Monday, April 25, 2005

Only five more years of closed door meetings before council makes a decision

Fred Tranquilli on the proposed pesticide ban in London:

"We're sort of at a point now where we have to start making decisions."
Uh huh:
A committee set up by council spent two years studying the issue before it was disbanded last December, unable to agree on key aspects.

That leaves the task to council, which must decide what direction the bylaw will take.

In a report to the committee tonight, city staff recommend a bylaw be delayed until health officials complete a survey to measure the effectiveness of a public education campaign. [. . .]

The lawn-care industry says banning pesticides will put companies out of business, threatening about 250 jobs in London.
I doubt it took them this long to make a decision regarding the smoking ban and they surely didn't care about jobs when they decided in favour of it. Today's editorial in the London Liberal Press, showing up the same day as a front page advertisement for the Liberal Party of Canada.
It's hard to sympathize with the Ontario hospitality industry's argument that it should be compensated for lost future revenue from a provincewide smoking ban in public places when a hospitality worker talks about being stricken with inoperable lung cancer after working 40 years in smoke-filled Ottawa restaurants.

"Why weren't we protected from this kind of environment?" Heather Crowe, a 60-year-old lifelong non-smoker, asked a public hearing last week into the Ontario Liberals' proposed ban, to take effect in 2006. "Are we the invisible workers, or are we the disposable workers? And why do employers think that they have a right to sacrifice our lives?"
Well, you could get another job. I suppose it's easier to pay half your wage in taxes than to think for yourself.