Debates of Oct. 30th, 2020

Bills of Exchange Act

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I officially welcome the member for Hamilton Centre to the House. I know it has been about a year now, but this is the first question I have received from him.

I am very familiar with the situation of the Haudenosaunee. Anyone who lives in Ontario is familiar with it and knows about the long-standing dispute.

I share his frustration insofar as the response we repeatedly hear to Haudenosaunee land defenders. What they have received on the part of law enforcement stands in stark contrast to law enforcement reaction when the tables are reversed. The Mi'kmaq were seeking to exercise Constitutional rights and were not receiving the same level of protection they felt was merited.

That disconnect and contradiction must be remedied in Canada, no matter where it rears its head. I fully appreciate the situation and the sensitivities of the situation with the Haudenosaunee and what they are facing with respect to the Six Nations, whom I consulted with extensively on the Indigenous Languages Act.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, I too would like to ask the hon. member about the Haldimand tract and treaty, and the Haudenosaunee people.

My sister is indigenous. She spent six years in Caledonia as a front-line officer with the OPP. She now has a degree in indigenous law. There is a treaty in this place, the Haldimand Treaty. The Haudenosaunee people want that treaty respected.

I would like to ask the hon. member what he thinks the role of the federal government is in fixing this situation and meeting those demands.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think the best thing I can say to the member is that the role of the federal government is to lead by example. When it comes to the issue that is affecting Caledonia and the Haudenosaunee, which was raised also by the member from the NDP, we have to appreciate that the law enforcement responsibilities that are being acted on are those of the Ontario Provincial Police. In my city, we have the Toronto Police Service.

Where we have situations with the RCMP, under contract or otherwise, not acting in a manner that appears to be addressing systemic racism, which is quite visible and marked to all of those who are observing, I think we have to lead by example in terms of ensuring that the training is sufficient, that the leadership understands the nature of the issue and that action is being taken.

I will say with some confidence that I think we are on the right track insofar as very recently, this week, with something that is squarely within federal jurisdiction, that being the judges training bill. When that was before the justice committee, we passed an amendment to expand out the judges training bill so that the training occurs not just on sexual assault law and social context, but by expanding out what social context means, including the terms “systemic racism” and “systemic discrimination”, amendments that were suggested by the leaders of the Black caucus and the indigenous caucus in this Parliament.

By ensuring that training is occurring, by ensuring that people are receiving the message loudly and clearly that systemic racism exists and is a phenomenon at all levels of government and in all of our institutions including law enforcement, we can lead by example, which hopefully can trickle down to the law enforcement that is operating currently in Ontario with respect to the Six Nations dispute.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)]

Madam Speaker, I am not going to ask a question. I will just let the member carry on because he has so much to offer. I want to say he is one of the most amazing members of Parliament I have ever met and he has done so much for human rights. He is totally right that we did not hear anything about this in the education system. That is why this is so important to me.

I want people watching on TV to think about what if someone came today and took their children? What if they said they were coming and people would not have their children back until next summer? What if the children did not come back or came back damaged?

We cannot imagine the pain and suffering, the effect that would have on people and whether they can survive if someone takes their children away. I think that is enough in itself; why it is absolutely essential that this pass and we give recognition to truth and reconciliation.

Marsi cho. Gunalchéesh.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know the member for Yukon is a father, as I am. My most visceral understanding of the residential school system came as a South Asian man with a South Asian wife trying inelegantly to teach Hindi to his kids. I thought about how my wife and I were not very successful at this endeavour.

I tried to explain to my kids that the problem that Dene, Sioux or Cree kids have is not that their parents are not good enough at teaching them; it is that they were actually beaten and hurt if they dared to speak their language at a school that was kilometres away from the place they called home. That is something of a completely different order, in terms of the obstacle that was put in place for those children. The impacts of that kind of system continued to be felt. That is what motivated me so much on indigenous languages work and really opened my eyes.

My thanks to the member for Yukon on his compliment about my human rights work, but I will frankly admit that I was quite embarrassed by my lack of human rights understanding about the indigenous experience in this country and the poor nature of indigenous human rights in this country, until the work that I did in the last Parliament. It clearly opened my eyes and it has helped me become a stronger advocate for this critically important cause.

I firmly believe in my core that until we address these issues, we cannot really even begin to address some of the other pernicious issues that affect human rights for Canadians.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Resuming debate. Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wants to request a recorded vote or request that the motion be passed on division, I invite them to rise and so indicate to the Chair.

