Bill 23 is not the solution…

Bill 23 is not the solution to fix the housing crisis and will have a huge impact on our precious farmland, wetlands and green spaces. Bill 23 will devastate municipal finances and our ability to fund things such as parks, community centres, transit -- all the amenities a growing community needs. Those costs will be shifted from for-profit developers to taxpayers. It is going to make it more difficult to appeal developments at the Ontario Land Tribunal, and is going to make it way easier for developers to develop what they want without input from council. And as Ottawa’s city staff have outlined in their response, this legislation undermines our municipality’s ability to create desirable streetscapes, promote sustainable development, protect natural habitats and biodiversity. City staff have put forward arguments that this Bill “compromises livability, health and safety of intensified areas.” It does so while also displacing the financial burden of growth from developers to residents.

It also minimizes the amount of greenspace that is required with each development. Which makes no sense….while everyone is changing their policies as we become more and more aware of the effects of climate change, the Ford government is choosing to be ignorant and prioritize profit? The Wild Species 2020: The General Status of Species in Canada report, released in November 2022, found that 1 in 5 wild species is in danger of disappearing from Canada. So while the federal Liberal Government is investing in nature (1.3 billion to create protecting areas and species at-risk conservation), our Conservative provincial government is going against and doing the opposite. I’m curious about reporting that would outline how many trees are being cut down, how many species would be impacted, and how exactly the Ford government plans to magically recreate the acres of the greenbelt that they are developing on elsewhere. Trees improve air quality, reduce heating and cooling costs, minimize our carbon footprint, and increase property value. Mature trees regulate water flow and play a key role in preventing floods and reducing the risk of natural disasters. A mature evergreen tree, for instance, can intercept more than 15 000 liters of water per year. Trees also help to reduce carbon emissions by helping to conserve energy. With the effects of climate change being felt all throughout the world, why is the province of Ontario completely oblivious?

There are many other impacts including conservation authorities and heritage designations. The bill while attempting to fix the housing issue creates a whole number of other issues and was passed during the municipal election when municipalities could not provide proper feedback. Municipalities typically have 1 main revenue source and that's property taxes and to recover the losses they are facing you will either see services cut or increases to your property taxes. Does the province of Ontario really believe the taxpayers should be funding millionaire developers considering the current financial climate?

The passing of this bill took advantage of Ontarians and gives the impression of a biased provincial government. The bill was passed with as little consultation and public feedback as possible and therefore didn’t allow the taxpayers to have a say in what is going on in their province. How are we supposed to fight the experts when we don’t possess the same knowledge or background or TAXPAYER PAID budget to fund and prep the argument over whether this is actually what’s best for our province. This Bill was introduced without consultation, and the post facto consultations planned do not include a hearing in Ottawa, the second largest city in Ontario. Bill 23 should be withdrawn, and the Ford government must consult with Ottawans before implementing this Bill.

Although Bill 23 is marketed as More Homes Built Faster Act, and tries to appear as though it’s sole interest is to address the housing crisis, it actually (along with the broader slew of other recent regulatory changes imposed upon municipalities), will succeed at making for-profit housing development less costly (i.e. more profitable) for developers. They will not, however, make a significant impact on housing affordability, especially not for those who need it most. The trickle-down politics of tax cuts and deregulation, of which this Bill is an expression, have limited efficacy when it comes to achieving the stated goals. It is an approach that has not worked in other contexts over the last 40 years, so why is the government assuming that it’ll work now?

As Ottawa city staff have pointed out in their comments on Bill 23, there are other variables beyond government regulations and taxes that limit the supply of for-profit housing that the market can deliver: i.e, interest rates, availability, labour, material and equipment. If making development less costly for developers does lead to supply of housing beyond what was already coming through the city’s comprehensive zoning bylaw review, there is good reason to be skeptical that this will in turn lead to lower, let alone affordable, prices for those seeking shelter. The real estate market in Ontario and beyond is not characterized by typical supply and demand side forces

It gets worse. City of Ottawa residents are not only being asked to pay more with this Bill, but we are also being asked to take even more of a backseat when it comes to urban planning. What little control we have over environment is now being undermined even further through your government’s changes to delegated authority and the Site Plan Control Process, which undermines the public’s ability to effectively appeal local planning decisions. Planning should not be left to development corporations to privately plan our city on a lot-by-lot basis. Yet, this new legislation is another large step in that direction—all while asking residents to either foot more of the bill or to otherwise accept a lower quality of life.

This approach to intensification will undermine its political viability. It also risks pitting intensification against the fight against climate change—no small feat given the two objectives should be complimentary. By undermining conservation authorities, wetland protections, green building standards, and parkland dedication, this Bill undermines the net environmental benefit that intensification could otherwise provide.

The proposed implementation of this Bill comes on the heels of an imposed urban boundary expansion through the City of Ottawa’s official Plan that will see further encroachments into our green space and bring with it the environmentally destructive accompaniments of sprawl. The existing expansion proposed in the plan was already set to be one of the largest costs to Ottawa taxpayers over the life of the plan; with the increased expansion and the cost reductions for industry in Bill 23, the cost to taxpayers will be the tune of billions of dollars in the decades ahead. This Bill is framed in a way that suggests that we must choose between affordable housing and sufficient infrastructure, greenspace, and other community amenities. The reality is that this Bill delivers neither.

We know that the solutions are out there, but your government must be willing to hear from everyone, not just industry. Bill 23 is presented as a response to the report from the housing affordability task force that you previously established; a taskforce comprised almost entirely of people who profit from real estate development, with zero representation from those who represent tenants, non-profit housing providers, or those who have or who are experiencing homelessness. It is not surprising that the proposed solutions benefit the very same industry. The answer to the affordable housing crisis is not tax cuts, deregulation, or any other free market solution.

Premier Ford told voters before the last election that he listened to the people and will not touch the Greenbelt. He said that he will protect it and all of it’s beauty. I voted Conservative based on a lie from Premier Ford.