Comment
I am in favour of economic development, intensification of downtown cores, ensuring livable cities, and speeding up housing development in Ontario. However, all of this MUST be done responsibly and with the safety and security of future generations in mind. Thus, I recommend that all of the subjective language in the guidelines be more clearly defined (or replaced) with language that sets out clear criteria. For example, the guidelines currently state:
a. “Activities are taking place in the area or are being proposed that, in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, are or will be ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT OR STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT to the Ontario economy.”
b. The area is, in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, NO LARGER THAN NECESSARY to encompass the activities described in paragraph 2.
This language essentially means that cabinet can approve anything it deems important, at any size.
The disproportionate reliance on the “opinion of the Minister” to make key determinations fundamentally undermines the purpose of developing criteria in the first instance. This is undemocratic and will absolutely be used to ignore criteria meant to safeguard people and communities.
The environment minister must be of the opinion that the project will benefit communities in Ontario, but wildlife communities are not specifically taken into consideration, even if they are at risk. All life should be considered as humans a part of a web of life and disturbance to other animals will cause disturbance to us. Plus, other animals have a right to exist.
The minister considers whether a “trusted proponent” has a plan for engaging and working with Indigenous communities, but the criteria do not require that the “trusted proponent” uphold Canada’s commitment to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and, in particular, the duty to obtain free, prior and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples regarding initiation of projects. This is absolutely unacceptable. Ontario must uphold our commitments to UNDRIP and to truth and reconciliation - including our DUTY to obtain free, prior ad informed consent.
Submitted October 30, 2025 9:57 AM
Comment on
Proposed legislative and regulatory amendments to enable the Species Conservation Act, 2025
ERO number
025-0909
Comment ID
159074
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status