggressive with younger kids or seniors. As for the possibility he'll give up smoking rather than run the risk of further incidents?

"It's on my to-do list," he joked.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2005/09/06/1203700-sun.html

Tobacco smuggling hearing begins

CANADIAN PRESS Sep. 6, 2005. 02:33 PM

A preliminary hearing to determine if there is sufficient evidence to proceed to trial has started into the activities of a tobacco conglomerate accused of cross-border cigarette smuggling in the 1990s.

After a four-year investigation, the RCMP laid charges in 2003 against Toronto-based JTI-Macdonald Corp., three affiliated U.S. companies and eight former senior executives.

The Mounties accuse the company of fraud and conspiracy for knowingly selling cigarettes to smugglers.

Investigators say tobacco produced at the company's plants in Montreal and Puerto Rico were exported legally to the United States.

But from there, the accused allegedly sold cigarettes to smugglers, who brought them into Canada illegally, primarily through the Cornwall area in southeastern Ontario.

The hearing is expected to end some time in November.

The accused face six counts of conspiracy to commit fraud over $5,000 and another of possessing the proceeds of crime.

Police allege that Canada, Ontario and Quebec lost $1.2 billion in taxes because of contraband smokes.

Charged are Stanley Smith from British Columbia, a former vice-president of sales for RJR-Macdonald Inc.; Edward Lang of Naples, Fla.; Dale Sisel of Gillette, Wyo.; Jaap Uittenbogaard of Jupiter, Fla.; Peter MacGregor of Atlanta; and Pierre Brunelle, Paul Neumann and Roland Kostantos of Geneva, Switzerland.

JTI-Macdonald sells several brands of cigarettes in Canada, including Export A and Vantage.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=

971358637177&c=Article&cid=1126002431987

Your cellphone could spy on you

Cristin Schmitz CanWest News Service Tuesday, September 06, 2005

OTTAWA -- Police and security agencies would be able to surreptitiously track unwitting Canadians via their cellphones, BlackBerrys and laptop computers, even when the devices are turned off or their location features are disabled, under a "creepy" measure contemplated as part of the federal government's planned electronic surveillance bill.

The government made the proposal during consultations this year on a legislative package that is anticipated to be unveiled in the fall, CanWest News Service has learned.

The proposal, which was raised by justice officials with groups consulted by the government, would amend the Criminal Code to expand the types of "tracking devices" available to police under a warrant.

The definition of a "tracking device" would be changed to include a computer program, in addition to any other device that can be used to help identify the location of any thing or person.

The new definition of tracking device would take in such ubiquitous products as laptops with wireless Internet connections, cellphones with global positioning systems, and wireless personal digital assistants.

"What they are talking about clearly is devices which have an active and a passive component in the sense that the active component could be controllable by the user who could turn the machine on or off, but the passive device will be built in and accessible to police," said Richard Rosenberg, a retired University of British Columbia computer science professor and board member of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

"I think the assumption is that we should be trackable whether we want to or not," he said. "It's very creepy. We will be in a society where we will have this incredible density of interconnections which will make it almost impossible to ... exercise what I think is one of our basic rights, which is anonymity in a free and democratic society."

Rosenberg said it is possible to build devices that retain select functions, even when they seem to be completely turned off. "There's no reason it couldn't happen because it's not a big complex thing to do," he explained.

Police are able to obtain warrants for tracking devices much more easily than for other types of electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.

To get a warrant for a tracking device, police need only convince a justice of the peace they have "reasonable suspicion" an offence has been or will be committed, and the tracking order would help their investigation. By contrast, for other types of surveillance authorities must at least demonstrate to a JP they have "reasonable and probable grounds to believe" that an offence has been or will be committed, and information relevant to that offence will become available via the surveillance.

Vancouver lawyer Greg DelBigio, vice-chair of the national criminal law section of the Canadian Bar Association, said computers and cellphones may reveal a lot more information than the types of tracking devices presently contemplated by the Criminal Code. His 34,000-lawyer association does not accept that such a serious erosion of privacy should be allowed simply on the basis of police "suspicion" a crime might be in he offing.

"Technology is rapidly making it increasingly difficult to remain anonymous within the world and retain privacy, despite positive steps one might take to protect these interests," DelBigio said. "We must ask: 'Just because the technology exists, is it the case that law enforcement should have access to the technology, or information available through that technology and, if so, in what circumstances and with what control?"'

http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/news/story.html?id=fdfbc310-44c5-4c73-9131-903cd4ca7897

Under the G: Greedy -MB

By TOM BRODBECK September 7, 2005

Penny-ante bingo targeted

The provincial government is cracking down on nickel-and-dime bingo operations -- some with pots as puny as $10 a game -- to help raise more money for government coffers.

And it's got a small group of seniors in East Kildonan, who have been playing bingo in the privacy of their seniors home for years, pretty damn angry.

With good reason.

Under changes made earlier this year to the Gaming Control Act, any bingo operation with yearly gross revenues of $5,000 or more now has to buy a bingo licence and submit quarterly financial reports to the government.

Even those in private dwellings that raise no money whatsoever have to comply with the new rules.

"This is absolutely ludicrous -- it's nickel-and-dime stuff," said Kate Kehler, 71, who lives at Edgewood Estates, a seniors complex in East Kildonan. "This is our home, and they're invading us."

Kehler and 20 to 25 of her tenant friends have been playing bingo in the basement of their complex Tuesday nights for 13 years.

