Editorial: Cancer link a serious concern

Mayor Stuart Crosby

It is good to see the city council is seeking alternatives to a toxic spray linked to causing cancer.

The city council this week took the first step towards finding alternatives to the agrichemical weedkiller glyphosate - the active ingredient in commercial brands such as Roundup.

Councillors have agreed unanimously to trial a mixture of pine oil and fatty acids as an alternative to glyphosate, to kill weeds on selected walkways and neighbourhood reserves. The fatty acids contain plant-derived agrichemicals.

The decision won the support of members of the council's toxic agrichemical advisory forum.

Forum member Dr Ron Lopert has urged the council to adopt the path taken by 12 countries, including Germany and Mexico, to ban the use of Roundup, saying there was enough scientific evidence to show it was a probable human carcinogen.

A report to the meeting says the World Health Organisation recently classified glyphosate as a "probably carcinogenic", following a study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with experts from 11 countries.

Some councillors expressed concern about balancing cost effectiveness with a desire to reduce toxicity in the community.

Councillor John Robson says he appreciates the issue more than anyone else because of his personal politics, but it will be difficult to whack an additional $200,000 into the budget to cover the cost of switching to alternative weed control measures.

I understand his concern.

It is a significant outlay but it is a necessary cost. The council would be remiss if it chose to not explore alternatives. As noted by Mayor Stuart Crosby, there is growing evidence glyphosate was against the public safety provisions of the council's vegetation management policy.

The council has made the right decision even if it does meet with resistance from ratepayers concerned about costs. If alternatives exist to glyphosate, the council has no option but to trial them given the serious concerns raised.