Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

DAN ALBAS -- What did the Prime Minister actually say? The promise was to “ban harmful single-use plastics as early as 2021”. So, the actual promise has no firm deadline whatsoever

Conservative MP Dan Albas

This Prime Minister (Justin Trudeau) has a habit of making promises. It appears this plan to reduce single use plastics is well intended but short on details

As the Official Opposition, it is our job to hold the government accountable and at the same time to provide information to citizens that the government may not widely share or present in great detail. An example of this can be found in the recent media headline “Trudeau announces ban on single-use plastics by 2021”.

This was an actual media headline quoted directly from a Global news story.

I believe most Canadians are supportive of the idea of taking action on the growing problem of plastic pollution that can have devastating impacts, particularly in sensitive marine habitats.  Often these sensitive marine habitats are polluted by developing countries that do not have proper waste disposal and recycling systems, or rogue fishing operations that break maritime waste management protocols.

However, as Canadians, we should always look to make improvements to ensure a clean environment.

The idea of taking action on this front requires a credible plan in order to be successful and -- on that note -- the Prime Minister’s plan to ban single use plastics is deserving of scrutiny. For starters, the Prime Minister actually made no promise to ban single use plastics by 2021.

The date of 2021 is an interesting one as the leader of the NDP made a similar promise recently, only setting their date at 2022.

So what did the Prime Minister actually say?  The promise was to “ban harmful single-use plastics as early as 2021” --- Note the word "early".  So, the actual promise has no firm deadline whatsoever.

One may also ask what is exactly meant by a “harmful single use plastic”? 

In this case the promise suggests this will be determined by “scientific evidence” and “where warranted”. In other words there is no clear definition.

What we do know about the Canadian plastic sector is that it has estimated annual sales of $10 billion in plastic resin and a further $25 billion in products for a total value of $35 billion, roughly 5% of sales in our domestic manufacturing sector.

From a waste perspective, some of the most common forms of plastic waste are found in plastic packaging that comprises 43% of total plastic waste. Automotive plastic waste is 9%, textiles 7% and electronic equipment is 7%. Other uses make up the remainder.

A few more important questions remain unanswered, such as:

  1. What is the specific timeline? 
  2. What happens when there is not an alternative replacement product to a single use plastic, such as in the medical field? 
  3. What would be the total costs to achieve this plan and who would pay for it? 
  4. Since provinces have jurisdiction over waste management and recycling, have they been consulted and are all provinces supportive?


If I sound skeptical, it is largely because I am. It appears this plan to reduce single use plastics is well meaning, but short on details ... more so with a fall election in the offing.

This Prime Minister has a habit of making promises. For example:

A balanced budget in 2019 ... that the 2015 election was to be the last to use first past the post ... and a Liberal government would not use omnibus budget bills that he makes no effort to fulfill.


Here is my question this week:

Do you believe this is a credible plan to reduce single use plastics?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1 (800) 665-8711.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...
Post a Comment
Read more

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...
1 comment
Read more

Labels

Show more