Environment committee  Mr. Chair, we did provide the committee earlier with details of all the different tools we've used in enforcement. We can certainly make sure that's brought to the attention of the member. I just want to make sure there's an understanding that the environmental protection compliance order is not the only enforcement tool.

Environment committee  I think they're at the national level.

Environment committee  When we conduct inspections, if there is no violation, there is no subsequent legal action. If there is no conviction, usually, it is really a sign of compliance with the law. For example, in the pulp and paper sector, there is a 98% rate of compliance. This is a really good indication of the industry's will to act in compliance with the law.

Environment committee  I think you're thinking of the environmental protection compliance orders. They were used extensively in the last couple of years with regard to dry cleaning regulations. This is a tool just to make sure that everyone is on the same page. Essentially it's like a stop work order.

Environment committee  The reason I said I think we've learned a lot is that the kinds of substances we were dealing with initially were obscure substances. In the past, CEPA 1988 was dealing with substances that were difficult to pronounce and unknown, and the purpose of the risk assessment phase was really to gather the science and the evidence on whether or not these substances were being properly managed and prevented from entering into the environment in such a manner as to cause harm to the environment or a danger human health.

Environment committee  Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've said this before publicly, so I think it's fair to say it in front of this committee: we learned a lot through the road salts example. We learned a lot about how difficult it is for the public to understand the word “toxic” and how much upfront work you need to do to indicate what the intention is of adding a substance to the schedule.

Environment committee  You're correct, it does not have to be verified.

Environment committee  I have a list that I can give the committee. These are substances found in the Toxic Substances Management Policy of 1995. There are 800 pesticides, in addition to dioxin, furan, polychlorinated biphenyls and HCBs--that's hexachlorobenzene--and that's a contaminant in chlorinated solvents.

Environment committee  We do take action on substances like mercury, which are present in the environment both as a result of human activity as well as naturally occurring. The wording in the act, focusing on those primarily from human activities, was to recognize that you wouldn't be able to virtually eliminate substances that are released as a result of naturally occurring events like fires, or naturally occurring phenomena in soils and things like that.

Environment committee  Correct, using our other powers under the act, primarily the regulation authority under section 93.

Environment committee  Yes, it was influenced by the work done by researchers at Environment Canada and Health Canada. Actually two things were affected: the annex on water quality and also the list of substances to be evaluated in the CEPA. So there was always an integration between the two.

Environment committee  I'll make three points. Somebody referred to the dirty dozen. There were 12 substances for which I think the departments pioneered in the concept of virtual elimination. They were acted on under the toxic substances management policy of 1995. Some actions were taken under CEPA, some actions were taken by provinces, and there were other types of actions.

Environment committee  We've been focusing on the virtual elimination discussion today around releases, which is generally associated with the substances already in use. I just want to remind members that the virtual elimination concept, or the prevention of releases of persistent biocumulative toxic substances also applies to the new substances program.

Environment committee  We have not heard the industry complaining about the burden that adopting regulations would represent. To clarify, let us say that there are not as yet any regulations associated with REACH. However, if, under the CEPA, it becomes necessary to put regulations in place, we will of course have to consider the costs, benefits and alternative substances.

Environment committee  As far as I know, there is not. In Canada, we base ourselves on a certain equation, since we estimate that 2% of factories produce chemical products. But we have not done any studies as such, as have been done for the REACH approach.