Evidence of meeting #27 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was plastics.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Senior Director, Sustainability Innovation and Circular Economy, Retail Council of Canada
Are you talking about our website?
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Yes. There's a link to the report on extended producer responsibility. It says you can download the report, but the link doesn't work. You get the “404 error” message.
4:05 p.m.
Senior Director, Sustainability Innovation and Circular Economy, Retail Council of Canada
I will try to send the report to the committee members.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you.
I'd like to ask you a question. You said earlier that the six items were not toxic. However, in her appearance before the committee, Ms. Curran, a lawyer and environmental law professor, defined the three markers of toxicity: immediate or long-term effects on the environment, an environmental hazard, and a health hazard.
Why does the industry use arguments such as how we interpret the word “toxic”? It seems clear to me that these six items meet all three criteria for toxicity.
4:05 p.m.
Senior Director, Sustainability Innovation and Circular Economy, Retail Council of Canada
I think we agree that these six items are toxic. The problem is that we're talking about manufactured plastic items, and that category includes many more items than these six that people are suggesting be banned.
On these six items, I agree with you. Based on the criteria used, they could be considered toxic.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Okay.
You work in the innovation and sustainability sector. Don't you think it's time the government reduced subsidies to the petrochemical industry so that investments can be made in the recycling and recycled product system?
4:05 p.m.
Senior Director, Sustainability Innovation and Circular Economy, Retail Council of Canada
I can't comment on how the government manages the budget.
I can say, however, that we certainly need more support and incentives for a green economy. We need it to create more packaging in line with the circular economy principle.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
That's right. As I understand it, to set up the circular economy, you have to include processes that are not “petroleum-based”.
My next question is for Mr. Moucachen.
Mr. Moucachen, first, I would like to commend you for your circular economy initiatives. You have entered into a partnership with NOVA Chemicals, which produces virgin resin. Last week, we had a representative from Dow Chemical. It was strange, because that company is not nearly as open as NOVA Chemicals in that respect.
Can you explain how Merlin Plastics managed to create this partnership with NOVA Chemicals?
4:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Merlin Plastics
Customers are driving these changes.
Today, NOVA Chemicals customers want products that contain a percentage of post-consumer recycled material. NOVA Chemicals wants to partner with companies that can help it thrive.
Things have clearly changed. Before, you had to choose between virgin resin and recycled resin. Now, we marry the two. You need both, and NOVA Chemicals understands that.
Dow Chemical once understood that too. When I started out in the industry 30 years ago, I partnered with Dow Chemical. We supplied those materials to Dow Chemical. Its major customers wanted postconsumer recycled materials. That was in the 1980s.
In the 1990s, the Iraq war broke out, and the price of oil dropped to $10 or $11 a barrel. Brand owners no longer wanted to buy recycled materials, because they were more expensive than raw materials.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you.
Apparently Mr. Olivier is with us. Has he arrived, Madam Clerk?
4:05 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes.
4:05 p.m.
Marc Olivier Research Professor, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual
I'm here. I had trouble connecting to you.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay.
You can give your five-minute presentation.
Mr. Bachrach will then have the floor for six minutes to ask questions.
Mr. Olivier, you have the floor.
4:10 p.m.
Research Professor, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual
My thanks to all the committee members.
We have a very special interest. When I say “we”, I am talking about the applied research group of which I am a member, the Technology Transfer Centre for Industrial Ecology.
4:10 p.m.
Research Professor, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual
No, I'm in a broadcasting studio that we use for distance learning at the university.
Can you hear me well enough?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Madam Clerk, is the sound quality good enough for the interpreters?
4:10 p.m.
The Clerk
The interpreters are telling me that they will be able to provide the interpretation.
4:10 p.m.
Research Professor, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual
Thank you very much.
Can you see that I tried to obey all the rules? I even put on a jacket and tie so that I could attend this meeting.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Research Professor, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual
Our angle of attack is a little different from what the other participants are describing or what I'm reading.
Our organization is an applied research centre. We work together with companies on the end of life of materials. However, we don't work directly with consumers; we take no position on how things work in society at large. We look at the materials that come to us or don't come to us. We ask ourselves what we could do to consistently extend their life cycle. I just wanted to start with that clarification.
We receive materials from factories. We receive some from sorting centres. These are household items that have gone through a sorting centre. Of course, we're also asked to join circular economy movements and implement industrial synergies to try to collect as many materials as possible in a given area. It's always about extending life cycles.
There was a meeting again last week. It's becoming clear that everyone wants to do the right thing. We fully agree that a ban is necessary, but it is not enough. Other factors are important to us, especially those related to single-use items. Just plain common sense drives us to try to create something coherent when the materials come to us.
In the short text I submitted, we talk about our vision, which we present in three points. The first point is about not designing single-use plastic items that do not match our recovery and recycling efforts. Only items that can be reused contribute to a sustainable development approach.
The second point says that, if we absolutely must use single-use items in certain situations, then we must choose materials that have a low carbon footprint, but more importantly, that are easy to recover and recycle. Here, I can see that our position goes against that of other participants. According to them, recovery and recycling are smoke and mirrors and they will never matter; what we need to do is ban, ban, ban.
And yet, we have real needs in our society. That's why we developed our third and final point, which we feel is important with respect to single use. The third point states that, if a single-use item absolutely must be made of plastic, buying and distributing it must be conditional on an orderly recovery and recycling plan.
We can establish accreditation bodies that will have organizational and financial responsibility for establishing forms of recovery and reclamation. We know of accreditation bodies that have been set up. Quebec already has five of them up and running and others are in development.
It's truly groundbreaking to claim that we want to address the issue of single-use items. Now, because I can't set aside part of my role as a university professor, I have to tell you, committee members, even if you already know, that we have a special situation. We have an elephant in the room right now, an elephant you refuse to talk about. It's these disposable masks.
Is that not the perfect example of a single-use item for which absolutely nothing has been planned, in terms of recovery and reclamation? They are everywhere now and they're spreading. Let me tell you, I'm under a lot of pressure from students in the academic community right now. They're asking why no mass recovery is being done.
People tell us that they were involved in massive movements before the pandemic to let governments know that they wanted to change how we relate to the environment. Is the best example we can set right now for all those students the shameless waste of tens of billions of disposable masks?
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We are going to have to stop here. It will be possible to come back to this during the first round of questions.
Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours for six minutes.
April 26th, 2021 / 4:15 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all our witnesses. We've heard so much interesting and provocative testimony on this subject over the past few meetings.
Mayor Vodanovic, I have some questions about the municipal role. I'm wondering if you could speak to the way in which a federal ban on single-use plastics would support municipal waste management strategies and operations.
4:15 p.m.
Mayor of the Borough of Lachine, City of Montréal
On a municipal level, we're kind of stuck. We're stuck running recycling plants that at the end can't sell their things. In terms of looking at how to solve municipal issues, well, I'm always looking at the federal government. That's why I'm so happy to be here.
If we do it in just a small way, such as just in my borough, or just in Montreal—we banned plastic bags, and I was on that commission—it's not the most efficient thing. Yes, you can ban things. It's okay, but the best thing is to put a price tag on it. For instance, in Ireland it's a dollar per bag. They stopped using bags, or 90% of them. It's something that a municipality can't do. Only the federal government can act on that.
We need to look across the country on how to work in a system. We want to create a circular system. We don't want to ban certain things, because it won't be effective.