Cities ask federal government for better help in protecting water



Cities ask federal government for better help in protecting water

Cities ask federal government for better help in protecting water

Raffy Boudjikanian
Published on August 7th, 2008
Published on Febuary 6th, 2010
Raffy Boudjikanian RSS Feed
Topics :
Conservative Party , Environment Canada , House of Commons , Great Lakes , St. Lawrence River , Quebec

Beaconsfield Mayor Bob Benedetti joined 54 other mayors from both north and south of the Canadian-American border recently to ask their respective federal governments to do more in terms of protecting water resources around the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. "There's a whole bunch of issues," Benedetti told <@Ri>The Chronicle$p>. Chief among these are updating the infrastructure of water-related equipment in the areas, such as waste water management plants, or protecting the water from hazardous waste.

Benedetti, who joined the group of mayors collectively known as the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative (GLSCI) last year, said the provincial government of Quebec, and even the United States federal government, have by and large been more co-operative on the issue than Canada on a federal level. "The St. Lawrence River is something that, if it weren't there, Beaconsfield wouldn't be what Beaconsfield is," Benedetti said. "This is the same for all the other cities that are in front of the Great Lakes," he added.

The mayors convened in Toronto in mid-July for their annual meeting, where they signed off on a number of resolutions to get federal governments to move and to sign a Great Lakes pact with the province of Ontario.

Besides including smaller cities like Beaconsfield, the GLSCI also counts some heavy-hitters among its members, like Toronto in Canada and Chicago in the United States of America.

Lac St. Louis Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia said one of the reasons GLSCI may perceive the federal government is not as helpful as the provincial government is because water-related legislation is usually a provincial issue.

Scarpaleggia said the federal government, however, could be doing more to help out. "I've proposed that the government create a junior minister for water," he said. However, the vote was rejected in the House of Commons, he added, because of opposition from the Bloc Québecois and the ruling Conservative Party.

Scarpaleggia theorized the Bloc rejected the notion simply because it did not want to "build up" a federal government it did not believe in. As for the Conservative Party, "they told their MPs we just want to create another bloated ministry," Scarpaleggia said. However, what he has in mind for a junior ministry of water is a small office of about a dozen employees helping co-ordinate different water-related issues between other federal ministries, provinces and municipalities.

Scarpaleggia said about 63 per cent of waste water management plants in the country are outdated.

He added a recent Environment Canada estimate put a dollar amount of $3 billion on estimates for water-related infrastructure updates in Ontario and the St. Lawrence basin in Quebec.

When Conservative Senator Michael Fortier visited the West Island in his former capacity as Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, he pledged $100 billion in infrastructure to municipalities in the next few years, partly to see to projects such as water filtration plants.

Environment Canada did not return a request for comments as of press time.

The St. Lawrence River is something that, if it weren't there, Beaconsfield wouldn't be what Beaconsfield is. -

Comments

  • Username
    Gerald R. Marriott
    - February 17th, 2010 at 14:18:05

    We, as Provincial Water Services Limited, have been proposing radical reform of Canada's municipal water utilities for the last 5 years, in order to facilitate increased capital investment in/provision for public (municipal) water supply infrastructure renewals and extensions, so as to meet the growing demands of increasing populations and of industrial and commercial consumptions. It is now clear that it is the many North American municipalities that oppose all and any substantial change or reform of municipal water management, seemingly prefer to maintain the status quo, which is clearly inefficient in terms of manpower and asset productivities. Why is change for increased productivity (and thus better value to rate-payers), such a problem in Canada's municipalities. Is the so also in the United States local governments, too?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Gerald R. Marriott
    - February 10th, 2010 at 12:55:34

    We, as Provincial Water Services Limited, have been proposing radical reform of Canada's municipal water utilities for the last 5 years, in order to facilitate increased capital investment in/provision for public (municipal) water supply infrastructure renewals and extensions, so as to meet the growing demands of increasing populations and of industrial and commercial consumptions. It is now clear that it is the many North American municipalities that oppose all and any substantial change or reform of municipal water management, seemingly prefer to maintain the status quo, which is clearly inefficient in terms of manpower and asset productivities. Why is change for increased productivity (and thus better value to rate-payers), such a problem in Canada's municipalities. Is the so also in the United States local governments, too?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Robin G. Marriott
    - February 8th, 2010 at 11:15:15

    Tanks for your interesting report/article. There are tried and tested reform measures for public (municipal) water which would enable far greater capital provisioning and would reduce operating costs. We have been working for over 18 months to get Alberta Government for one and Ontario Government as well, recently, but few in government will act to reform an antiquated structure for public water delivery, and so reduce costs and secure capital on far more favorable terms, than are now burdening municipal governments. Why is this? In fact, at a local level, Ontario Government (Minister Caplan) copied that strategy (and so breached confidentiality terms) and applied it in Ontario. The Premier does not appear to want to listen to that fact and ignored our letter of offering the strategy to Ontario rate payers. We have to wonder why we have not as much has a :Thank, but no thanks,: from him, either. Caplan was then "promoted." Should we pursue that matter?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Robin G. Marriott
    - February 8th, 2010 at 11:15:13

    Thanks for your interesting report/article. There are tried and tested reform measures for public (municipal) water, which would enable far greater capital provisioning and would reduce operating costs. We have been working for over 18 months to get Alberta Government, for one, and Ontario Government as well, to act, but few in provincial governments will initiate cost-effective reforms of the antiquated business structures for public water delivery, and thereby reduce costs and secure capital on far more favorable terms, than are now burdening municipal governments. Why is this? In fact, at a local Ontario level, former Infrastructure Minister( Caplan) copied that strategy, (and so breached confidentiality and IPR terms) and applied it in Ontario. The Premier does not appear to want to listen to that fact and has totally ignored our letter of offering the strategy to Ontario rate payers. We have to wonder why we have not as much has a "Thanks but no thanks," from him, either. Caplan was then "promoted." Should we pursue that matter? If so, do so in the Press? Kind regards.

    Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

This form is NOT used for emailing the article to a friend. Please use the "Send to a friend" link at the top of the page for that purpose.

The Westmount Examiner is not responsible for posted comments. Please be polite and confine your comments to the subject of the posted story. If you have an account, please sign on to it..

(we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts
loading...

Advertising