Ottawa-Proposed changes to federal pesticide regulations are an unnecessary distraction from the core scientific work of the Pesticide Managaement Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and offer no benefit to Canadian agriculture or the public, says Pierre Petelle, President and CEO of CropLife Canada, which represents pesticide manufacturers.

For the few years, PMRA has diverted efforts away from scientific evaluations and meaningful policies toward bureaucratic processes and initiatives that needlessly add red tape to the regulatory process and dissuade investment in innovation in Canada, Petelle said. “Canada has one of the most robust pesticide regulatory systems in the world when it comes to human and environmental protection.”

He was commenting on an announcement by Health Minister Mark Holland about moving to facilitate public access to confidential test data as well as clarifying the information needed from applicants to set maximum residue limits (MRLs) on imported foods. The proposed changes would also would require the minister to issue a public notification once an application for an MRL for an imported food product has been accepted for review.

“This early notification would improve transparency and enable better public participation in the pesticide decision-making process,” Holland said. “In addition, the proposed amendments would provide the minister with the explicit authority to require applicants to provide information on both cumulative effects on the environment and on species at risk.”

Petelle said the plant science industry supports science- and risk-based efforts to bolster already robust public health protections, which the PMRA has full authority to do under existing legislation. “The efforts being put into the proposed regulatory changes are draining the agency’s already stretched resources, and if implemented, could have negative unintended consequences. We’ve already seen many of the agency’s scientific experts drawn away from their core scientific work in recent years, which has resulted in a worrying drop in the PMRA’s performance standards.

“While the PMRA did receive funding over the next two years from Budget 2024, there is no long-term, sustainable funding strategy to support the important and growing work of reviewing and approving pesticides in Canada. To bridge the financial gap, the PMRA has come out with a punitive cost recovery proposal that would see registrants pay a fee increase of 256 per cent for maintaining existing pesticide registrations. This would put Canada well out of step with the U.S. and will be a significant disincentive for companies to invest in Canada.”

If the PMRA would re-focus its efforts on its core science work and streamlining regulatory processes with a view to the needs of the entire agriculture sector, “they would not need to pursue such dramatic and damaging approaches to recuperating funds,” Petelle said. “The stakes here are high - growers are facing new and changing pest pressures relentlessly and if they are going to continue to sustainably grow food for Canadians and the world they are going to need timely access to new innovations.”

Holland said changes would enable more efficient access to data and information on pesticides for the public while facilitating independent research and reanalysis. They would also complement recent work to strengthen protection of human health and the environment, improve transparency, increase public participation and boost Canadians' confidence in pesticide regulatory decisions. Since 2021, Health Canada has implemented several key policy and operational changes to achieve these goals including post plain language summaries of key decisions online, disclose the names of pesticide applicants, and adopt an early public notification process for MRL applications for imported foods.

This news item prepared for National Newswatch