The smell of government apathy

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 27/02/2024 (606 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Every time there’s another glug of raw sewage spewing into the Red River because of worn-out, outdated and broken infrastructure, many politicians are to blame — but there’s only one deserving of credit for trying to get it right from the beginning.

Twenty years ago, as then-commissioner of the environment, Terry Duguid ordered the city to upgrade all its combined sewers to prevent future runoff every time there’s a downpour. He also gave a very specific timeline in his 2003 Clean Environment Commission report of between 20 and 25 years for when this work should be completed.

If that advice had been heeded, by now the entire network of old pipes would either be replaced or up next for replacement, thereby eliminating approximately nine billion litres of sewage from flowing annually into Winnipeg rivers.

Instead, as dust grows thicker on this shelved report, at least 200 billion litres of sewage has been dumped into the watershed, helping create a massive lake-killing algae bloom.

To its credit, the city has committed to completing this work by 2045 with a $45-million-a-year allocation. However, to actually achieve this target, it needs at least another $15 million a year added to the budget.

To get the money, the city should do two things immediately.

First, stop the practice of putting money designated for wastewater upgrades into general revenue, and even worse, using it for garbage pickup, and instead put this money towards its intended purpose.

Second, pick up the phone and call Broadway.

As simple as this sounds, to my knowledge, the city has not asked the province for any help with the price tag of upgrading its combined sewers, at least not during my time in government. They’ve asked for money for other projects, namely the North End Water Pollution Control Centre (NEWPCC) upgrades, to which my former government gave $320 million, but more help is needed.

Now’s a great time to ask.

After all, if the ultimate goal is to save Lake Winnipeg while there’s still a sliver of opportunity, there is no greater project than finishing the upgrades to this water treatment plant.

And here’s where the most convoluted, unco-ordinated, and contentious bit of political wrangling I’ve ever seen comes in to play.

Some say nitrogen, phosphorous and ammonia all must be removed through a biological process, while others say removing phosphorous through a chemical process is what counts the most.

And then there’s the price tag.

Removing nitrogen adds nearly $1 billion onto the project’s total cost, and it pushes the nutrient removal component into the third phase, which is decades down the road.

Focusing on phosphorous removal through a chemical process could be achieved in the second phase of the project, which is on track to completed by 2030, and shave upwards of a half a billion dollars off the total price tag. Even after adding in the new inflationary costs to the second phase, it’s still cheaper. With the taps on full blast from Ottawa and the new NDP government finally getting the chance to put its money where its mouth is, funding should not be a problem.

But is it the right solution for Lake Winnipeg?

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Wednesdays

A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.

Sign up for Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

Politicians and the bureaucracy alike are between varying degrees of disagreement, and the Manitoba government licence still requires the more expensive nitrogen removal through a biological process. Yet experts outside of government are unequivocal in support for the phosphorous-only chemical path.

The Lake Winnipeg Foundation, using research from the International Institute for Sustainable Development and Experimental Lakes Area, holds a firm view that this is the best way. With five decades of research done at two experimental lakes (Lakes 226 and 227), and proof in the revitalization of six other lakes around the globe, including Lake Erie, Lake Geneva, and Lake Washington, this method does have merit.

Sounds almost too easy. Having been around the table, I know there are complexities in getting agreements and funding together from three levels of government on projects of this magnitude. But a good start would be reconvening that task force my former government created with Coun. Brian Mayes, who has been a steadfast champion of getting this project done from the start.

Get MP Terry Duguid, who has environmental clout within his Liberal government, and invite expert representatives from Lake Winnipeg Foundation to present their research. From there, make a decision.

At this point, any decision would be preferred to the smell of apathy coming off the river.