I strongly oppose this…

I strongly oppose this proposal. This proposal provides no evidence that habitat protections are preventing development. The proposal provides no evidence that habitat regulations cannot be overcome with appropriate planning. The proposal has not considered the ecological, social and economic benefits afforded through protection of endangered species habitat.

An alternative strategy would be to resource the implementation of the ESA by MECP relative to the development pressures so that permitting can meet planning timelines while protecting critical habitat. The ESA has all the regulations in place to enable sustainable development. Pointing to a convenient excuse and distraction with tariffs is not an acceptable reason when the implementation of the ESA has not been resourced appropriately. Allocate appropriate staff and resources to developers to mitigate to a reasonable extent and offset where they cannot.

Promptly reconsider this proposal and alternative ways to get to the same economic outcomes while maintaining the ESA in its current framework.