Convenience over the…

Convenience over the environment, yet again. Why is it so hard to follow the law, obtain the proper permits and authorizations, and construct the highway in the best possible way to mitigate against its detrimental effects? Nevermind the multiple studies that show that making more highways just encourages people to drive more, and you'll end up with gridlock in more places. You realize that the environment is not just a word, but actually provides for life itself, and for a much lower cost (are you familiar with the term 'ecosystem services'?) than human-made infrastructure. Make the 407 free - it already exists!

Also - stop restricting the construction of bike lanes. How dare you say that the 'time saved' by drivers is more important than the lives of bikers. Your focus on making things 'easier' for drives, instead of trying to solve the cause of the issue - that too many people are reliant on cars and we need alternatives for safely getting to work and play - is emblamatic of your party's superficial, feel-good 'solutions' that appeal to people's selfish nature. Of couse you didn't define 'unduly diminish' traffic flow - which means you get to define it afterwards however you like. Give a quantitative definition, and if you can't, that means you're just making assumptions about traffic flow, and I do not trust this government's judgment. In either case, this law is stupid, and needs to NOT be approved.

It also seems this government has no idea what Indigenous consultation actually means. It does not mean telling them what you're doing after you've decided to do it. Yet another example of tramping and ignoring their rights. If an Indigenous community says 'no' to the highway, will the government stop it? Seems like it's just another farce on paper, like environmental considerations.

You also failed to define what a 'sensitive natural or culture heritage' matter would be. Are you going to use this as a blanket excuse to withold studies that you don't like?

Why does the Minister of Transportation get final say in environmental effects and impacts and deciding how to mitigate them? That's a huge conflict of interest, not to mention outside of their sphere of knowledge. It's almost like we should have another process to assess environmental impacts...oh wait, that's exactly what you're proposing to do away with.

Stop this bill.