Science and Research Committee on June 18th, 2024

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Good. Thank you very much.

How does Nova Scotia fit into all of this? I'm a Nova Scotian MP.

[Dany Drouin]

In Nova Scotia, as in many Atlantic provinces, the issue is close to home, so it's an extremely collaborative and positive conversation. It already has a plastic bag ban, for example. I would say it's quite avant-gardist.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

We're pretty advanced, are we?

[Dany Drouin]

Yes.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you to both of our witnesses. That wraps up this round.

We appreciate Dany Drouin and Thomas Kruidenier for their testimonies this morning and their participation. You may submit the additional comments that you didn't get a chance to finish through the clerk.

We're going to suspend briefly now to do a sound check with the witness on our second panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

I call the meeting back to order. We had an initial problem with the sound check, but I think we have our witness all ready to go.

We want to welcome Karen Wirsig, senior program manager of plastics at Environmental Defence Canada.

At the bottom of your screen, Ms. Wirsig, you have the option for interpretation of floor, English or French.

Those of you here in the room are well familiar with that process.

We will give you up to five minutes, Ms. Wirsig, for your opening remarks, after which we'll start with our round of questions. You may begin.

[Karen Wirsig, Senior Program Manager, Plastics, Environmental Defence Canada]

Thank you very much for inviting me today.

Success in plastics recycling has proven elusive even after more than 40 years of promises to improve it, and while the role of science in addressing plastic pollution is crucial, I caution against focusing the scientific and research effort on recycling. The latest Statistics Canada data indicates that approximately 8% of the more than four million tonnes of plastics discarded each year in Canada is recycled. The needle has not actually moved in 40 years, and it's not for lack of trying.

The problem lies not in recycling itself, but in the proliferation of material types and uses of plastic that make it extremely difficult to collect, sort and process in any safe, effective and economical way. As a result, we see troubling levels of plastic waste leakage, concerning especially because of the threat this leaked plastic poses to ecosystems and wildlife. Once in the environment, this plastic never really goes away. Plastic is a persistent and bioaccumulative pollutant.

While improvements to product design, collection, sorting and processing could reduce this post-use leakage, it is highly unlikely to make a significant dent in the amount of plastics in the environment. This is true especially if plastic production and use continue to grow at the pace at which they are growing today, which is much faster than the rate of GDP growth, for example. At this rate, we will be running in place even if recycling improves.

What's more, plastics—or more specifically microplastics—are being found in every part of the human body, including lungs, blood, brain, testicles and placenta. While scientific research is still in development on the main pathways and impacts of this extremely pervasive plastic poisoning, we know enough to know that our bodies are collectively being used as the world's biggest laboratory and that we should proceed with every caution when it comes to addressing plastic production, use, recycling and disposal.

We know that microplastics in our bodies are more likely related to the use phase of plastics than the disposal phase. Plastic is in the air, in water, in household dust and in the food we eat. It migrates from packaging and products as we use them, so recycling is not going to address the urgent issue of protecting human health from plastics. The same is true for so-called bio-based, biodegradable or compostable plastics. They all contain unknown chemical additives, and recent research has shown they all act quite the same as conventional plastics when leaked into the environment.

How did we get here? One of the main drivers of plastic pollution is profit-motivated chemistry, which has largely shown disregard for the public interest, even if it has produced some applications that have an undeniable social utility. Everything you can imagine is made out of plastic, as well as a huge number of things you never imagined and probably don't need. What's more, this plastic is a chemical soup of substances that are largely unidentified and unstudied from a safety point of view. Earlier this year, researchers identified 16,000 chemicals used in plastics. Of those, only 4,200 have been identified as hazards, while a whopping 10,000 have no hazard information at all. This is because profit-motivated chemistry does not readily make their formulations known, even to regulators and researchers.

The study I referenced also found that more than 400 chemicals of concern can be found in each plastic type, including food packaging, and that every material they tested leached hazardous chemicals. That's why focusing scientific research on recycling is absolutely the wrong public policy approach at this time. Public science desperately needs to catch up to private chemistry and prioritize the protection of the public and the environment. That must be the priority for Canada's science and research agenda.

Furthermore, governments should not be subsidizing plastic producers for recycling, which only amounts to a subsidy to continue business as usual. EPR is an approach supported by all levels of government in Canada. It is meant to ensure polluters pay the full cost of their activities, including those that have been externalized onto the environment and our health. If these producers, including those that make the plastic and those that use it in their products and packaging, believe it makes sense to invest in improved plastics recycling, they can and should do it. The government's job is to make sure these activities are safe, are without undue risks to the environment or human health, and are actually effective in achieving regulated requirements to address plastic pollution.

