1. creation of a scent free
environment La crÉation d’un environnement sans odeur |
That City Council approve:
1. A scent-free program for City buildings, Community Centres
and Sport Centres; and;
2. That Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses
be part of the scent-free program, and;
3. That the scent free program request people to be considerate
of others who may have reactions or sensitivities to scented products, and urge
people to observe the program by using the many unscented products that are
available, and;
4. That a step approach, starting with a public awareness
program and a scent-free policy in the City’s corporate buildings, Community
Centres and Sport Centres, Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo
buses to be assessed on its effectiveness by 2010.
Recommandations modifiÉes DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil municipal approuve :
1. un programme d’environnement sans odeur pour les immeubles, les centres
communautaires et les centres sportifs de la Ville;
2. que le transport en commun par train léger ainsi que les autobus
d’OC Transpo et de Para Transpo fassent partie du programme
d’environnement sans odeur;
3. que le programme d’environnement sans odeur demande aux gens de tenir compte
des autres, qui sont susceptibles d’avoir des réactions ou d’être sensibles aux
produits parfumés, et encourage fortement les gens à respecter le programme en
utilisant les nombreux produits non parfumés disponibles;
4. qu’une approche par étapes, commençant avec un programme de
sensibilisation du public et une politique « sans odeur » dans les
immeubles, les centres communautaires et les centres sportifs municipaux, le
transport en commun par train léger ainsi que les autobus d’OC Transpo et de
Para Transpo, soit évaluée quant à son efficacité d’ici 2010.
DOCUMENTATION
1. Environmental
Advisory Committee report dated 8 December 2005 (ACS2005-CCV-EAC-0005).
2. Extract of Draft
Minutes, 1 June 2006.
Report
to/Rapport au :
Health Recreation and Social Services Committee /
and Council / et au Conseil
Submitted
by/Soumis par: Environmental Advisory Committee /
Comité consultatif sur l’environnement
Contact Person/Personne ressource : Kelly Sammon,
Coordinator / Coordonnatrice,
Environmental
Advisory Committee / Comité consultatif sur l’environnement
(613) 580-2424 Ext /
poste, 28136 / Kelly.Sammon@ottawa.ca
SUBJECT: |
The
creation of A scent free environment
|
|
|
OBJET : |
LA CrÉation D’UN ENVIRONNEMENT SANS ODEUR
|
REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS
That
the Environmental Advisory Committee recommend that the Health Recreation and
Social Services Committee recommend City Council approve:
1. A
scent-free program for City buildings, Community Centres and Sport Centres;
and;
2. That
Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses be part of the scent-free
program, and;
3. That
the scent free program request people to be considerate of others who may have
reactions or sensitivities to scented products, and urge people to observe the
program by using the many unscented products that are available, and;
4. That
a step approach, starting with a public awareness program and a scent-free policy
in the City’s corporate buildings, Community Centres and Sport Centres, Light
Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses to be followed later on by a
mandatory scent free program.
RECOMMENDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que
le Comité consultatif sur l’environnement préconise au Comité de la santé, des
loisirs et des services sociaux de recommander au Conseil municipal
d’approuver :
1. un programme d’environnement sans odeur pour les immeubles, les centres
communautaires et les centres sportifs de la Ville;
2. que le transport en commun par train léger ainsi que les autobus
d’OC Transpo et de Para Transpo fassent partie du programme
d’environnement sans odeur;
3. que le programme d’environnement sans odeur demande aux gens de tenir
compte des autres, qui sont susceptibles d’avoir des réactions ou d’être
sensibles aux produits parfumés, et encourage fortement les gens à respecter le
programme en utilisant les nombreux produits non parfumés disponibles;
4. qu’une approche par étapes, commençant avec un programme de
sensibilisation du public et une politique « sans odeur » dans les
immeubles municipaux, les centres communautaires et les centres sportifs, le
transport en commun par train léger ainsi que les autobus d’OC Transpo et de
Para Transpo, soit suivie plus tard d’un programme obligatoire
d’environnement sans odeur.
