9 Aug 2010

Bully for incineration?

Should we be bullied (pushed) into hosting something that is bad for our health, bad for our environment, bad for our pocketbooks?

This video appears to be quite relevant to many municipalities world-wide today. Residents are fighting newly proposed incinerators all over Europe, the U.S. and certainly in Canada, among other places. The incineration lobby is powerful and convincing to politicians who don't do their due diligence. Why listen to doctors and scientists when you can take the word of burner pushers?

Do we believe that the old technology (mass burn incineration) is without risk to human health, not to mention financial risk? Can't we use our heads and come up with something better? I've heard much better, saner, safer and less expensive proposals put forward only to be dismissed out of hand by politicians who have been sucked into the "let's burn it and it will disappear" mindset. It doesn't disappear.

So, will the new crop of politicians (we hope there will be some new ones after October) let the residents speak, and more importantly, will they listen?

It is not too late to stop this nightmarish mistake by the lake. Write to [UPDATE] NEW Minister of Environment Hon. John Wilkinson at minister.moe@ontario.ca or at his constituency office jwilkinson.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org and tell him your views on it. (The previous Environment Minister, John Gerretsen, was replaced in the latest cabinet shuffle). Tell Minister Wilkinson he must take into consideration all the research that shows considerable risk, and that the Precautionary Principle should prevail. Tell him that if he wants to be considered a "green" Environment Minister, he will not approve this travesty. Instead he will have Durham re-visit the waste management plan and come up with a green solution, not one that will likely pump another 135000+ tonnes of CO2 annually into our air shed along with other harmful chemicals, heavy metals, cancer-causing dioxins and contaminants.

This must be revisited by a new Council. Consider replacing those who supported the incinerator and refused to look at the entire picture. Elect representatives who care more about your health than their pocketbook. Otherwise we're locked into a 25-35 year nightmare (or longer).

Think about it. Should we be bullied (pushed) into hosting something that is bad for our health, bad for our environment, bad for our pocketbooks? Shouldn't we have a say in this?


  1. I am so glad that Watchdog is back, up and running. I was afraid that it had become redundant since last January. Anyway, "welcome back"

    It is especially important that we have the views of the Watchdog moderator, and that we have an opporunity to post comments.

    Yes, the ill-conceived incinerator is still the main issue in this campaign throughout most of Durham, but especially here in Clarington.

    Electors should constantly be reminded of the careless actions of four of our local politicians that resulted in us hosting this hideous incinerator. One of the culprits, Reg. Councillor Charlie Trim is not running in 2010. Too bad, as I would have enjoyed seeing this guy being soundly thrashed (trashed?) at the polls - which he would certainly deserve.

    Of those remaining, remember to punish and replace Mayor Jim Abernethy, Regional Councillor Mary Novak and Councillor Gord 'flip-flop' Robinson in their bids for re-election. They are deserve your scorn and disgust.

    Perhaps the Watchdog moderator would publish the names of all other Regional politicians who were in support of this burner along with the names of those who were opposed. This should be done as a public service.

  2. Welcome back Watchdog.
    Someone has to keep the best interests of the area in the foremost of the minds of the politicians.
    The people have to be told the facts and we certainly can't rely on the elected officials to let us know the truth.

  3. I have yet to find one, just one tiny one, argument in favor of incineration. Whether I look at the economics, environmental or health implications, I get a “thumb down” outcome. Why is it then that our “enlightened leaders” are stubbornly pushing for this non-sense?

    Indeed, trying to get some politicians to appreciate the implications of their incomprehensible obsession with incineration has been like trying to explain quantum physics to my cat.

    There is much more to this than what meets the eyes. Indeed, one tragedy of this charade, more appropriately called “Casualty”, has been our own democratic system. We are fighting oversees to implement responsible governance, yet here we are suffering from our very own dictatorial warlords.

    It is unfortunate that the people responsible for such an anti-social decision will not have to pay any price for their betrayal of their social responsibilities.

    It was Thomas Sowell who said:
    "It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.".

    This is constantly being demonstrated here in Durham Region, with serious consequences yet to come. And then, it will be too late to complain!

    In a delegation to Durham Finances & Administration on 2010/06/16 and to Durham Council on 2010/06/23, I have attempted to convey how much it will financially cost for Durham residents for the privilege of being poisoned. More specifically, I have presented a proposal to allow Council to “Save Face” by requesting that proper punitive consequences be required to ensure the veracity of the claims made by the Consultants and the Vendor.

    In particular, one would think that if the system is so safe as the proponents are claiming, then the vendor should have no hesitation in putting forth a surety deposit of $25 Millions - for which they would not have to pay for the "Cost of Money" according to the process that I outlined.

    Although this would have cost nothing to the vendor if its claims were true, this request for demonstration of goodwill was totally ignored by Council. The contents of these two presentations should be on the DEW site for those who want to see the details.

    One can only conclude that this deafening silence speaks volume about the fact that Council does not even believe its own claims.

  4. Funny video, but serious issues brought up by it. Whoever did this - bravo! You have captured the feeling of futility as well as the idiocy of what is happening. Will they ever listen to us? Do they even care about the future well-being of their residents?

    Once elected, it appears that our politicians think they know better than the majority of their residents. Just being elected gives them special knowledge? I don't think so. They are not invincible when it comes to election day especially when the anger has not subsided, nor the fears of their residents.

    If we don't teach those who refused to listen a lesson this time by turfing them, they will only be emboldened and continue their ways for another term. Please remember this on election day. I certainly will, as will my family.

  5. There is a new Minister of the Environment. He should be strongly encouraged to look at the health and sustainability impacts of incineration, especially in an already polluted area.

    Minister of the Environment Hon. John Wilkinson <minister.moe@ontario.ca> or constituency office:

    Check the facts, not the lobbyist fairy tales!

  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.