B.C.’s top health organizations are expressing disappointment after a B.C. legislative committee on cosmetic pesticides released a report last week calling for weak restrictions on lawn and garden pesticides.

“If these recommendations become law, they will not protect all British Columbian children from being exposed to unnecessary chemicals and possible carcinogens,” said Barbara Kaminsky, CEO, Canadian Cancer Society, BC and Yukon. “We waited years for the BC government to follow the lead of other provinces and BC municipalities, and this is the result? The report was slow in coming and is weak in content. It is disappointing overall.”

The health groups – which include the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE), the Lung Association, the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation and the Public Health Association of BC – had requested strong legislation banning the sale and use of all pesticides for lawns, gardens and non-agricultural landscaping.

“Doctors are displeased that, given all we know about pesticides and illness, the committee would offer something so weak” said CAPE Executive Director Gideon Forman. “We will continue to urge the BC government to implement strong province-wide cosmetic pesticide legislation, similar to Ontario’s.”

There is broad public support for cosmetic pesticide legislation in B.C. Over 70% of British Columbians support provincial legislation to restrict pesticide use, according to polling commissioned by the Canadian Cancer Society in 2010.

More than 35 B.C. municipalities have already adopted bylaws restricting the cosmetic use of pesticides, and delegates at the 2008 and 2009 Union of BC Municipalities Conventions voted in favour of resolutions calling on the BC government to ban the use and sale of cosmetic pesticides province-wide.

During the two public consultations that the BC government has conducted (in 2010 and 2011), some 8,000 British Columbians responded to each consultation and the vast majority of respondents were in support of province-wide legislation. Most recently, health and environmental organizations succeeded in making pesticides an issue in the Port Moody-Coquitlam by-election.

“To say that a lot of people are afraid of chemicals because they don’t understand the science is insulting to the majority of British Columbians in support of legislation and those who responded to the committee’s consultation,” says Forman.

Considerable evidence supports a link between pesticides and cancer incidence, reproductive problems and neurological diseases. A definitive cause and effect relationship between cosmetic pesticide use and cancer is unlikely to be firmly established, but enough is known to be prudent and prevent exposure to children, especially when the use of these chemicals is unnecessary.

“We’ve conducted polling and an awareness campaign and in response thousands of citizens contacted the BC government in support of a ban,” says Forman. “Both the Premier and the Health Minister supported eliminating the use of cosmetic pesticides during the Liberal Party leadership race and we hope that they will continue to do so,” says Forman.

The Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides was chaired by Kootenay East MLA Bill Bennett. The group has put forward 17 recommendations to promote the safe use of pesticides, but an outright ban was not part of them.

“Our recommendations are designed to promote the safer use of pesticides for lawn and garden care. But the majority of the committee does not think the scientific evidence, at this time, warrants an outright ban,” explained Bennett. “We are not prepared to say to homeowners that purchasing 2,4-D is prohibited, under all circumstances, or that they cannot hire a qualified person to apply it to their lawns.”

The all-party committee was appointed in June 2011 to conduct consultations regarding the unnecessary use of pesticides in British Columbia. The inquiry included briefings from federal and provincial regulators and stakeholder presentations. The committee also conducted an e-consultation and received almost 8,700 submissions, setting a new record for public participation in a committee inquiry.

The committee’s recommendations include:

* Restricting access to and use of Commercial-class pesticides by uncertified users;

* Tightening up the rules for the sale of pesticides;

* Improving public education, by using integrated pest management (IPM) specialists to develop educational resources, and creating a website to inform homeowners about IPM; and

* Expanding the provincial program for safe disposal of unwanted pesticides.

“The committee process has been a collegial one. Following the inquiry the minority of the committee came to the conclusion that there is enough evidence to support the public’s and the Union of B.C.

Municipalities’ call for a province-wide ban on the sale and cosmetic use of pesticides in residential settings,” said deputy chair Rob Fleming.

The provincial NDP are also disappointed with the bipartisan committee’s report.

