Neighbours want loitering stopped in walkway -AB
by Dave S. Clark Wednesday July 20, 2005
Sherwood Park News — A few Glen Allan residents say they have had enough of the loitering, vandalism and drug use near their property in a walkway that leads to Bev Facey high school.
Joann McMillan and Karen Klein say that ever since Strathcona County has enacted a bylaw that prohibits students from smoking on school property the nearby residents have to deal with the students.
According to Klein and McMillan students now congregate in the walkway that connects Colwill Boulevard with Garland Crescent. McMillan says the students have also ventured onto her property.
“The problem is escalating every year,” said Klein. “We have a reprieve right now in the summer, but God help us in September.”
Klein says she has seen teens smoking drugs, breaking glass, harassing pets and vandalizing the surrounding property but is often hesitant to confront the teens.
“We don’t say anything to them because we don’t want the retaliation,” said Klein. “They don’t care what the neighbours say anyway.”
Klein ended up with a broken fence because of a fight on the walkway at the end of April. The Bev Facey student was tracked down and made to pay $300 for repairs.
“He gave me the money face to face,” said Klein. “He was very apologetic. These aren’t bad kids when they are alone, but they change when in a group.”
Most of the activity happens during the school’s lunch hour, but the neighbours also had problems with people who aren’t students at the school.
Coun. Ken Lesniak says he is concerned about the area and hopes to resolve the problem in the fall when school is back in session.
“It has to be a community effort,” said Lesniak. “The county, the community and the school all have to do what they can.”
He said he hoped he could get the school to make a policy to keep kids out of the area, however, that would be difficult since it is public property.
Lesniak said he would also be in contact with RCMP and the parks and recreation department who maintain the walkway. He also hoped the Facey students’ union would get involved as well.
Const. Darren Anderson of the Strathcona RCMP said bike patrol would do its best to cover the walkway, however, they only ride for a few weeks when school is in session.
Tanya Orr of Elk Island Public Schools said nothing had been reported to the division and that nobody from Bev Facey would be available for comment.
http://www.sherwoodparknews.com/story.php?id=173769
Where else can students smoke? -AB
Wednesday July 27, 2005
Sherwood Park News — I want to respond to an article I read in the latest Sherwood Park News, because I have read about it repeatedly, but only ever from one point of view.
I remember how hard it was when I was underage not to long ago, just to find a “safe” place to smoke. When I say safe, I mean somewhere underaged smokers will not be caught by teachers or police officers. It was an almost impossible task then and still is.
The path between Colwill Boulevard and Garland Crescent is one of the few places that young smokers can go. Even those who legally are allowed to smoke are forced to go there.
I realize that there are bunches of “children” who spoil it for the rest of us. However, there are a lot of us who just want a shaded, out-of-sight place to have a smoke or talk to friends.
We are sorry on behalf of the student body for all the cigarette butts, broken bottles and any drug paraphernalia or usage that goes on. I don’t care for it either.
Please don’t try to cut everyone off from going to the path, although really I don’t think that’s possible seeing as it is public property. Let’s try to find some sort of compromise.
I realize this will not be easy; there are some stupid kids out there nowadays. I realize I ask for compromise but yet offer no solutions myself. I do see things from your point of view, and I hope you see mine as well.
Brandice Hewitt
http://www.sherwoodparknews.com/story.php?id=175211
Saskatchewan hotels challenge smoking legislation -SK
Erin Pritchard Wednesday July 27, 2005
Lloydminster Meridian Booster — The smoking bylaw – an issue of business inequality in the Border City since its inception in January – has now become a matter in dispute for the province.
The Hotel Association of Saskatchewan has taken the province to court to have the bylaw abolished, citing unfair business opportunities for establishments in Saskatchewan.
Currently, casinos on First Nations’ reserves are not required to follow the smoking bylaw because each of the four reserves operating casinos has passed a band bylaw that overrides provincial jurisdiction.
“It’s our position that once those bylaws are in place, then by virtue of what they call the doctrine of federal paramouncy – a rule of constitutional law – the provincial law no longer applies on those reserves,” said Mitch McAdam, crown solicitor with the Constitutional Law Branch of the Saskatchewan Department of Justice.
He said because of the federal Indian Act, native reserves have the ability to pass band bylaws, including matters of its members’ health, that will supersede provincial laws. In effect, band bylaws hold the same power as federally passed laws. Currently, the four reserves in question have passed such laws – a 60-40 split of smoking and non-smoking in the casinos.
The Hotel Association of Saskatchewan is challenging the province under Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (equity guarantee) and wants to see the law thrown out because it creates an unfair playing field for casinos operating off reserves.
“What we’re looking for is some kind of relief. Our revenues are down and what we’re looking for is some kind of compromise with the government,” said Tom Mullin, president of the Hotel Association. “We have had discussions with them, however, they haven’t been particularly interested in a couple of ideas we’ve put across the table.
“Basically, the Charter challenge is saying that if they cannot enforce this legislation on Indian reserves, on businesses that are in direct competition with us, then they would have to throw out the law.”
The province has made an application to have the claim made by the Hotel Association stricken and said Section 15 of the Charter is for individual use, not for the security of commercial business.
A hearing was held this past Thursday in Regina to decide the fate of smoking in the province, but no decision was made. Justice Peter Foley said a decision will be made as soon as possible, but he gave no indication of when the parties concerned would know.
“We’re not in disagreement as far as the jurisdictional issue with the First Nations, they have their federal bylaws and that’s fine,” Mullin said. “When the government provincially tried to legislate a complete 100 per cent ban, they didn’t have agreement from the First Nations and I think that’s the crutch of the matter. It has to apply equally to all businesses.”
As the province and the Hotel Association await a response from the courts, local businesses are hopeful the law will be changed to help bridge the provincial gap created by the bylaw.
“If it’s overturned it will help business for sure,” said Seann Brenan, owner of Cheers in Lloydminster, adding that he doesn’t think kids should be in smoking environments, but business has to be fair.
http://www.meridianbooster.com/story.php?id=175109
Huge native cigarette sales growth queried -SK
REGINA (CP) - The Saskatchewan government wants to keep a closer eye on cigarette sales on aboriginal reserves after seeing a boom in the amount of rebates it pays.
