The above is a load of garbage. In the capitalist economy, [basically] the only law is supply and demand regulated by consumer transactions.The only limitation on this principle is market restrictions set by a governing body [doesn't always mean the state] to insure in theory fair play. Outright banning of products and/or restricting of products is considered only when there is a demonstrable argument that the product harms the market and and/or its consumer base. That is as far as the whole.. “freedom and privilege” argument can extend. Therefore, it’s not a matter of the “right as a consumer”, it’s the matter of it’s inherant to the system that the consumer gets to define that which they buy. Human rights, constitutionalism, have absolutely nothing to do with this issue.

“In the state of extreme enviromental unrest..twenty years… government restrictions will be in place with are alot worse..”

Scaremongering? . Yup. These type of statements are dominating the discussion, it’s not promoting debate, it’s stifling it! Regardless of your personal views on what the government will or will not do in the next twenty years [the funny thing about prophecying is that usually it never comes to pass - I want my jetson's car !!] or the state of the enviroment, the issue is a consumer issue. Acess to drinking water is a very important issue,if that indeed is the issue – statements to what the issue with bottled water is change with every soapbox on this campus -but it has nothing to do with the availability of bottled water on a Canadian university campus. The water that pepsico sells out of it’s machines and the Aramark outlet at STU is collected and bottled from Canadian sources. It’s our water that we are paying to drink in the bottle. It’s not the water of the third world, it’s ours.Banning or restricting bottled water on this campus will not change a thing about the situation of third world water. Paying for water is not a new thing, Tap water isn’t free , the water bill is due every month for every houseowner- payable to the fredericton municipality. Water has been a commodity since men have been able to band together and build a fence around it, it’s hardly a unique phenomenon of the 20th century. As per enviromental degredation, synonynous with the global warming “issue” [???] , I just don’t care, same with other people. apathy is horrible, but hey, its the real life. You can save the enviroment while I have my bottled water. Isn’t that how crusades are supposed to work?

That’s my two cents, I’m probably wrong, but I want to hear a structured reason WHY, as opposed to scaremongering and supposition..

See section 26: “The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.”

Using a document to attack my position which has no reference to your position is a bit shaky. Should I fight for my charter rights to include consumer goods? – no that is absurd from my own perspective. But I would also not fight to restrict access to consumer goods either, unless they were somehow already in conflict with the charter.

Even if we had a right to water it would not exclude my ability to buy it. In fact, to reiterate my position, I am arguing it would most likely guarantee my ability to buy it, or sell it.

In response to your quip on government restriction:

Government does not exist to force people to act in accordance with its wishes but rather the people act in order for government to serve their own wishes. I shall support a referendum on the issue and will even stop buying water on campus if 2/3 of the registered students vote to ban the sale of it.

I hold no moral authority and will not choose what is right for any other student, I only hope the bottle-ban crowd has the same sentiment.

In a state of extreme environmental unrest which is occurring and will be worsening in the next twenty years, government restrictions will be put in place that will be much worse than “oh by the way, you can only drink from the tap or fountain (but you still have water).”

This is a much more complicated manner than consumer rights.

Our main point was to illustrate just the opposite of this comment.
If soda and other non-hydrating products steal water from the same sources as bottled water (which hydrates you) then practically it would make more sense to start fighting non-hydrating products first.

I personally do not agree with either the motivation or the practicality of the idea of banning water on campus. First off it is a very harsh and abrasive reaction to a business contract with our sole food providers on campus and secondly, the proposed bottled water ban is openly deceitful in its aims. Am I really to believe that a ban on campus would benefit the third world, considering the water is actually taken from Ontario and Quebec.

Thirdly, as a student my choices are already limited by a monopoly food service provider, it is a personal affront to me as a consumer to be forced by my own peers to be limited again in what choices I have with that food service provider.

If you don’t like bottled water – don’t buy it. Let us that take no moral issue with it make up our own minds.

Reduce re-use recycle-
Currently, over 75 % of returnable re-fillable containers end up in landfill as garbage.
Our grandchildren will be mining the garbage dumps for the materials that we used once and threw away.