Dear Conservative government…

Dear Conservative government,
I would like to remind you what good governance is - and how Bill 66 S. 10 and S. 5 was presented is not an example of good governance.
Good governance is an exercise by political leaders for the well being of citizens. Proper and effective use of resources is demonstrated by good leaders. Given that the most important needs of citizens is clean air, clean water, safe food and a healthy environment to sustain these needs, these sections of Bill 66 do neither.
Good governance is participatory and representative. By pushing the Bill through over Christmas break, it was apparent that the government was trying to limit any real participation by the public or municipalities who will be directly impacted by these changes. Bill 66 Section 10 eliminates any public participation and appeals process for real public concerns around development if the municipality chooses to pass a bylaw.
Good governance should be consensus oriented and accountable to All the people being represented, not just a few. Through the Planning Act, municipalities undergo a rigorous, thoughtful and public oriented process under their Official Plans. They have already established adequate development lands for employment. There are 16,742 vacant hectares of land currently available. There is no need to risk our Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine or Niagara Escarpment which provides the citizens of Ontario with much of its available farmland and provides many of its residence with clean drinking water. Since the Moraine feeds sits on 2 watersheds, negatively impacting this feature has serious consequences for a huge geographical area. As your environment ministry knows, cleaning contaminated groundwater is not an easy task.
Good governance should be competent. Risk assessment needs to be a top priority for the government when passing laws. Bill 66 S 10 does not seem to adequately consider the risk to farmland, drinking water or climate change. By carving into the protected areas, urban sprawl is encouraged. As you know our urban infrastructure is seriously insufficient. Exacerbating this with more sprawl is unconscionable and contributes more carbon emissions to the air as commuters sit idling in traffic every morning and evening. By repealing the Toxic Reductions Act without replacing it puts Ontario citizens at risk.
Good governance is operating via rule of law, but when the law is being changed to the detriment of the public, the government must be held accountable. They need to be responsive to the best interest of the public, ensuring the basic needs of all are equitably distributed. Our basic needs for clean air, water, food and a healthy environment to sustain those needs have to be the top priority of the government. As such, it is recommended that Section 10 be deleted and REPLACED with a clear, delineated area in which no development can take place in perpetuity. This will allow an equitable, level playing field where all know the rules around development lands vs. the piecemeal approach recommended in Bill 66. I sincerely hope our government will do what’s in the best interest of us all. The decisions of today will have serious consequences for tomorrow. What will be your legacy??