LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Tuesday, May 9, 2017
Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Please be seated.
Hon. Andrew Micklefield (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, this morning we'd like to deal with Bill 201. Is there leave–I beg your pardon, is there leave of the House to deal with Bill 201 this morning?
Madam Speaker: Is there leave for the House to deal with Bill 201 this morning? [Agreed]
Madam Speaker: Bill 201, The Service and Therapy Animal Day Act, second reading–oh, pardon me, concurrence and third reading.
Mrs. Sarah Guillemard (Fort Richmond): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Lagimodiere), that Bill 201, The Service and Therapy Animal Day Act; Loi sur la Journée des animaux d'assistance et de zoothérapie, reported from the Standing Committee on Private Bills, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mrs. Guillemard: I am always happy to rise and speak about Bill 201, The Service and Therapy Animal Day Act, as it reminds me of the amazing people and animals we have living in Manitoba.
We often find ourselves disagreeing over various laws and legislation in this Chamber, and this can paint a very bleak picture for some who only see the difficulties of our roles in government. I am privileged to be able to participate in a unifying bill that gives a glimpse of what is right and good in this province.
Madam Speaker, I would like to share with the House a few heart-warming stories from the committee stage as we discussed this bill. Tara Reimer from Cloud 9 Ranch spoke eloquently about the magical effects her horses have on those healing from trauma. Traditional therapy methods have the unique benefits for sure; however, animals, specifically prey animals like horses, they feel what the eye cannot see and respond in ways that people cannot, and they have a unique aspect about them that they can reach deep into our souls and touch the places that we are scared to go. The benefits that the patients see when they do participate in this therapy, they defy human explanation, but they definitely are palpable and they are very real differences and in growth that we see in these patients.
We next heard from Jody Kuik who works at Lead Rope Learning, another organization that helps people through horse therapy. Jody had approached me before the committee stage, greeted me with a hug and let me know how incredibly nervous she was to speak publicly. She spoke about this as a common anxiety the public does have to speak in front of others, but she felt it was very important that she face her fears in order to talk about the amazing effects that her animals have had on the lives of children and those who have been suffering in this life. As she approached the podium to speak, you could see her little hands shaking, but she had this resolve about her that she was going to implement the same coping skills that she hopes to teach the children that come through her various programs. And to see Jody using those coping mechanisms and seeing her triumphing over her fears was quite the moment, and it made all of this effort and discussion and celebration worth it.
Madam Speaker, Sergeant Wally Antoniuk with the Winnipeg Police Service K-9 Unit was also there, and he was able to speak about the pride that he had, not only in those who participate in training these animals–these dogs who they live with in their homes, who become family members–but also in the service that they provide to our city and to our province. They are able to track down suspects and allow the officers to arrest those who may have untoward intentions towards our public. He spoke about his appreciation for the hard work and the dedication of the officers who not only train these animals, but care for them in their homes and treat them like family members.
Madam Speaker, throughout this process and throughout the development of this particular bill, it became very apparent that society owes a huge debt of gratitude, not only to those who train horses for therapy and help in the healing process, but to those who help train service animals for those with disabilities, whether that be physical disabilities, whether that be emotional or psychological disabilities. We owe a debt of gratitude to all those who are involved.
And I just would like to say that I look forward to participating in celebrations and participating in the event planning for future May 20ths of years to come.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Richmond–oh, sorry, the honourable member for Fort Rouge.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Fort Rouge): What constituency did she say? [interjection] Oh, okay.
Madam Speaker, before speaking to the content of this bill, I did just want to share with the House and to put on the record that today is a dark anniversary in our country. It is the 25th anniversary of the Westray mine disaster in which 26 working people–miners, family people–lost their lives in a workplace accident, explosion, which must have been a very awful way to pass. So I just wanted to acknowledge that before proceeding with my remarks, as it is a very important day in our country.
So this bill would recognize, you know, service and therapy animals by having a designated day on the calendar, and, you know, we know that service and therapy animals are very important.
* (10:10)
I remember just over a year ago, shortly after the election, meeting with a constituent from Fort Rouge who uses a therapy animal–it's a dog–to help treat his PTSD. This young man suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, and, you know, that is an affliction that strikes many in our society. In some cases, they're, you know, police officers or, you know, people who've served in the military. In other cases there are people who've suffered some form of trauma, perhaps childhood trauma. In other cases, PTSD afflicts those who've encountered workplace accidents.
So, you know, guarding this man's particular medical history private, it's enough to say that he did experience this affliction. And he has a beautiful, super-nice, calm, white dog that he brings with him everywhere he goes and the dog has a service animal vest on and harness and all that. And the very presence of the dog helps to calm and settle the anxiety and the feeling of stress that sometimes crops up as a result of this PTSD situation.
And so we got to talking, this young man and I. I gained deeper and deeper appreciation for some of the new ways in which service and therapy animals are being used in our province.
Of course, you know, growing up as a kid we always saw the police dogs and, you know, the dogs–the Dalmatians at the fire hall, animals like that. And so I was very familiar with that. I remember also playing with the GI Joes and one of them came with a dog figurine. So from an early age I think in our society we're exposed to the role that service animals and therapy animals can have in our society.
But, as our society, you know, continues to progress and, you know, we start to pay more and more attention to issues like mental health and overall health and well-being, it's important for us to keep track of how that plays out in a variety of different dimensions, including the use of animals for things like therapeutic purposes. And so that was definitely important for me, because it just drove the point home that these animals can make a difference for things other than what I had been accustomed to seeing them for in the past.
Now, you know, I do think it is important to recognize that there are a number of different purposes that these animals can serve in our society. You know, we know that in the police service sometimes they're used as–quote, unquote–sniffer dogs to help protect the public and used by police to fight crime. They can be used to locate drugs or other contraband, in some cases explosives. They can even track criminal suspects.
But we know that, you know, in times they can also help save lives when people go missing and they're lost in the woods and an animal can help find them. In fact, I had an experience with that when I was a little boy on the reserve in Lake of the Woods, northwestern Ontario. And we had my uncle–his real name's Edwin but, well, I should say that's the name on his birth certificate, is Edwin, but we all know him as Tootoons. Well, my Uncle Tootoons was on an island on Lake of the Woods, a pretty large island not too far from the Aulneau Peninsula, but he became lost, perhaps due to complications from diabetes; maybe he got a little disoriented there. But he was missing. It was well after dark, usually the time when everyone comes off the lake, and so the alarm bells kind of went off and people were very concerned about his well-being and his whereabouts.
