The federal government has brought in major changes to how pesticides are regulated in Canada, granting cabinet the power to authorize their use — even pesticides Health Canada has deemed are unsafe.
Bill C-30 passed both the House of Commons and the Senate on Thursday before Parliament rose for the summer.
While the legislation largely deals with measures the federal government announced in its spring economic update, buried within it are major changes to Canada’s Pest Control Products Act.
The new law will give Prime Minister Mark Carney’s cabinet authority to greenlight any pesticide that ministers feel is in the interest of economic or national food security. The legislation doesn’t define or clarify what those security interests would be.
Environment and health organizations, along with expert scientists from 13 universities, have denounced the legislation, saying it marks the largest overhaul of the country’s pesticide rules in a generation.
“It’s pretty outrageous … what you’ve got is cabinet overruling science,” said Dr. Trevor Hancock, a public health doctor with the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment.
“We already have a pesticide regulatory system in place and it’s there to protect people and protect the environment. I don’t think they’ve given any clear evidence as to why overruling that is good for Canadians.”
Cabinet can also authorize a pesticide for a “seriously detrimental infestation,” regardless of whether the health minister has already denied a request for its approval. That pesticide could then be used for up to six years.
Liberals tout 21 bills passing House of Commons this year as MPs break for summer
“Why are they weakening pesticide regulation in the first place? Who’s asking for it? Not the public as far as I know,” Hancock said.
Sen. Rosa Galvez, a leading expert on pollution and human health, said the legislation represents a “fundamental shift” by giving a group of ministers the ability to disregard Health Canada’s safety decisions.
“Politicians should be very careful before substituting political judgment for scientific expertise,” Galvez said in the Senate on Thursday, pointing to the growing and extensive research linking pesticide exposure to increased risks of cancer, reproductive and neurological issues.
Galvez also noted that scientists, public health and environmental experts were not given the chance to testify in front of Parliament. Health and environment committees also did not study the legislation.
“For a reform of this magnitude, that should concern us,” she said.
The Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green Party have all condemned the measures, arguing the Liberals pushed through sweeping powers that could put Canadians’ health and the environment at risk.
“The Liberal government chose to shut down debate and fast-track the passing of their omnibus bill,” the NDP said in a statement.
“In the 51 years I’ve worked on pesticides in this country, this is the single most regressive proposal I’ve ever seen,” Green Party leader Elizabeth May said.
House leader Steven MacKinnon told reporters Thursday that cabinet would not use the measures “if there are health hazards attached to them.”
He referred questions to the minister of health, Marjorie Michel.
Michel’s office, however, declined a request for an interview. Michel also refused to answer questions from CBC News outside of the House of Commons Thursday.
In a statement, her spokesperson Alexandre Bergeron said cabinet would be transparent with its decisions and only allow “the temporary use of certain pesticides under specific conditions.”
Carney’s new $3.2B strategy aims to boost access to local, affordable food
“With respect to situations in which economic security may be prioritized, these authorities are intended to be used only in exceptional circumstances and are not exercised lightly,” he wrote.
Bergeron noted the federal government’s recent decision to temporarily allow the use of strychnine in Alberta and Saskatchewan to deal with ground squirrel infestations.
This was done under the existing rules of the Pest Control Products Act, which allows the health minister power to grant emergency use of an unapproved pesticide for up to a year.
“This authorization is subject to additional restrictions and mitigation measures designed to reduce environmental risks to an acceptable level,” he wrote.
Bergeron pointed to the rising cost of food as the reason to amend the pest control legislation, and the importance of having “successful harvests” as the government strengthens its “commitment to food sovereignty.”
The pesticide industry has previously praised Canada’s health minister for her “bold action” it says will modernize pesticide rules.
The day Bill C-30 was introduced, Michel spoke at an event hosted by CropLife Canada, the major organization representing pesticide companies. The next day, she touted in a speech that she was the first health minister to do so.
The lobby registry also shows Michel met with CropLife in December and January. Roy Karam, her political adviser, has met with CropLife four times this year.
Michel’s spokesperson defended the meetings and pointed to past comments made by the agricultural sector commending the proposed pesticide changes.
CropLife, for its part, applauds the new law, saying it allows farmers to be more productive, adapt to climate and pest pressures and remain globally competitive.
“For many years, Canada’s agriculture sector has called for a regulatory system that not only maintains its strong commitment to protecting human health and the environment, but also recognizes the critical role that crop protection tools and innovation play,” CropLife Canada’s president Pierre Petelle said in a statement to CBC News.
“CropLife Canada urges the government to move quickly towards the implementation of the updated mandate.”
