
Order a copy
The "Smoke-free Public Places: You Can Get There" offers hands-on, easy-to-use resources to help municipalities and communities through the various stages of planning, implementing and evaluating non-smoking by-laws and policies in public places in your community. You'll find an overview of the current non-smoking by-law situation in Canada and a discussion of key issues like the benefits and challenges of non-smoking by-laws, and the steps required to get one in place. Also included are promotion and communication ideas, health and economic information, by-law examples, sample surveys, evaluations and more. Find out about the experiences of other communities in six detailed case stories.
We have included a few sample pages to provide you with a better idea of the valuable information included in the resource guide.
The following resources are available:
If you would like to receive a copy, please click on the "Paper Copy" button above to order.
Across Canada, communities large and small are implementing by-laws protecting their citizens from the dangers of secondhand smoke. Long-term exposure to second-hand smoke causes lung cancer, heart disease, asthma and strokes. Not only do by-laws which restrict smoking in public places help non-smokers breathe easier, they have added benefits of reducing overall smoking behaviour, generating increased public awareness about tobacco issues and helping to change social norms related to smoking.
To date, more than 300 communities in Canada have by-laws or policies restricting smoking in public places and this number continues to grow. Why? Because these communities - and many others which have begun to look at the by-law process - are waking up to the fact that second-hand smoke - also known as passive smoke or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) - is too damaging to ignore.
A smoke-free by-law for public places is legislation which protects citizens from the dangers of second-hand smoke in areas where the general public is invited or permitted to access. This legislation is usually enacted at local or municipal levels in Canada, as the federal government does not have jurisdiction in the majority of these premises. (The situation in the province of Quebec is unique and is discussed later). Although individual by-laws may differ, public places are typically considered to be the whole or part of indoor areas such as restaurants, bars, arenas, retail establishments, shopping malls and other places of public assembly and access. As well, individual by-laws may include certain stipulations and/or exemptions for indoor places. However, from a health perspective, the ideal option is smoke-free legislation, which prohibits smoking in all indoor places, with no allowances for designated smoking areas.
The harmful health effects of secondhand smoke are now well known, and yet exposure to the dangers is still common in many public places and workplaces. Exposure to second-hand smoke causes at least 1,000 deaths per year in Canada from lung cancer and heart disease alone. Second-hand smoke is the single largest source of indoor air pollution and contains a mixture of nearly 4000 chemicals - more than 50 of which are carcinogens (cancer-causing agents).
Many Canadian service industry employees are exposed to second-hand smoke in their workplaces. Chemical concentration of second-hand smoke is, on average, four to six times higher in bars and 1.6 to two times higher in restaurants than offices where smoking is allowed. Restaurant, bar and casino workers are therefore especially at risk from workplace exposure to second-hand smoke. It has been demonstrated that the long-term, regular exposure of food service workers to second-hand smoke can result in this group having a higher rate of lung cancer than the general population.
The Ontario Tobacco Research Unit reviewed the major scientific studies on second-hand smoke and they concluded that the message is clear, consistent and unanimous among all of them...
All involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke is harmful and should be eliminated.
Smoking is costly both in terms of loss of human life and money paid out for health care. Health Canada has estimated that the societal costs of smoking were approximately $15 billion, of which $3.5 billion was spent on direct health care. The remaining $11.5 billion was from lost productivity, including foregone household income.
Second-hand smoke is also costly to businesses. The Conference Board of Canada (1997) found that the average cost associated with employing a smoker was $2,565 each year! This amount was a result of $230 for increased absenteeism, $2,175 for decreased productivity, $75 for increased life insurance premiums and $85 for cleaning and maintaining a smoking area.
