No - I disapprove of the…

No - I disapprove of the proposed changes. A project shouldn’t start before the Ministry has reviewed an application, habitat absolutely must be protected. There is nothing vague about needing habitat to live. And to the extent that defining habitat needs may be vague in some cases, responsible stewardship means erring on the side of caution until we have better information. As a government your job in that case is to- get better information, work harder to work around any need to impinge on habitat needs of threatened species. I can’t stress enough that I see you trying to wedge poorer species protection into another crisis you’ve allowed to fester in housing and I’m very disappointed. The SARA didn’t cause our housing crisis and you know it. Taking time to examine the impacts of wrecking habitat is sensible- not a thing to try and speed up. I live in an area of Ontario where various species in SARA are definitely not public favourites- nothing particularly showy or well known about them, or they are directly affected by huge industries. We have lots of space and people have a hard time under it isn’t homogeneous and that an open field bird can’t simply relocate to a swamp. I don’t see SARA or your government doing enough as it is- really on any front you’re trying to frame as action in these proposed revisions. You need to listen to science, look around for what has actually worked in other jurisdictions, understand that species and habitats (besides people) are also your responsibility- and get your heads out of your ideology. Your ideology might inform how you approach problems but you are of no use to future humans if it constrains your solutions.