Environmental offenses | Who are the worst repeat offenders in Quebec?

Over the past 10 years, a few companies have increased environmental sanctions in Quebec, with fines sometimes reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars. But to this sad record, we must also add many municipalities and government organizations that have been sanctioned more than once for breaking provincial laws.

Eric-Pierre Champagne
Press

This list includes companies such as ArcelorMittal, Sintra, Béton provincial, but also the cities of Quebec, Montreal, Gatineau and Terrebonne, to which must be added Hydro-Quebec and the Quebec Ministry of Transport.

However, Bill 102 tabled last October by the Minister of the Environment and the Fight against Climate Change (MELCC), Benoit Charette, could be a game-changer for these repeat offenders who do not respect environmental laws. If passed, the new law would allow the minister to refuse an application for authorization filed by a “delinquent promoter”.

Concretely, the Minister could henceforth refuse “to issue, modify or renew an authorization” if the applicant “has been convicted of an offense against any law for which the Minister is responsible for the application or one of his regulations ”.

When the bill was tabled, Minister Benoit Charette had also expressed his frustration at seeing “delinquents” capable of obtaining new authorizations.

“This is good news,” points out Anne-Sophie Doré, lawyer at the Center québécois du droit de l’environnement (CQDE). It is a good amendment to the law which will give more control power to the minister. This legislative proposal is inspired in particular by the municipal world, where cities can add “delinquent” companies to a blacklist, which can no longer participate in calls for tenders for a determined period.

“Our interpretation is that the Minister may refuse an authorization to a recalcitrant promoter who has several offenses in his file”, adds Mr.^e Golden.

Many recalcitrant

But who are these “delinquents”? A compilation produced by Press shows that several companies and public organizations have increased environmental offenses in recent years.

On October 15, the ArcelorMittal company was found guilty by the Court of Quebec of more than 90 counts of environmental offenses committed between 2011 and 2013 at the Mont-Wright mining complex, on the North Shore. She had violated the Fisheries Act as well as the Federal Metal Mining Effluent Regulations.

But ArcelorMittal has also accumulated breaches of Environment Quality Act of Quebec over the past decade. The company was sanctioned 19 times for a sum totaling $ 92,500 between 2012 and 2019.

The Canadian subsidiary of the mining giant is not the only company to present such a record. The mining company Osisko, Béton provincial, Rio Tinto Alcan, Sintra, Couillard constructions and several others have been sanctioned more than once in the past 10 years.

A few of these companies also accumulate fines of $ 10,000, the maximum prescribed for the most serious violations of the administrative monetary penalties register.

They apply when there is non-compliance with an emission standard for a hazardous material, during the release of a contaminant liable to harm the environment or human beings or a activity prohibited in a natural environment.

This is particularly the case of the road manufacturer Sintra, which had to pay $ 60,000 for six offenses committed between 2015 and 2020. For its part, Béton Provincial was imposed four maximum fines, between 2012 and 2016, for a total of $ 40,000.

Several municipalities

On this list, we also find many municipalities that have had to pay tens of thousands of dollars for violations of environmental laws. Quebec, Montreal, Rivière-du-Loup, Gatineau, Terrebonne and Shawinigan are among the worst performers in the province.

The City of Shawinigan sits at the top of the list, with 15 offenses between 2013 and 2015 totaling $ 136,500. Quebec is not far behind, with 14 offenses between 2013 and 2020 totaling $ 76,000. In particular, the Quebec capital had to pay five fines of up to $ 10,000.

To this list, we must add Hydro-Québec and its subsidiaries, which were sanctioned 24 times between 2013 and 2019, for a total amount of $ 545,400. The Quebec Ministry of Transport is also among the worst performers, with 12 infractions for a total of $ 60,000 between 2014 and 2020.

Over the past decade, 6,200 violations of Quebec environmental laws have been sanctioned for a total of $ 30 million, including $ 17 million in administrative monetary penalties.

They said

Hydro-Quebec

“We have worked hard to correct things over the past few years. Over the past two or three years, we have had better results, ”says Francis Labbé, spokesperson for Hydro-Québec, who recalls that the state-owned corporation has around 1,500 projects that are subject to review. Evaluation.

Provincial concrete

“Over the past five years, we have received an average of 1 breach per year, which equates to a 99% compliance rate across all of our sites. This compliance rate is among the best in the industry, ”says Jean-François Dufour, vice-president, strategic development at Béton provincial. “We have more than 100 sites in Quebec and we are [tout l’accent] to comply with the Environment Quality Act. ”

ArcelorMittal

“Environmental protection and sustainable development are core values ​​within our organization and our commitment to environmental protection is very clear,” says ArcelorMittal Director of Communications, Annie Paré. With regard to administrative monetary penalties, you should know that the vast majority of penalties mentioned in your file are items that have already been settled. For the others, we have implemented actions to rectify the situation and we are working in collaboration with the MELCC in this regard. ”

Quebec city

“The City of Quebec recognizes having received these sanctions during the period of 2012-2021, admits its spokesperson David O’Brien. You should know that these can sometimes be explained by breakdowns of mechanical equipment, accidents, maneuvering errors or even by situations that are beyond its control. In each case, the City maintained close communication with the Ministry and made sure to make the required corrections as soon as possible, both to meet the MELCC’s requirements and to maintain its provision of services to citizens. . ”