Is there no hope for Port Hope?
One hour east of Toronto is an idyllic little town that could be on the cover on any history book. Lovingly nestled along a river that hosts salmon runs and crazy boat races, Port Hope is a delightful amalgam of historic buildings and modern shops, quaint B&Bs and jazzy jazz festivals. If it had more Italian restaurants – has one good one – and a few vineyards, it could pass as Canada’s Tuscany. It’s that bucolic. But – and this is a big ass but – on its water’s edge sits a rather large, misunderstood, butt-sized, historic site. A uranium processing plant which has been there since 1934 and is now owned by the world’s largest producer of uranium, Cameco.
Cameco’s uranium processing plant in Port Hope.
A temporary problem
Sure it’s a big eye sore and it’s been there for eighty years but today Cameco is a modern, safe employer of hundreds of local people – from scientists and engineers to forklift drivers and security guards. Over the last decade or so Cameco has been a good corporate citizen, but before that, well … that’s a different story. Cameco’s predecessor, Eldorado Mines, which was bought decades ago by the Canadian Government, spent many years polluting the rolling terrain of Port Hope with toxic waste. It was such dastardly, reckless behavior that the federal government is now spending $260 million dollars and ten years to clean up the mess. The same mess that the government and the citizens of Port Hope allowed to be perpetrated in the first place. “Irresponsible” doesn’t begin to cover it. “Criminal” does.
Nothing like a garbage-burning incinerator towering over green fields and spewing black ash to bring in tax revenue and drive out tourism revenue. You can’t have it both ways. (photo: worldjournal.com)
What the hell is this?
Port Hope, founded in 1797, will weather the uranium dip in its rustic history, except no one can believe what Port Hope is thinking of next. Well, not all of them – that many people couldn’t be so stupid – but their town council just might be on the verge of leading the town from bad to worse. Out of the six councillors and mayor, only one, Councillor Greg Burns, has “seen the future” and declared himself opposed to a recently proposed, garbage-burning industrial project.
“Poor” Port Hope
If this project was proposed in some other community it would probably go through the proper process and get accepted or rejected on its merits and no one would be any worse off. But in Port Hope, it’s a very different story. Poor Port Hope has suffered from a bad rap and negative image for decades, as “home to nuclear,” all because of past corporate and government negligence and some intermittent, irresponsible uprisings by the citizens. Over the past 5-6 years, Port Hope has had an ongoing street fight between its protesting citizens and municipal decision-makers on numerous projects (“slightly enriched uranium,” historic nuclear waste, policing, train whistles), and now, here-we-go-again, a garbage-burning incinerator.
Either way Port Hope loses
The problem is that no matter what the decision, Port Hope loses. Not just because they might make the wrong decision but because the street fight, media noise and word-of-mouth will create a misconstrued, negative perception that will hang over the town’s most important industry – tourism. And that perception cannot be easily or quickly undone because Port Hope, like any small town, cannot mount adequate resources to “untell” a bad story. Therefore, they must stop the story before it begins.
- Port Hope cannot afford to have this fight out in the open, in the streets.
- Port Hope cannot afford to take another hit to its reputation.
- Port Hope cannot afford to damage its brand any further. And the $100,000 already spent to “design” a new one won’t come close to preventing it.
- In fact, Port Hope’s brand will take years –a decade or more – to recover. Brands fail all the time due to bad, uninformed decisions. Remember the likes of Edsel, Studebaker, Miller beer, Max Factor, and recently JC Penney (see earlier blog: Brands are like penny stock – priceless or worthless, in a blink).
There’s another cost
Most small towns struggle to attract industry and it is an important part of keeping property taxes reasonable and the job market improving. But there is a cost. And the 20th century, which is filled with environmental and health disasters, has taught us that the hard way. These costs are not the easy-to-calculate costs of providing services and maintaining infrastructure, rather they are the tough-to-calculate, not-so-obvious, long-term societal costs: Environmental costs, healthcare costs, loss of tourism and agricultural costs, to name a few. We instinctively, and empirically, know about these unmeasured, diabolical costs and yet, we keep allowing our communities to ride the old, economic stairs to more materialism (and “promised” lower taxes). And because we don’t know for certain these other costs, we ignore the long-term consequences. Are the decision-makers in small towns like Port Hope that short-sighted, that intellectually underdeveloped, that they ignore the common sense obvious for the short-term fix?
