Citizens taking action ~ Vancouver, Lower Mainland, and beyond.


Showing posts with label Heather Deal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heather Deal. Show all posts

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Metro politicians begin asking staff hard questions


Metro politicians are raising good questions about the proposed Solid Waste Management Plan. And they are not getting good answers.
First Vancouver Councillor Heather Deal pointed out that 93% of the money in the new plan seems to be directed to burning and burying waste, and only 7% allocated for the plan's first two goals: minimizing waste generation and maximizing reuse, recycling and material recovery.

And then Deal noted that 91% of that 7% is directed to the establishment of "Eco-Centres."

At a cost of up to $14 million dollars each, Deal sensibly asked: what performance targets have you set for these centres? what level of waste diversion will they contribute?

To which staff, if you can believe it, had no answer. The plan provides no information about what an "eco-centre" is. But staff confirmed that the first one will start up in Surrey in 2010.

(This could come as bad news to the established recycling businesses that pay taxes in Surrey, which would now have to compete against a publicly run facility duplicating their services.)

Then it was West Van Mayor Pamela Goldsmith-Jones who raised her hand. She wanted to know why the "Financial Plan" within the waste plan was alloted less than half a page. "This is not a financial plan," she said. "I hesitate to receive this report."

CAO Johnny Carline replied that you don't normally include financial information in plans "because you would be tied to that," Plans are "strategic documents."

But at Goldsmith-Jones' insistence, Carline committed to bring back further financial detail to the meeting in two weeks time when the Board is intended to sign off on the plan.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Metro politicians junket to Sweden to be "trained" in incineration

Vancouver Councillor Heather Deal will be one of four Metro politicians sent to Sweden next month to receive training in garbage incineration. This, despite the fact that her Vision Vancouver party took a position opposed to waste incineration in the November civic election.

Joining Deal will be West Van Mayor Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, Delta Councillor Scott Hamilton, and Surrey Councillor Linda Hepner, along with 12 other Canadian politicians, presumably from communities like Durham ON where the incinerator industry is trying to drum up business.

The proposal to send Metro politicians on this junket was introduced surreptitiously. It did not appear on the publicly posted agenda of the meeting where it was approved. It was slipped in as an "on-table" item and decided on the spot, without any public discussion.

The committee minutes published a month later (buried in the agenda package for the April committee meeting) suggest that some politicians had reservations about this junket. The minutes record that there was discussion of "whether the benefits of this intensive training is [sic] worth the cost."

Cost? There is no mention in the minutes of how much taxpayers will pay for this trip. It is sure to be higher than the $1500 approved approved a year ago by the Waste Management Committee for Surrey Councillor Marvin Hunt to buy a round of drinks at an incinerator open house in Paris last summer.

Benefits? Is it really the politicians' job to become "trained" in waste technologies? According to the Recycling Council of BC: "Joe Trasolini (Port Moody) said:
“We are poised to spend billions of dollars. Let us be informed.”
Trasolini got his intensive training on a junket to Sweden several years ago with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. He's been "pushing" (his word) garbage incineration ever since.

This is a junket, plain and simple. And one intended to push a waste incineration agenda.

If'we're going to send politicians on junkets, why not at least send them to Italy to learn from researcher Enzo Favoino how compost can turn agricultural soils into a carbon sink.
Waste incineration, on the other hand, encourages emission of GHGs, first to produce useless throw-away products and then to pump them up into the sky -- at taxpayer expense.