BACKGROUND
Over the past few months, the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) has consulted with other Advisory Committees as well as staff from the Environmental Sustainability Division in connection with the issue of creating a scent free environment.
On 17 November 2005, the Environmental Advisory Committee approved the following resolution:
WHEREAS
the Environmental Advisory Committee recognizes that a scent-free environment
will promote safe and healthy places in which Ottawa’s citizens can live and
work; and
WHEREAS
the City of Ottawa is the nation’s capital and should be a leader in innovative
environmental policy that promotes air quality in buildings; and
WHEREAS
scented products contain fragrances that are a complex mixture of chemicals
designed to disperse into the air for a long time and can be found in products
such as perfumes, soaps, shampoos, deodorants, hairsprays, cosmetics, household
and industrial cleaners and air fresheners; and
WHEREAS
with less fresh air circulation the impact of scents is increased on people
working in those buildings; and
WHEREAS
people are more and more sensitive to toxic chemicals in the environment and it
is estimated that 10.6% of the adult population and 12.5% of all children were
diagnosed with asthma; and
WHEREAS
72% of asthmatics develop respiratory symptoms when exposed to fragrances and
1-2% of the population have skin allergy to fragrance; and
WHEREAS
unscented products are available in stores for similar prices to scented
products, including cleaning products for buildings; and
WHEREAS
the Halifax Regional Municipality and organizations such as the University of
Calgary, the University of Toronto and the Kingston General Hospital have
already in place a “No-Scent” encouragement program; and
WHEREAS
a scent-free program can contribute to the wellness of people, reducing sick
time and providing a healthy work environment that is free of fragrance
chemicals; and
WHEREAS
a scent-free program should be supported by a good indoor quality program; and
WHEREAS
the cost of developing and promoting a public awareness program should be
similar to many other City’s initiatives like the reduction in the use of
pesticides.
BE
IT RESOLVED THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee recommends to the Health
Recreation and Social Services Committee and City Council that the City adopt a
scent-free program for City buildings, Community Centres and Sport Centres; and
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee recommends that
Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses be part of the scent-free
program; and
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee recommends that
the scent free program should request people to be considerate of others who
may have reactions or sensitivities to scented products, and urge people to
observe the program by using the many unscented products that are available;
and
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Environmental Advisory Committee recommends a step
approach, starting with a public awareness program and a scent-free policy in
City’s corporate buildings, Community Centres and Sport Centres, Light Rail
Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses to be followed later on by a
mandatory scent free program.
CONSULTATION
Accessibility Advisory Committee
At its 1 February 2006 meeting, the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) received a draft report from the Environmental Advisory Committee concerning the creation of a scent free environment. The Committee recognized that scents sensitivity impacts persons with disabilities and discussed at length EAC’s recommendation. The Committee approved the following motion:
That the Accessibility Advisory Committee
recognizes scents sensitivity as a disability and supports promoting a
community campaign to educate the public in reducing the use of scented
products.
Literature
Review by Ottawa Public Health
There is sufficient
information in the literature to support the fact that scented products can
trigger asthma attacks in susceptible individuals and cause skin and eye
irritant-type reactions in others. The
Canadian Lung Association estimates that 15 to –20 per cent of Canadians suffer
from some form of breathing problems, and 7 to 10 per cent of children suffer
from asthma. Fragrance chemicals are
well-documented respiratory irritants.
