This proposal is not the…

This proposal is not the answer to our housing problems, and it would set a precedent that will weaken the Greenbelt, if not ultimately destroy it.

It is not necessary at this time to start taking bites out of the Greenbelt. There are still plenty of areas in the GTHA where housing can be developed or re-developed. It is economically and environmentally more efficient to densify housing in urban areas where water, sewage, hydro, and roads already exist than to extend this infrastructure into green fields. Here's a suggestion: given this government's predilection for meddling in municipal affairs, why not use the housing shortage as an excuse to pass legislation to overrule municipal zoning laws. For example, it is currently illegal to build anything but a single family dwelling in most residential zones in Toronto. Instead, it should be illegal to zone only single family dwellings within, say, 500 metres of mass transit stations. The long fight to densify along the Danforth and, more recently, the blocking of a re-development proposal around Long Branch GO station are just two examples of inefficient zoning.

The risk of swapping Greenbelt land for development today is that it sets a precedent for repeating the maneuver in the future. If we don't respect the original intent and boundaries of the legislation now, what's to keep us from making excuses to disrespect it again and again? Adding parcels of land elsewhere for every parcel that is removed from the Greenbelt is a procedure that could be easily repeated, and if we keep doing it, eventually the Greenbelt as we know it today could be gone. Protecting land somewhere else is not an equivalent substitute -- it does not provide the environmental services to the same area that the current Greenbelt serves. The best way to protect the integrity of the Greenbelt is to resist the temptation to make adjustments to its boundaries, even if the current intent is to do so just this one time.