Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on Feb. 13th, 2007

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I'm talking about as it's written now.

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

Do you mean as CEPA is written, or as we deal with air pollutants now?

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I mean as Bill C-30 is written.

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

It's as Bill C-30 is written.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Is there a difference, for example, between objectives and standards?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

The recommendation, we said, was to clarify the use of the word “objective”, and suggest replacing it with the word “standard”. By standard, we mean something that's legally enforceable.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Is your reading of Bill C-30 as currently presented, that we do not in fact have clearly enforceable air quality standards?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

At the moment, even before Bill C-30, we have standards. As for whether they're legally enforceable or not, they haven't been court challenged yet. They're just a standard. The bill itself suggested objectives that didn't hit the nail on the head, if you will, for the fact that they're going to be regulated. Objectives are regulated standards.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

So in order to satisfy Mr. Warawa, we will be waiting for an amendment to clarify the point that, in terms of air quality, we're absolutely dealing with enforceable standards. So perhaps we can look forward to a government amendment on that. It's just an observation.

Let me also understand that you've raised a number of other issues. One, which has been raised as well by environmental organizations, is the whole question of altered equivalency provisions. I gather that whereas the current bill refers to “equivalency of effect”, you take exception to that and would rather we had “equivalency of regulation”. Could you explain your concerns about what Bill C-30 seems to be doing in terms of altering what we have under CEPA?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

What we have under CEPA, I think, doesn't use the word “effects” or “regulations”. Regulations are one of many options that CEPA allows for. Whether they're used or not is sort of secondary to the act. Of course, we all want the correct effect, but having gone through many examples of voluntary reductions from various emission sources and worried that they're not actually being met in some cases, we hope that we would achieve better emission reduction through regulations.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

So again, what we need are mandatory regulations, which Mr. Warawa would suggest the government is interested in bringing in for this equivalency provision?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

That's right, as long as the regulatory level is low enough to improve and protect of air quality.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Mr. Manning, you have five minutes.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our guests for their appearance here today. We certainly thank you for the recommendations you have put forward for amendments to Bill C-30, which is before for us.

I noted with interest some of the statistics that Mr. Maybee used. There were certainly some eye-openers for sure. I found one stat that I always knew to be high, but not that high. As Canadians, we spend 90% of our time indoors. The environment is on the top of people's agenda across the country now, but certainly indoor air and taking care of things at home here in our own country are priorities for everybody.

A new guideline on radon will be a basis for a national radon strategy. In your presentation, you mentioned the notion that government is to be congratulated on its recent action to reduce the radon guidelines. Would you like to elaborate on some of the things that you would like to see under Bill C-30, with which the government could go forward to more or less further that strategy?

[Kenneth Maybee]

Are you talking specifically on the radon strategy?

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Yes.

[Kenneth Maybee]

First and foremost, the guidelines have been approved by the province and territories. We are currently working with Health Canada on some strategies. There was an international conference that took place in January on radon. We believe what has to happen is the guidelines have to be promulgated, the information is passed out; that Central Mortgage and Housing gets involved and certainly all the provinces; then that education, communications, and awareness go out. There's a great deal of work that can be done. It can be remediated reasonably at a reasonable cost, but we have to get the information out and we have to get people who are qualified to do the remediation in place and get the equipment to do it.

I think it's a good initiative. It's going to take some time. They'll need some pilot projects. It is the second leading cause of lung cancer after tobacco, so it is an important issue.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

I live on the east coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in a small fishing community, so smog is not a major concern of ours. It's fog that's a major concern at certain times of the year.

I had the opportunity to be in downtown Toronto last summer and I was totally amazed at the amount of smog. I just can't understand.... It's certainly not a very healthy environment to live in. I know that you've done some research on that. Can you tell us from your research, and maybe Dr. MacKinnon could touch on it, just how serious and how bad the smog is in our larger cities in Canada at the present time?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

Gosh, I could quote you some of the days, which are increasing every summer, when they have levels of smog that have triggered an air quality alert in Toronto, for example. The numbers are increasing. I think that has to do with our increasing trend of warmth, which has to do with climate change as much as emissions.

It's a serious problem principally for people who are predisposed to that problem--for example, people with pre-existing cardiovascular disease, people with pre-existing respiratory disease, small children, the elderly. These are the typical groups that you would say are at most risk from this. Even healthy people perhaps who are working very strenuously outside or jogging outside may notice a decrement in their ability to breathe. The answer to you is that it's a range of problems, depending on how sensitive you are to the issue.

The Ontario Medical Association estimated for all of Ontario--and that's for the whole province--that about 5,800 people die each year from air pollution. And death is at the top of the health effects pyramid. There are many more people affected with lesser outcomes, such as lost workdays, or having to access the health care system and spend money on drugs, and so on. It's a serious problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Mr. Manning, you have about ten seconds. Make it really quick.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

In trying to deal with climate change throughout the world and with climate change here within Canada and with emissions, I'd like to get your opinion on whether it should be our priority as members of the House of Commons to take care of our own backyard first and to deal with the concerns that we have in Canada, as it relates to the health of Canadians, before we go trying to straighten out the rest of the world. What would be your opinion on that?

[Dr. Barbara MacKinnon]

I think you have to do both.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Thank you.

Mr. Holland, for five minutes, please.