And so we, again–not a trained service animal, but we used a–our dog Rex, a black lab at the time, drove him out to the island on the boat, and the dog who had been trained to be a retriever and had been helping us with hunting over the years, they gave him the scent and then he led my dad and the others on that mission to where my uncle was. And so it was a pretty memorable experience as a little boy to see how an animal can be used to help save a human life. And I always remember that and it always kind of stuck with me.
The joke afterwards, though, is that, like, you know how you used to see the St. Bernards with the little keg of alcohol on their neck in the cartoons. The joke was that they sent one of those on the dog into the bush and that's why they didn't come out of the bush for a while, because my uncle wanted to sit there and enjoy that little keg, though I don't think that actually happened. I think that that was just embellishment for the sake of a good story.
So all that to say that, you know, throughout my life, I have been exposed to the important role of animals. I do have a deep respect for animals and a love for animals.
Over this past winter, I also got to see, you know, the role animals can play in service. Again, this is maybe not a regulated or a recognized role, but also an important one that, I think, speaks to the substance of the bill. When I went to Sioux Lookout to visit a friend who has a dog team out there–and so, on New Year's Day, I took my boys and travelled with my wife to Sioux Lookout, and we took out two dog teams out onto Lac Seul. And we went and we did a nice, you know, tour onto the lake. It was very cold, but it was very beautiful at the same time. Travelling by dog train, in some ways, it's like travelling by Ski-Doo except it's totally silent. You know, when you're hooking the dogs up to the dog train, first they're yapping and barking, and they got a ton of energy. But once they start moving, they proceed in a straight line and with very little noise, and so all you hear is the whoosh and the sliding sound of the skis from the bottom of the sled, and the dogs themselves just run silently.
So, I think, that speaks to how, you know, indigenous cultures, people of many cultures, have been using animals since time immemorial, to help us in the various forms of service that we exercise in our society–be they, you know, purposes on the land; be they in the agricultural setting; or be they, you know, in the urban setting with some of the police and fire and safety rescue purposes that we talked about here today. And so it does seem to me that this is a very important purpose in our society and that we ought to be very appreciative of these animals, and we ought to do what we can to recognize them.
I'm pleased to say that, you know, that the New Democrats did, you know, over the years, bring in various laws and amend other laws to help towards these purposes. I know that the Manitoban human rights–you know, code was amended to move from a definition of a service dog towards a service animal, recognizing that there are other animals that can be used for these purposes, and also that The Accessibility for Manitobans Act was brought in, which, again, also sets up a framework which can helps to–or rather, can help to advance the use of service animals in our society.
So, with those few words on the record, Madam Speaker, again, I just want to say that we're definitely supportive of recognizing service animals. We definitely are on board with, you know, showing both the animals, their owners, the trainers, but also the clients that they serve, the respect that they deserve. And, with those few words on the record, I just want to say, you know, that this is certainly something that I'm learning more about, and I'm happy to continue to, you know, speak on in the future.
So, with that, I'll just say miigwech.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): The Liberals still proudly support this bill, and my hope is also that we move to recognizing the animals that our homeless people utilize as well. Indeed, we would be seeing much more deaths during the Winterpeg months if it weren't for those precious animals, as they sleep alongside their owners and give precious body heat. With the beautiful summer months approaching, we may be looking another direction, but I would like to remind everyone here to give generously, include dog feed or any other kinds of products that go to animals to our shelters and such.
And I thank the member for bringing this bill forward. Miigwech.
Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 201, The Service and Therapy Animal Day Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Hon. Andrew Micklefield (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I'm wondering if you could have that as recorded unanimously.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to have this indicated that it was a unanimous support for the bill? [Agreed]
* * *
* (10:20)
Mr. Micklefield: Madam Speaker, I'm wondering if there is leave to pursue the resolution by Mr. Curry–oh, leave to call it 11 o'clock?
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to call it 11 o'clock? [Agreed]
Madam Speaker: The hour is now 11 a.m. and time for private members' resolutions.
The resolution before us this morning is the resolution on promotion of e-waste disposal/recycling, brought forward by the honourable member for Kildonan.
Mr. Nic Curry (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister for Indigenous and Municipal Relations,
WHEREAS the production of portable electronic devices has increased exponentially in recent years due to the proliferation of the information economy and technological services; and
WHEREAS many electronic devices contain heavy metals such as cadmium, mercury, and lead in their composition which pose environmental hazards requiring special environmental mitigation; and
WHEREAS many electronic devices contain rare earth elements such as gold and cesium which continue to be valuable after the life of the electronic device; and
WHEREAS industry stewardship across Canada is the preferred model to promote proper disposal of electronic waste on behalf of industry in accordance with provincial regulations; and
WHEREAS The Waste Reduction and Prevention Act requires industry to participate in a product stewardship program for end-of-life electronic equipment; and
WHEREAS according to Statistics Canada, industry-led education and disposal programs are responsible for a near tripling of electronic waste being diverted from Canadian landfills from 2008 to 2012, from 24,000 tonnes to 71,000 tonnes; and
WHEREAS since 2012, the Electronic Products Recycling Association (EPRA) administers electronic waste disposal in Manitoba; and
WHEREAS the Department of Sustainable Development recently coordinated a recycling blitz in cooperation with the Electronic Products Recycling Association and private sector partners at a Winnipeg apartment complex as part of October’s Sustainability month; and
WHEREAS Manitoba has an end-of-life processor in the province who works in partnership with the Electronic Products Recycling Association; and
WHEREAS an industry commissioned poll in 2015 indicated that only 68% of Manitobans were aware of the EPRA recycling program and associated Manitoban drop-off locations; and
WHEREAS improper disposal of electronic waste has significant environmental consequences and measures to increase the amount of electronic waste diverted from landfill should be considered and encouraged.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Provincial Government to encourage Manitobans to use EPRA designated depots to dispose of their electronic waste and encourage municipalities to divert electronic waste from local landfills.
Motion presented.
Mr. Curry: It's a privilege to speak today on this important topic, and I want to thank all the people in Kildonan for asking me to be their representative to speak on these matters.
Matters of recycling are very important to people across Manitoba, but especially across Winnipeg in my home community.
Progressive Conservatives appreciate proper environmental stewardship. This is why we introduced resolution 26 in 1995 to promote general recycling throughout Manitoba, and why, in 2017, we are looking to promote proper e-waste disposal.
Progressive Conservatives value partnership with industry and are proud of the co-operative relationship between the government of Manitoba, Department of Sustainable Development and the Electronic Products Recycling Association, also known as the EPRA. The EPRA partnership is key to ensuring that electronic equipment containing valuable rare elements and also harmful heavy metals are properly disposed of. This partnership is highly valued among the recycling community.
