radiofree.asia

Category: government

  • Experts Respond to the 2022 Federal Budget

    Tim Gray, Executive Director:

    The world is facing mounting ecological and humanitarian crises. The time is now for bold, ambitious action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect our health from chemical pollution in our water and communities, and get rid of single-use plastics. Today’s budget contained some hopeful measures, but above all, the federal government should be prioritizing the needs of people over oil and gas corporations.Yet this budget continues Canada’s pattern of giving huge windfalls to industrial polluters with limited investment in creating the cleaner future we need and the prosperity that could flow from it.

    Julia Levin, Senior Climate and Energy Program Manager:

    Minister Freeland has bowed to Big Oil lobbyists and implemented their carbon capture tax subsidy. Carbon capture is not a climate solution – it’s a greenwashing strategy used to justify more fossil fuel production and get more taxpayer money into the pockets of executives and shareholders. By relying on future unproven techno-fixes to cut emissions, the government is gambling with our lives. Instead of creating yet another fossil fuel subsidy, the government should have invested in proven climate solutions, including renewable energy, efficient affordable housing, and electrification of transportation.

    Karen Wirsig, Plastics Program Manager:

    We will be watching to ensure that the money allocated in Budget 2022 for regulations to curb plastic pollution serve to speed up crucial measures, such as bans on single-use plastics, requirements for recycled content and reporting from producers. The only way to eliminate plastic pollution by 2030 is to reduce the production and use of plastic. That will require strong regulations and a shift to reused and refilled packaging to eliminate the more than 2 million tonnes of garbage generated every year in Canada from plastic packaging alone.

    Aliénor Rougeot, Climate and Energy Program Manager:

    The current budget allocations to the promised ‘just transition’ to a low carbon economy are inadequate, and give Canadian workers and communities little reassurance that they will be supported through this transition. Financing a just transition requires the significant investment of public funding – for income support, retraining, bridges to retirement and, as a last resort, fair relocation to other communities. Governments should also be developing a more just economy overall, by investing in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and a better service economy.

    Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager:

    The investments made today will help address the immense pressures that Canada’s freshwater sources will face in the coming decades from climate change, increased urbanization, and industrial activity. Budget 2022 proposes $133 million for freshwater investment across Canada and this is a welcome investment. However, the Great Lakes alone require more than that. In 2021, our neighbours to the South reauthorized the bipartisan Great Lakes Restoration Initiative program for five years.The level of funding increased to $375 million for 2022 and is set to increase by $25 million annually until it reaches $475 million in 2026. Canada shares responsibility for the Great Lakes with the U.S., and we hope to see future budgets increase investment to levels more closely matched to American levels.

    Cassie Barker, Senior Toxics Program Manager: 

    Today’s announcement recommits $476.7 million for the Chemicals Management Plan (CMP), and we will be looking at how this funding brings forward a new era of chemicals assessment and management. We hope that it will allow the CMP to replace their chemical-by-chemical assessment process with more class-based assessments of hazardous substances. That way, when one chemical is banned, it cannot be replaced with another that may be just as problematic. We also need this program investment to result in more precautionary decision-making to protect Indigenous, racialized and low-income communities from being disproportionately impacted by toxic exposures.

    Julie Segal, Senior Program Manager, Climate Finance:

    Today’s budget confirms that sustainable finance is underdeveloped in Canada and the government is not doing enough to fix this. We’re pleased to see the commitment to make climate-related financial disclosures mandatory by 2024, but we worry this promise will get watered down in the details, like with the Canadian Securities Administrator’s recent consultation on climate disclosure. Canada’s private finance sector is not aligned with net-zero – which puts the whole country’s climate action off track. But instead of recognizing sustainable finance as a broad-reaching public policy which requires public consultation, the government reaffirmed handing off the responsibility of aligning private capital with net-zero to the Sustainable Finance Action Council.

    Phil Pothen, J.D., M.L.A., Ontario Environment Program Manager

    For decades, Canada’s federal programs and infrastructure dollars promoted the expensive low-density sprawl that has wreaked havoc on the environment and pushed housing prices out of reach for many Canadians.  It’s encouraging to see this budget’s express focus on increasing the density of neighborhoods to deliver housing supply and improve affordability.  However, the devil will be in the details. We look forward to helping the government and MPs develop clear rules for infrastructure and housing investment that will produce millions of compact, lower-cost homes in the existing neighborhoods where they’re needed, not high-priced, car-dependent sprawl.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Barbara Hayes, Environmental Defence, bhayes@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Experts Respond to the 2022 Federal Budget appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Jordan Shanks, the Parliament prayer room, a police raid and the sounds of silence

    Jordan Shanks, @friendlyjordies, Parliament prayer room
    Allegations of senior Liberal figures cavorting with prostitutes in the Parliament prayer room. Another whistleblower raid. Yet two days on, deafening silence. Not a word from the corporate media and the national broadcasters. Michael West reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Nurses fight for a pay rise, politicians help themselves, in spades

    Nurses and midwives protest
    Guess how much politicians have jacked up their own pay as they keep a lid on workers pay? As wages stagnate, prices escalate and strike action looms, Callum Foote checks in on the principle, “A fair go for those that have a go”.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Scott, Anthony, or other? Who will the independents support?

