Presentation to Winnipeg City Council December 14, 2005 in support of the Benham/Smith motion to Reaffirm Support for the Civic Environmental Committee
Mr.
Speaker, Mr. Mayor, Councillors, once again I thank you for the
opportunity to be heard. I have recently read that there is reason for optimism at City Hall because recent outpourings of civic objection to the Mayor's proposals have seemingly prompted compromises. I would like to start by acknowledging that it is a good thing you have chosen to honour the work of the three other civic committees and decided to allow them to continue doing it. It is a good thing that you threw out the idea of eliminating the reduced transit fare and we hope to soon hear the same with the idea of building condos in the park. In a perfect world we could take all that at face value and simply say thank you. In a perfect world, there would be no need to look any further than that; no need to question whether democracy simply worked or whether some of that might have been a smokescreen. A red herring designed to deflect attention from much larger issues of a pro-development, anti-environment agenda. An agenda that includes making transit more expensive and less effective, thereby subsidizing the automobile stranglehold, excuse me, I mean industry. An agenda that includes eliminating the very civic committee that is not afraid to denounce urban sprawl and pesticide use and very possibly, if allowed to continue its voluntary work, might also publicly oppose oily urban pig factories. I would like to contrast that agenda with a different vision and a lens I invite you to look through now. The kind of vision that many Winnipegers got really hopeful about not so very long ago. The kind of vision for Winnipeg's future that includes such things as a comprehensive environmental strategy. The kind of vision that includes ideas like fiscal and environmental sustainability, the precautionary principle, polluter pay, and leading by example through innovation. It was called a “vision for a sustainable Winnipeg” and it includes this statement, “Communities will be rewarded for their efforts to save energy, protect natural areas, dramatically reduce the use of pesticides and develop active transportation networks.” I would like to live in that city. I hope that someday my grandchildren will live in that city. It will be a shame if you decide for all of us that we won't. I cannot understand why you would even consider abolishing a committee of dedicated VOLUNTEERS, who have no motivation but to bring their expertise and experience to help move the city forward in a healthy way. It cannot be because of the cost. The committee costs the city virtually nothing, especially when compared to the money you threw away when you turned down federal funds for Bus Rapid Transit. Or compared to the 5 million + dollars spent on spreading around toxic Malathion last summer. Those of us with a greater vision, those of us who can see that our actions now really can protect the future world of our grandchildren, believe that Winnipeg does need a Civic Environmental Committee. And please do not vote this motion down and then try to replace it with with some green-washed mayoral committee as an attempt to appease us. The Civic Environmental Committee is working well, and you must allow it to continue its very important work, as you have done with the other three civic committees, and as recommended by the Benham/Smith motion on which you will vote later today. Yesterday, I was interviewed by a young political science student about a social issue which he named, in one word, Malathion. After the interview, we chatted a bit and I asked him what he's been learning. He said he was surprised what his recent research has taught him about the biggest obstacle to social progress in Winnipeg right now. For this he had two words: Sam Katz. Today, I am going to ask each one of you to vote on this motion not with your head, not with dollar signs in your eyes, but with your heart. I want you to make this decision, not considering what the mayor would approve, not considering what your voters would approve, but considering what your voters' grandchildren would approve. What kind of city do you envision creating for our grandchildren to live in? ********************** by
Glenda Whiteman Minute No. 30 Moved by Councillor Benham, WHEREAS sustainability is
identified in
Plan Winnipeg as the first of six principles the City of AND WHEREAS on July 18, 2001,
City
Council approved creation of the Civic Environmental AND WHEREAS on October 27,
2004, City
Council approved in principle the CEC report AND WHEREAS City Council has adopted the Administration document Embracing Sustainability: An Environmental Priority and Implementation Plan for the City of Winnipeg 2004 - 2006 developed in response to the CEC report, to which the Administration will be reporting back to Council in December 2005; AND WHEREAS the CEC reports directly to the Mayor and Executive Policy Committee and that the Mayor's Action Plan for a new Winnipeg pledges that the Mayor will consult with the Civic Environmental Committee to consider priorities and how to act upon the CEC's Environmental Strategy; AND WHEREAS this consultation between the Mayor and the CEC has yet to occur; AND WHEREAS there is also a need to independently monitor and report on the City of Winnipeg's progress in achieving its environmental priorities and targets; AND WHEREAS the Mayor has
indicated a
desire to reduce City of Winnipeg expenditures on AND WHEREAS the CEC's current
mandate
expires on December 31, 2005; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. City Council reaffirm its support for the Civic Environmental Committee. 2. City Council extend the existing mandate, policy assistant, budget and membership of the Civic Environmental Committee. 3. City Council
co-operatively develop,
as soon as possible, a renewed mandate, budget and membership for the
Civic Environmental Committee that reflects a shift from developing Required to stand as Notice of Motion in accordance with Rule 17.1 of the Procedure By-law |
 |
 |
|