Waste collection disposal in Manitoba is a municipal matter. We respect the municipal autonomy and therefore wish to promote and educate e-waste disposal through this resolution. We are looking to work co-operatively with municipalities and not to mandate regulations.
Since 2012, EPRA collection sites have grown from over 25 sites to now 70, in total, and potentially growing. Under our government, we will continue to encourage further economic growth through the development of more of these e-waste collection sites.
We, as Manitobans, should be proud that all stages of e-waste disposal happens here in Manitoba: from the collection of fees to the collection of electronic waste, to transportation of that electronic waste, to the processing of those electronic items into potential commodities or properly disposing of that waste at proper facilities.
The resolution builds upon the strong relationship between the government of Manitoba and the Electronic Products Recycling Association. The Waste Reduction and Prevention Act requires industry to participate in a product stewardship program for end-of-life electronic equipment, and we are looking to encourage Manitobans to use EPRA-designated depots and properly ensure the disposal of electronic goods to divert them from landfills and potential harm. Furthermore, we call upon municipalities to work with the EPRA to see how services can be improved and e-waste depots increased across Manitoba, especially in the North.
We are committed to recycling programs in Manitoba, whether they explicitly relate to electronic waste or not. This is why the Department of Sustainable Development is now reviewing our new program plan for the EPRA 2017 to 2021. This new plan incorporates measures to enhance public awareness about e-waste products in Manitoba and improve access in northern communities. The department will call on municipalities to collaborate with EPRA to improve access and increase locations for e-waste disposal and collection.
Department co-ordination in–co-ordinated a recycling blitz in co-operation with EPRA as part of October's sustainability month last year.
Madam Speaker, the Minister for Sustainable Development toured our own extra e‑waste facility located in Elie, Manitoba, this last December with EPRA officials. I, myself, also had the privilege of touring this wonderful facility that is the heart of recycling electronic products, by taking something from TV screens–or from screens like TVs and computer monitors, computers themselves, to anything that really can be plugged in, this facility can take those items and either properly dispose of them or have them sent to proper disposal or turn them into commodities. Whether it be taking out things like aluminum or even anywhere from leaded glass, sending that to lead smelters, this disposal site is a heart of the recycling community and in many ways is poised for growth as expansion of the collection of e-waste will only continue.
In partnership with the Canadian Beverage Container Recycling Association, on April 25th, the government of Manitoba announced a partnership with all government-owned buildings in the northern regions to add and increase their recycling in their locations, new recycling options for all Manitoban cottages, seasonal sites and campgrounds and a new partnership with Manitoba property managers.
Recycling is something that Manitobans are passionate about, and along with the Minister of Sustainable Development (Mrs. Cox), this government is also passionate about promoting proper recycling techniques and methods and especially proper recycling of electronic waste.
Now, the EPRA has been an industry-led, government-approved organization responsible for managing electronic product recycling programs for individuals and businesses in Manitoba since 2012. In 2015, the EPRA won the Canadian Stewardship Award for their efficient and effective e-waste disposal programs and their government of Manitoba is proud to call the EPRA a partner. Since 2012, EPRA collection locations have grown, as I said before, from 25 to 70. This includes 48 in rural Manitoba and 22 here in Winnipeg. Furthermore, since inception of the EPRA-led program in 2012, all eco-handling fees have been significantly reduced. There are currently 514 manufacturers, retailers and other stakeholders that are part of the EPRA stewards.
And, more importantly, now that we are into the spring season, I'm told by many people in the e‑waste disposal and collection community that spring cleaning is a time where we can start bringing out our old TVs, our old monitors, our old electronic products–some that are even older than myself–and bring them to proper disposal through the EPRA. Such devices–the EPRA collects over 480,000 devices annually in this province and that includes now cellphones, since September 2016.
Since launching in 2020-2012, correction–the EPRA has recycled more than 13,000 metric tons of end-of-life electronics, diverting over 2 million devices from landfills and illegal exports. Regarding the EPRA's e-waste recycling programs, 95 per cent of waste recycled stays within Canada. Some recycled plastics are shipped to China for repurposing, some recycled aluminum is shipped to the USA for repurposing, but no harmful goods are shipped overseas. This is the mandate of a strong social licence that e-waste is all about.
However, an industry-commissioned poll in 2015 indicated that over 68 per cent of Manitobans were aware that EPRA recycling programs were associated and existed in Manitoba; 68 per cent is not enough. That number ought to be higher, if not all Manitobans being aware of proper e-waste disposal and where you can properly dispose of them.
This resolution asks that therefore be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the provincial government to encourage Manitobans to use EPRA-designated depots to dispose of their electronic waste and encourage municipalities to divert electronic waste from local landfills.
And, again, since 2012, the EPRA has administered such e-waste disposal methods that approximately three semi-trailers daily in electronic waste is being recycled by the EPRA–three semi‑trailers full–full to the top.
Again, not enough Manitobans know that this wonderful process is happening. Many of us are carrying electronic devices this moment, and all of us use electronic devices in some way or another in our daily lives, but when not 70 per cent–only 68 per cent–of Manitobans know that they can properly recycle those devices that they carry on them, this is not enough.
* (10:30)
We're very excited here in Manitoba; we have an end-of-life processing plant that is eyed to grow and with the potential for expansion as more people are aware of e-waste disposal. And, with, of course, the advance of technology, more and more things are being done on electronics, and, therefore, more and more awareness must be made that electronics must be properly disposed of and diverted from our landfills.
According to Statistics Canada, industry-led education and disposal programs are responsible for nearly tripling the electronic waste from being diverted from landfills. From 2008 to 2012, we went from 24,000 tonnes in Canada, to 71,000 tonnes properly disposed of. Over 50 million tons though of e-waste is produced each year worldwide. So electronic goods that potentially can be harmed–harmful in our landfills is created every year worldwide–50 million tons.
E-waste is growing, and our awareness of e‑waste is not catching up with that pace. This is why this resolution will help–again–more people be aware that e-waste can be properly disposed of, not just left necessarily at curbside, but disposed of at proper EPRA depots and to eventually be end-of-life processed hopefully right here in Manitoba.
Very happy that my own family's business, Curry Industries, has been a long-time supporter of sustainable development whether making products for the experimental lakes area, or using recycled material within our plastics as well. Something that business is keen on is of course keeping costs low. I know Curry Industries. We use recycled materials that are as useful as fresh products. And the recycled aluminum, once you see it, you look at the pebbled aluminum, you say well this is perfectly good to go back into perhaps the same product it just came out of.