Tax rebates for tobacco sales have increased from $3 million to more than $37 million in five years, according to the department of finance.
http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2005/07/27/fCanada.html
Business battles smoking fines -AB
Larry Fisher Wednesday July 27, 2005
Lloydminster Meridian Booster — Brent Underwood is determined to extinguish a pair of $550 smoking fines that have been burning a hole in his pocket ever since a Prairie North health inspector raided Shawny’s Bar in Marshall on March 11.
Underwood was working the bar that night and was charged with failing to request patrons to immediately stop smoking and with failing to ensure that no things designed to facilitate smoking are provided in the enclosed public place.
However, he says the fines were taken out of context and the small town business owner finally had his say yesterday morning as he represented himself in court at the Maidstone Legion Hall.
“I’ve been waiting for (Tuesday) for a long time,” said Underwood, adding the government has delayed his hearing as long as possible. “I have a pretty good feeling about taking this to court because the wording of the tickets is ridiculous and I think the judge may see the humour in it.
“Especially that second fine with the empty beer bottles being designed to facilitate smoking, I mean in my own words I’ll tell the judge that pretty much covers anything and everything including the floor.”
Underwood said the Saskatchewan government’s smoking legislation and enforcement tactics bother him to this day and that he is going to continue standing his ground until the government butts out.
“I’ve fought these fines tooth and nail since Day 1 and there’s not a chance in hell they will ever see a nickel from me,” he said.
http://www.meridianbooster.com/story.php?id=175108
Can't smokers butt out on patios? -BC
Complaints have coastal health unit looking at smoking in public places -- again
Mia Stainsby Vancouver Sun July 27, 2005
B.C. restaurants are smoke-free, but ever wonder where the smoke has gone?
Restaurant patios -- the primo spot on a warm, sunny day -- have become, by default, smoke pits. Restaurants with patios attract smokers because, well, where else can they eat and smoke in public?
It seems that whenever I opt for a patio seat on a sunny day, sooner or later, smoke comes creeping into my personal space and I expend far too much energy being the polite Canadian, reining in the inner rampage. It is, after all, perfectly legit.
Recently, I was eating inside, watching a woman on a small patio chain-smoking through her meal shrouded in a haze of smoke, some of it drifting into the small restaurant.
There were eight people at her table, including two young children. By meal's end, I am sure the group was gently smoked, like lox.
That I would be appalled and transfixed by someone smoking through dinner shows, I suppose, how far we have come.
And it's not just a summer thing. When I go to buy my organic, fair-trade, decaf coffee in the morning, rain or shine, I walk through a narrow phalanx of smokers in the doorway. The coffee's nice and healthy but I'm steeped in smoke. I've ditched the place a couple of times, but returned to replay the irony of getting my healthy cup of coffee.
It seems I'm not the only one kvetching. Domenic Losito, director of health protection for Vancouver Coastal Health, has received enough complaints from Vancouverites that his office is revisiting the issue of smoking in public places.
"It's something we may well put before council but more as a comfort and aesthetic issue than health," he says about smoking in patio areas. "A dining experience could certainly be spoiled by someone smoking a couple of tables over.
"One thing we are going to look at in the report is the establishment of a bit of buffer zone around doorways. That's an area we get a lot of complaints about. In Halifax, for example, there's a three-metre buffer zone from the door. We've heard from non-smokers, which is about 75 to 80 per cent of Vancouverites. They see prime space being taken up by smokers. But for the time being, it's not strictly a health issue and we'll let the market dictate."
B.C. and California, Losito says, led the way in the non-smoking regulations. "But it's been in place 10 years now and we're quickly falling behind as to where one can smoke. Many jurisdictions have pretty well said no to smoking rooms.
"An ideal situation," he says, looking out his office window, "would be to have two separate patios, like the Cactus Club across the way." It will be the next generation of smoking regulations, he says.
Currently, WorkSafeBC (formerly the Workers' Compensation Board) and the city allow smoking on patios as long as they aren't enclosed in any way and smoke isn't leaking back into the restaurant. Restaurants are allowed to have smoking rooms, however, and staff are permitted to be exposed for "20 per cent of their shift," whatever that means.
WorkSafeBC regulations say a safe outdoor location "may be a ground surface, floor, or deck area; a roof or awning may cover it. Any structure, including a temporary structure such as a tent that significantly obstructs the movement of air may bring the area within the meaning of an indoor workplace.
"For example, an area that has natural airflow obstructed on more than two sides by the presence of windbreaks, such as walls, fences, or other adjacent structures or objects may be deemed to be indoors for the purpose of this section. Walls less than 107 centimetres (42 inches) high or chain-link fencing or similar open structures that minimally obstruct airflow will normally not be considered as a windbreak."
Smoke on the patio, it is reasoned, dissipates and therefore doesn't cause a health risk. "The essential point is that smoke won't collect in an outdoor space. It's not a safety issue. It's a comfort issue," says Scott McCloy, director of communications for WorkSafeBC. "However, long-term exposure to second-hand smoke indoors has been shown in study after study to elevate the risk of negative health effects."
Errol Povah, president of Air Space Action on Smoking and Health, is very vocal on the matter. "Any place with a patio will attract smoking customers as opposed to ones that don't have a patio. There'll be a concentration. If they provide a patio for smokers, there should be an equally large one for non-smokers and if they're not prepared to provide both, then there should be no smoking.
"Why is it that non-smokers cannot be assured of a reasonably smoke-free meal and enjoy the patio? The bottom line is, whether or not I have a smoke-free meal shouldn't depend on which way the wind is blowing. It makes you wonder whether this is 2005 or we're still back in the '60s."
Povah says former labour minister Graham Bruce "gutted the WCB no-smoking regulations, allowing 20 per cent of a worker's shift to be in a smoking room. My position is that smoking should be eliminated entirely in restaurants, if for no other reason than to create what high-ranking people in the restaurant and bar industry have called for -- to maintain a level playing field."
