Comment
I am an advocate for affordable housing and transit within all of Ontario's towns and cities. There are far too many people who cannot house themselves even while working full time, and this is incredibly important.
However I am also an advocate for long-term environmental health, and this bill fails to convince me that anything more than a cursory glance at the ecology of a space will be given.
Granting some companies exemptions from environmental reviews altogether is inexcusable, as is the incomplete definition of habitat proposed by Bill 5. Is your bedroom only your habitat, but not your kitchen? How can you possibly expect species to survive when they have a place to sleep but nowhere to eat or a way to migrate? Perhaps having some actual scientists on hand while writing these bills could help you.
Instead of nothing but sprawling subdivisions that are bought up by investors, why don't we have the majority of new constructions open only to families that don't already own a home? Why aren't all new subdivisions also including multi-dwelling units such as small and affordable apartment buildings? We need to increase density and provide a range of housing, not just speed it up. That will perhaps lose some developers a million or two, but we all know they can afford it. The average Ontarian can't.
Submitted May 14, 2025 12:32 PM
Comment on
Proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and a proposal for the Species Conservation Act, 2025
ERO number
025-0380
Comment ID
142462
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status