They have been found to cause respiratory distress and trigger asthma
attacks. According to Shim and Williams[1],
72 per cent of asthmatics have respiratory symptoms upon exposure to perfume
(American Journal of Medicine, 1986). A
study reported in the Annals of Allergy and Asthma Immunology (Nov., 1995) has
shown that perfume strips in magazines caused exacerbation of symptoms in asthma
patients. Another study reported in
Allergy (June, 1996) showed that fragrance chemicals triggered asthma
symptoms. Both the American Lung
Association and the Canadian Lung Association cite perfume as an asthma
trigger. The American Academy of Allergy and Immunology warns asthmatics to
avoid exposures to perfumes (as well as to other strong odours, such as paints,
thinners, ammonia, etc.) since these volatile compounds can trigger asthma
attacks by stimulating already irritable airways.
Skin exposure to volatile
fragrances is known to cause allergies and eczema. The skin reactions to fragrance chemicals can produce rashes, hives,
dermatitis, or eczema. (The Copenhagen
Allergy Study, 2001) (Schnuch, Uter, Geiger et al. Contact Dermatitis, 2002).
Scented soaps and cleaning products used and provided in workplaces can
result in unnecessary skin and eye irritation.
The
issue of sensitivity to perfumes in the workplace is complex. Ingredients of
different fragrances vary, and allergic individuals may not be affected by all
fragrances.
Ottawa Public Health agrees
that there is a need to continue to raise awareness among City employees and
the community that scented products can result in adverse health effects in
certain segments of the population and affects the comfort of a larger
proportion of the population. Several areas within the City of Ottawa already
encourage people not to use scented products such as in the Ottawa Public
Health Branch, and the Real Property Asset Management (RPAM) Branch has
undertaken a scent-free cleaning products pilot project within select City
buildings including City Hall.
Occupational health and safety organizations
(such as Canada Safety Council, The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and
Safety) as well as many health-based advocacy groups (such as the Canadian and
American Lung Associations, Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, U.S.
National Institutes of Health: Heart, Lung and Blood Institute) already promote
scent-free workplace for employees.
Given the foregoing, City staff support developing and implementing a public awareness campaign targeted to City staff, similar to the Halifax program cited in the EAC report, that would feature messaging including a request that employees be considerate of others who may have reactions or sensitivities to scented products and promoting the use of available unscented products as opposed to products that contain fragrances. Above and beyond the EAC recommendations, the City also supports development of a campaign, through Ottawa Public Health, to encourage private employers to adopt scent-free programs for their employees.
City staff do not support a mandatory scent-free policy or an awareness campaign aimed at the general public at this time.
The following sections outline the proposed contributions of specific City branches to a City of Ottawa scent free campaign.
Ottawa Public Health
Ottawa Public Health can participate in a program aimed at educating other employers/ workplaces on scent-free working environments through its Workplace Health outreach team that brings public education messages to 600 large and small businesses. Given the fact that resources already exist, the cost of promoting this initiative could be done within existing Ottawa Public Health resources.
Employee
Services supports an awareness campaign to inform employees about the effect of
scents in the workplace and supports accommodating employees who may suffer
from scent sensitivities. Employee
Services would propose to implement a campaign similar to the Halifax campaign,
to display posters (see Halifax poster attached) on Health and Safety bulletin
boards (approximately 200) located throughout the City. This initiative, based on the development
and display of approximately 200 posters, could be undertaken within existing
resources.
Managers will be expected to deal with scent issues by
communicating and encouraging scent free workplaces and dealing with employees
who do not comply as per advice from Labour Relations.
The Real Property and Asset Management Branch is presently undertaking a pilot project to test unscented cleaning products. The results of that pilot are expected later this spring and RPAM will be reporting back with recommendations once the review of the pilot is complete.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial
implications associated with the staff supported initiatives set out in this
report.
A public awareness program
is not supported by staff at this time, and there is presently no budget to
support such a campaign. A public
awareness program involving the signage of City buildings and transit vehicles
would require additional budget. A full
year, full fleet campaign for OC Transpo buses, for example, would cost
approximately $87,000 based on current display rates while the signage of 300
to 400 municipal buildings would require the posting of approximately 2,000
signs with production costs, not including installation costs, in the order of
$10,000.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 A Scent Free Environment - EAC background report.
