Today I learned that, sadly, the City of Guelph seems to have been convinced by the bottled water lobby to pull a screening of a documentary about the issue. In Barrie, we've also seen similar pressure from the industry, and below are a series of letters that ran in the local paper in response to my column, plus the (current) final result for Barrie.
This was the first letter, in response to my first column, which spawned my second column.
Banning bottled water not the answer (May 8)
(Re: 'Plenty of ways to keep our beautiful city squeaky clean' in the May 3 edition of the Examiner)
I read with interest Erich Jacoby-Hawkins' column. In the piece, Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins writes that one way to keep Barrie's public spaces cleaner is to "refuse bottled water."
While he is to be commended for his commitment to environmental sustainability, Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins is focused on banishing from use a legal, federally- regulated food product found in a 100% recyclable bottle -- and the healthiest beverage found in a plastic container.
The industry that produces these products also funds a minimum of 50% of every curbside, depot and public spaces recycling program in Canada, including those in Barrie.
In partnership with five municipalities in four provinces over the last three years, Nestlé Waters Canada and its industry partners have funded pilot public spaces recycling programs with the objective of launching these initiatives provincewide.
The first permanent program in North America was established in Manitoba in 2010. The Canadian beverage industry is confident more provinces will come on stream with similar offerings in the years to come.
Independent waste audits from these pilots have confirmed that plastic beverage containers, of which bottled water is a small percentage of the total beverage mix, represent about 1% to 4% of litter in public spaces and/or recyclables found in garbage containers.
Achieving "squeaky clean" public spaces requires installing recycling infrastructure and supporting it with continuous public education -- not banning bottled water and, thus, infringing on Barrie residents' fundamental right to consume the beverage of their choice, wherever it may be.
John Challinor, Nestle Waters Canada, Milton
In my defense, my friend Don McNeil wrote this letter:
Water bottle issue 'muddied': LETTER OF THE DAY (May 14)
Nestle Waters Canada has a hired gun and he has trained his sights on Barrie. The problem
for Nestle's John Challinor is he keeps missing his target when he is not firing blanks.
Mr. Challinor, and his paid-for opinions in the defence of single-use plastic water bottles, missed their mark when he claimed Barrie Examiner columnist Erich Jacoby-Hawkins has called for a ban on the sale of bottled water in a recent article.
Mr. Challinor wrote his diatribe based on three words in Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins' column: "Refuse bottled water."
Actually, Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins never mentioned the word ban or even proposed one.
Also, Mr. Challinor defended his product, boasting of partnerships with five municipalities in four provinces, to fund pilot public spaces recycling programs proclaiming the first
permanent program in North America was established in Manitoba in 2010.
However, he fails to mention that, the following year, the Manitoba government actually banned the use of provincial funds to purchase single-use plastic water bottles and four Manitoba municipalities and two of that provinces' three universities have banned the sale of bottled water while the third is installing hydration stations with the hopes of a bottle ban.
Mr. Challinor also mentioned how he hoped the Nestle-led initiative would spread nationwide, while failing again to mention nearly 100 municipalities, including six provincial and two territorial capitals, have banned the sale of bottled water.
Those communities have been joined by nearly 40 universities, colleges and school boards. It almost seems Mr. Challinor is actually selling 'muddied water'.
I earlier stated Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins, in his article critiqued by the Nestle rep, never mentions the word ban or even proposes one, but it is a great idea. In fact, the Council of Canadians approached the City of Barrie in March 2012 with hopes city hall will join the growing roster of blue communities across the country in protecting our water in three important ways.
One, banning the sale of water bottles in public facilities and municipal events.
Two, commit to publicly financed, owned and operated water and wastewater services.
Three, officially recognize water as a human right.
At the end of the day, Challinor is a Nestle executive whose motives need to be questioned. Our interest is purely altruistic.
Don MacNeil, Simcoe Region (Ontario) Chapter of Council of Canadians
Which drew this response from Mr. Challinor
Bottled water not banned (May 22)
(Re: 'Water bottle issue muddied' in the May 15 edition of the Examiner)
I read with interest Don MacNeil's the letter.
