Successfulness of the canadian environmental protection act - Essay Example

On October 23, 1987, the bill passed second reading. After third reading and extensive amendments by House of Commons Legislative Committee, the bill passed as an Act that respects the protection of the environment and human life and health. Introducing the Act was a legislative initiative aimed at invigorating the insipid federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP).Proposed as a bill by the then Minister of Environment, Tom McMillan, CEPA perceived as federal government of Canada’s effort to firmly establish that it is federal government’s obligation to integrate environmental safety aspects in all of its projects planning and implementation.

Therefore, federal government ensured that no policy, program, project, or legislation should proceed without adequate analysis of its potential environmental consequences (UNEP, 1999, p.48). Considering the scope and complexity of changed made after review in 1990s, reviewers decided to repeat the practice in seven years. The objectives for assessment were to review the implementation process, and the extent to which it is proved effective in achieving its prime objective-protecting human health and environment.

First Reading Version of 1999 mandated for review in seven years, the final version mandated a reduced time period of five years (Standing Senate Committee on Energy, 2008, p.1). In order to determine CEPA’s success, Environment Canada and health Canada considered four years of implementing CEPA and attributed it as an essential part of the complex regime of inter-related laws, policies, and institutions which guarantee adequate and comprehensive management of threats to human health, life, and environment.

This complex regime incorporates federal, provincial, territorial, Aboriginal and local governments, judiciary, industry, and civil society in addition to other national or international organizations (Environment Canada and Health Canada, 2004, p.4). Despite the short time of its implementation and continuous review, in a 2005 web based public response primarily echoed the need of better implementation and enforcement of CEPA, 1999.Several practitioners across Canada and different sectors had a general perception that CEPA, 1999 is primarily a sound piece of legislation which does not require any substantial amendment in its content in order to ensure effective and continuous protection of human health, life, and environment.

However, many believed that, generally there is more to be done when it comes to effectively implementing the law in order to ensure that the legislation is tapped to its full potential by taking actions swiftly and reducing risks involved (Versteeg as cited in Standing Senate Committee on Energy, 2008, p.3) According to Standing Senate Committee on Energy(2008,p.3) it is argued that the lacking will to implement and enforce the CEPA, and lacking resources for implementation and enforcement are the major areas of concern that undermine the effectiveness of CEPA environmental protection regime.

It is also argued that resources and time for legislative review of CEPA should not be taken from those allocated for implementation