Document
2 Halifax Poster
DISPOSITION
The Committee Coordinator will inform the Environmental Advisory Committee of the Health Recreation and Social Services Committee’s and Council’s decision on the recommendations.
Document
1
A Scent-Free Environment
Purpose
The purpose of this discussion paper is to
explore options for the City of Ottawa to implement a scent-free environment in
buildings.
Background
Increasingly people are
becoming sensitized to chemicals emanated from fragrance and perfumes,
including so-called deodorants, aftershave-creams and cleaning products. For
some people exposure to perfumes poses a serious health risk to some 1.8 million
canadians1. In our society, people are reluctant to tell co-workers
or colleagues that their perfumes are making them sick.
Fragrances are generally complex chemical mixtures which are volatile by nature to emit scents. Elements of those chemicals disperse in the air remain in the environment for a long period of time and often change as they come in contact with other substances. People can be adversely affected by exposure to scented products including cleaning and building materials.
It is difficult to identify
all types of products that contain scents. Typically, perfumes are the most
common form of fragrance used in products such as soaps, shampoos, deodorants,
hairsprays, cosmetics, household and industrial cleaning products, washing
soaps in public washrooms, and numerous body fragrance products like colognes,
aftershaves and perfumes. Unscented products are available in stores for
similar prices to scented products.
Situation
Everyone should have safe
and healthy places in which to live and work. People have the right to breathe
clean air and to be exposed to chemical fragrances causing unnecessary health
problems. People should refrain from the use of scented products such as
perfumes and aftershave while in buildings. While much progress has been made
to improve air quality in buildings, it remains that with less fresh air
circulation the impact of scents is increased. The use of scented products has
an impact on indoor air quality.
Increasingly, people are
more and more sensitive to chemicals in the environment. It is well documented
that air pollution particularly diesel fumes cause sensitivity to allergens.
The use of scented products is being restricted while health is at risk. Alerts
to scented products are becoming more and more routine while people demand more
re-assurance regarding product safety. As more information becomes available,
numerous stakeholders such as consumer groups, politicians, enforcement
agencies and investors are challenging the fragrance industry.
Health Canada, in December 2004, published the new cosmetics regulations strengthening the protection of the health and safety of the Canadian public with regard to the use of cosmetic products. Health labels on outside packaging will come into force on November 16, 2006, at which time the regulations will become law. These labels will contain a list of all ingredients used.
Note
1:
A 1998/1999 National Population Health Survey identifies 2.5 million people
with asthma (www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ccdpc-cpcmc/crd-mrc/asthma).
The Institute of Medicine in a 1986 survey found that perfumes and/or colognes
triggered an attack in 72% of asthmatics
Statistics
The US Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) reported 21.9 million adults were ever diagnosed with asthma or
10.6% of the adult population (2002). CDC reported 9.1 million children who
were ever diagnosed with asthma or 12.5% of all children (2003).
Fragrances are respiratory irritants. People with asthma are
likely to have problems when exposed to fragrances. A report by the
Environmental Health Association of Nova Scotia mentioned that 72% of
asthmatics develop respiratory symptoms when exposed to fragrances. Skim, MD.
and Williams, MD. (1986) reported that 72% of asthmatics have respiratory
symptoms upon exposure to perfume (“Affects of Odors in Asthma”, American
Journal of Medicine, Vol. 80)
The Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) in a 1998 report indicated that an estimated 5.72 million people
in the U.S. have skin allergies to fragrance. Fragrance is the number one cause
of allergies to cosmetics and laundry products. In Nova Scotia, the asthma rate
in school children ranges between 11 and 20% (Citizens for a Safe learning
Environment, 15 September 1998).
