Dump Greenland landfill / EDITOR'S DIARY
Publication: Daily Nation
Paper Section And Page: 9
Paper Date: Tue, Sep 26, 2000
Byline: by Roy R. Morris
I HAVE been turning this one over in my mind for quite a while, unsure of which side was the right one. But now my mind is made up: On this issue I am on the side of Opposition Leader David Thompson.
I'm talking about the Greenland landfill. I've never been as bothered as many people I know about placing a dump at Greenland on the grounds that it is part of some national park. If a landfill is necessary, it has to be located somewhere, and that somewhere is certain to bring about vigorous objection.
I was more concerned that the topography of the land and nature of the soil would make proper management of a dump near impossible. But $20 million has been spent and its not easy to walk away from such expenditure.
Then came the reassessment and last month's announcement by Minister of Health Senator Phillip Goddard that in about two years and after a further $3 million of corrective work, Greenland would in fact take garbage. This has to be the Owen Arthur Administration's biggest error. The two years should be spent mapping out and implementing an alternative comprehensive policy on garbage disposal, with incineration as the central plank. I'm satisfied that Mr. Thompson's criticism of the decision to spend more money on Greenland is fair, reasonable and justified. The volume of corrective work outlined by the minister now leaves me feeling quite uncomfortable about the whole construction process, and in any event, I'm not so sure a landfill of that scale is necessary today.
As with the case of Jam-buster, Government has to be careful of not falling victim to the "god complex" believing that because so many people have praised them for being right on a wide range of matters they can't ever be wrong.
Look at the British. They spent more than £500 million on something called Millennium Done, which continues to be problem plagued. But they are getting out. If they can turn their back on £500, we can walk away from $20 million, before we regret it in a major way.
If you remain convinced that you were right in selecting Greenland, then fine. But accept that circumstances have changed, that the process of incineration has been advanced significantly, and even more important, that respected businessman, Bizzy Williams has provided you with an "out". He's offering to build one at no cost to taxpayers.
Toss the ball back at Edward Cumberbatch, Richard Goddard, Professor Bob Speed and other Greenland objectors and ask them to offer some alternative uses for the site that might yet make the $20 million already spent a reasonable investment.
Nobody can be right all the time. Hey, even the great Brian Lara can't score 20 runs these days if the lives of every West Indian depended on it. But you can demonstrate that, collectively, you are "man enough" to recognise that