Environmental Law Assessment in Canada Essay Eaxample

Introduction

Why is environmental pollution becoming rampant in our society today? Does it mean that there are no regulations to control or stop it? In a bit to answer these questions, the government of Canada has developed many laws to regulate and in the end stop pollution completely. However, despite developing these laws, pollution is still a cause for concern in Canada and beyond its borders. What are the country's 'so-called' enforcement programs? Are these programs effective? Does Canada have a working Bill of Rights concerning environmental protection? What are the consequences to the polluters found breaking these regulations? Do they get arrested or have the law favor them? Some polluters have previously been caught breaking environmental laws in Canada, but upon release, they continue to pollute again.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Channeling of wastes into rivers, acid rain, unlawful dumping are some of the many problems troubling Canada citizens today, but it seems that nothing is being done about these issues. What could be the reason? This essay is aimed at assessing Canada's environment while breaking down the different environmental laws in Canada. This essay begins by defining environmental assessment and giving a brief history of environmental assessment laws in Canada while reviewing the weakness and strengths in the performance of these laws. In the end, this essay proposes how to make these environmental laws effective in the future by tackling the observed weaknesses.

What is Environmental Assessment?

Environmental assessment is 'the procedure of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the social, biosocial and other significant consequences of development proposals before making major decisions and commitments' (International Association for Impact Assessment 1999). From this definition, environmental assessment can be understood as a means to improve on decision making and determine the design and selection of undertakings to minimize adverse impacts on the environment. As such, an environmental assessment is necessary to achieve a sustainable community.

Environmental Assessment History in Canada

According to Benidickson (2000) 'Environmental law', assessment can be defined as a combination of primary legislation, secondary legislation, judicial decisions, common law principles which are transposed into state law. One primary function of environmental assessment is not for complete elimination of pollution issues but instead to create legislation that allows equal pollution levels with gains of economic growth. It is from this phenomenon that the concept of 'sustainable development' is born. According to the Bruntland Report (1987), sustainable development is defined as 'the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising that of future generations.' In simple terms, what the Bruntland report recommends is that they should use the planet's resources in a manner that will not endanger how those coming after we could use the same funds.

With increased interest of the public in environmental issues after the US took the lead, the Canadian federal government committed to engaging in ecological assessment in the early 70s. This commitment was made formal in 1984 calling it 'Environment Assessment and Review Process Guidelines Order' (EARPGO). Previously, the federal government regarded EARPGO as a discretionary and non-binding process in national decision making, but the Federal Courts found this interpretation to be incorrect. EARPGO was then determined to be applied anytime the Federal Government wishes to undertake an affirmative regulatory duty. With this decision, the federal government began developing legislation for environmental assessment. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act was passed in court in 1995, amended in 2003 and streamlined in 2010 (DeMarco, 2010). In 2011, the Canadian federal government introduced other changes to environmental assessment laws where the old Act was replaced with a new one which was enforced in July 2012. The federal government does not wholly practice the field of environmental assessment law in Canada (Levy, 2002). This is because Canadian provinces began implementing their environmental assessment laws which are still practiced throughout Canada. The purpose of environmental assessment is to help in the planning process before decision making is done to make sure that the ecological consequences are considered and possible environmental effects addressed.

Components of Environmental Assessment

To begin with, most parts of the environmental assessment Act of Canada are both from provincial and federal legislation. These components are incorporated to make sure that individuals and companies respect the environment. At the center of environmental assessment, the law is the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). CEPA, on the other hand, is a combination of five other statutes; the Air Quality Act, the Ocean dumping Act, the Environmental Contaminants Act, the Canada Water Act and the Department of the Environment Act (Muldon, 1995). In CEPA, there are vital penalties and sanctions, provisions for data and evaluation, provisions for importation and exportation of toxic substances, provisions of waste reduction, cleanup of coastal zones, reduction of acid raid, development of more regulations and protection of Ozone layer. In all territories and provinces in Canada, different legislations establish general environmental rights and responsibilities, but the nature of security is not similar to that applied across Canada. Generally, it can be assumed that every province and territory in Canada has its regulation regarding what is discharged onto the environment by requiring operators to have permits and licenses.

