The Tribune's Article

        For the past three years, I have served as a member of two public advisory committees. I do not know how such committees function in other parts of the province or country, but, in these two instances, I do know that we are encouraged to raise concerns and to expect that these concerns will receive considerate, thorough, and appropriate responses. Both Bowater and Pioneer employees have responded to requests for information, including detailed scientific data, whenever they have been forthcoming. Both companies have set up field trips and information sessions with no hedging, hesitation, or withholding of the information that has been requested. In both situations, I really believe that committee members have become educated with regard to the issues that confront the companies.

        Two weeks ago, The Tribune ran a story about mercury contamination in and around Dalhousie. Pioneer Chemical management was upset with the story because its source was a leaked report that, management felt, should have been released to the company first, and from there to its advisory committee before reaching the press for public consumption. Plant manager, Dan Currie, stressed that he felt that the Tribune story was very well done, and that the writer had shown integrity in his presentation of that material. However, he was unhappy with the original report itself because it failed to make a fundamental and critical distinction among the different sorts of heavy metal contamination that are currently of concern in the upper reaches of the Bay of Chaleur and the lower Restigouche Estuary. In essence, he felt that the public should be aware of the fact that although Pioneer Chemical has inherited the mercury problem of its predecessors on site - there is mercury in the sediment around the plant itself - the company is not responsible for other forms of heavy metal contamination that are showing up in other places in the region.

        The Advisory Committee met to discuss the story and our response to it. He and Chris Irving, who is the Chemical Engineer in charge of environmental concerns for the plant, informed us that the issue at hand had to do with an imperfect distinction between mercury, on the one hand, and heavy metals - which include cadmium, lead, and arsenic, as well as mercury, on the other. While the company continues to be responsible for mercury around its own site, other agents are responsible for the contaminants that are showing up in Charlo and elsewhere. Our mandate, as a public advisory committee, is to try to bring this to public awareness. We feel that it is important that everyone realize that a problem exists, but that the solution to that problem does not lie in a facile blaming of an identifiable target; instead, it is essential that the source, or sources, of contamination be identified and corrected.

        Our role is twofold here: on the one hand, I think that we have a responsibility to inform the public that some of the information in the Tribune story needs to be modified and clarified; on the other, I think that we have a responsibility to demand of our government that efforts be made to trace the sources of the other contaminants of concern in our area and to implement solutions. This role is in accordance with our mandate, and it is one that I am willing to promote. Public advisory committees can function meaningfully - and this just might be a good example of that.

        This article appeared in the Campbellton Tribune, in Mike's "Grains of Sand" column. It is reproduced with Mike's permission.


About|Site Map|Feedback|Contacts|Credits|Advertise|Webmaster
2001 RestigoucheNet - All rights reserved