October 2, 2001

WCB Regulation Impacts Gambling Revenues

Government documents obtained under freedom of information show that the BC Lottery Corporation estimates that the WCB smoking regulation would result in a loss of $5 million to $20 million per year in revenue. Anyone who visits a BC casino where smoking occurs will see players blow smoke directly into the faces of dealers. There is not a filtration system on earth that can protect casino workers from that kind of assault.

(more ...)

Health Heavy Weights Lean on Premier Campbell

The "Clean Air Coalition" is very substantial. It consists of the Canadian Cancer Society (British Columbia and Yukon Division), the British Columbia Lung Association, and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of B.C. & Yukon.

These heavy weights in the community invited Premier Campbell and his ministers to a forum on October 1st to demonstrate the terrible error that was made in delaying the WCB smoking regulation. They would have demonstrated to the Premier that air filtration schemes simply do not work, but neither he nor any of the members of his caucus committee accepted the invitation.

When one hears of a coalition fighting against something it could well be little more than a handful of people adopting a convenient name. The "Clean Air Coalition" might pack more weight if the names of its three major partners were in the news, but at least these major fund raising organizations are doing something about second hand smoke as a serious health threat.

July 16, 2001

Premier Campbell has said his government may interfere with health and safety by delaying the implementation of the WCB regulation on secondhand smoke (see below). This raises the question of how he could interfere - perhaps he'll fire another Board and have his new folks do his bidding. Of course, that would destroy the customary employer-employee balance as well as the independence of the Board. Without being able to give direct orders to the Board, he has a problem. The WCB is independent.

A background paper for recent Royal Commission on the WCB explained the old process for reviewing and setting WCB regulations. It noted that "British Columbia and Quebec are the only two jurisdictions where the OSH enforcement agencies have direct statutory authority to make regulations. In other Canadian jurisdictions, the Lieutenant Governor in Council or territorial commissioner (in essence, the cabinet) has the regulation-making mandate." The issue of whether the WCB should remain able to independently set regulations later became the subject of much debate. The BC Liberals argued that the power to make regulations should be taken away from the WCB!

Some of the recommendations of the Royal Commission were implemented with Bill 14 (1998). The Minister responsible said during second reading that regulation-making authority would now be split between the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council and the Workers Compensation Board.

In that debate, Colin Hansen, then the Opposition critic, said "As I mentioned before, we are obviously interested in enhancing workplace safety, but regulations and legislation do not make a safer workplace." Perhaps that was a foreshadowing of what we now see with the prospect that Premier Campbell might side with the tobacco industry.

In third reading, Hansen argued "Basically all regulations that we have are made by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council. What we have under the Workers Compensation Board is a very unique definition of "regulation," because it's the only act where a body that is not directly accountable to this Legislature has the power to make regulations. So this is a very unique section. Historically, we've had the provision under the Workers Compensation Act that gives the power to make regulations exclusively to the Workers Compensation Board. As a result of the recommendations of the royal commission, that was reviewed and reconsidered. Now we have this shared responsibility, which is new and is, again, unique -- the shared responsibility between the board and the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council."

It is not easy to interpret the legislation, but when one reads the 1998 debate, it is clear that the WCB retained the independence that the Campbell government now finds in its way.

Premier Campbell is speculating that WCB smoking regulations may be delayed in their implementation. During the election campaign critics attacked the Campbell promise to slash red tape when they said that health and safety for some is redtape for others.

Scheduled to take effect September 10, 2001, the WCB regulations were already delayed once due to a procedural error that resulted in a March 2000 Supreme Court judgment that restored partial rather than full protection. The regulations now scheduled to take effect have been well researched by the WCB.

The Campbell government seems to be very interested in following the example of Alberta. Health Canada reports "The issue of smoking in the workplace is increasingly relevant to the bottom line of Canadian employers. In October 1996, for example, the Alberta Workers' Compensation Board ruled in favour of claims brought forth by four prison guards. The Board found that secondhand smoke aggravated previously existing medical conditions. In effect, the ruling recognized Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) as a workplace hazard." Perhaps Premier Campbell could recognize the Alberta decision and refrain from interfering with the WCB.

With the impending loss of independence for the WCB, just think of what other dramatic steps might be taken. Browse through the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation and you will quickly see other worker protections that might become the subject of political interference. In British Columbia 14 workers are permanently disabled on the job every day, and 3 workers are killed on the job every week. That doesn't count deaths and disabilities due to substances not previously recognized by the WCB - like second hand smoke. The BC Cancer Agency reports that "in 1994, tobacco smoke killed 5300 people in British Columbia. 53% of British Columbians worked in an environment where illness from tobacco smoke was a risk."

Research confirms that exposure to second hand smoke can triple the risk of lung cancer. On July 12th, 2001, The Globe and Mail reported on a Canadian study published in the International Journal of Cancer which found that a non-smoking woman who has always lived in a smoke-free home but works where smoking is permitted sees her risk of developing lung cancer jump by 27% and can increase up to threefold.

Political interference with the WCB shouldn't make these odds even worse