Ornamental Pesticide Use

Oakville’s recent revisiting of the cosmetic pesticide issue got me thinking way back to last summer when I made a fairly futile attempt to resurrect this issue at the Region of Halton.

After all spraying your lawn for no good purpose other than so you can say yours is prettier than your neighbour's is hardly a community priority.

And hazardous to our health, right? Look it up.

The Canadian Cancer Society, for example, has called for a ban on the use of pesticides on lawns and gardens as "ornamental use of pesticides has no countervailing health benefit and has the potential to cause harm."

Their position is based on science. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a World Health Organization research body, found that "some substances used in pesticides are classified as known, probable or possible carcinogens."

Another group, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, wants to move towards a legislated end to cosmetic pesticide use within two years. This was recommended by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

That Committee says we ought to "give absolute priority to the protection of human health and the environment within any decision making process regarding the regulation of pesticide use."

I can cite other sources.


Halton’ s Answer - Prudent Avoidance

According to the Region of Halton Medical Officer of Health spraying might not be good. But, instead of banning it, he has recommended (and Council has continued to support) a policy of "prudent avoidance." Many Councillors like this strategy because it sounds erudite or scientific, I guess.

A typical "made in Halton solution," or so I thought.

In fact, "prudent avoidance" is an American concept developed in 1989 relating to exposure to Electro Magnetic Fields. Now adapted to pesticide use it is the cornerstone of Health Department policy - that, and the contention that it is really up to local municipalities to enact by-laws that ban or restrict use. That contention was found to be incorrect in a report from Halton’s Legal Department last summer.

The House of Commons Committee again:

"The most effective way to protect human health and the environment is undeniably to prevent the generation of polluting substances in the first place, rather than minimizing or mitigating the risks associated with their use."

Am I wrong or isn’t protecting human health what Public Health is supposed to be about?

The Precautionary Principle

This widely accepted principle argues that "where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation."

This Principle is supported in Canadian law.

A Region wide enforceable by-law would cost a half dollar or so per person per year.

Let’s do it.

John Sewell and William Lyon Mackenzie

John Sewell has cast a large shadow over Ontario municipal politics for nearly forty years.

The first election campaign I worked intensively on was his failed re-election bid for mayor of Toronto in 1980. Since 1999 Sewell has published a Local Government Bulletin .

In his final bulletin Sewell notes it has become "harder to maintain interest as the opportunities for local government empowerment appear to have diminished." He is moving on as "the moment for change is in the air, and at this point there is little I can add to the debate. "

Pity.

The bulletin always offered something current from the world of municipal politics. Back issues are still available.

Sewell's books are of interest as well. An earlier posting referenced A New City Agenda which was published a couple of years ago.

Another book - Mackenzie - A Political Biography of William Lyon Mackenzie - came out in 2002. Sewell's considerable research on this one took him to Scotland to track down Mackenzie's links to the Dundee Rational Instititution ( a club that championed intellectual discussion and debate of scientific matters) and Scottish reform politics of the day (1810 -1832).

Many forget that Mackenzie was Toronto's first mayor. His ideas on government and its relations with the public, documented and analysed by the author, remain relevant today.

For example, it was Mackenzie's strong belief that information should be available to the people and he put much effort into this by providing information through written documents and at public gatherings so that people could discuss and form their own opinions on issues. He convened ward meetings and valued the public's right to be heard by legislators.

One wonders what he would have thought of the Internet?

The man who was expelled from the legislature five times - not just for the day but for good - until the voters sent him back could have given some lessons on negative campaigning to today's pols.

Descriptions of political opponents were pointed ("a boot polisher"), personal ("a pitiful mean looking parasite") and nasty (the Lieutenant Governor was described as a "low born fortune hunter" and his wife as a "base born descendant.")

Politics, fun in the 19 century and still fun today.

Sewell's insights will be missed.

NIMBY

Eight months of caretaker counselling has taken its toll.

After more than six weeks of decompression I've resurfaced.


It has been said that municipal politics is all about real estate. Some might say it is about NIMBY - not in my backyard.

NIMBY Queen Street East

Today's Toronto Star (December 28) tells a typical NIMBY tale.

A "tony beach enclave" is up in arms over - are you ready for this? - the introduction of a program designed to house twelve people experiencing homelessness. A church would do this for one night per week.

The sponsor invokes the Christmas story - Mary, Joseph and Jesus homeless in Bethlehem until someone took them in - as support for the program. But Christmas is now three days past. Who can remember that New Testament story amidst the Boxing Week Blitz?

Community opposition has now put the program on hold.

NIMBY - Burlington

An earlier so-called career in local politics afforded an up close look at NIMBY. Examples:

• Allegations that a city bus route would bring violent crime to the affluent Millcroft community leads to the route's cancellation.
• Oakville politicians force non-profit housing residents to install uniform window blinds.
• A delegation's description of condominium owners as a lower life form (as compared to "real homeowners') fails to impress Burlington Councillors, as some of them actually live in condos.

This go-around (caretaker from March - December 2006) a suggestion that a painted centre line on a local street could bring down property values stands out as my most memorable NIMBY moment.

The White Line in the Middle of the Road was "invented" in 1915 by Burlington Mayor Maxwell Smith. Did His Worship have any idea of the impact his invention would have on neighbourhoods.

