Consider this: the city passes a bylaw that prohibits eating ice cream on a Sunday on Bank Street.
Ridiculous, you say – even bizarre. Well, yes. But in its own way no more so than a new bylaw that will ban smoking at city bus stops to create a “smoke-free transit.” – an extension of the smoke-free city/province campaign.
Transgressors will face a minimum $150 fine, but a maximum penalty of $5,000 is on the books.
As the devil is always in the details, how does the new bylaw define proximity to a bus stop? Anywhere within a radius of nine metres – approximately 30 feet (that is not a typo).
How the designers of this policy came up with this distance is baffling. Is smoke from a cigarette even two metres away going to be of any notice to non-smokers?
But beyond this puzzling detail, the new bylaw leaves a lot of other questions that have yet to be answered.
How will enforcers differentiate between transit users and other pedestrians walking down the street? What about bus stops near bar and restaurant patios, which have become a refuge for smokers after they were told they could no longer light up in places of work. And private property? Are smokers on their own porches violating the bylaw if their houses happen to be near a bus stop?
Unfortunately those responsible for implementing the policy say they do not yet have the answers to these questions. You would think these things should be determined before a bylaw takes force.
The next two months of the implementation phase will focus on an educational blitz, although educational material for the campaign clearly states the bylaw can now be enforced. And come early 2008, the “strict enforcement” of the bylaw will begin.
Social engineering is alive and well in Ottawa. The city banned smoking in public buildings and workplaces in 2001. This included bars, restaurants, taxis, and common areas in apartment buildings. Now many anti-smoking activists are lobbying for bans in apartment buildings. And it is quite possible that all private residences may be next on their list.
But the city and OC Transpo are really one step ahead. They are attacking smokers in what is perhaps their last refuge – the great outdoors. Like it or not, the move to prohibition is upon us.
And maybe the anti-smoking activists will be able to make that case. There are many obvious negative consequences involving tobacco consumption. But smokers will argue back it is their choice how they spend their money and what they put into their bodies and will point to a lot of more harmful things that affect the air quality we breathe (think cars).
So what we need is not another unreasonable and unenforceable city edict to make these decisions for us.
Rather create a bylaw that can be used to stop those few inconsiderate smokers who light up in a crowd or blow their smoke in the faces of passers-by. And leave the prohibition debate where it belongs – with the public.
–Garrett Zehr