May 25, 2026

Federal Government proposes to weaken pesticide regulation

May 25, 2026 – Buried in budget-related bills introduced in Parliament by the federal government in the spring of 2026 are provisions that weaken the protection of Canadians from exposure to harmful pesticides.

Since it first came into effect in June 2006, Canada’s Pest Control Products Act has set health protection as the foremost consideration of federal pesticide regulation. Now the government is proposing to allow federal cabinet to override restrictions placed on pesticides by regulators in cases where the continued use of a product is judged (in the view of cabinet) to be economically justified, despite known or suspected health risks.

In addition, scientific re-evaluations of pesticides, which have been previously required every 15 years, would be able to be set aside in favour of vague assessments that prioritize “national economic security, regional economic security or national food security.” These security-based criteria are not defined in the proposed legislation. And the new kinds of “assessments” would not involve public participation, as re-evaluations formerly did.

“The federal government is now quietly weakening the key law that is supposed to keep Canadians, and our ecosystems, safe from the dangers of these chemicals,” said Bronwyn Roe, Healthy Communities program director for the non-profit environmental law organization, Ecojustice. “People, pollinators, and the planet are all at risk from pesticide deregulation.” An Ecojustice blog and news release have further details.

Take Action to Keep the Regulatory Focus on Health Protection

Ecojustice has prepared a sign-on letter objecting to the proposed changes, to be sent to local Members of Parliament, the Ministers of Health, Environment and Finance, and to the Prime Minister. You can read, sign and send the letter here.

Posted by on May 25, 2026 in Uncategorized and tagged , , .

Comments Off on Federal Government proposes to weaken pesticide regulation

May 25, 2026

Health Canada’s PMRA has a new name: Pesticides Regulatory Directorate

Spring 2026 – Visitors to this web site should be aware that Health Canada has renamed the agency that deals with pesticides in this country. In posts regarding matters up to April 1, 2026, the old name “Pest Management Regulatory Agency” (PMRA) is used.

In keeping with the change, our posts regarding future pesticide matters will use the new name – “Pesticides Regulatory Directorate” (PRD). We note that this name change does not signal a move to strengthen health protections for Canadians with regard to exposure to harmful pesticides. So it’s new name, same old.

Posted by on May 25, 2026 in Uncategorized and tagged .

Comments Off on Health Canada’s PMRA has a new name: Pesticides Regulatory Directorate

June 23, 2025

Court orders new review of popular weed killer

Health Canada failed to consider recent evidence on harmful impacts of glyphosate, federal court rules

June 23, 2025 – Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) has been ordered to conduct a new review of the pesticide, glyphosate, to take account of recent studies that raise concerns about adverse health and environmental effects associated with exposure to the popular weed killer.

The ruling from Federal Court on February 18, 2025 follows a lawsuit by the environmental law group, Ecojustice, on behalf of four non-governmental organizations – Friends of the Earth Canada, David Suzuki Foundation, Safe Food Matters, and Environmental Defence.

Products containing glyphosate received a Canadian regulatory stamp of approval back in 2017. The PMRA subsequently approved another glyphosate product in December 2022 on the basis of their 2017 review.

Ecojustice objected to the new rubber-stamp approval and appealed for an updated review of glyphosate-based herbicides, listing 61 new studies published since 2017 that identify specific health and environmental concerns around exposure to glyphosate.

In a statement, Ecojustice noted that “since the re-evaluation of glyphosate in 2017, scientific evidence has evolved. There are many emerging potential risks associated with glyphosate, including impacts on the microbiome, neurodegenerative and reproductive toxicity, adverse impacts to monarch butterflies, carcinogenicity, and ecological harm to freshwater ecosystems that Health Canada had not previously considered.”

The ruling by Justice Russel W. Zinn of Federal Court in British Columbia specifically says that the PMRA attitude of “trust us, we got it right” without actually examining current evidence is “unreasonable” and not sufficient as a rationale for new pesticide product approvals.

The judge gave the PMRA six months to conduct a detailed further review, including evidence on health and environmental risks identified in the 61 studies tabled by Ecojustice. Results are expected by the fall of 2025. (See update below.)

