Pesticide Debate heats up
Brantford holds public forum
The Brantford Expositor
Thursday, March 15, 2001
Letter to the Editor - Noel Almond
WHAT: PUBLIC FORUM ON PESTICIDES
WHO: JANET MAY-TORONTO ENV. ALLIANCE
WHEN: MONDAY MARCH 19, 2001 - 7:30PM
WHERE: UNION GAS BUILDING, BRANTFORD, ONTARIO
Noel Almond writes that in response to Christine Bonham's letter
March 10, her statement "that study after study concludes that if
these products (pesticides) are used as directed, they have no
harmful effects" must be examined on the basis of when they were
approved, who provided the research information and the lack of
public scrutiny.
The report of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment
and Sustainable Development remarked in his 1999 report that the PMRA
(Pest Management Regulatory Agency) had gained a reputation of being
a "closed
shop.''
| "The federal government would never be allowed to conceal its reports
on fiscal matters...
yet it considers this type of secrecy (by PMRA) to be the norm." |
The committee agreed with the observation of the Canadian
Environmental Defence Fund which indicates "public involvement in the
decision-making process of registration (of pesticides) is at an
unacceptable level by today's standards.
"The federal government would never be allowed to conceal its reports
on fiscal matters or prohibit the public from commenting on budgets,
yet it considers this type of secrecy (by PMRA) to be the norm.''
|
| "It would appear that
there is a simple lack of accurate public information on the safety
or otherwise of pesticides available from the PMRA." |
The lack of public information on pesticides and the approval process
was a major concern of the pesticide committee. It would appear that
there is a simple lack of accurate public information on the safety
or otherwise of pesticides available from the PMRA.
The heavy reliance on registration fees for the agency's operation
casts doubt on its independence and the direction of its mandate.
If one cares to absorb the information regarding the terrible
consequence resulting from the global use of pesticides whether they
are used as directed or in an irresponsible manner, the only logical
conclusion is that we must change our attitude regarding pesticide
use and the chemical soup that we ingest through air, water and food.
Should we be judged as being ignorant of the truth as we attempt to
create greater awareness of the harmful effects of pesticide wherever
they are found?
Those working to create increasing awareness of pesticides are
neither damning the professionals of the lawn care industry or trying
to put them out of business.
We believe that if people must have lush manicured lawns there are
more environmentally friendly ways of producing the desired result.
With increasing demand for organic lawn care, the reality of business
suggests that the professionals in the lawn care industry will
respond to that need. We are the thoughtful people attempting to
accelerate that demand.
Public interest thrives on controversy. Controversy explores opposing views
and results in a better informed public.
Join other interested people on March 19, at 7:30 p.m. at the Union Gas
building to listen to and ask questions of Janet May, Pesticide Campaign
Director of the Toronto Environmental Alliance.
|
