Environmental groups said the decision limits the government's response to plastics pollution crisis
Environmental law charity Ecojustice has expressed disappointment with the recent Federal Court decision declaring that the government of Canada acted outside its authority when it designated plastic-manufactured items as ‘toxic’ under schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).
Ecojustice acted on behalf of Oceana Canada and Environmental Defence as interveners in the case. The groups said the decision limits the government’s ability to respond to the urgent crisis of plastics pollution. Ecojustice pointed out that as leaders from around the world gather in Kenya for negotiations of the United Nations Global Plastics Treaty, the Federal Court decision is out of step with the globally recognized need for both international and domestic efforts to tackle the plastics pollution crisis.
The case was initiated by the Responsible Plastic Use Coalition (RPUC), an industry coalition featuring Canada's major plastic producers, including NOVA, Dow, and Imperial Oil. The same coalition also challenged Ottawa's ban on several common single-use plastic items, a ban that was implemented following the CEPA listing.
Lindsay Beck, a lawyer at Ecojustice, stated, "By listing plastics as a toxic substance under CEPA, the government took a vital first step toward curbing plastic pollution and ensuring its harms are mitigated. This decision sets Canada back in its efforts to tackle the plastics crisis."
Ashley Wallis, associate director at Environmental Defence, expressed dismay at the court's decision favoring the plastics industry. Wallis urged Canada to appeal the ruling and move forward with its planned regulatory and policy agenda.
“The evidence is clear: plastic products are toxic to the environment, and there is increasing concern over their harmful impact on human health. We need federal regulation to help stem plastic pollution in Canada and around the world,” Wallis added.
Ecojustice highlighted the plastic pollutions crisis that the world is facing in a press release. More than 8 million tonnes of plastic end up in the oceans each year, representing 80 per cent of all pollution in the oceans. Evidence of the human health impacts of plastic pollution were not before the court in this case, but groups are concerned about overwhelming evidence of potential harms.
Ecojustice also emphasized that industry opposition to plastics regulation is out of step with science and public opinion. Ecojustice said that the plastics industry has often deflected the blame for plastic pollution to consumers or “litter bugs” rather than investing in reuse systems or alternative plastic-free choices.
Environmental groups said that the plastics industry should put their well-resourced efforts into addressing the serious harms of their products rather than continuing to try and prevent needed regulation. They encouraged the government to appeal the recent Federal Court decision.
