Trashy truth belies clean image
If we’re lucky, none of the 10,000 delegates who are in Montreal for the United Nations Climate Change Conference will notice our dirty little habit. If Paul Martin is lucky, no one will point out that there is a slight problem with his characterization of Canada as the “ conscience of the world” on environmental issues.
If Trade Minister Jim Peterson is lucky, no one will make political hay out of his threat to launch a trade challenge if the United States closes its border to Toronto’s garbage. But sooner or later — probably sooner — our hypocrisy is going to catch up with us. Canada can’t claim to be an environmental leader when its largest city dumps 3.5 million tonnes of trash in Michigan every year.
Ottawa can’t flaunt its green credentials when it uses the letter of the law to force an unwilling neighbour to accept Toronto’s garbage.
Last week, Peterson made it known that he has formally notified U. S. Trade Representative Robert Portman that Canada will take legal action if the American Congress approves legislation allowing Michigan to ban foreign trash.
This was not a surprise. The federal trade minister had already told both Toronto Mayor David Miller and Ontario Trucking Association president David Bradley that he would do whatever was necessary to hold the U. S. to the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Agreement. ( Both pacts prohibit discrimination against clients or suppliers from other member states.) But what was expected is now official. Ottawa is backing Toronto in its fight to keep the U. S. border open to its unwanted export. No doubt this is a relief for Miller and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty. The city and the province would be left scrambling if Michigan won the right to turn back truckloads of garbage. Some Toronto residents are probably thankful, too. Dumping the city’s trash in a neighbour’s backyard — unsavoury as it may be — solves a messy problem. But when a nation uses trade law to trump legitimate environmental concerns, it raises serious questions about its principles and priorities.
If we were on the receiving end of tonnes of American garbage, we would want our government to put the health and safety of Canadians ahead of commercial interests.
If the U.S. tried to use the North American Free Trade Agreement to defend its right to pollute our landscape, we would object bitterly. By taking Toronto’s side in this grubby dispute, Peterson is signalling that Canada’s environmental ideals are dispensable, if they prove inconvenient.
This case is reminiscent of another NAFTA showdown — except that the roles are reversed.
In 1997, the Canadian government enacted a law banning the fuel additive MMT ( methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl) on health grounds. Its American manufacturer, Ethyl Corp., challenged the legislation, claiming that Ottawa was violating NAFTA by expropriating its assets in this country.
Recognizing that the law was on the company’s side, the government revoked the ban and paid $ 13 million in damages.
At the time, it seemed preposterous that trade rules could be used to force Canadians to use gasoline laced with an octane booster that posed a potential health risk. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Our government is proposing to use NAFTA to force Michigan residents to accept garbage shipments they do not want and their legislators regard as an environmental and health threat. We’re the bad guys. One could argue that Peterson is really not to blame. It is Toronto City Council that has failed to come up with a local solution to the garbage mess. It is the Ontario government that has shirked its responsibility to manage municipal waste.
All that is true. But Ottawa is enabling — even condoning — their pusillanimity by standing up for Canada’s right to use Michigan as a dumping ground. One could also argue that Toronto’s trash exports are inconsequential compared to the greenhouse gases being discussed in Montreal this week. The planet’s atmosphere isn’t going to be materially harmed by 125 garbage trucks rumbling down Highway 401 every day.
That is true, too. But if Canada aspires to be a model of sustainable development, it can’t afford to send mixed messages.
Peterson, or whoever succeeds him, has a reasonable chance of winning a NAFTA challenge against the frustrated citizens of Michigan. But many Canadians would regard such a victory with shame. Carol Goar’s column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.