Evidence of meeting #22 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 cepa.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We are just, as individual parliamentarians, making people aware that there is something there.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We're entitled to do that, and I think it would be good if we did. There's some good information there.
Is that fair?
Noon
Liberal
William Amos Liberal Pontiac, QC
It's not what I was seeking. I was seeking a proactive sending by the committee to previous witnesses, but I'm gathering that there's not a lot of consensus around that.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We could discuss that in our subcommittee meeting and see if we can get some consensus on what we might want to do.
Noon
Liberal
William Amos Liberal Pontiac, QC
In any event, I guess the point has been made to the witnesses who were here, and to any who are following the transcript, that it would be very valuable to receive submissions on those two documents provided by the department, which are already in the public domain.
Noon
Liberal
Noon
Liberal
William Amos Liberal Pontiac, QC
I would invite Ms. Duncan to comment on the environmental rights provisions in CEPA, in particular the environmental protection action provision. Has there been litigation pursuant to that provision? Oftentimes, the floodgates argument is floated as being an issue. Has there been a flood of litigation pursuant to the environmental protection action provision?
Noon
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
As I've been elected for the last eight years, and not always in the environment portfolio, I have to say that honestly, I haven't followed it closely. My understanding is that previously, it definitely was not a floodgate.
The vast majority of actions by the environmental community or the public are generally against a government agency, demanding the right to be heard. They're more to do with standing, procedure, judicial review, and so forth. I think the floodgates argument initially put forward has been shown not to be true for that, but I think it's also very important to revisit those sections to make sure that they are updated also, to make sure that they are compliant with the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you very much, Linda. I appreciate it.
We now go to Mr. Shields.
Noon
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to the witnesses today, and to our neighbour to the north from the former city of champions.
Noon
Voices
Oh, oh!
Noon
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Oh, you did have a champion last year. We'll see how your draft picks do this year. Maybe Toronto will figure out how that works.
Ah, sorry, I digress. Never mind—point of order.
Dr. Scott, I found your third principle interesting, the assessment and regulation of toxic substances. Could you just enlarge that a little bit more on that, or go back through it for me, please?
Noon
Associate Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School and the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, As an Individual
The third principle that I mentioned?
Noon
Associate Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School and the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, As an Individual
It should be evidence-based.
I indicate this because sometimes we hear that we have to choose either a precautionary approach or an evidence-based approach. I am really trying to emphasize that we can have a precautionary approach to risk management that is based on sound scientific evidence. In fact, the emerging science, particularly around endocrine disruption, is the kind of evidence that's not adequately being taken into our decisions to date. It would be wrong to suggest that CEPA is now evidence-based and that we'd be moving to something else.
I think we need to move to a more precautionary regime that is also, in fact, even more evidence-based.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
When you say that, I remember lead in paint. Kids chewing on lead in paint was an issue, then the lead in toys, and then you get to our sports world or our police, where they're now going back and looking at evidence because they have a new technology to identify things that they didn't used to be able to identify.
How do we get that science? You say “precautionary”, but we don't have the science that says it isn't. If you don't have that technology, how do you justify that in the science world so that you get to that precautionary stage?
12:05 p.m.
Associate Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School and the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, As an Individual
I think you need to have a regulatory regime that periodically comes back to these reviews of substances, particularly where we have found them to be non-toxic on the basis of not very good evidence or not enough evidence. It's something you might have with respect to the pesticides management regime, where there's a periodic review that happens every few years so that we can get the benefit of the emerging knowledge.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Associate Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School and the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, As an Individual
Yes.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Where is this responsibility in the sense of the science that we talk about? When I think of the sports world or the police world, the science comes from some other source that they then apply. Where do you envision this science in our country coming from to do this? Who's going to do it? You review it in five years. I know where it comes from in the sports and criminology world, but where do you view it coming from?
12:05 p.m.
Associate Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School and the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, As an Individual
I think the science is hopefully going to be done in university labs, within the public sector itself, and some of it will come from industry, from their own research and development that they're doing in trying to develop new products, new substitutes, and those kinds of things. Ideally, we would have a way of incorporating new science from all of those places.
