News and Views » News Features

Smoking crackdown coming to public areas in Vancouver

Park board expected to restrict tobacco use in public areas later this month.

By Carlito Pablo,

Park commissioner Raj Hundal says a total ban on smoking is an option.

Nick Losito of Vancouver Coastal Health has been a tireless campaigner against smoking.

At the end of March, Losito is retiring as regional director of health protection, and he’s extremely pleased that the Vancouver park board is determined to curtail smoking in parks and on beaches, playing fields, and trails.

“That would be a nice retirement present,” Losito told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview. “It’s long overdue.”

Vancouver park commissioner Raj Hundal can’t say yet to what extent smoking will be restricted in public areas. The park board had expected to deal with this long-standing subject on February 1, but this was pushed back for another meeting.

According to Hundal, options include the designation of smoking zones within public areas and a total ban on smoking.

“I think it’s safe to say, though, that there will be some sort of regulation in place,” Hundal told the Straight by phone.

The board has strong public support for the antismoking initiative.

A staff presentation before the board’s planning-and-environment committee last year about the results of an on-line survey noted that only seven percent of 608 respondents stated that they would use parks less if smoking restrictions were put in place.

The remaining respondents, according to minutes of the December 12, 2009, meeting, “thought the restriction would not create behavioural change or would increase their use of the park system”.

Survey results also showed that 74 percent believed that the park board “should take a leadership role to provide clean, smoke-free air”. Of the respondents, 90 percent were nonsmokers, like Hundal, and 10 percent identified themselves as tobacco smokers.

The board can also count on science to support a move to restrict public smoking. According to the Canadian Cancer Society, secondhand smoke contains more than 4,000 chemicals, many of which are known to cause cancer. These chemicals include carbon monoxide, ammonia, cadmium, cyanide, mercury, and arsenic.

Each year, according to the group’s Web site, more than 1,000 nonsmoking Canadians die from diseases associated with secondhand smoke.

The site also explains that although a cigarette produces about 12 minutes of smoke, a smoker may inhale only 30 seconds of that smoke, while the rest stays in the air for nonsmokers and smokers alike to breathe.

The association advises children, pregnant women, older people, and people with heart or breathing problems to avoid secondhand smoke. It also notes that secondhand smoke can trigger asthma attacks, increase one’s risk of contracting bronchitis and pneumonia, and exacerbate allergies.

A smoking regulation would lessen tensions between smokers and nonsmokers, a matter that Iram Zaidi knows well.

A Kitsilano resident, Zaidi regularly frequents the beach in her neighbourhood with friends, and she’s the type who doesn’t hide her displeasure about inhaling secondhand smoke.

“At times I make a face and the person gets an understanding and they try to blow the smoke from my face,” Zaidi told the Straight. “I think some people are just insensitive.”

Hundal said that the park board hopes smokers and nonsmokers can agree on one expected beneficial result of the prohibition: no more cigarette butts on the beaches.

The Vision park commissioner related that machinery used to clean up beaches cannot pick up these stubs, which have to be collected manually. “We’ve been told that it’s hours and hours of labour-intensive work,” he said.

According to Hundal, the board expects to make a decision about smoking restrictions later this month.

Comments

seth
This is too stupid to believe.

Colognes and perfumes in closed spaces like buses and restaurants are much more dangerous pollutants than cigarettes on a public beach.

Vehicle exhaust is an infinitely more dangerous pollutant in public spaces than cigarette smoke. It's like making sure that all arsenic is removed from your hemlock before you drink.
seth
 
sean
whats next- spitting laws? farting laws? derrogatory comments about assholes in power laws? how about selfishness laws? make it illegal to try to or impose your will on someone else laws? ciggarettes or auto exhaust? i'll choose the sacred plant tobacco. ciggarettes or campbells drunk driveing, ciggs again. I know outlaw skunks-they stink.
 
Michael K
"Each year, according to the group’s Web site, more than 1,000 nonsmoking Canadians die from diseases associated with secondhand smoke."

I am curious, how many die every year due to air pollution by fine particular matter created by car engines / tyres?

Yes, people die needlessly every single day, maybe they should just bypass the whole thing and set up "no dying" signs and be done with it.
 