There are four principal statutes in the Ontario Environmental Protection Act (OEPA). OEPA is developed with the aim of protecting the natural environment which is broadly defined. OEPA also creates the environmental board concerned with the protection of all surface and ground waters. This Act prohibits any discharge of contaminants into natural environments in a way that would adversely affect the quality of water and that of life (Morrison 1991). At the same time, the Ontario Environmental Bill of Rights gives provisions for public participation in environmental assessment. Established in 1993, the ecological Bill of rights is a representation of a new era in environmental assessment decision making; one that is characterized by citizen empowerment enhanced public participation and greater accountability from decision makers.

What happens therefore to those who are caught breaking the law? With environmental assessment laws in Canada, specifically Ontario, most offenders who violate the law face legal consequences outlined in EPA (Environmental Protection Act). When people are companies are caught breaking the law, they are charged with the offenses they performed and brought to trial (Smith 2018). These offenders are loaded and when found guilty; they are brought to trial in many ways to be punished. From the Environmental Assessment Act, one way of punishing offenders is through fines. An offender can receive a penalty up to $ 1,000,000 with most serious cases exceeding that amount. However, penalties can range from $ 100 to $ 50,000 for individual offenders. What is the problem with this range of sanctions? Some people get away with severe offenses by paying little amounts for it. As a society, harsher fines should be established to punish or cripple such crimes severely. In simple terms, penalties must be implemented in a way that would hurt the company or give them something to think about to avoid similar operations in the future.

With improper fines, it is evident that environmental assessment in Canada is weak. It seems that the Act provides measurements, standards, and guidelines for achieving sustainable environments but does not act in the same way. The decision making is not just and does not promote public involvement wholly because of the small fines given to other offenders. Instead, the Canadian Environment Assessment Act should take into account public concerns regarding penalties and do so in a way to ensure environmental pollution instances do not occur in the future. With this weakness, the assessment documents should be subjected to further review, and scrutinies especially have the public review existing procedures. With this said, the review body should use civil participating investigation and review to decide and recommend what should be retained or added in the Act.

Jurisdiction Overlap

CEAA 2012 becomes a significant departure from the traditional approach to federal assessment in Canada (Wood, Tanner and Richardson 2010). In the past, national assessments could be triggered by federal involvement. With the current CEAA, environmental assessment can also be triggered by the public because of the provision to allow members of the public participate. Compared to CEAA that was unrevised before 2012, CEAA development of 2012 is more restricted because environmental assessment may only happen if a project has been listed in the 'Regulations Designating Physical Activities.' If a plan is not contained in the regulation, it may not occur because it is not allowed by federal environmental assessment or it is not designated on the basis that the public has assessed it. In an authoritative text by Hogg (2009), he discusses the law of delegation between provincial and federal governments. According to him, the equivalency and substitution in CEAA 2012 do not amount to a direct authorization by central governments to enact laws because they are delegated.

For this reason, the equivalency and substitution provisions of the CEAA 2012 Act should be examined from a different perspective. With the new design of CEAA 2012, the only option is to declare equivalency in cases determined by the federal government and those identified from public participation. With this decision, the Canadian reveals fewer misunderstandings of the purpose of environmental assessment.

Conclusion

With decades of the existence of environmental laws in Canada, improvement of these regulations shows great efforts in combating polluters. The rules in Canada are effective but the punishments particularly fines are not valuable. However, to make Environmental Assessment work in Canada, equivalency and substitution provisions should be removed in a bid to have the federal government focus less on avoiding jurisdictional overlap and work together with the public for better coordination and results. Substitution and equivalency provisions reduce national presence in Canada's environmental decisional making which to some extent is not needed in ecological matters. With changes in fines, equivalency, and substitution, Canada will send a direct message to polluters and other lawbreakers. Federal governments and courts must be involved to help spread the awareness of environmental assessment to allow public participation. With all these things, the environment will be safe.

References

Benidickson, J. (2000). Environmental law, 4th Ed. Irwin Law.Brundtland, G. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdfDe

Marco, J. V. (2010). Developments in Environmental Law: the 2009-2010 term: Two Decisions on Environmental Assessment, p. 247.

Hogg, Peter W., (2009). Constitutional Law of Canada (2009 Student Edition). Scarborough, ON: Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. International Association for Impact Assessment. (1999). UK Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice.

Levy, A. D. (2002). A Review of Environmental Assessment in Ontario. Journal of Environmen...