Update and Further Notes

Spring 2026 – In August 2025, the PMRA reported that, following the court order, it had reviewed the studies listed by the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Apparently, none of the 61 studies offered evidence that the PMRA regarded as requiring any change in the approval status of glyphosate. In the words of the Agency, “the existing reference values for glyphosate do not need to be revised, and the current risk assessment on file for the active ingredient glyphosate is valid.”

Some observers wonder if there is any level of scientific evidence that would prompt Canadian regulators to impose further restrictions on the use of glyphosate-containing pesticides.

Meanwhile in the United States, Bayer, the manufacturer of Roundup, which is much used in agriculture and whose principal active ingredient is glyphosate, is continuing to face legal pressure. The Lawsuit Information Center created by a US legal firm notes that more that 160,000 lawsuits have been brought by Americans claiming that their cancers (including non-Hodgkin lymphoma) were caused by exposure to Roundup. The site reports that Bayer has paid out nearly $11-billion to date to settle some 100,000 of these suits. And in February 2026, Bayer offered a further $7.25-billion to settle the 60-65,000 lawsuits that remain unresolved. A US judge is to rule on the proposed arrangement in July 2026.

Back in Canada, under current regulation, glyphosate is scheduled for formal re-evaluation in 2032.

Posted by on June 23, 2025 in Uncategorized and tagged , , , .

Comments Off on Court orders new review of popular weed killer

March 19, 2024

Time to reinstate Manitoba’s cosmetic pesticide ban

In the 2023 election campaign, the (now) Provincial Government pledged to bring back the ban on non-essential uses of pesticides. Let’s get it done.

March 19, 2024 – In the absence of restrictions on the sale and use of non-essential pesticides, Manitobans will be further exposed to unnecessary risks from these harmful chemicals again this summer.

A previous provincial government had enacted a ban on cosmetic uses of pesticides in 2014, but the restrictions were subsequently repealed. During the provincial election campaign in October 2023, representatives of the current government committed to bring back the restrictions. To date, legislation to do so has not been tabled in the Manitoba Legislature.

Public opinion polling shows that a clear majority of Manitobans favour the ban. And a letter signed by more than 30 health and environmental groups (including the Manitoba College of Family Physicians, Manitoba Public Health Association, Manitoba Lung Association and the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg) expressed strong support for restrictions on cosmetic pesticides.

It is time to remind the provincial government of its commitment to reinstate restrictions on the sale and use of non-essential pesticides.

A simple, effective way to take action

Send an e-mail message to the provincial government, addressed to –
Manitoba Minister of Environment and Climate Change
minecc@manitoba.ca

If you would like to send a copy of your message to your own MLA, here is a list of Members of the Legislature. Click on their name to obtain an e-mail address.

Below is a short sample message that you can copy and paste into your e-mail. Or write your own thoughts on why you want the cosmetic pesticide ban to be reinstated.

Dear Minister …

As you know, the previous provincial government rolled back the cosmetic pesticide regulations that were legislated in 2014, resulting in the resumption of widespread sale and use of toxic chemicals for turf care around the province. During the 2023 election campaign, representatives of your party (now government) pledged to reinstate restrictions on non-essential pesticides.

It is well-established that exposure to conventional pesticides puts human health at risk, especially children’s health. Pesticides are also linked to illnesses in pets that play on treated lawns. Pesticides are harmful to essential pollinators, and the chemical runoff contaminates our waterways. Experience demonstrates that weeds on lawns and green spaces can be successfully managed without resorting to toxic pesticides.

Please introduce legislation to restore cosmetic pesticide restrictions at your earliest opportunity. Thank you.

Posted by on March 19, 2024 in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , .

Comments Off on Time to reinstate Manitoba’s cosmetic pesticide ban

November 23, 2022

Polling shows Manitobans want to keep cosmetic pesticide ban

By a wide margin, Manitobans say they want to maintain restrictions on non-essential uses of pesticides.

November 23, 2022 – A province-wide poll by Prairie Research Associates found 52 per cent of respondents in favour of keeping the ban on cosmetic pesticides, while just 34 per cent said they were opposed to the ban, and 14 percent expressed no opinion. The survey of 800 Manitobans was conducted between October 3 and November 7, 2022. Results are accurate within 3.5 percentage points.