In 1989 the US National
Institute of Occupational Safety & Health identified 884 of 2,983 fragrance
chemicals as being toxic substances. The incidence of skin allergy to fragrance
has increased with exposure. Skin allergy
to fragrance is estimated at 1-2% of the population. There is a direct
correlation between use of scented products and development of skin allergy to
fragrance (Niels, Moller and Madsen, Danish Environment, Internet Edition 2,
September 1996 “Perfume Causes Allergy”).
Municipalities and Organizations
The Halifax Regional Municipality has had a “No-Scent” encouragement
program in effect for at least four years. It encourages people to consider
that some others may suffer allergies or sensitivities to fragrance found in
perfumes, creams, aftershave lotions, hair sprays and other personal grooming
products. The policy simply requests people to be considerate of others who may
have medical allergies or sensitivities to scented products. It encourages
people to use the many scent-free or unscented products that are available on
the market. It is not a by-law or any other form of legislation. It is not an
enforceable issue, and there are no fines or penalties. The scent-free program
is promoted in municipal corporate offices and the City’s public transportation
system. The City did a tremendous job in communicating the scent-free program,
since people think that there is a by-law versus a no-scent encouragement
program.
The Province of Nova Scotia has a similar program as the Halifax
Regional Municipality. It has a policy in provincial hospitals and the Halifax
Regional School Board.
The University of Calgary has a scent-free initiative. It has an
education program and provides some basic suggestions about how to deal with a
problem arising from the use of scented products. It provides guidelines for
students, staff and faculty members.
The University of Toronto has a scent-reduced university environment.
The University has an awareness program and is asking for voluntary cooperation
towards a scent-reduced environment.
Dalhousie
University in April 2002 launched a pilot project for employees of the Killam
Library to promote scent-free environment. Following the success of the pilot
project, the scent-free program has been extended across the campus.
The
School District 8 of Saint John in New Brunswick when it advertises for
employment it indicates that it provides a smoke and scent free environment.
The
City of Hamilton has published a guideline regarding scented products in the workplace.
The Kingston General Hospital has adopted a scent-free policy effective
01 July 2005. People are asked to refrain from wearing any scented products
and/or bringing high-fragrance flowers into the facility.
Les
Terrasses de la Chaudière, in Hull has adopted a scent-free policy. The
building main tenants are Environment Canada and Indian and Northern Affairs.
Veterans
Affairs Canada promotes scent free buildings to improve air quality in its facilities.
The
Lung Association offers a model for developing a scent-free policy for the workplace.
It offers a questionnaire to do employee survey (http://www.lung.ca/cando/scents.htlm).
Benefits of a Scent-Free
Program
A scent-free program can
contribute to the wellness of people, reducing sick time and providing a
healthy work environment that is free of fragrance chemicals. Poor indoor air
quality can affect productivity in an office environment. Such a program will
help reduce illness and discomfort among sensitive people that are suffering
from scent allergies or asthma.
A scent-free program should be supported by a good indoor quality program free of mould, particulate matter and with adequate ventilation. People need to feel a difference.
Possible Courses of Action
To aim to a scent free city the following steps need to be established:
Ø Step I – Public awareness program – Make the
public aware and explain how to handle situations where a person if adversely
affected by the scented products used by others. Scented products are not
appealing to all individuals in their broader living environment. The chemicals
present in perfume, be it expensive or inexpensive, may cause serious health
problems for others. The awareness program should provide information about
alternative unscented products that are available. The City should seek the
participation of the private sector such as building owners and tenants to
enhance the scent-free program. A scent –free program will work best when it is
supported by an education program and community support. The program should
include Community Centres and City’s Sport Centres. The City should have a
scent-free policy for meeting, conferences and workshops in all corporate
buildings and OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses. The program could simply
request people to be considerate of others who may have reactions or
sensitivities to scented products, and urge people to use the many unscented
products that are available in stores. The City should develop an information
brochure that is intended to increase awareness of Citizens about the potential
impact of fragrance chemicals on the health and well-being of those people
affected. To protect those people with fragrance sensitivities and others that
may develop such a reaction to fragrance, the City should ask for voluntary
cooperation towards a scent-free environment. This information should also be
posted on the City website.
