Environmental inspector in white safety suit examining polluted water at industrial site.
This article was originally published in The Hill Times.
For the past two decades, Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan has been helping to protect people and the environment from harmful substances. Despite not being a household name, the Chemicals Management Plan serves a vital function. As mandated by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, both Environment and Climate Change Canada and Health Canada assess and regulate the hundreds of thousands of potentially harmful chemicals on the market.
These substances we interact with, from plastics and PFAS “forever chemicals” to flame retardants and household products, are found in our blood, our lungs and even in placentas. Many are linked to cancers, hormone disruption, reproductive harms, asthma and neurodevelopmental disorders. The Chemicals Management Plan’s science-based process protects environmental and human health, is fundamental to our trade relationships and is supported by both industry and the public.
But current funding for this program runs out at the end of this month, and, inexplicably, the government has not communicated any decision about funding the plan beyond this fiscal year. With funding decisions being pushed to the last minute, this makes it harder for the researchers and regulators to plan and execute multi-year assessments, and they are left wondering about the future of their essential work.
The main estimates, tabled on February 26 by Treasury Board president Shafqat Ali, show that Environment and Climate Change Canada expenditures on pollution prevention are expected to decrease by $61-million in the next fiscal year.
The main estimates show that Environment and Climate Change Canada expenditures on pollution prevention are expected to decrease by $61-million in the next fiscal year.
Federal departments are already cutting scientists who monitor air quality, wildlife and pollution — and hundreds of federal workers protecting us from polluters. If the government is truly focused on results and efficiencies, it should confirm permanent, robust funding for this program without further delay. It needs predictable funding for multi-year monitoring, testing, policy development and accountability measures to better protect us and the natural world from toxic exposures.
We can’t cut our way to a safer world for future generations, and we can’t let polluters get away with harming the environment and our health while departments are starved of the resources they need to do their work.
Global chemical production has increased 50-fold between 1950 and 2010, and is poised to triple by 2050. The triple-planetary crises of pollution, biodiversity loss and climate change will worsen, and planetary boundaries for petrochemical pollution will be exceeded unless we improve controls and incentives for safer chemistry. Chemicals management is increasingly complex, and we need robust governance systems more than ever.
Protecting people and the environment from toxic exposure is not optional; it’s a core responsibility of the federal government. It is not in anyone’s interest to allow polluters to dump unregulated chemicals in our products, food and natural world — or disproportionately harm Indigenous, racialized and low-income communities on the fencelines of their facilities. A well-funded Chemicals Management Plan is one of the few national tools available to prevent further environmental injustice.
Protecting people and the environment from toxic exposure is not optional; it’s a core responsibility of the federal government. It is not in anyone’s interest to allow polluters to dump unregulated chemicals in our products, food and natural world — or disproportionately harm Indigenous, racialized and low-income communities on the fencelines of their facilities.
The federal government wouldn’t restrict its commitments for national security to short-term funding cycles. Similarly, protecting human health and the environment from toxic chemical exposures is an ongoing federal responsibility that requires stable resourcing. Yet, this funding has been essentially flatlined since its inception and meted out in two, three or five-year increments. This short-sighted arrangement impedes the program’s ability to efficiently deliver results.
It’s time to end the waiting game, confirm renewed funding and make it permanent. Protecting people and the environment from pollutants and exposure-related diseases is preventive medicine at a national scale. If bolstered by other investments in wellbeing and environmental protection, we’ll see the benefits in a healthier, less toxic future.
Cassie Barker is the toxics senior program manager at Environmental Defence. Seán O’Shea is the government relations and campaigns specialist at Ecojustice. Lisa Gue is the national policy manager at the David Suzuki Foundation. Jane McArthur is the toxics program director at the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment.
