I don't see how the proposed…

I don't see how the proposed amendments can be considered "for the people" unless "the people" are limited to those who find current regulations inconvenient, and who would see improved profits if current protections were to be relaxed.

The current government does not seem to comprehend (or perhaps comprehends too well) that when given free reign, a business will take any advantage in seeking to maximise profitability. Several of the proposed changes (for instance increasing the number of children an unlicensed carer may mind, or eliminating Greenbelt development bans) are in place not because they're "good for business", but precisely because it is clear that if we don't protect children and the environment they'll be exploited.

The cynical titling of the proposed act attempts to distract from the unfortunate contents. I fail to see how any of this can be reducing "red tape" or acting in the best interests of Ontarians in general.