MP May is correct in that the bill would slightly amend the preamble, essentially by removing reference to virtual elimination because virtual elimination is codified—well, defined—in the current CEPA, and there is a codified set of requirements regarding virtual elimination. As she explained, the implementation of those provisions has proven unworkable, despite two decades of effort.
There is a new approach proposed in the bill that would expand on virtual elimination, retain the emphasis on a default preference for prohibition of a broader set of substances than are referred to in the current virtual elimination regime, and define that group of substances as substances of highest concern.
In order to avoid confusion by retaining the reference in the statute in one place when we're removing it in all other places, the proposal is to remove it from the preamble while retaining the overall emphasis in the preamble on the need to control, manage and prevent pollution and waste.
I apologize. I said “highest concern”. I think the term is slightly different in the act, but we'll get to that provision later. The point is that there is now a new regime that is broader than virtual elimination and that focuses on giving a preference to eliminating those substances that are posing the worst kind of risk. It's broadening the concept in it but deleting this particular term throughout the act in order to avoid any confusion.