A Question

Have you or any of your close family or associates ever belonged to a NIMBY group?

Fellow travelers, perhaps?

More on NIMBY in future postings.

I Thought I was Over It

I really thought I was past it. My anti-Toronto bias, that is.

But it is back. And the Toronto Star has done it.

Their continuing careless and just plain wrong municipal election coverage will eventually put me over the edge.

A recent story talked about our former popular Mayor Mulkewich. That's Robert Mulkewich, or so the Star thinks. Call him Bobby why don't you? Out here he is known as Walter.

Today's profiles of candidates confuses a west end incumbent Rick Craven with an east end contender Rick Goldring. An easy mistake I often confuse David Miller with David Shiner.

And how many times can they refer to Mayor Rob MacIsaac as a"former mayor?" Well, I suppose with twenty-one days left in November twenty-one times is a good possibility.

Mr. Editor, give your reporters a Go Train ticket, point them west (that's where Burlington is) and tell them to come out here and look around. There is a lot of interesting stuff going on out here that could benefit from accurate news coverage.


Bob Wood
Councillor
Ward 5

Jackson - "MacIsaac Just Up and Quit on Us"

Mayoral candidate Cam Jackson, who quit Queen's Park to run for Mayor of Burlington, had this to say in today's Toronto Star (Wide Open Race in Burlington):

"MacIsaac just up and quit on us... "

Jackson's quote, if accurate, raises a question.

Who is the "us" that Mayor Rob MacIsaac quit on?

He didn't quit on me. Fifteen years on Council (nine as Mayor), late meetings, countless hours away from a young family, loss of privacy and on and on.

That's no 'quit.' It sounds more like a commitment to the people of Burlington.

Jackson goes on to say that after the 'quit' "a lot of people in the community approached me..." to run for mayor.

Perhaps. It is certain that many other community people had different ideas and wondered whether Jackson, described in today's article as a "polarizing figure," was the right fit for a job that is a lot about consensus building.

This quote may leave them wondering still.

But slow down - don't believe everything you read. Writer Richard Brennan notes that former mayor "Robert" Mulkewich supports candidate Richard Burgess. If you can get popular Walter "Mayor of all the People" Mulkewich's name wrong you could misquote Cam Jackson.

Couldn't you?

E -Day Minus 14

"Ever get the feeling you've been cheated."


I can't say that I know much about Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols. I lifted the line above from one of their songs. It seems to sum up the public attitude toward politicians these days.

As I look at the numerous candidates busting themselves to achieve electoral success in next month's municipal elections I recall former Mulroney Conservative Cabinet Minister John Crosbie. The colourful Newfoundlander is reported to have said:

"If I win, I win. And if I lose, I spare myself untold agony."

Or as Mayor MacIsaac said to me when I was appointed as Ward 5 Councillor for an eight month period.

"Congratulations and condolences."

Yes. It is often thankless work.

In many cases today the public's expectations of politicians has more to do with what you (the elected official) can do for them (the constituent.) Forget the broader public good.

'Get that bus off my street.'

'I'll stop paying my taxes if you don't....'

'Not in my backyard.'

And all politicians, or so the public believes, have become captive to special interest groups. But even this has changed.

Shortly before he died John Munro, veteran Liberal politician, reflected on how the times had changed. Munro noted ruefully:

"Back in the (the seventies) when you talked of special interest groups everyone knew, all parties knew, that you meant the banks and insurance companies. Today special interest means people who are poor."

Broken Promises

Yes, they all break promises. Writer, broadcaster Steve Paiken in his book The Life - The Seductive Call of Politics tells a story of a promise not broken.

Nova Scotia Premier John Savage had apparently committed to end the practice of turfing out all civil servants after a change in government. This tradition meant that staff who supported the new government were put in place in virtually all public service positions. Even road crews changed.

Challenged over this new policy at a meeting Savage said:

"I told you I was going to do this."

Then a voice at the back of the room replies:

"You know something, you did. But we didn't fuckin' well believe you."

Paiken again quotes a family member of one much maligned hard working politician:

"Why would you want anyone you love to do this?"


Am I too cynical?

Royson James Got Me Thinking

Star columnist Royson James took a break from bashing Toronto Mayor David Miller today.

In a thoughtful piece he suggests ways to create more excitement in municipal election races. (James' column can be found at www.thestar.ca.)

He's got some good ideas like expanding who can vote, promoting diversity etc. Other notions such as term limits and the creation of an independent election office are well intended but not practical.

Giving non-incumbents a chance is James' most significant point. Heh, I should know I'm an incumbent - sort of.

Here is my contribution. Why don't we send Toronto politicians and staff on fact finding trips to small municipalities to see how those guys manage elections. OK, they've got incumbents out in the 905 who have been around far too long but some, like mine, have already initiated reforms to "level the playing field."

Burlington, for example, eliminated Councillor references in Ward newsletters after March 31st. Politician's websites are cleaned up of that self promoting bombast early in election year as well.

Do municipalities do enough to promote the importance of voting?
James argues that Toronto doesn't.

However, a quick check of some small town and city websites shows me that info is easy to find. Newmarket, for one, encourages you to vote and tells you why it is important. (See www.town.newmarket.on.ca.)

On second thought maybe that fact finding trip can be simplified. Do it on the web. Toronto could learn a thing or two.

Imagine that.