This type of reduce, reuse, recycle mantra is catching on with industry. It's catching on with businesses where it makes sense to do it, but also more importantly the diversion of this harmful material from our landfills is something that will help develop a more sustainable future for our young people, generations to come, and especially the young families from Garden City which I myself am very proud to say I now count as one of those young families.
Very happy that we have this resolution for debate and I look forward to support from across all political stripes on this issue.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: A question period of up to 10 minutes will be held and questions may be addressed in the following sequence. The first question may be asked by a member from another party, any subsequent questions must follow a rotation between parties, each independent member may ask one question, and no question or answer shall exceed 45 seconds.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I appreciate this motion being brought forward here today. I noted in the member's opening remarks he acknowledged that recycling rates of e-waste have increased dramatically from 2008 to 2012. I wonder if he could tell us why he thinks that happened.
Mr. Nic Curry (Kildonan): Certainly, industry-led campaigns of awareness have been part of that, the expansion of programs such as EPRA has been a part of that, and in general, I think that there is more awareness across all parts of the world of recycling, and e-waste is a part of that.
As we have more electronic goods that we use, people are looking at their old products and saying, what can we do with this? But I again support EPRA and their industry-led efforts for awareness campaigns.
Mr. Andrew Smith (Southdale): Can the member from Kildonan please tell us who he's consulted with while drafting this great resolution?
Mr. Curry: Stakeholders that have been consulted for this of course the department of Sustainable Development, the Electronic Products Recycling Association, but also Call2Recycle. Also the good people at Exner E-Waste, who have been recycling products anywhere from TVs to airplanes back in Germany for many decades. Also Mother Earth Recycling who we are joined today–a representative from Mother Earth Recycling, just in the North End off Main Street. And then also many municipalities that I've spoken with, representatives from those municipalities who have endorsed EPRA in their efforts as the stewards–proper steward program to have electronic waste recycling.
Mr. Altemeyer: Yes, back to my initial question. What the member failed to mention is that probably a fairly large role in increasing the amount of recycled e-waste in the province was the fact that the EPRA in Manitoba started in 2012. I wonder if he might tell the House which government was in power and made that happen?
Mr. Curry: I'm going to thank the member opposite. Certainly, this is an issue that crosses all political stripes. People of New Democrats and people of Conservative values have the same interests in diverting electronic waste from their landfills–and, of course, also our good friends in the Liberal caucus, and friends across all political stripes. This is a topic that transcends political disunity, sometimes, and this is something we can all stand up to agree with. And I, again, compliment the member that, I believe, he was in–I don't know what his role was in government at the time, but I believe he was an MLA in 2012–so I commend that he likely supported EPRA's efforts in that time.
Mr. Blair Yakimoski (Transcona): Thank you very much to the member for Kildonan for bringing this forward, as well as acknowledging that we all–that environmental issues and recycling is important to all of us and acknowledging the previous government and what they did for this.
Can you talk a little bit about your passion and reasoning–why you brought this forward?
Mr. Curry: My past life in the military before politics was something that formed a lot of my ethos of my daily life, and one thing that the Canadian military is keen on is that we are a green military. We follow many environmental codes, and one thing that, as a young corporal packing up old computers, I asked, well, are we taking these to our house? Someone answered: No, they're being recycled.
And, as a very young soldier I thought, well, okay; interesting idea. And the more and more I evolved as a soldier, I found that we spent a lot of time in the military making sure that we did not have waste in our field, whether it be from body waste, whether it be from burying old parts of vehicles that were taken out, or whether it be wasting electronic products.
And the military stewardship is something that has inspired me–that many industries and many businesses have a similar ethos.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, this is an important area, and clearly recycling electronic products is vital for a whole variety of reasons but including the toxic nature of some of these products if they're put in landfills.
One of the concerns about recycling computers and hard drives has to do with privacy. And I would ask the MLA whether there are standards in place for how people deal with privacy issues and ensure that there are no potential for people to stumble across private information after computer equipment is recycled.
Mr. Curry: Again, I thank you, Madam Speaker. I thank my friend for the question. Again, I'd like to draw our attention to Mother Earth Recycling, who worked with–I want to use a specific example–well, they will receive computers from, say, either schools or companies, and they will videotape the destruction of the hard drives and the proper disposal of those hard drives that will be shredded and then properly disposed of therefore after. And this is something that the industry is very keen on: of making sure protection of proprietary material is done so sustainably. And Mother Earth Recycling goes the extra step of actually videotaping the proper disposal of those hard drives, and this is something that the industry's, in itself, keen to make sure there are standards. And EPRA is also another element to making sure those standards are met.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Can the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry) please explain to this House why it's better to–promotion and education as proper e-waste disposal is important to the environment?
Mr. Curry: The inspiration myself–for this resolution is that not enough awareness exists. Although the industry poll suggests that 68 per cent of Manitobans are aware of e-waste, I fear that perhaps some of that is even lower, or that people may be aware that e-waste disposal exists but not where they can dispose of it.
Resolutions like this that we can conduct here in our Legislature are things that all members can take and remind their constituents when asked, what did you do today in our Legislature? Well, we talked about e-waste; by the way, you can go to this website recyclemyelectronics.ca/mb and you can go find out where there's a disposal site where you can get it. And not enough Manitobans know about this, because I would like that industry poll to be 100 per cent, because even if we have 100 per cent, we know there will be people who do not properly dispose their electronics. And any one that makes it to the landfill perhaps is too much.
Mr. Altemeyer: I thank the member for his comments in answer to my last question.
Picking up on his answer just now, promotion is certainly interesting and important; action is also.
How–perhaps this minister–or this member can tell us all why his government shut down Green Manitoba, which was the agency which was overseeing all of the recycling work in Manitoba for electronic waste and a dozen other areas?
* (10:40)
Mr. Curry: I thank the member for the question.
This resolution focuses on the importance that the Electronic Products Recycling Association plays in this industry-led recycling program. Everywhere I've gone to, whether it's depots, whether it's the end-of-life processing, speaking with the transportation industry, there's enthusiasm that the EPRA is something that not only manages the recycling well, but is something that is sustainable, that's moving forward into the future.
We, of course, have with us Dennis Neufeld from EPRA. And I thank him so much for a lot of the details that he's helped to fill in for me. And this is–sometimes we say it's not just a one-person operation, but Dennis is able to manage much of the flow–or all of the flow of it here in Manitoba and the network that the EPRA provides is something that Canada can be proud of.
