Evidence of meeting #16 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Public Issues, The Lung Association
No. That was the only province that actually tried this approach.
But again, it's hard for the provinces to actually impose this kind of legislation on first nations reserves because the Indian Act actually gives the power to band councils not to follow the current provincial legislation. A court may say this should not have happened. Again, the Indian Act provides enough leeway right now on this.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
I think it's unfortunate that we allow jurisdictional gamesmanship to interfere with protecting the health of all Canadians.
Would you be encouraging the federal government to ensure that such bans apply uniformly across the country, as opposed to the current potential for jurisdictional disputes to interfere with the ability to protect Canadians in a broad-based way?
Director, Public Issues, The Lung Association
Absolutely. We had approached the Minister of Indian Affairs about these questions. Again, because it was a question of health, they relayed it to Health Canada.
Within the Indian Act right now, there is an article that provides that no band council can actually put forward legislation or bylaws that would actually harm the first nations people. Allowing people to smoke in casinos, bars, restaurants, or in public places could actually harm first nations people. Again, that would be a route, but I don't think too many governments would like to actually repeal some of the Indian Act.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
I would appreciate it if you'd share that correspondence with the committee. Would that be possible?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Thank you.
I think it's a shame when any leader, regardless of whether they are aboriginal or not, would trade casinos for cancer. It's ridiculous.
Director, Public Issues, The Lung Association
Exactly.
I would add one more thing. We've been working closely with the Assembly of First Nations, Phil Fontaine, as well. They have a leadership role in showing that tobacco is sacred but that smoking is not. It's killing their people at an alarming rate.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Very good.
This is my final question. In one of the points in your presentation, you asked for support for strengthening tobacco control legislation in federal government buildings. I would ask you to elaborate, relatively briefly. What do you mean when you say “to support and strengthen”?
Director, Public Issues, The Lung Association
At this stage, I think it's a policy issue at the federal level. The provincial governments may put in place provincial laws, such as what we have in Quebec, Ontario, and several other provinces, that say no smoking in public places, but right now, in federal places, such as in prisons, this law cannot be enforced. We have brought this forward to the Minister of Health to look at this and find a way to enforce these smoking bylaws in federal places as well.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Just to refer back to my first example, it would be your view that aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians should be protected equally, and that so, too, should federal government employees and customers of federal government services. Is that fair to say?
September 19th, 2006 / 6:30 p.m.
President and CEO, Canadian Lung Association
Yes, I would think so.
The spectre of going into a province, for example, like Ontario, which just finished passing a province-wide act, and then going to the airport smoking lounge, is a little difficult to take.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
In support of your argument, you may be aware there are lawsuits currently in the courts in the United States, and in other jurisdictions I am told as well. There are class-action lawsuits being brought by employees--for example, with airlines, where one group of employees was protected by non-smoking rules and another group was not, and by first nations communities in the United States that say they were not protected by legislation that the federal government used to protect others against second-hand smoke.
We wish, most importantly, to avoid health problems down the road, and secondly, lawsuits that may cost taxpayers in this country tens and hundreds of millions of dollars. It would be wise to proceed as you are recommending. You can take that as support from the chair.
In any case, I thank you all for your presentations. It has been a most informative session. We very much appreciate your time in coming here today. All the best.
Committee members, we will reconvene tomorrow at 3:30. I urge you to be here on time, or early.
The meeting is adjourned.