“Not every item within [the plastic manufactured items category] has the potential to create a reasonable apprehension of harm”

As long as we agree not to be apprehensive about the harms resulting from the use and manufacture of all plastics, they are ok. Got it, bring back the straws and stir sticks!

The challenge to the federal government’s proposed ban was brought last year by the Responsible Plastic Use Coalition (RPUC) and several chemical companies. They argued that the federal government had failed to demonstrate that it had enough scientific evidence to justify the regulations. RPUC was formed in 2021 in response to the “toxic” designation, and currently includes more than 30 processors and resin makers, including Berry Global Group Inc., CCC Plastics, Dow Inc., Ingenia Polymers, IPL, LyondellBasell Industries, and Nova Chemicals Corp.

https://www.canplastics.com/canplastics/judge-quashes-cabinet-order-underlying-canadas-single-use-plastic-ban/1003462513/

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In a ruling released Thursday, Justice Angela Furlanetto wrote that the category of plastic manufactured items was too broad to be given a blanket toxicity label under federal law.

    Those regulations will prohibit the sale of plastic checkout bags, cutlery, food service ware, stir sticks and straws in Canada after December 20.

    “We know that plastic pollution is one of the major environmental crises of our time and this [ruling] really hampers the federal government’s ability to come to grips with this crisis,” Beck told CBC News.

    The judge also wrote that Ottawa’s decision “poses a threat to the balance of federalism” because it didn’t restrict its regulations to those plastics that have “potential to cause harm to the environment.”

    Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and her Environment Minister Rebecca Schulz said Ottawa’s initial decision to add plastics to the toxic substance list was an example of “federal overreach.”

    But Beck said that by quashing the order-in-council, the judge effectively struck down the government’s reasoning for adding plastics to the toxic substance list under S-5.


    The original article contains 512 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!