Mr. Smith: Can the member for Kildonan please explain to this House how industry and government enjoy and will continue to enjoy a stronger more co‑operative relationship with the industry steward model under our new government?
Mr. Curry: And, again, I thank the member for the question.
The Department of Sustainable Development is currently reviewing a new action plan for how the EPRA and government will interact for 2017-2021. This new plan will incorporate measures to enhance public awareness about e-waste recycling and improve access to northern communities.
Recycling is something that is everyone's responsibility, and I think the members across the way as well bring up the need for information.
These resolutions are something that we can take to the municipalities, who are the ones who are responsible for recycling at the end of the day, and take them and say that all levels of government, or at least this level of government, is excited about e‑waste proper disposal. And our Sustainable Development Department is working on that currently.
Mr. Altemeyer: I'll give the member a chance to answer my earlier question again. Our side of the House has a difficult time understanding how removing important environmental legislation, cancelling the special operating agency running recycling programs and making major cutbacks to environmental programs and protections is leading to the type of green future that he is talking about being in favour of.
I'm wondering where the disconnect is between this member and his government's direction.
Mr. Curry: And, again, I thank the member opposite.
And I'm so happy to hear that he is also enthusiastic of a proper e-waste disposal. And I know that he himself has endorsed EPRA as a wonderful organization that is a part of this.
This industry-driven system of taking electronics by paying a fee when you purchase it, finding proper disposal sites, making sure there is a credible and proper transportation to an end-of-life processing plant, having an end-of-life processing plant and then the eventual potential resale of recycled products or proper disposal is something the EPRA manages well.
The industry is in favour of EPRA. This government is in favour of EPRA, and I look forward to every member of the House having the opportunity to support EPRA.
Madam Speaker: The time for questions has expired. Debate is open.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I will offer a few comments on this proposal from the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry), and I appreciate him bringing this issue to our attention.
I think where I'm going to start, though, is just to contrast where this government is at compared to where things were prior to the election. And we all know there's a change in government and you can expect a change in direction.
But, as luck would have it, I mean I've been a career backbencher; I was never a Cabinet minister. But I was honoured on occasion to be given a specific file to work on, and one of them was to chair a working group of some really great staff from the now defunct Green Manitoba special operating agency and other members of the Conservation and Waterstewardship Department, and our task was to come up with, not just a review of a plan of one part of the waste challenge, but to look at what we could do in reducing all types of waste, and I think the good folks from Mother Earth Recycling will perhaps remember this as well.
They started up while our government was in office and we were very, very pleased to see their initiative come forward and to get some good support. But the vision that we came up with, Madam Speaker, was we laid out a path which showed quite clearly that it's possible–would've been possible for Manitoba to cut the amount of waste that we're sending to landfill in half, 50 per cent by the year 2020, and to create hundreds and hundreds of new green jobs, just like what's happened with Mother Earth Recycling and elsewhere in the process.
So that was the vision and the direction that our province was headed in, and now with the new government in place, all of that has come to a screeching halt.
The agency that was most involved in facilitating that process, Green Manitoba, was shut down overnight. I think the government would have been perfectly content if no one had ever heard about that, but we did expose what they had done and the staff that were forced with no notice to suddenly try and find either–new opportunities in government or outside of government.
My understanding is that none of the stakeholders were consulted on this, with the exception of a few of the producer responsible organizations, the PROs. I believe they were informed, but organizations like Compost Winnipeg and others, maybe even Mother Earth Recycling, I don't know that they got any word that the government was bringing in this massive change, which, of course, makes it very difficult to continue doing your work when you don't know what is happening with your funding, or what your reporting requirements are going to be, or who your contact person is anymore. All of that was just turned out like a light switch by this government and all of this in the backdrop, of course, that when our government brought in the legislation to make it possible for producer responsibility organizations to form, there was enormous resistance from the opposite side on that front.
This is a unique model; it involves the industry taking responsibility for its waste, hence the name, producer responsibility organization. It is rooted in the polluter-pays principle.
What's different and unique and innovative about it, and what we were excited about it and why we did it, is that rather than government passing a regulation and then that is imposed on business and business then, hopefully, follows the regulation, instead, government says, listen, this is how much of a problem we have and this is how much we want the waste to be reduced. In this case, electronic waste.
Let's say–you, industry, we're going to empower you with legislation to set up the system that you want in order to achieve that goal. And so then the industry gets to decide amongst themselves how much of a fee they need to charge on different types of products, how those waste items are going to be collected and processed afterwards, and there's still accountability back to the public through government in the terms of annual reporting and–both on the work that has been done and the–where the money has all been collected and then spent.
It is government which empowers the industry association to go out and do that good work. That's the unique part of this model and it faced enormous resistance from members opposite, and now today their actions are not all that dissimilar in terms of their government. Not in any way disregarding the intentions of the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry) in bringing forward this discussion piece, but I will point out, Madam Speaker, in his own comments there was absolutely nothing in either his opening remarks or in his answers to any of the questions that were asked to suggest that his government is actually going to do anything more to actually increase the recycling rate of electronic waste.
The government has similarly not provided any indication of any work that it's going to do in any other areas–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Altemeyer: Okay. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
There has been no indication from this government they're doing anything else in any of the other types of waste streams out there. Organics, for instance, is a huge component of our solid waste stream.
We're talking at least a third of all the waste that goes into landfills is organic material that could and that should be captured and turned back into compost and returned to the soil. Multiple benefits available through this, both agricultural and in terms of nutrient retention on the land–returning the nutrients to the land, rather, and also reduced greenhouse gas emissions, Madam Speaker.
* (10:50)
The government has said absolutely nothing about this, and the member's own comments put it on the municipalities to somehow do more without any additional support or help from the provincial government.
And I'm pretty sure if, you know, the municipalities were represented here, they would say, you know, sure, we'd love to do more, but the provincial government is the regulatory body that has created the producer responsibility organizations, and it really is up to the Province to show some leadership and to make a difference on these fronts rather than just passing the buck down onto the local level of government without any additional resources.
So, you know, the member's proposal is well and fine, but I do feel the need to make it very, very clear there's no actual teeth to this; there's no actual proposal to change a law or to increase any type of support from the Province, whether it be funding or technical or informational. This is merely just a comment. You know, it's not a bad comment, but it doesn't really do anything. It says that, you know, recycling e-waste is important. Well, I think that's a given.
