Trade criticism ‘unfounded’

Press, 2 December 1978, Page 20

Trade criticism ‘unfounded’

Criticism directed at the; netai-finishing trade for dis■harging high concentrations if metal wastes is unfunded, says the chairman; if the electroplaters’ trade group of the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association; ■Mr L. R. Huston). The Christchurch Drainage Board had recently said that some metal-finishing comoanies in Christchurch had made little effort to clean up : heir trade wastes to acceptable standards. As a result, , it was asserted, high concern ; (rations of metals collected in city sewers and in treated! sludge which eventually j reached farmland. The board is considering; taking action against four ■ firms. Mr Huston said: “The;' opinion apparently held byi some members of the Drain-:i age Board that the metal-fin- i I ishing industry is a major; i source of heavy metals in I]

|effluent is certainly not substantiated by scientific research done overseas.” The industry in Christ- ; church would welcome a visit by board members to plants “to see for them- ; selves the problems of the industry and what has been done and is continuing to be done in the endeavour to I comply with the very strict of the board,’’ Mr Huston said. He said that the chairman of the board’s construction and treatment works committee (Mr J. de C. Hanafin) had issued an “unfair and ; incorrect statement” when he said that some companies in Christchurch were not Iprepared to spend the money to clean up their ! waste discharges. Mr Huston asked for betiter communication between board members and the industry before considering prosecuting any company.