Ø Step II – Mandatory program in City’s corporate
buildings –Make employees aware of the scent program. A phased approach
will be easier to implement over time starting with an awareness program for a
certain period of time (Step I) before going with a mandatory program. The
public transit system, Community Centres and City’s Sport Centres should also
be declared scent-free zone although it will be difficult to enforce it. OC and
Para Transpo should institute a system to receive complaints by bus-route and
location that would lead to local corrective action. OC and Para Transpo buses
should have a scent-free sign pointing out the health consequences. When a
person feels that being exposed to scented products would pose a health risk,
the person should inform the driver or transit officials. Step II should go
forward following a successful implementation of the Public Awareness program.
It is suggested that a Committee should be created to oversee this project.
Membership should include representatives of management, staff and unions.
Ø Step III – Mandatory program in city and public
buildings – The City can have a program for its own buildings. To extend
such a program throughout the City will require a by-law against fragrance just
like smoking ban. A total ban is not very enforceable. The by-law by itself
will not stop people from using scented products. The question is who is going
to police the by-law. Strong reactions are expected from the fragrance industry
and people that want to use scented products. The challenge is that scented
products are not regulated. In addition, some people will wave the individual
freedom banner. At this time, this approach is not recommended.
Recommendation
Step I is the first course of action to be followed by Step II. Its implementation will require the development of an education program to increase the awareness level of health risks when exposed to fragrance products. A policy statement should be prepared and distributed to City’s personnel, posted on the City’s website and posted at key locations in the City’s corporate buildings.
Document 2
THE CREATION OF A
SCENT FREE ENVIRONMENT
LA CrÉation D’UN ENVIRONNEMENT SANS ODEUR
ACS2005-CCV-EAC-0005 City
Wide / À L'échelle De La Ville
The committee received in
advance two e-mail submissions from the following:
a. the Scented Products Education and
Information Association of Canada advising of information on their website
b. H. Proulx, objecting to a ban of
scented products
A copy of each is held on file.
Serge Morin, Vice Chair, Environmental
Advisory Committee recommended that the City should implement a
program that requests people to be considerate of others who may have
reactions or sensitivities to scented products. Such a program should begin with a public awareness campaign and
a scent-free policy, followed by a mandatory program. He also highlighted the following points:
- an education program would increase
the awareness of City employees and the public about the potential impact of
fragrance chemicals on the health and well-being of those affected with
environmental sensitivities and would explain the benefits of adopting
scent-free practices;
- similar programs have already been
implemented in Halifax, Calgary and Toronto and locally, Les Terrasses de la
Chaudière, Constellation Court, Nepean Sportplex and the Orléans Recreation
Centre are designated scent-free;
- in the interest of health and safety,
the scent-free program should be expanded across City’s buildings, community
and sport centres, Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses;
- the current public awareness program
should continue (even without signage) in various facilities; if the cost of
signs cannot be covered within the existing budget, it should be included in
the 2007 budget.
A copy of his
PowerPoint presentation and speaking notes are held on file.
Linda
Nolan-Leeming, President, Allergy and Environmental Health Association of
Ottawa explained that people with environmental sensitivities have an invisible
disability, and it prevents them from going to places where people are wearing
perfumes or other scented products.
This is a legally recognized disability and people who suffer from it
should not be socially isolated. Mrs.
Nolan-Leeming advised that 12.6% of the population have environmental
sensitivities and 2000 new chemicals are introduced into the environment each
year and with air-tight buildings, everyone is breathing these chemicals. The Association maintains that everyone has
the right to breathe clean air. She
provided a brief explanation of some of the ways the problem manifests itself,
including: heart palpitations,
difficulty breathing, inability to think, et cetera. Mrs. Nolan-Leeming made note of the fact that perfumes are
about 90% synthetic petroleum or solvent-based chemicals and are not natural
botanicals as they were in the past.