Still, Losito says, B.C. and California are the "two shining examples" that lead the smoke-free way. "We have the lowest per capita of smokers. We're around 16 and 20 per cent of the adult population."
He says it has been universally shown that there is no negative impact and even a slightly positive impact to business upon calling for a no-smoke zone. "There's usually a six-month transitional impact, but, time after time, it's been shown in places like New York and Ottawa there's been a zero or positive impact, even for smokers. More people tend to quit and smoking rates go down, so that's a nice side effect."
He cautions: "You hate to make the smoker the victim because they're already victims of the industry. I'd like to see some [anti-smoking] funds diverted to help them quit."
Bus solves problem -MB
Letter to Editor July 28, 2005
This is in response to the July 27 letter suggesting we ban smoking in cars. Do we really want the government diving deeper into our personal lives? At what point do we stop letting government legislate our actions?
As far as banning smoking in cars, if smoking is so dangerous in a car, what about coffee cups? We should force the car manufacturers to remove those cup holders to reduce the risk of accidents.
What about those mirrors on the visors? How often have we seen women checking their make-up and applying it while driving? Men with their cordless shavers making sure they got all the stubble?
Music can be distracting in a car so we shouldn't allow radios in cars. How about that person beside the driver that carries on some conversation that distracts the driver? If you want to ban one distraction, you should ban them all.
Oddly enough there is an excellent vehicle designed to alleviate all those distractions and reduce the risk of accidents. It's called a transit bus! If you are worried about drivers having accidents because of smoking, let the skilled drivers of our transit system get you to where you want to go!
RICHARD KREIS Winnipeg
QP still shows butts -ON
By Antonella Artuso, Toronto Sun July 28, 2005
DESPITE PASSING one of the toughest anti-smoking laws on the continent, the Ontario government continues to allow cigarettes to be displayed for sale in its own corridors.
Customers get a behind-the-counter eyeful of the wicked weed in the tuck shop of the Queen's Park Whitney Block. But David Spencer, a spokesman for Health Minister George Smitherman, said the law outlaws "powerwall" displays of tobacco as of May 31, 2006.
http://www.torontosun.com/News/TorontoAndGTA/2005/07/28/1150602-sun.html
****Smoke draws ire -AB
Still lighting up in the Legislature
By DARCY HENTON, LEGISLATURE BUREAU
You can't smoke in bars, restaurants or offices in Edmonton, but you can still light up at the Legislature.
The sandstone dome and its adjacent blue annex building is the last refuge of the workplace smoker.
The Legislature is exempt from the city's no-smoking bylaw.
Government officials and visitors can enjoy a cigarette in the ventilated smoking room in the Legislature's basement cafeteria or in a similar smoking room on the annex's fourth floor.
'HYPOCRISY'
Liberal health critic Laurie Blakeman, a former smoker, calls it "the hypocrisy of the lawmakers."
"It's a huge hypocrisy and it always has been," she said. "We have our very own lawmakers giving themselves exemptions."
She said some senior government officials had their offices registered as designated smoking areas so they can smoke on the job.
The situation appalls civil service union boss Dan MacLennan, who had been pressing the Ralph Klein government to impose a provincewide smoking ban in all public places.
"If you can't smoke in a jail or an office, you shouldn't be able to smoke in that building while school tours are going through," he said. "If it is carcinogenic across the street from the Legislature, it is carcinogenic at the Legislature."
Marisa Etmanski, Klein's spokesman, said the Legislature is a "unique building" that doesn't fall under municipal authority.
However, she said the province will ban smoking in the Legislature when its own no-smoking bill, which received royal assent May 10, takes effect on Jan. 1, 2006.
"It will be smoke-free by January," she said. "We're trying to take care of that."
Les Hagen, Action on Smoking and Health executive director, said the provincial lawmakers should be setting an example for the rest of the province rather than lagging behind.
"Why wait until Jan. 1? They could do it right now," he said. "That doesn't require legislation. That just requires resolve."
He said 1,000 Canadians die annually from second-hand smoke.
NOT LAW YET
Lloyd Carr, a senior manager with the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission, said once Bill 201 is proclaimed, smoking will not be allowed in premises where there are children under age 18.
Currently 86 Alberta municipalities, including Edmonton, have no-smoking bylaws.
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonton/2005/07/28/1150685-sun.html
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=Encyclopedia&op=content&tid=163
Smoking ban cuts Q1 profits by third, gaming corp. says -SK
CBC News Last Updated Jul 28 2005 09:25 AM CDT
Profits at government-owned casinos in Regina and Saskatchewan dropped by almost a third in the first quarter of the 2005-06 fiscal year that began Apri 1 – and the smoking ban is the cause, the Saskatchewan Gaming Corp. says.
Under the smoking ban that became provincial law Jan. 1, smoking is banned in bars, restaurants, casinos and other enclosed public places. The gaming corp. says as a result, net income was down 33 per cent and revenues declined 6 per cent between April 1 and June 30.
To counter the impact of the ban, the gaming corp. increased advertising and hired more staff, resulting in a 14 per cent increase in expenses.
Ironically, although profits were down, attendance was up – average attendance for the first three months of 2005-06 increased 25 per cent at Casino Regina and 21 per cent at Casino Moose Jaw. Although the smoking ban that became law Jan. 1 was also in effect for part of the 2004-05 year, both casinos continued to be big money-makers, according to the gaming corp.'s annual report.
SGC's net income last topped $39 million in 2004-05, an increase of almost $3 million or 8 per cent over the previous year. The two casinos employ about 800 people.
The gaming corp. runs Casino Regina and Casino Moose Jaw but not four Indian-controlled casinos – all which do allow smoking.
http://sask.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=casino-profits050728
Smoking ban blamed for tumbling casino profits -SK
BN July 28, 2005
REGINA -- A new smoking ban has put a serious dent in casino profits in Regina.
Profits at government-owned casinos in Regina and Saskatchewan dropped by almost a third in the first quarter.
