|
|
|
Being anti-pollution isn’t being anti-industry |
|
|
Written by Tyler Lindsay
Prince George
|
|
Sunday, 11 May 2008 |
Related Items
No related items found
The writer must have wrapped his lips around one too many diesel tailpipes to postulate that industry is not a significant contributor to the ongoing state of our air quality.
It is actually the responsibility of government to produce the accurate and non-biased reports to demonstrate it is protecting the health of the public. That is its fiduciary duty.
Unfortunately, government continues to turn a deaf ear to genuine concerns from residents as well as health-care professionals.
There is a marked difference in being "anti-industry" and being "anti-polluting industry." Industry is motivated strictly by the bottom line. It is the responsibility of government to strengthen standards to ensure the health of the public is not impacted in a negative manner.
Perhaps it is time for some type of class-action lawsuit similar to those launched against the tobacco industry to get the focused attention of the respective parties. Technological upgrades can lessen the health impacts, but they cost money.
Corporations continue to be driven by a "return to the shareholder" philosophy and not by any sense of responsibility to the inhabitants of the communities where their industries are located.
One need look no further than our local oil refinery for a prime example. With sky-high prices and record profits, we continue to inhale its pollutants while getting stiffed at the pump. That doesn't seem like a win-win situation to me.
-- Tyler Lindsay
Prince George
 |
|
Last Updated ( Sunday, 11 May 2008 )
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed