Canadian Grand Prix Dumped (merged)?

[Knowlesy]

Another of the great races gone!

I always did look forward to Canada as it always turned out to be a gripping race.

Still, at least it shows that it isn't just a European track vendetta by Bernie......which is both bad and good.

[Gore]

I think the underlying conspiracy theory is that Bernie just wants all proper motor racing circuits (Spa), and tracks that produce entertaining Grands Prix (A1 Ring, now this) axed

[ralf fan]

Sad to see Canada going for next year especially because it is being canned for political rather than racing reasons

[JohnSSC]

Realizing this is a minority opinion, but since when should we consider F1, or any sport that is overly-dependent on tobacco $$, more important than the lives that are lost to tobacco? The manufacturers created a product, found that it was addictive, developed additives that made it more addictive and market it in a slick way. So Montreal loses $38 million. How much is spent in Montreal every year on oncologists, radiation therapists, hospital stays, etc? Consider further the emotional cost to families dealing with the cancers and the pulmonary insufficiency diseases. The cost to employers for lost productivity. The cost to families for lost income. The human cost is not worth it and day-to-day the costs to pay for the physical damage done is way more than the "good" racing dollars provide.

It is a shame that we love our sport so much that we are willing to justify the actions of the sponsors.

I read constantly how smoking is a "choice." Well it is not. Cigarettes contain addictive substances the volumes of which have been increased by the tobacco companies by their own admission. It has nothing to do with choice and everything to do with seduction.

"Nannies?" Something needed to be done. I am glad the various "governments" (elected in most cases by the various residents of the respective countries) are finally doing something.

Ask someone who was debilitated by pulmonary failure if it all was worth it for them to see the snappy Jordan livery?

[Liz]

When the marching mommies and daddies realise that the $100 million hit Montreal will take (by this morning's early estimates) next year means they will have to pay for their babies' own daycare, summery camp, education and medical care without any help from The Government, because money doesn't fall from the angels in heaven, and because every other business in Canada is either owned by foreigners or bankrupt, we will hear less from the "We had to destroy you to save you" crowd and more from the people who realise it's not all an abstract exercise being played out far away.

I predict that they will do absolutely nothing for the next eight months or so, steadfastly pretending that somehow this will all magically disappear, "blow over", or be rescued by persons unknown, and after the weekend passes and the money goes to Spa and not to Montreal, then the backlash will begin.

JohnSS, I merely repeat the time honoured phrase "Actions have Consequences" and if you choose to smoke, in the face of overwhelming evidence that your action will have dire consequences, it is not the fault of others.

Incidentally, there are high schools in Canada where not only are kids suspended for smoking, but they must attend forced re-education camps before being allowed back into schools; and the police of Alberta are now authorized to confiscate cigarettes (a legal product legally obtained) at will.

Perhaps this is the world you want to live in. Personally I find it alarming. I'm hiding my candy bars, coffee, beer, and ice cream before the next wave of Nannies is unleashed.

[Mark Mitchell]

I am disappointed!
I would much rather see the European GP or Silverstone disappear than Montreal.

The Canadian GP is a favourite of most drivers and even the FIA themselves voted it best GP of 2001.

[Phoenix1]

Personally I am a major anti-smoking but even I think this could be handled better, I am also a realist and the Goverment should have given fair warning and maybe tried to change the rules at the same time as europe, it was only another year or two until the FIA ban it anyway! :-S Is there a Canadian election coming up somewhere that is anti-smoking? Without people like P Morris and his sponsorship would F1 be as big as it is today? Shame to see Canada go but hopefully they can bring it back as now North America only has one race.

Quick extra in answer to Liz the problem with smoking is it affects others whereas Candy Bars etc.. do not. You smoke you give me Cancer, see enough relatives die of it and you may begin to understand but this is a thread about Canada so lets get back to morning it's loss ironically due to lack of smoking.

[serverbrainfailure]

since when did Bernie care what anyone else thinks?

[Mark Mitchell]

As Mr E is getting on a bit in his years, does anyone know who might take over his role once he goes?

[spanner]

can you really say that just because the F1 circus doesnt go to Canada that people are going to stop smoking, or even not start? and some how recoup that 38 million. In this era people do not seem to be given any intelligence, or self control and somehow smokers are victims of the companies, forgetting that they chose to start nobody forced them. By banning adverts goverments are seen, rather thinly to be making an attempt to stop the spread of smoking while they get massive amounts of money from it.

