Ottawa Citizen  *  May 17, 2000  *  Page: A1

MPs' committee urges sharp cuts in pesticide use - Report calls for 90% cut in food residue content and eventual ban in 'cosmetic' use

by Tom Spears
The Ottawa Citizen

Canada should allow only one-tenth as much pesticide residue in food as current rules allow in order to protect children and fetuses, says the House of Commons environment committee.

And Health Canada should investigate making the rules even tighter than that, it recommended in a 200-page report yesterday on Canada's 31-year-old pesticide law.

Children are more vulnerable to pesticides, and their immature livers and other organs are less efficient at getting rid of toxins than adult organs, the committee says.

The committee also called for a ban on "cosmetic" use of pesticides in lawns and gardens, phased in over five years as pesticides that are legal today come up for regular re-evaluations.

But pesticide makers and distributors said, in a joint announcement with the Canadian Alliance Party, that the anti-pesticide report is "hysteria."

"We have found compelling evidence that pesticides are threats to human health and the environment, and such evidence keeps accumulating," said committee chair Charles Caccia, a Toronto Liberal.

"For instance, a National Cancer Institute study in the U.S. says children whose parents use pesticides in their homes and gardens are six times more likely to get leukemia" than children in homes without pesticides, he said.

Pesticides are also linked to non-Hodgkins lymphoma and possibly breast cancer, he said.

The committee wants the expected update of the Pest Control Products Act to ban weedkillers and insecticides for lawns, parks and playgrounds.

"Increasingly people resent being involuntarily exposed to pesticide spraying," Mr. Caccia said.

He also argued it's time to stop demanding weed-free lawns: "Dandelions are a natural and a friendly presence in the Canadian landscape."

The committee stops short of asking for a ban on farm pesticides. Both the Conservative and NDP MPs spoke out in favour of letting farmers keep using chemical pesticides and said the government should give tax incentives to organic farmers, and teach farmers how to get rid of weeds and insects without toxic chemicals.

About 80 per cent of the fresh fruits and vegetables sold in Canada have no detectable pesticides residue, according to figures from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

Nearly two per cent of all the foods the agency sampled had too much residue under the current rules, and were ordered off the store shelves.

The changes in the law, the committee said, should be:

- To protect the most "vulnerable populations" -- mainly children and sensitive wildlife species. (For instance, frogs are very easily poisoned by chemicals in their water.)

- To ban "cosmetic" weed- and insect-killers without waiting for absolute proof that they are dangerous.

"The ultimate evidence, the smoking gun, is not required," Mr. Caccia said. Waiting for absolute proof meant it took 60 years to get lead banned from gasoline, he said. Lead fumes cause brain damage in children.

Mr. Caccia acknowledged that the science involved in setting safe levels for pesticide residues is "very complex." Still, he said it's necessary to tighten the allowable levels because they are currently based on what adults eat, not on children's bodies.

Industry associations joined the Canadian Alliance in denouncing the committee's report as unbalanced, and not based on "sound science.'

"One ought not to work from the assumption that today's system isn't adequately ensuring safe food in the marketplace," said Lorne Hepworth, president of the Crop Protection Institute of Canada. The institute represents makers and distributors of pesticides and biotech products.

Canadian farms produce top-quality food "because our producers manage the pests, the diseases and the insects that could otherwise damage their crops," he said.

"The committee report has done very little to recognize the importance of pest control products in both agricultural and non-agricultural sectors," said Alliance MP Rahim Jaffer.

"Pesticides are important to allergy sufferers in alleviating the discomforts associated with weeds, pollens and moulds," Mr. Jaffer said.

“Risk management is the language of corporations and institutions, not the language of public protection."

Dr. Michelle Brill-Edwards
Senior Drug Reviewer
Health Canada, 1988-1992


Bradford Duplisea

mailto:brad@tao.ca
 
Cathy Booler
Administrative Director
Georgia Strait Alliance
195 Commercial Street
Nanaimo, BC V9R 5G5

cathy@georgiastrait.org

gsa@georgiastrait.org

www.georgiastrait.org

===== A message from the 'toxicscaucus' discussion list =====


Important Action Alert

Its time to ask the Prime Minister of Canada to show some leadership, listen to the people, and do the right thing by making Bill C-388 (Marlene Jennings) a government bill. Bill C-388 is an Act to prohibit the use of chemical pesticides for non-essential purposes.

On May 16, 2000, the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development tabled their report in the House of Commons titled "Making the Right Choice for the Protection of Health and The Environment". It stated that: "the Committee firmly believes that a moratorium on pesticide use for esthetic purposes is necessary" (see page 116).

If the Government of Canada is serious about implementing the precautionary approach and if they are serious about protecting human health and the environment as an absolute priority in pest management decisions then an IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM on the cosmetic use of these chemical pesticides must be implemented.

Furthermore, at the annual convention of the Liberal Party of Canada on March 16-19, the delegates adopted a priority resolution that stated:

"Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the federal government to introduce an immediate moratorium on the cosmetic use of chemical pesticides until such time as their use has been scientifically proven safe and the long-term consequences of their application are known"

Your help is needed to request immediate action on this issue from the Prime Minister of Canada.

ACTION ITEM # 1

Write, e-mail, fax or call Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and copy your local MP, if they are with the Liberal Party of Canada.

You can make the following points:

1. You firmly believe that a moratorium on pesticide use for cosmetic purposes is essential;

2. You are very concerned about the data and scientific studies on the use of chemical pesticides and the hazards that they are having on our health, our communities and our environment;

3. There are time-proven effective alternatives to chemical pesticides for lawn and garden care;

4. You expect the Prime Minister to act on the Liberal Party of Canada priority resolution calling for an immediate moratorium cosmetic use of chemical pesticides;

5. You expect the Prime Minister abide by the precautionary approach on protecting human health and the environment as an absolute priority in pest management decisions and therefore an IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM on the cosmetic use of these chemical pesticides must be implemented;

6. You expect the Prime Minister to show some leadership, listen to the people, and do the right thing by making Bill C-388 (Marlene Jennings) a government bill;

7. Ask for a reply.

The Rt. Hon. Jean Chrétien
Prime Minister of Canada
Rm 309-S
Centre Block
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OA6
E-mail: pm@pm.gc.ca
Phone: (613) 992-4211
Fax: (613) 941-6900

Thank you for taking action and your continued support on this issue. We must strike while the iron is hot!!!

It is VERY important to pass this on to family, friends and like-minded supporters to speak out and contact the Prime Minister of Canada as soon as possible.

Mike & Marsha

Mike Christie
95 Wrenwood Crescent
Nepean Ontario
K2G 5V3 Canada

(613) 228-7499 / bus.
(613) 228-7487 / fax.
mike_christie@attglobal.net

Translate this page automatically.