Ban on Six Single-Use Plastics

Summary#

The federal government published the proposed Single-Use Plastics Prohibition Regulations on December 25, 2021 under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. If adopted, they would phase out manufacture, import and sale of six common single-use plastic items, while allowing some exemptions (for export and for people with disabilities). Over 2023–2032 the government estimates a net reduction of about 1.4 million tonnes of plastic waste and about 23,000 tonnes less plastic pollution, but a net present-value cost of about $1.3 billion.

What it does#

• Targets six product groups: checkout bags, cutlery, foodservice ware made from or containing problematic plastics, ring carriers, stir sticks, and straws.
• Prohibits manufacture, import and sale of those single‑use plastic items, with these main exceptions:
  • Manufacture and import for the purpose of export are allowed.
  • Special rules for straws: flexible plastic straws may be manufactured/imported and can be sold in certain ways (e.g., packs of 20 or more sold only if requested, and supply to hospitals and care facilities allowed).
  • Exemptions to preserve access for people with disabilities.
• Sets performance tests to tell reusable items from single‑use ones for checkout bags, cutlery and straws (tests must be done in accredited labs).
• Requires exporters and firms importing for export to keep records for at least five years.
• Timing (if the regulations are finalized):
  • Prohibitions on manufacture and import: come into force one year after registration.
  • Prohibitions on sale (most items): come into force two years after registration.
  • Prohibitions on sale for straws: come into force one year after registration.

Who's affected#

• Consumers, because many everyday items (bags, straws, takeout containers, cutlery) would change or be replaced by non‑plastic or reusable options.
• Foodservice and retail businesses (restaurants, cafés, grocery and convenience stores) that give out or sell these items.
• Manufacturers and importers of the six items — the government estimated about 131 businesses manufacture and about 128 import at least one of these products; up to 250,000 businesses could sell or offer them (about 242,000 of those are small businesses).
• Municipalities and community groups that pay to clean up litter (reduced cleanup needs are part of the expected benefits).
• People with disabilities and some health‑care settings — the rules include specific accommodations to keep flexible plastic straws available where needed.
• Provincial, territorial and Indigenous governments — they were consulted and some already have local bans; remote and northern communities may face different waste‑management challenges.

Why it matters#

• Environmental effect: the government estimates a net reduction of about 1.4 million tonnes of plastic waste and about 23,000 tonnes less plastic pollution over 2023–2032. That includes preventing an estimated 2,663 tonnes of marine plastic pollution over the same period.
• Wildlife and nature: the scientific assessment cited by the government says macroplastic litter can entangle and poison animals and harm habitats. Eliminating common litter items (bags, straws, rings, cutlery) reduces those risks.
• Costs and trade‑offs:
  • Monetized benefits (mainly avoided clean‑up and some marine costs) were estimated at $619 million (present value).
  • Monetized costs (higher prices for substitutes, waste handling, other adjustments) were estimated at $1.9 billion (present value), yielding a net monetized cost of about $1.3 billion over the 10‑year analysis.
  • That aggregate cost was estimated to average about $5 per person per year (spread across Canadians).
• Substitutes and other impacts: many substitutes (paper, wood, heavier single‑use items or reusable products) already exist. Some substitutes weigh more and can raise total tonnage of waste (the analysis projects an increase of about 3.2 million tonnes of substitute waste over the same 10 years), and some upstream impacts (manufacturing emissions, water use) may rise for those substitutes.
• Practical protections: the rules explicitly allow export manufacturing/import for export and include straw exceptions for accessibility and health settings, aiming to balance environmental goals with trade and social needs.
• Public reaction: the government received thousands of written submissions and over 24,000 emails from individuals during consultations, and a civil‑society petition topped 100,000 signatures; views from stakeholders were mixed (strong support from environmental groups and many local governments; industry views were more divided).

If you want to know whether a particular item or business activity would be allowed or when the ban would start for a specific product, the proposal text gives detailed definitions and timing and can be consulted for those specifics.