QUESENEL – Environment friendly NDP pesticide ban

Article content

Manitoba must follow sound science and not succumb to ideological environmentalists who place too much emphasis on negative outcomes.

Article content

The provinces’ sensible decision to lift at least a portion of the ban on cosmetic pesticides that was passed by the NDP government in 2014 is a good example.

Cosmetic pesticides are used to control weeds, and make private lawns and grassy areas visually appealing.

The current government was planning to lift the ban against cosmetic pesticides being used on private lawns and other designated municipal parks. Its bill would have kept pesticides out of schools, child-care centers, hospitals, municipal playgrounds and province parks.

Article content

The Opposition NDP used its legislative privileges in order to delay the bill until the fall session, as they are allowed for a few bills.

One wonders, however, why the Opposition wouldn’t meet the government halfway considering that the governments bill was a compromise. The Opposition would still be receiving substantial concessions from the government on their side, so they would not be able to meet the government halfway.

Article content

Even though the ban will be lifted, pesticides must still be approved by Health Canada in the areas where they are used. This safeguard ensures that any chemicals used to protect the environment or health of Canadians would be approved by Canada’s main health regulator. Why does the Opposition not trust the scientists and regulators at Health Canada, They trust them in many other areas as well, especially when it comes to the health of Canadians.

So why is the Opposition willing die on this hill? Despite the popularity and acceptance of cosmetic pesticide bans in Canada, a thorough review of scientific reviews has shown that the link between pesticides and human and natural environment health is weak at best. Health Canada would not approve certain products for lawn use if there were any significant effects.

Article content

There is no compelling policy reason to ban cosmetic pesticides. It is a pet cause for ideological environmentalists who often advocate for the precautionary principle of steroids. They hold an absoluteist position on chemicals, which is based on emotion and not science.

The death on this hill is a concession made to the provincial NDP’s ideological environmentalist wing. This concession is also made to a small number of fearful businesses, who worry that pesticides could affect their livelihoods. People are concerned that what you do on your lawn will have an impact on their children, even though there is no empirical evidence. The pandemic policy environment has created a climate of fear and anxiety that is threatening the health of many people.

Article content

This shotgun marriage between environmental ideologues and frightened business interests and scared suburbanites has led to skyrocketing municipal costs for ineffective and expensive chemicals to beautify their communities and control noxious plants.

Ironically, this policy could have the unintended consequence that it may cause more environmental harm than the original bill would allow. This is because municipalities are forced to use ineffective chemical products at higher amounts to reduce the risk of causing more environmental hazards.

But environmentalists, and political parties that are dependent on environmentalists, ignore unintended outcomes in their policy calculus. They prefer symbolic politics and emotionalism to good outcomes.

The Manitoba government must immediately reintroduce the bill, and side with a sensible, fact-based strategy.

Joseph Quesnel, a senior research associate at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, is an author. www.fcpp.org