If the member–next time he wants to bring a motion forward, if he could include a tangible element which is actually going to make a real difference so that the good folks at Mother Earth Recycling and everywhere else can actually take that extra support and get some real results out in the community with it, that would actually be a far more useful proposal and a much stronger proposal than what we have in front of us here right now.
I do encourage the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry) to attempt–I'm sure it's very difficult in his caucus, given the government's environmental track record so far, but I do very much encourage him to try to achieve change from within. I was very pleased to get the chance to do that as a backbencher over many years, and sometimes I was successful and sometimes I wasn't, but you know what the answer's going to be if you don't try.
So I commend the member for bringing this forward, and I appreciate that the task ahead of him is much more challenging than the task that I had because his government is not at all inclined to make much of a difference, a positive difference, when it comes to the crucial environmental issues of our time.
And you need only look at the Premier's (Mr. Pallister) absolute refusal to sign onto the national climate-change program as evidence of that, never mind all of the dramatic underminings of water regulations and water protections in our province that this government is actively pursuing.
So many, many red flags from this government, and I wish the member opposite well in his future efforts.
Thank you.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, I rise to talk a little bit about recycling e‑waste and the importance of doing this and supporting this resolution, which highlights the need to be addressing e-waste in effective ways in Manitoba.
One of the reasons why it's important to recycle e-waste is that a lot of the components are quite toxic. There is the potential to reuse many of the components, and, clearly, one of the benefits of this is better access to computers and digital material, digital technology, for people who are less well able to pay the full price of new equipment. And so the benefits of this are multiple, and we should be doing more and more of this.
I want to speak specifically, this morning, to one program, the Responsible Electronics Recycling program, which is run out of the Selkirk & District Community Learning Centre. This program was one of the very first to be dedicated to recycling electronic waste, one of the very first in Manitoba, if not the first to be specific in terms of recycling electronics waste.
This program was put together a number of years ago. Leaders in this effort were Alvin and Karen Keppler, who've been very involved in the Selkirk & District Community Learning Centre for many years, and they realized that there was a need for doing this, and so they put together this electronics–Responsible Electronics Recycling program.
This was initially, of course, to serve Selkirk. The RM of St. Andrews, I think, was a partner in this effort and it developed the facilities, the expertise to be able to do this recycling and do it in effective way for the benefit of the environment and for the benefit of Manitoba. Indeed, our interim leader, the MLA for Kewatinook, and I, a number of weeks ago, were visiting the Selkirk & District Community Learning Centre, not only to see their Responsible Electronics Recycling program, but to learn more about their learning programs, which are excellent and provided not only on-site, but in various ways in distance learning and learning not just for areas where one might typically be concerned about, but they're very hands-on in helping people to start businesses and in helping people with new start-ups and getting their businesses going and have been responsible for launching quite a number of new businesses and contributing to our Manitoba economy.
This recycling depot for–at the Selkirk & District Community Learning Centre has become an important pivot point for recycling e-waste and e‑waste education in the St. Andrews municipality and in the area around Selkirk. The staff and the volunteers who work there make sure that the e‑waste is recycled or disposed of and handled in a responsible manner and that issues–we talked earlier about privacy–are addressed properly.
It's interesting the list of items that the Responsible Electronics Recycling is involved with recycling and taking. This includes: computer cables, with or without the connectors; computer cards; a sound video network; modems; controllers; circuit boards from computers; printers, fax and scanners; internal and external CD-ROMS, DVDs, CD-ROM burners; electronic typewriters; fax machines; hard disks and floppy drives; laptops, laptop parts, laptop accessories; chargers; batteries; cables and cards; external modems; networking equipment: cards, hubs, routers, switches, cabling; personal computers; CPU monitors; keyboards; mouse and peripherals; inkjet and laser printers; software manuals; CDs, DVDs and diskettes; cassette and reel-to-reel tape players; recorders; mobile radios and FRS phones; remote controls for televisions and stereos; game decks: PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo; mobiles, cellphones, chargers and batteries; pagers and answering machines; regular telephones, corded or wireless; stereos; television entertainment equipment; batteries, dry cells and rechargeable; paper shredders; fluorescent light bulbs, tube or compact; humidifiers and furnaces; appliances, even like stoves, microwaves, washers and dryers.
It is a–[interjection]–well, I think that it's important that people are able to see and recognize the total extent of what's involved in recycling 'eekway'–e-waste at an operation like this one at the Selkirk and district learning centre because we may think just of computers but, in fact, it's a much, much broader box or list of items which are involved and, of course, that's all the more reason why it would be important to let people know that this is a broad-ranging effort.
* (11:00)
I think it's important to note, as the MLA for Kildonan already has, that this is now occurring at many, many sites all over Manitoba, which is a good thing, and I want to compliment all those who are involved in addressing this situation of e-waste and in the recycling programs, wherever they may be located in Manitoba. All are contributing to this effort to make us a more sustainable province, but at the same time to help get access to computer equipment and help to recycle it in a responsible way.
So, with those words, thank you, Madam Speaker. Merci. Miigwech.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): I'm pleased to speak on this resolution. I sort of thought there'd be one of the member for Kildonan's (Mr. Curry) PC colleagues who'd want to get up and speak. I take the member for Kildonan's word that he's excited about dealing with e-waste. It's unfortunate that he seems to be in a caucus that, other than him, couldn't care less about this issue.
And the member for Kildonan, I think, is coming from a good place with this resolution, and I mean that sincerely. But I'll tell you, Madam Speaker, I think he finds himself hanging with the wrong crowd–[interjection]
And I think–and as the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) says, the member for Kildonan, who I've had the chance to get to know a little bit, is more than welcome to find himself with a group of people that are actually interested in protecting Manitoba's environment. Of course, that's our NDP team that both in government and opposition, has not been afraid to stand up and speak out in support of the environment, whether it's been a politically easy thing to do at any given time, whether it's been a smooth path. That's something I'm very proud that our New Democrats have been prepared to deal with day in and day out.
And I thank the member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) for getting up and speaking to this resolution. I thank the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) for getting up and also speaking to this. It is telling that we can't find a single–not one of the member for Kildonan's 38 colleagues decided they could stand up–[interjection]
Well, I'm saying 38 because I don't expect Madam Speaker to get engaged in the debate, so if my own members would stop heckling me, I could get back to the substance of this resolution.
Our NDP team knows, in all seriousness, Madam Speaker, that Manitobans value the environment and we are committed to protecting Manitoba's environment. We know the amount of electronic waste is growing every day, and there I agree with the member for Kildonan. And we know that, if not disposed properly, that electronic waste can have a lasting and a damaging impact on our environment.