They play for chump change -- pots of maybe $10 to $12. It's not a fundraiser, and nobody's making any money off it. It's a social event -- a chance to get out of the apartment once a week.

Now government wants a piece of the action.

The group has been told by the Gaming Control Commission that they have to pay for an annual $500 bingo licence and submit quarterly financial reports to the government, including the names of who won, how much they won and what the group's expenses were.

Doesn't government have anything better to do than harass little groups of seniors on fixed incomes and burden them with more taxes and paperwork?

Under the old system, as long as payouts for a single bingo event didn't exceed $150, groups did not have to buy a licence or report winnings to the government.

But government wasn't making enough money off that. So they dropped the threshold to $5,000 a year -- or $96 per event for weekly games -- so they could capture the smaller nickel-and-dime games.

TO REDUCE POTS

"Does the government not make enough money through the slot machines and their casinos?" said Kehler. "They've got to go after senior citizens on fixed incomes?"

Kehler says there's no way they're going to pay $500 a year to the government to play bingo in their basement.

So they've decided to reduce their pots to fall below the $96 bar, which -- unbelievably -- Gaming Control Commission inspectors came out to verify two weeks ago.

What's next, are they going to regulate Friday night poker games in the privacy of our living rooms?

"This is just a tax grab," said Tory lotteries critic Ron Schuler. "The push is on to get as much money as possible -- they're going after everybody and anybody."

GCC spokeswoman Liz Stephenson says they're regulating small bingo outfits to make sure everybody is playing by the rules.

"We try not to be onerous, we recognize that these are voluntary organizations," said Stephenson.

"But we also recognize that people who are playing require protection, and that's essentially the role of the Gaming Control Commission."

Protection? You mean like the mob?

"We need to see where the money goes, how much came in and who won the money," said Stephenson.

Give me strength.

And call Dave Chomiak, minister responsible for the Gaming Control Act, at 945-5356 if you object.

This is ridiculous.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Brodbeck_Tom/2005/09/07/1204889.html

Slain man linked to smuggling -ON

BETSY POWELL CRIME REPORTER Sep. 1, 2005. 06:22 AM

Cigarette dealer was shot in May

$500,000 seizure may have led to death

The spring shooting death of a 36-year-old man may be linked to the seizure by provincial investigators of $500,000 in contraband cigarettes weeks earlier at a home in Maple, sources familiar with the case say.

Sung Woo Lee, known as Jack Lee, had been out with friends at a Bloor St. W. karaoke bar before he was dropped off in the area of Lee Centre Dr., near Highway 401 and McCowan Rd., around 2:40 a.m. on May 15.

The divorced father of two then called his girlfriend and was waiting for her to arrive when he was approached by someone who shot him outside a condominium complex on nearby Corporate Rd.

Police, who have no eyewitnesses to the crime, are at a loss to explain how anyone could have tracked Lee to that location at that time, since his rendezvous with his girlfriend seems to have been unplanned.

But they are looking at the possibility that the killing wasn't a random act.

While police initially described Lee as a self-employed tobacco wholesaler, it now appears he was an unlicensed tobacco distributor trading in contraband cigarettes.

The Toronto Star has learned police are investigating whether his dealings in the illicit tobacco trade cost him his life and what, if any, links there may be to organized crime.

Homicide Det. Sgt. Gerry Cashman said the investigation is progressing but he had no comment on any specifics.

But there is another element in the case and that is the role played by the provincial finance ministry's special investigations branch.

In May, branch investigators intercepted a truck parked at a home in Maple, north of Toronto, and seized $500,000 worth of cigarettes.

It is believed the truck driver transporting the cigarettes did not know he was under surveillance when he stopped to have lunch at the house, nor did he attempt to unload the cigarettes. Details of the seizure are sketchy, sources say, and questions are being asked as to whether proper procedures were followed.

There are also questions about Lee's connection to the cargo and whether his killer targeted him because the money owed for the cigarettes seized by the ministry had not yet been paid.

It's not known why the finance ministry initiated an investigation.

A spokesman for the ministry declined comment.

"Any investigation or alleged investigation under the Ontario tax statues is highly confidential," said Manuel Alas-Sevillano.

"The ministry does not discuss any matter about investigations or alleged investigations out of concern for jeopardizing the ministry's investigations processing."

Concerns about freedom of information and privacy legislation were also raised by the ministry as the reason for not sharing information about the investigation and seizure with Toronto police, despite the fact they are conducting a homicide investigation, said a source.

On the night he was killed, Lee and friends, including the owner of the house in Maple � described by a source as a close friend and business associate � were at the Emerald Restaurant and Sports Bar on Bloor St. W. near Christie St.

His companions dropped Lee off in Scarborough at about 2:40 a.m. His girlfriend arrived and found him on the ground suffering from gunshot wounds just after 3 a.m.

The coroner said the cause of death was "penetrating gunshot wounds to the head and torso."

He was Toronto's 24th homicide victim of the year and is now among the 33 gun-related homicide victims so far in 2005.

The finance ministry has undertaken a major crackdown on contraband cigarettes by increasing fines and beefing up enforcement. The ministry seized 54,800 cartons of contraband cigarettes in 2004-05, compared with 11,600 cartons in the previous fiscal year.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=

971358637177&c=Article&cid=1125526233198&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

Posted at 3:08 pm by looped_ca
Comments (1)