With word yesterday that Ontario’s bar and pub owners are seeking $500 million in compensation from the province if a province-wide smoking ban is implemented, at least one local bar owner is worried about the situation here, too.
“I hope the province considers exempting bars,” said Larry Syrovy, owner of the Rainy Lake Hotel on Scott Street. “If they don’t, people will stay home and party or go across the river, and that will mean lost business, lost jobs, and ultimately, lost tax revenue.
“It’s a big concern,” Syrovy added. “The effects are for a prolonged period. Business might drop off between 30-50 percent at first, and then back up to 20 percent in the long haul.
“But I don’t know any business that could survive that,” he warned.
Syrovy, a member of the Freedom of Choice Coalition which is fighting the Northwestern Health Unit’s effort to ban smoking in all enclosed public places in the Kenora-Rainy River districts, said the group asking for the $500 million—the Pub and Bar Coalition of Canada (PUBCO)—isn’t unreasonable in its request.
And while local bars aren’t affiliated with PUBCO, there could be similar action here.
“We’ve been in touch with PUBCO and got some information from them regarding this issue,” said Syrovy. “I would expect us to do something.”
He noted if monetary compensation isn’t sought, then perhaps breaks on property taxes from the municipality—such as what some businesses in Winnipeg are doing to make up for lost revenues—might be an alternative.
But area bar owners might not have to wait for the Liberal government at Queen’s Park to ban smoking in enclosed public places.
They should find out if the health unit can make them “butt out” later this month when the provincial Health Services Review Appeal Board is expected to release its ruling on smoking in enclosed public places.
“We’re waiting,” said Syrovy, noting the coalition still has the option to appeal the appeal board’s decision if it’s not in their favour.
“We’d really like the health unit to back off enforcing it [a smoking ban] in bars. If you tell people they can’t smoke in bars, they won’t come,” he remarked.
“If they’re in a bar, they’re over 19, they have a choice where they want to be,” Syrovy added. “If some bars wanted to go smoke-free, that’s great. Then everyone would have a choice.”
But Georges Blanc, co-owner of La Place Rendez-Vous here which features bar and restaurant areas that went smoke-free more than a year ago, said the idea of compensation doesn’t quite make sense.
“In our experience, we haven’t seen an adverse effect on our business since going smoke-free,” he noted. “And the comments we’re getting from people generally have been positive.
“I mean, non-smokers outnumber smokers, right? And I think even the smokers know what they do is just not acceptable anymore.
“People are kidding themselves if they think it [a widespread smoking ban] isn’t going to happen,” Blanc added. “It’s hard to disagree second-hand smoke is bad for your health.
“I think it’s inevitable we’ll see smoking banned. And if it happens with everyone on a level playing field, I can’t see how it’s unfair for businesses.”
Blanc said even losing business to American bars may not be much of an issue if a regional or provincial ban goes through since the U.S. seems to be getting on the same wavelength as elsewhere.
But PUBCO head Barry McKay stated in press release yesterday that it is certain a smoking ban would “cost a lot of money to our industry.”
“There is no justification for such a draconian approach,” said McKay, “especially when there are far more sensible solutions available such as ventilation.
“PUBCO finds it deplorable that the government should become involved in this type of social engineering, especially when it is carried out on the backs of thousands of innocent small business men and women,” he argued.
McKay said if Queen’s Park insists on introducing such “intrusive and destructive legislation,” then PUBCO believes bar owners and their families who will bear the brunt of such measures should be entitled to fair and reasonable compensation.
“Given the seriousness of the situation, as the only organization in Ontario established to represent small pub and bar owners, PUBCO is disappointed that the government has made no effort to discuss the matter with us,” McKay said in the release.
“There are two sides to every issue, but so far the government appears to be listening to only one of them,” he charged.
“There will be collateral damage to our industry,” McKay warned. “We feel if they insist with going ahead with a ban, knowing full well the damages that are going to be caused, they should be prepared to pay some compensation.”
A province-wide smoking ban would mean a loss of $180 million in beer sales for bars and pubs every year, PUBCO said.
With a minimum investment of $250,000 in a small bar, and factoring the loss of revenues for businesses that survive a smoking ban, potential losses will be in the region of $500 million, it estimated.
The Ontario Tobacco Control Act, passed in 1994, allowed municipalities to restrict smoking in workplaces and public places.
Since then, 73 of 446 Ontario municipalities have implemented smoke-free bylaws in restaurants or both restaurants and bars. However, Fort Frances was not one of them as the previous council chose for a senior government to make such a decision.
The Brewers Association of Canada has found that in municipalities where smoking bans have been implemented, beer sales have dropped by roughly six percent on average, said McKay.
At least 900 small bars across Ontario will be forced to close if all municipalities follow the no-smoking trend, PUBCO said.
In last fall’s Ontario election campaign, the Liberals promised to implement a province-wide ban on smoking in public places and workplaces.
Fort Frances Times
Local News from Across the Rainy River District