    @climate200, Australia election, independents
    The politics of a cliffhanger. The independents may have the final say in deciding who takes government in the event of an inconclusive result in the 2022 election. They’ll have to make up their minds, or the Queen’s man will be the kingmaker, writes Mark Sawyer.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Changing the official list of coronavirus symptoms two years too late is a political decision

    After two years of inaction and incompetence, the government has finally changed the list of coronavirus (Covid-19) symptoms that the public should look out for. The NHS now lists twelve possible symptoms on its website. At the beginning of the pandemic, it listed just two symptoms, which it then updated to three symptoms. This makes it one of the most woefully incomplete symptom lists of any country in the world.

    Back in April 2020, I questioned the government’s motives for failing to provide the public with an accurate list of Covid-19 symptoms. In July 2021 I questioned why the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) still refused to update the list.

    It’s all about timing

    It’s likely to be no coincidence that the government changed the list just days after ditching free coronavirus testing for the public, and after it announced that people no longer need to self-isolate. It is a political decision to consistently ignore two years of advice from prominent scientists.

    If the NHS advice had been this extensive over the last two years, more of the public would have been eligible for a free PCR test. More people wouldn’t have dismissed their symptoms as “just a cold”. This would, most likely, have increased the official coronavirus figures in the country. According to the latest figures, our small island has had the fifth highest number of coronavirus cases in the world so far, despite being the 21st most populated. Imagine if the government had given us the proper advice: our rates would probably have shot up even further. This would, of course, have looked like a massive failing for Boris Johnson. And it would have been even more proof of what we already know: he has blundered at every step of the pandemic.

    It would also have ground a number of businesses to a halt, as more people would have had to take time off work, and forced corporations to grant more sick leave. But the Tory government’s priority is profit, no matter the cost. To keep the economy running, you need workers. And it seems that in order to keep workers working, the government withheld information on symptoms. This comes on top of the fact that the government flouted WHO guidelines on how long to quarantine for.

    Now, even though more people will fit the NHS’s symptom-checker, it’s unlikely to affect our confirmed coronavirus figures. Because at a time when people are struggling to pay to heat their house or to boil their potatoes, they’re not likely to pay for a coronavirus test.

    Now that nobody is legally obliged to self-isolate, the NHS is advising the public that:

    You can go back to your normal activities when you feel better or do not have a high temperature.

    This vague advice is likely to see corporations cracking down on employees who need to take more than a few days off work. It’s also likely to see unfair – but perfectly legal – dismissals.

    The Canary contacted the DHSC for comment, but the government department told us to contact the UK Health Security Agency. At the time of publishing, we’d received no reply.

    At a time when coronavirus rates are at a record high, and when ICU admissions are rising once again, the government continues to act irresponsibly. It continues to prioritise the economy and corporate wealth over the country’s most vulnerable people. This comes as absolutely no surprise. With the impending Covid-19 Inquiry, some might be hopeful that the government will be held accountable for the way it has handled the pandemic. But don’t hold your breath.

    Featured image via via Alan Santos/PR under Creative Commons 2.0 license, resized to 770 x 403 px

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • HUNG PARLIAMENTS ARE AN ASSET OF DEMOCRACY

    A revolution will occur when Australians vote in Election2022. A considerable majority of us will express our profound disgust with a decaying political establishment that has long since ceased to serve our nation. We will vote in huge numbers for candidates who do not belong to a political party. This will mean that no Party …

    Continue reading HUNG PARLIAMENTS ARE AN ASSET OF DEMOCRACY

    The post HUNG PARLIAMENTS ARE AN ASSET OF DEMOCRACY appeared first on Everald Compton.

    This post was originally published on My Articles – Everald Compton.

  • Budget hides a $30 a week tax increase for most Australians

    Morrison and Frydenberg
    Despite the federal budget’s focus on cost of living measures, the typical working Australian will be $50 a week worse…

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • The first time Morrison lost the nation’s confidence: the story they don’t want you to know

    Scott Morriosn - Tourism Board Australia
    The Prime Minister seeks inquiries into the conduct of others, but information about his departure from Tourism Australia is kept out of sight.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Greens and climate independents: a true test of this country’s political carrying capacity?

