I am opposed to the proposed…

I am opposed to the proposed changes to the Greenbelt. This is not the answer. It does not represent responsible growth.

Once paved under by new subdivisions, our previous farmlands are gone forever. Only 3.2% of Canada’s total landmass is arable. We cannot afford to further erode the small amount of farmland we have.

The pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions, and the inflationary impacts of rising fuel prices at the grocery checkout, surely have demonstrated the importance of food sovereignty. An undermining of our future ability to feed ourselves is not responsible growth.

The February 8, 2022 Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force importantly noted:

— a shortage of land isn’t the cause of the problem. Land is available, both inside the existing built-up areas and on undeveloped land outside greenbelts

— We need to make better use of land … to create more housing, we need to modernize our zoning rules.

— Most of the solution must come from densification.

— Underused and vacant commercial and industrial properties are another potential source of land for housing.

— Greenbelts and other environmentally sensitive areas must be protected, and farms provide food and food security. Relying too heavily on undeveloped land would whittle away too much of the already small share of land devoted to agriculture.

Not only our farmlands, but our wetlands are important. They control erosion. They purify our water. They stabilize our shorelines. They offer flood protection.

Our conservation areas are important as well. They protect our watersheds. They enhance carbon storage and clean our air. They help mitigate extreme weather events.

Add to the Greenbelt lands by all means! But do not remove any lands currently within it.

We need to continue to provide permanent protection to our agricultural land base and to the ecological and hydrological features and areas previously marked for protection. Responsible growth does not mean impinging on ecologically sensitive areas.

Both responsible growth and the building of 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years can be achieved by continuing to adhere to the original plan — ie. intensification within existing urban boundaries.

Hold firm on those boundaries! I will cite another statistic: Only one-half of one percent of all the land in Canada is Class 1 agricultural — prime farmland.

In my own municipality, what were our Class 1 lands have largely been lost to urbanization. Those that remain meet all these criteria:

— The lands are adjacent to existing settlement areas
— The lands are adjacent to the edge of the Greenbelt area boundary
— The lands have the potential ability to be serviced in the near-term with local infrastructure upgrades to be entirely funded by proponents
— The lands proposed for removal have the characteristics that would enable housing to be built in the near-term.

My municipality’s remaining Class 1 lands, by these considerations, are prime candidate sites for future and near-term housing development. So tempting and so easy to include them in the urban boundary: So tenuous the protection and so easy for this small remnant to be permanently last as well.

Do not allow any farmlands, wetlands and protected areas to be removed from the Greenbelt! As the Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force noted earlier this year: There area plenty of places to build homes without eroding the Greenbelt.