In Winnipeg, support for pesticide restrictions was even stronger, with 57 per cent in favour of keeping the ban and only 30 per cent opposed. Thirteen per cent expressed no opinion.

Notably, across the province, in every demographic category (age, gender, income, education), the proportion of survey respondents favouring pesticide restrictions was higher than the proportion of those opposed. (See detailed poll results.) Among respondents who hold an opinion, the overall margin of 18 points (52-34) in favour of the ban is decisive.

PROVINCE NOT LISTENING

On November 3, 2022, the provincial government passed a bill rolling back Manitoba’s cosmetic pesticide restrictions, allowing lawn care companies, municipalities and homeowners to resume using previously banned pesticides.

Survey results indicate that the government is out of touch with the majority of Manitobans on this issue. People want to be protected from unnecessary exposure to pesticides. Repealing the ban increases risks to public health, especially children’s health.

No other province in Canada has taken such a backward step. Allowing the use of toxic lawn pesticides is going to increase chemical runoff into waterways, harm essential pollinators and increase risks for pets and other animals. Green spaces can be well-managed at reasonable cost without using the riskier pesticides.

Both public and expert opinion in Manitoba favour keeping cosmetic pesticide restrictions. In June, a coalition of more than 30 health and environmental organizations appealed to the province to maintain the cosmetic pesticide ban. The group included the Manitoba College of Family Physicians, Manitoba Health Coalition, Manitoba Public Health Association, Learning Disabilities Association of Manitoba, Canadian Environmental Law Association, David Suzuki Foundation, and Winnipeg Humane Society.

WHAT’S NEXT?

Now that the Province has revoked the cosmetic pesticide ban, Manitobans will have to turn to municipal councils to pass local bylaws to protect public health and the environment from unnecessary pesticide risks.

Posted by on November 23, 2022 in Uncategorized and tagged , , .

Comments Off on Polling shows Manitobans want to keep cosmetic pesticide ban

June 28, 2022

Health and environmental groups oppose roll-back of Manitoba cosmetic pesticide restrictions

Doctors, public health and environmental groups urge Manitoba Ministers to preserve non-essential pesticide ban

UPDATE: November 3, 2022 – Despite urgent requests by health and environmental groups, the Manitoba Government has enacted legislation weakening restrictions on non-essential uses of pesticides. The move will allow municipalities, lawn care companies and homeowners to resume using previously banned pesticides, increasing risks to public health (especially, children’s health).

—————————————

June 28, 2022 – More than thirty health and environmental organizations are appealing to the Manitoba Government to maintain the province’s restrictions on non-essential uses of pesticides.

The Manitoba College of Family Physicians, Manitoba Health Coalition, Manitoba Lung Association, Manitoba Public Health Association, Learning Disabilities Association of Manitoba, and Winnipeg Humane Society are among the organizations speaking out.

The groups have endorsed an open letter to Jeff Wharton, Minister of Environment, Climate and Parks, and Audrey Gordon, Minister of Health, warning that resuming the use of currently banned pesticides will increase health risks for Manitobans, particularly children.

Allowing the use of riskier lawn pesticides will also increase chemical runoff into waterways, harm essential pollinators and increase risks for pets that play on treated lawns, the groups note.

WHAT ORGANIZATIONS ARE SAYING

Manitoba College of Family Physicians: “Family doctors take the privilege and responsibility of caring for their patients and communities seriously, and this includes advocating for public policy that protects the fundamental right to health. Peer-reviewed studies have established that serious health risks are associated with human exposure to chemical pesticides; therefore, the Manitoba College of Family Physicians believes that there is a need for continued restrictions on non-essential use of pesticides.” – Dr. Joanna Lynch, President

Manitoba Health Coalition: “The Manitoba Health Coalition views human exposure to pesticides as a matter of public health. The overwhelming consensus of the available research tells us that children are most at risk from exposure to pesticides. Toxic lawn pesticides represent an unnecessary and avoidable threat to the health of children and others in our community. The pesticide ban can and should stay in place.” – Thomas Linner, Provincial Director

Learning Disabilities Association of Manitoba: “Significant research suggests a link between exposure to these chemicals and neurodevelopmental toxicity. Exposure to even small amounts of these pesticides carries a risk of impairing healthy brain development, ultimately leading to an increased risk of developing a neurodevelopmental disorder, learning disabilities, ADHD, IQ deficits, autism. We strongly encourage the Manitoba Government to keep the current pesticide legislation in place, for the sake of our children’s health and education.” – Karen Velthuys, Executive Director

