I oppose the removal of…

I oppose the removal of these lands from the Greenbelt. The Premier has promised the people of Ontario that these lands would not be developed. Reports from the Ontario government's in-house experts have indicated that there is enough land to accommodate development without impacting the Greenbelt.These lands were meant to be protected in perpetuity.
According to Ontario Farmland Trust 319 acres of farmland is being lost per day - see link. Considering the recent issues we have had with food security and supply chain issues, it is irresponsible to remove any farmland from the Greenbelt, especially those that can serve local urban communities. The government has provided no evidence on how the loss of these fertile farmlands will be mitigated - if in fact they ever can be, considering the difficulty in acquiring productive class 1 fertile soil.
Land swaps cannot replace functioning ecosystems within a locale. Human development is exerting extreme pressure on biodiversity. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services has estimated that around 77% of land and 87% of water have been altered by humans resulting in 83% loss in wild mammal biomass and about 50% loss of the world's plant biomass. They have suggested we are undergoing a 6th mass extinction. Is there a point where biodiversity is pushed past a point that it can recover? Reports such as these should encourage all levels of government to enhance, not destabilize existing natural heritage features. The government has provided no evidence on the local impacts to ecosystems. Once developed these functioning systems cannot be recovered. As per the attached supporting letter, there are a number of significant wildlife corridors, wetlands and woodlots that would be significantly impacted. see link re: biodiversity concerns.
Development of these lands will not provide suitable, affordable housing. Infrastructure is not available. By waiving the development charges and downloading these fees to the municipal taxpayers, it will be negatively impacting those who can already not afford homes. Again the rich get richer, and the poor cover their costs. 50,000 "affordable" homes out of 1.5 million is insignificant. 80% of market value is approximately $800,000. Only a rich person would consider this affordable. The government needs to address what is actually impacting affordability and house construction such as real estate supply scooped up by investors - see link, homes sitting empty, lack of trained tradespeople and supply chain issues instead of pandering to developers.

It seems apparent that developers have influence with this government based on the lands purchased prior to legislation being passed. Considering the Premier's broken promise of not allowing development on the Greenbelt, how can anyone believe that additional lands will not be developed? Will this precedent setting land grab be death by a thousand cuts to our Greenbelt? Housing, especially affordable housing, is a priority but so is food security, climate change, biodiversity, clean water and air. Removal of these Greenbelt lands will set a precedence which can negatively impact all of these areas. I urge you to leave the Greenbelt intact.