A complicated legacy

It’s somehow fitting that the two men who dominated Nova Scotian political life in the 1970s and 1980s should pass on within weeks of each other.

Gerald Regan, 91, who served two terms as Liberal premier from 1970-78, died on Nov. 26 at the age of 91. His Conservative rival John Buchanan died on Oct. 3 at 88.

A native of Windsor, he was born in 1928, graduated from Dalhousie law school and was admitted to the bar in 1954. He was big and gregarious and in his years before politics worked in sports broadcasting, promoting the idea of an international hockey series between Canada and the Soviet Union long before it became a reality in the early 1970s.

He was a well-known labour lawyer before winning a seat in Parliament in 1963, joining Lester Pearson’s minority government. He won the province’s Liberal leadership in 1965, a job he held until 1980.

He was opposition leader during the Conservative government of G.I. Smith and toppled the Tories with a minority win in 1970. His Liberals won a majority in 1974.

His government nationalized the former Nova Scotia Light and Power electrical utility, creating the Nova Scotia Power Corporation. He also championed tidal power in the Bay of Fundy, laying the groundwork for the tidal power dam near Annapolis Royal.

He championed industrial development and worked to develop offshore oil. He established the office of provincial ombudsman.

He and his wife Carole had six children. His son Geoff has served as Speaker of the House of Commons and his daughter Nancy was a TV news broadcaster.

After losing to Buchanan in 1978, Regan ran for the federal riding of Halifax for the Liberals, winning in 1980 and serving as labour minister and international trade minister in Pierre Trudeau’s final term. He was defeated when Brian Mulroney swept into power in 1984.

His long political career was overshadowed, though, by a lengthy criminal process in the 1990s, when he eventually faced trial on eight counts of sexual offences on allegations from decades earlier.

He was acquitted of all charges by a jury in December 1998. A Crown appeal won the right to a trial on other charges, a ruling upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2002. But the case was dropped later that year after the Crown conducted "an exhaustive review and consultation."

As Regan himself acknowledged in an interview before his trial in 1998, the allegations would damage his reputation forever, regardless of the result.

Premier Stephen McNeil, a fellow Liberal, said, Regan “governed with a true sense of liberal values — investing in people, creating economic development and ensuring fiscal responsibility.”

WATER IS THE SUBSTANCE OF LIFE — PROTECT IT!

Mr. Terry Hennigar brought up what I believe to be the most important point during the debate over the preservation of agricultural land in Kings County.

During his presentation, he expressed his disappointment over the absence of a water policy in the new Municipal Planning Strategy regarding the protection and preservation of our future water supplies in Kings County.

Here's a little history.

In 1988, after being elected for Kings County's council, I was appointed to the Board of Health. During that time, a report was forwarded to the board regarding safe levels of drinking water in the agricultural district of Kings County.

It was an extensive study with approximately 500 wells being tested for insecticides, pesticides and fertilizers. Basically this study was to examine the impact that a generation of farming had on our water supplies on the Valley floor. The result of this study indicated trace amounts of agricultural chemicals being detected in water supplies but were deemed not at dangerous levels.

I am not aware, since 1988-89, of any such studies being repeated or any serious discussions over this issue. My question would be: “if trace amounts of pesticides and insecticides were detected in the 1988-89 study, what levels exist today in 2019 with over 30 years of substantial increases in field crop farming and agricultural chemical infusion into our soils on Kings County’s Valley floor?”

At the very least we need a new comprehensive study to determine the impact, if any.

I believe there needs to be a balanced approach between the preservation of prime agricultural land and the preservation of our water supplies.

I also want to make clear my support for farmers and the agricultural industry in Kings County. I also generally support the preservation of agricultural land through the lens of a reasonable approach not within an extreme viewpoint. This seems to be the order of the day by certain councillors and the same proponents that expressed their opinions on this issue 10 years ago.

Some farmers are very vocal against any development of farmland but these same farmers work comfortably within growth centres and villages whose regulations allow them to residentially and commercially develop their farmlands if necessary. The majority of this extremist view are non-farmers and urban dwellers.

I find this troublesome as it seems sometimes it is this group of concerned individuals who are leading the debate.

I keep hearing councillors and members of the “Organization to Preserve all Farmland" saying “any decisions they make must have future generation's interests in mind”.

Yes, we need food to eat but equally and more important we need uncontaminated water supplies to drink and to irrigate our crops.

I have yet to hear any serious discussions regarding our future water supplies, other than herding people into serviced subdivisions and the so-called “regional approach to planning.”

What about our rural residents who live in the rural areas of our county? What does the future hold for us?

Over the years our Cornwallis River has been labeled one of the most contaminated rivers in the country. There are many different reasons for this contamination but one is agricultural run off from farming practices and livestock manure contamination.

The Village of Port Williams is quite right in wanting to expand their boundaries to protect their water supplies from agricultural contaminates. It is unfortunate their concerns for their future drinking water supplies were ignored and not addressed by council.

With respect to conflict between the farming community and residential development, it is inevitable, however, it will pale in comparison to future conflicts between the preservation of agricultural land and the preservation of our precious water supplies if our water becomes contaminated from agricultural chemicals, in particular, on our north and south mountains.

Mayor Peter Muttart said the time for Port Williams to take steps to preserve and protect their water supplies will come. Not a lot of vision expressed in that comment. In my opinion the time is now, not in some distant future.

Much of our drinking water in Kings County comes from the north and south mountain ranges. With the double edged commendable efforts to preserve even more agricultural land we may be opening a pandora’s box.

The new Municipal Planning Strategy has expanded farmland protection to our North Mountain, with three parcels placed under it’s new regulations. This not a good precedent. Agricultural expansion on our mountain ranges should be carefully examined along with the clear cutting of our forests.

With the clearing of our forestry land for agricultural purposes on both mountains are we not placing our future drinking water supples at risk for both the residents that live in the rural mountain regions and to our neighbours on the Valley floor?

Due to our rocky soil conditions on the North Mountain, chemical contaminate drainage into our mountain water systems will be impacted much more than the soil conditions on our Valley floor.

So far, those water supplies have not yet been seriously impacted by agricultural chemical contaminates.

Let’s keep it this way!

Dick Killam Halls Harbour