Anon
I find the restrictions to be a bit lame, second hand smoke is really only a concern indoors, as the smoke just hangs there. No moving air to clear it out. There are already smoking bans on indoor public spaces. But when you are outside, the smoke doesn't hang and blows away right away. So what's the big deal?
 
duncan
unnecessary, to say the very least. orwellian, in my opinion.
 
calling bullshit
skeptical about how great a threat to health secondhand smoke is in vancouver's windy parks.
 
@realtorblair
how about a crackdown on smoking crack in public places first.
 
I am happy about that!
With a person who has severe asthma reactions to cig smoke (it only takes a few wiffs) I am very happy about the new pending laws. People have a choice if they want to smoke, but I do not have a choice regarding breathing. At the very least they can have a designated spot for people to do their drugs.
 
hillbilly
hahaha...your taxdollars at waste, machines to clean the beach then go by hand to pick the butts. the same retard that bought that machine prolly bringin in this reg to cover his a** !! this is to keep us alive?? hey outlaw sex, BIRTH has a 100 percent deathrate, nobody dies without bein born.
 
Ron van der Eerden
If we were really serious about health and safety we'd keep the cars out of our parks, keep them 6 meters away from doors and patios etc...

Would you rather spend a couple hours in a room with smokers or a couple hours in a room with a running car? See what I mean?
 
response to asp
why do smokers believe they have the right to impose their addiction on others? Smoke in your own homes!
 
William
"Each year, according to the group’s Web site, more than 1,000 nonsmoking Canadians die from diseases associated with secondhand smoke."

What the hell is that supposed to mean? How many of the 1,000 died from diseases "caused by" secondhand smoke?

Somebody looking for the satisfying feeling of fighting for a cause should just just have a smoke; it can be very satisfying.
 
Enough!
This city needs to rid itself of the diehard authoritative leftists.

We will do as we please, back in the kitchen bitch!
 
leroy brown
a room full of smoke wont kill you but a room ull of car exhaust will. dont be fooled.
 
Stray Comma
Heh heh, with a slight change to punctuation the headline would read

Smoking crack, down coming to public areas in Vancouver
 
J Mahaney
People are starting to realise now how we were talked into this misjustice,Most smokers have always been the types to let people say what they want and were too quiet at the time when these laws went through when they should have fought back way more strongly.The whole idea of smoking bans and stealing money off people in the form of cigarette taxes is nothing but yet another attempt to take away all our rights.In the first place the government should be paying reprorations to all soldiers that they addicted to cigarrettes during world war 2 not to mention the fact that the government of England actually brought tobacco to Canada so in fact are responsible for all the addiction of tobacco.people actually should bring a class action suit against all of the government and it's agents acting on their behalf(such as Columbis)We need to revisit these laws and fight to get our rights back and stop the government from thinking they are our parents,They are our employees,Supposed to be in charge of protecting us from outside threats not from ourselves.Kindly give us back our rights of freedom which our fathers fought for and go do the job you were elected for.
 
D Straw
Unless you can some way to enforce the existing laws, what's the point?
 
Smoker
This is bull. Equality please!
 
fan22
Smoking is an intelligence test. Plain and simple.
 
dp
How about us non smokers just start defecating and urinating in public parks and on beaches? That's also not as bad as car exhaust so should it be allowed?

Smokers stink and that's why I don't like them.
 
lc
The benefit of keeping cars off the road (cleaner air and improved health) is outweighed by the cost (todays' society can't function without them).

The benefit of not smoking in public spaces (cleaner air and improved health) outweighs the cost (grumpy smokers).

So I don't think it's really hypocritical to ban smoking but not cars!
 
Adolf
We pay a large amount of taxes on tobacco products just for the government to come back at us and continually restrict where we can and can't smoke. I'm not defending the habit, but people should have the right to smoke outside in a public place. I understand that banning smoking inside public places, but at a beach?? give me a break! What's next? A ban on smoking in your own home? (i smoke outside) Politicians should start putting higher taxes on fast food and crap like that. That crap will kill you in sooner.
 
 
[Comments Disclaimer]
Post a comment
· Use your real name to have your comment considered for publication in print.
· URLs and email addresses will be automatically turned into links.