Green Party Leader Elizabeth May speaks during a news conference in Ottawa on April 25.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press
The federal government’s new environmental-protection law, which gained royal assent on Wednesday, is a missed opportunity and could even weaken protection against toxic substances, environmental groups and the Green Party say.
Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said the updated legislation affirms the right of Canadians to live in a healthy environment and increases scrutiny on the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple chemicals. It also aims to phase out the testing of chemicals on animals.
“By affirming that every individual in Canada has a right to a healthy environment, CEPA [the Canadian Environmental Protection Act] will help protect vulnerable populations and contribute to a stronger, more resilient Canada,” said Mr. Guilbeault.
But Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party, said the first CEPA update in 20 years fails to strengthen the regulations of genetically modified animals and fish, and the dumping of chemicals in the oceans.
“The right to a healthy environment, if you can’t enforce it, is a bumper sticker,” said Ms. May, who voted against the bill. “I will vote for something if it is marginally better than it was in the past, but not if it is worse.”
The David Suzuki Foundation said Wednesday the bill is a “historic win” for environmental rights and it was significant that the right to a healthy environment had been recognized for the first time in federal law.
Ms. May said the effect of the updated act – considered Canada’s flagship environmental law - would be to downgrade some chemicals previously considered toxic. However, she welcomed the phasing-out of toxicity testing of chemicals on animals.
The bill requires the government to publish a plan within two years with steps to promote the development of alternative methods to animal testing.
It follows the government’s ending of cosmetic testing on animals, set out in the budget bill, which is in its final stages in the Senate.
Humane Society International, Canada said many of the toxicity tests on animals are not only cruel but outdated.
“A concerted move away from animal-based toxicity tests could spare tens of thousands of animals each year and advance public health and environmental protection with more advanced and relevant tests for the benefit of all Canadians,” said Shaarika Sarasija, the society’s senior strategist of research and regulatory science.
Liberal and Conservative MPs voted against attempts by the Green Party to strengthen Bill S-5 by making pollution-prevention plans mandatory for all chemicals listed as toxic under the act, a move supported by the Canadian Environmental Law Association.
“At a time where evidence continues to show that toxic pollution is growing, Bill S-5 prioritizes the phase-out and elimination of only a small fraction of the worst toxic substances in Canadian commerce and does not advance the use of safe alternatives in most instances,” said Joseph Castrilli, a lawyer at the association.
“How is it possible that the federal government does not regard this huge class of chemicals as highest risk when they are linked to cancers, birth defects, and liver dysfunctions, and are responsible for widespread contamination of drinking water sources?”
He said the bill had failed to impose mandatory chemical-testing obligations on the private sector where information is not available to determine if a substance is toxic or capable of becoming toxic.
The act would increase the assessment of cumulative effects of exposure to multiple chemicals.
It also brings in fresh environmental assessments of medical drugs that may be flushed away and enter rivers and lakes. Studies have shown, for example, that the birth control pill, entering the sewage system, has interfered with fish’s ability to reproduce.
Nature Canada expressed disappointment that Ottawa did not improve the regulation of genetically engineered animals and fish, including GE Atlantic salmon, farmed on Prince Edward Island.
It said tighter controls were needed to stop GE creatures from escaping and breeding with their wild counterparts, altering the genetic makeup of wild populations.
Mark Butler, senior adviser with Nature Canada, blamed “industry pushback” for the failure to tighten controls on GE animals.
Mr. Guilbeault told an Ottawa press conference that he planned to work as fast as possible to bring in regulations to implement the bill, hoping to do so within two years. He said he would work with provinces and territories, Indigenous nations and interest groups on how to “operationalize” the new right to live in a healthy environment.