April 18th, 2022
The Canadian Paint and Coatings Association (CPCA) is questioning the federal Government over its intention to inaugurate a series of workshops and interactive events in which participants will be brought together to 'collaboratively develop and test innovative solutions' to environmental issues. CPCA says "there is no substantive, verifiable data as to what those ‘solutions’ are meant to address."
The association points out that as part of the announcement in April 2021 on strengthening the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the Government signaled its intent to enhance chemical ingredient transparency throughout the supply chain and to strengthen mandatory labelling for cosmetics, cleaning products, and flame retardants in upholstered furniture specifically. Ostensibly, the goal is to provide Canadians greater access to information about all substances in commerce.
"Currently, a robust system is already in place in Canada to ensure worker safety first and foremost and then of course consumer safety," CPCA states. "Underpinning this effort is the Globally Harmonized System for the Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) under which the requisite Safety Data Sheets (SDS) remain the gold standard for all workplaces: manufacturing, transporting, storing and selling hazardous chemicals. This ensures those handling chemicals in commerce are fully aware of specific uses in products and any valid concerns with those products.
"And, where required by law, labelling is provided for consumers in compliance with Health Canada’s longstanding Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations (CCCR). Furthermore, heavily regulated sectors, such as paint and coatings, are fully compliant every step of the way with all federal regulations in place for chemicals in commerce. Presumably the federal government would not have approved chemicals in commerce if they did not meet high standards of assessment for which Canada is well known. This also includes extensive provincial regulations for worker safety and federal laws for the transportation of dangerous goods."
It is not clear, CPCA says, why this robust system of chemical assessment has been questioned and what specific demands have been made to have more information on the chemicals in commerce beyond the comprehensive data already provided and used to make informed, risk-management decisions related to both human health and the environment.
"It has been suggested that there is a growing need or demand by consumers for more information on chemicals in products they use. It is unclear how strong those demands are, what chemicals are targeted and the data supporting those demands. Of course, when asked every consumer will say they want safe products, which is completely understandable. It has been stated that Government has a difficult time getting all the information they require, yet there is already federal legislation that allows them to legally ‘demand’ industry data as needed, which industry must provide by law under various legislation as noted."
The association suggests, "Maybe the first order of business is to determine if the processes in place collecting volumes of substantive data under a long list of legislation and regulations are enough and then decide if it’s worth creating a whole new apparatus, using more consultants and ‘experts’ to duplicate what is already in place and robust. Many policy areas of government are obviously linked in one way or another. Surely an array of federal government policies targeted at specific areas of concern cannot be the reason for creating more work and programs when those already in place suffice."
