The Conservative Party’s attempt to make “plastic packaging great again” would be laughable—if it weren’t so dangerous.
Touting deregulation as a solution to food affordability, Pierre Poilievre’s latest move to scrap Canada’s single-use plastics ban and roll back mandates to move toward bio-degradeable packaging over the next years (in line with the EU’s commitments) isn’t a plan—it’s a handout to oil lobbyists, disguised as relief for struggling families.
Over 99% of plastic is derived from oil. So when Poilievre promises to bring back single-use plastics what he’s really pledging is to protect oil and gas profits from government regulation. He isn’t talking about affordability—he’s talking about impunity. And the cost of that impunity? We all pay for it. Not just through the thousands of hazardous toxic chemicals associated with plastics and microplastics overflowing in our landfills, waterways, and bodies, but through rising grocery bills.
How does plastic packaging increase food prices?
- Because the petrochemical industry is one of the biggest contributors to climate change.
- The climate crisis is driving droughts, wildfires, and pest infestations that devastate crops, raising costs for farmers and ultimately for consumers.
- In the long term, policies that support the ‘throw away economy’ also make us poorer. While there are initial costs to move toward a circular green economy, doing so ultimately can save trillions (UNEP, 2023)
If Poilievre were serious about food affordability, he’d back policies that actually help people
His party could propose emergency price caps on essential food items, a guaranteed livable income, stronger support for local food systems and farmers, and a crackdown on price gouging by corporate grocery giants. He could champion windfall profit taxes on those same grocery magnates as the NDP has suggested, and bolster the Competition Bureau to take on price fixing. All the other parties have actual policies to address food affordability challenges.
Instead, he’s focused on deregulation and what sounds a lot like fossil fuel appeasement and climate obstructionism. Poilievre’s latest announcement to reverse the country’s commitment to join with global partners to reduce plastic waste purposefully delays and weakens real climate action —it’s another Maple -MAGA move. What’s next, a proposal to pull us out of the Paris Agreement or the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP)?
Canada needs leadership that sees the food and climate crises as connected. Real solutions would support things like: funding for university and public-private-sector partnerships to scale up next-generation bioplastics made from renewable materials like mushrooms or hemp. Regions like Québec and BC are already investing to some degree in circular economies. We should be building on successful pilots and initiatives with national tax incentives and through increasing support to scale up solutions that work for the long-term health of the people and the planet. In this day and age, with all we know, it’s ridiculous to keep thinking about wealth for the few without talking about health for the many.
Canada could play a significant role in scaling up sustainable, affordable packaging innovation. But first, we need to stop pretending that plastic straws are freedom and start acting like the future of healthy food, farms and families matters.
Finn Cook