September 14 , 2001

Burn question goes to court

Citizens for a clean Iqaluit face off against city

MIRIAM HILL
Nunatsiaq News

IQALUIT — The burning issue went to court in Iqaluit this week.

Lawyer Paul Crowley, representing a group of residents called Citizens for a Clean Iqaluit, faced off against the city on Tuesday in an attempt to force Iqaluit officials to suspend the burning of unsorted garbage at the community’s landfill.

Crowley wants the court to call an "interim injunction" against burning until a federal judge can determine the validity of Iqaluit’s water licence. The licence, issued in January, required unsorted burning to cease by June 1.

In his arguments, Crowley accused the city of defying the licence. He also referred to a number of public documents stating that open burning releases toxins into the air and water.

He asked that burning stop, but suggested that an injunction could be lifted if the city proves it has made a "diligent" effort to study other options.

John Tidball, counsel for the city, said the injunction should not be granted unless Crowley can prove that he had been harmed by the burning.

Tidball also claimed Crowley needed to provide testimony from expert witnesses. Crowley’s public documents, he said, do not provide satisfactory proof that burning is harmful.

Crowley admitted that ceasing burning will be inconvenient for Iqaluit.

"Yes, it will be difficult for the (city)," he said. "I’m realistic." And if officials can satisfy the court that they’ve done everything they can to avoid burning trash, he said, residents will have to try and live with it.

Crowley concluded by arguing that necessity is the mother of invention: As long as the city is allowed to burn garbage, it won’t bother to come up with a better way of dealing with its garbage.

Tidball, however, claimed that the city’s case is compelling.

The landfill is already filling up, he said, and the city needs to keep burning to reduce the amount of waste. The kind of sorting required by the water board is too complex and expensive for the city to conduct, so a ban on burning unsorted garbage would mean a ban on burning all together, he explained.

The location of the dump makes burning necessary, he said, because piling up trash would attract birds, presenting a hazard for aircraft landing at the nearby airport.

The city is trying to work with the water board, but just can’t comply with the burn ban, Tidball said.

All the legal wrangling may have been moot.

During Tuesday’s court proceedings, Judge Beverly Browne warned the lawyers that if it turns out that the water licence’s validity is in question, she doesn’t even have jurisdiction in the matter.

Browne said she would try to produce a ruling by the end of this week.