A recent court ruling has mandated Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) to revisit its 2017 decision regarding the glyphosate-containing pesticide, Mad Dog Plus. Federal Justice Russel Zinn handed down the decision, citing concerns about the agency's transparency and accountability. The PMRA initially approved the renewal of Mad Dog Plus despite a prior World Health Organization classification of glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic.” This ruling sheds light on broader issues within Canada’s pesticide management and regulatory practices.
Justice Zinn criticized the PMRA for its opaque decision-making process, highlighting a “trust us, we got it right” attitude. The agency, which regulates over 7,000 chemical products, did not require new data from Loveland, the manufacturer, during the renewal process. This lack of documented analysis was a key point in Justice Zinn's decision.
“No further information was provided, and the Minister of Health did not submit an affidavit or any other explanation clarifying the lack of documented analysis,” – Zinn
The rising use of pesticides in Canada has amplified concerns. A report indicated that the amount of pesticides sold in the country has increased five-fold over the past two decades, reaching 130 million kilograms from 26 million kilograms in 2005. By 2018, Canada had become the fifth largest user of pesticides globally, according to the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization. This dramatic rise has prompted experts to question the necessity and safety of such extensive pesticide use.
“Dramatic — and in my view, unnecessary — rise in the use of pesticides in Canada” – Bruce Lanphear
Critics argue that despite some restrictions on undeniably toxic pesticides like chlorpyrifos and paraquat, these measures are insufficient. The PMRA's failure to adequately assess new scientific data on glyphosate during its renewal decision has drawn particular scrutiny. Environmental advocates have raised alarms over glyphosate’s potential risks, including increased toxicity when mixed with other products, hazards to human health, and ecological risks.
“Increased toxicity when glyphosate is mixed with other products; hazards to humans; evidence of neurodegenerative and reproductive toxicity; environmental risks to freshwater habitats; indications that glyphosate worsens wildfire risks; and added ecological risks to wild pollinators” – Lisa Gue
The PMRA's regulatory process begins with companies submitting information on pesticides to Health Canada. Nonetheless, the decision-making occurs behind closed doors without public disclosure of how approvals are determined. Meg Sears highlighted this secretive practice.
“It’s the magic moment that the public has no access to” – Meg Sears
The agency's delayed release of information on pesticides for over four years has been documented in 11 rulings by the federal Information Commissioner. This lack of transparency and responsiveness has fueled widespread criticism from environmentalists and public health advocates alike.
Environmental scientist Bruce Lanphear emphasized that these regulatory shortcomings "captured the key flaws in Canada's pesticide management program and illustrate how PMRA is failing to protect Canadians." He stressed that the chemical industry's influence over agriculture is substantial, with only a small fraction of registered pesticides actively monitored for human impacts.
“The chemical industry is dominating the entire agriculture sector” with only a handful of the 7,000 pesticides registered for use in Canada actively monitored for impacts on humans – Sean O’Shea
Peter Ross pointed out inadequacies in how new biomonitoring studies are utilized within PMRA’s regulatory processes. His repeated inquiries to the agency went unanswered, reflecting broader issues with accountability and transparency within PMRA.
“I asked numerous times how PMRA uses new biomonitoring studies in their regulatory process. I never received an adequate response” – Peter Ross
Despite these criticisms, Mark Johnson from Health Canada stated that appropriate actions will be taken if there are reasonable grounds to believe that approved products containing glyphosate pose unacceptable health or environmental risks.
“Health Canada will take appropriate action if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the health or environmental risks, or value, of approved products containing glyphosate, are unacceptable” – Mark Johnson