Under the smoking ban that became law earlier this year, smoking is banned in bars, restaurants, casinos and other enclosed public places.
The Saskatchewan Gaming Corporation says net income was down 33 per cent for the three-month period.
To counter the impact of the ban, the gaming corporation increased advertising and hired more staff, resulting in a 14 per cent increase in expenses.
Although profits were down, attendance was up by 25 per cent at Casino Regina and 21 per cent at Casino Moose Jaw.
http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/story.html?id=69ea9fbf-21de-452c-a3b9-4acbc92c9e1a
Tobacco harvest approaching fast -ON
Jeff Helsdon - Staff Writer The Tillsonburg News Friday July 29, 2005
Area tobacco crops are growing well in the heat that’s been blanketing Southwestern Ontario this summer.
“Tobacco likes the heat as long as there’s enough moisture,” said Denise Beaton, integrated pest management specialist for specialty crops with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food. “There's a lot of nice crops out there.”
Most farmers are done topping, but Beaton hasn’t heard of any who have started harvest yet. For farmers who completed topping last weekend, Beaton said they could start harvest as soon as next week. The first week of August is the traditional starting time for the earliest farmers.
As of yesterday (Tuesday) she said most farmers weren’t irrigating as there had been enough rainfall in recent days. That is drastically different from a couple of weeks ago when there was little or no rainfall and everybody was irrigating.
Too much rain has been a problem in some areas. There are some low-lying sections of fields that aren’t well drained that resulted in drowned tobacco after the rain of two weeks ago. Most of this was in the Burford and Brantford area where the soil is heavier.
In the Aylmer area, high winds and rain resulted in plants being partially knocked over. Beaton understands most farmers in this situation were able to stand the plants back up.
The heat has resulted in a few injuries to the crop, although none of it has been severe. Permanent wilt is a condition that usually affects one to two leaves under the heart where the leaves are the most tender. It occurs in the rapid growth stage because the plant isn’t able to take up enough moisture to keep up with the growth. Beaton said damage was typically one to three leaves per plant.
On the disease front, Ontario is still clear of blue mould. There have, however, been some cases of tobacco mosaic virus.
http://www.tillsonburgnews.com/story.php?id=175528
We're losing appetite for dining out -MB
By Kevin Rollason Friday, July 29th, 2005
YOU can blame it on the provincewide smoking ban, the mad cow crisis or flooding in southern Manitoba but any way you slice it, Manitobans are dining out less.
Manitobans spent $82.1 million in restaurants and taverns and on catering last May compared to $84.5 million in May 2004.
A similar drop was seen in April when Manitobans spent $79.8 million compared to $83.5 million in April 2004.
The drop bucks national figures in May, which saw total sales for restaurants, taverns and caterers hit $3.3 billion, a 3.7 per cent increase over May 2004.
Alain Mbassegue, who works in the Service Industries Division of Statistics Canada, said while they don't have the actual numbers available just for Manitoba drinking places, they know that's where a good portion of the drop was experienced.
"Drinking places did go down a lot in Manitoba," Mbassegue said yesterday.
"But we can't say what it's due to. People have to come to their own conclusions."
Jim Baker, president of the Manitoba Hotel Association, said he has come to his own conclusion, and it's that the province's smoking rules have hurt his membership's bottom lines.
Manitoba's smoking ban, which prevents smoking in all enclosed public places under provincial jurisdiction, took effect last October.
"The numbers don't surprise me," Baker said.
"If you could zero in on bars alone, we know it's a significant drop for them."
Baker said experience across North America has shown that while restaurants see a resurgence in business in the months after smoking bans take effect, bars don't.
"Smokers can go without smoking for a bit during a meal, but not with bars. There smoking bans have a major effect."
Saskatchewan, which put its smoking ban in place in January, also saw its food services sales figures drop, from $80.4 million in May 2004 to $75.4 million last May.
But in New Brunswick, which enacted a similar law the same day as Manitoba, food services sales went up from $55.9 million in May 2004 to $61.3 million.
Theresa Oswald, the province's healthy living minister, said "we did expect some short-term negative impact" for restaurants and taverns in the province when the government implemented the smoking ban.
"We knew this would happen," Oswald said.
"But we also know it bounced back reasonably well in Winnipeg after its ban... I would actually be inclined to think there's any number of factors for this (the sales decrease). There's also BSE and horrendous weather conditions.
"With the ban, we expected an initial downturn, but we hope there will be an upturn."
Jeff Glover, chairman of the Manitoba Restaurant and Food Services Association, agreed there are numerous factors for the drop in sales, many of which would be unique to individual businesses across the province.
"The numbers are significant because as an association you look at the dollars spent eating out and eating at home and if sales in the province are down, then we as a province are losing. People haven't gone through a recession so it's more people choosing to eat at home."
Keith Robertson, executive director of the Manitoba Cattle Producers, said sales figures for rural restaurants and taverns would also have been affected by the mad cow crisis.
Robertson said when the province's cattle producers aren't receiving any income, they wouldn't be eating out at the nearest restaurant.
"This is a direct effect of cash flow on farms which in many cases has been extremely diminished," Robertson said.
kevin.rollason@freepress.mb.ca
Get off 'ban wagon'
July 30, 2005
In response to the July 27 letter Ban smoking in cars:
I would like to express my agreement with the letter's statements that smoking in cars can be a distracting activity for the driver. I also agree that children and other passengers shouldn't be exposed to second-hand smoke; it has been established as hazardous for others.
What I cannot agree with, however, is the made-in-Manitoba solution to the problem: Ban It!
Adding one bylaw after another to the already unmanageable regulatory array in this province is not only unrealistic in a financial context, but also has more profound consequences for the limits of law-makers. A society that forces its government to enact policy against every potentially hazardous behaviour must also be prepared to wholly surrender its autonomy and personal freedom. The outcome is absolute.
Intelligence and common-sense cannot be legislated, any more than they can be enforced.
