Director Graham Has Credibility Problem

Eric Graham, our elected representative on the Regional Board, has a problem with the credibility of our 830-name petition opposing the SCRD's plan to close the Pender landfil, according to his column in the Feb. Harbour Spiel. Mr. Graham takes issue with a couple of points that follow the main statement—namely, that people fear the SCRD will eventually close the transfer station for the same reason they closed the landfill, and that trucking unsorted garbage to the Sechelt landfill doesn’t help recycling-- but it is just his opinion against those of the petitioners. He should not be telling 830 of his own constituents who signed that their input is invalid just because he happens to disagree with them. He should listen to what so many people are trying to tell him.

The wording at the top of that petition is very clear: “We, the undersigned citizens of Area A, respectfully request the SCRD do everything necessary to allow the Pender landfill to keep operating.” Over 830 mature, thoughtful citizens of Area A have now put their legal signatures to this clear request, and Mr. Graham should give his constituents more credit than to suggest they would do that carelessly.

Mr. Graham represents himself as unbiased on the question of the landfill closure and says he will support whatever the majority wants. We would like to believe that, because it means he will have to support the landfill when and if the SCRD ever gets around to objectively measuring public opinion. They have done it once already and found residents 83% opposed to closure, but they are ignoring that, claiming their “information” campaign has changed public opinion. It hasn’t. Our canvassing shows a strong majority still disbelieve it can possibly be cheaper or better to truck garbage 40 km and landfill it in Sechelt than to landfill it right here where it starts out.

Much as we want to believe Mr. Graham is unbiased, it does sometimes seem that he is leaning toward those who wish to close the landfill.

What really raises questions about Mr. Graham’s objectivity is his reaction to the petition circulated by Wendie Milner and others who favour closing the landfill. That petition states that the landfill threatens to leak "leachate into our local water systems." This is actually false information, and has been contradicted by the SCRD’s own manager of sustainable services, Dion Whyte. The landfill’s drainage is first purified in a biofilter, then drains into a small local watershed that empties into Oyster Bay. This small, isolated watershed is not connected to either of Pender Harbour’s community water supply areas. This misinformation on the Milner petition has caused much unnecessary alarm and has influenced many of the people who signed it. If a petition were to be disqualified on the basis of having the wrong reasons, you would think this one would be. But apparently Mr. Graham has no problem with it, and has frequently cited it as evidence opinion has turned against keeping the landfill. SCRD staff has also pointed to this petition as evidence their “information” campaign has caused those 83% of Area A residents who voted to keep the landfill open to change their mind. If any have, disinformation may have more to with it than information.

We urge upon Mr. Graham to keep working on that objectivity.