Summary#

This bill updates the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) and the Food and Drugs Act. It recognizes a right to a healthy environment under CEPA, changes how toxic substances are assessed and controlled, and adds new powers over products and drugs that may harm the environment. It also repeals older “virtual elimination” rules and reorganizes the toxic substances list.

• Recognizes a right to a healthy environment under CEPA and requires an implementation framework within 2 years of coming into force (Part 1, Implementation framework).
• Requires a public plan within 2 years that lists priority substances for assessment, with an 8‑year review cycle (s.73).
• Makes assessments consider vulnerable populations and cumulative effects; lets any person request an assessment with a 90‑day response (s.76 request; s.76.1(1)–(2)).
• Splits Schedule 1 into Part 1 (highest risk) and Part 2, and directs priority to prohibition for Part 1 substances (s.77(3); s.90(1.1)–(1.2)).
• Expands information‑gathering and pollution‑prevention powers to products and certain activities (e.g., hydraulic fracturing, tailings ponds) (s.46(1)(e.1), (k.1)–(k.3); s.56(1)(c)).
• Tightens confidentiality rules and allows disclosure of explicit chemical names in defined cases and after 10 years (s.313(2); ss.317.1–317.2).
• Adds environmental risk assessment and risk‑management powers for drugs and other therapeutic products (Food and Drugs Act s.11.1; ss.21.2, 21.31–21.33; s.30).

What it means for you#

• Households

  • The federal government must consider a right to a healthy environment when it administers CEPA; details will be set in a framework within 2 years of the relevant section coming into force (Implementation framework). The Act does not create a new private right to sue; existing CEPA participation rights remain (s.15).
  • More public information via a searchable Environmental Registry and more disclosure of chemical names in set situations and after 10 years (s.13(2); ss.317.1–317.2).

• Workers

  • Facilities handling substances on Schedule 1 may face new or stricter controls, including pollution prevention plans that prioritize safer substitutes where viable (s.56(1), (1.1)).
  • Assessments must consider vulnerable populations (people more at risk due to exposure or susceptibility) (s.3(1) “vulnerable population”; s.76.1(2)).

• Businesses (manufacturers, importers, product makers)

  • Broader information notices can require data, samples, and testing about substances and products that contain or may release substances (s.71(1)–(2.3)).
  • Pollution prevention plans can now be required for products containing or releasing listed toxic substances, with progress reports (s.56(1)(c), (6)).
  • “Significant New Activity” obligations expand; you must notify downstream recipients about obligations when transferring certain substances listed on the Domestic Substances List (DSL) (s.87.1(1)).
  • Confidentiality requests must include reasons; explicit chemical names may be disclosed in specific regulatory steps or after 10 years with notice (s.313(2); ss.317.1–317.2).
  • Substances of highest risk (Schedule 1, Part 1) face priority for prohibition of activities or releases; plan accordingly for substitutions (s.90(1.1)).

• Oil and gas, mining, and heavy industry

  • The Minister can gather information on hydraulic fracturing and tailings ponds (s.46(1)(k.2)–(k.3)).
  • New or updated controls may target products that release toxic substances and activities that contribute to pollution (s.93(1)(f)–(q); s.46(1)(k.1)).

• Drug and medical product manufacturers

  • It is prohibited to sell or make a drug with a prescribed substance unless Health Canada has assessed the environmental risk of that substance (Food and Drugs Act s.11.1).
  • The Minister can order label/package changes, recalls, or information/testing to address serious environmental risks (FDA ss.21.2; 21.31–21.33; s.30(1)(b.01), (l.1)–(l.3), (1.2)(d.01)).

• Indigenous peoples and communities

  • The preamble commits to implementing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including free, prior and informed consent; annual reporting must summarize consultations and reconciliation measures under CEPA (preamble; new report on Indigenous consultations).