Other activities can also be distracting to the driver of an automobile. Fighting with a spouse, wiping ice cream from a tot's face or applying makeup are just a few. Should we ban all of these, too? Laws and bylaws should be enacted not because they are fashionable, but because they are reasonable.
Isn't it time we got off the "ban wagon"?
JOHN HUDSON Winnipeg
Phones the problem -MB
Regarding the July 27 letter Ban smoking in cars:
July 30, 2005
It is hand-held cellphones that are the problem. That's why New Jersey banned their use in vehicles a year ago. Smoking is only being blamed for one per cent of distractions, far behind other things. (Also probably the smallest figure that could be used.)
The proposed legislation has almost no chance of passing. Even if it is passed, it likely wouldn't be enforced.
VINCE HARDEN Winnipeg
Native bingo must play fair — Greenbelt -ON
Charities file complaint with OPP gambling unit, threaten suit
By Elaine Della-Mattia, THE SAULT STAR Local News - Saturday, July 30, 2005 @ 09:00
The Greenbelt Charities Association threatens a lawsuit if the new bingo hall to open in Garden River next week doesn’t operate under the same regulations as other bingo halls in Ontario.
The 33 charities that make up the Greenbelt Charities Association filed a complaint with the Ontario Provincial Police illegal gambling unit alleging that some bingo halls are not operating with proper provincial licences.
The investigation has been forwarded to police services units that have jurisdiction over the Batchewana First Nation and Garden River First Nation lands, said OPP Det. Const. Paul Chafe of the illegal gambling unit in Orillia. “I cannot comment any further because I’m not sure if that investigation is still ongoing or not. You should check with that police service,” he said.
Acting Anishinabek Police Chief William Sayers was in meetings and did not return phone calls earlier this week.
Scott Reid, president of the Greenbelt Charities Association said local not-for-profit agencies are hurting financially due to a number of recent industry challenges, including the city’s non-smoking bylaw.
Reid said his group doesn’t oppose competition, but wants to ensure that each bingo hall in Ontario is required to play by the same rules.
Reid suggests if laws are not enforced equally across Ontario, a legal suit could be filed by the Greenbelt Charities Association against the federal and provincial governments for discrimination.
“We have a plan in place at this time,” he said.
Reid believes his organization won’t be able to compete with a new 11,000-square-foot bingo hall set to open next week on the Garden River First Nation, if it is not licensed by the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.
Garden River First Nation runs 14 bingos weekly out of its community centre and has done so for several years.
Chief Lyle Sayers said he hasn’t spoken to anyone from the Greenbelt Charities Association directly about their allegations but has heard “rumblings” about the complaints.
“What we’re doing is trying to create jobs for our people to help our community,” Sayers said.
The new hall, which is expected to grow to a seven-day-a-week operation, has stated it has begun to ask charities from the Sault to participate in bingos there.
Sayers said the new hall plans to gear up slowly to ensure “any of the bugs are worked out” before having area charities hold their bingos there.
“We’ll make an offer to them and it will be up to them to decide if they want to come here or not,” Sayers said.
AGCO is an arm’s length agency that reports to the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services and is charged with administering the framework governing the issuance of charitable gaming licenses.
Ab Campion, spokesperson for AGCO, said the regulatory body has entered into legal agreements with First Nation communities in recent years, granting them gaming licences.
Under the agreement, the First Nation communities must enforce provincial laws dealing with charitable organizations.
The deal is similar to those established with municipalities whereby First Nations can charge charitable organizations up to three per cent of prizes offered as a fee for administering licences.
The Garden River First Nation or Batchewana First Nation are not among the 30 to 35 licences granted to First Nations to date, Campion said.
There are 134 First Nation communities in Ontario.
“If they operate without a licence, then under the Criminal Code, it’s an illegal gaming activity and that falls to the OPP anti-gaming unit,” he said.
Sayers said bingos run on Garden River First Nation are approved by chief and council and the community plans to continue with that.
“There are other First Nation communities that do not have licences. Why is Garden River being targeted?” he said.
“We didn’t complain when Sault Ste. Marie received the charity casino and we don’t get a dime from it for our community.”
Sayers said non-natives complain that First Nation communities rely too heavily on government assistance. “We’re trying to create jobs for our people and help raise money to become less dependent on government and to help offset costs that there is no government money for in our community.”
First Nations had been in negotiations with the province to establish their own licensing system to operate bingos but the talks stalled during the last provincial election and have not resumed, Sayers said.
“I hope they get talking again. We’re not trying to break any laws. We’re trying to help the citizens of Garden River.”
In Sault Ste. Marie, city council reduced the three per cent licensing fee to one per cent to help charities cope with the strain of business loss after it enacted the city’s non-smoking bylaw.
That temporary one per cent licensing fee, which was to expire at month’s end, received a six-week reprieve by council Monday.
Reid said the Greenbelt Charities Association will continue to seek a permanent reduction on that levy.
Sault Ste. Marie MPP David Orazietti said his office has received a number of complaints from various charities, alleging inequities in the system.
He forwarded those complaints to the Ministry of Consumer and Business Affairs and to the Ministry of Correctional Services.
“No elected official should be directing enforcement officers to take action and I won’t suggest what the OPP should do here. That’s not my role,” Orazietti said. “But as a citizen of Ontario I expect the OPP to enforce laws equally across the province if they believe they have the evidence that laws are being broken.”
Smoke ban enforcer a no-show in court -SK
Larry Fisher Sunday July 31, 2005
Lloydminster Meridian Booster — The judge didn’t have to inhale too much information before dismissing a pair of $550 smoking fines stemming from an incident at Shawny’s Bar in Marshall on March 11.
The charges were thrown out this past Tuesday because the Crown’s key witness – Prairie North health inspector Richard Koroluk, the man who originally issued the tickets – failed to appear in court.
“It wasn’t the way I wanted to do it, I really wanted to say my piece there, but as it turned out we didn’t have to do it and my charges were all dismissed,” said Shawny’s Bar owner Brent Underwood, who had been saving his breath for months as his hearing was initially delayed by the prosecution. “They weren’t exactly rarin’ to go on it anyway and then when the tobacco cop didn’t show up, we waited and waited and finally the judge had enough and just threw it all out.”
