Bill 697 establishes a province-wide strategy to reduce waste and sets an explicit target: halve food waste by 2030. It requires processors, manufacturers, distributors and retailers to offer recognized organizations the opportunity to take unsold products (food fit for consumption, animal feed, compost/energy recovery, and recoverable non-food goods), creates a public register of unsold-product quantities and agreements, and gives the Minister powers to fill gaps where private arrangements fail.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill creates a national strategy and an action plan to combat waste, mandates donation-offer obligations for unsold food and recoverable non-food goods, establishes a public register and reporting regime, forms a Repair Fund to finance circular-economy and repair measures, and adds enforcement tools including administrative penalties and criminal fines.
Who It Affects
Processors, manufacturers, distributors and retailers of food and recoverable non-food goods; recognized recipient organizations and Recyc‑Québec; the Minister and provincial regulators; repair-sector firms and companies seeking blended financing from the Fund; municipalities that participate in implementation.
Why It Matters
This is a statutory shift from voluntary donation and repair markets to an enforceable framework with transparency and penalties. It creates operational, reporting and legal obligations across the supply chain, channels public funding toward repair and circular startups, and elevates the provincial recovery agency’s role where market negotiation fails.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill opens by framing waste reduction as a provincial priority and requires the government to adopt a national strategy and action plan. The Minister must consult civil society, set indicators tied to the 2030 food-waste target, and publish an annual report on government measures; municipalities are explicitly named as contributors to on-the-ground implementation.
Operationally, the bill does not mandate mandatory redistribution by force; instead it obliges suppliers (processors, manufacturers, distributors and retailers) to offer recognized organizations the chance to enter donation agreements for unsold products that are still usable. Offers for food deliveries must prioritize local and regional organizations.
If a business cannot find a recognized partner after "serious efforts," the Minister can require it to contract with the Société québécoise de récupération et de recyclage (Recyc‑Québec). The Minister also sets the list of recognized organizations, may establish quality-control mechanisms for donations, can demand information from obligated parties, and may grant class exemptions by regulation.Transparency is a core mechanism: within three months of signing an agreement businesses must send a copy to the Minister, who maintains a public register that records annual unsold-product quantities per business, the agreements’ parties and terms, and the volumes processed under each agreement.
The register will also list convicted offenders. The bill clarifies that those donation agreements are exempt from specific Civil Code formalities.To shift behavior on the consumer side and support circular businesses, the bill creates a Repair Fund to finance repair-promotion programs, blended finance offerings in partnership with private funds, and acceleration of circular-economy firms.
The Minister manages the Fund, which may receive parliamentary appropriations, transfers from the Minister of Finance, gifts, and investment income; the Auditor General audits its statements annually and the department must report Fund activity separately in its management report.Compliance and enforcement sit on two tracks. Administrative penalties apply for failures to make serious efforts to reach agreements, to provide requested information, or to file copies of agreements.
More serious conduct — intentionally rendering food unfit for consumption, destroying otherwise-recoverable goods, or submitting false or misleading information — triggers criminal fines with higher ranges and broader judicial discretion based on the offender’s financial capacity. The bill also amends consumer protection law to prevent refusal of warranty service simply because a good was repaired by a third party or a manufacturer’s warranty seal was removed, unless the repair caused the defect.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill sets a province-wide target to halve food waste by 2030 and requires the Minister to establish indicators and an action plan to reach it.
Processors, distributors and retailers of food must offer recognized organizations opportunities to take unsold products still fit for human consumption, animal feed, compost or energy recovery; manufacturers/distributors/retailers of non-food goods must offer recoverable unsold goods.
If a business cannot secure an agreement after "serious efforts," the Minister can require it to enter an agreement with the Société québécoise de récupération et de recyclage (Recyc‑Québec).
The Repair Fund is established, managed by the Minister, financed by appropriations, transfers, gifts and investment income, audited annually by the Auditor General and dedicated to repair promotion and financing circular-economy firms.
Enforcement includes monetary administrative penalties ($2,000 for natural persons; $10,000 for others) for compliance failures, and criminal fines for intentional destruction or falsification ranging from $2,500–$250,000 (natural persons) and $7,500–$1,500,000 (others).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
National strategy, targets and action plan
Sections 3–9 require the Minister to develop a coordinated national strategy and action plan after stakeholder consultation and to set measurable indicators tied to the 2030 target. Practically, this sets the policy frame: ministries, municipalities and partners must align programs and the Minister must publish an annual implementation report (to be made public within 60 days). The provision creates the administrative pathway for future regulations and government-directed measures tied to the indicators.
Obligation to offer donation agreements and Ministerial powers
Sections 11–17 place direct obligations on processors, manufacturers, distributors and retailers to offer recognized organizations the chance to take unsold goods. The offers must prioritize local/regional recipients. The Minister has rulemaking authority to define recognized organizations, to exempt classes of persons or goods, to require specific information from businesses, and to oblige businesses unable to secure agreements to contract with Recyc‑Québec. Those powers allow the government to operationalize the charity-market interface and to backstop market failures.