While I studiously avoid he said-she said debate in the pages of local newspapers, Mr. MacNeil makes a number of statements about bottled water that have long been confirmed as false - mythology one typically finds on anti-bottled water activist websites, including the Council of Canadians.
Contrary to what was stated, the province of Manitoba has not banned the sale of bottled water in its facilities, as a letter to me, dated Dec. 13, 2011, from Manitoba Conservation Minister Dave Chomiak will confirm.
A copy has been filed with the editor of the Examiner.
To date, 120 local governments across Canada have formally rejected resolutions to ban the sale of bottled water in their facilities. Twenty-eight municipalities, four school boards and 12 colleges and universities have banned the sale of the product.
Most telling is the fact that several thousand local jurisdictions have determined there are more important matters to consider than bottled water, like repairing aging water and sewer infrastructure, improving local service delivery and keeping taxes low.
John Challinor, Nestle Waters Canada (Guelph)
Meanwhile, Mr. Challinor had also written a letter in response to my second column:
Column dilutes water facts (May 18)
(Re: 'City heads must leads residents back to the taps' in the May 10 edition of the Examiner)I read with interest the column written by Erich Jacoby-Hawkins. While I studiously avoid he said/she said debate through the editorial pages of local newspapers, the comments by Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins require a reply.
In the piece, he makes numerous statements about bottled water that have long been confirmed as false - mythology one typically finds on anti-bottled water activists' websites, like the Council of Canadians and the Canadian Union of Public Employees.
For example, independent research firm Quantis International (www.quantis-intl.com) found that bottled water has the lightest carbon footprint of any bottled beverage, whether measured by water use, petroleum product use or greenhouse gas emissions. The average bottle of water travels about 250 kilometres from source to shelf. That compares to 2,400 to 3,200 km for fresh fruit and vegetables and most consumer packaged goods, according to Washington agricultural consultant Dan Murphy.
Health Canada regulations for bottled water must be as strong and protective of public health as provincial regulations for tap water.
However, Examiner readers need not take my word for it, nor Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins' for that matter. When it comes to the quality, safety or regulation of bottled water, they can get the facts by simply visiting the Health Canada website (www.hc-sc.gc.ca).
His information related to recalls is simply false.
His comment that recycled plastic bottles weren't being used to make new ones is also incorrect. Nestle Waters Canada is one of several bottled water producers in Canada that are selling bottled water in recycled packaging. The company's Montclair brand is Canada's best-known natural spring bottled water produced in recycling packaging.
Also contrary to what was written, while bottled water costs about 200 to 300 times more than tap water, it's an irrelevant comparison. Most Canadians don't view them as competing hydration alternatives.
According to independent consumer research firm
Probe Research (www.probe-research.com), 70% of Canadians drink both. They consume tap water at home and bottled water away from home for health and convenience. Bottled water competes with other bottled beverages. It is not an alternative to tap water.
As for CUPE and the council's Blue Communities Project, it is a Trojan horse-like treatise developed solely to encourage Canadian municipalities to ban the sale of bottled water in their facilities under the guise of human rights and infrastructure management. It is not an environmental initiative - it is a political campaign.
We agree with the council and CUPE that water is a human right. And given that Canada has a $31-billion water and sewer infrastructure deficit resulting in, amongst other things, more than 1,500 boil-water orders across the country last year, we also support continued investment in our municipal systems.
Where we draw the line with the council and CUPE is their misguided and misleading attempts to ban the sale of bottled water in public facilities.
In closing, while Mr. Jacoby-Hawkins is entitled to his views, Examiner readers have a right to know the facts. Publishing poorly researched columns like this will erode the reputation of a good newspaper like the Examiner over time.
John Challinor - Nestle Waters Canada, Milton
I must say that of all of his spin, the part I take greatest exception to is his accusation that "His information related to recalls is simply false." No, it's not - it's fully documented here.