Glennys Uzelman, vice-president of primary health services with Prairie North, said miscommunication between the regional health authority and the prosecution was responsible for Koroluk’s absence.
“We are aware those charges have been dismissed … but Richard was not made aware of that (trial) date and that would be the reason he did not attend,” said Uzelman, adding Koroluk’s full intention was to make an appearance and speak to the matter. “He would have been there had he known and we certainly plan on following through on all the other charges that have been laid to date.”
Prairie North health inspectors have handed out 14 fines since the Saskatchewan smoking legislation came into effect on Jan. 1, 2005 – three of them have been paid voluntarily, while the other 11 are being fought. Out of those 11 fines, Underwood’s were the first to make their way before a judge and the other nine are scheduled to be heard in Saskatchewan Provincial Court in October and November.
Uzelman admitted it has been frustrating for the health region to exhaust a lot of time, energy and resources into enforcing the smoking ban only to have a small percentage of people actually pay the fines. But she said she is not entirely surprised the fines are being fought.
“That is certainly within the prerogative of those individuals and those businesses … this is a new law and I would expect it to be challenged to some extent,” said Uzelman.
Underwood is hoping that even though his fines weren’t thrown out based on his arguments, the fact they were dismissed will set a precedent for other business owners and cause a ripple effect across the province.
“I don’t think anyone should be paying these fines … take it right to the bitter end like I did and I think they will eventually give up,” he said. “There’s something in the air and everyone’s fighting the government right now, so that whole (smoking legislation) could come crumbling down one of these days.”
http://www.meridianbooster.com/story.php?id=175781
Yellowhead Casino Visit -AB
Sun July 31, 2005
I VISITED the Yellowhead Casino during the Grand Prix when there were many tourists in town and, thanks to the no-smoking bylaw, was able to play any machine I wanted as there were plenty available. The casino (or bars) weren't prepared for the bylaw when they had all kinds of time to prepare. I wanted to save my machine while outside for a smoke break as it was due to hit. There were no markers available to let other gamblers know that the machine was taken. If I'm smoking outside, I'm not gambling; thus, no revenue. Have they considered an enclosed, heated smoking shelter for the winter or rain? I know smoking is no good for me but I am addicted and can't quit even though I want to.
Bill Demers Fort McMurray
(Keep trying ...)
http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Letters/2005/07/31/1154076.html
Smoking At The Auto Motion Car Show -ON
The account of a smoker knowing his rights
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1870
Old bylaw up in smoke
By Kathy Taylor Tuesday August 02, 2005
Pincher Creek Echo — After being burned by its current smoking bylaw, the town has given first reading to one it is sure is flame-retardent.
The town’s smoking bylaw was successfully challenged by Swiss Alpine Restaurant owner Heinz Inabnit.
The judge found the bylaw was too “ambiguous.”
As a result, the town has decided to use the City of Medicine Hat’s smoking bylaw which has held up to two court challenges.
“They’ve been challenged twice and they won both times,” Special Constable Kevin Sonnenberg told council.
While it was given first reading, it wasn’t unanimous.
Councillor Bill Bradshaw voted against the proposed bylaw, which contains a clause exempting the Royal Canadian Legion, private residences, or rooms available for rent in a hotel, motel or bed and breakfast establishment.
Bradshaw asked why council would consider exempting an establishment from complying with the bylaw when they allow children into the facility.
“It (the bylaw) gives the parents the choice,” said Councillor Sharon Smith.
Choosing not to take your children into a place where there is second hand smoke is just common sense, said Smith.
“You can’t legislate common sense,” Smith said.
Council gave the bylaw first reading, with Bradshaw opposed, agreed to advertise it for two weeks, gather some public input, and to discuss the matter further amongst themselves.
The matter will be on the agenda at the next regular meeting of council Aug. 22
http://www.pinchercreekecho.com/story.php?id=175737
Anti-smoking logic -MB
August 2, 2005
Regarding the letter Ban smoking in cars:
The man is talking on a cellphone and smoking a cigarette so of course using typical anti-smoker logic the cigarette is the reason he is not paying attention and goes through a stop sign.
Give us a break!
GORDON FINLAY Swan River
'Devastating' butt ban -AB
By SORCHA MCGINNIS, EDMONTON SUN Tue, August 2, 2005
A city restaurateur claims butting out has meant jobs have gone up in smoke, while others say it's hard to know what impact the smoking ban will have because of a recent surge in tourism.
Tom Goodchild said that since the city's new smoking bylaw took effect on July 1, he's had to eliminate up to 10 jobs at The Moose Factory, 4810 Calgary Tr.
"It's devastating. Our sales are down 35 per cent," said Goodchild. "We've had to terminate people because there simply isn't the work."
The restaurant has laid off between eight and 10 part-time servers, while those remaining have complained they are making less money in tips.
And Goodchild added he's been forced to say no to the approximately 10 requests he gets from city charities every week because he doesn't have the cash.
He says he'll continue to make donations as long as he can to the charities to which he's made a commitment, including a program that feeds underprivileged kids at inner-city schools.
Assurances by proponents of the ban that business will eventually bounce back as non-smokers reclaim bars haven't been convincing.
"Smoking is a social event," said Goodchild. "People don't suddenly decide they want to change their social habits because there's no smoking."
Other restaurateurs say that with so many visitors to the city in July, it will be a month or more before they know whether to expect a sharp drop in business.
Pat Tarbox, who manages the Sherlock Holmes Pub at West Edmonton Mall and the Rose & Crown Pub at 10235 101 St., noticed an initial 40 per cent drop in business.
However, in recent weeks, business has picked up.
Tarbox says this may be due to an increase in tourism from events such as the Grand Prix of Edmonton and the World Masters Games.
"It's hard to determine," he said. "The owners are kind of waiting for a month with not a lot of events happening, to see if it will tell the tale of what's going on."
Tarbox, a former smoker who backed the high-profile anti-smoking crusade of his late wife Barb, said he hasn't yet been forced to lay off any employees.
