Hello, I am a concerned…

Hello,

I am a concerned student of environmental sciences and studies who has participated and organized a series of rallies in resistance to Bill 23. I'm hopeful that community concerns are not overrun by the "bold" proposals within this legislation, and am submitting my comment in hopes of sharing some of these concerns. This is an omnibus bill, where proposals to develop on protected lands will result in a multiplicity of irreversible impacts, which is why so many Ontarians, Indigenous Peoples, and activists are calling for repeal.

Below are listed outlines to the recommended changes to this bill, in hopes that these areas will be thoroughly considered for review. All those who are impacted by unfair wage rates, systemic racism, and homelessness agree that there is a housing crisis on hand, yet understand that Bill 23 is not the answer. We would rather wait for repeals, reform, and adequate planning, putting the vast majority at risk, then to have this Bill be moved to the next stage. This Bill is being called out for the damages it will cause within municipal deficits, tax increases, vulnerable ecosystems, species at risk, Indigenous inherent and Treaty rights, sustainable food systems, democracy, accessible and affordable housing, and much, much more.

See the below list for recommended amendments.

1. Schedules 1 and 9 – Restore Municipal Agency in Climate Planning and Impacts to Wetlands

Schedules 1 and 9 aim to strip several municipalities of their authority to uphold green development standards in response to climate change impacts, which dangerously puts local response to climate change at risk and imposes a decision-making process that balances on the precipice of authoritarianism. Regarding Schedules 1 and 9, high-density urban spaces are currently impacted by heat island effects from lack of green space. The answer here is not to create more "grey-belt" areas, rather to improve existing amenities and infrastructure to support affordable, accessible, and quality housing while addressing lack of green space through sustainable urban planning. If the Greenbelt is to be developed, anticipated results will include increased flooding events, which will place low-income and high-density residents at risk, particularly as development is proposed in conjunction with wetland removals along natural boundary zones (McClenaghan, 2022).

Wetlands provide us with free ecosystem services, which include regulating water flow, filtering polluted rainwater, sequestering carbon, and controlling flooding. These services are key components as to why Ontario experiences relatively low levels of urban water-related disasters, a critical consideration when planning for anticipated impacts of climate change. Wetlands also serve innumerable ecological services which cannot be overlooked nor ignored, including habitat for migratory birds, endangered species, and vital components towards human health. These ancient systems developed over thousands of years are incredibly complex, and it is well researched that duplicating them in other areas to mitigate their loss seldom works. There is no way we can replicate intact ecological function of these aquatic systems.

To protect these free services provided by wetlands, conservation agencies perform standardized assessments in the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System to be able to identify Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW) (Bell, 2022). With proposals from Bill 23, wetlands will be at risk of losing this designation and will no longer benefit from decades of protective measures (Bell, 2022). Additionally, by removing PSW designations, inevitable risks associated with climate change includes billions of dollars of flood damages in high density areas, and, more importantly, will result in global biodiversity loss. Proposals in Bill 23 to offset the loss of wetlands from development by recreating them elsewhere will be essentially ineffective and a waste of resources, time, and effort. The only option should be to maintain and improve the current designations and protection systems in place to prevent these immense, compounding losses (Bell, 2022).

Carbon concentrations, a major contributor to climate change, will also skyrocket with increased building and traffic emissions, especially with the removal of wetlands and wooded areas. Beyond local emission concerns, impacts of "grasshopper effects" of cycling atmospheric Greenhouse Gas have been well documented and experienced in northern communities since the mid-20th century. These communities contribute minimally to emissions but experience the worst of climate change. By removing necessary carbon sinks found in the Greenbelt will result in long-term and irreversible impacts to communities far outside the GTA. By removing the agency of municipal governments to anticipate local climate impacts will therefore not only have regional ramifications but will impact broader global communities. We ask that section 2 of Schedule 1 and section 11 of Schedule 9 be removed so agency is returned to municipalities, who can advocate for local climate protection and adequate development planning.

2. Schedules 2, 7, and 9 – Restore Agency of Conservation Authorities for the Protection of Watersheds and Natural Heritage

As watersheds travel across local, regional, and international boundaries, the role of
Conservation Authorities (CA) in South-Central Ontario involves advocating for and specializing in comprehensive environmental and municipal planning. CA expertise in local, regional, and global ecological functioning is critical for consulting long-term climate preparation and effective development strategies. CAs are responsible for restoring and protecting Ontario’s natural heritage (i.e., threatened habitats like wetlands and grasslands) from harmful development activities which contribute pollution, threats to biodiversity, and hazards to human health (McClenaghan, 2022). These agencies safeguard the last remaining sources of ecological integrity in this region of Ontario and were established to address these exact concerns during South-Central Ontario’s urban sprawl and industrialization in the mid-twentieth century.

