Last month, Halifax councillor Jennifer Watts raised the issue of bottled water being provided at City Hall, but I was apparently too busy to do more than a couple of Twitter posts about it.
In typical Watts fashion, she approached the issue from a human rights perspective– clean water should be available to everyone, so if there’s a problem with the tap water we should fix it. Past that, there are so many environmental problems with bottled water, the city should avoid providing it.
Watts got buy-in from enough other councillors that the motion passed. This of course was spun as “banning bottled water,” but it was nothing of the kind– anyone who wants to bring their own bottled water to City Hall is welcome to; it’s just that the city itself will no longer provide bottled water.
Part of Watts’ motion essentially has the city taking a slow-motion assessment of other city facilities, upgrading the tap water when needed and eliminating city-provided bottled water, including water for sale in vending machines.
This is where Linda Mosher comes in.
Mosher pointed out that in recreation facilities, if there isn’t bottled water available in the vending machines, people will instead buy the Coca Cola and other sodas, rather than using water fountains (the public still believes a lot of nonsense about water fountains being diseased-ridden and such).
We should also ban the sale of “sugary drinks” in city facilities, said Mosher.
It’s a good point, and I agree with Mosher.
I am continually annoyed when I go to the Sportsplex and see the little kiddies running out of the pool and straight to the soda machines. Our rec centres are there to provide for the health of the citizenry, not to degrade it.
No doubt the Sportsplex and other rec centres derive much-needed revenue from sales of sugary crap, but that’s no excuse for providing it– we should remove the machines and, if need be, replace the lost revenue with a public subsidy.
The schools successfully banned the sale of sugary crap some years ago, so perhaps they can provide some guidance on the matter.
Anyway, back to Mosher.
The night council considered Watts’ motion, Mosher attempted to amend it to include sugary drinks, but she was ruled out of order. Watts motion passed, and the next week, Mosher put forward the sugary drink issue as a stand-alone motion. That failed, for want of a second, as I recall.
I was disappointed that Mosher wasn’t taken seriously. But I suspect that had less to do with the content of her motion than with council dynamics—from the outside looking in, it looks to me that Mosher has burned bridges with councillors who might have been potential allies on the issue, including Watts. I could equally fault Watts for not trying to cultivate a dialogue on the sugary drink issue, but as things unfolded, it looked as if Mosher was at the last minute trying to disrupt Watts, who had obviously put many hours into the bottled water project. Of course, Mosher has in the past accused Watts of doing the same.
Maybe with some prodding from the public, the issue can be revisited without the petty personal politics of council interfering.
Moving forward, Mosher surprised me this week by announcing she will at next Tuesday’s council meeting move that in the future, all of council’s appointments to boards and commissions be made in public.
I’ve argued as much, and I’m again supporting Mosher’s aims.
Unlike the sugary drink issue, Mosher will find many councillors supportive of her appointment motion— I’ve talked with maybe a half-dozen councillors from across the political spectrum who are on board. This is actually what surprises me; I assumed that one of those councillors–perhaps Gloria McCluskey, who has raised the issue at council many times— would take the lead on the issue.
Hopefully Mosher is consulting other councillors and laying the groundwork for a cooperative effort to implement the right policy.
She deserves to win this one.
This article appears in Oct 22-28, 2009.
We do not need HRM interfering in our right to choose what we drink. It is none of their business. There are enough social engineers around already without our Komedy Kouncil trying to do the same.
You can bring any bottled water or sugary drink into any city building, and no one will ever stop you. I promise.
What part of that did you not understand?
Just wait until the lawyer raises the issue of ‘Privacy’.
My view, after reading Legislation, is that an amendment to the HRH legislation or FOIPOP is required to ensure that any future council cannot by motion revert to the present practice without once again asking the legislature to change the law. A legislated change also enables the public to provide an opinion at Law Amendments Cttee or Private & Local Bills Cttee. I prefer the province have a tighter rein on HRM council.
Well, Tim, it’s this:
“Part of Watts’ motion essentially has the city taking a slow-motion assessment of other city facilities, upgrading the tap water when needed and eliminating city-provided bottled water, including water for sale in vending machines.
This is where Linda Mosher comes in.
Mosher pointed out that in recreation facilities, if there isn’t bottled water available in the vending machines, people will instead buy the Coca Cola and other sodas, rather than using water fountains (the public still believes a lot of nonsense about water fountains being diseased-ridden and such).
We should also ban the sale of “sugary drinks” in city facilities, said Mosher. “
Odds are that the vast majority of folks using city facilities will not think to bring their favorite beverage with them. You go to the Metro Center, the Forum, the Sportsplex, you expect to be able to buy a Coke or a bottle of water. Now, you will not. And good luck bringing your own beverages into the MC.
What part of the word “ban” do you not understand?
And what’s next on Watt’s social agenda: a ban on coffee because it comes from exploited farmers in Colombia? This is not why she got elected.
“This of course was spun as “banning bottled water,” but it was nothing of the kind– anyone who wants to bring their own bottled water to City Hall is welcome to; it’s just that the city itself will no longer provide bottled water.”
If people want to drink crap, they’ll find a way. And if they want to drink tap water from ontario, bottled and marketed as better than our own tap water, then they’ll find a way. Watt’s and Mosher are simply arguing that the city shouldn’t be profitting from the sale of these things.
And correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think we’ll see a ban on coke at the Metro Centre… if they’re going to sell beer, I’m pretty sure they’ll keep selling coke.
PS I bring my own water into the Metro Centre on a regular basis.
I assume I can’t bring beer into city council meetings (although I’ve never tried)– that’s a ban. I can bring a cooler full of cokes, tho, and no one would say a word to me.
It’d be amusing, but bone-headly stupid, for me to insist that the city is violating my civil rights by not providing me with beer at council meetings.
Mosher “scooped” McCluskey’s motion, because she knew it would be popular.
Matthew Luthor is dead on..