Yes, say No!
The resounding answer is “yes!” Not just in Port Hope but in towns and cities everywhere. We are stuck in the 20th century economic model and our short-term addictive need that makes materialism the real “god delusion.” We have, since the industrial revolution, worshiped at the altar money and material and now, almost 300 years later, there is only a sliver of insight that we’ve been doing it wrong and that we’d better start measuring the”other costs,” before it’s too late. Today, in little ol’Port Hope, there is an opportunity to do what is right before it is too late: Say “No” to a proposed project that promises to cause a firefight that will damage one industry (tourism) for the sake of another, as well as create division and dissension among the citizens. Rise above the historically myopic, economic rationale that brings in industrial projects based on the flawed, 20th century cost-benefit equation and stop the fight before it begins. Rethink the potential, disastrous “side effects.”
Port Hope has a problem
Port Hope is stuck in the same old-school, politics as other communities, a broken system that still operates under the myth and misrepresentation of democracy. Politicians seldom, if ever, serve the majority of the people. They are not elected by a majority. The Mayor of Port Hope was voted in by about 20% of the eligible voters (43% of the 48% who voted). In fact, politicians usually serve a minority, especially minority interests that are directly opposed to the interests of “we the people.” They serve special interests, monied interests and the civil servants who ostensibly work for them – a false assumption perpetrated for centuries. In Ted Kennedy’s memoir, he stated that 95% of the legislative content (laws) were written by Congressional staff, not elected representatives. The civil servant is the politician’s doppelganger, the behind-the-scenes ghostly figure who feeds elected officials reams and reams of data, reports, recommendations and complex gobbledygook, on which the besieged and ignorant (not well informed) politicians make decisions. One of the biggest impediments to democracy is the phalanx of civil servants, the people in the hallways and backrooms who steer the decision-making. They are the power. They manage the sewer pipes that intake the taxpayers money, connect it to special interest groups and feed the overwhelmed, under unqualified politicians. If you look closely at the careers of the career civil servants who “retire” near the top, you will see that many land in some cushy appointments or on cushy boards with their cushy taxpayer’s pension. And if you follow the money and appointments, they link those people to the businesses that economically benefited from the political decisions made on their watch. Nowhere is this more evident than in small towns where there is a dearth of competent politicians who are desperately dependent on one or two well-informed, well-connected, seldom-questioned civil servants.
Port Hope has a choice: Garbage ash or cow dung?
Dead fields filled with what garbage leaves
Green fields filled with what cows leave
There are more reasons than can be covered here as to why Port Hope should “Say No” to this incinerator project, but there are a few that are more than enough to simply stop the application and proposal for this project in its tracks. Because the community should not go through another debilitating fight between citizens and politicians over a toxic industry in their pastoral little town. If they do, the word will get out. The scandal-chasing Toronto media will feed on an out-of-town, political food-fight because they’re tired of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford’s criminal escapades. Here are four reasons to stop the stupidity in Port Hope, now:
- “News” (forget whether it ever happens) of a possible garbage-burning, ash-spewing incinerator will kill a large segment of Port Hope’s tourism business, which, along with retail, directly accounts for almost 25% of the community’s jobs. Did Port Hope not learn from the fight with the irresponsible group, Families Against Radiation Exposure (FARE)?
- Port Hope’s tourism is already suffering from the perception of “home to nuclear waste,” so if garbage waste is added, tourism and real estate will be in the dumpster for decades.
- Port Hope is at the center of a large and prosperous agriculture industry and a garbage incinerator that can burn up to 600,000 tonnes of garbage annually will spread a lot worse than healthy manure on the green fields of Northumberland County.
- Port Hope recently spent $100,000 to try and develop a new “brand image” for the community to help off-set the damage done by the perception of nuclear waste. A tough enough assignment itself. But if they add the perception of “home to a garbage incinerator” the $100,000 will be a spit-in-the-ocean against a tsunami of negative image.
It’s a choice
To fight or not to fight? Your choice, your future
It’s the fight that matters, not the outcome. It’s the war that does the damage, and no peace treaty can ever repair it. Stop the process now, before it’s too late.
It takes twenty years to build a reputation and five minutes to lose it. If you think about that, you will do things differently. – Warren Buffet
