Gatineau’s 2009 greenhouse gas inventory revealed the main sources of emissions to be municipal services (wastewater treatment plants, municipal buildings), municipal vehicles (buses, cars and trucks), and the processing and breakdown of waste material.  

The city will reduce its municipal services emissions by 15% by 2015 and by 20% by 2020.  As for vehicle emissions, the city aims to stay at the same level to 2015, but population growth means emissions will effectively drop by 6%.  Vehicle emissions should drop by 6% by 2020, but given the expected growth in population, emissions will effectively drop by 17%.

(JM)

Photo: Julie Murray

These bins represent $1 million in rewards for Gatineau.

Gatineau is making progress on meeting its residual waste management goals, saving the taxpayers money in the process.  Councillor Alain Riel, the chair of the Environment Committee, told the Bulletin the City will be issuing a tender call in March for the construction of a facility to treat waste that can’t be recycled or composted.  Mayor Marc Bureau said, “We’re going to invest in technology that will help us treat this material here in Gatineau.  We’ll be one of the first places in Quebec to do this and it is going to save us millions of dollars.”

“This plant is going to cost between $50 million and $70 million.  A private firm will build, finance and operate it for 20 years.  “It’s a turn-key operation for the City”, explained Councilllor Riel.  He added that provincial standards require the facility to create energy.  “We don’t know if it’s going to be an incinerator,  or plasma gasification, or create ethanol.”  There is a plasma gasification plant in Ottawa; for more information, visit plascoenergygroup.com.

How the reward system works

The City also benefits directly from increased recycling and composting rates, because the province has a program to financially encourage landfill diversion by returning user fees in a manner that rewards municipalities whose citizens recycle and compost the most.  In 2012, Gatineau will collect $900,000 in the return of user fees from the province, reported Councillor Riel.  “Whenever we ship a tonne of garbage to the landfill, we have to pay $20 to the province.  The government then distributes it to municipalities based on their performance in landfill diversion. So it’s payback time for the taxpayer.”

“Because we’ve been recycling and composting like crazy, this money is getting to be very important to us,” Councillor Riel added, noting that the City sent 20% less garbage to the landfill in 2011 than it did in 2010.  He also said that the returned user fees must be used in a way that directly connects with garbage.  “We can’t use that money for roads or parks or other infrastructure. We use it to pay our contracts for garbage pickups.”

Nomination forms have been available since January 25th at www.gatineau.ca, at the Service Centres, at the libraries, and at the Communications Department of the City.  

(DD / CB)

Au premier chef de ces mal-aimés de l’histoire politique québécoise figure l’ancien premier ministre libéral Robert Bourassa. Ce dernier fait couler beaucoup d’encre ces temps-ci. En effet, au cours des prochains jours deux ouvrages vont se confronter sur les tablettes de nos libraires. D’abord l’oeuvre du «portraitiste» George-Hébert Germain, qui dresse un portrait que certaines critiques appréhendent déjà comme étant un peu complaisant, surtout parce qu’il tente de remédier à certains mythes entourant M. Bourassa. À la tête de ces critiques on retrouve Jean-François Lisée qui publie de son côté un condensé de deux oeuvres polémiques, Le tricheur et Le naufrageur, qu’il avait publiées en 1994, quelques mois avant d’accepter un poste de conseiller politique au cabinet de Jacques Parizeau, principal adversaire politique contemporain de Bourassa. Son «nouveau» volume s’intitulera « Le petit tricheur : Robert Bourassa derrière le masque». 

Entre les lignes de cette guerre publicitaire qui oppose deux auteurs qui publient en même temps sur un seul et même sujet, il faut surtout voir cette sempiternelle polémique sur ce qu’a été, n’a pas été ou aurait pu être Robert Bourassa. Cet homme difficile à cerner a pourtant été premier ministre du Québec pendant plus de 14 ans, sous la bannière libérale. La minorité anglophone du Québec, une des bases électorales fondamentales de son parti lui en veut toujours d’avoir ouvert le bal des lois linguistiques avec la Loi 22, ancêtre de l’actuelle Loi 101. Les souverainistes, quant à eux, lui reprochent de ne pas avoir fait l’indépendance du Québec après l’échec de Meech, symbole ultime du refus par le Canada anglais des aspirations et de l’affirmation de l’identité nationale des Québécois, moment où leur cause approchait les 70% d’appuis populaires dans les sondages. On reproche surtout au jeune diplômé en économie politique de l’Université Harvard d’avoir mal géré la crise d’octobre de 1970 et au politicien nationaliste plus expérimenté d’avoir été un peu trop mou dans les décisions de sa deuxième vie politique menant aux échecs constitutionnels des années 1990.   

Il faut aussi rappeler que Robert Bourassa était l’adversaire politique contemporain de René Lévesque, personnage plus grand que nature dont on se souvient aujourd’hui comme un genre de héros politique national. Il est pourtant difficile à imaginer que notre « ti-poil » national serait demeuré ainsi béatifié dans l’univers politico-médiatique des médias 24-heures assoiffé de scandales que l’on connaît aujourd’hui. Du même coup, les défauts des ses adversaires en aurait sûrement aussi été relativisés. Ce qui ne change pas avec le temps, c’est le jugement sévère que portent les Québécois sur les personnes qui ont le courage d’exercer l’ingrate et pourtant respectable fonction de premier ministre du Québec. Obtenons-nous ainsi les politiciens que l’on mérite?