For the sake of clarity, I would invite a member present in the House to rise to indicate if the motion is agreed to on division or to request a recorded division.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I would request a recorded vote.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Accordingly, pursuant to order made on Wednesday, September 23, the division stands deferred until Monday, November 2, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House, you might find unanimous consent to call it 1:30 p.m. at this time so we can begin private members' hour.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Accordingly the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Member's Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

moved that Bill C-204, An Act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (final disposal of plastic waste), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Madam Speaker, every week, millions of Canadians diligently sort and place their plastic in the blue boxes for municipal curbside collection. We do this to reduce our waste and to ensure that our plastic can be recycled and reused in some other meaningful fashion. However, despite our best intentions, and to the surprise of most, only 9% of plastics Canadians put in their blue boxes ever actually gets recycled domestically. Most of the rest is exported, piled up in a landfill, dumped in the ocean, burned or otherwise discarded into the environment. Because of this, our plastic is ultimately ending up in the food we eat, the air we breathe and the water we drink. This is having a considerable impact on our health and the health of the environment. If not addressed, it threatens our future.

The proposed legislation before us today, Bill C-204, an act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, seeks to address these serious concerns by prohibiting plastic waste intended for final disposal from being exported to foreign countries.

For too long, Canada has been sending its plastic waste for other countries to deal with. Of the 380,000 tonnes of plastic waste collected in Canada in 2018, more than one-quarter was exported to foreign countries for processing. Between 2015 and 2018, almost 400,000 tonnes of plastic waste was sent to Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, India, Hong Kong, China and the United States. Unfortunately, many of these countries lack the capability and regulatory waste management standards to ensure that plastic is properly disposed of. As a result, these plastics are all too often landfilled, illegally dumped or incinerated, allowing them to enter and negatively impact the environment.

In late 2017, China, which had for a long time been the primary market for plastic waste from Canada and other countries, adopted much higher standards for imported recyclables. After handling nearly half of the world's recyclable waste for over 25 years, China effectively banned the practice, resulting in Canada and other western nations turning to developing countries in southeast Asia and elsewhere to handle their plastics. It is common practice for certain businesses in these developing countries to import plastics for the purpose of recycling, only to dump them in a landfill or incinerate them. This is more likely to occur when plastics are poorly sorted, mislabelled or otherwise contaminated, making them more difficult to recycle properly.

The direct and indirect effect this is having on the environment is a serious concern. When plastics are dumped in unmanaged landfills, the waste leaks into the natural environment. The incineration of plastic waste also contributes to a significant amount of greenhouse gas emissions and may result in the emission of toxins that threaten both humans and environmental life. Investigations into the export of plastic waste to developing countries have found that this sort of mismanagement is all too common with few controls to ensure that the imported plastic is being handled appropriately.

In September 2019, CBC Marketplace highlighted the conditions of the small northern Malaysia village of Ipoh, which had become a primary destination for the processing of Canadian plastic waste. The report describes towering heaps of burning plastic garbage, chemical and microplastic runoff polluting local waterways, and mounds of poorly contained Canadian plastic. The residents of Ipoh were outraged by the invasion of foreign plastic waste and the impact it was having on their health and the local environment. Pleading, they said, “We don't want to be the next cancer village.” This is just one example of a situation that is becoming all too common.

Many developing countries are now rejecting plastic imports from abroad, having struggled to properly manage the sheer quantity of plastics coming from around the world since China's ban took effect.

The substantial increase in plastic waste to these developing countries is having a devastating impact on their environment and the population. Most Canadians were alerted to this pressing issue last year when, after prolonged diplomatic dispute, Canada repatriated thousands of tonnes of non-recyclable waste from the Philippines and Malaysia at a significant cost to taxpayers.

Canada’s plastic waste is not a problem that can be simply exported away. Many of the countries receiving our plastic are developing nations incapable of managing it to ensure that its impact is reduced and the environment protected. This does not only affect the environment and citizens of these countries. Eventually, the impact of plastic, as it breaks down, also leads to serious ramifications for the health of Canadians and Canada’s natural environment.

Canada is an industrialized nation with capabilities far beyond those of the developing world. We must put an end to the practice of exporting plastic waste to foreign countries.

Canada has signed a number of international agreements pertaining to the import and export of waste. The foremost agreement concerning the movement of waste is the Basel Convention. As of last year, the Basel Convention has been updated to specifically include the transboundary movement of plastic waste, which was not part of the original terms of the agreement. This change was made in direct response to the rapidly increasing levels of plastic waste around the world and its known impacts on human health and the environment.

