Precautionary principle (or 'Trust us. We know better')

Great Debates
1

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that local communities, at the municipal government level, can issue bans on substances that, while never shown shown to be harmful, theoretically still might be (If you want, we can also debate the notion of trying to prove a negative, but that’s probably better left to another thread).

Specifically, Health Canada has found various pesticides safe. No evidence was mustered to demonstrate to that Agency that any of 7000 or so pesticides available in Canada poses any danger. Notwithstanding this “seal of approval” from Health Canada, a small community in Quebec enacted legislation to ban their use. The Supreme Court found in the community’s favour when the law was challenged. In effect, this ruling has extended the power of municipal governments to the point that they can overrule federal or provincial authorities.

The issue is neatly and succintly summarized in this editorial. I could not make the case any better than the editorial writer.

Bottom line is that the Supreme Court has now made it legal for the opinions of those in power to be made into law on the grounds that it’s better to be cautious even when there is not an iota of proof of any danger.

Logically then, local communities should now be able to ban the use of any substance, or group of substances. After all, there is always the possibility that the substance(s) could turn out to be dangerous. It would just be a precaution.

2

Well, down here in the States, we have a lot of “dry” counties (although, I believe they are only able to control the sale and distribution. I do not believe that they are allowed to govern consumption on private property.

3

What tomndebb said.

Down here in the good ol’ U.S. of A., the kinds of laws that a municipality can and cannot pass are entirely up to the State Constitution. If the Constitution of Kansas doesn’t say that a city cannot outlaw short-tailed hamsters, then by golly, the Wichita, Kansas city council has every right to pass a law against short-tailed hamsters. There are a few limitations placed on state and local governments in the Federal Constitution (e.g. the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, the 4th Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, Article 1 Section 10’s prohibition against making something other than gold or silver coins into money, etc.), but the Federal Constitution leaves the local governments with a hell of a lot of wiggle room.