Environment committee  Sure. As I said before, there's no doubt that plastics big and small bring measurable risks in the environment, and from that, we know we have to do something now. We've done assessments to try to estimate how much plastic is going into the environment every year, and from that

Environment committee  I'm not an expert on EPR. I will tell you that. I'm an ecologist. However, from my understanding, you can use extended producer responsibility to incentivize recycling or the use or production of more sustainable items and to deincentivize those that are not sustainable. By using

Environment committee  You're talking about the paper by Brahney et al. in Science Magazine last year, understanding and basically showing us that microplastics cycle in the water cycle and cycle in the global dust cycle. We're starting to understand how that relates to the carbon cycle. What this say

Environment committee  I appreciate that question. Unfortunately, it's too difficult to tell. People have tried to think about ways you can trace it. The best information we have is the paper from Jenna Jambeck et al., trying to say how much is coming from each country, but it doesn't take into accou

Environment committee  Are you asking if I agree with the change in our exports of plastic waste?

Environment committee  Is it to stop our export of plastic waste, full stop?

Environment committee  I will say that I'm not an expert in this, so it's hard for me to just give you a yes or no. I agree that made-in-Canada solutions are great and that we should learn how to take care of our waste at home, but I don't feel that I have the expertise to really comment on the shippin

Environment committee  There's a huge increase in the amount of literature that comes out every year. We're learning a lot more every year about the risk of microplastics to [Technical difficulty—Editor] comes to seafood, which is, I think, what you are asking me about. We know these microplastics can

Environment committee  Yes. Right now the concentration that we know will affect 5% of species is found in certain parts of the marine environment and also in certain areas of fresh water, including the Great Lakes.

Environment committee  I'll just say that in terms of the way “toxic” is defined under CEPA, I agree with it.

Environment committee  I think it's important that we take care of this issue as quickly as possible. As I said, the concentrations in the environment or the amount going out may triple in just a decade. I think people should also recognize that the word “toxic” under CEPA does not mean the same thing

Environment committee  No, I don't have any scientific rationale for it. I will remind you that I'm an ecologist, but I don't have any scientific rationale for it.

Environment committee  I agree with how the list of proposed reasons, which you just mentioned in terms of how we assess products, are being assessed. I think persistence, toxicity and ubiquity are important. It's how we address persistent and ubiquitous chemicals. They persist in organic pollutants or

Environment committee  I think so. I think we've made a good start. We should start somewhere. We should continue to assess items and we should think about whether more should be brought onto the list, which I think could include some items on the list you mentioned earlier.

Environment committee  I think part of the reason those products have been left off is that they're not easily substitutable. That's my guess. Food packaging, for example, is a tricky one. Right now, from what we know about the toxicity of plastics and from the risk assessments in place, the risk has