Back to Bills

Stronger Waste and Recycling Enforcement Act

Full Title:
The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act (Strengthening Enforcement)

Summary#

This bill updates Manitoba’s Waste Reduction and Prevention Act to strengthen oversight and enforcement of waste and recycling programs. It creates a designated “director,” expands inspection powers, adds new compliance orders and administrative penalties, and increases public reporting. The goal appears to be better compliance, transparency, and accountability for regulated waste and recycling activities.

Key changes:

  • Creates a director role to run and enforce the Act; lets the minister delegate powers to the director or staff.
  • Clarifies who is a “regulated party,” including owners/operators of Class 1–3 waste disposal grounds (landfills), stewards of designated materials (as set by regulation), and operators of approved stewardship programs.
  • Expands inspection powers for environment officers (with a warrant needed to enter a home). Officers can examine records, copy them, and require assistance.
  • Allows environment officers to issue compliance orders. If an order is not followed, the director can levy an administrative penalty up to $10,000, subject to review and appeal.
  • Lets the director require independent audits of stewardship programs at the operator’s expense.
  • Makes unpaid levies and penalties debts that can be enforced in court. Updates offence provisions and adds a two-year prosecution window from when sufficient evidence becomes known.
  • Requires posting on a government website of proposed and approved stewardship programs and allows posting of compliance and enforcement actions.
  • Timing: most changes start on royal assent. The new compliance orders, administrative penalties, audit powers, and public posting provisions will start later on a date set by the government.

What it means for you#

  • Owners and operators of Class 1, 2, or 3 waste disposal grounds (often municipalities or private landfill operators)

    • Must allow inspections at reasonable times, provide records (including electronic records), and assist officers.
    • May receive a compliance order if found in breach. If not followed, the director can impose an administrative penalty (up to $10,000), after an internal review and with a right to appeal to the minister.
    • Obstructing officers or giving false information is an offence. Prosecution can be started up to two years after sufficient evidence is known to an environment officer.
    • Your organization could be named on a government website for program approvals, suspensions, or compliance/enforcement actions.

  • Stewards of designated materials (who is a steward is set by regulation)

    • Are explicitly covered as “regulated parties.” The same inspection, compliance order, and penalty rules apply.
    • Information about your compliance may be posted online by the director.

  • Operators of stewardship programs (approved programs for designated materials)

    • The director can require you to hire and pay for an independent auditor to review specified parts of your program and report findings.
    • You must give the auditor access to records and information needed for the audit.
    • Your proposed and approved programs, and any suspensions or cancellations, will be posted online. Compliance and enforcement information may also be posted.

  • General public

    • You will be able to view proposed and approved stewardship programs and some compliance/enforcement outcomes on a government website. This could make it easier to see how waste and recycling programs are performing.

  • Timing

    • New powers for compliance orders, administrative penalties, audits, and public posting take effect later, on a date set by proclamation, after regulations are in place. Other updates take effect on royal assent.

  • What is unclear

    • The bill repeals two sections (18 and 18.1) but does not explain here what they contained.
    • The exact criteria and amounts for administrative penalties will be set by regulation.
    • Who is a “steward” and which materials are “designated” depend on existing or future regulations.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Possible impacts:

  • Government may face added costs to administer inspections, reviews, appeals, website postings, and collections.
  • Operators of stewardship programs may face new costs to pay for independent audits and prepare records.
  • Regulated parties may have compliance costs (staff time, record production, responding to orders).
  • Administrative penalties up to $10,000 may be imposed for failing to comply with a compliance order.
  • Unpaid levies and penalties can be collected as debts through court processes.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to improve compliance by giving clear inspection powers and a step-by-step path: compliance order first, then an administrative penalty if the order is ignored.
  • Administrative penalties could provide a faster, less costly way to address non-compliance than going straight to court.
  • Requiring audits of stewardship programs could improve accountability and program performance.
  • Posting proposed and approved programs, and enforcement information, could increase transparency for the public and regulated parties.
  • Treating unpaid levies and penalties as collectible debts and allowing court registration could strengthen enforcement and deter non-payment.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is due process: compliance orders are issued by officers, reviews are decided by the director, and penalty appeals go to the minister rather than to an independent tribunal. This may raise questions about independence, even though judicial review may still be possible.
  • Expanded inspection powers (including copying records and bringing experts) may be viewed as intrusive or burdensome for regulated parties, even though entering a dwelling still requires consent or a warrant.
  • Public posting of compliance and enforcement actions may cause reputational harm, especially if information is shared before all appeals are finished. The bill allows posting at the director’s discretion and does not specify timing.
  • The bill leaves important details to future regulations (how notices are issued, how penalty amounts are set, audit standards). This creates uncertainty for businesses until those rules are published.
  • It is unclear whether the maximum administrative penalty of $10,000 will be enough to deter large organizations, or could be too high for small entities, until the regulations explain how amounts will vary.