And I suppose every piece of electronics is in its own small way, a ticking time bomb. It's manufactured, and then it is used by a consumer for a year, two years, five years–I would say 10 years, but I don't know how many electronics that are being manufactured these days last that long–and then they are disposed of. And either there is a proper way to dispose of them to make sure that heavy metals, that other ingredients don't poison our soil, don't poison our water–or, they are left to start polluting our environment.
And we recognize that promoting proper disposal and recycling procedures for electronic waste will help mitigate the negative impact that e‑waste has on our environment and our health. And the difficulty is, Madam Speaker, that it's not so easy to tie the cost of doing that to when the actual expenses are incurred. And that is one of the struggles that I appreciate governments across the world have had in trying to decide who should pay for the costs of dealing with e-waste and when should that amount be paid.
And the general rules, the member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) put on the record, is we have moved to try to find a system where truly the polluter pays. And, in general terms, that often means a levy that's paid upfront when an item's bought, with the idea being that levy is then used at the end of that product's life cycle to make sure there's proper disposal.
Now, I think perhaps the reason why none of the other PC colleagues get up to speak is they believe that things like levies to provide a fund for the safe disposal of e-waste, well, that's–they would either consider that to be a tax, or they consider that to be red tape, because we know every time they have the opportunity to stand up for the environment, to stand up for environmental protection, they will find a way to get around it. And the means they use to justify it are by using those very terms: it's red tape; it's too much tax. It's inconvenient for the polluters to actually have to have responsibility and make sure that there's money in place.
It is interesting this–the–and again, the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry), I suppose, got the blessing from his caucus to bring this forward. This is a caucus, of course, which is now claiming to be concerned about 'safey' waste disposal and environment protection when there is now a bill before this House, an omnibus bill, I would add, that would recklessly eliminate many important regulations that help to keep our air, our water and our land safe. And, as the member for Wolseley pointed out, it was just recently, just before Earth Day, as a matter of fact, that the government shuttered the special operating agency responsible for delivering environmental protection programs, including recycling programs.
When it comes to protecting our air, when it comes to protecting our water, when it comes to protecting our soil, when it comes to protecting our forests, when it comes to protecting our wildlife and when it comes to protecting our people, this Premier (Mr. Pallister) and his government are completely out of touch. And even in their first year, it is very clear that their policies are putting our environment and the health and safety of Manitoba families at risk.
Now, unlike the current government, our NDP team knows that when you protect–that the–protecting our waters, protecting our infrastructure from climate change, are things which have to be priorities. You have to talk about them, you have to raise them, and, of course, we had a budget speech which I do not believe actually mentioned the word climate change even once. Manitobans are proud of our waterways, our lakes and our wetlands which make our province such a great place to live and raise a family, and that's why in the past we took strong action to protect our waterways and the environment, and these initiatives were widespread and actually impacted a lot of Manitoba territory.
We banned logging in provincial parks. I know, actually, we were pushed hard by the environmental community. They didn't think we were moving fast enough. It was actually not an easy thing to do, to deal with every single individual and every single corporation that had been issued a licence to log in provincial parks, but we did it and it cost some money to accomplish that, it took some time, it took some negotiation, but we actually went and spoke to people. We were able to negotiate a suitable solution, so now Manitobans can be proud that we don't allow logging in provincial parks any more. We created Canada's first Department of Water Stewardship, and one of its first acts was to ban bulk water exports, and we introduced a first‑of‑its‑kind water protection act, way back in 2004, and that was cutting‑edge legislation to protect our water.
Our government has invested millions of dollars in scientific research in and around Lake Winnipeg and we did that despite not much interest at all from successive governments in Ottawa. I always found it amazing that more money was being spent by the federal government on studying and protecting Lake Simcoe than protecting Lake Winnipeg, despite the fact that Lake Winnipeg is–I believe it's somewhere from 50 to 60 times bigger than Lake Simcoe.
We also established the University of Manitoba watershed system research centre to try to get the best and the brightest people working with government, providing advice to government on how best to protect, not just the water in the watershed, but the rest of the environment. Of course, our government fought hard against the Devils Lake diversion in North Dakota to stop the artificial flow of foreign biota into Lake Winnipeg. We wound up with lots of different allies in that, including the State of Minnesota, which was equally worried about what was coming downstream from North Dakota.
We also put measures in place to conserve our valuable water resources, including innovative programs such as Water Smart. The Water Smart program actually helps to save over $270 million litres of water annually, and what do all of these measures have in common? Well, the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry), probably doesn't know it, he probably wasn't aware of this when he signed up to run for that party.
What brings all these together is that every single one of these measures was opposed by the Progressive Conservatives while they were in opposition. Instead of standing up for people and families and the environment, they chose to fight instead for their well‑connected friends instead of offering solutions. And maybe, Madam Speaker, there was no better example of that than the fight over bill 17, The Water Protection Act, and I remember that because it was a lot of long committee meetings, into the evenings as well as on Saturdays. And we stood together as New Democrats and we said, you know, maybe 9 million hogs a year in Manitoba is enough, and maybe we should favour those producers that are using solid, safe agricultural practices and maybe we need to stop the unbridled expansion.
* (11:10)
Well, back to the future. Now we have a government which has moved ahead to take away the protections that we fought for, to remove those protections from legislation so that they can then be changed by a stroke of the pen in a Cabinet meeting without having to come back before the people of Manitoba.
So again, I believe the member for Kildonan has come from the right place, but there is no question that he's with the wrong team. And I hope that if the member from Kildonan will reconsider and we'd be happy to invite him with his environmental desires into a party that actually supports–
Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Mr. Greg Selinger (St. Boniface): I have the dubious distinction of debating this resolution today. The Electronic Products Recycling Association, EPRA, is being identified as something that we should encourage Manitobans to use–their facilities, their depots, to recycle electronic waste. Sounds like a laudable resolution in front of the Legislature and likely one that everybody in principle would support, and therefore it's worthy of debate and discussion here, particularly with the proliferation of electronic products that we all use inside of Manitoba.
I can just talk for a moment about my own experience. Recently, I had a coffeemaker that wasn't working, and I looked at the cost of repairing it. Just to have it looked was $39, but the cost of the product was less than $20. So there was no value in repairing it, the cost of repairing it was double–the cost of just looking at repairing it was double the cost of the actual acquisition of it. And as a result of that, people are throwing away electronic products, coffeemakers, dishwashers, dryers, you see them out on people's curbs; they're being thrown away in record numbers because people do not have any encouragement or incentive to repair these products.