The Basel Convention was also amended in September 2019 to outright ban the export of plastic waste for final disposal from industrialized countries to developing countries. No participating country is beholden to this amendment unless they elect to ratify and accept it. Canada has not. It is unfortunate that under the current Liberal government, Canada has failed to show leadership on the issue of plastic waste.

It was not until two days ago that the Liberals finally accepted the amendment to the convention to include plastic waste, a year and a half after the amendment was made and only after 186 other countries had already agreed to it.

While I am pleased to see that Bill C-204 has already made a difference even before it was debated, it is clear that more still needs to be done. It is particularly concerning that the Liberals are still refusing to act to limit the export of plastic waste. In fact, the Liberal government has stated that the practice of exporting waste from Canada to developing countries for final disposal is beneficial. This is an outrageous position to take, given the significant negative impact plastic waste has on developing countries and on the environment.

Last year, even the Liberal dominated Standing Committee on the Environment recommended that Canada prohibit the export of plastic waste to be landfilled in a foreign country. The government did not respond. Clearly Canada needs to step up and that is exactly what Bill C-204 proposes to do.

Bill C-204 would put an end to Canada's practice of exporting plastic waste to other countries through a modest amendment to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. This is achieved by explicitly prohibiting the export of plastic waste to foreign countries for final disposal, something that is still currently permitted under the existing regulation.

The definition of plastic waste outlined in the accompanying schedule is derived straight from the Basel Convention annexes. Likewise, final disposal is a specifically defined term, meaning operations that do not lead to the possibility of resource recovery, recycling, reclamation or alternative reuse. This ensures that legitimate, sustainable and environmentally sound exports of plastic waste are not prohibited.

Finally, Bill C-204 would bring these changes in line with the rest of the regulations in this section of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, giving the minister the ability to add or remove plastics from the prohibited list and applies fines and penalties against those who contravene it. Through these reasonable changes, the export of plastic waste for final disposal from Canada to other countries will finally be prohibited.

While other countries are taking action on the issue of exporting plastic waste, Canada is falling behind. Comparative nations are implementing stricter domestic laws to control the export of plastic waste, just as Bill C-204 proposes.

In Australia, the Recycling and Waste Reduction Bill 2020 has been introduced in parliament by its government, which will phase in the end of the 645,000 tonnes of plastic and other waste that Australia ships overseas each year. The Government of the United Kingdom has made a similar commitment, pledging to ban the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries and impose tighter restrictions on all outgoing waste.

This is in addition to the other 98 countries that have already ratified the Basel ban amendment to prohibit the export of waste to developing countries.

However, even as Canada falls behind while other governments and jurisdictions around the world are taking action, there is hope. Canadian industry and small businesses are stepping up to address the issue of plastic waste.

One of these companies is Cielo Waste Solutions, based out of Aldersyde, Alberta. Cielo uses a unique advanced refining process to take all types of plastic and convert it into renewable diesel fuel. This innovative process significantly reduces Canada's plastic and landfill waste and lowers our country's reliance on imported diesel. The company aims to build over 40 refineries across Canada and would convert over 3,000 tonnes of plastic waste a day into renewable fuel, diverting over one million tonnes of waste from landfills and foreign exports per year.

Another innovative company is Goodwood Plastic, out of Stewiacke, Nova Scotia. Goodwood Plastic takes post-consumer plastic waste, including plastic bags and old fishing line, and turns it into tough, flexible and long-lasting lumber. Their products could replace the wood that we use in posts, in guard rails, even in small craft harbour docks and countless other uses, all while reducing plastic waste.

Both of these companies and many others across Canada want to use their products to make a difference. Instead of Canada exporting its waste to foreign countries, where it will be mismanaged, we should be leveraging this kind of innovation and making a difference right here at home.

It is time for Canada to stop treating the rest of the world as its dumping ground for plastic waste. Canadians from coast to coast to coast expect action on this issue. They overwhelmingly support a ban on exporting plastic waste. The Liberal government can no longer keep justifying this shameful practice, a practice that so many other industrialized countries have already put to an end. Today, developing countries are being inundated with Canada's plastic waste, waste that is being mismanaged with dramatic implications for our environment.

