Environment Committee on April 1st, 2019

[The Chair, Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)]

Good afternoon everybody, and welcome.

To our governmental officials, thank you for being here today. Apologies for the late start.

We're going to go with the departmental officials. We'll have the opening statement for up to 10 minutes, and then we'll get into our questioning.

We have an outside witness who is expecting to join us at 4:30 by telephone. That won't give us a lot of time, so we probably won't go the full hour with the departmental officials. We'll move into our second panel with our telephone witness probably at 20 to five or a quarter to five, somewhere in that range. It's all a bit abbreviated today, but that's the kind of day we're having here on the Hill.

Welcome to Monsieur Martel and Monsieur Robillard.

With that, who from the department is going to be making opening comments?

[Helen Ryan, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment]

I will.

[The Chair]

Okay. If you would like to start, please go ahead.

Then, I assume we'll direct questions to all of the departmental officials at the table, many of whom we've met before. Nancy, welcome back.

Ms. Ryan, it's over to you.

[Helen Ryan]

Good afternoon. My name is Helen Ryan, and I'm the Associate Assistant Deputy Minister of the Environmental Protection Branch at Environment and Climate Change Canada.

I am joined today by my colleagues Nancy Hamzawi, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Science and Technology Branch, Jacinthe Seguin and Dany Drouin.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and for your interest in the federal government's work on plastics.

I'd like to begin by providing some context on plastic waste, including our international commitments, the domestic strategy on plastic waste, and waste management in Canada.

Plastics are present in every part of the economy and the lives of Canadians, due to their low cost, durability and high performance. It's really changed a lot of the ways we live in the world. They're especially prevalent in materials and products used in consumer goods, the health sector, the automotive sector, for construction, the textile sector and a myriad of others.

Plastics have caught the world's attention. Plastic pollution is pervasive. It collects on shorelines, in waterways and sediments; it entangles or is ingested by fish, birds and other species, and is found in our food. Plastics of various types and sizes, from macroplastics to microplastics, are found in populated regions and the most remote areas of Canada and the world.

Globally, an average of 8 million tonnes of plastic waste are entering the oceans from land every year. The estimated value of this material leaving the economy as waste is in the billions of dollars. Plastic waste is an important issue affecting ecosystems and economies around the world.

There's considerable momentum internationally to take action on marine litter and plastic waste. Last year, Canada championed the development of the ocean plastics charter during our G7 presidency. The charter contains commitments and concrete targets with respect to recycling, reuse and recovering of plastics, with the goal of stopping the flow of plastics into the environment.

These targets include working with industry towards 100% reusable, recyclable and recoverable plastics by 2030; increasing the recycled content by at least 50% in plastic products, where applicable, by 2030; and working with other orders of government to recycle and reuse at least 55% of plastic packaging by 2030 and recover 100% of all plastics by 2040.

Achieving this targets will keep valuable plastics in the economy—this is what we refer to as the circular economy. To date, 18 governments around the world and 54 organizations have signed on to the charter.

Canada also announced funding of $100 million last year to support developing countries improving their solid waste management systems, for example. We also urged our G7 partners to do the same, as better systems will go a long way to solving the global marine litter problem.

In Canada, the management of plastic waste is a shared responsibility. Provincial and territorial governments manage, for example, the operation of landfill sites and recycling facilities, and their funding and fee structures.

Municipalities generally manage the recycling and composting programs for households, establish litter by-laws and educate citizens on waste reduction. Industry is increasingly playing a role in funding and operating recycling programs as part of producer responsibility programs.

The federal government plays a role through the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes, and by preventing toxic substances from entering the environment.

My department is an active member of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, which is our main forum for collaborating with provinces and territories on issues related to plastic waste. For example, we played a leading role in the development of the Canada-wide action plan on extended producer responsibility, adopted by CCME ministers in 2009. They committed to developing the framework for legislation and promoting a harmonized approach to EPR programs and policies across Canada.

Last November, Minister McKenna and her provincial and territorial counterparts approved in principle the Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste, and also agreed to work collectively toward a common overall waste reduction goal.

Work is currently underway on the development of an action plan on zero plastic waste, which will include measures to address five priority areas in the strategy: product design, single-use plastics, collection systems, markets, and recycling capacity.

Environment and Climate Change Canada is also conducting research, collaborating with other federal departments and engaging with stakeholders and other levels of government to support the move to a circular economy approach to plastics. Recently, my department commissioned a comprehensive economic study of the plastics sector in Canada by Deloitte.

