Neglecting mother nature.

Keeping our air, land, and water clean is turning out to be a big problem

Under the Constitution, the environment is an area of shared jurisdiction. However, environmentalists say a strong federal presence is needed partly because pollution crosses borders, but also because many provinces have scaled back their budgets for environmental protection.

Their concerns seem to be well founded.

Early in 1998, several environmental groups revealed that at least 20 pulp and paper mills in Quebec had violated federal pollution laws but had not been charged. In 1996 alone, Quebec mills breached the federal standard that forbids them from discharging pollution that kills fish at least 189 times.

Quebec has primary responsibility for policing the federal regulations in the province under a 1994 agreement with Ottawa. The environmentalists say Quebec has not prosecuted any of the pulp mills; neither has Ottawa, which retained the power to do so under the agreement.

The Sierra Legal Defence Fund, Great Lakes United, and the Quebec Environmental Law Centre say their findings show the danger of the federal government transferring responsibility for environmental protection to the provinces.

But, none of this stopped the federal government from signing an environmental harmonization accord with all the other provinces in January 1998. The accord deals with national environmental standards, inspections, and environmental assessment.

The Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy is not impressed. It says the harmonization accord "marks a new low point in what was already an abysmal period for Canada's environment."

The federal and provincial ministers say it will reduce costly overlap and duplication. The other argument that runs through all the moves to download federal programs is that it strengthens national unity, and proves that the federation is flexible.

The parliamentary environment committee takes another view. Even with a majority of Liberals, the committee urged the government not to go ahead with the environmental agreement because there is no proof of duplication and overlap.

Environmentalists say the pact will mean neither the federal government nor the provinces will be accountable to Canadians for protecting the environment.

The Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy released the results of another major non-governmental survey in February 1998, which supports this concern. The study, on what happens to hazardous waste in Ontario, found that the province's businesses are flushing hundreds of thousands of tonnes of the nasty stuff down sewers every year. That includes as much as 75 million litres of waste oil from such sources as do-it-yourself mechanics and about 14,500 tonnes of biomedical waste. The report adds that lax regulation threatens to make the province a pollution haven.

The Environmental Institute has pointed out in the past that the provinces are in no position to take on additional environmental responsibilities. It says that since 1996, Environment Canada has lost about 30% of its budget, and most provincial environmental agencies have suffered even more drastic cuts. New-foundland's environment ministry has lost 65% of its budget, Quebec's 65%, Ontario's 44%, and Alberta's 37%.

Massive staff reductions have resulted. The Institute uses Ontario as an example: the province has laid off inspectors and prosecutors, resulting in a dramatic decline in fines for environmental offences. It says the Environment Ministry has felt it necessary to prepare legal defences against the possibility of being sued by people harmed because it can't enforce its own laws.

The reduction in its resources has led the government to offload regulatory responsibilities onto municipalities. At the same time, the Ontario government has abandoned many existing commitments under the Canada-Ontario Agreement on the Great Lakes Ecosystem.

In addition, the Institute points to the Auditor-General's report to Parliament in 1991. Canada's government watchdog noted "a substantial decline in compliance with federal water-pollution-control regulations made under the Fisheries Act after their enforcement was handed off to the provinces."

Federal-provincial harmony seems to be leading to environmental hostility.

SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES:

1. Opinion polls have consistently shown high levels of public support for a strong federal role in protecting Canada's environment, according to the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy. A 1997 survey conducted by Oracle Research for the Institute, found that 76% of respondents supported a stronger federal role and only 4% favoured a weaker one. Research and report on breaches of environmental law in Canada not covered in this article. What do you think should be done about it?

2. Some leaders of business and industry say the environmental accord is a constructive effort by various levels of government to work together to develop a better system to manage the environment. Discuss whether you think they see this as a genuine attempt to improve our environment or merely a means of escaping close scrutiny on environmental issues.

RELATED ARTICLE: FACT FILE

In 1992, the federal and Quebec governments announced they would pump $16 million in industrial aid into Tioxide Canada Inc., described as one of the province's larger and more persistent foulers of the mighty St. Lawrence River, and a company with a string of broken promises to clean up its act.