Anyhow, back to letters, as Don again came to my defense:
Flood of missing information in letter (May 22)
(Re: 'Column dilutes water facts' in the May 19 edition of the Examiner)
I see the Nestle Waters hired gun is once again playing his version of spin the (water) bottle.
In Nestle's John Challinor's latest missive, he once again cherry picks the truth and plays a misdirection game with the facts. He speaks of outdated polls and offers up morsels of detail as he defends nothing more than his company's ability to make obscene profits.
Mr. Challinor tells you "independent research firm Quantis International found that bottled water has the lightest carbon footprint of any bottled beverage".
What he forgot to mention is that other bottled beverages, including juice, pop, sports drinks, beer and even milk, use grown ingredients, such as sugar, to manufacture their products. Those ingredients need to be shipped to bottling plants. Since none of these other beverages flow from my kitchen tap it puts bottled water in a different class and enforces the redundancy of the product Nestle Water peddles.
Mr. Challinor also mentions "independent consumer research firm Probe Research (found) 70% of Canadians drink both (tap and bottled water)" and this, in Nestle's eyes, means "most Canadians don't view them as competing hydration alternatives". He adds these people "consume tap water at home and bottled water away from home".
That Canadians drink bottled water away from home is one reason why so many single-use plastic water bottles don't find there way to a blue bin. It's easier to recycle at home. Also, Mr. Challinor neglected to mention that the Probe Research findings are four years old. Polls are snapshots in time while opinions and behaviours are, pardon the pun, fluid. His data, like his product, has a limited shelf life.
And finally Mr. Challinor employs fear tactics. He, ironically, accuses the Council of Canadians of being misleading and misguided in our attempts to ban the sale of water bottles at municipal buildings and events and goes as far as to call our Blue Communities initiative "Trojan horse-like" adding "it is not an environmental initiative - it is a political campaign".
Once again, he is partly right. It is a political campaign. To paraphrase Council of Canadians national chairperson Maude Barlow, all grassroots activism invites our elected local representatives to have a democratic, public debate and that it is "laughable (and insulting to local elected officials) to suggest that city councillors are being duped by our call to rethink the use of bottled water. Decisions to end the sale of bottled water are made in public, after open and democratic debate. It's hard to argue with that process".
In closing, Mr. Challinor said "Examiner readers have a right to know the facts. Publishing poorly researched columns like this will erode the reputation of a good newspaper like the Examiner over time."
Finally, something we can agree on.
Don MacNeil
Simcoe Region Chapter of Council of Canadians (Barrie)
And for good measure, Don also responded to Challinor's response to him:
Facts do hold water (May 30)
(Re: 'Bottled water not banned' in the May 23 edition of the Examiner)I see John Challinor of Nestle Waters Canada is at it again. His playing three card monte with the facts would be comical if it weren't so disconcerting.
He makes the claim that, in a previous letter to the editor, I had made "a number of statements about bottled water that have long been confirmed as false."
Yet, of all the information I , presented he could only cite one statement he found erroneous.
And he even got that wrong.
Mr. Challinor writes "contrary to what was stated (by me), the province of Manitoba has not banned the sale of bottled water in its facilities."
What I wrote was that "the Manitoba government actually banned the use of provincial funds to purchase single-use plastic water bottles."
Manitoba Conservation Minister Bill Blaikie said, at the time: "We believe, by taking this step, we are leading by example and encouraging Manitobans to move away from using single-use bottled water."
I had forgotten to mention at the time that Nova Scotia enacted a similar ban on purchasing bottled water a year before Manitoba did.
Perhaps in the future, Nestle Waters can use some of the profits it makes from its overpriced, unnecessary product to pay for a proofreader, or fact-checker.
Don MacNeil, Simcoe Region Chapter of Council of Canadians (Barrie)
If you've read this far, you probably agree that Challinor lost the battle of the letters. Unfortunately, he won the battle at Council - for now, anyway. And he's trying to do the same in Guelph. I hope that their valiant letter writers will have more success than we did.
p.s. Apologies for the weird formatting, Blogger seems to have trouble with cut-and-paste from some websites.
No comments:
Post a Comment