Public register, reporting and publication rules
Sections 18–20 create a public register where businesses must file copies of donation agreements within three months and where the Minister records annual unsold-product quantities, parties and volumes processed. The register also records convicted offenders. The Minister must share certain data with Recyc‑Québec. By making volumes public, the bill injects transparency into supply chains but also raises questions about commercial confidentiality and data use.
Repair Fund: objectives, financing and oversight
Sections 21–25 establish the Repair Fund to finance repair-promotion programs, blended finance offerings with Québec private investment funds, and support for high‑potential circular-economy companies. It details revenue sources (parliamentary appropriations, transfers under the Financial Administration Act, gifts, statutory sources and investment returns), requires separate reporting in the department’s management report and mandates annual audit by the Auditor General. The structure is designed to combine public seed capital with private finance to scale circular businesses.
Enforcement: administrative penalties, offences and application rules
Section 26 creates monetary administrative penalties for failures to show "serious efforts," to provide information or to file agreements; sections 28–31 establish criminal offences for intentionally rendering goods unusable or providing falsified information, with wide fine ranges and judicial discretion that must consider the offender’s financial capacity. The bill leverages enforcement machinery from an existing environmental enforcement statute for inspections, investigations, claims and penalty procedures, integrating the new obligations into established compliance processes.
Consumer Protection Act amendment — right to repair and warranty service
Section 35 adds a provision preventing merchants or manufacturers from refusing to perform a warranty solely because a good was repaired by a third party or a manufacturer’s seal was removed, unless the repair caused the defect. This directly strengthens consumers’ ability to choose independent repair services and limits warranty-based lock‑in practices, while still allowing denial where the third‑party repair created the failure.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Local and regional food-rescue organizations: prioritized offers and a legal framework increase predictable access to surplus food and create a public record to support fundraising and logistics planning.
- Circular-economy and repair startups: the Repair Fund provides targeted capital, blended-finance vehicles and government-backed acceleration support that can lower financing barriers for high‑potential firms.
- Municipal waste-management programs: clearer diversion avenues and provincial indicators help municipalities target collection, composting and reuse initiatives and reduce landfill loads.
- Consumers seeking repairs: the Consumer Protection amendment reduces warranty-based barriers to independent repair, expanding options and likely extending product lifetimes.
- Recyc‑Québec: the agency gains a statutory role as a fallback agreement partner and a recipient of register data, increasing its operational responsibilities and influence in provincial recovery programs.
Who Bears the Cost
- Processors, manufacturers, distributors and retailers: they must put in place offer procedures, track unsold volumes, report data, negotiate or enter into agreements, and potentially pay administrative penalties or criminal fines if they fail to comply.
- Small retailers and independent operators: even with ministerial exemption powers, smaller actors face disproportionate compliance and logistical burdens in identifying recipients, transporting, storing and documenting unsold goods.
- Provincial administration and Minister’s office: implementing the register, maintaining recognized-organization lists, conducting inspections and auditing Fund activity requires staff time and possibly new budgets or reallocated resources.
- Charities and recipient organizations: increased volume can strain transport, storage and food-safety capacity; organizations may need to invest in handling infrastructure to accept regular deliveries.
- Taxpayers/public budgets: the Repair Fund relies in part on parliamentary appropriations and transfers, so public funding decisions and long‑term sustainability may create fiscal trade-offs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate aims that pull in opposite directions: maximizing diversion of usable products away from waste (and publicly exposing supply‑chain outcomes) versus preserving businesses’ operational flexibility, proprietary information and the practicalities of food safety and logistics. Reducing waste at scale requires prescriptive reporting and backstops, but those same measures can impose significant compliance costs and commercial risks on the very actors whose cooperation is essential.
Several implementation and policy tensions in the bill warrant close attention. First, the mechanics of proving "serious efforts" to reach an agreement are undefined; businesses will need guidance on what documentation and outreach satisfy the standard, and regulators will need protocols to evaluate good-faith attempts versus evasive conduct.
Second, the public register enhances transparency but creates commercial confidentiality and competitiveness concerns: publishing annual unsold-product volumes by company could reveal supply-chain weaknesses or business strategy, potentially chilling participation or prompting legal challenges unless redaction rules or aggregation methods are adopted.
Measurement and categorization raise practical problems: the bill’s definitions of "recoverable" goods and what is "fit for human consumption" require alignment with food‑safety rules and federal jurisdictions. The Minister’s broad rulemaking and exemption powers address flexibility but also create regulatory unpredictability for businesses until clear regulations and recognized-organization criteria are published.
Funding and governance of the Repair Fund pose another question: leveraging blended finance and private fund partnerships is promising but risks favoring firms with existing investor relationships over smaller, community-scale repair initiatives, and ongoing reliance on appropriations introduces fiscal uncertainty. Finally, enforcement calibrates between administrative penalties for paperwork/effort failures and large criminal fines for intentional destruction; establishing proportionality and consistent prosecutorial discretion will be key to avoid chilling legitimate operational choices.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.