Worldandnation: In Ottawa, smokers are fuming over ban

OTTAWA -- As customers enter Dock's Bar and Grill, they can't help but notice the "No Smoking" sign and a copy of Ottawa's tough new anti-smoking law posted prominently on the door.

And as they step inside, they can't help but notice a cloud of smoke so thick it burns the eyes and tickles the throat.

"It's outrageous," electrician Tony Zabchuk says of the law, taking another drag on a Player's cigarette. At the table next to his, four other customers are also puffing away.

Since Aug. 1, Canada's capital city has been struggling to enforce the newest -- and one of the strongest -- smoking bans in North America. Lighting up is illegal in most workplaces and public areas, including restaurants, bars, bingo parlors, legion halls, casinos and bowling alleys. When a monthlong grace period ends Monday, violators will be subject to fines of up to $3,300.

City officials say compliance has been good. But even if opponents aren't hurling ice cubes at inspectors, as happened in Waterloo, it is clear that not everyone is happy with Ottawa's efforts to protect the public health.

Robert Cushman, the city's medical officer, has been called "The Prince of Darkness" and worse by angry smokers. Some establishments are openly flouting the law or trying to get around it by forming private clubs. Alarmed by a sharp dropoff in business, 170 bar and restaurant owners banded together and filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against the city to get the ban overturned.

What's happening here might presage what's in store for Florida if voters approve a constitutional amendment that would ban smoking in restaurants and most workplaces. The proposal, which supporters hope to get on the Florida ballot in November 2002, reflects the growing friction throughout the United States and Canada between nonsmokers and those who see their ability to enjoy a legal product being steadily eroded.

"This is not about smoking," says Mike Kennedy, a chain-smoking Ottawa courier and founder of Smokers Choice, a group opposed to the city's law. "This is about being able to choose. I think smoking is wrong, but this is a free country and we have the right to do the wrong thing."

Supporters of the law say non-smokers have rights, too, namely being able to work or dine out without being exposed to potentially harmful secondhand smoke.

"You have the freedom to smoke, but you don't have the freedom to force someone else to smoke," says Cushman, Ottawa's top health official.

In recent years, Canada has been aggressive in its efforts to curb smoking, which causes about a fourth of the nation's deaths each year. Since Jan. 1, tobacco companies have been required to cover 50 percent of the surface area of cigarette packs with graphic photos of diseased lungs, blackened teeth and other smoking-related problems. Canadian Health Minister Allan Rock recently proposed that companies be forced to drop "mild" and "light" from cigarette names, saying the use of such words "offers smokers a false sense of security."

Canada also used to impose heavy taxes on cigarettes to discourage sales. But that led to such widespread smuggling from the United States that the Canadian government reduced taxes, only to see the lower prices attract more and more young smokers. The rate of smoking among teens has jumped from 18 to 28 percent.

Alarmed by the increase and the documented dangers of secondhand smoke, Cushman began pressing Ottawa's City Council to crack down on smoking in the Canadian capital, a sprawling but attractive metropolis of nearly 1-million people.

Bar and restaurant owners urged Ottawa to follow the lead of other cities and let them maintain separate, well-ventilated rooms for smokers. But officials rejected the idea because of evidence that even the best ventilation systems are not totally effective in removing particulates from the air. Moreover, there was concern that smaller businesses unable to afford separate rooms would be at a competitive disadvantage to larger establishments.

Ottawa also decided against exempting casinos and bingo parlors, which attract many older smokers. Even if the patrons didn't mind the thick air, employees needed to be protected from secondhand smoke, the thinking went.

After listening to scores of presentations, the City Council in April passed the toughest smoking ban in Canada and one that rivals California's law, considered the strictest on the continent.

Opponents say the effect was immediate.

"Beer and cigarettes seem to go together," says Scott Philip, an Ottawa pub owner. "Instead of two or three beers, now people have one and leave."

"My business is down, and the scary thing is this is just the warning period," says Jill Scott, one of those suing the city. "There are businesses that have dropped 85, 90 percent."