    Bob Brown, Australian Greens
    The Australian Greens had the environmental vote sewn up. But the 2022 election may be the one where the tide went out for the party after 40 years of passion and picketing and manoeuvring. It may be the election where parliamentary activism on clean energy is entrusted instead to a breed of reassuring, female ‘’climate leaders’’ who better reflect the aspirations of middle Australia, writes Mark Sawyer.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Justice for whistleblower Bernard Collaery is as far away as ever

    Bernard Collaery featured
    In a setback for the defence, top-secret evidence will be allowed in the prosecution of Bernard Collaery, who exposed Australian spying in East Timor, an ACT Supreme Court judge has ruled.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Government incompetence and lack of planning: it never rains but it pours

    FOI reveals that the government was warned about the increased likelihood of floods in November last year, and failed to properly prepare for the disaster, writes Callum Foote.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Paying dues: party card is just the ticket for media giants

    Once again, the big four, the banks, lobby groups and the biggest industry players lined up to pay their dues to political party coffers. Even media companies got in on the action.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • False Progress on Labelling of Toxic Ingredients Continues to put our Health at Risk

    A global pandemic illustrates for us, on a devastating scale, that we only have so much time for prevention, and then we spend all of our precious time, energy and resources attempting to manage the unmanageable – widespread harm, illness and complex long-term health impacts. 

    With toxic substances, it’s the same prevention vs. management problem. There is a small window to act in the public interest, and then it’s a massive, complex cleanup project that industry profits from and the public pays for. The government is failing us by not taking any action on preventing these toxic exposures in the first place.Red button that says "take action"We cannot put these toxic chemicals back in the bottle once they’re released, so we need to keep them out of the bottle in the first place. With products such as cleaners and cosmetics, we don’t even have the right to know what’s in it – because companies are not required to include ingredients in their labels. This problem has an easy solution: require these product manufacturers to disclose ingredients. 

    The federal government is dragging out the implementation of their election promise to label the hazardous ingredients in cosmetics, upholstered furniture, and cleaning products by Spring 2022. Health Canada announced that it would take at least another year to consult with industry, and we are looking at Spring 2023 at the earliest before we get any meaningful action on product labelling. This delay risks any chance they have to make real changes on these issues before the next election. 

    Such an irresponsible delay undermines the government’s commitments and puts our health and the environment at continued risk from known hazardous substances.

    This government’s own 2017 report recommended improved labelling to protect consumers from hazardous substances found in many products we use every day. Labelling these hazards is an easy to implement requirement that is already in place in Europe and California. We don’t need to listen to yet another year, or decade, of consumer product companies telling the government they don’t want more labelling rules.  

    While the government continues to underdeliver on promises to tackle health and environmental harms, the consumer products industry has been getting away with hiding toxic chemicals in its products for decades. Their free run on exposing their customers to toxic pollution – by not having to disclose ingredients due to “trade secrets” – needs to end. Canadians need less talk and more action if we are going to see any real progress. 

    The risk of poorly labelled consumer products cannot be ignored, especially during a global pandemic when Canadians are exposed to more cleaning products than ever. We need to know what is in the products we buy and any risks their contents pose to our health. If the burden of telling us the truth is too high, the companies who make these products should remove the hazardous ingredients. There are plenty of safe and effective alternatives available. 

    Industry influence on this issue is significant – they don’t want to disclose their formulations, and often argue they are trade secrets. Secret recipes containing toxic chemicals have no place in our world and many other countries and U.S. states agree, and have acted. Our government should never put the suspect claims of industry ahead of safety and environmental health. 

    It is now time for the federal government to get serious about delivering on its commitments regarding this issue and include a legislated commitment to labelling of toxic chemicals in consumer products within Bill S-5, the bill that will reform and update the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

    The post False Progress on Labelling of Toxic Ingredients Continues to put our Health at Risk appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Federal Government Breaks Promise To Label Products Containing Toxics

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, BREAST CANCER ACTION QUEBEC, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

    Canadians still unknowingly exposed to toxic chemicals in consumer products

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Huron-Wendat, the Anishnaabeg, Haudenosaunee, Chippewas and the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation  – The federal government announced today that they will delay action on requiring disclosure of toxic ingredients on labels of consumer products. This stall tactic denies consumers the right to know about ongoing hazardous chemical exposures and allergens that are currently not disclosed on everyday products such as cosmetics and cleaning products.

    By delaying action and addressing only a small number of substances, the government has signalled that it will not meet its election platform promises and Ministerial mandate letters commitments on this important issue. The flame retardant commitment, for example, would only deal with a single type of flame retardant (since the government has only completed one assessment) out of hundreds within this class of chemicals. Most of the needed actions have been delayed to at least Spring 2023 – a year late, with no specificity on what will be regulated or how.

    The failure to act demonstrates the need to amend the newly introduced Bill S-5, which is intended to modernize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).

    The government has already undergone years of consultation and has received multiple reports that underscore the need to strengthen CEPA. Notably, a 2017 Parliamentary committee report recommended action on labelling for consumer protection and transparency. Canada is also falling behind Europe and California, which already require product labelling. The EU requires products to be labelled with health warnings for harmful ingredients and carcinogens. California brought in labelling regulations in 2017, flagging allergens and other substances of concern.

    Building on a commitment made last Spring by former Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, the Liberals’ 2021 Election Platform commits to the following:

    ​​“By Spring 2022, move forward with mandatory labelling of chemicals in consumer products, including cosmetics, cleaning products, and flame retardants in upholstery, that may have impacts on our health or environment.”

