I spend time in two very…

I spend time in two very different municipalities in Ontario . One is mostly rural and the other is in a municipality with some of the worst air quality in Ontario. I therefore have a vested interest in every issue in this poorly thought out piece of proposed leglislation.

1. The province needs to set the highest standards and not choose the lowest common denominator which would allow "open for business by-laws" to become the most important factor. Bill 66 is a flagrant attempt to appease those businesses which are already responsible for poor air quality, plundering water resources, creating urban sprawl , dumping toxic waste etc. Citizens have been working with municipalities to create municipal official plans that go even further than the most stringent legal requirements that have been put in place to date. These critical legal requirements protect water, natural heritage, farmland and human health and well-being.
2. I travel frequently on the fringes of the "Blue Belt" and understand the fragile nature of our water resources. Bill 66 threatens drinking water across Ontario. Open-for-business by-laws are detrimental to policies for approved source protection plans intended to protect existing and future sources of municipal drinking water. There are continual threats from sources such as landfills, sewage systems and improper handling of fuel, manure and pesticides.
3. Bill 66 undermines federal policies and programs that protect wetlands, woodlands and habitat for species at risk . Provincial policies are supposed to enhance these programs with special consideration for some of the unique features of each province. "Open-for-business by-laws" would circumvent protections for these important habitats and species set out in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) under the Planning Act. The Bill could also create conflict with neighbouring provinces who are currently working in harmony with Ontario on these issues.
4. Bill 66 threatens farmland across Ontario. Open-for-business by-laws would bypass
agricultural protections set out, for example, in the PPS. This could lead to more urban sprawl.
5. Bill 66 threatens two million acres of natural areas and farmland across the Greenbelt.
Open-for-business by-laws would override protections for natural heritage and farmland set out in the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.
6. Bill 66 threatens freshwater and the ecological health of the Lake Simcoe watershed. Open-for-business bylaws would over ride the requirements of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan.
7. Bill 66 shows the utmost contempt for citizens, municipalities, and organisations who have been steadily improving the quality of life in Ontario communities. These combined efforts have made communities more livable, sustainable and resilient. Open-for-business by-laws would override PPS policies supporting active transportation, affordable housing, green infrastructure and climate resiliency. In addition to comments on Schedule 10 already submitted there is no need for a new regulation as the proposal is a backwards step .
8. Bill 66 encourages a lack of transparency and public engagement. Contrary to current
legal requirements (Planning Act, Clean Water Act), the by-laws could be passed without
any prior public notice, behind closed doors.
9. Bill 66 would leave citizens without recourse and the ability to appeal open-for-business by-laws to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.
10.Bill 66 proposes the repeal of the Toxics Reduction Act. I have first hand knowledge of current community liaison committees which work with local industrial facilities to explore ways to reduce the use and emission of toxic chemicals in their operations. Reducing toxins often creates a higher quality product so that in the long term businesses become more competitive. The citizens of Ontario unlike the proponents of Bill 66 understand such concepts