• Timelines and processes

  • Priority plan published within 2 years of Royal Assent; reviewed every 8 years (s.73).
  • Ministers must respond within 90 days to any assessment request (s.76(2.1)).
  • After proposing a measure for a substance, final publication steps have defined timelines, and delays must be explained publicly (s.77(8); s.91(1); s.92(1)).
  • Some provisions start on Royal Assent; others start on a date set by Cabinet (Order in Council) (Coming into force).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No explicit appropriations are in the bill text (throughout).
• The bill creates new duties for Environment and Climate Change Canada and Health Canada, including:
  • Develop and publish an implementation framework for the right to a healthy environment within 2 years, with annual reporting (Implementation framework; s.342 report).
  • Develop and review a priority plan for substances, compile and update a list of substances suspected of becoming toxic, and process public assessment requests within 90 days (s.73; s.75.1; s.76(2.1)).
  • Conduct research, studies, or monitoring to support protecting the right to a healthy environment, including biomonitoring and work on vulnerable populations (s.44(3.1); s.45).
  • Manage expanded information‑gathering, pollution prevention planning, and confidentiality review and reporting (ss.46, 56, 60, 71; s.313(5)).
• The bill authorizes new regulatory and compliance obligations for regulated parties (e.g., environmental assessments for certain drugs; reporting and testing for substances and products), but no government cost estimates are provided (FDA s.11.1; CEPA s.71).
• Data unavailable on administrative or enforcement costs; no fiscal note identified.

Proponents' View#

• Strengthens protections by recognizing a right to a healthy environment under CEPA and requiring a framework, research, and consideration of vulnerable populations and cumulative effects (s.2(1)(a.2); Implementation framework; s.76.1(2)).
• Focuses controls on the highest‑risk substances by creating Schedule 1 Part 1 and directing priority to prohibition of activities or releases (s.77(3); s.90(1.1)–(1.2)).
• Closes gaps by regulating products that contain or may release toxic substances, enabling life‑cycle controls such as packaging and labelling (s.46(1)(e.1); s.93(1)(f)–(q)).
• Improves transparency and accountability: searchable Environmental Registry; reasons required for confidentiality; publication of delays; authority to disclose explicit chemical names in defined circumstances and after 10 years (s.13(2); s.313(2); s.77(8); ss.317.1–317.2).
• Reduces animal testing by requiring use of alternative methods where practicable (new restriction on vertebrate animals, s.68.1).
• Adds environmental safeguards for drugs and therapeutic products by requiring environmental risk assessments and enabling recalls and label changes to address serious environmental risks (Food and Drugs Act s.11.1; ss.21.2, 21.31–21.33; s.30).

Opponents' View#

• The right to a healthy environment is limited to CEPA administration, subject to “reasonable limits,” and may be balanced with social, health, scientific, and economic factors defined later in an implementation framework; it does not create a new private right to sue (s.2(1)(a.2); Implementation framework content; s.15).
• Repealing CEPA’s former virtual elimination provisions and the PFOS Virtual Elimination Act could weaken stringency, relying instead on Part 1/Part 2 categorization and ministerial discretion (repeal of ss.65, 65.1; repeal clause; transitional provisions).
• Allowing risk management under other federal Acts and by the “best placed” minister may fragment accountability and slow action (e.g., statements identifying other Acts under s.77(6)(c)(ii), s.91(1)(a)(ii), (b)(ii); s.84(4)).
• Expanded information demands and product controls increase compliance costs and administrative burden for businesses, including testing, reporting, pollution prevention plans, and onward notifications for significant new activities (s.71(1)–(2.3); s.56; s.87.1).
• New confidentiality rules, including potential disclosure of explicit chemical names after 10 years, may risk revealing trade secrets despite criteria in s.313(3) (ss.317.1–317.2; s.313(2)–(5)).
• Timelines depend on future regulations and orders; while delays must be explained, there are limited automatic consequences if deadlines slip (s.77(8); s.91(1); s.92(1); Coming into force).