Dear Mr. Premier, I do not…

Dear Mr. Premier,

I do not agree with this proposition to open the Greenbelt to development.

You may think, "Well, this is just one individual. Just one personal opinion. It doesn't count for much." However, that is not true. Your proposition to open the Greenbelt - an area consisting of prime agricultural land and forests, wetlands, and other natural habitat home to a variety of native flora and fauna - is also considered detrimental and irresponsible by a large number of scientists, researchers, and citizens.

As Premier, you must govern responsibly, ethically, and in furtherance of democratic principles. Your decisions must be evidence-based, not driven by self-gain or for the financial benefit of a few at the expense of the many.

You have a Cabinet of Ministers at your disposal. Deputy ministers, legal counsel, policy advisors, researchers, legislative committees, and a whole Assembly of elected officials. For someone who seems to regularly chant "Efficiency!", it seems very inefficient to not make use of all these capable people to provide you with the scientific research, data, and environmental analysis to inform your decision-making.

I do not have access to the same resources as you so I will not be providing hyperlinked footnotes to any sources re: my comments below. However, such evidence does exist and I have no doubt your team is capable of providing you with this information.

Below are a few reasons why the Greenbelt should not be opened up to development:

1. You say this would be a one-time event. However, opening these acres to development today would set a dangerous precedent to open the Greenbelt again and again, and again, to future development. This is especially true considering some of the silly "criteria" listed in your proposal re: when land can or can't be developed. Every acre of land we pave over is one more cut in what is sure to be a death by a thousand cuts.

2. Ontario is already losing approximately 300 acres of agricultural land every day - even before the Greenbelt is opened up to development. Simultaneously, the Ontario population is projected to increase. What will all these people eat and drink to survive?

3. Extreme weather events because of climate change, such as drought (e.g. Alberta, California, Africa) and flooding (British Columbia) are already negatively impacting crop yields, both in Canada and globally. Geopolitical turmoil in Ukraine shows how political bad actors can weaponize food and create food insecurity on a global scale. Rather than putting food security at risk, Ontario should support our agri-food industry. Ontario has some of the best agricultural land in the world. Ontaro farmers feed Ontario families. With the right support, the sector could also feed people the world over. If the ethics of that proposition don't compel you, then think of the economic gain of Ontario's agri-food industry exporting food to millions of people beyond our provincial borders.

4. Despite what many people may think, human beings are a PART OF the ecosystem, not observers on the outside. If we don't make decisions that support the survival of the rest of the ecosystem, we too, risk endangerment. Biodiversity is under threat. The number of threatened flora and fauna species in Ontario continues to increase. When we destroy their habitats, we threaten our own survival, too. Think of the pollinators.

5. The more we pave over nature, the hotter the planet gets. Concrete absorbs heat and radiates that heat outwards. It exasperates the global warming problem. Concrete can't absorb water from rainfall, like natural habitat can, increasing the risk of floods. It doesn't act as a carbon sink like a forest. It doesn't feed wildlife or humans.

6. Building new affordable housing, respecting the environment, protecting our food supply, and supporting our farmers, do not need to be mutually-exclusive goals. We can do all these things simultaneously. There are plenty of opportunities for in-fill development and plenty of work for the construction industry within existing urban boundaries. We should build "in and up". This would have the added benefit of either using existing infrastructure (e.g. roads, water and wastewater systems, broadband, hydro) or upgrading existing infrastructure (which in many regions is already in need of modernization). Again, read the studies which conclude that building homes within existing urban boundaries would actually save municipalities (and citizen taxpayers) money as opposed to urban sprawl which would cost everyone more.

7. In my own city, I am amazed by the number of single-story strip malls with vast, half-empty parking lots. Imagine if those properties were rebuilt with commercial/retail businesses on the first two floors and a few extra floors of spacious homes above (with large private terraces, allotment gardens, and community green spaces). Imagine if derelict properties were either renovated or replaced with new, energy-efficient developments. Communities could be revitalized, beautified, improved, and local economies strengthened.

8. There is a large community of homeless people in my neighbourhood. Sadly for them, your idea of housing in the Greenbelt would not help them as they would not qualify for an $800,000 mortgage and do not own a car to get there. Imagine building permanent homes for the homeless, within existing cities, where they would be close to much-needed social supports and employment opportunities, which they could access using existing municipal or regional transit systems. Imagine expanding public transit with the cost-savings from building "in and up".

Perhaps Ontario's government and Ontario's developers are not suited to the challenge? Perhaps Ontario's government and Ontario's developers don't want to do the hard work? Perhaps Ontario's government and Ontario's developers are only interested in their own immediate financial gain, intentionally dismissing the fact that the price will be paid by their grandchildren?

We are 22 years into the 21st century. Perhaps it's time to shelve the 1950s-era policy playbook and make decisions based on current data, science, democratic principles, and research-driven insights.