A common concern among businesses is the fear that smoke-free by-laws will cause financial loss. However, study after independent study, based on sales tax receipts confirm that the hospitality industry does not lose business when bars and restaurants go smoke-free. In addition, studies show that after going smoke-free, insurance costs are lower, cleaning costs are reduced, there is less damage to furniture and equipment and there is less risk of fire. While it is true that just after smoke-free by-laws are implemented, some businesses feel the effects, but after a short adjustment period most businesses get back to their usual level of sales and many even increase sales, based on a whole new market of people who were staying home because they don't like or can't tolerate second-hand smoke.
One year after a smoking ban was introduced in restaurants and bars in Victoria, B.C., business trends confirmed a public opinion survey that found the public was frequenting these places as often or more often. The B.C. Liquor Distribution Branch found an increase in hospitality beverage sales in the Capital Regional District in the first nine months after the by-law came into effect as compared to the same period the previous year. The B.C. Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) found an increase in the number of persons hired by the hospitality industry after by-law implementation as captured by increased premiums paid to the WCB by this sector. There was also a decrease in the number of food establishment closures from 271 in 1998 to 189 in 1999, based on the number of Capital Health Region food establishment operating permits issued. Nine months after the City of Ottawa went smoke-free, 82 new bars and restaurants had opened. A Decima Research Poll conducted in July 2002 found that public support grew for the City's smoking by-law after one year and there was no net reduction in city-wide visits to bars and restaurants.
Policies restricting smoking in public places may also have the added benefit of reducing overall smoking prevalence among the general public. Not only will this help to improve health, but fewer people smoking means a lower financial burden on Canadian society.
The Preparation phase, before a by-law is even drafted, may take several years depending on a variety of factors in your community such as existing legislation, smoking prevalence rates, awareness of the dangers of second-hand smoke and community support. Preparing for smoke-free public places legislation in your community will involve:
The Action phase is the time during which decisions about smoke-free public places are being made in your community. This is a more intense period of 8 - 10 months, when advocacy campaigns, public consultations, report writing, media management and regular communication with the politicians occur. Your goal at the end of this phase is to have the legislation for smoke-free public places approved by your municipal council. Expect the unexpected and work with it. Steps in the phase include:
This third phase, Maintenance, will remain intense during the first year of implementation, as your community adjusts to the new legislation and to enforcement. You will need to keep the pressure on and the support high with the local politicians during this time, so they do not revisit their decision. Most jurisdictions have found that a strong education campaign, an equitable by-law, adequate resources for enforcement and a fair but firm approach to enforcement leads to early and strong compliance of smoke-free by-laws. After one year, continued monitoring and communication of the success of the by-law is warranted as well as proactive management of the media especially as it related to any legal battles. Steps for consideration in this phase are:
Here are the common misconceptions opponents use to raise concern in communities where by-laws to restrict or eliminate smoking in public places are in the works.
Without exception, every objective study using official sales tax data shows that smoke-free legislation has no negative impact on restaurant, bar, hotel and tourism receipts, according to The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Workplaces: An Assessment for Nova Scotia (2001) by Ronald Colman of GPI Atlantic. Also according to Colman, there can be an initial decline in receipts during the first one to two months following enactment, but there is no evidence of any overall or aggregate decline in the longer term. Indeed, several studies found that restaurant, hotel and tourism receipts increase following smoke-free legislation.
It may be that smoke-free by-laws are actually good for business. Non-smokers may frequent eating and drinking establishments more often and smokers do adjust to the new rules. Money not spent on tobacco can be spent on other things and help boost the local economy. As well, studies show that smoke-free by-laws can reduce the overall smoking rate, thereby freeing up additional money that was previously spent on tobacco.
Non-smoking by-laws offer other potential benefits: Cleaning and maintenance costs may decline, and employee absenteeism due to respiratory illnesses can be reduced.
So, for the record:
Colman, Ronald (2001). The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Workplaces: An Assessment for Nova Scotia, GPI Atlantic.
US Public Health Service (2000). Reducing Tobacco Use, A Report of the Surgeon General. US Department of Health and Human Services. Atlanta, Georgia. 193.
