Environment Committee on May 5th, 2021

[Helen Ryan]

Thank you for your question.

We do have a work plan for the single-use plastics program.

You mentioned producer responsibility and the targets established in 2009, but they did not specifically address plastics. Now we have targets for plastics as well. As part of our work plan, we are developing program guidance, which should be released by the end of the year.

You also asked about funding. That's another dimension of the work plan. Before the end of the year, an infrastructure assessment will be conducted to identify the improvements that need to be made throughout the plastics life cycle. We are also working on an initiative for funding access. That's one of the specific components of the action plan. We are working closely with our provincial and territorial counterparts to that end. It is part of phase 1 of the Canada-wide action plan on zero plastic waste.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

If I understand correctly, then, part of your role is to make funding-related recommendations.

I want to ask about something that was raised at the committee's first meeting on single-use plastics. An expert on marine biology and the biological effects of plastics, Ms. Rochman, told us that the quantity of microplastics emitted into the Great Lakes could triple by 2030—that's not that far away.

Of the $2.2 million for research under the strategy, how much is going to microplastics, with the Great Lakes in mind?

[Helen Ryan]

Thank you for your question.

I'm going to ask Marc D'Iorio to answer that.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

All right.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have about 25 seconds, Mr. D'Iorio.

[Dr. Marc D'Iorio, Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment]

Okay.

The request for proposals was based on different themes. I don't know off the top of my head how much was allocated to microplastics research and how much was allocated to research on the rest of the plastics life cycle, but we can get back to the committee with the information once we have it.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes, please. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Bachrach, you may go ahead.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to Ms. Ryan and her team for being with us today and answering our questions.

My first question, Ms. Ryan, relates to the timeline. I believe the government has stated that the regulations are going to be in place by the end of 2021. Could you inform us as to whether things are on track and what might be the expected date for the regulations to be finalized and come into force?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Was that for Ms. Ryan?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Yes, that's correct.

I think she's looking for something.

[Helen Ryan]

I am. I'm looking to make sure I don't mislead you with my answers. I apologize for that.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

It's not a problem.

[Helen Ryan]

With respect to the work to advance the regulations, as I mentioned in my earlier comments, we issued the discussion document, which laid out the proposal in terms of how we would approach it for public comments. We received a number of notices of objection and calls for boards of review. We have responded. The minister made his decision, recently published on the CEPA registry. His response was to deny the board of review. He did so after careful consideration of information that was put before him that the objectors hadn't raised sufficient uncertainty or doubt in the scientific consideration underlying the proposed order.

We're currently going through the considerable number of comments we've received on the discussion document as well. Specifically with respect to the approach on banning or restricting certain problematic single-use plastics items, along with other comments on the discussion document, we're targeting publishing the proposed regulations for public comments later on in 2021. In addition, as I mentioned, we're undertaking those follow-ups with the accessibility community to ensure that the design of that regulation will take into account their needs as well as others.

The government is on track to publish draft regulations in the Canada Gazette later on in 2021 for consultation, and then, following a period of transition, looking to implement the regulations.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Ms. Ryan.

Next, the six single-use plastic items that are proposed to be covered under the ban were selected in part on the basis of the existence of readily available alternatives. What does your department consider the readily available alternatives for the six items that are proposed for the ban?

[Helen Ryan]

In terms of readily available alternatives, those issues were laid out in the discussion document. We do look to see that there are available alternatives that fulfill the same purpose and are on the market. For each of the items, that assessment is undertaken.

For instance, with respect to stir sticks, an assessment was undertaken to determine if there are alternatives to a single-use plastic stir stick that can fulfill the same function. With respect to six-ring carriers—we call them that, but they aren't really six-ring carriers—we assessed whether there are alternatives that can fulfill the same purpose as that product, and so on.

Those considerations are assessed, and were assessed, with regard to the proposed items that were put forward in the discussion document in October 2020.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

In fulfilling the same purpose, how does your department consider reusable items? Is the definition of “same purpose” essentially another single-use item that isn't plastic? Does a readily available alternative include a durable, reusable item that serves that purpose?

[Helen Ryan]

In assessing whether an alternative is available, we consider a variety of factors, including whether there are durable and non-durable products and the ease of use and the purpose they serve. It's ensuring that the functionality that product was providing is still available to the users.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Ms. Ryan, if reusable products were considered as readily available alternatives, would there not be a greater list of items that would meet the criteria set out in the proposed ban?

[Helen Ryan]

With respect to the criteria for which we're assessing these problematic single-use plastic items, we're looking to see those items that are found in the environment and potentially causing harm. We're looking to see whether they're hindering or causing issues with the recovery or the recycling functionality of things. We're looking to see that there are readily available alternatives. The alternative has to suit the purpose. It's not necessary that a durable product will be able to serve the same purpose as a non-durable product. These items are all very different in their use and purpose.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go to our second round now, a five-minute round. We'll start with Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Ryan, you were at this committee on March 17. I asked you about safety consultations with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. It took a little bit, but you did confirm that you consulted Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the CFIA, and I also asked some witnesses about this.

On April 26, Philippe Cantin of the Retail Council of Canada spoke of the interaction between Environment and Climate Change Canada and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. He said this:

They're not necessarily moving at the same pace when it comes to adjusting the requirements.

Most of the reason certain companies are going with plastic packaging is [because] it's the only cost...viable solution on the market to comply with the requirements from Agriculture Canada.

This was from a witness whose members include Loblaws, Safeway, Metro, Walmart, etc. They're concerned that you haven't actually done proper consultation.

If the food retailers do not have faith in your consultation process, why should consumers?

[Helen Ryan]

With respect to the consultation process that we've undertaken on the discussion document, it includes a 60-day public comment period and it includes outreach and engagement with specific communities, with the provinces and territories, with industry and with others.

With respect to the comment that you're hearing from committee witnesses, I think there's a distinction in the issue that they're referring to, which are plastics used for food conservation in grocery stores and so on. These are not the items in the proposed ban for single-use plastic items. The items that would relate to foodware are those that are used for take-out purposes, and they're specific ones with respect to what's being considered.

With respect to our work with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the CFIA, as well as with Health Canada, these issues are very important issues. Food safety and food security are extremely important, and we take them seriously and consider them in the design of any potential measure. Those factors are important, and the elements that have been put forward with respect to a proposed ban do not address those specific items.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Are Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the CFIA in 100% agreement with Environment and Climate Change Canada on this proposal, or have they raised concerns as to how this may affect food security?

[Helen Ryan]

We have an integrated approach, and we work across government with respect to the approach on the zero plastic waste agenda. The Government of Canada's approach is one that is endorsed by the Government of Canada with respect to the proposals in terms of items that would be put forward for proposed bans. Those items are discussed and reviewed with our interdepartmental community, and we ensure that all of their issues and considerations are taken into account, because it is eventually a Government of Canada proposal that gets put forward. It's extremely important that issues of food security and other considerations are taken into account and addressed in the actions that are taken.

There are a number of measures that are advanced as issues of importance to them with regard to how we move to recycle content and with regard to other considerations. Those technical considerations are very live, and we engage with them on those to ensure that any potential measure is appropriately designed.