Currently the federal government is pushing through tough anti-smoking legislation that will severely restrict tobacco advertising. The opposition to this legislation has taken the form of special interest groups who benefit from tobacco advertising - jazz festivals, Indy Car racing groups, the Symphony of Fire and so on - claiming that their efforts will be hampered by such legislation.
In Vancouver and other municipalities, a ban on smoking in restaurants has brought out bitter complaints from restaurants who argue that their businesses will be hurt by the ban. They pitch at best for a relaxation of the ban, and at worst, they argue for province-wide prohibition that includes every establishment including pubs and bingo parlours.
While these various groups might be right in their claims, they miss the big picture. The hazard of these laws is not some restaurants going out of business or the Symphony of Fire being canceled. The danger of these laws is that they are the thin edge of the wedge in a gradual process that can only end up with a totally repressive state in the name of health - in other words health fascism.
The federal law violates the basic principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The government pushes a bogus dichotomy. They say that commercial speech and press is not protected by guarantees in our constitution. Beware - today's commercial speech becomes tomorrow's general speech. It is not at all far fetched to contemplate the government some day prosecuting those who endorse smoking or disparage the health claims made against smoking for contributing to the delinquency of minors.
The municipal laws severely restrict business owners in the use and enjoyment of their property. It is argued by proponents of the law that a business is not really private property. It is private in name only, but is a public space and subject to government control and regulation. Again this is a short step away from banning smoking from private homes, particularly homes with children. (Will they get kids to rat on their parents?)
The government argues for the smoking ban on the alleged harm to innocent parties from second hand smoke. Ignored in the equation is that the conditions of work are known prior to an employee taking a job. Someone applying for a job as a bartender knows he will encounter a smoky atmosphere. It is a risk he is willing to take for the job. Such risks are encountered in numerous professions. The hazard of working in an underground mine is far greater than that of working in a smoky bar or restaurant. Should we ban mining?
There are a great many jobs that encounter far greater risks to life and limb than that of second hand smoke. Logging, mill work, fishing - the list goes on and on. BC's economy would go to ruin if we banned fishing, forestry and mining because of their related risks. So why does the government go nuts over the comparatively minor risks associated with smoking? Why? Because it is the politically correct thing to do! Because fascism in the name of health brooks no opposition.
The anti-smoking zealotry is the beginning of a totalitarian regime of such health fascism. Down the road we may see mandatory annual check-ups for those over 50, a ban on unhealthy junk food, and mandatory exercise classes for all citizens. How far away are we from the midnight knock at the door by the health police to check your refrigerator for contraband foodstuffs? Closer than you think!
Marco den Ouden
GVLA President
|
|