Their schedule has been adjusted to reflect a decline in business, with some staff working fewer hours, he said.
Mark Ung, general manager at the Boston Pizza at 4804 Calgary Tr., says the restaurant has been doing well in recent weeks.
Ung said he expects business will soon be a little slower.
"There's been so much going on," he said. "August will be the better test."
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonton/2005/08/02/1156206-sun.html
The New smoking Bylaw - AB
August 2,2005
THE NEW smoking bylaw has driven down the price of a beer in the bar, because they are scrambling for business, and I'm only two steps from being outside to have a cigarette! I can drink more and cut back on my smoking, not disrupting my fellow man in the process. God bless the anti-smoking people. Just be thankful I don't drive.
Geoff Dean
(Most bylaws are a mixed blessing.)
Gov't should buy them out
Mark Kennedy CanWest News Service Tuesday, August 02, 2005
OTTAWA -- Canada's governments should buy out the country's tobacco companies and hand them over to a new "public-interest" agency that manufactures and sells cigarettes so they are less addictive and appealing, says a new book.
Under the proposal, the new agency's fundamental purpose would be to gradually sell fewer cigarettes -- thereby providing the country untold savings in reduced costs to the health-care system, according to Cynthia Callard, Neil Collishaw and Dave Thompson, authors of Curing the Addiction to Profits.
A variety of models -- from Crown corporations, to non-profit companies, to public utilities -- could be considered as the best way to take over the tobacco industry, says the book.
The tobacco companies would be given the chance to voluntarily sell their firms as part of a negotiation, or they could be forced to comply and be paid fair-market value as part of the expropriation.
The book says it is difficult to predict how much it would cost to buy the companies. It says the price tag could be virtually nil if the companies -- already faced with lawsuits from governments seeking money from alleged tax-evasion and the health costs of treating smokers -- decide they're better off to get out of the business now.
Otherwise, it says the total value of the Canadian tobacco market could potentially be $15 billion.
"If buying tobacco companies seems expensive, the cost of allowing them to continue to serve private interests is no less costly," say the authors. "Since society pays the health costs associated with smoking, the cost to Canadians of buying tobacco companies is much lower than the cost of leaving them in place to keep smoking rates high."
In an interview, Callard -- who works with Collishaw at Physicians For a Smoke-Free Canada, a leading anti-tobacco group based in Ottawa -- said the authors want to kickstart a debate about innovative "long-term strategies" designed to reduce smoking rates.
She said that while federal and provincial governments could collectively purchase the tobacco companies, the simpler approach would likely be having the federal government make the move on its own.
The book notes that for nearly 50 years, governments have battled the consequences of high rates of smoking by encouraging individual smokers to recognize the dangers.
"The policies deployed to reduce smoking -- high tobacco taxes, bans on cigarette promotions, health warning labels, public education, etc -- try to modify the mindset and actions of smokers or potential smokers, which is why they are considered to be 'demand-side' interventions."
But from the start, says the book, tobacco companies have stood in the way. The authors say people should not expect companies to behave contrary to their "fiduciary responsibilities."
"The corporation has no moral responsibilities, and is incapable of feeling guilty about this selfish tendency. It does, however, have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of its shareholders.
"Tobacco corporations, like all business corporations, are not evil, and they are not good; they are incapable of any moral judgment or culpability. Like other rule-driven systems, their behaviour is programmed and predictable. In striving to sell more cigarettes and recruit new smokers, they are doing exactly what they were created to do and what they are required to do (that is, make money). The visible hand of corporate law and the invisible hand of the marketplace both compel tobacco corporations to try to increase tobacco use."
Thus, says the book, as long as the profit-driven companies themselves control the market, they will continue to weaken, bypass and violate tobacco control measures put in place by governments.
"Health regulators may develop more sophisticated and stringent tobacco control measures, but the companies will reply every time with more sophisticated and imaginative strategies to blunt their effect," say the authors.
The book argues that governments should recognize this fact and overcome the problem by influencing the "supply side" of the tobacco industry.
"There are many forms and hundreds of examples of public-interest enterprises, such as co-operatives, public utilities, Crown corporations and non-profit agencies, that can serve as models for creating a new public-interest tobacco manufacturer that has a legally binding mandate to help reduce smoking."
After the purchase, workers and retailers would not stop manufacturing and selling cigarettes but they would be directed to "focus their energies" on new ways to get people to stop smoking.
Under the new system, the companies would: work with public health agencies to devise and implement smoking cessation initiatives; cease all advertising and promotion aimed at increasing demand; adjust the design of cigarettes to make them less addictive and less attractive; and change the retail system so that store owners are not paid for promotional counter-top displays.
Christina Dona, manager of media relations for Imperial Tobacco Canada, said in an interview that buying out the industry is not necessary. "We think that a lot of the health-care objectives the government wants to accomplish can be done through a regulatory regime."
Moreover, she expressed doubt that even if there was an expropriation, federal and provincial governments would want to eradicate an industry that last year provided them with $8.7 billion in taxes.
http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/news/story.html?id=a9e98c44-1da4-4983-9546-5bc77f26908d
Rothmans faces triple threat
Tobacco company Rothmans Inc. is sleeping with one eye open.
Canada's second-largest tobacco company is facing a triple threat from contraband cigarettes, indoor smoking bans and pending litigation.
However, it still managed a first-quarter profit and impressive market share gain. But the momentum may cease.
"This [stock] is expensive," said David Hartley, an analyst with First Associates Investments. "Going forward, it's all about valuation of the stock and I think we've hit the end of the rope in terms of this stock going up. I think the valuations have finally become unreasonably stretched."
An increase in payout ratio (dividends as a percentage of share profit) to 86 per cent from 55 to 60 per cent two or three years ago has caused Rothmans to trade at 20 times earnings, 10.5 times EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) and 20 times free cash flow, Mr. Hartley said. Historically, Rothmans' peers have traded at 12 times earnings, 14 times EBITDA and 12 to 14 times free cash flow.