The recommendations of the Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides fail to address the environmental and human health concerns of British Columbians and do not live up to the commitments of the premier, says New Democrat environment critic Rob Fleming.
“New Democrats are profoundly disappointed in the outcome of this process,” said Fleming, who served as the deputy chair of the committee which began meeting in June 2011. “Instead of making good on the premier’s repeated promise to ban cosmetic pesticides, the Liberals have brought in minimal regulatory changes.”

“Unfortunately, despite the fact that it’s the right thing to do and has overwhelming support from British Columbians, the government majority on the committee has chosen to bring in status quo recommendations instead of advancing protections that 22 million Canadians in six provinces currently enjoy,” said Fleming.
Noting that the Liberals simply tabled the report, without an accompanying motion to adopt which would allow debate in the legislature, Fleming said that it does a great disservice to the 8,700 British Columbians who participated in the process.
“We had an unprecedented level of public interest and participation for a legislative committee, reflecting a widespread consensus among the public and scientific community that the cosmetic use of pesticides pose an unnecessary health risk to children, pets and our water supply,” said Fleming. “There are viable non-synthetic alternatives that are already available and the associated health risks of cosmetic pesticides warrants government action to reduce everyday exposure to toxins that are potentially harmful and easily misused.”

Fleming noted that a patchwork of B.C. local government bylaws currently exist throughout the province with 2.6 million residents living in cosmetic pesticide-free municipalities. A number of other Canadian jurisdictions have bans or strict regulations in place, with Newfoundland and Labrador joining other provinces with bans during the time B.C.’s committee met and deliberated.

A ban on cosmetic pesticides has been urged by the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, Toxic Free Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation, and the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

“After almost a year of Special Committee meetings, the Liberal majority on the committee has recommended B.C. remain with weaker regulations than most other provinces have in place.”
Since 2009, Adrian Dix and the New Democrats have introduced legislation on three occasions calling for a ban on the unnecessary use of toxic pesticides on lawns and in other places where children play.

And regional environmental watchdog and education group Wildsight stated earlier this week that it supports Canadian Cancer Society stance on the pesticide report.

Both the Canadian Cancer Society and Wildsight are members of the Pesticide Free Columbia Basin Coalition. They have been working with 17 partner groups, including doctor and public health associations, to raise awareness of links between pesticides, disease and adverse environmental effects. The goal of the coalition is to create a healthier environment and healthier communities for all citizens of B.C.

“Wildsight supports the stance of the Canadian Cancer Society,” said Robyn Duncan, Wildsight’s Pesticide Reduction program manager. “We’ve reviewed the science on pesticides—both epidemiological and toxicological studies—and remain firmly in support of a ban on cosmetic pesticides in B.C.”

Duncan noted that pesticides affect our environment by entering waterways, threatening important pollinators, such as bees, and killing the natural predators of pests—among other detrimental effects.

“Wildsight is working to find healthy, pesticide-free alternatives for people to use instead of pesticides,” Duncan said. “Healthy ecosystems are the foundation of healthy human communities.”

Five Kootenay communities—and 40 across the province—have enacted municipal bans.

Duncan said a province-wide ban would be the most effective way to move away from harmful pesticides and toward a healthier approach. “People are waking up to the dangers posed by many pesticides,” she said. “Thousands of people support a province-wide ban and we hope it’s only a matter of time before the people of B.C. are protected by that ban.”

For more information on the cosmetic pesticides consultation process and to view a copy of the report, please visit the committee’s website at: www.leg.bc.ca/pesticidescommittee .

The members of the Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides were: Bill Bennett, MLA (Kootenay East), Chair; Rob Fleming, MLA (Victoria-Swan Lake), Deputy Chair; Murray Coell, MLA (Saanich North and the Islands); Scott Fraser, MLA (Alberni-Pacific Rim); Douglas Horne, MLA (Coquitlam-Burke Mountain); Michael Sather, MLA (Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows); John Slater, MLA (Boundary-Similkameen); Ben Stewart, MLA (Westside-Kelowna).

Above image from davidsuzuki.org

Ian Cobb/e-KNOW

---

Article Share

---