Will the new NAFTA undermine our ability to protect ourselves from toxic chemicals?

Undoubtedly, industrial chemicals have played an important role in making our lives more convenient and productive. But these benefits have come with significant costs: plastic trash is choking the world’s oceans and toxic chemicals, such as flame retardants in furniture, are making Canadians sicker, disrupting ecosystem processes and threatening the survival of wildlife. As the federal government contemplates ways to regulate plastic pollution and reduce Canadians’ exposures to toxic chemicals, the newly signed trade deal with the United States and Mexico may prove to become a sticking point. Here are three key ways that the new United States, Mexico and Canada Agreement (USMCA) may weaken future action on toxic chemical pollution. Firstly, the USMCA will commit Canada to continue to promote a “risk-based” approach in assessing and regulating chemicals. While this may sound like a reasonable proposition—to regulate chemicals when they pose high risk—a deeper look at Canada’s current chemicals management process reveals a more troubling picture. As an illustration, let’s look at the toxic chemical bisphenol A (or BPA). Canada banned BPA from plastic baby bottles in 2010 after scientists shone the light on its hormone mimicking properties and their threat to fetal development. Eight years later, BPA’s detrimental effects on human health are even more documented, yet it remains in many consumer products as well as in the bodies of virtually all Canadians. This is because Canada classifies the effects of BPA as “low risk," based on the amount of BPA Canadians are exposed to from products that contain it. However, this characterization doesn't account for the totality of exposure from all sources and fails to consider that some Canadians, including pregnant women, are more susceptible to being harmed. It also neglects a large body of evidence demonstrating that even very low levels of BPA exposure can have tremendous impacts on the healthy development of babies in the womb. By contrast, the European Union strictly regulates highly hazardous chemicals that demonstrate to be toxic to reproductive health, regardless of the level of exposure. Consequently, the EU has taken the first step in placing BPA on a list of banned chemicals and will also ban it from receipts starting in 2020. Secondly, the new proposed NAFTA replacement deal may override the government’s ability ensure the safety of cosmetics sold in Canada. The USMCA will preclude Canada from requiring companies to register their products before they are sold on the market—a practice Health Canada recently proposed to adopt. To the surprise of many, cosmetics companies currently do not need to provide product ingredient information until 10 days after the first sale. Moreover, Health Canada does not have the legal authority to mandate recalls on cosmetics containing a restricted substance, even once they find out. Additionally, fragrance formulas, which often contain dozens of chemical ingredients, are not legally required to be disclosed to Health Canada or the public. Any steps taken by Health Canada BPA to correct this problem may be hindered by new provisions in the USMCA that compels Canada to harmonize cosmetics labelling with the U.S. and Mexico. Lastly, new requirements in the USMCA will ensure equal rights for persons from the U.S. and Mexico to participate in public consultations on proposed regulations or new rules. Persons in this case include corporations. This provision effectively means that non-Canadian companies and lobbyists will be better enabled to stifle government decisions that may be in the interest of the Canadian public. The new North American trade deal may mean that Canada remains stuck in a system that is not working, but was poised for improvement. A recent poll by the Gandalf Group shows that nine out of 10 Canadians would like to see increased protections from toxic chemicals of concern, such as BPA, and better access to chemical ingredient information for consumer products. Indeed, the House of Commons Environment Committee, which recently completed a 15-month review of the country’s toxics law—the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA)—confirmed that Canada must adopt stricter rules for the most hazardous chemicals and label consumer products containing toxics. The chemical industry in North America has long touted Canada’s current chemicals management model, since it allows them to continue to sell products containing chemicals that are banned elsewhere. But this outdated view neglects the fact that stronger restrictions will act as a regulatory stimulus for companies that make greener, safer and more innovative products that will carry great economic and social benefits. Canadians expect trade deals will improve their livelihoods and uphold the highest standards of health protection for everyone. Unfortunately, the USMCA misses the mark when it comes to increasing protections from harmful chemicals and could take us back to the lowest common denominator. Muhannad Malas is the toxics campaign manager at Environmental Defence. The Hill Times

Will the new NAFTA undermine our ability to protect ourselves from toxic chemicals?

Unfortunately, the USMCA misses the mark when it comes to increasing protections from harmful chemicals and could take us back to the lowest common denominator.

Strengthen Bill S-5 to make Canada’s environmental protection law more just

Think adverse environmental effects affect people equally? Ask these women

Federal laws on toxic chemicals not serving consumers

Strengthen Bill S-5 to make Canada’s environmental protection law more just

Canada needs a modern, national health data architecture

To address online harms, Canada must commit to digital media literacy

A cure for multiple sclerosis could be just around the corner

Renewable energy is the way to go, says letter writer

Supporting local broadcasters is critical for our democracy

It’s time to protect Canadians from toxic chemicals, say Canada’s scientists

Feds should strengthen Canadian Environmental Protection Act

What does Health Canada’s latest biomonitoring study say about the state of Canada’s toxics law?

Reducing pollution makes economic sense

Overwhelming evidence supports need for Canadian atrazine ban

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Will the new NAFTA undermine our ability to protect ourselves from toxic chemicals?

Unfortunately, the USMCA misses the mark when it comes to increasing protections from harmful chemicals and could take us back to the lowest common denominator.

Get The Foreign Policy and Diplomacy Newsletter