Scott, whose Chateau Lafayette bills itself as the city's oldest pub, says she has posted no-smoking signs, removed ash trays and warned customers they could be fined. "Yes, they're still smoking," she says.

Other businesses have refused to comply. Aware that inspectors view ashtrays as evidence of violations, they've put empty Coke cans and beer bottles on the tables to catch smokers' ashes.

Most customers have been cooperative about stepping outside when they crave a cigarette. But businesses won't be able to rely on that willingness much longer.

"It's fine now but what about when there's 6 feet of snow and it's 30 degrees below zero?" asks retiree Jan Blank, taking a break from the slot machines at the Rideau Carleton Racetrack Slots.

City officials downplay the law's economic effect. They cite studies showing that smoking bans only temporarily hurt business in California, British Columbia and other areas where they've been adopted. In some cases business was even better than before because restaurants began drawing nonsmokers who previously stayed away because of the foul air.

But Roger Bell, a partner in Dock's Bar and Grill, remains unconvinced.

"They use California as a model, but they forget to mention that close to 2,000 establishments went bankrupt or out of business," he says. "If you can get rid of the competition, of course business is going to go up."

Bell and his partner bought Dock's a year and a half ago, and he says they were doing well until Aug. 1. While the smoking ban has had little effect on their breakfast and lunch business, it was driving away their most valuable customers: blue-collar workers who drop by for drinks at shift's end.

"If we lose them, we lose half our business," he says.

Bell considered joining the suit against the city but decided he couldn't afford to wait until the case was settled. So he seized on an idea proposed by the Smokers Choice group: asking his customers if they would like to join a private smoking club.

"We had 100 percent of them sign a petition, give us $2 and say 'We'd love to help you out.' "

From 5 a.m. to 2 p.m., Dock's is smoke-free and open to the public. At 2 p.m., it becomes a private club that customers are not allowed to enter unless they have signed a card stating they are adults who accept responsibility for their health.

So Dock's wouldn't be considered a "workplace" under the law, Bell stopped employing anyone directly. Instead, all 12 of his workers moved onto the payroll of Smokers Choice, which subcontracts them to the bar.

Bell says he will comply with the law if forced to, although he thinks the loopholes he has found would stand up in court. But that he has to resort to such means leaves him bristling with indignation.

"If government is serious about stopping smoking, why not start at the root of the problem and simply ban cigarettes?" he asks. "But this is a financial decision for them too -- they'd lose tons of revenue."

As it tries to enforce the law, the city has had a few minor public relations embarrassments. It turns out that the pub in the local veterans home was exempted from the smoking ban, partly out of concern it would seem too cold-hearted to deny the veterans one of their remaining pleasures.

The city also took some heat for fliers that urged residents to patronize "smoke free" businesses. Included was a number they could call to report violations of the smoking ban, prompting one Ottawa newspaper to accuse the city of setting up a "smoking snitch line."

All in all, though, officials say most residents support the ban and up to 95 percent of businesses have complied.

"I think it's going to be easier with time," says Cushman, the city's medical officer and the law's biggest booster. "This is a very well-heeled, well-educated community where people are concerned about health. It's also a government town where people play by the rules, and this law is serving an idea whose time has come."

-- Susan Taylor Martin can be contacted at susan@sptimes.com.

Ottawa's new smoking law

Ottawa bans smoking and the carrying of lighted tobacco products in public places and workplaces. A public place is defined as the whole or part of an indoor area to which the public is invited or permitted access.

These include:

Amusement arcades (the public portion)

Arenas (including rink, spectator areas, dressing rooms and concession areas)

Bars

Barber shops or hair salons (public areas)

Billiard halls

Bingo halls

Bowling alleys

Common areas in retail shops and offices (including corridors, public restrooms and unenclosed public seating, standing or eating areas)

Food courts

Coin laundries

Public buildings (any enclosed building or group of buildings to which the public has access)