Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have just a few notes about this amendment. Some of the concerns that were raised were around administrative burden. I wanted to note that most substances assessed under CEPA are found not to meet the threshold for regulation as a toxic substance under CEPA, so the number of risk assessments or risk management plans published in any year is actually relatively small.
This amendment has a requirement to check back in on implementation two years later, which seems very manageable when you look at the numbers. This is from the CEPA annual reports: From 2020 to 2021, ECCC published “risk management approaches” for five substances. In 2019 to 2020 there were three. In 2018 to 2019 there was one. In 2017 to 2018 there were five. From 2016 to 2017 there were five. In 2015 to 2016 there were zero. You will see that there are a very small number that are published each year.
It's just so that folks know what we're talking about. When we're expressing concern about delays, there are a number of examples of multi-year delays when moving forward with the measures deemed necessary in the risk management plans, which is really what we're talking about right now.
PBDE flame retardants, assessed as toxic in 2006, had a 16-year delay—12-year delays based on 2010—but a 12- to 16-year delay is something that should not be acceptable.
Hydrazine, which is a carcinogenic industrial chemical used to inhibit corrosion in power plant boilers—it's also in tobacco—was assessed as toxic in 2011, and there was a seven-year delay. The pollution prevention planning notice was published in 2018.
TDI is used in polyurethane foam, as well as sealants, coatings, automotive paint and wood varnish. This is carcinogenic, and it also has respiratory effects. It was assessed as toxic in 2008, and pollution prevention planning notices were published in 2019, for an 11-year delay.
This is why it is essential that we address these issues. I hear people's concerns, and I hope that some of my comments have addressed them. My plea would be for the committee to support the amendment.