But I don't get it. I'm just a consumer, and already I know from the hazardous products component that this is bad stuff if used incorrectly. Right? To have that reconfirmed in an act that I'm not going to read, as opposed to looking at it on a label that I am going to read.... I don't understand how these are gradations of stigmatization, which I think for the average customer.... Of course it's bad for you under certain conditions. The difference between calling it toxic in CEPA and having a skull and crossbones on the label is a refinement that surely the average person doesn't concern himself or herself with. They just know that you shouldn't do certain kinds of stuff with this product.
Evidence of meeting #14 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was products.
A recording is available from Parliament.