Surely this one is long past any point of debate.
Six years ago, the Tobacco Act became the law of the land, giving cigarette makers a generous five years to phase out their various sponsorships of sporting and cultural events -- and yet they are still acting as though the legislation is merely on its way to committee for further discussion.
The manufacturers tried to have the law declared unconstitutional, and when that failed late last year in Quebec Superior Court, they launched an appeal that is still under way.
Then came the Montreal Grand Prix, with organizers first threatening to cancel next year's race unless the event was given a permanent exemption from the ban on cigarette advertising, which it was not. Last week it was announced the Formula One event is headed for Bahrain, a tiny Persian Gulf kingdom with no such irritating laws.
More National Stories
Now we have a new poll out of Montreal that claims six out of every 10 Canadians want Ottawa to put off its Oct. 1, 2003, deadline until 2005, thereby opening the gate for at least two more Grand Prix races.
Perhaps I should state my ridiculous prejudices here. I have not smoked since I threw up in Boyd Galbraith's '57 Ford Fairlane after splitting a pack of Export A's with several friends. And I have also long considered that the only connection the automobile has to sport is to get you to the game and back. But my personal absurdities are not the issue here.
The Leger Marketing survey of 1,501 people, which was released to The Canadian Press this weekend, might suggest that Canadians are having second thoughts about this law, given that 57 per cent of respondents want a delay while only 37 per cent want to stick to the Oct. 1 deadline. The remainder either didn't know or did not care to respond.
The question asked is most curious in that it says, "The European Union member countries have agreed to postpone the enforcement of the antitobacco law until 2005. According to you, should the Canadian government do as the Europeans and extend its moratorium on the antitobacco law until 2005?"
Some might contend the question has as much to do with the Canadian desire to stay in step and not be noticed as it has to do with actual feelings on tobacco advertising. It's pretty hard to argue with Francis Thompson of the Non-Smokers Rights Association, who told CP that if the question had read " 'Would you be willing to accept some tobacco advertising to keep the Grand Prix alive even if it meant your teenager started to smoke? ' you would get an overwhelmingly different answer."
Personally, I would prefer a far more straightforward question than either of these and have always been intrigued by the one James Naismith put to his grandchildren back in the Great Depression, when money counted for rather more than it does today.
Naismith, of course, was the Canadian who invented basketball, a sport that is today far more significant in North America than Formula One racing will ever be.
Naismith, who had long since moved from his Almonte, Ont., roots to live permanently in the United States, where he became an American citizen, was highly regarded as a man of admirably high principle. He had dedicated his life to education and had never bothered to cash in on the magnificent game he had invented that was then growing, literally and figuratively, by leaps and bounds. Time magazine had even openly chided him for his financial foolishness.
One of the American tobacco giants saw great opportunity in this, and set out to connect its product to the great sportsman with a deal that would pay Naismith $500,000 over the next decade.
The money worries that had long troubled him would be over. He was rapidly aging -- he would die at age 78 in 1939 in Lawrence, Kan., -- and this money would also ensure the long-term well-being of his family.
Naismith determined, therefore, to leave the decision to those who would benefit most: his grandchildren.
He gathered them around and talked to the children about his own feelings about smoking and its appeal to young people and what he believed to be the long-term effects of smoking on a person's health. And then he asked them to vote.
They turned the tobacco money down flat.
Canadians honour Naismith for inventing one of the world's great games, but they might also take inspiration from his principles. Let the Europeans place a two-year moratorium on their antitobacco rules, but let Canada press ahead, no matter how many Formula One races, equestrian meets, tennis tournaments or jazz festivals are lost.
If the events are worth keeping, others, surely, will step in.
And as for posing accurate and fair questions, surely the only one ever worth asking was, "Do you think the promotion of smoking is a good idea? "
That, we would humbly suggest, has already been answered.
9