There is NO safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke
Second-hand smoke - also known as environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) or passive smoke - is a combination of the smoke exhaled by a smoker, and the smoke that drifts into the air from the burning end of a cigarette, pipe or cigar (sidestream smoke).
Second-hand smoke is responsible for more than 1,000 lung cancer and heart disease deaths each year in Canada.
It is poisonous!
There are more than 4,000 chemical compounds in second-hand smoke, including carbon monoxide, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, and formaldehyde.
At least 50 of these chemical compounds can cause or promote cancer.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency has declared secondhand smoke a Class A cancer-causing substance. Class A is the most dangerous of cancer agents. There is no known safe level of exposure.
Second-hand smoke has more than twice as much nicotine and tar as the smoke smokers inhale. It also has five times the carbon monoxide, which decreases the amount of oxygen in the blood.
About two-thirds of the smoke from a burning cigarette is not inhaled by the smoker but enters the surrounding environment. The contaminated air is inhaled by anyone in that area.
Exposure to second-hand smoke for even short periods can cause eye, nose and throat irritation, headaches, dizziness, nausea, coughing and wheezing. It can severely aggravate symptoms in people with allergies or asthma. Long-term exposure has been linked to heart disease, cancer and death.
In young children, second-hand smoke can result in chronic respiratory illness, impaired lung function and middle ear infection. For pregnant women, second-hand smoke can result in low birth weight babies and a greater likelihood of complications during pregnancy and delivery.
Ventilation systems do not remove all the harmful chemicals found in secondhand smoke. There is only one way to eliminate second-hand smoke from indoor air - remove the source.
Municipal by-laws that restrict smoking in public places help to protect workers who otherwise must work in environments highly polluted by tobacco smoke. Many restaurant, bar and casino workers experience higher risks from exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace. Colman (2001) states that in restaurants, bars and casinos, second-hand smoke levels can be much higher than in workplaces that do not have smoking restrictions. In addition, food service workers have a higher rate of lung cancer than the general population.
Health Canada (2002). Go Smokefree! The Facts About Tobacco, www.gosmokefree.ca
Colman, Ronald (2001). The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Workplaces: An Assessment for Nova Scotia, GPI Atlantic.
Some of the people who oppose smoking restrictions suggest that ventilation can clear second-hand smoke from restaurants, bars and other public places. They wonder why anyone would advocate smoke-free indoor spaces when ventilation systems can do the job.
Well, they can't. Contrary to what you may have heard, no ventilation system can completely remove second-hand smoke.
Indeed, they can't even remove secondhand smoke fast enough to make a significant difference. Electronic air cleaning systems would need to increase the air exchange rate a thousand fold to be effective -- resulting in gale force winds!
The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) set standards for ventilation rates in North American and beyond. ASHRAE maintains that there is no acceptable ventilation process for second-hand smoke. That is, no ventilation system is capable of making the air meet clean air quality standards. Since 1999, ASHRAE's standards apply only to air that doesn't contain cigarette smoke.
Increasing ventilation can dilute the smoke in a room, but will not make it safe since there is no known safe level of exposure to the carcinogens in cigarette smoke. Because there is no acceptable level of second-hand smoke, removing the source - the smoke - is really the only solution.
Restricting smokers to a separate room will only help the non-smokers in the other room if the smoking room has its own ventilation system, and if the room is completely isolated with no connecting doors. Still, separately ventilated smoking rooms still means these smokers are being exposed to the harmful effects of second-hand smoke. Why would establishment owners want to create an unsafe environment for their customers, their staff and themselves?
More than 45,000 people will die this year in Canada from tobacco use. More than 1,000 of them will be non-smokers.
Ventilation systems don't protect people from the many harmful effects of secondhand smoke. An inferior option, such as ventilation, is not a healthy option at all. Worse, it might give non-smokers a false sense of protection.
Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada (2001). Questions and Answers on Ventilation of Second-Hand Smoke - fact sheet.
Health Canada (2002). Go Smokefree! The Facts About Tobacco, www.gosmokefree.ca