National Strategy to Cut Textile Waste

Summary#

This bill orders the federal environment minister to develop a national strategy to reduce textile waste. It sets a 2‑year deadline to table the strategy in Parliament and requires a follow‑up report on results within 5 years after that. The strategy must consider reuse and repair, labelling, design standards, polluter‑pays approaches, and ways to curb harmful chemicals and microplastics (Bill, Content (2)(a)-(k)).

• No immediate rule changes; it directs planning and future proposals (Bill, Development (1)).
• Strategy must cover reuse, repair, recycling, and new infrastructure (Bill, Content (2)(a)).
• Must examine tax relief for clothing repairs and industry incentives (Bill, Content (2)(e)-(f)).
• Could propose labelling and design rules, chemical and fabric bans, and microplastic controls (Bill, Content (2)(g)-(j)).
• Aims to stop exports of unusable textile waste to developing countries (Bill, Content (2)(k)).
• Minister must consult provinces, Indigenous governing bodies, and stakeholders (Bill, Development (1)).

What it means for you#

• Households

  • No immediate changes to what you buy or throw away. The minister has up to 2 years to table the strategy after the Act takes effect (Bill, Tabling of strategy (1)).
  • Future proposals could make clothing repairs cheaper if sales tax on repair services is removed, but the bill only requires an examination, not a tax change (Bill, Content (2)(f)).
  • You may see new care and content labels, including recycled content and chemicals used, if the government later adopts labelling rules (Bill, Content (2)(g)).
  • Some fabrics or dyes could be restricted in the future if prohibitions are proposed and adopted (Bill, Content (2)(h)).

• Workers

  • Potential growth in repair, resale, and recycling jobs if the strategy leads to new programs or infrastructure, but there are no immediate changes (Bill, Content (2)(a), (c)).
  • Training or standards could shift for designers and manufacturers if sustainable design rules are proposed later (Bill, Content (2)(j)).

• Businesses (retailers, brands, manufacturers, recyclers)

  • No new compliance duties now. The strategy may later propose extended producer responsibility, labelling, design, and chemical restrictions (Bill, Content (2)(d), (g)-(j)).
  • Possible new costs or incentives tied to “polluter pays,” circular models, and decarbonizing supply chains, subject to future decisions (Bill, Content (2)(d)-(e), (i)).
  • Repair service providers could benefit if sales tax on repairs is later changed; the bill only mandates study (Bill, Content (2)(f)).

• Local and provincial governments

  • Will be consulted in strategy development (Bill, Development (1)).
  • Possible future coordination on collection, sorting, recycling infrastructure, and limits on waste exports (Bill, Content (2)(a), (k)).

• Service users and the public

  • Public education campaigns on reducing textile waste may be part of the strategy (Bill, Content (2)(c)).
  • Reports will be public: the strategy within 10 days of tabling, and an effectiveness report within 5 years after the strategy is tabled (Bill, Publication (2); Report (1)-(3)).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No direct appropriations or new taxes/fees are in the bill text. It directs the minister to develop and table a strategy within 2 years and to report on effectiveness within 5 years after that (Bill, Tabling of strategy (1); Report (1)).
• Administrative costs to develop, consult on, and publish the strategy and the 5‑year report are likely, but amounts are not provided. Data unavailable.
• Any future costs or savings from measures such as labelling rules, producer fees, tax changes for repairs, or export controls would depend on later regulations or legislation. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• A national plan addresses a large and fast‑growing waste stream; Canadians send nearly 500 million kilograms of textile waste to landfills each year (Preamble).
• Significant reuse and recycling potential justifies action; over half of textile waste could be reused and almost a quarter recycled (Preamble).
• Cutting textile waste can lower climate and water impacts; the sector accounts for up to 8% of global greenhouse gases and consumes about 215 trillion litres of water annually (Preamble).
• Polluter‑pays and circular design can shift costs from municipalities and taxpayers to producers, improving collection and recycling (Bill, Content (2)(d)-(e)).
• Labelling transparency and design rules can reduce harmful chemicals and microplastics, improving health and environmental outcomes (Bill, Content (2)(g)-(j)).
• Preventing exports of unusable waste reduces harm to developing countries and aligns with responsible waste management (Bill, Content (2)(k)).

Opponents' View#

• The bill creates a strategy but no immediate measures; benefits depend on future regulations or laws that are not guaranteed (Bill, Content (2); Tabling of strategy (1)).
• Potential duplication with provincial waste programs and extended producer responsibility could raise coordination costs without clear federal funding. Data unavailable.
• Possible compliance burdens for small and medium firms from labelling, design, and chemical rules, if later adopted; costs are unspecified (Bill, Content (2)(g)-(j)). Data unavailable.
• “Polluter pays” and export restrictions may face complex enforcement and trade considerations, increasing administrative costs (Bill, Content (2)(d), (k)). Data unavailable.
• The bill asks to examine removing sales tax on repairs but cannot itself change tax law; benefits for consumers may be limited without separate tax legislation (Bill, Content (2)(f)).