    While these delays continue and mandates are ignored, the widespread use of these products continues to impact our health and contaminate the environment.

    Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence said: 

    “This is about the right of all Canadians to know what harmful chemicals they are exposed to in everyday products. The government’s failure to act on labelling toxic chemicals in consumer products is an attack on the health of all Canadians. If the government can’t or won’t provide this within their own proposed timeline, we must make it a mandatory requirement through Bill S-5.”

    “Mere months after being re-elected, the government is trying to punt real action on toxics until after the next election.”

    Jennifer Beeman, Executive Director, Breast Cancer Action Quebec said:

    “Labelling of ingredients and substances in products is a fundamental issue of corporate accountability and there is no reason for the government to delay action on this. Corporations have huge latitude in terms of the substances they use in their products, including substances that are toxic and endocrine-disrupting. But then they fight labelling and having to disclose publicly what they use and to take responsibility for it. The use of toxic substances should no longer be hidden from view. Toxic exposures are affecting our health in profound ways. We need full disclosure of ingredients and labelling on the items we use every day or that will be in our homes for years to come.”

    Jane McArthur, Toxics Campaign Director, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment said:

    “Exposure to toxic substances in the products we use in the many environments we live, work and play in is a critical human health concern. One of the mechanisms that people in Canada can use in their efforts to prevent exposures – particularly within certain windows of vulnerability to harm from exposures – is to act on their awareness of product ingredients through transparent labelling. The right to know about exposures is a right that at the very least grants notice of potential harm and provides the transparency people in Canada want about possible exposures and related adverse health impacts. Action on labelling now means prevention of potential health harm in the future. Delay leaves the door open for more adverse health outcomes.”

    Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry, and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate, and healthy communities.

    Breast Cancer Action Quebec is a feminist, environmental health organization whose mission is the prevention of breast cancer, with a particular focus on environmental factors linked to the disease.  Working in collaboration with a wide range of groups, BCAQ educates on toxics and other health issues and works for a clean environment and communities that support the health of their members.

    The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) is a physician-directed non-profit organization working to secure human health by protecting the planet. Since its founding in 1993, CAPE’s work has achieved substantial policy victories in collaboration with many partners in the environmental and health movements. From coast to coast to coast, the organization operates throughout the country with regional committees active in most provinces and all territories.

    -30-

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Communications Manager, Environmental Defence, pgray@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    Viorica Lorcencova, Internal Coordinator, Breast Cancer Action Quebec, viorica.lorcencova@acsqc.ca, 514-443-8437

    Pamela Daoust, National Communications Director, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, pamela@cape.ca, 514-267-2589

    The post Federal Government Breaks Promise To Label Products Containing Toxics appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Dreaming of a free and fair media: when a rolling debate gathered a Moss

    Moss Cass featured
    Fifty years ago, an Australian government had big plans for the media, seeing it as biased in favour of conservatism and its ownership too narrowly held. Powerful interests saw a sinister attempt to impose state control. With the death of Moss Cass, Australia’s second and last minister for the media, Mark Sawyer looks at a brave experiment and its legacy.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Guns still point to China: Ukraine a backdrop for national security panic merchants

    After a two-decade wait, Australia’s ”defence and strategic policy think tank” ASPI finally has a new war, one that will be a financial boon for its murky weapons maker backers. Backed by Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton, this “independent” think tank is a key player in drumming up a pre-election China threat, writes Marcus Reubenstein.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Scraping the bottom of the (pork) barrel as big swill nears

    Federal ICAC, rorts, Scott Morrison, Josh Frydenberg
    Coalition’s Ministerial Panel “gorged themselves” on regional grants for their own electorates, no matter how unworthy the applications

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • This changes everything, from the world stage to polling booths far from the fatal steppes

    As the world watches in horror the Russian assault on Ukraine, it seems crass to discuss what it means for a little election in faraway, Australia. But local political operators in the big parties and the small will be doing nothing else this weekend, writes Mark Sawyer.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Steggall takes hatchet job, but will the chickens come home to roost for major parties?

    political donations, AEC
    Spooked by independents, Liberals are happy to turn the spotlight turn on their opponents on political donations. But when it comes to taking dirty money, they only need to examine their own house.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • What happens when you bet the house against one of our leading politicians?

    Michael Staindl, Josh Frydenberg citizenship
    It was an Australian citizenship challenge no other, pitting an ordinary citizen against the Treasurer Josh Frydenberg in the High Court. Frydenberg’s challenger, the activist Michael Staindl, finds out in the coming week if he loses his house in legal costs.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Canada’s Toxics Law Is Finally About To Get Better…With Some Work

    We are celebrating because we are finally able to welcome the proposed update of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) – it’s been over 20 years since it was amended or modernized. Bill S-5, also known as the Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Act, replaces Bill C-28, which was introduced last spring, but died on the order paper when the federal election was called. The new bill brings with it some important changes to CEPA that will better protect our health and the environment from toxic chemicals – and it gives us a chance to push for further amendments to make the bill even stronger. 

