When is one more bylaw one bylaw too many?

They’re a practical way of changing behavior or, at least, punishing behavior we don’t like within our towns and cities.

There are more bylaws than bylaws officers can enforce. That’s why many are “complaints driven.” In other words, bylaws folks and police don’t hustle around looking for infractions — they wait for somebody to complain.

This new anti-idling bylaw is different. It doesn’t seem to be about enforcement at all. It’s about “education.”

Enforcing a three-minute limitation on idling your vehicle is so fraught with difficulties and so subject to negative public reaction that the tone of the conversation suggests it’s about 99.9 per cent friendly information with a very slight chance it might actually be enforced some day.

As council discussed the proposal with staff this week, it was emphasized six ways to Sunday not to worry, that it wasn’t about handing out tickets, it was about raising awareness.

This idea that the law should be used as an education tool is new. It was noted, for example, that the bylaw on camping in parks is more important for the information provided to the overnighters than for enforcing it with penalties.

We are subjected to a lot of rules and regulations in our everyday lives, some of which can get us thrown in jail or at least fined. A lot of people would say we have way too many rules on the books. There are, or have been, bylaws in this country making it illegal to climb a tree, paint your garage doors purple, swear at your mother, drag a dead horse down the street on Sundays or challenge someone to a duel.

If we’re now going to start using bylaws as public information campaigns, we’re going to end up with a lot more bylaws.

Quite a number of other B.C. communities already have anti-idling bylaws and, presumably, they’re for education, too.

So, all you over-idlers, don’t get overly concerned about the long arm of the law reaching out to grab you. Before that happens, all manner of exceptions and circumstances would be considered. Is it cold outside? Is there a dog in the car? Do you have a good reason for idling so long? Here, have a brochure.

The three-minute rule will be advertised on radio and in other media. Signs will be put on the backs of City buses.

So why can’t all this education be done without an unenforceable bylaw? If the object is education and awareness, why not educate instead? Why not put the $20,000 into a PR campaign without the bylaw?

Assuming that people basically want to do the right thing, and since the bylaw isn’t going to be enforced much, why not a carrot rather than a stick?

Bylaws are for enforcing. When there’s no longer a need to enforce them, they become irrelevant and we get rid of them. When people no longer ride their horses down Victoria Street (or drag dead horses down the street on Sundays) we no longer need a bylaw setting out ground rules, and we make laws about double parking our cars instead.

If we don’t intend to enforce a bylaw in the first place, that bylaw seems about as relevant as all those others we’ve taken off the books.

Call me old-fashioned, but I’m a believer that we have enough laws without using them for public relations campaigns and environmental messaging.

by Armchair Mayor

When is one more bylaw one bylaw too many?

Our Community