Evidence of meeting #156 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was single-use.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Helen Ryan  Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
Nancy Hamzawi  Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
Dany Drouin  Acting Executive Director, Plastics Initiative, International Affairs Branch, Department of the Environment
Jacinthe Seguin  Director, Plastics Initiative, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Good afternoon, everyone.

This is our final hearing of our plastic pollution study. I welcome Madame Gladu and Mr. Shields, who are joining us today.

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

It's an honour to be with you folks.

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

It's always a pleasure to see you.

To our departmental officials, thank you for coming back. I know we had you here at the beginning of our study. We've had about 10 hours of testimony. Our intention was that as we processed what we heard from witnesses, it would be good to go back to the department with some questions that we might have on federal jurisdiction and what is and isn't possible, and just to try to tidy up some of the other things we've been hearing and to get your thoughts on them.

I understand that you will be making opening statements for up to 10 minutes. With that, I'm happy to turn it over to you to get started, and then we'll get into our questions and answers.

My intention is to go through our two rounds of questions and then see where we're at. We might not need to go any further than that. We'll play it by ear.

We'll go to the department now for opening statements.

May 13th, 2019 / 3:30 p.m.

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

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm pleased to be here with you again.

My name is Helen Ryan, and I am the associate assistant deputy minister of the environmental protection branch at Environment and Climate Change Canada.

I'm joined today by my colleagues Dany Drouin; Nancy Hamzawi, the assistant deputy minister of our science and technology branch; and Jacinthe Séguin.

I understand the focus of the session today is on the questions you have provided, and I am happy to go over them with you. We have also submitted written responses to your questions.

In the course of your study, you've heard from many stakeholders along the plastics value chain, as well as from environmental organizations. I think you'll agree that the plastic waste question has many different angles and issues associated with it. I look forward to reading the recommendations that you'll put forward in your upcoming report.

From the testimony you've heard, major themes have included the state of the science regarding plastic and marine litter, commitments under the ocean plastics charter, the role of extended producer responsibility, the potential for national standards and requirements, and the federal government's jurisdictional authority to pursue things such as bans or other regulations for things such as single-use plastics.

With respect to the ocean plastics charter, these commitments are voluntary. The charter is not legally binding, and signatories, who are government and industry partners, are invited to implement the objectives and commitments of the charter within their respective jurisdiction and in their areas of influence. About 20 governments and about 60 industries have signed on to the charter to date.

In support of the charter, Canada committed $100 million to support the development of plastic waste solutions in developing countries. The commitment includes support for waste management, funding to spark innovation through the G7 innovation challenge to address marine litter, and public-private partnerships through the World Bank's PROBLUE fund and the World Economic Forum's global plastics action partnership.

As mismanaged municipal solid waste in select developing countries accounts for an estimated 50% to 70% of plastics wastes that are entering the world's ocean and needs in the order of U.S. $5 billion annually to help achieve the ambitious reductions we're targeting, this financial commitment we have put forward remains modest.

You've asked for clarification on the European Union's recent targets on plastic waste and how they compare with the targets set in the the ocean plastics charter. In June 2018, the European Union endorsed the EU strategy for plastics in a circular economy. The strategy includes targets for design of products and packaging for reuse and recyclability, and improving the uptake of recycled content in new products.

The European Union ecodesign directive also sets out rules and requirements for environmental performance of products, many of which include plastics.

More recently, the consideration of a single-use plastics directive intends to target specific products designated as major contributors to marine litter in the EU context. The ocean plastics charter takes a comprehensive approach rather than focusing on specific products, committing to targets for both single-use and durable plastics.

The commitments made by the EU do not surpass the commitments made in the charter, as their scope is slightly different. However, the legal nature of the EU plastics directive can help to ensure stricter compliance by countries to help meet their targets.

As we work with our provincial and territorial counterparts in the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, actions by other jurisdictions are references to inform federal actions.

Regarding the commitment of the provinces and territories under the 2009 Canada-wide action plan for extended producer responsibility—EPR—the provinces and territories have made uneven progress in implementing phase 1 and have not moved beyond limited measures for the plastic products covered under phase 2. This means that the biggest source of plastic waste, which is packaging, is subject to some form of recycling program under EPR in only five provinces, with B.C. being the only jurisdiction coming close to offering recycling for a broad number of plastic packaging products.

However, it should be noted that nearly all provinces have a deposit return system for plastic drink bottles, which results in about 70% recovery of these bottles nationally.

