Good afternoon.
I want to start by thanking the committee for having me. I appreciate the opportunity to make some brief comments on Bill S‑5.
This bill interests me in more ways than one. First and foremost, I am a research professor in overall environmental health, and I work under the “one health” model. I am also an environmental sciences professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal's institute of environmental sciences. It was established in 1972 and was the first-ever program in environmental sciences in Canada, if not North America. I have also been researching the bio-technosciences for more than 30 years. I've been involved in plant, animal and fish transgenesis, including genetically modified salmon beginning in 1987‑88 and genetically modified pork, as well as nanotechnology research. Right now, we have research projects focused on agriculture 4.0. Lastly, I head up a team of about 40 researchers working on pesticides, policies and pesticide alternatives.
The COP 15 conference on biodiversity is getting under way today in Montreal. With that in mind, I think it's important to examine Bill S‑5 through the lens of accelerating climate and biodiversity degradation. The issue now goes beyond a single organism or toxic ingredient. It's broader than that. It has to do with how our policies and economic models push us across the planetary boundaries, bringing us closer to the dreaded tipping point.
In a December 2 report, the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development, or OECD, says that crossing the earth's tipping points will have severe impacts on the earth. The OECD, which usually adopts a more moderate tone, is calling for unprecedented, immediate and ambitious action. In other words, it's time to look at issues more broadly than we do now.
A number of the earth's nine planetary boundaries involve our intensive food system, which is responsible for 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. Those boundaries have already been crossed, including nitrogen and phosphorus flows. We are on our way to crossing others, including the release of novel entities such as pesticides, plastics and new living organisms. This reality requires much more careful examination.
I want to make three quick points, seeing as I don't have much time.
First, it is entirely appropriate that Bill S‑5 seeks to “recognize that every individual in Canada has a right to a healthy environment” and to “provide that the Government of Canada must protect that right”. However, that means putting in place independent and interdisciplinary mechanisms for scientific evaluation. France did that with its agency for food, environmental and occupational health and safety.