Domestically, Canadian industry is in a position to step up and develop made-in-Canada solutions to manage our plastic waste. Our country needs to get behind them and support their efforts, instead of simply dumping our plastic in someone else's backyard. I urge all members of Parliament to support Bill C-204. Canada must take some responsibility, show leadership on the world stage and ban the export of plastic waste for final disposal to foreign countries. The time is now.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Western Economic Diversification Canada) and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change (Canada Water Agency)]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his interest in combatting plastic pollution and his strong advocacy for Lake Simcoe.

I do not know if the hon. member heard his colleague from Sarnia—Lambton this morning in her S.O. 31 speak against the government's efforts to reduce, manage and recycle plastic pollution. I wonder how he reconciles that with his motion. Perhaps he should talk to that hon. member.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will always be pulling for Lake Simcoe. If I have to get in my hip waders again, I will.

As far as the member's question goes, and I appreciate that question, the government is moving the goal posts on single-use plastics. I want to keep my eye on the ball today. My bill, Bill C-204, is banning the export of plastic waste for final disposal. That is the issue we are talking about, and I want everyone to keep their eye on the ball today on that issue.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I really enjoyed the speech from the member for York—Simcoe.

In my province there is a great need to diversify the economy, which has been so heavily damaged by the policies of the current government among—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

It is true.

However, the nascent plastics industry that is developing and trying to take root in my province, to help provide employment opportunities and to take the best, most efficient and most ethical advantage of the resources we have, has been under attack by the government. I would like this member to maybe comment on the notion of plastics being labelled toxic. Plastic is not toxic. There are economic opportunities and benefits around the plastic industry, such as the excellent effort under way with this member's private member's bill that would seek to recycle plastic domestically.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Madam Speaker, that was a great question. We have to be driving Canadian industry here at home. I talked about the lumber manufacturer that turns plastic into plastic lumber out in Nova Scotia. These are innovative companies that we have to get behind. They even reached out to the Government of Canada, saying they can redo all small craft harbours with this new innovative solution. The problem is that plastic becomes toxic when we send it overseas to developing nations and they start burning it on the shore of the ocean with no security and safety in mind.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for York—Simcoe for bringing forward this important issue. We should never be offloading our garbage to other countries that cannot deal with it. It is appalling to me that the government fought to continue this terrible practice.

One of the things advocates have flagged as a concern with the bill is that, as it is currently written, it leaves open loopholes that could allow Canada to only apply the ban to non-recyclable plastic waste, when we know the majority of the waste in plastic pollution being shipped overseas is deemed recyclable in Canada, but in reality, is not able to be dealt with by the countries receiving these plastics and electronics. We know that the government, for all its talk, fought against the Basel Convention and would use loopholes to continue this atrocious practice.

Is the member open to amending the bill to ensure it is, in fact, banning exports of all plastic waste, deemed recyclable or not, which is impacting human health and the environment in countries predominately in the global south that often do not have the infrastructure to handle it?

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Madam Speaker, I actually thought when my other hon. colleague got up that we were going to have the full support of all members in the House. I am hopeful this will be sent to committee. I know we will have a constructive conversation there in looking at the bill.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Western Economic Diversification Canada) and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change (Canada Water Agency)]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-204, an act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, on the final disposal of plastic waste. Bill C-204 proposes amendments to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, to ban the export of plastic waste for final disposal in other countries.

I would like to thank the hon. member, as I did previously, for bringing forward this bill and for his interest in combatting plastic waste.

We all recognize the important role plastics play in our economy due to their low cost, unparalleled functionality and high durability. However, the negative effects of plastic waste and pollution on the environment are undeniable. It is estimated that in 2016, 86% of plastic waste ended up in our landfills, representing $7.8 billion in lost revenue.

Our government shares the member’s concerns about the management of plastic waste and the environmental harm caused by plastic pollution both at home and abroad. We agree plastic waste does not belong in the environment and that action must be taken to reduce and better manage plastic waste.

I would like to begin by discussing our government’s comprehensive agenda for achieving zero plastic waste, which will help us transition to a circular economy for plastics. Our agenda takes a multi-faceted approach that includes action domestically and internationally. It is grounded in science and evidence.

The bill before us is about trade in plastic waste. Plastic pollution, as I said, is a problem in Canada. It is estimated that 29,000 tonnes of plastic pollution entered Canada’s environment in 2016 alone. This challenge is even greater for countries that lack the capacity to properly manage it. Canada, as part of the international community, has recently taken significant steps to better regulate trade in plastic waste, particularly the waste that is most difficult to recycle.