Thomas Gagné

It is under-discussed, despite having far-reaching, long-lasting and serious consequences.  300 kids commit suicide in Canada every year due, in some part, to being bullied at school, and depression and anxiety are known repercussions.

Premier Jean Charest announced this week a million dollars of provincial spending on bullying awareness by the ministère de l’Éducation.  I think it would be best spent on conflict resolution training for principles and on promoting anti-bullying awareness to parents.

The Western Quebec School Board has no anti-bullying policy.  It absolutely must have one; it is long overdue!  The Ottawa Catholic School Board has a great one under “Safe Schools” at http://www.ottawacatholicschools.ca/content.php?doc=6580. 

As ideal as it sounds apparently “zero tolerance” to violence in schools is an impossibility.  So the principal has to satisfy the desire of some parents to protect their children, and to provide a non-violent climate, while also working with parents whose children display too much aggression. Parents also have to be aware of things they can do to support a child who has been pushed down or verbally assaulted. Most of all, parents have to make time to listen to their child, and to support her or him, and address the situation, which is not always easy.  Parents have to be their child’s advocate in the school, without being intimidated by school administration. Ontario’s Ministry of Education has a good guide for parents at www.ontario.ca/safeschools called “Bullying: We can all help stop it.”  One of the most effective ways to stop bullying is for a male relative (father or uncle) to supervise the bullied child’s recess.

In Aylmer, retirees’ condos and residences are walking distance to schools.  Wouldn’t there be many retired teachers and policemen (or other trustworthy individuals who would pass a criminal record check) who would be happy to contribute to the prevention of bullying by spending an hour outdoors supervising recess?  It seems it could be a great solution.

A concerned but optimistic parent,

Julie Coulson
Aylmer

Of the 13,082 signatures, 9,904 were registered on the on-line version and 3,178 were collected on the paper version.  The deadline for signing was February 2, the petition having been open for three short months.

The three simultaneous demonstrations that were held on February 5 in Montréal, Québec City, and Sherbrooke were a great success, attracting about 200, 110, and 125 participants, respectively.  As part of the demonstrations, the Coalition presented three demands to the Government of Québec.  The most important of these is for the Bureau d’audiences publiques en environnement (BAPE) to conduct an inquiry that will thoroughly and impartially evaluate all aspects of Hydro-Québec’s plan, including those related to the possible health effects of the increased exposure to microwave radiation that wireless electric meters will cause.

On February 15, the petition signatures were formally presented by MNA Amir Khadir to the National Assembly, and in March, the Régie de l’énergie du Québec will be holding additional consultations, which will not be open to the public. 

A big thank you to everyone who signed the petition!

Sharon Déoux
Aylmer

Amusement parks and water displays, of course, are useful. But they will never replace the natural habitats and watercourses that are our responsibility to safeguard for future generations and that have made yesterday’s children so happy and as they do to children today.

Let us reclaim our territory and participate in its management. Didn’t Mr Francoeur, environmental journalist, at a conference on water and biodiversity held in Hull last week, say that the most generous ideas come from citizens, who, when invited to “real” consultations and public hearings, demonstrate how knowledgeable they are on the subject of their environment and how to enhance it?

 Let us be bold and imaginative so that our children may continue to, as Roland Giguère’s poem “Faire terre” suggests: Walk, bent under the leaves’ weight/ Walk forever in the ash-tree woods (…) Follow ones shadow to reach the sun/ Follow the stream that holds our hand/ Follow the colour of tomorrow…

Nathalie Bélanger
Aylmer

This stream, that flows into the Ottawa River, is shown on Aylmer’s topographic maps since 1925, on many aerial photos, in the City of Gatineau Atlas and it is also listed in the City of Gatineau’s official document “Water” (the list of all the protected watercourses in the City which was developed by AECOM Tecsult Ltée thanks to taxpayers money). It is not a ditch.

How can we justify that the advocacy and preservation of this watercourse is left to a group of citizens rather than to the City of Gatineau or to the Department of Environment? I would like to understand why the City pays for studies and publishes the documents if it is to ignore them and not take them into account in their decision-making?

Lately, I have more than my share of anger! I am not happy with Mr Alain Riel who wants to make us believe that he has consulted with the citizens that will be affected, that he has heard them and that even more, he has defended their interests in this project! Please note, Mr Riel, that the syndrome “Not in my backyard” to which you refer does not apply in this case since the citizens never opposed the housing construction on this land. They believed you when you said you were committed to inform them and to involve them in the development of a future project. This, I must say, did not happen.

So, Mr Riel, chair of the advisory committee on the environment, how do you explain that residents in your district have had to initiate and pay out of their own pockets expensive legal procedures to stop the destruction of a stream and a wetland, two sensitive habitats that were “supposed” to be protected? What should we make of your present attempts to come back with your words, “to harmonize the project with the developer”, while still ignoring the residents that are affected by this matter? What’s a councillor for anyways?

Notice to all citizens and neighbourhood associations of beautiful Aylmer: we must scan all the future developments on our territory to ensure that our forest and watercourses are protected. Be vigilant and dare to ask questions! And, most of all, at the next municipal election, vote for councillors who will truly listen to the population and seriously defend the rights of both citizens and the environment, with transparency and integrity!

Ann Lapalice
(Aylmer resident for more than thirty years)