Cananda has given some good races, its sad that its another place off the calender. What happened to trying to get more viewers from the American continent to F1?

[PenelopePitstop]

Circut Gilles Villeneuve have still got the most exciting single seat, opened wheel event there, (& it is one that seems to give a t055 about its North American fans.) I am sure there won't be to many upset French Canadians, the only down side is we won't lose the British G.P. so we have to financially support Octogan/Bernie.

[Gore]

I've always wondered what kind of person banning cigarette sponsorsip protects? Surely the kind of person who makes the decision whether to smoke or not based on what colour racing cars are will be just as easily influenced by seeing people smoking in the street, on TV etc..?

[kdr]

funny to watch f1 desperately running from here to there to keep adverts which will go in the next few years anywhere.

i agree totally that canada deserves its gp. but its not their elected goverments fault...its the team owners and rulers who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

oh and to johnssc...brilliant post.

[cos]

Seems like there's a bit of confusion, maybe it hasn't gone after all :confused:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/3133815.stm

[climb]

As an extremistic anti-smokie as I am, I should agree with John SSC, (whose post i respect), but i don't.
I'm against smoke, not against ads. (this should be a gravel trap post, but it's closed now, so i pray the moderators to tolerate it)
Regarding my country , Italy, i have to admit that, despite the tobacco ban, which has ruled for many years, cigarettes consumption has not decreased at all. On the contrary, it has dramatically increased by new groups that, when ads were legal, smoked way less: teenagers and women.
Why all this?
Apparently banning tobacco ads is totally uneffective; wherever you go in Italy (restaurant, disco, railway stations) you regularly come back home carrying a terrible smoke smell.
There is something in people's mind that has nothing to do with ads. For the same reason, i don't agree with those patients sick of cancer who sue the tobacco companies: every smoker knows the danger , but each of them laughs at you if you remind him. There is no reason for them to pretend they are surprised by their cancer!
Well, let's get back to motorsport: I conclude saying that, because of the total uneffectiveness of anti-smoke campaign, criminalizing F1 for tobacco sponsorship is a senseless exageration.

[Jay]

I back Legault on this. JohnSSC makes very good points as well.

It's silly to blame our government when most of the countries F1 races at will have similar restrictions in 2006. This is just a world trend, and F1 has to get used to it.

I'm almost certain that this is just the FIA trying to scare every country in Europe that if the proposed legislation becomes law, and tobacco ads are outlawed in all of Europe, that F1 will just kill all of the Grand Prix in Europe....except for France mind you..couldn't dare touch the one in the home country of the FIA .

[Mark Mitchell]

Confusion over Canadian GP


The organiser of the Canadian Grand Prix has said the race has been dropped from next year's calendar - only for Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone to deny it.

Race promoter Normand Legault told a news conference on Thursday that he had received a letter from Ecclestone saying that Montreal would not be hosting a race in 2004 because of national anti-tobacco laws.

But on Friday Ecclestone denied that he has axed the race.

"I've no idea where this story came from - the calendar for 2004 has not been put out yet or even considered," Ecclestone told the PA news agency.

"I don't know what's in my head at the moment I'm so busy, but the calendar for 2004 is not out yet."

source: BBCi

[billiaml]

I suppose I'll add my to the growing list of the same. And furthermore,

I can't believe how stupid. Wait. That's not true. NOTHING ANY GOVERNMENT -- OR GOVERNING BODY (e. g. FIA) -- NO MATTER HOW STUPID -- DOES SURPRISES ME ANY MORE!

Call me cynical, but I'm generally surprised when they make an intelligent choice.

[Miss Hardt]

Originally posted by corkholio
Replace "Grand Prix" with "Driver" and you might be onto something.

Miss Hardt - I find it strange that I get a warning from you about this post, and then you immediately break the forum rules :confused:



Corkolio - I'm not a fan of Jacques either, but even I am growing tiresome of your flamebait. I suggest you put a 'cork' in it.