Many countries, including Canada, trade plastic waste for recycling. The reasons for this trade include a lack of recycling capacity for some types of plastic and excess capacity for others as well as varying regional capacity across Canada. As well, as a traded commodity, plastic waste will end up in the most cost-competitive location. The majority of Canada’s trade in plastic waste is with the United States.

Until recently, there were no controls internationally on trade in plastic waste. In countries facing challenges with waste management, this plastic, traded in high volumes, could then contribute to plastic pollution. Canada took a leadership role in the adoption of new international controls on transboundary movements of plastic waste in May 2019. The new controls were adopted under the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.

These controls aim to tackle environmental issues raised by trade in plastic waste, including marine litter. As a result of the new controls, prior to a transboundary movement of plastic waste, the exporting state will have to seek and obtain the consent of the importing state. These changes will foster trade of clean, sorted and ready for recycling plastic, and will allow countries that import this plastic waste to confirm they are in a position to manage it in an environmentally sound manner.

This approach will allow everyone involved to reap the economic benefits of continued trade in plastics for recycling while addressing associated environmental concerns. Canada strongly supports these new controls and is working very hard to start implementing them as soon as possible.

We have also been taking concrete steps to prevent illegal waste exports from Canada under existing rules. These steps include communicating with waste exporters in Canada to ensure they understand the rules and enforcing the rules when they are not followed. We are working with other government departments, such as Global Affairs Canada and the Canada Border Services Agency, to make sure this issue is tackled from all angles.

Our government has also been working closely with provinces and territories through the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment on the Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste. This strategy takes a circular economy approach. It outlines a vision to keep all plastics in the economy and out of landfills and the environment, and it provides a framework for taking further concrete actions.

One focus is that of increasing the level of recycled content in plastic products. For this, we first need to collect and recycle much more of our plastic waste here in Canada. Second, we need to kick-start the secondary markets that will buy and utilize this recycled plastic in a broad range of products. We are working with standards organizations, the provinces and territories, and industry to identify the means to achieve this and introduce new practices in the marketplace.

In addition, this government is committed to banning harmful single-use plastics where warranted and supported by science.

As part of our approach, we released a discussion paper that outlines our approach to reducing plastic waste and preventing pollution. This includes details on actions such as minimum amounts of recycled content in certain products or packaging. This measure in particular will strengthen recycling markets and make it more likely that plastic will be recycled at the end of a product’s useful life. We very much look forward to hearing from Canadians, governments, businesses and all stakeholders about these important initiatives.

I would now like to raise a number of considerations with respect to Bill C-204 that it is not clear the Conservative member or his party has contemplated.

They believe the sole focus is on exports of a specific list of plastic waste destined for final disposal and leaves the far more problematic issue of plastics destined for recycling unaddressed. Unlike the government’s comprehensive agenda, I am wondering if my Conservative colleague considered that this bill targets many substances that would not commonly be considered plastic and would not reduce volumes of plastic waste exported for recycling to countries that do not have the capacity to effectively recycle highly mixed or contaminated plastic waste.

Has my Conservative colleague considered that, in practical terms, the bill would also prevent exports of municipal solid waste to the United States to the extent that such waste contains plastic that is on the bill’s proposed list of plastic waste? Trade in municipal solid waste between Canada and the United States is a long-standing practice with environmental controls. Limiting such exports would put pressure on provincial and territorial landfills. The United States might also object to such a restriction. I would also note that a significant amount of all waste in Ontario, including household, industrial, commercial and institutional, is shipped to the U.S. for process and/or proper disposal.

I urge my Conservative colleague to consult with the provinces, municipalities and companies on this bill and take great care in fully assessing its implications.

I am proud to say that we are working on all fronts, internationally, domestically and in partnership with our provincial and territorial partners, industry and other stakeholders, to change how plastics are used and managed throughout their life cycle in order to increase prosperity and protect the environment.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will start by saying that the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C-204, which was introduced by my colleague from York—Simcoe. We welcome this bill because it also gives us a chance to talk about some of the many other things the government should do about plastics.

We have to tell it like it is. We should be alarmed about the plastics situation. Eighty-six per cent of Canadians say they are worried about the impact of plastics on the environment, on pollution levels and, as the member for York—Simcoe pointed out, on health.

Excessive plastic consumption is caused by packaging and excess packaging of consumer goods and food. The industrial use of plastics, inadequate recycling infrastructure and the lack of recycling facilities, as well as lax regulations and Canada's lack of integrity on this issue internationally, must move parliamentarians to act. We feel that supporting this bill is essential because it really is a step in the right direction.

