I don't understand why we…

I understand some of these proposed amendments. For instance being able to delay the protections (although 3 years seems like a significant delay), while current business owners work to address concerns over newly listed species. But I can not get over the pay your way out of / in lieu of protections.

This is dangerous and has shown to not work effectively in the past. When it comes down to it I believe most Project proponents would be inclined to pay a one time or multi year penalty to have a species at risk issue overlooked then have to follow through with remediation or monitoring commitments. If this becomes standard practice species at risk will suffer (more then they currently are).

Even if the fines/payments are collected by our government, and somehow effectively utilized (not a specialty of the Government whether Conservative or Liberally run). The fines would have to be large enough to cover the costs of some type of remediation/compensation, and the ongoing monitoring to ensure whatever remediation is serving the purpose to carry on the current level of species protection. In general, it would be cheaper for the Project owner to carry out this work by hiring a private consultant to carry out this work, as opposed to paying the government to get it done (again running/spending efficiently is not a specialty of the government). If the fines/payments are not suitably large to fulfill all the necessary work, either tax payers will be required to pay the remainder or the Species will ultimately receive reduced or no protection (more likely).

Overall this change will reduce the effectiveness of the legislation at fulfilling its purpose, protecting endangered and threatened species. A tradeoff for some potential marginal economic benefits.