    CEPA is the legislation that helps us protect the environment and human health. When we want to take action to get toxics out of products, such as getting BPA out of baby bottles or receipts, regulating climate-changing greenhouse gases, or banning single-use plastics – it’s done under CEPA. Improving this act can address the hazardous exposures that affect us all and do more to protect low-income, racialized and Indigenous communities disproportionately impacted by environmental toxins and the effects of climate change.

    These are a few key changes that the government is proposing in this Bill: 

    Environmental rights: Environmental rights are being introduced for the first time in Canadian law, and if a few amendments can be secured this inclusion could represent an important step towards enshrining broader citizen rights to a healthy environment, and enhancing the rights that exist in some provincial legislation. 

    Vulnerability and susceptibility: Our current system tends to prohibit toxic substances only when substances are hazardous enough, and exposures are high enough within the ‘general population’ that our government decides they warrant some level of restriction. The changes proposed to CEPA would incorporate so-called ‘vulnerable populations’ considerations, which would require the address of the health hazards of particular chemicals at critical life stage windows of exposure (e.g. prenatal, infancy, puberty) and for Indigenous, racialized, and low-income communities who are exposed at higher levels because of where they live or work. 

    Cumulative effects: This change to chemicals risk assessment will help regulators incorporate the impact of our real-life exposures to chemicals which most often occurs in a manner where we are exposed to multiple chemicals at the same time. These chemicals can magnify the impacts of each other or even cause an effect that is very different from those caused by the individual chemicals alone.  

    This Bill is a welcome start, and we will work to make sure it goes further to make environmental rights, a precautionary approach to approving chemicals, and public transparency more meaningful and complete. 

    Here’s what we’ll be pushing for: 

    • Make environmental rights meaningful, procedurally clear and easily made operational. In the current draft of the legislation, this new right is being framed in a manner where it will be  “balanced” against economic considerations – this balancing language needs to be removed.
    • Ensure that more class-based risk assessments are undertaken, such as for PFAS or ‘forever chemicals’ so that whole groups of similar dangerous chemicals can be restricted at once. This will ensure that hundreds or thousands that are similar do not have to be evaluated one at a time.
    • Prioritize prohibiting toxic substances of high concern, establish clear timelines for assessment and management actions of toxic chemicals, and ensure that toxic chemicals are replaced by those that are safer.
    • Establish better mechanisms for public participation and access to information, and make it harder for companies to claim Business interest confidentiality as a reason to hide product ingredients from the public when there are health and environmental hazards. 

    The introduction of this Bill comes at a time when the latest research states that we have reached a planetary boundary on chemical hazards, we need to start reducing our emissions immediately if we want to have a healthy future.  We can design an economy that prevents massive future harms, burdens, and costs that are punted onto the next generation. 

    If we want to catch up to the 156 countries that already have environmental rights, and join the EU on prohibiting toxic substances, we need this government to go further. The stronger CEPA becomes, the better we can tackle our most pressing pollution problems.

    We will be working with this knowledge about the urgent need for change as we push for these further amendments to make CEPA better. We will keep you informed and identify opportunities for you to get involved as we work to create a great toxics law for Canada!

    The post Canada’s Toxics Law Is Finally About To Get Better…With Some Work appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Parliament Must Prioritize Passage of Strong Environmental Protection Bill

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, BREAST CANCER ACTION QUEBEC, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, DAVID SUZUKI FOUNDATION, ECOJUSTICE, ÉQUITERRE

    CEPA modernization bill now reintroduced in the Senate must be strengthened and passed this year, groups say

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – Environmental and health groups are urging Parliament to prioritize Bill S-5, introduced today in the Senate. The groups have long called for Canada’s most important environmental law, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), to be strengthened to better protect the environment and human health.

    Bill S-5 was previously introduced in the House of Commons, as Bill C-28, in the last session of Parliament but was never debated and died on the order paper. The groups are calling for Bill S-5 to be strengthened and passed without further delay.

    CEPA is supposed to protect Canadians from harmful pollution and toxic chemicals, but it has not been updated in over 20 years. In 2017, the House Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development recommended strengthening CEPA. Consideration of these recommendations has now spanned three sessions of Parliament.

    A modernized CEPA must be able to protect everyone in Canada from 21st-century environmental harm. All Senators and MPs must work together to make sure that the bill is improved and passes before the end of the year.

    Groups are recommending amendments to Bill S-5 to make sure that CEPA contains an unqualified right to a healthy environment, that there are no loopholes for substances of the highest risk to remain a threat to the public, and that there are no delays in assessing the risk of dangerous chemicals, among other improvements.

    Canadians cannot wait any longer for Parliament to bring CEPA into the 21st century and finally join other countries in recognizing the human right to a healthy environment in federal law.