Winnipeg Humane Society: “The Winnipeg Humane Society has supported restrictions on cosmetic uses of pesticides since regulations were first introduced in Manitoba. Animals are subject to many of the same health risks as humans when exposed to chemical pesticides on lawns and boulevards. Provincial restrictions on non-essential pesticides should remain in place to protect family pets and all animal species from these preventable health risks.” – Jessica Miller, CEO

Posted by on June 28, 2022 in Uncategorized and tagged , , .

Comments Off on Health and environmental groups oppose roll-back of Manitoba cosmetic pesticide restrictions

March 28, 2022

Municipalities don’t need toxic pesticides, study finds

Maintaining attractive, functional parks and sports fields doesn’t have to cost the earth

October 2018 – A report from the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) refutes the myth that the cost of municipal weed control spirals upwards — and weeds run rampant in public parks and green spaces — when local governments are not allowed to use conventional toxic pesticides.

Some municipalities in Manitoba have expressed fears of skyrocketing costs and a virtual dandelion apocalypse, because of the province’s restrictions on non-essential uses of pesticides, which came into effect in 2015. The Association of Manitoba Municipalities has indicated that its members want the law changed to allow local governments to use currently banned products. But the study prepared by CAPE, based on information from practising weed program managers, found that the riskier pesticides are simply not needed.

City Hall, St. Catharines, Ontario

In the summer and fall of 2018, CAPE conducted interviews with parks managers in six municipalities across Canada — London, Guelph, St Catharines and Toronto in Ontario, Richmond, BC, and Cape Breton Regional Municipality in Nova Scotia. All cities that participated in the study are operating under either provincial or municipal restrictions on non-essential uses of pesticides on lawns and gardens. Some regulations have been in effect for more than 10 years.

The study found that satisfactory levels of weed control can be readily achieved at reasonable cost without the use of prohibited pesticides. How is this possible? Instead of relying on pesticides to suppress weeds, parks managers in these cities have adopted horticultural practices aimed at building and maintaining healthy turf to encourage desired plant growth and discourage weeds. These measures include mowing, aerating, fertilizing, overseeding and top-dressing.

In brief, parks managers who were interviewed for the study reported that:

  • Alternative practices that focus on building healthy soil and turf are effective in controlling weeds, even on sports fields that require maintenance under demanding conditions of use.
  • The cities’ weed control costs have not escalated, but have remained stable. Parks managers reported that priority green spaces of higher use and visibility can be maintained in well-groomed, attractive and functional condition within available budgets without using the banned pesticides.
  • Community residents appear to be satisfied with methods of weed control that do not expose people to toxic pesticides in parks and on sports fields. Managers reported that complaints are minimal.

Cities and towns that are resisting bans on non-essential uses of pesticides, like some in Manitoba and Alberta, can take heart from the experiences of their peers in other municipalities, who are successfully controlling weeds without using the riskier pesticides. The complete report — Municipal Weed Control: Lessons from Ground Zero — is available on CAPE’s web site.

Posted by on March 28, 2022 in Uncategorized and tagged , , , .

Comments Off on Municipalities don’t need toxic pesticides, study finds

October 13, 2018

Why it matters – lessons from the life and work of Sandra Madray

Honouring a committed advocate and researcher who campaigned on behalf of the most vulnerable

SEPTEMBER 2018 – In this heartfelt and personal reflection, Anne Lindsey, a member of Cosmetic Pesticide Ban Manitoba, remembers Sandra Madray as a dedicated activist who was resolutely committed to the protection of human health from pesticides and other toxic chemicals in our environment.

Sandra Madray (family photo)

I went to visit a friend and colleague recently — someone I hadn’t seen for a while. Sandra Madray was in the final stages of cancer. She was dying. I was shocked and deeply saddened to see the physical changes the disease had wrought on my beautiful friend. She was so thin, and in so much pain.

Cancer is horrific in every circumstance, but the cruel irony in Sandra’s situation is that she worked much of her adult life in a volunteer capacity to prevent cancer and other illnesses — in particular, those caused by, and associated with, environmental and industrial chemicals.

As a co-founder (with Margaret Friesen) of the local group Chemical Sensitivities Manitoba and an adviser to the national organization Prevent Cancer Now, she participated as a citizen/environmental representative in countless government consultations on laws and regulations regarding chemicals.She sat on the National Stakeholder Advisory Council for the Chemicals Management Plan, and on the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council. She served on the board of the Manitoba Eco-Network for several years, and was active in the Children’s Health and Environment Partnership.

Sandra’s back garden (family photo)

Sandra educated herself (and others) on the science and public policy of chemical exposure and what it means for human health. Studying reams of documents, she did the arduous and often thankless work for which many of us have neither the patience nor the appetite, as we trust hopefully that our governments will make the right decisions in the public interest.

Sandra’s garden (family photo)

Because she did that work, she knew that our hopeful trust is misplaced and that most regulatory decisions about chemicals are not taken with the utmost care to protect health or the environment, but rather lean heavily toward maximizing commercial profits and expedience. She knew that as a result, we inhabit a chemical soup of hazardous exposures to pesticides, cosmetics, plastics, vehicle and power plant emissions and other byproducts of the hydrocarbon society.

Sandra’s cancer may or may not have been attributable to environmental or workplace exposures, but many cancers are, and in all those cases, the pain and suffering, the unmitigated sadness and loss for family and friends are probably preventable.

Always kind, generous and with good humour and deep conviction, Sandra used her knowledge to advocate tirelessly for better solutions to society’s problems. She campaigned especially for the most vulnerable — for children, the elderly, the chemically sensitive (of which she was one) and the immune-compromised. A quiet warrior, she never sought special recognition for her work.

Sandra’s garden (family photo)

Some of the efforts she engaged in were successful — one recent example being the Manitoba law to prohibit many chemical pesticides in lawn care. With her own urban yard — an oasis of gorgeous native plants, buzzing and bright with butterflies and pollinators — as an example of better, healthful solutions for green space management, she worked with a coalition of groups to end unnecessary exposures to so-called “cosmetic” pesticides, some of which are linked in epidemiological studies to a variety of diseases, including cancer, respiratory and neurological/developmental problems.

When Manitoba joined numerous other provinces in legislating against lawn chemicals, it was a small but significant step forward in preventive medicine.

It is beyond sad that in Manitoba, it now seems destined to be reversed. Even though recent polling shows most Manitobans consider pesticide-free to be the best approach, powerful forces support chemical solutions for weed control, and they appear to have the ear of the current government behind the scenes. Possibly acting on inside knowledge, one lawn company owner was quoted in Home Décor and Renovations magazine as saying that the regulation would be amended for 2019, and that he was optimistic that it would allow “licensed lawn care professionals to resume the use of more effective weed control products.” We can only surmise that he was referring to substances such as 2,4-D, dicamba and mecoprop.

Sandra’s front garden (family photo)

As citizens, not only must we make every effort to avoid unnecessary products like cosmetic pesticides and scents, we must also continue to encourage our government not to take this terribly backward step. In fact, it would actually be more appropriate to strengthen the law by adding glyphosate-based compounds, such as Roundup, a weed-control product with links to cancer, to the list of prohibited substances. Roundup’s sordid history of coverups by its manufacturer, including the fact that its carcinogenic properties were long known about and hidden, is steadily being revealed in court challenges brought by cancer victims.

Sandra’s garden (family photo)

Sandra will not be with us to see a possible reversal of the policy that she contributed to, and once again, have to endure the impacts of lawn pesticides on her chemically sensitive body. But if this change of policy comes to pass, so many will be affected, including the children and all the other vulnerable people she worked so hard to protect.How many of them will have to get sick and perhaps die before a clean, common-sense and precautionary approach to green spaces is adopted once and for all in Manitoba? For Sandra Madray’s sake, let this number be zero.

Sandra passed away on August 17 at 68 with her husband, Winston, and family members at her side.

Anne Lindsey is a former executive director of the Manitoba Eco-Network, a long-time activist on health and environmental issues, and a research associate with the Manitoba office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

 

Posted by on October 13, 2018 in Uncategorized.

Comments Off on Why it matters – lessons from the life and work of Sandra Madray