other materials, but he also made it clear he intended the same treatment for packaging.
While we are a long way from real extended producer responsibility (EPR), as opposed to just shifting the cost back where it belongs, it's a good start.
The other obvious benefit for the Province is that this will take some of the fiscal pressure of municipalities. (Let's not kid ourselves that something else won't come along to put that pressure right back on local councils, but every little bit helps.)
Mr. Premier, your minister has given you a lot of good press over the past little while, and you need that.
It doesn't matter how much the Toronto Sun might try to lay the blame on you for the retailers screwing up the eco fees they chose to charge for certain goods.
It doesn't matter if the electronics recycling program isn't recovering as much material as had been hoped.
It is the private sector that should be responsible for running these programs, and you can claim credit for the fact that now they are.
It is not your fault if they are not as efficient as some may wish.  Things will improve.
The recent brouhaha has shown that your opposite member will jump on anything that he thinks will help him score points, even if his facts are completely off base.  And that is becoming clear to everyone.
So, with the greatest of respect, here's what you need to do.
First, get all the ducks lined up for an early appearance of the new Waste Diversion Act as soon as possible after the Legislature reopens on September 13.
Make sure there are sufficient clauses in there to keep these new industry programs on track.
Make lots of statements about how you have worked with municipalities to shift the tax burden back where it belongs, just in time for the municipal elections this October.  (Oh, and ask them to refrain about complaining about industry inefficiency, tempting though it may be.)
And then, as the private sector programs mature over the coming year, next fall you can say nice things about them, and how Liberals saved big bucks for local taxpayers--just in time for the provincial election.

-30-

By Jay Arthur

Dear Mr. Premier,

I know you must get lots of "open letters" like this, both from within and without Ontario, so I'll try to keep this brief.
You may have noticed by now that a lot of folks were very upset when the new and improved Waste Diversion Act didn't find its way into the Legislature before the summer break.
We don't have official word as to why this good news bandwagon hit a road block at the finish.  It had been rolling nicely through the system up to this point, and pretty well had all the key players onside, or so we thought.  Even the organizations representing the stewards were quietly preparing for the day when they would be paying 100% of the dollars.
Speculation has it that you were "got at" by a strong industry lobby that understandably opposes anything that takes cost off the taxpayer and puts it where it rightly belongs--on the product itself.
After all, they've had a pretty good ride.
The blue box was almost 20 years old in some places before municipalities saw any kind of significant support toward the cost.
It wasn't till the early 2000s that we saw any real support, albeit as a result of a Waste Diversion Act that put the oft-quoted "shared responsibility model" on the table.  But in many other ways it could also be described kindly as "flawed", and unkindly, but more honestly described as a dog's breakfast.
Fortunately, there was a mandatory review built in and this allowed your very able Environment Minister and his staff to rework the Waste Diversion Act into something that might actually work.
Very few, including this writer, believed full product stewardship for blue box materials could actually be achieved, given the way the act was written.
But give Mr. Gerretsen his due. He not only put the idea squarely on the table with his calls for stewardship plans for