Posts Tagged ‘Canada’

Smoker’s rights fight heats up

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

You gotta love this story. After years of people telling him he’s a whackjob, someone actually listens. And…by gosh, he might be right!

cnews.ca

By RON CORBETT, QMI Agency

Mike Kennedy is a smokers' rights advocate who is trying to take a court case to the Supreme Court. (Tony Caldwell/QMI Agency)

OTTAWA — This story reads like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, only instead of windmills Mike Kennedy has been taking a run at government bureaucrats and public-health officials.

He has been fighting for eight years. Fought the City of Ottawa when it came in with its no-smoking bylaw. Then the province of Ontario, when the Smoke-Free Ontario Act came into effect in 2006.

It’s the province he’s still fighting with, in a story that took an interesting turn last week. It may also be the funniest tilting-at-windmill story that Kennedy has.

Happened in September 2007, when Kennedy tried to open a “private-members club” in Smiths Falls. Tried to do it at the site of the old Doolittle’s Pub, one of the few pubs in the world that once had a one-armed bartender.

STRANGE

It was a strange little pub, on the ground floor of a Comfort Inn, right by one of the locks on the Rideau Canal. Sadly missed, in an odd way. The perfect site for one of Kennedy’s escapades.

So anyway, he opened a private-members’ club. Hired some contract workers. Threw open the doors. Sold membership to his private club, the greatest amenity of which, as it turned out, was ashtrays.

That’s right, it was a smoker’s club. And boy, did that cause some problems.

In less than a month Kennedy had been booted from the premises (and it always took a fair bit of work to be booted from Doolittle’s). The Leeds Grenville and Lanark Health Unit had laid charges against him. His business dreams were up in smoke.

Kennedy has been fighting those charges ever since. Along with the $3,600 in fines the health department gave him.

Fought it at trial. Fought it through two appeals. Fought it when everybody started laughing at him and saying things like, “Mike, forget it. You’ve lost. Go home and have a cigarette.”

Fought it and talked about it and pretended he didn’t hear the laughter, or understand that people thought he was obsessed and perhaps even moderately crazy (“why would I spend so much time on this? Well, I guess its because I’m a dumb hick from Overbrook who can’t walk and chew gum at the same time.”)

But you know what? Someone finally listened to Mike Kennedy.

Martin W. Mason is one of the most respected lawyers in Ottawa.

He is a partner with Gowlings. Has served on the national and Ontario council of the Canadian Bar Association. Is past chair of the bar association’s council on constitutional and human rights law. Teaches constitutional law at the University of Ottawa.

And Martin W. Mason thinks Kennedy has a point. Has such a strong point, in fact, he hopes to argue his case before the Supreme Court of Canada.

“This is not a smoking case,” says Mason. “That’s one of the dilemmas here, because smoking is evil. We have all been taught that, and it’s hard to see beyond that.

BOUNDARIES

“But there are larger issues here. And one is whether we have the right to erect boundaries to which the state shouldn’t cross.”

Or put another way, as he goes on to explain, is there such a thing as “private” anymore in Canada?

In the pursuit of some societal goal, even one most Canadians feel is laudable, can the state go too far?

To Mason, the argument that Kennedy has been making for two-and-a-half years now — that the Magna Carta died when the Leeds, Grenville and Lanark health department barged into his club, that the King now has the right to enter your home on a whim — is not such a stretch.

“What is the definition of a public place?” asks Mason. “The distinction between private and public, in my opinion, was not addressed properly by (the Ontario Court of Appeals.)

“As it reads in the appeals court decision, I think an argument could be made that your home is now a public place.”

That’s what tripped up Kennedy. That he allowed smoking in a public place. Now one of the most pre-eminent lawyers in the country thinks the state has gone too far, in its search for a smoke-free Ontario.

Last week, Mason filed the final paperwork on his application to the Supreme Court to review the case.

He thinks the demise of Kennedy’s little smokers’ club in Smiths Falls is of “national and public interest,” one of the requirements for the Supreme Court to hear the case.

“Maybe,” says Kennedy — with a little self-satisfied laugh you almost can’t fault him for — “I’m not so crazy after all.”

Critics fume as Quebec doctor defends smoking

Friday, January 15th, 2010

canada.com

By Marianne White , Canwest News Service January 12, 2010

QUEBEC — The current anti-smoking climate is putting too much pressure on those who can’t kick the habit while keeping from them the psychological and health benefits of smoking, charges a Quebec doctor and psychiatrist in a controversial new book that has anti-smoking groups fuming.

