Evidence of meeting #24 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 chemical.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Nothing; we haven't done anything about the gym.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Great, thank you.
Mr. Khosla, as far as the precautionary approach is concerned, you're saying it was established in the 1990s and that nothing has changed since the 1990s, that we can't do a better job of doing it?
Executive Director, Industry Coordinating Group for CEPA
Madam Chair, I am saying that the way in which we should be applying precaution, because it is such a values-based concept, is something that needs to be very firmly grounded in how other people also see precaution and apply it. So I am saying that—
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Chair, I believe the witness should be allowed to answer the question.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
But I think he did give an answer. I know time is short, so we're trying to get a lot out of a very short period of time.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
I don't mean to give offence, Mr. Khosla. It's just that I have limited time and I need to get this information out.
Executive Director, Industry Coordinating Group for CEPA
Please continue.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
If more data emerged from another jurisdiction, a respected jurisdiction, an OECD country, that did show impacts from a given chemical, do you agree that a mandatory reassessment should then undertaken? If we take the precautionary principle at its value, as you've stated, should we have a mandatory reassessment of that chemical?
Executive Director, Industry Coordinating Group for CEPA
Madam Chair, in a large program like the CMP, you have to set priorities. So I have two parts to my answer. One is that, in principle, the answer is yes; meaningful new information should be considered. The second part of my answer is that you have to do that in a priority-driven scheme. There's a lot to be done, so as new information comes in, periodically the government departments have already indicated in the CMP that they will be applying what they call their “feeders framework”.
I think there are seven different streams of information they look at, and they do that continuously. Down in the bowels of the departments, they're doing that continuously. Once in a while, they will bring it all together into a proposal on what to do next.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
You mentioned there would be a conference for this fall. What was the name of that conference?
Executive Director, Industry Coordinating Group for CEPA
It's called the CEPA Update Conference. It's something we hold every 18 months.
Liberal
Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, As an Individual
No, I haven't even been made aware of it.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Is Dayna Scott going to that conference? Sorry. If you're not aware of the conference, you probably wouldn't know him.
Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Liberal
Executive Director, Industry Coordinating Group for CEPA
It's an industry conference, yes.
Liberal