The Deloitte study documents that plastics represented a $35-billion industry in 2017 in Canada. That's for the production, manufacturing and recycling activities. They estimated that in 2016 about 86% of plastic ended up in landfills; 4% was used as fuel or energy, and 1% was lost to the environment. Only 9% was recycled. This represents a lost value of $7.8 billion in 2016. This loss is projected to grow to $11 billion in 2030 if our recycling and recovery rates remain at their current levels.

Over 200 businesses in Canada are involved in plastics recycling, 80 of which make up the core of our recycling sector.

To reach our goals of diverting 55% of plastic packaging from landfills by 2030, and 100% of all plastic waste by 2040, the competitive recycling sector needs the right conditions to expand and diversify.

If we work to increase our diversion rate of plastics to 90% from 9%, we could generate 40,000 new jobs and reduce up to 2 megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.

A I mentioned previously, last November environment ministers launched the Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste. The strategy recognizes the utility and value of plastics in our society and proposes a circular economy approach to reach zero plastic waste and reduce plastic pollution.

The three broad areas of work outlined in the strategy are to prevent plastic waste, to increase its collection and to improve the recovery of plastics back into the economy.

The strategy identifies 10 result areas that require action along the entire life cycle of plastics, and in enabling activities. These areas are product design, single-use plastics, collection systems, markets, recycling capacity, consumer awareness, aquatic activities, research and monitoring, cleanup and global action.

In February, the CCME organized a multi-stakeholder workshop where over 130 participants from across the value chain discussed and debated solutions for the first five results areas of the strategy. The first phase of the action plan will be submitted to environment ministers in June.

Science and research are integral to success. We need to understand the issue and the potential risks. Science and research are needed to make evidence-based policy decisions, to support action, and to help drive innovation.

Experts in our department and across the federal government are working to advance the understanding of plastics in the environment, including their sources, fate and effects.

We recently hosted science workshops focused on identifying priorities for scientific research. Priorities and gaps identified covered the entire life cycle of plastics and included understanding the impacts of plastics on wildlife and human health; standardizing how we monitor and characterize the sources, pathways and fate of plastics in the environment; developing new materials and technologies to increase the recyclability and compostability of plastics; supporting informed usage and disposal of plastics; and innovation to enhance the capture and value recovery of existing and future plastics.

Our researchers are also working with partners to evaluate the impacts of plastic pollution on seabirds, fish, shellfish and plankton. We want to understand how plastics and associated contaminants move through the food chain. This is particularly relevant for some of our northern indigenous partners and needs to consider hunted species, such as seals.

We are also conducting research looking at the long-range transport, source, fate and impacts of plastics in the Canadian Arctic to inform possible mitigation efforts.

We're taking actions to reduce plastic waste in our government operations. Last September, the federal government committed to divert at least 75% of the plastic waste from its operations by 2030. This will be accomplished through changing our practices and through the procurement of more sustainable plastic products, such as those that are reusable, recyclable, repairable or made with recycled plastic content.

Working with Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and other federal departments, we are also supporting Canadian innovation. Over $12 million is being provided to Canadian innovators to tackle plastic challenges in seven key areas: separation of mixed plastics; food packaging; plastic waste from construction activities; ghost fishing gear and marine debris; improved compostability of bioplastics; recycling of glass fiber-reinforced plastic; and sustainable fishing and aquaculture gear.

In total, 124 submissions were received for the innovation challenge for plastics. Winners will be announced later this month.

Other federal actions include the phased—

[The Chair]

Excuse me. We're at the end of the time, so if you could conclude your comments, that will allow us to get in.... I'm sorry to interrupt you.

[Helen Ryan]

Okay.

I would like to highlight that in our international efforts there has been considerable momentum to reduce marine litter and plastic waste. We championed, as I mentioned, the ocean plastics charter during our G7 presidency. There are some specific targets that we've highlighted in there. We've also put forward financing, which I've mentioned already.

In conclusion, we're active on a variety of international and domestic fronts and are taking a comprehensive approach. Many of the solutions are interdependent, and we recognize the need to work with all partners to achieve the vision of a Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste and to contribute to developing a circular economy around plastics.

Thank you for your attention.

I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair]

Excellent. Thank you for those opening comments.

I should have mentioned at the start that this is our first hearing on plastic pollution. We've set aside a total of six two-hour hearings on this. The intention today was to hear from officials, as well as some outside experts—which will continue on Wednesday—to help us understand the nature of the plastics issue facing the planet and the role that Canada could play with federal leadership.

Today we're looking at fairly high-level comments. On Wednesday, at five o'clock, the idea is that we'll go in camera and decide where we want to focus in the remaining four sessions with eight hours of testimony, because we do want to table a report before the session ends. We'll need to be fairly tight, given the limited amount of time we have. On this, we can't study the full range of things.

