It is possible that I am being a little cute by including question marks beside GHD/Stantec above. By cute I mean aware of Libel laws and our pitiful courts here in Waterloo Region and Ontario. I have never knowingly lied about anything regarding the Elmira Water Crisis but Libel Chill has been a constant thorn and harassment for anyone involved in public interest cases for decades even despite a new Libel defence accepted by the Courts possibly fifteen or more years ago. Do I have any doubts about the integrity or not of Conestoga Rovers ? I do not. Their corporate successors, GHD, on occasion have appeared to be an improvement on them and then they turned around and produced some claims, statements or reports of a dubious nature. Finally of the three I have the least experience with Stantec although I find their claims of "no unacceptable risks" downstream in the Canagagigue to be incomprehensible and bizarre.
The Ministry of Environment (MECP) have bluntly told Lanxess/Stantec that their draft Risk Assessment (HHERA) "...has not sufficiently evaluated all other potential exposures to humans and the aquatic ecosystem." Do you think? How the hell could it possibly have done so? I know for a fact that Stantec have not approached highly knowledgeable Elmira residents for their input. I also do not believe that they have properly and appropriately approached all the residents and property owners the length of the downstream Canagagigue Creek to the Grand River. Exactly with whom and how often have they discussed exposures to the natural environment in, around and nearby the Creek? Have they talked to visitors, fishermen, hikers, kayakers and others walking, swimming, boating, fishing and even just playing in the Creek including children? Have they included in their calculations air contamination by solvents, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, DDT and dioxin/furans? After all the entire downstream community are downwind based upon prevailing west to east wind direction? This air exposure is decades long and multi generational.
The MECP have suggested that concerns and comments by Ministry staff as well as by TAG "are appropriately resolved." in their December 20/23 cover letter. If that happens I suggest that it will be a first. I also suggest that there are lots more stakeholders than just the MECP and TAG despite our local politicians assisting Lanxess by scoping down the list of stakeholders who have spent the last 34 years actively involved in this environmental disaster.
Despite about five years racking up the bills to Lanxess, Stantec keep missing the boat. Many of these concerns, comments and complaints have been stated both verbally and in writing over the years simply to be put on the back burner with vague promises to reexamine them later. Later serious examination rarely occurs.
No comments:
Post a Comment