Evidence of meeting #32 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 standards.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
It seems to me we have a patchwork. We have voluntary standards over here, government standards over there, and all kinds of different things. Let me get more clarification from our witnesses.
I'll start with Catherine. In your opinion and from your organization's opinion, is this patchwork of voluntary standards effective in protecting the health of Canadians and protecting our environment? Are we doing a good enough job on that front?
Vice-President, Environment, Forest Products Association of Canada
I think it depends on the jurisdiction you're taking a look at. I think it's an important role of the federal government to do that review, actually, and that's why I was talking about performance standards earlier. It is reasonable from our perspective that the federal government may want to verify that indeed the intentions are being addressed. Are permits in B.C. sufficient? It's a regulatory mechanism in Alberta; is that sufficient? Is the point of impingement in Ontario sufficient?
We have not only a patchwork that you're referring to, but also a patchwork in approaches. They are very different; hence, as industry, when we have all of these different regulations coming at us based on very different means, it's extremely burdensome and very frustrating, and it's limiting in terms of moving forward.
There is no black and white answer to your question, I'm sorry to say. It is very jurisdiction-specific.
President, Environmental Education Association of the Yukon
I would agree with what she says, but one thing I would like to add is that any sort of voluntary commitment really hinges on a basic question that I don't think is in CEPA and may be outside the purview of CEPA, and that is that we haven't figured out yet what we want our economy to do.
I'll digress for just a minute. Next year I'm part of an international sailing expedition circumnavigating North America to call attention to climate change. Two of our largest sponsors are private businesses that you would not think would be supportive of the whole science of climate change; that's Wal-Mart corporation and DuPont. I'm convinced that both of those large-scale businesses are making serious attempts to voluntarily change the way they do business, and I look at that as extremely positive.
How that filters down through CEPA into local jurisdictions I don't know, but I know that large corporations can be great teachers when it comes to some of these issues, if there's some clarity on how government wants to allow them to operate.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
From a philosophical perspective, I would agree with that. I like nothing more than when consumers, through their own choices, dictate where society is going to go. I think we have a very enlightened consumer society in Canada that chooses conscientiously a lot of the products they have.
Now that you've mentioned DuPont and Wal-Mart, I would agree that most organizations and corporations in Canada are great corporate citizens when it comes to environmental protection. Where there are a few failings, that's where I see, from my personal opinion, that government has to step in, be clear, and put in regulations to make sure those who aren't necessarily going along with where the nation wants to go have to step up. I'm glad to see that you're not condemning businesses and corporations out-and-out, but I think you're absolutely right: that's where it needs to come from.
I don't mean to cut you off, but it sounds as though the button is going on my time. Let me just get some last-minute comments from Ms. Broten, please.
Senior Policy Advisor, Reach for Unbleached Foundation
The patchwork makes life extremely difficult for people in communities. For example, I mentioned the ozone and particulate Canada-wide standard, which they're now considering in British Columbia when they assess a new polluter--when somebody wants a permit to put in a new boiler or something. But what they do is say the air is not going to be polluted “up to” the Canada-wide standard, so it's okay, whereas the Canada-wide standard was supposed to be the bottom line. It said, this is what we think is achievable, but you're not supposed to make clean areas dirty. But now our government is interpreting it as so long as it doesn't get as bad as the Canada-wide standard, it's okay.
That's the trouble with a voluntary, unenforceable thing.
December 4th, 2006 / 4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Are there any other questions from any members?
Thank you very much. You can tell you came on a day when people's minds are somewhere else--in the House, with Bill C-30 being tabled today and being sent to committee later today.
I want to thank our witnesses. Your testimony is very welcome, and Tim has it all on tape, so it'll be part of our report.
Thank you very much.
