The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, JULY 10, 1985, WIIITBY FREE PRESS l>uhlished every ~Vediesdaiy MICHAEL KNELL Voice of the County Town whitby Michael Ian Burgess, Publisher .Managing Editor 1,1 M.B.M. Iublishing Sand I>hnotograph 'v I nc. l>hol.e 668-6111 Tlie F'ree Press Building. 131 Brock Street North, 11.. Box 204), Whitby, Ont. MICHAEL KNELL Community Editor VALERIE COWEN Advertising Manager Second Class Mail Registration No 51351 The only Whity newspaperi i my Ineinerator would solve waste disposal problems Garbage. lt's becoming an ever increasing problem. Statistics recently showed that every man, woman and child ln this country produced at least one tonne of garbage each and every year. But the problem being faced by local governments is: where do we put it? Here in Durham Region, we are fast running out of available landfill site space to dispose of all the waste we produce. At last week's meeting of Durham Regional Council, a consultant said that the region will run out of availabe space sometime A weekly hnews coxnuarY oe of Canada's outstanding news pem naitis A few days ago a special committee on the House of Commons presented its report, presenting six months of work by seven talented and conscientious Members of Parliament. It was overshadowed in the media, unfortunately, by other news stories with more glitter. And where the report was dealt with, constraints of time and space dictated that only the juiciest element would be touched, that is, what the committee recommended about patronage. In some respects, what the report suggested about that was Its least impressive element. it recommended that Parliament be given an outright veto over 64 federal appointments, and the right to scrutinize another 1,900 of them. This is a step in the right direction, but it is only a step, and one which will do little to quiet those who are most disgusted by the spectacle at the trough. The main thrust of the report is that increasingly, the ordinary members of one of our great democratic Institutions, the Commons, feel they are left out of the business of government. They are hog-tied by fierce pressure to adhere blindly to party lines, frusted by the fact that even government back- benchers have little impact on legislation, and disillusioned because most of what they say is ignored,by their colleagues and the media alike. One of the committee members, Bill Blaikie, the NDP member for Winnipeg-Bird's Hill, says of parliament that what ought to be a forum for the ex- change of ideas is, in fact, "the black hole in which nobody listens to anybody". The report suggests that the role of committees be enhanced and strengthened and that private member's business, and private member's bills, be put on a more hopeful footing. The committee recommends a hard look at the whole business of confidence, that is, votes in the House of Commons on which a government traditionally survives of falls. Relaxing that conven- tion, the committee argues, would tend to restore the independence of individual MP's, and free them somewhat from the party whips. But the report is realistic about this. It points out, and i quote, that "one member taking an independent stand might end up paying a heavy political price, but a sizeable body of members following the same line could not be ignored. What that suggests, in effect, is that united, MP's could stand, that divided, they'd be picked off one by one by party whips and punished. That plea for solidarity tells us just how desperately ordinary MP's want a shake-up. n the next decade. So, now the political process will begin. Firstly, c a decision must be made as to how the region is v going to dispose of solid waste. The immediatesolution is the development of a new regionallyc owned and operated landfill site. It has beenty suggested that Durham continue its current arrangement with Metropolitan Toronto, but that should be rejected for two reasons. The most important reason is that Durham Region should no longer continue to be the gar- bage bin for Metropolitan Toronto. The Metro owned Pickering facility should not be expanded because Metro Council is not accountable to the taxpayers of Durham Region. The other, probably equally important reason, is1 that Durham should have complete control over its own waste disposai operation. Durham Regional Council is then accountable to the tax- payer and voter. However, perhaps we shouldn't be considering a landfill site at ail. Reg. Coun. Gerry Emm, chair- man of the region's works committee, has suggested that the region should, at least, con- siderdeveloping an incineration program. While Emm says that the cost would be tremendous, probably in the neighbourhood of $30 million, there are distinct advantages. The ash that is left after the burning processes will only take up one-tenth of the space currently required by solid waste. That means that either a smaller landfill would be needed or one that would have a life span of 20 years could be used for 200 years The region could also charge other municipalities (i.e. Metropolitan Toronto) to i- cinerate their waste. That would help recover the costs of building It. Furthermore, if the provincial government could be persuaded to take an active financial role in its development, the immediate impact on the local taxpayer couId aiso be reduced. But the other major advantage offered by an in- cinerator program is environmental, constructed with the proper scrubbers and bags, an incinerator would only produce water vapour as a byproduct of the burning process. Solid waste, therefore, would not present as great a hazard to the en- vironment as it does currently. There is a lot to be said for developing an in- cinerator program. It will be costly. But the benefits outweigh these considerations. From the consultants' report that was recently submitted to regional council, one thing is ob- vious ...something must be done and done within the next two to three years. The recycling program that Durham Region will probably implement this fail will go a long way towards solving part of the problem. Recycling not only reduces the amount of waste needing disposai, it creates jobs and had definite en- vironmental advantages. It also reduces the need to tap into this country's depleting natural resour- ces. So recycling is a part of the solution, but it is not the complete solution. Development of new landfill sites would become a political "hot potato". Everyone would suddently develop a severe case of the "we really need this but don't put it in my backyard" syndrome. Landfill also isn't the best alternative. Problems with leakage and the collection of methane gas have been well documented at landfill sites across Ontario. The best alternative would seem to be an in- cinerator. Yes, it is costly. But, there are some things that are worth spending money on. If an in- cinerator would solve our garbage disposal problems without posing a hazard to the environ- ment then it is probably worth every penny in- vested in it. Before, regional council makes up its mind on this matter, we hope it gives this alternative a great deal of consideration. ww . - - :1 INM puidislied every Wediiesday v %. Indonpiiiipiitlv om-ned and oiperated by wilitbyresidents for Whitby residents. .ILJLJLq-/.IL.MLJIL M-'Jmý. M~ M, - - . - - - AI16 i