Hello, I support leaving the…

Hello,

I support leaving the Greenbelt intact to preserve farmland, forests, wetlands, rivers, and lakes.
These lands provide us with clean water and fresh air. The recommendation to "free up land to build more housing" works only on a planet with infinite resources. Where there is a scarce resource, the decision to take advantage / exploit it needs to be evaluated more seriously.

1. Protect the water supply - this year had some of the worst droughts in history. In Western US the drought is the worst in “1,200 years”; in Europe in “500 years”. The Danube river receded so much this year that for the first time ever it exposed the hulks of dozens of explosives-laden sunken German warships…from during WWII. Ontario’s lakes contain 20% of the world’s freshwater while housing only 0.2% of the world’s population (recently having reached 8 billion). If we can’t come up with a way to preserve our water supply, there isn’t much hope for our planet.

2. Protect farmland and animals - this helps ensure biodiversity. We’re coming off the heels of a pandemic that disrupted our daily lives at best, and caused millions of deaths at worst. The ability of our planet to generate renewable inputs and absorbing unavoidable wastes needs to be considered before we reach such severity and frequency of pandemics that we can’t keep up our defences. Note our farming and animals are already stretched: only <2% of world’s farming is organic (the rest is forced to rely on pesticides), and most animals live in cages and are given antibiotics due to unfathomable living conditions. We cannot continue eroding more farmland this way.

3. The people need somewhere to live - and, yes, if one asks a first grader what to do about that they’ll probably say build a house (although it depends on the first grader, mine would probably consider the environment). As adults with so much technology and scientific knowledge at our disposal we can do better than exploit a protected Greenbelt that is perceived as a “low-hanging fruit”. We can start by acknowledging that there is housing shortages in most parts of the world. However, many locations are land-constrained but manage to fit in housing. Over time the Greenbelt will become only more precious and more valuable. It has the potential to put Ontario/Canada as the most desirable place to live in the world (and possibly one of the only places to live if climate crisis drags on due to climate refugees). The Greenbelt’s value will grow beyond the value created by single family residences where no-one uses half the space (think of your dining room). Here's an example - Central Park in NYC. Taking a large chunk of prime land away from development and turning into a green space sounds like a poor economic decision - but in reality the space has transformed New York, resulted billions if not trillions of additional tourism revenue, helped create "billionaires row" (homes alongside the edge of the park with views of the park). 
 Green space has value...so much value. And it is both financial and existential.

4. Other solutions - address people’s mentality about “financialization” of real estate. People don’t look at housing as a consumption good, they look at it as an “investment”. Part of this is the 100% capital gains tax exemption on primary residences - this needs to be capped similarly to the US. A cap on the capital gain preserves the ability of households to build reasonable wealth while stabilizing pricing and encouraging downsizing in an elderly population from large houses they no longer need so that younger generations can get into the market. Secondly, use technology to compile vital complex data and find insights. Examples include number of people residing in Ontario, number of new housing units built (by type), the number of primary residences sold each year by count and amount of profit claimed, the amount of new infrastructure (schools, hospitals, medical clinics, public transportation) built each year, traffic studies, electricity grid usage etc. All this data is available piecemeal but a comprehensive project would tied it all together and help make better decisions. Then overlap this with existing land usage and see where else we can build these “millions of homes”. Because we can. Looking at nibbling away on land in the Greenbelt because it is the simplest solution is not right. It is also not clear what the financial impact of building these houses specifically in the Greenbelt will be - if it is to address the population growth from immigration ....take look at the statistics on immigration. Most people arrive on low incomes (<$50K) and can't afford $1.5million homes. So how is this helping? We need transparent data to make practically-relevant decisions and leave monopoly playing to the board game.


In conclusion, “freeing up land to build houses quick” is really a fig leaf for “quick profit on development”. To really build the financial wealth and overall health of our people we need to give them the whole package - fresh water, clean air, good education, access to cutting-edge technologies, green infrastructure, and democratic platform for decision-making. The opinions of indigenous communities should also be taken into account. Housing is important, but it’s also about having access to clean water and fresh air. Consider international projects with countries short on land as a way for collaborative decision-making as well. Japan, South Korea, UK etc.

Please keep the Greenbelt intact and we’ll reap the benefits a million times over.