    Environmental and health groups urge the House Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to initiate an early consideration of the bill while the Senate debates and votes on this legislation to ensure a strong CEPA becomes law as soon as possible.

    Dr. Elaine MacDonald, Ecojustice Healthy Communities program director said:

    “CEPA reform is urgently needed to protect Canadians – especially the most vulnerable in our society – from dangerous levels of toxic pollution and chemicals. An outdated law means that people in Canada, unlike 156 countries worldwide, do not have the legal right to a healthy environment.

    “Senators and MPs must make CEPA reform a top priority in Parliament and must move quickly to pass a strong and effective law that protects the public from 21st-century threats.”

    Cassie Barker, Environmental Defence Toxics Senior Program Manager said:

    “The toxic chemicals found in our air, water, food and products threaten Canadians and it’s past time to improve the legislation that prevents harm to our health and the environment.

    “We need to heed the science on toxic chemicals, and this legislation needs to be improved so that Indigenous, racialized and low-income communities are no longer the most exposed to these hazards.  When we need to act to prevent environmental harms, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions or banning plastics – it’s done under this Act. The stronger it becomes, the better we can tackle our most pressing pollution problems.”

    Lisa Gue, David Suzuki Foundation national policy manager said:

    ”Bill S-5 would recognize the human right to a healthy environment for the first time in federal law, a critical paradigm shift that reinforces other overdue updates to CEPA. While it’s encouraging that government is moving quickly to revive the bill after it died on the order paper last session of Parliament, as is, the bill isn’t perfect. To set us up for success as we tackle the climate and nature crises, this Parliament – both House and Senate – must prioritize the bill, strengthen it and pass it into law.”

    Jennifer Beeman, Executive Director of Quebec Breast Cancer Action, said:

    “Canadians and First Nations communities know that we have a serious problem with toxic exposures in Canada.  Flame retardants and PFAS in furniture and clothing, BPA in plastics, cash receipts and can linings, phthalates in air fresheners, fabric softeners, perfumes and cosmetics, to name just a few, have all been shown to interfere with biological processes in ways that produce serious harms, including neurological and reproductive disorders and cancers. What citizens don’t understand is why we have all these problems. Our regulatory system for toxic substances has failed us badly, but if this bill is strengthened and passed, the federal government has a real opportunity to protect the environment and the health of citizens. We must absolutely get this reform right.”

    Jane McArthur, Toxics Campaign Director at Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) said: 

    “Today’s environmental health realities must be reflected in legislation to be protective and preventive. For the present and future health of people living and working in Canada, we need meaningful recognition of a human right to a healthy environment, a bill that will close the loopholes on toxic substances and remove barriers to citizens bringing forward concerns about toxic exposures. We need to think for the long-term. Action on CEPA reform now is action for the future of public health and environmental justice.”

    Marc-André Viau, director of government relations at Équiterre, said:

    “Stronger environmental laws make for healthier communities: the two are intricately connected. Updating the Canadian Environmental Protection Act must be a priority for this session of parliament to ensure we have the legislative framework in place for the transition to a green economy.”

    Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry, and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate, and healthy communities.

    Breast Cancer Action Quebec is a feminist, environmental health organization whose mission is the prevention of breast cancer, with a particular focus on environmental factors linked to the disease.  Working in collaboration with a wide range of groups, BCAQ educates on toxics and other health issues and works for a clean environment and communities that support the health of their members.

    The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) is a physician-directed non-profit organization working to secure human health by protecting the planet. Since its founding in 1993, CAPE’s work has achieved substantial policy victories in collaboration with many partners in the environmental and health movements. From coast to coast to coast, the organization operates throughout the country with regional committees active in most provinces and all territories.

    The David Suzuki Foundation (davidsuzuki.org) is a leading Canadian environmental non-profit organization, collaborating with all people in Canada, including government and business, to conserve the environment and find solutions that will create a sustainable Canada through evidence-based research, public engagement and policy work. The Foundation operates in English and French, with offices in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal.

    Ecojustice uses the power of the law to defend nature, combat climate change, and fight for a healthy environment. Its strategic, public interest lawsuits and advocacy lead to precedent-setting court decisions and law and policy that deliver lasting solutions to Canada’s most urgent environmental problems. As Canada’s largest environmental law charity, Ecojustice operates offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Halifax

    Équiterre offers concrete solutions to accelerate the transition towards a society in which individuals, organizations and governments make ecological choices that are both healthy and equitable.

