Coherent Identifier About this item: 20.500.12592/42hvwr

Re: Bill S-5, An Act to Amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, etc. CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ASSOCIATION

16 May 2022


The following is a short list on the good, the bad, and the ugly of Bill C-28: Bifurcating “Toxic Substances” in Schedule 1 • Section 58 of Bill C-28 proposes to divide the existing single list of approximately 150 toxic substances in Schedule 1 of the Act into two parts. [...] The approach appears to be based on a federal government view, long supported by the chemical industry, that many of the substances on the current Schedule 1 are not “toxic” in the traditional sense, and therefore should not be stigmatized and subjected to the most rigorous of measures available under the Act. [...] The Bill C-28 approach, coupled with the views of the federal government and industry that maybe some (most?) of the substances in Schedule 1 really are not toxic in the traditional sense, has the potential to undermine the constitutional foundation of CEPA. [...] 68 of the Act, amendments in Bill C-28 authorize the Minister of Environment to collect data and conduct investigations in relation to whether a substance has the ability to disrupt the endocrine system of an organism. [...] Thus, the definition of “toxic” in the Act includes both the hazard that a substance poses (its inherent toxicity) and the exposure of humans and the environment to it.