Environment Committee on March 15th, 2021

[Jo-Anne St. Godard]

I think we'd be looking to landfill.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Right. Okay. Would our landfills currently have the capacity for that?

[Jo-Anne St. Godard]

I can't answer the question because we don't have good data to even know what 90% export actually means.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Yes. Okay, so maybe not.

If I can, I'm going to go to Ms. Khan with my remaining two minutes.

I want to go back to what I've heard from a number of you presenting to us today. It's that the problem we're trying to solve, or that at least was articulated by Mr. Davidson, is how plastic waste is disposed of at its final destination. What I've heard from a number of you, including Ms. St. Godard just a moment ago, is that we need transparency, line of sight and accountability—those are some of the words you've all used—to ensure that these materials are properly disposed of or recycled, whichever the case may be.

Ms. Khan, is it your perspective or the perspective of the David Suzuki Foundation that the solution to this problem therefore is the implementation of the Basel Convention? Is that essentially what you're telling us?

[Dr. Sabaa Khan]

What essentially I'm telling you is that the Basel Convention is the highest international legal standard—also the international minimum legal standard—when it comes to transboundary movement of hazardous waste and certain other waste.

Plastic waste has newly been introduced into that framework as another waste that needs to be controlled under the procedure of prior informed consent. This doesn't mean that the global plastic waste trade has been banned. In fact, there are no bans in place. It is simply a procedure for transparency to make sure that an accountability chain has been set up, so I believe that Canada needs to ramp up its pace in implementing the Basel Convention obligations.

This is a very purposeful ratification that Canada did. Initially, in the month of March, Canada indicated that it would not accept the plastic waste amendments. In that case, the agreement that it had made with the U.S. would have been fine, because it wouldn't have had to control annex II Y48 wastes under the prior informed consent controls. However, in December Canada retracted its non-acceptance and officially accepted and ratified those amendments.

The EU has already put these amendments into domestic legislation. Any trade between the EU and Canada of dirty mixed plastics has to go through the PIC controls, the prior informed consent controls, and has to basically go through notification and consent.

We would like to see Canada meet the international minimum standard for exporting plastic wastes and meet its obligations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thanks.

We have time for one more round.

We will start with Mr. Albas for five minutes.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, thank you to all the witnesses.

Mr. Masterson, I would like to ask you.... I'm sorry we keep going back to this. I want to make sure, when we make these changes, that they are done through a proper process and that those concerns are heard.

Would keeping the existing bill but exempting clean, sorted and labelled plastic waste for recycling address your concerns and the concerns about ensuring that proper recycling can continue?

[Bob Masterson]

It would not do so entirely. I think you have to come up with a very clear definition of “final disposal”. Also, as discussed, you will still have mixed bales, mixed loads of plastic.

One of the main concerns is that the bill has to be crafted in a way that allows the integrated North American economy, which includes an integrated approach to waste management, to continue to operate, or at least be aware of what the repercussions will be, depending on what the final definitions are.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

I appreciate your pointing out that this multi-faceted solution needs to be found, and particularly your comments around provincial regulation having to step up and create scale within Canada as part of it.

Put another way, does your industry ultimately have a problem with banning raw, non-recyclable waste from export, as this bill seeks to do?

[Bob Masterson]

I'm going to defer to my colleague Ms. Mantagaris on this one. I've handled most of the questions, and her voice deserves to be heard. I think she was hoping to talk more about some of the solutions.

[Elena Mantagaris, Vice-President, Plastics Division, Chemistry Industry Association of Canada]

Thanks, Bob.

I'm sorry, Mr. Albas. You're asking whether we have an objection to the export of.... Can you repeat that?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Ultimately, do you have a problem with banning non-recyclable, raw waste from exports, as this bill seeks to do?

[Elena Mantagaris]

We do have a concern. Let me come back to the definition of “final disposal” and what it actually means or doesn't mean in the context of this document.

Many of you will be familiar with one of our leading members, Ice River Springs water company. They are a “no waste” facility. They have a by-product, ultimately, an element of the plastic that they recycle, that they can't use. It's called purge. They purge it from their system, and it is exported as blocks. It gets used as filler in the manufacturing sector for sofas and couches.

Do we consider that to be “final disposal“? Do we consider it a proper reuse of material in another environment? How are we defining this stuff?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes, but again, would it be labelled? It could be categorized on its own and separated out so that it's not mixed waste. It is obviously a resource. If we created an exemption, it would clearly cover products such as that.

[Elena Mantagaris]

This is one example. We would have to see the list of what is being exempted before I could provide any kind of blanket statement like that.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes. I get a sense, though, that if it's clean and it's sorted and it has value, then we should allow that chain to continue uninterrupted.

[Elena Mantagaris]

Absolutely.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

That's it. Okay.

Are you concerned that shipments of plastic waste to developing countries from the United States have not decreased and that the U.S. could act as a transfer point for Canadian raw waste to get around the Basel Convention?

[Elena Mantagaris]

Canada has signed the Basel Convention, and if there's a requirement for additional rigour in the type of tracking that's being proposed, the government may wish to consider that. We know that many of our member companies are trading plastic waste that is repurposed and reused in new plastic products, and that is the kind of trade and support of recycling and the circular economy that we want to see continue.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

To that point, though, our analyst has set up some very good charts. You see quite clearly the Chinese decision and a drop in exports. Then you see a slow and then sudden spike to the United States.

Again, The New York Times did a piece this past week that outlined concerns within the United States. I take it, though, that your industry wants to be part of the solution, wants to be positive, because ultimately we can do this in Canada. Is that not right?

[Elena Mantagaris]

Yes, we can.

Not having seen the data in front of me, the recycling facilities continue to grow and expand, both in Canada and the U.S., so part of that trade expansion is the expansion of the recycling system that we want to see.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes, okay. I think that goes back to my point about making sure there's a clear carve-out for clean, sorted and labelled recyclable material that could be utilized up the value chain.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

We'll go to Ms. Saks for five minutes.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all our witnesses who have come here today to help us unpack this so we have a clearer understanding of where we can improve and also know how we can better use the tools we have.

Mr. Masterson or Ms. Mantagaris, I think you have plenty to offer to this conversation today. Does the chemistry industry overall support Bill C-204? Can we know where you sit on this bill? I'm jumping off where my colleague Mr. Schiefke initially asked the question of Mr. Masterson.

[Bob Masterson]

No. Again, it's a categorical “no” to the bill as written.

Do we support the Basel Convention? Absolutely. Do we support other means to address plastic waste? Absolutely. A one-sentence bill for a complex issue like this, given the size of the economy you're talking about and the issues we have to solve, is not an acceptable bill for the problem at hand. I think we've heard everybody say the same, with suggestions of an amendment here, an amendment here.

One of the MPs suggested giving this adequate consideration when we're in the discussion on the reform of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. That would be much more acceptable. This bill is not commensurate with the challenges at hand. It's a categorical “no”.