That's a bit of context for what we're doing.

I would also invite the department to submit the Deloitte report that was referenced. If there are any other materials, you can always send them to our clerk and they can be shared with the committee, which, again, will help us understand the nature of the plastics issue facing the planet.

With that, I will go right to Mr. Amos....

The final thing, looking at the time, is that we have divided the committee into a first round of questions and then a second round. If we go through the first round of four sets of six-minute questions, that will take us to about the end of the time we have for today. That will give the Liberals two rounds, Mr. Fast one and Mr. Stetski one. We'll see where we're at, but that's what I'm thinking. That would be the end of the first round of questions, and then we could get into our second panel.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Abbotsford, CPC]

Mr. Chair, perhaps I could make one comment. I was very much looking forward to having our ministerial staff from the department here with us so that we could scope out the mandate of this study in a way that delivered something of substance for Canadians to review, so my preference would be to add a few minutes to our first panel. I think I am going to value their input very much in terms of scoping out this study, which is a big challenge, because we have effectively only 10 hours' worth of—

[The Chair]

Okay. Let's see where we're at when we get through the first round, even if we could do with an abbreviated second round, and see where that takes us.

[Ed Fast]

Fine.

[The Chair]

Mr. Amos will have the first six minutes.

I'll be using my cards. The yellow card signifies that you have one minute left, and the red card means wrap it up. I'll try to hold this as close as possible to six minutes per person, so please co-operate and respect the cards.

Mr. Amos.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To our witnesses, thank you for your hard work on behalf of Canadians. I'll try to ask a lot of questions, so I will thank you for brief answers.

There is a lot of material here that speaks to the work that our government is doing in research and in intergovernmental collaboration around recycling and reuse, after the plastic is created, and with good reason. As you point out, the statistics show that very little of the plastics that are produced or purchased in Canada are recycled. However, when I knock on doors in my riding, I'm getting, “What are you doing to get rid of the plastics? What are you doing to reduce the use of plastics in the first place?” So I really want to turn our focus to that issue.

I'll come back to the Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste in a moment, but I want to address a couple of comments to the other aspects and ask a few questions on why we're not seeing more of a focus on reduction in the work that Environment Canada is doing. I'm looking at the science workshops and identifying priorities for science research. There's nothing in there on reduction. I'm looking at the government's own sustainable efforts to divert. I'm not seeing much in the way of reduction there in terms of procurement. In terms of other federal actions, the phased ban on microbeads is something about which my constituents will say, “That is a concrete measure. That is a concrete federal measure to reduce.” I think it's something that is quite appreciated.

Why is there not more of an emphasis across the board on reduction on all aspects—research, procurement, etc.—and what measures are being contemplated currently by our government, not in the realm of collaboration with other governments but in the federal government's own jurisdiction, to reduce?

[Helen Ryan]

I think when we look at the issue of plastics, not all plastics present a problem in the environment. Keeping them out of the environment is the challenge for us, as opposed to keeping them out of our economy. Plastic resin, the production of plastic resin in Canada, is a complex $35-billion industry, so it's important for our economy and for the jobs we have here. I think the production and reuse of that plastic are really where we see that we can continue to maximize the economic benefits of it and address the environmental challenge it presents. That's why we approach it from a circular economy perspective, as opposed to saying that all plastics are bad. It's not the plastics that are bad; it's when the plastics get into the environment and then cause issues. That's why the emphasis is in the direction that it's in.

With respect to what risks might be posed from certain other plastics, that's an issue that we need to look at further. I'll turn to my colleague Nancy Hamzawi to answer that part of the question, before moving to your other question with respect to the measures we're doing.

[Nancy Hamzawi, Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment]

Thank you.

With respect to the science agenda, certainly first and foremost we are focused on situating our research agenda to support the policy direction. That being said, in terms of what you've heard about the areas of focus, that's what we've heard in the science symposium. These are the initial conversations we've had with the traditional usual suspects, who are typically in the natural science domain. That's why you hear more about a focus on sources, fates and effects.

One area where we did hear there was a significant gap was in terms of opportunities from a multidisciplinary perspective that could help us lead to those reduction opportunities. At this point in time, we are well on our way to developing a focused science agenda for plastics in Canada, leveraging the capacity within and outside of government. We're hoping to conclude that process later this summer.

[Helen Ryan]

With respect to the specific measures, we've been working through the government operations and our procurement strategy. In September 2018, the Treasury Board Secretariat announced the Government of Canada's action on plastic waste in our federal operations. In there, we're looking at increasing the waste diversion and diverting at least 75% of the plastic waste from our federal operations by 2030. We're reducing the use of single-use plastics in our operations, meetings and events. We're eliminating the unnecessary use of single-use plastics in government operations, events and meetings, and we're looking at procuring sustainable plastic products and promoting the procurement of sustainable plastics and reduction of the associated packaging.

