Maybe there are three options for the falsehoods written in yesterday's Woolwich Observer. The good news is that the Observer are now finally covering TAG meetings. The damage they did to the public interest by not covering TAG from Sept. 2015 until December 2016 was enormous. After 2017 their failures to cover public TAG meetings were also significant. ........................................................................ The three options are that 1) Michael Mackin (Lanxess) lied by stating that "...Lanxess testing results found there is no risk to human health from the creek." This is a quote from the article not directly from Mr. Mackin. 2) Mr. Mackin isn't all that bright and confused the conclusions of a (RA) Risk Assessment (based upon many assumptions & crappy data) that stated there was no risk to human health versus the testing and sampling that found indeed many, many toxin concentration exceedances of various health & safety criteria. 3) The reporter got it wrong. ................................................................... The article that I am referring to is titled "Community group calls for cleanup of hot spots in creek" written by Leah Gerber in yesterday's Woolwich Observer. There is an amazing quote from TAG Chair Tiffany Svensson namely "We have one request that is not explicitly stated in the document (RA) and that is that hotspots, those areas where we know the samples have exceeded the standard for the contaminants of concern. In those areas where we know they exist, whether they've been identified as statistically significant or at risk, we would like to see them cleaned up,". Well now! My problem is that while multiple members of TAG did have good things to say I somehow missed this particular quote from Tiffany. Hunh? ................................................................. What I certainly did not miss was the following: "Notably multiple members of the committee expressed a desire to ensure all the hotspots-areas of increased amounts of harmful chemicals-were found and removed from the creek". That is a different cup of tea than what was suggested above although I would suggest that both statements are excellent statements. ................................................................ There is one more problem with an article of huge public interest and that is the suggestion by the reporter that the citizens of Woolwich will be agreeing with any Risk Assessment produced by Lanxess/GHD/Stantec. First of all the TAG members are not all Woolwich residents and secondly they were appointed politically with much past pressure from Uniroyal/Chemtura for amenable and "qualified" candidates primarily. This refers to only "qualified persons" with professional designations in the environmental field. Most Woolwich residents do not have any such credentials but they sure as hell know when they are being poisoned. Finally whether TAG agrees or disagrees with the final Risk Assessment they have zero authority or say in the matter. The Ontario Ministry of Environment (MECP) may have some minor say but they appear as usual to be thoroughly in bed with the polluter. They have a vested interest in putting this decades long scandal to bed permanently. Hence there is absolutely no "...agreed upon actions" by the Woolwich/Elmira community or anything else in this Risk Assessment. It is just another in a long list of shams, crocks and coverups.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment