Outline
Thesis statement: Harmful substances are believed to cause a number of complications to human life. The Canadian government has been reluctant to implement policies that could reduce supply of harmful products. This paper analyzes some of the reasons why the state is reluctant to implement regulatory policies.
Introduction
Canadians rely on compound materials that are utilized in hundreds of merchandise, from drugs to computers, textiles and petroleum. Unfortunately, a number of substances can harmfully influence our wellbeing and atmosphere when emitted in a certain capacity or concentration in the atmosphere.
Systematic evaluation of the effects of individual and ecological experience have established that a number of these chemicals comprise or may pose a threat to human fitness or to the atmosphere as per the criterion defined under chapter 64 of the Canadian ecological safety Act of 1999.
About 23 000 harmful materials, often branded as existing chemicals, are said to be utilized in Canada. These chemicals are registered under Domestic Substances List (DSL), although several of these chemicals have never been reviewed as to whether they conform to any of the toxicity criterion explained in section 64 of the 1999 act.
Chapter 73 of the same Act demand that chemicals on the DSL be classified to establish which ones are more dangerous to the universal populace over and above those that are constant or bio-accumulative and intrinsically poisonous to human beings or non-human creatures 1.
According to chapter 74 of 1999 Act, chemicals that have met classification condition should go through an evaluation process to establish whether they meet any of the principles set out.
From the above description, it can be seen that the state came up with strong laws in 1999 to solve environmental problems. The Canadian government has been reluctant to implement these laws because of some reasons. This paper unravels these reasons by first analyzing the effects of volatile substances such as mercury.
Effects of Chemicals
Toxicity statistics point out that polychlorinated naphthalene with two to five chlorine particles may perhaps be detrimental to marine creatures at moderately low concentrations. In addition, polychlorinated naphthalene containing six to eight chlorine particles was proved to have dangerous consequences in mammals after short-term contact at comparatively low amounts.
Methodical data also point out that all polychlorinated naphthalene are exceedingly importunate in the atmosphere and can build up in creatures.
Evidence that a harmful material is extremely importunate and bio-accumulative, as described in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations, altogether with possible ecological release or creation and likelihood of toxicity in creatures, offers an important suggestion that the material may enter the atmosphere under conditions that may have damaging long-term environmental consequences.
Harmful chemicals that are importunate remain in the atmosphere for a long time after being emitted, amplifying the possible extent and length of contact. Materials that have extensive half-lives in the atmosphere and water and partition into them in considerable magnitude have the possibility of causing extensive pollution.
Emission of small quantities of bio-accumulative materials may possibly lead to high interior concentrations in organisms. Extremely bio-accumulative and importunate chemicals are of particular concern because they may bio-amplify in food webs, leading to very high interior damages particularly to top predators2.
These effects are indeed serious but how comes the government does not want to tackle them. This question is of great concern to this paper. Lack of political good will have contributed to continual environmental degradation. Mercury is proved to have effects to both humans and non-humans but the government has never acted to ban its usage.
Chemicals emitted in industries that is, volatile substances, have contaminated both air and water ecosystems. There is a clear law that gives the government powers and authority to eliminate or stop the usage of a chemical but how comes the government is reluctant to invoke such laws.
Chemical emissions affect human life both socio-culturally and economically. Many resources are spent in managing complexities resulting from poor environmental management.
The government has achieved little by controlling the distribution of polychlorinated biphenyls and removing lead from paints and petroleum products. This is because there are other deadly products that affect human life. Such chemicals are in widespread meaning that they are used by many manufactures in making finished products.
New threats include PBDE and PFCs3. Volatile organic chemicals have been in the market for quite some time but the government is yet to regulate their usage. These classes of chemicals include heavy metals such as lead and mercury, polycyclic perfumed hydrocarbons and a variety of pesticides, insecticides, fungicides and herbicides.
Respiratory pollutants influence the inhalation system. When these contaminants are breathed in, they affect the nasal cavity, pharynx, trachea, bronchi, and lungs. These venoms cause both sensitive and unending sicknesses, for example bronchitis, pulmonary fibrosis, emphysema, cancer, and common inhalation problems.
As irritants, respiratory pollutants can as well enhance the sternness and occurrence of respiratory illnesses and can intensify asthma4. Human reproduction and the growth of the embryo, fetus and baby are intimately connected processes. Due to this, reproductive and developmental pollutants are frequently considered to be chemical-health result cluster.
Human reproduction entails the manufacture, discharge and fertilization of gametes (sperm and ova). Child growth includes the embryonic, fetal, infancy, tot, infancy, and teenager stages. All these stages are affected in one way or another.
Government’s Role
Any government that fails to protect life and property must cease to exist. The main aim of any political system is to guarantee healthy living. Environmental pollution poses a threat to the existence of human beings. The government must rise to the occasion and implement the provisions of the 1999 Act, especially sections 64 and 73.
On its part, the government is reluctant to request manufactures to follow the law or face dire consequences. The state is always the product of the owners of the means of production. Producers of chemicals, as well as those who use them are people with great influence in society.
They force government to compromise the quality of life by allowing pollutants to destroy major species. It is from manufacturers that political elites obtain their campaign money hence they cannot intervene to rescue the poor. Poor individuals are more predisposed to environmental hazards because they do not have the means of preventing atmospheric effects.
The bourgeoisie will never come into direct contact with chemicals such as pesticides and herbicides. They always employ workers, meaning that they cannot allow government to formulate policies aiming at eradicating chemical use5.
Furthermore, the state earns too much tax from chemicals. Volatile chemicals are exported to other parts of the world such as Africa, earning the government foreign exchange. The government only controls the use of harmful substances but those proved to be harmless to human beings such as pesticides are allowed to circulate freely.
Without taxes, the government cannot operate normally. Multinational corporations producing chemicals or using chemicals in production would be forced to close down their operations if the state bans the usage of certain substances. Some of the companies are state owned meaning that many people will be rendered jobless.
In case this happens, the cost of security will skyrocket since people will engage in crime and other unlawful businesses to earn a living. Chemical industry employs many young people, with graduates leading the list6.
Free movement of chemicals encourages scientific exploration and research. Chemicals are being used to solve farm problems that other techniques could not have managed. Agricultural development could not have reached its climax were it not for chemicals.
Farmers can now practice large-scale production because there are reliable methods of eliminating plant diseases and efficient storage techniques. The government weighs the benefits and limitations of substances before coming up with a solution. Most chemicals are used in production of finished products implying that shortages would be encountered in case state authorities decide to regulate chemical usage.
Importing finished products from other parts of the world is costly7. The state loses its sovereignty because it is forced to rely on other states for goods and services. Canada has not acquired alternative sources of production that would replace chemical production. For this reason, regulation of harmful chemicals is unnecessary. Application of regulatory policies would discourage investment.
Almost all industrial processes depend on chemicals. Depending on government for supply of chemicals would cause delays in production. Governmental decision-making procedures are unnecessarily complex and time consuming.
Furthermore, regulations will scare away foreign investors.
The state considers the policies of other states and the position of international law before designing some radical policies8. Many states in the world allow chemical manufacturing implying that manufactures will tend to move their business to such states. In this way, the state would have lost its hegemonic powers in the international system.
The issue of chemicals and their usage is a global affair that should be addressed jointly. Developing countries are accusing western powers of destroying the environment. This means that the issue is not with Canada alone but all states in the world. Regulating the usage of harmful chemicals within state boundaries would mean that Canada reviews its foreign policies.
It would perhaps imply that supplies to other states are also regulated. Canadian firms operating abroad would suffer because they will have to realign their policies to suit the agenda of the state. This would affect their businesses, forcing some to close down or switch to different areas.
Those investing in chemicals by either using them for production or producing them are mainly foreign firms. Regulation of harmful chemicals would drive them away from the Canadian financial system. Traditional multinational corporations have enormous resources and power to an extent of influencing state actors to defer policy implementation.
American and British MNCs use their governments to request Canadian authorities to stop any plans of eliminating the usage of harmful chemicals. Such companies have political machinery that ensures their continuity. Leaders who usually attempt to implement unfavorable laws are always silenced through these political machineries. In the current international system, the state has lost its sovereignty mainly because of the powers of MNCs and international regimes.
MNCs at times bail out states meaning that states will always listen to their requests. Furthermore, decisions are made globally in the modern world. Implementation of a policy calls for cooperation between state and non-state actors. Executing policies without consultation or due process would amount to serious international violations9.
Interest groups are so powerful and are well represented in government. Their views are taken with seriousness because they have enough members who push for their interests. The Canadian manufacturers association is so powerful and well organized to an extent that no policy can be made within state boundaries without consulting its officials.
This leaves decision makers in both public and private sectors with minimum options. Environmental interest groups are not well organized and mostly operate on an ad hoc basis, implying that they do not wield power like other interest groups. Furthermore, such interest groups have a global scope implying that there focus is wide and extensive.
This does not allow them to act swiftly like manufacturers interest groups. On the other hand, environmental organizations have no enough resources to fund their activities. The government is reluctant to fund such groups because they have interests that conflict with state agenda.
Environmental preservation does not have a direct impact to the lives of citizens. Of course, other issues are more pressing than environmental conservation10. The issue of poverty and state security are valued than anything else. If it means that state security would be enhanced through allowing the usage of harmful chemicals, then state authorities would not hesitate to adopt policies that permit utilization of chemicals.
Interfering with the financial system through regulation of some goods is against the ideology of the state. Canada is purely a capitalistic country meaning that the state cannot restrict movement of goods and services as long as they do not pose a security threat. The most harmful chemicals are prohibited but those that are not proved harmful such as mercury, pesticides and insecticides are allowed to circulate freely.
The principle of lazier fairer argues that interfering with the market is harmful to the economy. The market has its own internal logics, which are self-correcting. This means that consumers and suppliers will always check each other to ensure peaceful coexistence. The state only comes in when there is an economic turmoil.
The scholars argue that the state must withdraw immediately normalcy and constancy is regained11. This principle has been informing public policy in Canada since the end of the Second World War in 1945. Democracy is only attained when people are allowed to decide their own destiny.
Restricting the sale of some products would interfere with individual freedom. People would not have enough options or alternatives since the government may withhold some goods that are of great importance.
Conclusion
The government considers many factors before implementing some policies. Priority is always given to state security and state interests. A state may decide to adopt a defective policy provided it fulfills its interest. In Canada, the issue of environmental preservation is not a priority since many organizations have been formed to handle the issue.
The most pressing need is the issue of poverty, unemployment and state interests abroad (foreign policy). These factors make government to be reluctant in adopting policies aimed at abolishing the use of harmful products. Eliminating the use of substances such as mercury, herbicides and pesticides would derail development.
Furthermore, the chemical industries employ so many Canadians hence banning the use of chemicals would render such individuals jobless. Therefore, national interests are the most important factors that influence policymaking and implementation in government.
Bibliography
Benedick, Richard. Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in safeguarding the planet. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.
Blackman, Albert. “Can Voluntary Environmental Regulation Work in Developing Countries? Lessons from Case Studies”, Policy Studies Journal, 36, 1, 2008, p. 119-141.
David, Victor. The collapse of the Kyoto protocol and the struggle to slow Global Warming. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
Dewar, Helen. “Senate advices against emissions treaty that lets developing nations pollute”, Washington post, July 26, 1997.
Hileman, Better. “Ozone treaty: Successful but pitfalls remain”, Chemical and Engineering News, September 15, 1997.
Johnson, Chris. Australia’s Mammal Extinctions. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Lnaders, Fredrick. “The black market trade in chlorofluorocarbons: The Montreal Protocol makes banned refrigerants a hot commodity”, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 26, 1997.
Murphy, Cameron. “Australia as International Citizen – From Past Failure to Future Distinction”, 22nd Lionel Memorial Lecture. The Lionel Foundation. Retrieved
Sattler, Paul and Creighton, Colin. “Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment 2002”, National Land and Water Resources Audit. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. Retrieved
Saleem, Saab. “Move over drugs, there is something cooler on the black market-Freon”, Dickens Journal of International Law, 16, 1998.
Short, Jeff and Smith, Andrew. “Mammal Decline and Recovery in Australia”. Journal of Mammalogy, 75, 2, 1998, p. 288-297.
Footnotes
1 Fredrick Landers “The black market trade in chlorofluorocarbons: The Montreal Protocol makes banned refrigerants a hot commodity”, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 26, 1997.
2 Better, Hileman. “Ozone treaty: Successful but pitfalls remain”, Chemical and Engineering News, September 15, 1997.
3 Sattler,Paul and Creighton, Colin. “Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment 2002”, National Land and Water Resources Audit. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. Retrieved
4 Johnson, Chris. Australia’s Mammal Extinctions. Melbourne: Cambridge University, 2006.
5 Benedick, Richard. Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in safeguarding the planet. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1991
6 Blackman, Albert. “Can Voluntary Environmental Regulation Work in Developing Countries? Lessons from Case Studies”, Policy Studies Journal, 36, 1, 2008, p. 119-141.
7 David, Victor. The collapse of the Kyoto protocol and the struggle to slow Global Warming. Princeton: Princeton University, 2001.
8Murphy, Cameron. “Australia as International Citizen – From Past Failure to Future Distinction”, 22nd Lionel Murphy Memorial Lecture. The Lionel Murphy Foundation. Retrieved
9 Dewar, Hellen. “Senate advices against emissions treaty that lets developing nations pollute”, Washington post, July 26, 1997.
10 Saleem, Saab. “Move over drugs, there is something cooler on the black market-Freon”, Dickens Journal of International Law, 16, 1998
11 Short, Jeff and Smith, Andrew. “Mammal Decline and Recovery in Australia”. Journal of Mammalogy, 75, 2, 1998, p. 288-297.