There are some other things we're working on to advance the broader agenda, but with a focus on efforts with respect to government operations.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Just before my time runs out, I'd like to just ask a question. Perhaps we can receive the response in writing. What are the regulatory or legal jurisdictional limitations, in the view of the department, with regard to bans on single-use plastics? In order to have an informed policy discussion within our own committee as we make recommendations, it would be very helpful to know how the government sees that issue.

Thank you.

[The Chair]

With that, we're out of time. Either Mr. Amos can get a written response to that, or somebody else may pick that up and we'll get to it before the end of the day.

Mr. Fast, you have six minutes.

[Ed Fast]

Thank you, Ms. Ryan, for all the work that your department does in addressing plastics pollution.

I note your comment that not all plastic is bad. It is a huge industry that drives economic prosperity in Canada, so we have to be very judicious in how we address the various challenges facing us.

Because we're trying to scope out the study, we want to make sure that, with the time available to us, we really produce something of value. I'd be interested to hear from you about where you feel our study should take us. There's a whole global context, especially oceans pollution from Asian countries. Canada may not be a major contributor to that, but it could be a contributor to resolving some of those challenges.

There's a whole issue of whether we focus on studying recycling, or perhaps reduction, as Mr. Amos has suggested. Do we focus on a specific type of pollution, say, microbeads or single-use plastics? You've also referenced waste and waste water in your presentation, and you referred to some of the global challenges we have. I'd be interested to know whether you feel the study should, within the context of the limited amount of time we have, focus on planetary leadership, as opposed to domestic leadership, or do you have another suggestion? We're trying to have you help us scope out the size of this study.

[Helen Ryan]

That's a tough question to answer. With respect to the complexity of this issue, if I were to try to think what might be helpful in the context of the time that you have to help advance the collective agenda and where you would best place your efforts, my sense would be around the systems dimension of plastics—but it's complicated. My sense would be that you should focus on domestic versus international, because I think our actions at home are going to matter and will influence what we do abroad. The very dimension that we spoke about, which is the importance of plastics in our economy, is huge for us. We need to deal with that issue, while at the same time dealing with the end result that comes from whether it's disposed of rather than reused.

That would be my free advice to you, but that's not an easy task. I don't know if my colleagues have further thoughts.

[Ed Fast]

I'll follow up with another question. Mr. Amos has suggested to this committee—perhaps rightfully so—that we should be focusing on a study of reducing plastics, as opposed to perhaps spending a lot of time on the recycling aspect of it. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on that. My mind is open, so this is not a partisan issue here at the table. We want to make sure we're focusing on something that we can really get our teeth into.

[Helen Ryan]

I'll go back to my earlier comment, with respect to the value of plastics in the Canadian economy. I'm not certain that reducing plastics is actually the solution we're looking for. I think what we're looking for is keeping the value of the plastics in our economy, and not in the environment. Doing so will create economic opportunities for Canada, and at the same time address the environmental issues we're facing.

If you say, “Well, I'm going to focus on reducing plastics,” my sense is that it may lead you a little astray, in terms of trying to figure out which plastics you're trying to reduce, and to what end. That would speak to the comment of my colleague Nancy with respect to understanding the fate and impact, in order to then figure out which ones you should target. At this stage, that would be, in my view, a bit premature. That's my advice with respect to that.

[Ed Fast]

Would anybody else from the panel like to speak?

[Jacinthe Seguin, Director, Plastics Initiative, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment]

I think you asked the million-dollar question. It's one that we've pondered a lot as well, especially when the public's attention is on straws and bags. We'll happily share some stats with you. One of the reasons we're looking at the entire system, and some big parts of the system that we could actually try to change, is that straws are 0.1% of the waste stream. Single-use plastics are also a very small portion of the waste stream, albeit a visible one, and probably a visible one for Canadians or the public at large. As Helen mentioned, there's a lot of value in looking at some of the bigger pieces of the system, such as our recycling capacity and the value of those activities in the economy, and how to enhance them so we can recover more.

We export plastics, plastic waste, but we also import a whole bunch as well. We've been trying to figure out what those big pieces are that can actually move us toward a much higher degree of recovery. Certainly, reduction is near and dear to everyone's heart. We're looking at it a little bit, but it raises a lot of difficult questions as well: What do you reduce, and why?

[Ed Fast]

Thank you.

[The Chair]

We'll move over to Mr. Stetski.