After years of seeing smokers — himself included — battle their addiction unsuccessfully, Jean-Jacques Bourque has decided to stand up for them.

“Smokers are not criminals,” Bourque said Tuesday in a telephone interview. “I wanted to let them know that it’s not all black and white, that there are many shades of grey when it comes to smoking,” added the retired physician.

In his book, Ecrasons la cigarette pas les fumeurs (Crush cigarettes not smokers), Bourque asserts that many smokers are not able to quit because they suffer from depression without knowing it. The nicotine contained in cigarettes acts as an antidepressant and when people stop smoking suddenly it can have dire consequences, he contends.

“If we put a lot of pressure on those people to stop smoking they can become more depressed, suicidal and even die,” said Bourque, a former president of the province’s Association of Psychiatrists.

Bourque points out to the case of a friend who he said committed suicide because he felt he was a failure for not being able to quit smoking. That friend, like many smokers according to Bourque, was vulnerable and wanted to please his relatives by trying to quit.

He also asserted that people smoke to relieve stress and that quitting suddenly can harm them. For instance, he said smokers who stop lighting up after a heart attack double their chances of dying faster than those who continued to smoke.

Bourque also notes in his book that smokers are less likely to suffer from Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases.

He is not encouraging people to smoke but rather calls for more tolerance on the part of non-smokers.

Bourque takes aim at what he describes as propaganda from Health Canada and anti-smoking activists. He says they have resorted to fear to convince smokers to quit and overblown the effects of second-hand smoke.

“I think we need to find ways to encourage smokers to seek help to quit instead of playing on their guilt,” said Bourque, who is a pipe-smoker.

But his book is drawing fire from anti-smoking activists.

“We shouldn’t be rolling back measures to protect people’s health just to make smokers feel better about themselves,” said Cynthia Callard, executive director of Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada. “But certainly we need to be doing it in a way that smoking is the issue, not smokers.”

Callard said the book could be a dangerous mischief that could comfort smokers and give them the false assurance that they don’t need to quit right away.

But the president of the Quebec College of Physicians, who penned the preface of the book, embraces Bourque’s plea.

“I think we need to show compassion, empathy and understanding towards those who are dealing with such difficulties instead of setting them aside,” writes Yves Lamontagne, who noted he finally managed to quit smoking two years ago after several attempts.

This comes a week after a group of University of British Columbia researchers called on governments to review their anti-smoking policies. The academics argue that years of anti-smoking laws and campaigns have amounted to a public shaming of smokers, thus making it harder for them to quit.

They also found the stigma around smoking could lead to patients hiding their tobacco use from doctors, and feeling desperate about ever quitting.

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

Tobacco store owner gearing up for another legal fight

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

Tobacco store owner gearing up for another legal fight

Last Updated: Monday, May 18, 2009 | 2:42 PM AT

A tobacco seller in Kentville, N.S., is gearing up for another legal fight with the provincial government over its law on displaying tobacco products.

Bob Gee, who has owned Mader’s Tobacco Store for more than 30 years, has refused to comply with a law that requires him to cover up or hide his cigars, cigarettes and pipe tobacco from public view.

In May 2008, Gee was charged under the province’s anti-smoking law with one count of storing tobacco products and another of improper display.

Gee, who said the law violates his charter rights guaranteeing on freedom of expression, was set to go to trial on April 1. However, the Crown attorney for the province requested a stay of the charges against him.

Since then, the provincial government has amended the law, which still requires store owners to keep tobacco products hidden from public, but now allows for them to display their products in a catalogue.

Gee said he wasn’t impressed with both the stay of charges and the rewording of the law.

“I went to court to face the charges and then they’re using the system and whatnot to hide behind.”

Now a ‘waiting game,’ store owner says

Gee has already received two warnings from a government inspector to once again, cover up his tobacco products.

“We had a good warm discussion on the first visit that we got the 30-day verbal warning,” Gee told CBC News on Monday. “I guess the talk is over and it’s just the waiting game.”

A second written warning Gee received expires in early June.

Gee said the amended law still violates his right to freedom of expression, so he intends to keep his tobacco in full view behind the counter. He said he hopes the provincial government moves quickly if it intends to charge him.

“We went to court to get closure and I would hope that happens sooner rather than later,” Gee said. “I’m not going away and I’m not giving up.”

The fine for violating the anti-smoking law is $2,000 for the first offence. A second conviction carries a maximum fine of $5,000, and the fine goes to $10,000 for a third conviction.