We have provided a table with our written responses that gives more detail on the programs offered by the different provinces and territories.

You also asked us about options for federal regulation of plastic products in the context of single-use plastics, EPR programs, recycling targets, or deposit-return schemes.

The federal government first needs to access appropriate regulatory powers to do this. To gain this access, plastics, or a subset of plastics, must be added to schedule 1, which is our list of toxic substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Regulatory measures under CEPA could then be proposed where the science warrants action because of the harmful effects on the environment or danger to human health.

ECCC has used voluntary environmental performance agreements with industry sectors to achieve release targets or meet environmental quality objectives in other areas. These require negotiations with industry sectors to complete. They are non-binding, but they could be options for a variety of other products containing plastic, such as durable goods.

So we have flexibility in the tools available to us, both our regulatory ones—if we add an element of plastics to our list of toxic substances—and our voluntary ones.

Some provinces, such as P.E.I., and municipalities, such as Victoria, B.C., are breaking ground by using their authorities to ban plastic bags, takeout containers, and some single-use products.

I hope this information is useful to the committee, and I'd be happy to answer any further questions you may have.

Thank you again for your contribution to our understanding of plastic waste and the options for its management in Canada.

Thank you very much.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Thank you for those opening comments.

Committee members, everybody should have seen the responses to our questions that we received from the department. They were circulated previously in both official languages. Those are out there for our information as well.

We'll go into our questions and answers now, with Mike Bossio for the first six minutes of questions.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Thank you all so much for being here once again. You've been regulars at the environment committee overall, and we're very appreciative of the testimony and your helping us to better understand how we can reduce the amount of plastic in our environment and the contamination being caused by it. As we've heard from so much testimony, only 9% of our plastics are making it to recycling. We have to do better. Nine per cent just doesn't cut it, and we're seeing the impacts of that globally.

We just finished Earth Day collections last weekend and the weekend before in many different municipalities, and the vast majority of waste seen in the ditches in our rural communities is plastic. It disgusts people.

We've heard different testimony on regulating plastic. If I understand correctly, you recommend putting plastic under schedule 1 of CEPA. Could we then take a number of different measures, such as regulating recyclability and banning toxic plastics such as PVC and polystyrene and the like, as well as other single-use plastics? Could we take it as far as banning the landfilling of plastic to help enforce recyclability, putting a moratorium on it so that all plastics are created recyclable and then ensuring that all plastics are collected for recycling?

I'm just wondering how far you feel the authority of the federal level of government goes to take national actions on plastic pollution. Can we go this far under CEPA?

3:40 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

In terms of accessing our CEPA authorities, it's important that we first conclude an assessment that identifies what the nature of the risk is. Based on that, we can take the appropriate action that's warranted to help manage those risks to the environment or to human health. As I mentioned, access to these authorities is gained by adding the substances to schedule 1, which is our list of toxic substances. The regulatory measures under CEPA that could be proposed would have to be aligned, as I mentioned, with what's been identified in terms of the areas that warrant action because of their harmful effects. Provinces such as P.E.I. and municipalities such as Victoria have used their regulatory authorities to ban single-use plastic bags, for instance. P.E.I. has passed the Plastic Bag Reduction Act, and Victoria applies a by-law through its powers to regulate business transactions.

In terms of the federal government, we have a variety of measures that we can use depending on what the nature of the risk is. That needs to be determined based on the conclusion of the assessment.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Once again, if we find that once it's under schedule 1, and we've done all of those assessments to determine its toxicity and the impacts on the environment, is it possible...?

We heard Dr. Liboiron from Newfoundland, and then another doctor whose name I can't remember, talking about how plastic acts like a sponge in the environment by drawing other toxic chemicals surrounding it into itself, thereby further contaminating the environment with that sponge effect. Then it breaks down and is consumed by different aquatic species, etc.

Under those authorities, is there anything that would limit the federal government's ability to take actions such as recyclability, harmonization, EPR, banning certain substances, banning landfilling? Is there anything that would be a barrier to the federal government's taking action to that extent?

3:40 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

By adding a substance to the toxic substances list it enables a wide range of regulatory actions under CEPA. As I mentioned, they do need to be targeted to help get at the issue that warrants action. They can include setting targets on the aspects of the substance through its life cycle, from the research and development stage through to manufacturing, use, storage, export, transport and disposal. This could include a total, partial or conditional ban on the manufacturing, use, processing, sale, offering for sale, import or export of a plastic substance or products that contain that substance.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

So it's a tentative yes, depending upon the analyses and assessments that are done on the different forms of plastic and their levels of measured toxicity?

