The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 1984, WHITBY FREE PRESS whitby w mp Voice of the County Town blished every Wednesday Michael lan Burgess, F The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby Pu Publisher - Managing Editor residents for Whitby residents. by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography Inc. Phone 668-6111 The Free Press Building, 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. MICHAEL KNELL Community Editor CONWAY DOBBS -dvertising Manager Second Class Mail Registration No. 5351 Durham needs landfill site to save taxpayers' money At last week's meeting of Durham Regional Council, Mayor Bob Attersley - in a rare moment of publically displayed anger - sharply criticized Metropolitan Toronto Council for increasing the rates it charges Durham for dumping waste at its Pickering landfill site. These rates will increase by 17 per cent on June 1 - from $13.25 per ton to $15.50 per ton. According to Regional Councillor Tom Edwards this'will mean an increase to the Town of Whitby of about $18,000 this year for disposing our garbage. Atterisey used this issue to ask that regional council consider establishing its own landfill site The word reciprocity hasn't had much of a workout in this country since 1911, except in the occasional Canadian History class. Reciprocity, which roughly translated means free trade, was Sir Wilfred Laurier's campaign battle cry in 1911. He staked his ail on reciprocity with the United States, and he lost. It's interesting to note that, seventy-three years later, it is another Liberal govemment aided, abetted, perhaps even egged on by public service mandarins, which has initiated limited free trade talks with the United States. Interesting also to note that the Tories, who won the 1911 election with the battle cry "No truck nor trade with the Yankees," are now even hotter for reciprocity than the ruling Grits. The Tories say the negotiations are going too slow- ly, that American protectionism is on the rise, and that unless we move more quickly, any hope of reciprocity will be lost. The negotiations are concerned with the possibility of free trade in four important economic sec- tors - steel, agricultural equipment, mass transit vehicles, and what is called "infomatics," a vast field which covers computer and information services. Senator Michael Pitfield and a variety of non- governmentai critics are saying hold on. Let's have some public discussion about this. They're saying that private and informai negotiations are dangerous, and that some morning we'Il ail wake up and find that free trade is a fact. One of the proponents of the current negotiations is Sylvia Ostry, the deputy minister for International Trade. She doesn't believe that the current round of talks, even if they resuit in an agreement, would be like- ly to impinge on Canadian sovereignty. "Look at Europe," she told THE GLOBE AND MAIL. "The coun- tries are nationalistic as ever. Look at Canada. Ask yourself: Is Canada now more linked economically to the United States than it was in 1950? The answer is yes. But has that diminished Canada as a nation? The answer is no." End of quotation. I don't agree with Ms. Ostry at ail, and i think that Europe is a bad example. It may not be our burgeoning economic links with the United States that have diminished our sense of nationhood since 1950, but something has. Europe is something else. Of course the European nations have maintained separate nationalistic outlooks. Their nationalism is nur- tured by centuries of animosity and conflict. They have deep-rooted and very different traditions and cultures, different languages. Canada, on the other hand, is over- whelmed in a benevolent way by her great neighbor to the south. The tidal wave of American television and culture roIls over us continuously. Our separate identi- ty and our will ta survive is constantly under assault. I'm not saying that free trade is not the answer. As a matter of fact, I have tended to favor it for a long time. But I think it's just as dangerous now as it was in 1911, and that there ought to be some public debate about it. with each of the eight member municipalities paying their fair share of the load. .. The mayor and other members of Durham Regional Council said that Durham is at Metro's mercy because they have the only site locally that can handle our waste. The problems of waste management disposai can become quite emotional. One only has to think of the uproar caused in Ajax a couple of years ago when the local water pollution control plant was to be converted to handle industrial waste. However, it is an issue that must be faced. The safe and efficient method of waste management disposai is a question that is going to have to be faced by local politicians and residents in the next few years. Statistics Canada once said that every man, woman and child in this country produces the equivalent of one ton of garbage each every year. It has to be disposed of. Before a site can be established it will be necessary for the region to do a series of studies and hold another series of public meetings. What the politicians are afraid of, and we sup- pose they can't really be held at fault for it, is that they wilI be barraged by a host of neighbourhood associations who will say: "Yes, we need a landfill site but don't you dare put it in our backyard." Well, folks, it has to go in somebody's backyard. The cost of waste disposai is charged directly to the property taxpayer. If Durham continues in its arrangement with Metro, these costs are going to go up indiscriminately. If the local taxpayers 'Should I hav want control of the cost of waste disposai, we are going to have to establish a locally owned and operated landfill site. Keeping the costs down will mean doing the job ourselves. This entire issue has had a great deal of media exposure over the past few years and those people who are avid newspaper readers are aware of the environmental concerns raised by It. The region is going to have to find the best method possible of disposing our garbage without creating an adverse effect on our all too fragile environment. One method the region is considering is recycling of metal, glass and paper waste. Not only is it good for the environment but it creates a small local industry that will provide jobs for some of our neighbours. However, this still leaves the question of or- dinary and industrial waste. As a society we are producing more garbage every day and If we don't find a way to get rid of it safely and effectively we may produce a host of unknown health hazards for our children and their children. It would be in the best interests of the taxpayers if the region used some of our money to in- vestigate the problem of waste disposai in Durham. They should also find the best possible site to establish a landfill site. This issue is bound to be an emotional one. But it is one that should be viewed objectively. It is in the best interests of the taxpayers of Durham Region to have our own landfill site if only to have controi over the cost of waste disposai in this area. e aten this In L-Z440Y Ilt