It should be a wake-up call. It should spur us to demand action. Let's remember that in the throne speech the Prime Minister said we needed to take action. Let's take action on this.

We should keep in mind that Canada's plastics economy is linear. Raw materials are extracted and plastics are manufactured, used and disposed of.

According to 2016 data, in Canada, 9% of plastic waste was recycled, 4% was burned for energy, 86% ended up in landfills and 1% was discharged to the environment as litter. Canada uses 4.6 million tonnes of plastic, which represents 1.4% of world consumption, while we represent only 0.5% of the world's population. I would bet the current record is even worse.

Canada has a sorry record in this regard, particularly when it comes to exporting plastic waste to developing countries. That is what Bill C-204 is all about.

Despite the country's full participation in the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, under Conservative rule, Canada violated this convention by authorizing a mass shipment of containers to the Philippines in 2013 and 2014. Canada dragged its feet for six years before finally bringing back the containers, which had been left in Filipino ports at a cost of $1.1 million. Clearly, urgent action was not taken and the issue was not dealt with quickly. What is more, what is happening with the Basel Convention ban amendment?

We in the Bloc Québécois believe that before even considering exporting its plastic waste, Canada has a duty to rethink how materials circulate in the economy. Canada must do the work here first and take the necessary steps to ensure that materials are managed properly in order to stop the reprehensible act of dumping. There is nothing acceptable, either morally or otherwise, about sending our waste to India, Thailand or Taiwan. I think the government already knows what it needs to do.

I would say it is perhaps deliberately turning a blind eye to the ethical, environmental and regulatory problems caused by its positions on plastics. This should elicit some degree of indignation or at least a sigh of exasperation. Do we really need yet another reminder that our ecosystems are in critical condition?

Let me turn to some more positive ideas and proposals.

There is the linear economy that I was describing earlier and that underpins the entire way that we consume plastic in Canada, and then there is the circular economy. The hon. member for Winnipeg South talked about this earlier, but we have to do more than just insert a term in this document. We need tangible projects that would create jobs, add value to the material and provide the best tools to protect the environment, achieve a green and fair recovery and ensure respect for international commitments. Those seem like pretty good arguments to me.

Although we recognize the work that needs to be done, Recyc-Québec and its partners have already begun the process of leaving the linear model behind and implementing production, trade and consumer systems based on the circular economy model.

Quebec is on the right track to accelerate this transformation with the Institut de l'environnement, du développement durable et de l'économie circulaire, where researchers and experts from the University of Montreal, HEC Montréal and Polytechnique Montréal are innovating.

Polytechnique Montréal is especially active in this area. It is home to the International Reference Centre for the Life Cycle of Products, Processes and Services, known as CIRAIG. I think that the federal government should consider establishing ties with this Quebec centre of expertise, because CIRAIG already offers consulting services and solutions for this issue to governments and businesses.

The hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie is very knowledgeable about this issue. Unfortunately, he does not seem able to communicate the urgency of the situation to his caucus. He recognized this in June 2019 when he said, “The crisis with China, Malaysia and the Philippines will force us to find solutions and to stop exporting our problems abroad.” Our hon. colleague was also fully aware that plastics sent to southeast Asian countries are incinerated to produce energy, with predictable environmental consequences.

At the G7 meeting held in the beautiful Charlevoix region, Canada and four other major economies signed a charter whereby they would commit to reusing, recycling or burning all plastic produced on their soil by 2040.

An action plan for implementing a circular economy is already in place at the European Commission and includes not only the scourge that is plastic, but also textiles, packaging, batteries and electronics. What is Canada doing?

Could the government stop this reprehensible practice of making promises and making commitments to the public and the international community and not following through?

Banning six single-use plastic products was necessary, but it is not the most ambitious move. It is a drop in the bucket of what we should be doing to properly manage plastic waste.

We know that the pandemic has increased the availability of these products, so their projected ban by 2021 seems unrealistic. Are there not other categories of plastic we can tackle, plastic products that are not affected by the pandemic? I have not heard anything about that. Do we have a timeline for phasing out the industrial use of plastics? We have not heard anything about that.

What bothers me is that the Government of Canada, led by the Liberals since 2015, is well aware of the plastic issue, especially since they brought in a renowned environmentalist to their team. The government's refusal to cease the export of plastic waste is irresponsible.

The absence of a planned initiative to progressively reduce our use of plastic is discouraging, but at least with Bill C-204, we will be able to stop sending our garbage to another country and instead deal with it here, which, for one, is much more ethical.