    –  30  –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Stephanie Kohls, Communications Director, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca, 416-885-7847

    Viorica Lorcencova, Internal Coordinator, Breast Cancer Action Quebec, viorica.lorcencova@acsqc.ca, 514-443-8437

    Pamela Daoust, National Communications Director, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, pamela@cape.ca | 514-267-2589

    Brendan Glauser, Communications Director, David Suzuki Foundation, bglauser@davidsuzuki.org, 604-356-8829

    Sean O’Shea, Communications Specialist, Ecojustice, soshea@ecojustice.ca, 416-368-7533 ext. 523

    Anthony Côté Leduc, Media Relations, Équiterre, acoteleduce@equiterre.org, 514-605-2000

    The post Parliament Must Prioritize Passage of Strong Environmental Protection Bill appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Private school funding rises five-fold while public school funding stagnates

    Brisbane Grammar School
    New school funding figures show that government funding for private schools rose by nearly five times that of public schools over the last 10 years, writes Trevor Cobbold

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Senate report sets manufacturing battle lines for the election

    The federal Opposition has backed the creation of a manufacturing industry fund, regular reviews of R&D incentives, as well as changes to procurement rules to encourage the development of sovereign capability in a Senate report which sets the manufacturing battle lines for the upcoming election. The Labor-led Economics References Committee tabled its report into Australia’s…

    The post Senate report sets manufacturing battle lines for the election appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • AEC cracks down on Twitterati, lets breaches by major political parties slide

    While the AEC has been blocking its critics on Twitter, it is not so diligent when it comes to policing myriad breaches by the major political parties.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Court orders Health Canada to re-consider objections to approval of dangerous pesticide

    Glyphosate poses an unacceptable risk to human health

    Toronto, Ont./ Traditional territories of several First Nations including the Williams Treaties First Nations, Huron-Wendat, the Anishnaabeg, Haudenosaunee, Chippewas, and the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation – The Federal Court of Appeal has ordered Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) to reconsider an objection to its approval of the pest control product glyphosate, a probable carcinogen. The decision is a major win that upholds Canadians’ right to participate in decision-making about risky pesticides that impact their health and that of the environment.

    This victory stems from a case brought by Safe Food Matters (SFM) who were ably represented by Andrea Gonsalves of Stockwoods, LLP. Unlike other glyphosate cases, this one focused on the actions of the regulator, the PMRA, not about whether the chemical causes cancer. SFM called for a review of the PMRA’s 2017 decision that allowed glyphosate to stay registered in Canada for another 15 plus years.

    Ecojustice lawyers represented the David Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence Canada, and Friends of the Earth Canada as interveners in Safe Food Matters Inc. v. Attorney General of Canada. The groups raised concerns about the unduly high threshold the Federal Court set for a member of the public to trigger an independent review panel of a PRMA decision. In its ruling, the Court reaffirmed that allowing the opportunity for public participation is a main pillar of the Pest Control Products Act that must be respected.

    This is the first time the Pest Control Products Act has been considered by the Federal Court of Appeal, providing an opportunity for guidance from the court about how the Act should be interpreted by the PMRA. In the decision, the panel found the Federal Court erred in its interpretation of the term ‘scientifically founded doubt,’ and provided guidance to the PMRA as it goes about its redetermination.

    Laura Bowman, lawyer, Ecojustice said:

    “Ecojustice is pleased with the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision which reinforces the right of Canadians to request an independent scientific review of decisions made by the PMRA about potentially harmful pest control products.

    “The PMRA needs to take the independent review of its pest control product decisions more seriously, and the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that decisions about independent science must align with the Act’s purpose to prevent unacceptable risks.

    “The Court’s decision will help encourage the PMRA to use the best available scientific research to guide decision-making about this potentially dangerous product.”

    Mary Lou McDonald, founding member and President, Safe Food Matters Inc. said:

    “We are beyond pleased with this decision. The Court did more than just remit our objections back to the PMRA; it added strong ‘guidance’ for PMRA to follow. The PMRA needs to look at our case through a purposive, statutory lens. When making a decision, it must ask, ‘what are we supposed to be doing?’ And the answer is: ‘Protecting Canadians and the environment from the risks of pesticides.’ The answer is not advancing trade or allowing continued sales. It is protecting Canadians.

    “Safe Food Matters’ evidence raised a ‘scientifically founded doubt’ about the 2017 assessment of glyphosate. Based on the guidance provided in the Court of Appeal’s decision, PMRA will now have to explain how its decision-making approach is protective of Canadians. We don’t think they will be able to because they didn’t look at the risks associated with pesticide translocation, indeterminate crops and old data. Our expectation is the PMRA will strike a review panel, and our hope is the panel puts an end to the pre-harvest use of glyphosate.”

    Cassie Barker, Toxics Senior Program Manager, Environmental Defence said:

     “This is an important wake-up call to government officials to ensure that they are conducting comprehensive, science-based reviews of these hazardous substances.

    “When thoughtful, evidence-based questions are raised on the health and environmental impacts of pesticides, government must consider that evidence.

    “Glyphosate residues on our food are a real concern to scientists and Canadians, and it’s time that governments look beyond corporate science and consider the independent evidence for prohibiting this carcinogen.

    “We shouldn’t have to go to court to get government regulators to consider that their information on hazardous pesticides is incomplete, and their decisions to allow these products on our food and in our water are flawed.”