And so recycling is a good idea, Madam Speaker, but even more importantly is we need to start thinking about a time when products that we buy were allowed to be repaired and there was information on how you could repair them. Any of you in this Chamber that might have had a car back in the day, knew how to repair your car. Most people have no idea how to repair a car these days. They have–it's a lot of electronic programming elements to it, so people don't repair their cars anymore. People don't even change their oil anymore, they get somebody to do it for them. On electronic products there was a time when electronic products were relatively simple and could be repaired. Not the case anymore. [interjection] Yes, thank you. We can open that up.
And, as I was saying, electronic product recycling is one phase of what we're dealing with in our society right now. Many, many people using electronic products–everything is being electrified except perhaps transportation at this stage of the game, even though that is coming along, and recycling is an important component. But maybe we need to go upstream a little bit more and identify how we can produce products that have the ability to be repaired, not only by the owners of the products but also by small tradespeople within a community. There's actually very little place a person can go now to get a small appliance repaired, or a major appliance repaired, and often people are encouraged to dispose of that appliance completely rather than getting it repaired. And when they dispose of it, it then winds up–hopefully–in some sort of recycling depot where the valuable elements can be extracted from it.
And I want to talk about that for a second as well, Madam Speaker. The way we recycle products is absolutely critical. Products have various forms of metals within them. Some of those metals are valuable, other elements of those metals can be actually quite dangerous to the health of the people involved in the recycling facility or the people in the immediate environment if there are emissions that come off of that recycling process.
And we have to be careful that we have proper protocols in place to protect the people, the safe workers that are there, and the protect the communities around these recycling facilities because when these products are recyclable–electronic products–there are many elements within them that if not properly handled, if not properly dismantled, could actually pose a health risk to the people working there or to the people in the environment through the air emissions that come out of that.
So recycling is an important feature of what we do in our society, but it is only one element of the stream of creating a product to the eventual disposal of that product. And what we want to do, even more than recycling, is we want to extend the life of these products by allowing people the knowledge to be able to repair them and maintain them in good working order, in a safe way for the people that are using them.
And that is starting to happen. There are places in the United States right now at the state level, equivalent to our provincial government, where they are passing legislation that every product that is produced has to have with that product the information, either a video or a YouTube or written instructions on how that product can be repaired and maintained by the purchaser of that product, and there's an explosion through the Internet of DIY, do-it-yourself technologies out there that are helping people figure out how they can extend the life of their products and reduce the need to have to recycle them in a way that creates an enormous amount of waste that may not all be recycled. Some of the valuable items like copper, metals, silver, et cetera, golds, they are extracted from the products, but there are many other elements in the electronic product which are completely ignored and wind up being in the landfill and–or emitted into the air through the deconstruction process that can be dangerous for people's health.
So it's hard to argue against the general nature of this resolution, Madam Speaker, but I think it’s important to put it in the context of the manufacturing process that we have for electronic products and to ensure that we find a way that we can extend the life of our electronic products and allow them to be easily repaired at the local level by either the owner of that product or by people that are in the business of repairing products. There used to be many, many jobs with local people that ran shops or tradespeople that had the ability to fix things and to make–extend the life of those products and would do it in a way that made that product of greater value and greater contribution to the community.
We live in a society where people look after everything in their household. You get up in the morning; you do your laundry; you vacuum; you fix things; you look at your radio, your television, your computer. You have streaming products now. Many people are getting their news now no longer through the mainstream media but through various forms of digital technology.
All of these require instruments. All of these require tools. All of these require items that need to be repaired over a period of time, and most people have no idea how they can repair these things. They look at their computer and the first thing they do is they find out if they can't repair it, how they can dispose of it, and I know in my own community we have computer retail outlets that take an enormous amount of recyclables into it.
Where do those recyclables go? They may go to these depots, but then where do they go after that, and what happens to the valuable elements within them? There are stories out there that these products get shipped to other parts of the world into countries where they wind up in huge piles–mountains of recyclable electronic products that are extremely dangerous to the people that are harvesting the valuable components of those products, and they're not done with any regard to environmental standards. They're not done with any regard to the safety standards of the people harvesting the valuable items within it.
So we may be taking through the recycling program the valuable electronic products which are going to these depots and shipping them to parts of the world which put people at risk for their health and which put communities at risk for their health because of the way they're being treated and handled down there.
So, yes, this is an important element of what we're trying to do, is to have recycling, but it's just one part of the stream of how we handle manufactured goods, and in this case, electronic goods within our society. And it's fundamentally important that we take a life-cycle approach to how we look at these products and ensure that these products are as durable as possible, as accessible as possible in terms of how they're repaired, and as sustainable as possible in terms of limiting their impact on the environment in terms of not only nature and animal life, but also human life as well, Madam Speaker.
So, as we look at this today, I simply say that this motion, although well-intentioned and laudable, is too limited in scope. It ignores the larger issues in the recycling process, and even the larger issues on how we manufacture goods and how we dispose of goods, not only within our local community, but how we dispose and manufacture goods in a globalized economy where they may be manufactured in another jurisdiction with parts sourced from all around the world and then disposed of at another jurisdiction where there is no proper standards in place to ensure the protection of the people that are dealing with the disposal process.
And that is something that we need to pay attention to as we go forward, Madam Speaker, and look at electronics recycling within Manitoba. Yes, depots are an important step. Better to have a depot to take your product than to just try and junk it into the waste stream out your backyard–in your backyard, into the waste stream, in Winnipeg, for example, the pick-ups done on products inside of Manitoba–or to take it to the landfill with no regard to what's going to happen to it.
* (11:20)
But, that being said, we've got a long way to go to ensure that electronic products are extended in terms of their usability, are safe for the people that are using them, that are understandable for the people that are using them and have the ability to be repaired and looked after within our local communities which creates employment.
We are seeing now–every single when you flip open the newspapers, we're seeing people's jobs being eliminated by the disruptive technologies that we have out there. Many of those disruptive technologies are electronic technologies, and they're displacing people's jobs. Channels of retailing now are eliminating direct contact with the retail individual that's selling the product. They're being sold online; they're being sold over the Web; and they're being done in such a way that jobs are being destroyed.
Madam Speaker: When this matter is again before the House, the debate will be open–[interjection]. Well, if we want to do that, then the member will have four seconds remaining in his debate–or–debate will remain open.
The hour being–the one-hour debate for this resolution has ended, so the House is now recessed and stands recessed until 1:30 p.m.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Tuesday, May 9, 2017
CONTENTS