I am responding to Bill 132…

I am responding to Bill 132.

Omnibus bills do not not allow proper public debate and scrutiny with so many issues and items in one piece of legislation. Also, the short timelines for comments and hearings inhibit in-depth consultation and hinder your parliamentary role and responsibility in reviewing and debating legislation. Omnibus bills and rushed legislation are risks to the integrity of our democratic process.

It is alarming that this bill includes changes to more than 14 pieces of environmental legislation. Along with a wide range of public policy priorities, CFUW advocates nationally, provincially, and locally for many environmental issues, including pollution controls and water protections. You may also know that leadership from CFUW Stratford was instrumental in banning cosmetic pesticides locally and provincially.

Echoing the concerns of several environmental advocacy groups in this province, we call for the following changes to Bill 132:

- Retain the current restrictions on pesticides: While we understand that the government’s intent is to maintain the cosmetic pesticide ban, Bill 132 introduces changes in wording to Ontario’s Pesticide Regulations that could potentially allow the reintroduction of cosmetic pesticides that are currently prohibited and might also permit the approval of new pesticides even more swiftly without sufficient safety testing. We support strong wording and the original language for “low-risk criteria” and ask the government not to risk weakening the cosmetic pesticide ban.

Other changes proposed will undermine Ontario‘s restrictions on the neonicotinoid insecticides (neonics) — which are linked to bee mortality — by removing the requirement for seed vendors to report sales numbers for treated and untreated seeds, and for the government to publicly post seed sales data. The amendments would also eliminate third-party assessment of pest threats as a requirement for accessing the neonic treated seeds under the current rules. These public accountability mechanisms are key in ensuring public confidence in the regulatory system. We are concerned that these changes could mean increased use of bee-killing neonic pesticides.

- Maintain municipal powers to protect ground water: Proposed changes to the Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) would outlaw the use of municipal zoning bylaws to prevent aggregate operations from digging beneath the water table. We agree with Wellington Water Watchers, Ontario Nature, and Environmental Defence that this change "poses a dangerous threat to local groundwater supplies and quality.” (https://ontarionature.org/news-release/ontario-blocks-efforts-to-protec…) These changes will also prevent municipalities from implementing zoning restrictions on aggregate development on Crown land within their boundaries. This could impact many communities across Ontario.

- Strengthen deterrents against water pollution: The proposals to repeal regulations regarding industrial wastewater (sewage, toxic sludge, and chemical waste) released into waterways and to cap pollution fines at $200,000 would weaken pollution protections. Currently water pollution fines are $100,000 per day which encourages prompt reaction to spills. The targeted regulations create standardized rules for environmentally harmful industries including pulp and paper mills, steel plants, oil refineries, and mineral extraction. We support strengthening deterrents against water pollution, not weakening them.