    Beatrice Olivastri, CEO, Friends of the Earth Canada said:

    “This important Court decision is about protecting individuals and the environment from harm by pest control products which are designed to kill.  It reaffirms the important role citizens were given 20 years ago by Parliament when they last overhauled the Pest Control Products Act.

    “Friends of the Earth has grave concerns about the safety of products containing glyphosate as their active ingredient that the Pest Management Regulatory Agency has allowed into Canada. There is a lack of confidence in PMRA’s assessment of glyphosate. As a minimum, a review panel of independent scientists is essential to building any public confidence in PMRA.”

    Background 

    In April 2017, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency released its re-evaluation on glyphosate which failed to take into account its impact on human health. Despite alarming evidence brought to light by the Monsanto papers, and additional evidence submitted by Safe Food Matters and other NGOs in their notices of objection, the PMRA determined the risks to human health and the environment were acceptable without new restrictions.

    Safe Food Matters raised concerns about the decision-making process undertaken by the PMRA regarding this harmful chemical. The group looked at pre-harvest use of glyphosate on certain crops. The organization saw high levels in cereal and legume crops, and objected that PMRA had not properly considered:

    • how glyphosate gets into these crops (mechanism of translocation);
    • that it will always be present in crops like lentils and chickpeas (indeterminate crops); and
    • that the consumption data PMRA used was not telling the true story. 

    The dietary consumption data was based on what Americans ate in 1994-1996 and 1998, not Canadians’ diets, and Canadians are now consuming far greater quantities of chickpeas, hummus, and other legumes than in the 1990s. The PMRA should not rely on outdated scientific data from other regions when making important decisions about chemicals that impact the health of Canadians and our environment.

    Canada’s health minister subsequently refused requests from SFM and several other environmental and health organizations for an independent panel to review the decision to continue the registration of glyphosate use in Canada. In early 2019, Safe Food Matters initiated legal action. The Federal Court dismissed their application to judicially review the Minister of Health’s decision, a ruling that the Federal Court of Appeal victory overturns. Ecojustice represented the interveners David Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence, and Friends of the Earth Canada in this appeal.

    About

    Ecojustice uses the power of the law to defend nature, combat climate change, and fight for a healthy environment. Its strategic, public interest lawsuits and advocacy lead to precedent-setting court decisions and law and policy that deliver lasting solutions to Canada’s most urgent environmental problems. As Canada’s largest environmental law charity, Ecojustice operates offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Halifax.

    Safe Food Matters Inc. is a Canadian non-profit corporation, engaged in policy issues on pesticides and crop production technologies that harm Canadians and the environment. It works to improve the regulatory landscape and is currently active on issues relating to glyphosate, chlorpyrifos and gene editing. It would like to see improvements in the risk assessment process used by Health Canada.

    The David Suzuki Foundation is a leading Canadian environmental non-profit organization, collaborating with all people in Canada, including government and business, to conserve the environment and find solutions that will create a sustainable Canada through evidence-based research, public engagement, and policy work. The Foundation operates in English and French, with offices in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal.

    Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry, and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate, and healthy communities.

    Friends of the Earth Canada is the Canadian member of Friends of the Earth International, the world’s largest grassroots environmental network campaigning on today’s most urgent environmental and social issues.

    To arrange an interview:

    Zoryana Cherwick, Communications Specialist | Ecojustice
    1-800-926-7744 ext. 277, zcherwick@ecojustice.ca     

    Media Relations| Safe Food Matters Inc.
    905 467-8531, SafeFoodMatters@gmail.com

    Beatrice Olivastri, CEO, Friends of the Earth
    1-613-724-8690, beatrice<at>foecanada.org 

    Cassie Barker, Toxics Senior Program Manager | Environmental Defence
    media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Court orders Health Canada to re-consider objections to approval of dangerous pesticide appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Election issue: outer city areas are running out of GPs

    It doesn’t matter whether you live in Sydney’s west or Vaucluse, or Melbourne’s Broadmeadows or Kew, your health needs are the same, our politicians believe. In trying to bolster services to rural Australians, the government has neglected struggling suburbs of our big cities, Callum Foote reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Information wars: are we getting a fair view of China’s treatment of Uyghurs?

    Vicky Xu, Jaq James
    Genocide or puffery and clickbait? Independent journalism is the touchstone of MWM. So when a widespread narrative about China is challenged, who better than former China correspondent for The Australian, Michael Sainsbury, to sort of the wheat from the propaganda chaff?

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • A Poor Knock: Colbeck carousing at the cricket amid aged care crisis just tip of incompetence iceberg

    Aged Care, Richard Colbeck
    Failure to protect Federal aged care residents has left 389 elderly Australians dead this year alone, and 40% of private nursing homes locked down. Dr Sarah Russell reports on the government’s devastating failure

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.

  • Australia hits new low on Transparency International Corruption Index

    The decline of political and corporate standards in Australia over recent years is not just in the imagination of some critics. Transparency International released its annual corruption report yesterday which gives Australia the lowest score and global ranking since the series began in 1995.

    This post was originally published on Michael West Media.