3:45 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

CEPA provides us with a wide variety of tools that can be used. I've covered the spectrum of what they could be used for. Depending on what the assessment concludes in terms of the nature of the action that's warranted, you can then target it in response to that.

Since we've not yet concluded the assessment, I'm not in a position to be more specific.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

I have just one addendum to that. If Europe has already made those assessments and labelled these substances toxic, can we use those assessments that have already been generated in other jurisdictions?

3:45 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

I'll turn that question over to my colleague Nancy.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Again, we're out of time, but I'll let you answer quickly because we do have some time.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Thank you, Chair.

3:45 p.m.

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

As in the case for microbeads, we can do a state of the science and pull from the best available knowledge globally. It will help us in terms of fast-tracking in that scenario.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Thank you all so much for being here.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Monsieur Godin, you have six minutes.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here. We are seeing each other more regularly and are going to become neighbours, if not friends. We are going to build relationships. Let's stop here for now and see how things go from there.

Some witnesses have told members of this committee that there is a problem. Everyone around the table here agrees that plastic is a problem. I understood from your presentation, Ms. Ryan, that there is a jurisdictional problem, but I think the problem is bigger than that.

Plastics must be a priority, and not just at the territorial, provincial and national level. We must look at this major problem in a global way. Canada, from east to west, collects a lot of plastic that it does not control. It's people from other countries who are polluting the planet. We must go beyond provincial and federal regulations.

What is the best advice you could give to us legislators so that there are concrete results? What would allow us to measure the results so that, at last, we can begin to have the hope of cleaning our planet of plastic?

3:45 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

Thank you for your question.

The problems of plastic waste affect us all. I wouldn't say it's a jurisdictional problem, but rather that municipalities, provinces, territories, the federal government, countries, industry and consumers must contribute and each have a role to play.

Initiatives have been taken internationally as part of the ocean plastics charter. Several countries are joining us in meeting this challenge, and it will require concerted action by all countries.

We're just coming out of a triple-COP meeting, and at the Basel Convention we worked together with other countries to put forward amendments that were agreed to, with the addition of taking action to strengthen the control of the transboundary movement of certain plastic waste. We've all collectively and internationally agreed to this. I think it's those kinds of collective action and domestic action that are happening. It's the action by individuals, both at home and abroad, that's going to help us resolve this issue and achieve the targets we're looking for of zero plastic waste.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

In your presentation, you said that the ocean plastics charter is not legally binding. But if we don't set binding rules or guidelines in order to achieve a specific objective, with human beings the way they are, it is easy to put off dealing with the problem.

In the various forums, all environmentalists in Canada are alarmist. The provinces, territories, municipalities and countries agree that there is a problem and intend to take action to address it. Canada is investing $100 million internationally, but it is agreed that this amount will have a minimal impact. I don't believe that Canada is taking a leadership role and is not demonstrating through its actions that it wants concrete results.

We have heard testimony throughout our study on plastics that there is a recycling problem. The municipalities all have good intentions, but they haven't established any standards. Companies that can recycle plastic have difficulty finding it. They don't have enough and have to buy it abroad. There is a problem.

Where do we start in order to address this issue of reducing plastic? I know it's a really big question, a killer question, but we are going to kill plastic, not ourselves.

3:50 p.m.

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

Helen Ryan

Thank you for your question.

I'll come back to my answer. It's really by working together at all levels that we'll solve this problem.

Last November, we established a pan-Canadian strategy. We are working with the provinces and territories to develop a waste reduction action plan, which includes measures focused on recycling and waste management. The first phase of the action plan will be proposed to the minister in June. These are the kinds of measures we need to put in place, in addition to all the other measures I have mentioned to you.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Thank you.

Mr. Drouin, briefly.

3:50 p.m.

Dany Drouin Acting Executive Director, Plastics Initiative, International Affairs Branch, Department of the Environment

With regard to the ocean plastics charter, there are two ways to take voluntary action. The charter is more in line with international agreements, in that it sets objectives to be achieved within a given period of time and indicates with whom we can work. For instance, we can work with industry to ensure that, by 2030, 100% of products are recyclable and reusable or that 55% of plastic is recycled by 2030, and 100% by 2040.

This type of approach allows members to have a better idea of what they are signing and with what they are committing. It also allows them to show the public that they support the charter. That's why many developing countries are interested in the charter.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John Aldag

Mr. Stetski, for six minutes.