For these reasons, and many more not listed in this letter, we ask that Schedule 2 be amended to restore Conservation Authorities’ agency to participate in development proposals, issue and regulate permits, to be consultants of associated development risks during municipal planning efforts, and recommend that CA’s ability to protect designated natural heritage spaces be reinstated in this Bill (McClenaghan, 2022). Other sections recommended to be deleted and amended can be found in the letter prepared by the Canadian Environmental Law Association, which should be comprehensively reviewed and implemented (McClenaghan, 2022).

3. Schedules 7 and 9 – Public and Third-Party Appeal Rights to Consult

In addition to Bill 23 advocating for stripping agency of municipalities and Conservation Authorities, public oppourtunities to challenge poor planning are being made ineffectual and unaffordable through this Bill, despite rights laid out in the Planning Act (McClenaghan, 2022, p.p. 4). Members of the public who wish to appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal about environmental concerns will now be subjected to unnecessary costs for hearings. This will serve as a major barrier for public participation in this process, as the rise in fees will effectively prevent low-income earners from challenging poor planning, unnecessary development, and environmental and human health issues. In addition, section 9 proposes the erasure of third-party appeal rights, which are similarly in place to allow public discourse surrounding concerns about zoning change impacts to environment conditions. Ensuring fair oppourtunities for public engagement in planning efforts are the foundations of a democratic system. We ask that sections in Schedule 7 and 9 that relate to costs of appeals and that termination of third-party appeal rights be unequivocally revoked to protect democratic rights (McClenaghan, 2022, p.p. 5).

4. Schedules 4 and 9 – Affordable Housing

It’s clear that there is a need for affordable housing, and it cannot be denied that solutions do need to be made swiftly. However, it is suspected that the provincial government is using inflated estimates on housing supply to justify excessive development and sprawl into the Greenbelt (McClenaghan, 2022, p.p. 6). There is also concerns being circulated regarding the manner of land purchasing in the Greenbelt, as developers have been buying these lands prior to Bill 23's release (Jones & Brockbank, 2022; Moore & Mahoney, 2022). Some of these developers have been lobbyists and others have donated thousands towards recent PC elections. There are suspicions as to why land has been purchased before release of Bill 23 to the public, and why developers felt secure in purchasing protected lands without an upcoming safety-blanket.

There are already suitable areas for housing development available with relevant infrastructures in place, such as water and power supplies, that will support goals to provide affordable housing without extending into protected green spaces. Utilizing pre-existing structures and urban spaces will allow for the crisis to be addressed and allow for the prevention of further economic and environmental degradation.

Concluding Message

By removing fair oppourtunities for timely public response and consultation with diverse voices, as well as the removal of Conservation Authorities power and municipalities directive towards local planning and climate prevention, Bill 23 sends a clear message that government officials desire minimal democratic processes. It's clear that a lack of environmental planning and protections are directly related to lining developer pockets and securing political position with lobbyists. This incredibly dangerous prospect thus threatens due democratic processes and is particularly harmful to communities vulnerable to climate impacts, who are unjustly removed from land-based decision-making processes and disproportionally impacted by poor urban planning. Exclusion from decision-making includes the many distinct Indigenous communities of these regions, whose inherent and Treaty rights to self-determination, land-based decision-making, and sovereignty are being violated. Constant requests for reconciliations through meaningful consultations are ignored by colonial governments, and is directly connected to land dispossession, genocide, and colonial extraction of Indigenous stewardship, which is perpetuated by the actions taken to get this Bill published and passed. It is requested that legislators take action to invite diverse voices and meaningfully consult with them on matters that impact their communities, who are at highest risk of impact from the proposals in this Bill.

Bill 23 clearly poses numerous interconnected threats to ecological function and services, where biodiversity and endangered species will be threatened by the removal of intact ecosystems, migratory pathways will be disrupted by increased habitat fragmentation, and climate change will be exacerbated. We humbly ask for deep consideration of all those that are left out of this Bill, non-human beings and the vitality of the landscape, once vibrant and full of life, and request that the amendments and removals in this letter be duly considered. Our voices will not be silenced in matters of the environmental, human, and non-human rights, and we hope that the values and goals that lay the foundations for true democratic processes are as important to you as they are to us.

References:

Bell, A. (2022, November 16). Bill 23 – What You Need to Know. Ontario Nature. https://ontarionature.org/bill-23-what-you-need-to-know-blog/

Jones, R. P., & Brockbank, N. (2022, November 11). Who are the GTA developers set to benefit from Ford government’s Greenbelt land swap? Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/gta-developers-own-greenbelt-lan…

McClenaghan, T. (2022). Written Submission to Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy. In Canadian Environmental Law Association. https://cela.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CELA-letter-to-Standing-Comm…

Moore, O., & Mahoney, J. (2022, November 28). Developers who bought Ontario Greenbelt land linked to Ford government. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-sales-of-greenbelt-land-…