By Joel Kom
It was about –20 C one day recently, but Larry Leadman was outside enjoying a beer and a cigarette on the patio of the Barley Mow on Bank Street.
Leadman was braving the chill, which was partly reduced by walls of clear plastic sheeting and an awning, because the patio remains one of the last public places he can enjoy a cigarette.
But Leadman may not have to fight the cold much longer – even if he wants to – thanks to the Ontario government’s plans to abolish smoking on all outdoor patios with overhead coverings and in all private smoking rooms by May 2006.
“It’s gone far too far,” Leadman said between sips of his beer. “I think it’s a lot of hypocrisy. They don’t mind taking all the tax money from tobacco sales.”
The Ontario Liberals introduced the Smoke-Free Ontario Act last December. The new plan would ban smoking in designated smoking rooms, private clubs, outdoor patios with roofs and any other indoor public area not covered under current bans.
Health Minister George Smitherman said the bill aims to prevent employees in restaurants, bingo halls and legion halls from having to inhale second-hand smoke.
But many Ottawa restaurants, bars and pubs with outdoor areas claim to already have suffered from the indoor ban enacted in 2001. They say the proposed legislation will be a further blow to their businesses.
“I don’t even know if an establishment like ours would be able to survive with no place to smoke,” said Matthew Egyed, a manager at the James Street Feed Co. on Bank Street.
The restaurant has a tent in the summer months where people can smoke and be served. Egyed agreed that servers should not be forced to wade into the smoky tent if they do not want to, but he believed that was an issue between employer and employee.
He said he would be willing to accommodate servers who wanted to stay off the patio, but acknowledged some could be scared to ask for the exemption for fear of it affecting their jobs.
Randy Hughes, vice-president of operations for the Pub and Bar Coalition of Canada, said the Ontario government should provide compensation to businesses that would be affected by the new proposals.
Hughes referred to about 700 bars and pubs in Toronto that either successfully applied to build or already built separate smoking rooms with the approval of the municipal government. Those businesses have invested considerable money in building those rooms, Hughes said, and to have the rooms suddenly taken away makes for a significant financial hit.
“If those 700 businesses thought it was important to build private smoking rooms, then it’s obvious that they need the rooms for the business,” he said.
While some groups dismiss restaurants’ claims that the current city ban had a significant impact on business, smoker Philip Glofcheskie said he will probably go out less should the new bill become law.
“I only spend my money on places that accommodate smokers,” he said, right before he went out for a smoke on the Barley Mow patio. “It absolutely affects my choices.”
The new bill also has implications for bingo and legion halls. Bruce Kane, manager at the Montgomery branch of the Royal Canadian Legion on Kent Street, said the new proposals are an insult to the approximately 50 veterans who use the branch’s smoking room.
Kane said the branch won a court exemption in 2003 from the municipal smoking ban, but the new bill would take away the private smoking area.
“If the vets don’t deserve any special consideration, it’s pretty sad,” Kane said. “We don’t argue that it is bad for your health. But you can’t say to an 85-year-old vet, ‘Don’t smoke, it’s bad for you.’”
He added the branch doesn’t allow smoking during major events so that those veterans with lung problems can attend. No employees have to go into the room while it’s being used, he said, and the room does not bother anybody else.
But Michael Perley, director of the Ontario Campaign for Action against Tobacco, said separate smoking rooms – even those equipped with ventilation systems – still cause smoke to filter out into other areas.
He cited tests done in Toronto, which found that 78 per cent of separate smoking rooms failed to keep smoke in or properly ventilate, as evidence that private rooms hurt non-smokers.
But Hughes said that instead of simply eradicating all private smoking rooms, the government should set more stringent ventilation and usage standards for those rooms.
If a business’s smoking room is not working properly, he said, the business should be ticketed and told to fix it. Hughes added it doesn’t make sense to just do away with smoking rooms altogether without trying to accommodate the businesses.
“We’re not opposed to the legislation,” Hughes stressed. “We’re opposed to the way it’s written. We believe there’s room for compromise in areas like ventilation.”
Perley emphasized that the bill was not an attempt to trample on smokers.
“We’re not saying don’t smoke,” Perley said. “We’re just saying don’t do it where it’s going to hurt someone else. It’s unfortunate that (the bill) inconveniences people.”
Still, many smokers feel they’re being unfairly targeted.
“There’s obviously an ulterior motive to this,” said Glofcheskie. “Now there seems to be an agenda to enforce legislation against smokers.”
“I’ll probably be hosting a lot more parties at my place.”