(Reprinted from Thornhill Month, November 1999)
By Sean B. Pasternak
The voice behind business in York Region is telling the government to ‘butt out’ when it comes to legislating no-smoking laws in their establishments.
“We’re not discussing the health concerns of smoking,” insists Richmond Hill Chamber of Commerce President Barb Scollick, who is teaming up with Chambers of Commerce in Markham, Georgina, Richmond Hill, Whitchurch-Stouffville and East Gwillimbury to address the lack of say York Region businesses have in creating no-smoking bylaws.
“We’re looking at the economic concerns, and we’ll continue to do so until we have a level playing field.”
Currently, Markham and Vaughan have by-laws banning smoking outright, whereas Richmond Hill allows for smoking in some parts of establishments, which Markham Board of Trade president Ruth Burkholder said is “a fair compromise”.
For the past 8 months, the Region’s No Smoking Bylaw Committee has discussed the possibility of a total smoking ban for York Region. Because some municipalities within the region enforce the bylaws, local businesses are losing clients to neighbouring municipalities which do not have such rules, explains Scollick.
As well, the chambers of commerce are arguing that industries such as tourism and hospitality in York Region will suffer if patrons can travel to nearby towns that allow for smoking.
The business community wants to take an active role in any decision made by the government. So far, they have not been successful in becoming members of the bylaw committee, despite an additional request from the Ontario Restaurant Hotel and Motel Association, a lobby group with over 4000 members.
“If you involve the opposition from the beginning, a lot more can be accomplished,” insists Burkholder.
Soo Wong, a member of the bylaw committee who is also a health educator for the Region, says that there have and will continue to be meetings for everyone in the community to voice concerns.
“For (the business community) to say that they weren’t consulted is not true,” Wong insists. “These meetings were pretty public; whether they came or not is another issue.”
Any no-smoking bylaw, the Chambers of Commerce say, should be based on freedom of choice by the public and free enterprise by businesses.
“I am a non-smoker,” says Scollick. “I have the choice whether to go to a bar or a restaurant that allows smoking.”
Conversely, businesses such as Tim Horton’s proudly promote the fact that over 90 per cent of its establishments, such as the ones in York Region, are completely smoke-free.
“The (smoke-free) policy came from our storeowners,” says Tim Hortons spokesperson Diane Slopac. “We actually started towards that in 1984, and by 1994, we were the first to offer separately-ventilated rooms in our restaurants.”
Scollick applauds the decision of the Canadian donut and coffee store chain to do that, but points out that Tim Hortons was never forced into the concept.
“They’re doing very well, but they’re the ones making the choice to do that,” she says.
Wong says many establishments in the United States have also prospered despite smoking restrictions; the state of California, for instance, is completely smoke-free.
A study in North Carolina concluded that no-smoking laws ‘resulted in no adverse economic effect on the restaurant industry.’
Ultimately, taxpayers in the Region will pay the biggest price, Wong says.
“The amount of money we get as taxpayers from tobacco sales is minute compared to the bills for our health care dollar,” she says.
As well, the health department strongly feels that the health implications must be considered in any ban. “There’s enough out there (on the dangers of smoking) to substantiate what we’re doing,” Wong says.
“You can talk and educate until the cows come home, but until you have enforcement, people aren’t going to listen.”
While Burkholder agrees with the dangers of second-hand smoke, she says there is less being done about pollution in the air, yet smog alerts and warnings made the news consistently throughout the past summer.
Scollick adds that the government should not be able to ban smoking with allowing for consistency in its rulings. “Smoking cigarettes is still a legal substance,” she says.
