As an archaeologist in this…

As an archaeologist in this province for the last 12 years, I firmly disagree with the underlying notion of this Bill 5 that archaeological requirements are red tape. Good archaeology does not have to cause delays and should be viewed as an asset to any project. When brought in early, archaeologists can employ sophisticated predictive modelling and screening techniques to help avoid and protect critical
archaeological sites. The province should view archaeological requirements as a tangible way to ensure
all citizens of Ontario can benefit from these priority projects.

Much of the delays we observe as professional archaeologists hired to facilitate important provincial projects is with the Ministry's own backlog due to chronic underfunding of it's heritage divisions.

So-called Ontario has witnessed at least 13,000 years of Indigenous history before settler occupation, which results in a non-renewable legacy in and on the land for all Ontarians to learn from. Indeed, Canada would not exist at all without Indigenous communities who helped stave off American expansionism during the War of 1812. Settlers have added to this archaeological legacy since the early 1600s. Surely the Province would prefer to have support from all descendant communities for priority projects and especially to have Indigenous leaders as allies in the threat to our sovereignty.

We need to learn from past lessons. Indigenous participation and community support are key to the future of Ontario. Ensuring archaeology has an important voice in a project – rather than remove it all together – is the only path forward, especially in historically underrepresented areas like northern Ontario, where the encroachment of development is happening more and more. Northern and remote Indigenous communities have already been subject to un-impeded development for a century, the outcomes of which have been notoriously damaging to multiple generations, e.g., Asabiinyashkosiwagong Nitam-Anishinaabeg (Grassy Narrows) mercury poisoning. Natural and cultural heritage are inextricably linked, and human beings are not separate from the natural world. Deregulating environmental and archaeological assessments to prioritize economic gain is short-sighted, let alone in complete defiance of any commitment to Truth and Reconciliation that the Ontario government espouses to have.

We therefore ask the Province to reconsider its proposal to exempt provincial priority projects from
archaeological requirements. A more proactive and constructive approach to addressing any
perceived concerns about “efficiency” or “delay” would be seeking measures whereby the Province
can improve its own internal regulatory and review operations as they relate to archaeology.