Wrex

[Testure]

Originally posted by Liz
When the marching mommies and daddies realise that the $100 million hit Montreal will take (by this morning's early estimates) next year means they will have to pay for their babies' own daycare, summery camp, education and medical care without any help from The Government, because money doesn't fall from the angels in heaven, and because every other business in Canada is either owned by foreigners or bankrupt, we will hear less from the "We had to destroy you to save you" crowd and more from the people who realise it's not all an abstract exercise being played out far away.

Short term pain, long term benefit. Tobacco advertising is being banned and the F1 teams will be better off without it. There are too many issues, legal and otherwise, for it to continue. Yes, this will cause economic pain to some. The cumulative benefits several years down the line will more than make up for it. My preferred solution would be to deny health treatment for self-inflicted diseases, thus showing us the painful, disgusting consequences of those actions you mention. I'm a real , though

Originally posted by Liz
Incidentally, there are high schools in Canada where not only are kids suspended for smoking, but they must attend forced re-education camps before being allowed back into schools; and the police of Alberta are now authorized to confiscate cigarettes (a legal product legally obtained) at will.

Perhaps this is the world you want to live in. Personally I find it alarming. I'm hiding my candy bars, coffee, beer, and ice cream before the next wave of Nannies is unleashed.

In this context, there is no meaningful comparison between smoking and beer, chocolate or a lazy lifestyle. Personally, I don't care if tobacco, speed or smack is sold in my local newsagents. They shouldn't be funding sports, though.


In any case, the race isn't being banned purely because of the tobacco issue, it's to make way for more races in Asia and elsewhere. There are already many races in countries where such advertising is banned. It's a convenient excuse, but I imagine the main reason is pressure from car manufacturers to race in other markets. I certainly hope it's not gone, though, it's a lovely looking circuit which I'll be viewing in two weeks time

[eatapc]

I was about to go on a rampage against JohnSSC. I think his post is chock-full of well-meaning myths about tobacco, but I don't want to start a Gravel Trap debate here. Instead, I refer everyone to a concise analysis by Jacob Sullum: http://reason.com/opeds/jacob072097.shtml

I've researched this enough to be convinced that the anti-tobacco Nannies are doing more harm than good, but in the case of F1 sponsorship, I think it's possible to look at this from another point of view, neither pro nor anti tobacco: The blame for this debacle can be placed more on Bernie than on hypocritical politicians. Why does Bernie feel the need to punish fans? He and Max allow tobacco sponsorship, but then THEY CAN'T LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS. By canceling Spa and other races, they show no concern for the fans or the traditions of the sport. Let's face it: Bernie is perhaps the greediest human being on Earth.

Bernie and Max should let the sponsors themselves decide whether they can live with the restrictions imposed by the laws of most Western nations. As Jay pointed out, it's a done deal as far as removing tobacco sponsorship from sports worldwide. Bernie knows that tobacco money will dry up in a few years anyway, so he's trying to maximize his profit in the short term at the expense of a smoother transition to other sponsors.

A tip of the cap to Frank Williams for resisting tobacco sponsors in the first place.

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally posted by JohnSSC
How much is spent in Montreal every year on oncologists, radiation therapists, hospital stays, etc? Consider further the emotional cost to families dealing with the cancers and the pulmonary insufficiency diseases. The cost to employers for lost productivity.

Actually, our health system and employers save far more money with smokers, because they die young. No need to pay them their pensions until they are in their 90's, and no need to put them in hospitals for hip replacements, and other age-related complications.

Edit: I just read the article that pceater pointed out, and this is one of the points they make.

[shiny side up!]

Not to sidetrack from the theme of this thread , but F1-Live is reporting that Bernie has said there has been no plan to axe the Canadian GP, and he doesn't know what all the fuss is about...

I'm soooooo confused, but hoping for the best

[ralf fan]

I read that on F1-live that Bernie has said thad he has still not axed the Canadian GP.Heres the link
http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlin...030808135817.s

So thers a bit of confusion

[ElScOrChO]

In an article I read somewhere, Normand Legault said that Bernie called him and said that he would receive a letter saying that there will be no grand prix for 2004... Really confusing!

Also, in an article coming from here: http://www.rds.ca/courses/chroniques...13F3312DC.html

The commentator from RDS found out on the FIA website that the 2006 tobacco interdiction was changed with a recommendation to the teams to not use tobacco sponsors...