There are two serious…

There are two serious objections I would have to this Schedule (or this part of it).
First, it would allow the introduction of market principles into public spaces such as the Greenbelt. This would endanger both the aquafers we rely on for drinking water, and the agricultural land we need for food self-sufficiency. Many of the currently-in-place regulations would be weakened or eliminated, and I have real concerns that this would lead to a severe deterioration of the land that the Golden Horseshoe relies on as a buffer, now and into the future. Once this land is developped, it will never again be farmland or natural spaces. Once the aquafer is polluted, it will be decades before it is again clean. Our children rely on us fo keep them safe, and this is one are where we can do this. I am opposed to the reduction in regulation, and the opening of this land to (potential) development.
Secondly, there is no appropriate path to appeal or ask for a second opinion for any decision made. If land is put up for development, the citizens cannot legally oppose this decision. How can citizens be sure that there is adequate input from them into the decision-making process, and that this is not geared to benefit the rich against the average person?
This is a bad Schedule, and should be abandoned, in my opinion. There is nothing to recommend it.