Page 2

February 2009

CAMPUS

Smoking. « efrom front page

“It remains to be seen how this policy will in fact be en- forced as there are no claus- es in this policy that explic- itly state the punishment for smoking too close to a build- ing.”

But the topic of punish- ment has been close behind the potential new policy. How exactly will individuals who break any new restric- tions be punished? There has been discussion of fines, but a measly $10 fine is not necessarily going to deter anyone from seeking shade and warmth at the side of a building.

There have been many safety precautions discussed with any implementation

By Sebastian Baglole Panther Post

Smoking | kills....especially when you have to stand 30 feet away from any building to do it.

What’s the point having the Butt Stops when you got to run to the middle of cam- pus with plenty of breathing room, smoke for a few min- utes, and then beat it back to the Butt Stop to drop off your butt before it cauterizes your fingertips?

Presumably, UPEI desires

of new smoking by-laws. One problem discussed was where smokers would be ex- pected to go.

If the campus were to go smoke-free, smokers may be obliged to go elsewhere close to campus, such as

sidewalks. But this raises more questions. Assuming students are

forced to move close to streets, on weekends when Wave patrons go out for a cigarette they are in a haz- ardous situation, _ specifi- cally because of cars on the frequently busy University Avenue, and the chance of sidewalks being slippery in the winter months.

“This was a point raised

Smokers feel the

to rip the joy out of smoking, taken by extremely small measures. We are still per- mitted to smoke on campus, small as we are. And yet the smoking policy which had been a required 15 feet away from any building, has now been extended to 30 feet. And yet how can the offi- cials enforce this? Who has the power? Maybe they think smokers can’t run. We can run, don’t let the cough fool you, we can run. I’m only an occasional smoker and I’m pretty sure I can still outrun someone if need be.

by the SU last year when a smoke free campus initiative was being brought forward. The council felt that it would be much too dangerous, es- pecially with a licensed es- tablishment on campus, to have an entirely smoke free campus,” Douglas noted.

Another scenario __ dis- cussed was allowing smok- ers to move into parking lots, where smoking poli- cies would be different from those on campus. It is a new concept, however, that has yet to be approved.

“The proposal that suggests smoking be allowed in des- ignated areas such as park- ing lots has only recently been introduced to the Stu-

So then why, why? If you crack up a policy no one can moderate, one I hadn’t heard of until recently and some- thing I’ll bet most students

didn’t know before they.

read this in the paper, then it seems pretty clearly a lame- legged and passive move- ment, which leads me to be- lieve that it had only taken effect to shut someone up. Take a look at a larger uni- versity, any larger university. You do get a larger campus, and yet anybody who wants to and has a cigarette can smoke, anywhere outside

CHECK OUT THE PANTHER POST ON FACEBOOK

dent Council: That proposal would need to be approved by the Board of Governors in order for it to take effect.” Most recently, in ‘another heated discussion, council has decided to pursue a ref- erendum regarding the poli- cy, to leave the decision per- taining to the campus to the individuals who frequent it, but this too raises questions. “If areferendum by students were to be held on the issue this would not be binding to the University as a whole. It would permit the SU execu- tive to approach the Board of Governors with either an overwhelming majority of students in favour, against or split on the issue. This would

burn

they want. And yet with such a minor percentage of smokers here on campus, the slightest whiff can offend. Obviously this is a two- sided issue, and I see that, don’t get me wrong. I know as a non-smoker someone can take offense to the scent. It gets in your clothes, your fingers -- some tell me it rots out your eyes. Some univer- sities across North America have strongly considered a campus-wide ban on smok- ing.

But here’s the thing: you will hardly find a study which

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE PAPER AND HOW YOU CAN CONTRIBUTE

AND GIVE STORY TIPS

PANTHER POST

_ give the SU leverage to lob-

by on behalf of students for a proposal that met the needs of the most students.”

But what about the smokers themselves? At what point do the rules start to conflict with the smoker’s right to smoke?

“Tt is a complicated issue,” Douglas said. “As of this time, we are currently in the process of listening to pro- posals and concerns being brought forward to council. The decision of council on this issue, whether it be to put the question to referen- dum or not will be what I bring forward in my discus- sions with the Board of Gov- ernors.”

proves that there is a pos- sibility of inhaling second- hand smoke and ingesting nicotine if you’re walking by. Only a smoke-heavy area with little ventilation can do that, and we already have a ban on smoking in bars.

So is it merely the appear- ance of a non-smoking uni- versity that we crave, and not for the simple logic of preventative health safety reasons?

Correction

The January issue of the Post incorrectly identifies - Gavin Hall as Gawin.

We attempt to correct any errors made. If a correction is needed, please email the

Panther Post at pantherpost@gmail.com