The result to people with environmental sensitivities can be varied and
in some cases, quite adverse.
Following on her
comments about perfumes, Councillor Doucet wondered how the City could address
this issue, particularly as it relates to the changes made to these products over
the years. While there was no simple
answer to his question, he maintained that there must be some way to do better
and to ensure whatever is being produced does not cause harm.
Linda Kinsella was of the
opinion that what is being proposed is not strong enough and she suggested the
City should adopt a procurement policy to stipulate that every effort should be
made to buy unscented products. She
explained how easily scents (everyday products like laundry detergent and
static cling sheets) can be carried on people using such products, noting these
scents can sometimes last for days and can impact those with environmental
sensitivities. She recognized that most
people do not even know they are affecting someone they may be sitting beside
and as part of the education campaign, she asked that mention be made of how
easy it is for people to carry scents on their body. Mrs. Kinsella believed the City should be a leader in purchasing
scent-free products, stating this would set a good example which would be good
for other corporations.
Rob McDonald spoke as an
individual with environmental sensitivities and related the steps he and his
employer have taken to improve the environment in his office and to reduce his
contact with people at work who may be wearing scented products. He noted that this illness can become quite
serious when it is combined with other issues.
Mr. McDonald supported an education component, but did not think
the public was ready for a by-law. He
did suggest, however, that the education component examine the Human Rights
Code implications around this particular issue, because the Human Rights
Commission recognizes environmental sensitivities as a disability with
protected status under the Code. He
believed that both employers and employees need to be educated in this respect
and that while there may be some costs associated with an education program,
the costs associated with people having to go on disability is a more expensive
alternative.
Agnus Kowalska did not agree
with the proposal to progress to a mandatory ban on scented products. She preferred to be given the choice to wear
a product she feels inclined to use and would wear unscented products if they
were not so expensive. She believed the
City has to strike a balance for both sides because people who choose to wear
scents because they need to, should not have to face being banned from using
public transit, for example, for fear of affecting someone with environmental
sensitivities. She supported a public
education campaign to ensure people are made more aware of the issue.
Charles Matthews,
Disabled and Proud indicated that in most cases, most afflictions that
are not understood are those that cannot be seen, such as environmental
sensitivities. They believe the report
does not go far enough and believe that a by-law is necessary in order to
ensure enforcement. He agreed that
there has been some education on this issue in the past, but suggested that
program needs to be improved to ensure the public is aware of the problems
experienced by some people as a result of scented products. He compared the learning curve associated
with this issue to what was learned many years ago about peanuts. Mr. Matthews also read into the record
a statement from Pat McGrath which essentially applauded the City for proposing
a by-law, but expressed concern that enforcement would not be strong enough to
ensure compliance. A copy of her
complete statement is held on file.
Moved by A.
Cullen
That
Recommendation 4 be amended by replacing “to be followed by a mandatory scent
free program” with “to be assessed on its effectiveness by 2010.”
CARRIED
That the Environmental Advisory Committee recommend
that the Health Recreation and Social Services Committee recommend City Council
approve:
1. A Scent free program for City buildings, Community Centres
and Sport Centres; and;
2. That Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo buses
be part of the Scent free program, and;
3. That the scent free program request people to be considerate
of others who may have reactions or sensitivities to scented products, and urge
people to observe the program by using the many unscented products that are
available, and;
4. That a step approach, starting with a public awareness
program and a scent-free policy in the City’s corporate buildings, Community
Centres and Sport Centres, Light Rail Transit, OC Transpo and Para Transpo
buses to be assesed on its effectiveness by 2010.
CARRIED, as
amended, with Councillors Brooks and Chiarelli dissenting
[1] Shim, MD. and Williams, MD. (1986). Affects of odors in asthma. American Journal of Medicine. Vol. 80.