Siemens Says - In perusing the aisles of a Winnipeg box store, I stopped to read the label of a product claiming to control, not kill selective weeds on residential lawns. In looking a little closer, it didn’t say which weeds it controlled, only selective weeds. I recall this product isn’t cheaper either.
I asked another gentleman who was looking at the same product, and asked him what it meant to control only selective weeds. He said that means it probably doesn’t work very well - in fact he said his neighbour tried it, and found it mostly useless.
I put in a call to Chris Goertzen, president of the Association of Manitoba Municipalities [AMM], also the mayor of Steinbach.
Goertzen adamantly says AMM does not support the cosmetic pesticide ban that became law in this province in 2015 and remains consistent with its position.
The former NDP government passed legislation to implement the ban that requires lawn care companies and municipalities to use eco-friendly products for weed control.
That is what I held in my hand where the label refers to controlling selective products.
Goertzen tells me Manitoba’s Sustainable Development minister Cathy Cox, the government will review the province's cosmetic herbicides ban to ensure it is in the best interests of Manitobans and intends to meet with stakeholders to discuss their concerns.
“Obviously, it is a regulation that is burdensome to municipalities and yes, we do want to see this government change it,†says the AMM president. “If we keep the same level of service, and use the product we should be using instead of the ones that are approved by Health Canada, our costs in Steinbach go from $18,000 a year to well over $200,000 plus per year. That's just not doable for RM's. That is just one anecdotal evidence plus they are much less effective.â€
Guess what, it kills the green stuff, burns it off so to speak, and the root stays alive meaning you have to use it multiple times.
The AMM has met with both ministers, Blaine Pederson, infrastructure and minister Cox, generally very positive discussions.
“These are early days of this new government and we continue to be consistent with our message, but feel this government will definitely review this legislation and ensuing regulation,†says Goertzen. “The point is we all want to use less chemicals in our municipalities and in our lives in general, absolutely! But we want to be practical, and not ideological about it. We want a review of that regulation so that it is practical for our municipalities and doesn't put a huge burden on them, and so we can have healthy communities and beautiful communities.â€
Having the president of the AMM on the line offered opportunities to discuss some other issues facing his organization and in turn rural Manitoba, and farmers alike.
There are many issues that we will be dealing with this new government just like with old one.
The AMM’s overriding theme includes two issues, partnership and one already touched on, regulations, or as I sense it too many regulations that make no sense and only cost money.
“We want to have a partnership with this new provincial government to solve the issues we have in common. When it comes to infrastructure, we want to do this in partnership with the Pallister PC government to help solve the infrastructure issue. We think if we work together, we can do it cheaper and more effectively, than if we just have our hand out and not working as a team,†he says.
“When you look at regulations, which is our other main thing that we want to talk about, so many times there are regulations implemented that are very difficult for municipalities to deal with; either there are costs involved, or very difficult to administer,†says Goertzen.
“In the end, had the government consulted us first, viewing us as a body that can help them get the right perspective, we can help them make better regulations, we can reduce regulations where needed, and we can be that partner that can bring better government, better ideas.â€
He sites the cosmetic pesticide ban as a prime example. It is not useful and not practical and what it creates a scenario of dramatically increased costs, and there's different standards that people start to apply to their own properties.
Yes, how right he is. This person standing next to me at the product stand in that box store, says if you go to another home, lawn and garden store, ask for the product that kills pesticides too, and you will have the product that actually kills weeds, too.
-
I asked another gentleman who was looking at the same product, and asked him what it meant to control only selective weeds. He said that means it probably doesn’t work very well - in fact he said his neighbour tried it, and found it mostly useless.
I put in a call to Chris Goertzen, president of the Association of Manitoba Municipalities [AMM], also the mayor of Steinbach.
Goertzen adamantly says AMM does not support the cosmetic pesticide ban that became law in this province in 2015 and remains consistent with its position.
The former NDP government passed legislation to implement the ban that requires lawn care companies and municipalities to use eco-friendly products for weed control.
That is what I held in my hand where the label refers to controlling selective products.
Goertzen tells me Manitoba’s Sustainable Development minister Cathy Cox, the government will review the province's cosmetic herbicides ban to ensure it is in the best interests of Manitobans and intends to meet with stakeholders to discuss their concerns.
“Obviously, it is a regulation that is burdensome to municipalities and yes, we do want to see this government change it,†says the AMM president. “If we keep the same level of service, and use the product we should be using instead of the ones that are approved by Health Canada, our costs in Steinbach go from $18,000 a year to well over $200,000 plus per year. That's just not doable for RM's. That is just one anecdotal evidence plus they are much less effective.â€
Guess what, it kills the green stuff, burns it off so to speak, and the root stays alive meaning you have to use it multiple times.
The AMM has met with both ministers, Blaine Pederson, infrastructure and minister Cox, generally very positive discussions.
“These are early days of this new government and we continue to be consistent with our message, but feel this government will definitely review this legislation and ensuing regulation,†says Goertzen. “The point is we all want to use less chemicals in our municipalities and in our lives in general, absolutely! But we want to be practical, and not ideological about it. We want a review of that regulation so that it is practical for our municipalities and doesn't put a huge burden on them, and so we can have healthy communities and beautiful communities.â€
Having the president of the AMM on the line offered opportunities to discuss some other issues facing his organization and in turn rural Manitoba, and farmers alike.
There are many issues that we will be dealing with this new government just like with old one.
The AMM’s overriding theme includes two issues, partnership and one already touched on, regulations, or as I sense it too many regulations that make no sense and only cost money.
“We want to have a partnership with this new provincial government to solve the issues we have in common. When it comes to infrastructure, we want to do this in partnership with the Pallister PC government to help solve the infrastructure issue. We think if we work together, we can do it cheaper and more effectively, than if we just have our hand out and not working as a team,†he says.
“When you look at regulations, which is our other main thing that we want to talk about, so many times there are regulations implemented that are very difficult for municipalities to deal with; either there are costs involved, or very difficult to administer,†says Goertzen.
“In the end, had the government consulted us first, viewing us as a body that can help them get the right perspective, we can help them make better regulations, we can reduce regulations where needed, and we can be that partner that can bring better government, better ideas.â€
He sites the cosmetic pesticide ban as a prime example. It is not useful and not practical and what it creates a scenario of dramatically increased costs, and there's different standards that people start to apply to their own properties.
Yes, how right he is. This person standing next to me at the product stand in that box store, says if you go to another home, lawn and garden store, ask for the product that kills pesticides too, and you will have the product that actually kills weeds, too.
-
Comment