Commentaire
I have real concerns with rolling back reporting on toxic substances.
Companies that release toxic substances into communities and ecosystems require tight and multi-jurisdictional reporting mechanisms. In northern communities, we have seen the legacy of under-, and poorly framed, regulation on both human and eco-system health. The costly legacy left by the forestry and mining industry is one that we will be paying for generations. The costs associated with this environmental degradation must be born up front and mitigated whenever possible.
Furthermore, the last time we had a Conservative government in power - the relatives of many of those leaders are now running this administration - this type of passing the regulatory buck actually citizen lives. This policy has Walkerton, Grassy Narrows, Wabaseemoong, and Sarnia all over it. This policy seems to be in the best interest of a small number of business people but risks major long term consequences. We have seen this movie before, with many of the same actors, and it almost always ends as a tragedy.
Finally, the provincial government should never pass the regulatory buck to other levels of government. Many of the industries associated with this legislation very clearly fall under s92(5) and s92A of the Canadian Constitution. As such, they should be tightly regulated through Queen's Park.
Soumis le 5 janvier 2019 10:30 AM
Commentaire sur
Modifications concernant la planification et la production de rapports dans le cadre du Programme de réduction des substances toxiques et en vertu du Règlement de l’Ontario 455/09
Numéro du REO
013-4235
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
16897
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire