It is extremely rare, perhaps even unique, to see the Quebec government make a decision that is radically opposed to what its 18 regional public health departments recommend. Yet that is what he did by authorizing an increase in the standards for nickel in the atmosphere in Quebec. We find this decision unacceptable.
Posted at 11:00 a.m.
The nickel case is very complex, but also very simple. Nickel is an atmospheric contaminant, certain forms of which are known to have carcinogenic potential.
To accommodate mining companies with activities at the Port of Quebec, the government plans to adopt a bill aimed at authorizing higher quantities of nickel in the air we breathe daily, arguing that such a measure would not be harmful to health. He says he trusts the standards in force in Europe and Ontario.
However, it omits a significant element: the type of nickel present in the majority in these regions is not the same as that found in Quebec. In Europe, the effects of nickel mainly cause respiratory irritation. However, the type of nickel that we find in Quebec is, for its part, associated rather with lung cancer.
For this type, the standard of the World Health Organization is much more severe. Faced with such a significant risk, it is necessary to apply the precautionary principle, in order to minimize the potentially fatal consequences.
By moving forward with this new regulation, the Quebec government is making a fundamental mistake. Despite the stated and documented risks of groups such as the regional public health departments and the Quebec Association of Physicians for the Environment (AQME), it consciously chooses to promote the development of an industry already recognized for its poor environmental practices rather than to protect the health of its citizens.
Already, each year in Quebec, air pollution is responsible for more than 4,000 premature deaths and generates health costs estimated at 30 billion dollars, not to mention the additional burden on our already congested health system.
Human health first
It is inadmissible to claim, on the one hand, to want to reduce congestion in the network, but, on the other, to continually take decisions that exacerbate health risks. This is without taking into account that the population most affected by this new standard will be that of the lower town of Quebec, which presents among the highest levels of socioeconomic deprivation, medical comorbidities and environmental risks in the province.
Today, we are calling on the Quebec government to reconsider its decision and instead to draw inspiration from best practices. Simple and inexpensive solutions, such as vacuum transshipment, are within our reach. Other jurisdictions sharing a reality similar to ours (such as Western Australia) have had the courage to do so, without even harming their economic development.
We invite François Legault, Benoit Charette and all the ministers to show courage and responsibility: the least we can do is that human health comes before that of industry.