This proposal is so deeply…

This proposal is so deeply flawed that I am only going to comment on what I feel are the worst aspects of the bill.
The removal of local planning policy is totally wrong, as each community MUST have a say in how their communities grow and develop. Many communities, including my own, the Waterloo Region, have hammered out Official Plans that balance growth and environmental concerns, and this policy proposes to toss all of that out, and dictate how growth will occur. This is clearly wrong and antidemocratic.
Third Part Appeals are also part of local input. For example, in our area, a gravel pit was proposed that would have severely compromised the drinking water for thousands of people., This was brought forth through third party appeals. This was a case of the "benefit" to a few (the gravel pit developers) vs the benefit to many people (drinking water). Water id necessary to life, gravel is not.
The local conservation authorities are the groups who look at the entire region and can tie together the various environmental outcomes of a particular action. For example, a development could be proposed, and it's the conservation authorities that could say, "Hey, wait a minute, that development is on a flood plain, and all of these houses will have flooded basements if we have a significant rainstorm." this bill would limit that, and as a result, over zealous developers can build doomed developments that will be a headache to anyone who buys a house there. We need the long term vision of the conservation authorities to limit this sort of poor planning.
This policy is so poorly planned that it will not Build More Homes Faster, but Build Some Homes More Poorly. I am totally apposed to this proposed policy.