Omnibus legislation shouldn’t weaken protections against pesticides

Speak up, to strike pesticides-related clauses from budget omnibus Bill C-30

In its final week before summer break, the Canadian Parliament is fast-tracking omnibus Budget Implementation Bill C-30. Brief clauses would substantially, fundamentally weaken protections under the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA).

Fundamental changes to pesticides regulation have no place in omnibus legislation. Notably, review of the PCPA is overdue. That would be the avenue to consider sweeping amendments presently in Bills C-30 (as well as C-31).

Bill C-30 inappropriately adds economic considerations into pesticide assessments.

Costs do not inform scientific assessments of efficacy and harms. Inclusion of finances would distract from the central scientific responsibilities: to protect human health and the environment, while controlling pests. Chemical costs can be at the whim of vested interests, would introduce biases, and are irrelevant to safety.

Bill C-30 contemplates Ministerial approval to use a pesticide in an “emergency,” despite previous Health Canada findings that the chemical is excessively toxic to the environment.

A concern during hearings was that the safety assessment of pesticides—chemicals that are designed and deployed to be toxic to life—would delay use of new products. The suggestion was this delay would risk food security and become a financial burden.

“Emergency” uses of unregistered, environmentally hazardous pesticides, however, could increase problems that Canadian farmers face, with unintended consequences of their use. These may include infestations and diseases—related to loss of biodiversity and declining soil fertility. Impacts on Canadians’ health could mount with more pesticides in our food.

Furthermore, Bill C-30 minimizes the PCPA’s currently required re-evaluations of pesticides, leaving them at the Minister’s discretion, politicizing the science of safety.

This is contrary to the recent work of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. In May 2026, the committee made 20 recommendations, including that food security requires:

• ongoing work of the seven research facilities and the Organic and Regenerative Research Program, including fields with irreplaceable cropping histories in various climates and with signature soil types; and
• strengthening pesticide regulation.

Costs

Harms from pesticides require expensive health care and social services to address developmental damage, chronic diseases and cancers. Narrowing first-time pesticide evaluations, and eliminating mandatory post-market re-evaluations, may save modest costs to assess and to regulate – only to create greater, impossible to calculate costs to support victims and their families.

Science is advancing. Health Canada is implementing new approaches. Pesticides need ongoing, sophisticated, informed study—not blunt, poorly considered amendments in omnibus bills.

Protecting Organic Agriculture

Organic farming is increasing in Canada and internationally. Without synthetic pesticides, organic farming benefits soil quality, improves food quality and is more resilient against climate change. Pesticides from neighbouring fields pose significant risks to organic operations, certification and marketability of products. Organic agriculture must be protected. It should also inform “essentiality,” when determining value of pesticides.

URGENT: WRITE TO YOUR MP
Ask for deletion of pesticides measures, from the budget bills

Take a few minutes NOW to send an email to your Member of Parliament, the Finance Committee, and the Ministers of Health, and Environment and Climate Change, to ask for deletion of pesticides clauses from Bill C-30.

Compose your own email, or you can complete and customize our “starter” email in any way you choose.

1. Add your MP’s email address in the “To” section.

Please consider copying or blind copying Prevent Cancer Now: info@preventcancernow.ca
You can add or remove any recipients.

2. Add a catchy subject line.

Here are some ideas, to inspire creativity:

• The Answer to Cancer is PREVENTION — NOT PESTICIDES
• Cancer is costly—don’t de-regulate pesticides in budget bills
• Supporting agriculture in Budget Bills = Supporting Organic (NOT deregulating pesticides)

3. Body of your letter

Use, edit or replace the text in the “starter” email. What matters is that you are writing to your Member of Parliament and sharing your concerns.

Add an Introduction

Share a bit about who you are and what is personally motivating you to write about the importance of primary cancer prevention

Main Points

Pesticides are spread in the environment specifically to be toxic. Amendments in omnibus budget bills are the most substantial roll-back in regulation since the present Pest Control Products Act was passed in 2002.

The mandated periodic review of the Pest Control Products Act is late. Prioritize good governance, and updated science with thorough review. Parliament should not fast-track toxic agricultural chemicals.

Conclusion

Ask your MP what they are willing to do to support evidence-based pesticide regulation and transparency. Tell them you are looking forward to their response and thank them for their follow up.

Be sure to include at least your postal code, so the MP knows you are a constituent.

Next Steps

If you do not receive a response from your MP — CALL THEIR OFFICE.

Pesticides can impact all forms of life, and effects can ripple through generations. For example, today’s youngsters are less healthy and more prone to cancer, due to intergenerational effects of long-discontinued pesticides such as DDT. Foodsecurity requires maintaining agricultural research and strengthening pesticide regulation—not Ministerial reversals of Health Canada’s refusals.

Canadian farmers face unintended consequences of pesticides, with infestations, crop disease and soil degradation.

We fall ace costs for pesticides’ harms, including social services and health care to address developmental harms, chronic diseases and cancers. Narrowing first-time evaluations, or eliminating mandatory post-market re-evaluations, may save modest costs to assess and to regulate, only to pay greater, incalculable costs to support child development, to treat chronic diseases and cancers, and for environmental impacts.

When you do receive a response from your MP — WRITE TO THEM AGAIN, addressing their letter and reiterating your concerns and views. These second letters have a powerful impact in terms of how politicians assess the level of public concern about specific issues!

ASK FOR A MEETING. If your MP is interested in meeting, and you would like to include PCN, please email info@preventcancernow.ca with a meeting request.

THANK YOU for working to prevent cancer, and for a healthier world!