Reducing the Conservation…

Reducing the Conservation Authorities from 36 to 7 would not increase efficiency.
This drastic change would create more confusion and erode the role of the conservation authorities. The proposal indicates that the current system has” led to unpredictable and inconsistent turnaround times for approvals across all conservation authorities, creating uncertainty and delays for builders, landowners and farmers seeking permits, and undermining conservation authorities’ ability to protect communities from floods and natural hazards.”

It seems the conservation authorities have been doing a competent job of “protecting communities from floods and natural hazards” for many years in spite of increased climate events, so it seems the main concern is delays with permits for builders and landowners… seeking permits. If that is the primary issue it could be addressed in consultation with the existing agencies to streamline according to geographical boundaries that make sense from an environmental perspective and revise protocols and red tape that might be outdated without undermining their role to set appropriate limits to any developers who might override needed protections. After all Developers and Builders are not environmental scientists and there needs to be boundaries to protect both current and future communities from climate events.

The conservation authorities have amassed data and protocols doing this job for the past 80 years and have valuable insight on how issues and concerns could be addressed; and if streamlining is actually required, how to best do that. The Ontario Government can facilitate a process of change without centralizing control. The provincial government says it is making these changes to improve efficiency and transparency; however, the provincial government could be more transparent. How will they ensure environmental accountability if they are not even doing meaningful consultation with conservation authorities who have been tasked with protecting environmental safeguards for the past 80 years.

Centralizing control distances decision making from local communities and undermines the role of conservation authorities to do their job more effectively. It can lead to decisions that prioritize developers and builders over environmental needs. Creating a new layer of bureaucracy doesn’t address this concern; it just costs more money and creates more distance from conservation staff and local expertise.

I am concerned that conservation authorities would be pressured to prioritize development agendas over environmental safeguards. If that is the true aim of this proprosal that would likely lead to outcomes that impact the watersheds, damage ecosystems and reduce environmental protections that could lead to more climate events. I urge the Environment Minister and the Government of Ontario to reconsider the 7 proposed conservation authorities and open up genuine consultation and a helpful facilitation process to actually work on making changes to streamline the approval process for development without undermining much needed environmental scientific expertise and local community input.