|
"If you don't
give up, you win sooner or later."
June 13, 2006
London Free Press
London bans pesticides
The 13-6 vote, after a two-hour debate, allows exemptions such as
sports fields and farms.
By JOE BELANGER, FREE PRESS CITY HALL REPORTER
In two years, Londoners won't be allowed to kill their
dandelions -- or any other weeds -- with pesticides.
Sensing the political winds in an election year, city council
voted 13-6 last night in favour of a bylaw banning the cosmetic
use of pesticides.
The bylaw takes effect in September 2008, giving industry and
residents three growing seasons to adjust.
"It's the right thing to do," said an elated Coun. Bill
Armstrong, who led the push for a bylaw.
Two key issues to be resolved are how the bylaw will be enforced
and the breadth of a public education campaign.
City staff estimate enforcement will cost up to $300,000 a year,
while an education campaign could cost $300,000 -- nearly $1
million over three years.
Last night's vote came after a two-hour debate with most council
members speaking.
Council first voted on a series of four proposed amendments,
including one calling for a total ban. The only one that passed
was an exemption for playing fields and lawn bowling centres
proposed by Coun. Cheryl Miller.
"It was that one final compromise to make it a good majority of
councillors to pass the bylaw," said Sean Hurley, spokesperson
for the Coalition Against Pesticides in London. "I think they've
made a good decision. It's a good bylaw."
Other exemptions in the bylaw -- mostly a blend of bylaws passed
in Toronto and Peterborough -- include golf courses, farms,
swimming pools, utility rights of way and for threats to human
health and insect infestations.
John Matsui, spokesperson for the lawn-care industry, said he
wasn't surprised by the vote.
"It's clear Imagine London is in control of the majority of city
council and they're to be congratulated," Matsui said.
"That's what London should get used to."
Sam Trosow, the driving force behind the citizens' group Imagine
London, which also successfully appealed to the Ontario Municipal
Board for a new 14-ward electoral system, said he's happy with
the bylaw, except the phase-in. "But it's a real victory for
those of us working for a meaningful bylaw for London."
The debate was mostly civil, but Deputy Mayor Tom Gosnell raised
eyebrows when he described council's pro-ban members as
"idealogues."
"I hear a lot of opinions, but don't see a lot of facts,"
Gosnell said. "We've heard just a lot of people scare-mongering.
You have to have evidence and you have to have empirical
evidence."
Gosnell echoed the lawn-care industry's position that scientists
at Health Canada and similar agencies around the world have
approved pesticides for use, including 2,4-D, the main herbicide
used by the lawn-care industry, saying they pose an acceptable
risk if used as directed.
Ban supporters concede there's little or no scientific evidence
showing a direct link between pesticide use and health issues,
but argue banning cosmetic use of the materials is needed as a
precaution because of casual links and associations between
various ailments and pesticides.
Council defeated a bylaw last November that would have allowed
spraying of pesticides on up to 20 per cent of a property owner's
lawn, reducing that to 10 per cent by 2010.
But the debate was renewed in the wake of a poll by the Canadian
Cancer Society and the Canadian Association of Physicians for the
Environment that found 74 per cent of Londoners favoured phasing
out pesticides.
"I think that poll really helped make council realize we do have
public support," said Trosow.
Meanwhile, council began to feel the pressure as political
observers warned the pesticide issue was emerging as a major
issue for the Nov. 13 election.
Laura Wall, manager of the Elgin-Middlesex unit of the cancer
society, was pleased.
"We recognized the weight that poll would carry, and that's why
we worked so hard the last four or five months to answer
questions for council and the public," Wall said, adding the
group will now shift focus to the public information campaign.
HOW COUNCIL MEMBERS VOTED
- In favour of a pesticide ban: Mayor Anne Marie DeCicco,
Controller Gord Hume and councillors Fred Tranquilli, Bernie
MacDonald, David Winninger, Susan Eagle, Sandy White, Judy
Bryant, Ab Chahbar, Cheryl Miller, Joni Baechler, Bill Armstrong
and Harold Usher.
- Opposed: Deputy Mayor Tom Gosnell, controllers Bud Polhill and
Russ Monteith and councillors Roger Caranci, Rob Alder and Paul
Van Meerbergen.
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2006/06/13/1628904-sun.html
Armstrong lauded over pesticide ban
By JONATHAN
SHER, FREE PRESS CITY HALL REPORTER
Supporters of a pesticide ban tipped their hats
yesterday to a city councillor who pushed the issue even when many
thought it was dead.
Ward 4 Coun. Bill Armstrong drew stares of disbelief, when, in
February, he pushed for a ban even though a less stringent measure had
been rejected three months earlier.
A supporter of the ban, London Mayor Anne Marie DeCicco, said
then she was resigned to letting the next council consider the issue.
Last night, a smiling DeCicco was singing a different tune.
"Good for (Bill). I'm delighted council finally saw reason," she
said.
The debate on pesticides here began in 2001, but the tide turned
this year, when the Canadian Cancer Society released a survey
suggesting 74 per cent of Londoners wanted to phase out pesticide use
on private property.
"We definitely feel the survey reinvigorated the debate," said
Laura Wall of the society's Elgin-Middlesex unit.
"It gave councillors the assurance a majority of Londoners
wanted this," she said.
But it took Armstrong to take the results and ask for a ban, she
said.
"He showed a lot of courage . . . He seized the moment and
pushed it forward," she said.
Asked about his role, Armstrong downplayed his contribution,
saying the ban came after a "team effort."
It was not the first time Armstrong had championed a cause his
colleagues thought was lost, he said.
But that was more the reason to keep pushing, he said. "If you
don't give up, you win sooner or later."
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2006/06/13/pf-1628919.html
|
 |