44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 24, 2022 11:00AM
- Oct/24/22 12:21:48 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for a fulsome speech. It was very interesting.
I wonder if he could comment on some of the Liberal amendments. The Liberal Senate put in 24 amendments, of which 11 made the bill much worse.
One of the things I am concerned about is this. We hear the Liberals talk about auto manufacturing and wanting to bring more of it to Canada. I do not know if the House realizes, but items manufactured from plastic are now on schedule 1 and listed as toxic. One of the things Canada could really benefit from is not having regulations that are outside the norm in North America.
I wonder if the member could comment on the danger of amending legislation like this and if he maybe has a solution we could put forward to help the automotive industry and other industries, like the medical field, that rely on single-use plastics.
157 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 4:39:02 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, for my hon. colleague from Cariboo—Prince George, it is such a joy to hear such a thoughtful speech that really looked at Bill S-5 and what is wrong with it. I totally agree with the member that it is not adequate for the government to promise us a right to a healthy environment and then tell us it will take two years to figure out what that is. Let us hope we fix that.
With respect to the question on plastics, I want to put to the member that, in order to regulate plastics at all, the government is using the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, and I believe it is using it appropriately. The concept of CEPA toxic has been used for years, which is not the common-sense meaning of toxic.
When the government uses the power it derives through CEPA, it uses it in an overly restricted way, so it is only prepared right now to not really deal with the threat of ocean plastics. It is in very limited circumstances, and certainly not ever getting into the hospital use of single-use plastics. Looking at forks and straws is as far as it has gone. I offer that to the member as a comment to see if that gives him any reassurance.
220 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 5:35:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, my question has to do with the plastic industry, and my concern is with the virtue signalling of this government.
For example, 93% of the plastics that are going into the ocean come from 10 rivers, and none of them are in Canada. However, we are moving to paper straws, for example, from plastic straws. Now, the life cycle of a plastic straw is 1.5 grams of CO2 compared to the paper one, which is 4.1 grams of CO2. There maybe a well-meaning purpose here, but the government is not looking at the science.
Could the member comment on the virtue signalling versus the concrete action that needs to be done for Canada with the bill before us?
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 5:51:47 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from the Green Party for her speech. I want to get her input on the idea of competitiveness.
She knows I come from a community that does a lot of manufacturing with plastics. We try to make cars lighter and integrate it into the manufacturing. My concern is the way plastics are being treated in this bill. Inadvertently, we may be driving the pollution to other parts of the world.
For example, I brought up that 93% of the plastic going into the oceans is from 10 rivers, and none of them is in Canada. There is the Yangtze River in China, for example.
The carbon footprint for the lifetime of a plastic straw is about 1.5 grams, whereas for a paper straw it is 4.1 grams. We are putting in these policies that may affect our competitiveness here in North America.
What is the member's advice to make sure we do not have that pollution leakage to other parts of the world, like China, because of our policies being too strong or different here?
186 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 5:52:57 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I would like to reassure the hon. member for Oshawa that there is no way in this world that we could accuse the Liberal government of being too strong with its actions on single-use plastics.
We have an appallingly weak set of regulations. Nothing in any government announcement or in this act will reduce the use of lightweight plastics in the manufacturing of durable goods. Nothing.
We do know that if we change the way this act is worded, we undermine its constitutionality. I can tell the member that none of those 10 major rivers has anything to do with the plastic contamination that we find on our shorelines in Canada. We need to take action under CEPA. We need to list and regulate the use of substances like polystyrenes for uses like floats and wharfs. They should be banned. They are contaminating our waterways and our wildlife, and, ultimately, they are poisoning us.
157 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:05:32 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the member was speaking about plastics and the need to curb our usage of those plastics. The reality of the situation is that the very first piece of plastic that was ever made is still in existence today, and it will likely be hundreds if not thousands of years before it is no longer around.
We continually hear the narrative from the Conservatives that we need specialized plastics in certain types of aircraft; therefore, we cannot get rid of plastics and we should abandon all hope of even trying to pick the low-hanging fruit. The reality is that, although with some types of aircraft there are specialized plastics that we still need right now, we do know that other things like straws could be replaced with other options.
Would the member not agree that, even though we cannot move forward with some of these specialized plastics that we need, there are other areas we could look to curb plastic use and plastic consumption?
166 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:37:38 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. He is a good friend. I really appreciated working with him on OGGO when he was our previous chair.
I am really grateful that my colleague voted for my Motion No. 51 back in 2018 to tackle plastic pollution and reduce plastics in our environment. He supported the banning of straws and different plastics. Does he not agree that we have a duty to ensure that, when there are chemical ingredients that are known or suspected to cause cancer or harm the reproductive or endocrine systems, it should be mandatory to require the labelling of hazardous substances in consumer products, which is what we are calling for in this bill? Would he support an amendment to support that?
129 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:38:29 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, we need to look at the aspect of plastics as we move forward. I agree that there are steps that can be used to utilize that, but it ultimately comes down to people doing the—
38 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:33:24 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the Conservatives keep talking about this as though it is as a government bill. I would remind the member that the burgundy shade on the screen where it lists the name of the bill, along with the S in front of it, means that it came from the Senate. It is not a government bill.
Nonetheless, the way the Conservatives are approaching this is that as we have to use so many plastics nowadays, therefore we may as well give up and assume that plastics are inevitably going to be as abundant as they are now forever.
Yes, I am aware, and I am sure most people are aware of the fact that just about everything in this room has some degree of plastic in it, but does that mean that we cannot at least strive for a better world? If we know that plastics are so bad, that the very first plastic ever created is still in existence today, and the harm they are doing to our environment, why would we not at least try to do better? Why can we not at least look for ways to do things differently, even if it means that today we are still going to be using plastic? Why can we not look toward a future that has less plastic in it? Would the member not agree that is a good thing?
232 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 6:34:43 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, knowing the level of knowledge this gentleman has, I am sure he is well aware of the fact that the original legislation was put forward by his government back in the last Parliament and that the Senate has proposed some amendments to it. The unfortunate part is that, although some of the amendments being proposed may have good steps, some of them do not, and those steps need to be taken as we move forward.
With respect to plastics, I would agree with the member if someone had the knowledge to come up with another product, but at the present time we are moving propane and other dangerous chemicals via ship, truck or train, and putting the lives of Canadians at risk when we could actually be producing it here in Canada. We can produce these nice wee pebbles that can be used to produce many products that we need, such as the parts we need for our vehicles, our new electric vehicles, or other items we have in this country.
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
