The proposed smoking ban in Surrey parks and beaches is way overdue.
Beyond the fact science has proven smoking is not beneficial to anyone’s health, including the smoker, our climate change has shown over the last decade the ground, parks and gardens becoming parched must faster as soon as the sun appears. Smoking bans in the summer will become the norm.
Listening to any attempt to rationalize smoking is a waste of time. To listen to someone who smokes, who knowingly is hurting themselves and the people around them when they light up, does not make sense. There can be no credibility in their argument.
Parks are used for sports, a healthy alternative to smoking. They act as shelter for wildlife, which is disappearing. Public spaces are there for the enjoyment of everyone, not just the minority smoker.
I smoked and I am happy to have not smoked for seven years. I admit I was selfish. It was my generation. It is the new norm to not smoke.
Smoking is bad. We have all the evidence. We need our parks green and healthy. The city has failed us to protect the trees on private land. All new houses are now treeless, paved all around the cars. The time is now to listen to the people for once.
Ban smoking in all parks.
Paul Fitzgerald, Cloverdale
I am writing in reference to the culture committee’s proposed ban on smoking in outdoor venues in Surrey.
I question this secondary to the rights of all people to enjoy Surrey’s parks and beaches. It is my position that the amount of second-hand smoke is immeasurable and tobacco is a legal product. Council is supposed to fairly represent the rights of all citizens, not just the favoured few. I am active and a non-smoker, but I believe in the rights of all people to enjoy parks and beaches without restrictions.
I know people complain about second-hand smoke and butts on the ground. That could be solved by providing more receptacle for smokers. Or a compromise could be a smoking area set aside where people could smoke. Before council thoughtlessly takes away the rights of people, how about doing an air quality study to see what the level of pollutants are? You will find that there are more toxic risks inside buildings than at a beach or park with smokers.
An outdoor ban is nothing more than a money grab and a further encroachment on citizen rights. In other words, we the people do not want a “nanny state.”
I would also challenge Surrey’s right to pass these laws. Where does the authority to do this come from? If council wants to do something useful, here is a short list:
Surrey needs more schools, road repair, a living wage law, a standard-of-maintenance law for landlords to follow, so tenants can keep landlords accountable and not run tenement slums.
Citizens elected council to do the business of the city. We did not elect them to micro-manage our lives.
David Campbell, Surrey
