In his response to my earlier letter on Nov. 2, Robert Shepherd suggests we should wait until 2040 to decide on the sewer treatment plan. I find that a little odd since his earlier letter on the same subject suggested the cost of the plant was too high. I wonder, with inflation the way it is, what Mr. Shepherd thinks the cost of the plant will be in 2040.
Perhaps he’s counting on not being around in 2040, so the cost won’t concern him.
Mr. Shepherd also explains he carries an umbrella and wears good rain gear, so whatever pollutants may be in the rain as a result of humans putting crap in the ocean does not concern him. That’s a little bit like the guy wearing a gas mask around asking what the problem is with the spraying of toxic gasses everywhere.
Mr. Shepherd says there is no “scientific reason” that we need to build a sewage treatment plant. According to him maybe, but the simple fact that condensation and evaporation exist, turning the water in the ocean into rain, the same rain that feeds our gardens and our water tables, is reason enough to build one. If we want the water we drink and feed our crops with to be clean, then we need to stop pumping raw pollutants into the ocean. It is common sense.
He is right on one account though, and that is, we are not required by law to build a treatment plant for our sewage. Then again, the law really doesn’t care if the water is polluted.
As for his concerns about housing being impacted by the cost of a sewage treatment plant, maybe. However, the high cost of housing has a lot more to do with the greed and profit making intentions of builders and developers than it does on the cost of housing. I think he was meaning to imply that taxes will go up, but again, if we could get the rich profiteers who are making money hand over fist in the housing industry to pay their fair share of taxes, the cost of the sewage treatment plant would be negligible to the average working stiff.
Will Webster
Saanich