Throwing government time, money and intellectual effort at plastics recycling simply allows the businesses at the root of plastic pollution to continue overproducing and underperforming, at least when it comes to the environment and our health. It also lends credence to the corporate greenwashing that insists recycling can get us out of this mess.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you for those opening remarks.

We'll now start with our first round of questioning. We'll kick it off with MP Tochor for six minutes.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witness online. Hopefully we'll have an opportunity over the summer to spend some more time together to ask some questions about plastics.

We are entering an almost three-month shutdown of the session. As everyone knows, I put a motion on notice a couple of days back that we should sit a couple of times over the summer. As Canadians are working through their summer, we should be working in committee as well.

I will move the following motion, the notice of which was given on Tuesday, June 11, 2024:

That, given the large workload the committee has on the docket, the committee instruct the chair to book five meetings between July 8 and September 13, 2024, to deal with unfinished business and pressing matters facing Canadians, including the study on innovation, science, and research in recycling plastics, and the study on the distribution of federal government funding among Canada's post-secondary institutions.

I'm moving that motion right now, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

We have a speaking order.

First in the speaking order is Mr. Longfield.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Tochor, for the motion.

We have a witness in front of us whom I would like to hear from. We have committee business scheduled for the second hour, so I move that we adjourn debate until we're in committee business.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

On a point of order, there is no committee business scheduled.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I'll move to adjourn debate, then.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Does anyone want a recorded division on that?

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Yes, Madam Chair, we'd like a recorded vote on this.

I don't think we're asking for too much in asking for a few meetings to be held over the summer. With all the challenges we're facing, we're adjourning debate. We should have a vote on the motion, and—

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

There's no point in debating now. We're going to call a vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

The motion to adjourn debate is carried.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

We'll continue, though, with the witness. Is that right? That's the point.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

That's right.

Mr. Tochor, you have two and a half minutes left in your time with the witness.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I apologize to the witness, but it is very important, obviously, that the committee work over the summer. I'm sure that with the work you do, you'll be working over the summer. Hopefully, we're all trying to find a better environment for all Canadians. Some of the work you're doing with plastics would have benefited from the committee work we would have done over the summer. Unfortunately, the motion did not pass. We're only going to hear from a handful of witnesses, and then we're going to break for three months, which is unfortunate. There should have been some time over the summer for us to hear more about how to become a superpower in recycling in Canada.

I'm pretty much done with my time, so I would like to thank you for being online today.

I'll cede my time to the next member.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you.

We will now turn to MP Longfield for six minutes.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Great. Thank you.

Thank you to our witness for being here.

I'm looking at the motion we're studying right now on innovation, science and research in recycling plastics. You said in your testimony a few times that you don't think we're studying the right thing. Briefly, what should we be studying? Then I'd like to go back to our study. I have some questions for you there.

[Karen Wirsig]

Actually, the research agenda in Canada is quite strong at the moment in studying microplastics from both a health and environmental point of view. We are collaborating on a project at the University of Waterloo looking at the Grand River watershed, for example, and trying to identify and quantify the pathways and the amounts of microplastics in that watershed.

Canada is largely on the right track. Should there be more money going to research on plastics, the impact of plastics pollution and how to avoid plastics pollution? Absolutely. In terms of funding the right types of research right now, including on the human health impacts of microplastics, for sure there needs to be more money, but we're on the right track.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I'm looking at what solutions we can be researching. You mentioned the Grand River watershed, which is obviously close to home for me. The University of Guelph has the Bioproducts Discovery and Development Centre, which is using oil from plants rather than petroleum to create plastics. They've had some really good results that they're using in automotive parts now. The parts are of lighter weight, higher strength and lower cost. You don't usually get those three things in the same sentence.

Bioplastics are something we see a future in and that we're researching. You commented that you don't think bioplastics are a viable solution. What's your alternative?

[Karen Wirsig]

I think bioplastics can be a solution for the kinds of plastic products that have a social use and that we will require, especially the durable types of products you're talking about. I would caution, though, that even bioplastics require all kinds of additives to make them functional. We always have to be aware and careful about those additives, because they will leach out when we're using those products and certainly when we throw them away.