Sewage questions deserve answers
Times Colonist
(Lead editorial)
It has been almost two years since the provincial government decreed that Greater Victoria would, like it or not, start treating its sewage. That announcement did not end the debate over the costs and benefits of a sewage treatment system; if anything, it turned up the volume.
So far, however, this debate has been somewhat one-sided. Critics of sewage treatment call it a financial disaster that will cause more environmental damage than it will prevent. Proponents respond by saying the debate is over, that the decision has been made.
But the people raising questions about sewage treatment are not just rabble-rousers, naysayers or property owners concerned that settling ponds might end up in their backyards. The critics include current and former medical health officers as well as Keith Martin, a medical doctor and member of Parliament for Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca. They deserve answers.
Several of these people have been asking questions for months and are having trouble getting information. If the $1.2-billion project is worth pursuing, it's time for proponents to start defending the decision to go ahead.
The public health officials, for example, have said there is no measurable health risk from Victoria's offshore liquid-waste disposal system. There is no significant contamination of surface waters, they say, that can be attributed to the deep-sea discharges that take place one kilometre off Clover Point.
Beyond that, they say the environmental impact of a treatment system has not been adequately assessed. That impact includes the construction of treatment plants, the odours and the impact of sludge disposal on the community where it ends up.
The stand of the medical health officers has been endorsed by Martin, who represents a constituency with a keen interest in the proposal. The major sewage treatment plant will be in Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca.
It's been estimated that a sewage treatment system will cost every householder $500 a year. We deserve to hear reasons why that the money will be well-spent.
To that end, we need a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of sewage treatment. If the critics are wrong, they should be told -- and the answers should be made public.
No matter what, saying that the discussion is over is not an appropriate answer.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2008