Aerial spraying by-law rejected

READER

Can I draw your attention to a most interesting but unexplained item in Tuesday’s Examiner ? It was on page 11 and headlined: “Aerial spraying by-law rejected”.

The full article:

The Break O’Day council has rejected introducing a by-law to regulate aerial spraying in te municipality, despite previously stating opposition to the activity.

Cr David Clement failed to have a motion passed at yesterday’s meeting that requested council officers start work on the development and introduction of the by-law.

Under this by-law, certain pesticides would be banned within the municipality and users would be required to keep a detailed register of pesticides used on their land.

The motion was defeated with no debate even though all councillors except Cr Robert Legge had last year voted in favour of submitting their opposition to aerial spraying for the Department of Primary Industries and Waters perticide application review.

Now I certainly don’t expect the Examiner to follow up on such an obvious lead because there’s the tiny possibility it might lead to something agaist the forestry industry, but do you find this strange ?

The motion was merely to “start work on developing” the by-law. And yet it was defeated and no one even spoke ? I’m not normally into conspiracy theories but this one at least needs each councillor to be asked why.