Public Comment on Bill 5: A…

Public Comment on Bill 5: A Step Backward for Environmental Protection in Ontario
I am writing to express deep concern regarding the proposed Bill 5, which represents a significant rollback of environmental protections in Ontario. This bill undermines science-based decision-making, weakens critical habitat safeguards, and opens the door to unchecked industrial development under the guise of economic growth. If passed, Bill 5 would prioritize political and economic interests over ecological integrity and public accountability.
First and foremost, Bill 5 shifts environmental oversight from a scientific to a political domain. By removing the requirement for environmental registration and review processes, the bill effectively eliminates a key mechanism for assessing the ecological impacts of development projects. As highlighted by Ecojustice, this change would allow projects to proceed without any formal evaluation of their potential to harm species at risk or their habitats (Ecojustice, 2025). This is not just a procedural change—it is a fundamental erosion of evidence-based governance.
Scientific literature has consistently shown that even under current regulations, environmental assessments often fall short in mitigating harm. A 2019 study published in Science of the Total Environment found that many projects already bypass or inadequately address avoidance, reduction, and mitigation of ecological impacts (Tarabon et al., 2019). Removing the review process entirely will only exacerbate this issue, allowing habitat destruction to proceed without scrutiny or accountability.
Moreover, Bill 5 paves the way for the creation of “Special Economic Zones” (SEZs), where standard federal and provincial environmental laws would not apply. This is a deeply troubling development. SEZs have long been controversial due to their tendency to prioritize industrial interests over environmental and social protections. As noted in academic literature, SEZs often operate as regulatory loopholes, enabling environmentally harmful practices under the pretense of economic development (Aggarwal, 2006). Using Bill 5 as a backdoor to establish such zones is a disingenuous tactic that undermines democratic oversight and public trust.
The cumulative effect of these changes is a dangerous precedent: one where environmental stewardship is sacrificed for short-term economic gain, and where political expediency overrides scientific evidence and public interest. Ontario’s natural heritage—its forests, wetlands, and wildlife—deserves robust protection, not deregulation.
I urge policymakers to reject Bill 5 and instead strengthen Ontario’s environmental review processes. We must ensure that development is guided by science, transparency, and a commitment to sustainability. The health of our ecosystems, and the well-being of future generations, depends on it.

References
Aradhna Aggarwal. (2006). Special Economic Zones: Revisiting the Policy Debate. Economic and Political Weekly, 41(43/44), 4533–4536. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4418855
Bowman, L. (2025, May 6). Ford’s omnibus bill guts environmental protections. Ecojustice. https://ecojustice.ca/news/demystifying-bill-5-how-doug-fords-omnibus-b…
Tarabon, S., Berges, L., & Isselin-Nondedeu, F. (2019). Environmental Impact Assessment of Development Projects Improved by Merging Species Distribution and Habitat Connectivity Modelling, 439–449. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.02.031