A week ago, Toronto-based Rothmans reported an increase in first-quarter profit to $29.7-million or 44 cents a share from $23.8-million or 35 cents a year earlier.
Despite an industry-wide decline in volume, the 60-per-cent-owned Rothmans Benson & Hedges Inc. was able to harness growth by being the first of Canada's three tobacco companies to offer discount cigarettes.
Revenue after excise duty and taxes increased to $176-million from $161.8-million.
Rothmans' share of the domestic market increased to 31.3 per cent from 27.9 per cent a year earlier.
"You have to remember market share was only 21 per cent two years ago and now they're at 31.3 per cent. That's a phenomenal management job right there," Mr. Hartley said.
The cigarette price category, or discount cigarettes, barely existed three years ago and now represents more than half of Rothman's business, chairman John Lute said in a conference call.Rothman's price category cigarettes, which include Number 7, Canadian Classics and Mark 10, represented about 38 per cent of total reported industry domestic cigarette sales volume in fiscal 2005, an increase from 7.2 per cent in fiscal 2003 and 18.3 per cent in fiscal 2004.
"As this change took place, we were quick to accept the days of predictability were over and that for the foreseeable future, this industry would be at best variable and at times volatile," Mr. Lute said.
The 4.72-per-cent dividend yield of the sin stock was in line with its peers, Mr. Hartley said. But it was almost identical to the dividend yield of low-risk BCE Inc., Canada's largest communications company, and power producer TransAlta Corp. Mr. Hartley's recommendation and 12-month price target are "under review." The stock closed Friday at $25.40 on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
A Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. analysis voiced concerns that Rothmans may be vulnerable regarding market share as competitor JTI-Macdonald Corp. has launched another brand into the lower-tier category at a price lower than both Rothmans' and Imperial Tobacco Canada's.
"[Rothmans Benson & Hedges] has over the past 12 months taken two separate price increases in the discount category; this may make the ability to take further increases more difficult," the report said.Rothmans blamed higher taxes for the proliferation of contraband cigarettes.
"Governments are simultaneously raising taxes to unprecedented levels and placing increasingly rigid restrictions on the industry. This set the stage for the growth of counterfeit and contraband product, which is a growing problem for everyone," Mr. Lute said.In 2004, the RCMP seized 120,582 cartons of contraband cigarettes across Canada, valued at between $40 and $70 each, spokeswoman Nathalie Deschênes said. In 2003, three shipments from China were intercepted and 357,298 cartons were seized.
Indoor smoking bans have led to lower cigarette consumption in the winter, and Rothmans is continuing to research what impact this trend will have on the stock price.
"It seems to make sense that that would be the case, but we're continuing to do analysis," Mr. Lute said.
There have been no developments in litigation brought against tobacco companies, but a positive result for the plaintiffs in British Columbia and Quebec could burden the tobacco industry.
In British Columbia, the Supreme Court is reviewing the province's right to sue tobacco companies for health care recovery costs while class-action litigation is proceeding in Quebec.
"The risk comes in waves the way the market looks at it. When court cases are upon us, the stock tends to contain a greater risk premium than at times when the news is low," Mr. Hartley said.
"I think [litigation] is going to be a factor in the near term if the result is positive for the province."
Smokin'
Rothmans has racked up first-quarter profit and impressive market share gain, but industry challenges could ease its momentum.
Company snapshot
| Headquarters | Toronto |
| Chairman | Joseph Heffernan |
| President / CEO | John Barnett |
| Friday's close | $25.40 |
| Change from previous | down 25¢ |
| 52-week intraday high | $26.99 |
| 52-week intraday low | $16.76 |
| P/E ratio, trailing | 17.58 |
| Dividend yield | 4.72% |
| Market cap | $1.72-billion |
| Price / book ratio | 16.87 |
| 1-year total return | 64.37% |
| YTD percentage return | 27.32% |
| Revenue, Q1 2006 | $176-million |
| Profit, Q1 2006 | $29.7-million |
SOURCE: BLOOMBERG FINANCIAL SERVICES
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050802.wxredge02/EmailBNStory/Business/
Government told to buy up big tobacco to cut smoking
Mark Kennedy Citizen Special August 2, 2005
Making cigarettes less addictive would help Canada kick habit: book
Canada's governments should buy out the country's tobacco companies and hand them over to a new "public interest" agency that manufactures and sells cigarettes so they are less addictive and appealing, says a new book.
Under the proposal, the new agency's fundamental purpose would be to gradually sell fewer cigarettes -- thereby providing the country untold savings in reduced costs to the health care system, according to Cynthia Callard, Neil Collishaw and Dave Thompson, authors of Curing the Addiction to Profits.
A variety of models -- from Crown corporations, to non-profit companies, to public utilities -- could be considered as the best way to take over the tobacco industry, says the book.
The tobacco companies would be given the chance to voluntarily sell their firms as part of a negotiation, or they could be forced to comply and be paid fair market value as part of the expropriation.
The book says implementing its plan could cost practically nothing to as much as $15 billion.
The price tag could be virtually nil, the book claims, if the companies -- already faced with lawsuits from governments seeking money from alleged tax evasion and the health costs of treating smokers -- decide they're better off to get out of the business now. Otherwise, the value of the Canadian tobacco market could be $15 billion.
The varying predictions reflect just how difficult it is to estimate the cost to buy the companies, and what factors should be used in any estimation.
"If buying tobacco companies seems expensive, the cost of allowing them to continue to serve private interests is no less costly," say the authors. "Since society pays the health costs associated with smoking, the cost to Canadians of buying tobacco companies is much lower than the cost of leaving them in place to keep smoking rates high."
In an interview, Ms. Callard -- who works with Mr. Collishaw at Physicians For a Smoke-Free Canada, a leading anti-tobacco group based in Ottawa -- said the authors want to kickstart a debate about innovative "long-term strategies" designed to reduce smoking rates.
She said that while federal and provincial governments could collectively purchase the tobacco companies, the simpler approach would likely be to have the federal government make the move on its own.
The book notes that for nearly 50 year