Thank you, Sheila.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My report examines a number of areas critical to effective environmental management, starting with the importance of solid information.
Informed decision-making is at the heart of sound policy-making. The federal government needs science-based environmental information that is timely, robust, and accessible in ways that both identify patterns of environmental degradation and help programs concentrate on the most urgent environmental problems. Until data programs are woven together to track major changes over time in the quality of Canada’s environment, we are left with piecemeal approaches to protecting the environment.
The importance of good information is clear in our chapter on applying the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. More than 100 federal organizations are required to apply the act to projects that could impact the environment. Assessing the possible effects of projects early in a planning phase is a cornerstone of good environmental management. Identifying potential impacts such as pollution or habitat destruction before they occur allows for corrective action to avoid or reduce environmental problems.
In half the files we examined, the rationale or analysis was too weak to demonstrate if environmental effects of projects had been considered appropriately and whether actions were taken to mitigate them.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, which administers the act, has not established a quality assurance program for assessments, although the act requires it to do so. Roughly 80,000 environmental assessments have been initiated since 1995. Yet, because it lacks a quality assurance program, the agency does not know how good the assessments have been and whether they have contributed to environmental protection.
Another chapter looks at the risk that certain toxic substances pose to the environment and human health. We note a number of significant control and monitoring systems to reduce toxic emission and to check levels of exposure among Canadians. We also note the need for improvements in how risks are managed. Lead and mercury, for example, continue to present risks. New research indicates that exposures to lead at levels currently considered safe may be in fact too high, underscoring a need for an overall risk management strategy.
It is critical that the government take stock of how well its actions are working and also consider new research and the results of monitoring in order to protect human health and the environment from the risks of toxic substances.
Current product labelling does not fully disclose the chronic risks posed by toxic substances in some common household products. As a result, Canadians are not fully informed about these risks and may not be taking appropriate precautions to protect themselves.
The third chapter of my report looks at the National Pollutant Release Inventory, or NPRI. Created in 1992, the NPRI provides Canadians with information about key pollutants in their communities. The NPRI is important because it helps to track releases and transfers of substances that can have a negative effect on the environment and on the health of Canadians.
Environment Canada does not provide inventory users with enough information to help them understand what data can be used for and where caution should be applied. Environment Canada has taken measures to improve NPRI data quality. However, these actions must be guided by an overall strategy and plan to improve data accuracy so that pollution tracking and environmental monitoring can rely on the best possible information.
Finally, Mr. Chair, the fourth chapter is my annual report on environmental petitions. We received 28 petitions this year. The issues most commonly raised include health, biodiversity, fish habitat, and environmental assessments.
Mr. Chair, we would be happy to answer your questions.
Thank you.