Defending Canada’s…

Defending Canada’s sovereignty from the U.S. is more than just making us economically independent from the U.S.. It also rejects the idea that government red tape is an impediment to the economy as a excuse to gut laws meant to protect the things that we love and need.
I have seen environmental assessments that were well done and I have seen environmental assessments that were poorly done. The proponent only has themselves to blame for delays for the latter. There is a reason for detailed planning and it has been identified as a uniquely human trait – the ability to imagine the future and prepare for it. Some people are detailed thinkers and some are quite shallow – you can’t really tell just from looking at them – and proponents (trusted or not) have their fair share of either. I had understood that conservatives were risk adverse but it appears that has been changed to being risk blind which is what will happen without an environmental assessment. That isn’t good business.
The laws created so that we can have a more harmonious relationship with nature, who we depend on for life, were created for good reasons. To abandon them for short-term economic gain is short sighted and blind to the long-term consequences of doing so. Nature does not respect human ideas like an “economy” but humans do need to respect Nature’s laws because they work remarkably consistently and violating them is at our own peril. Nature does not need us but we do need nature.
At least some of the laws have been passed because businesses have not shown due caution in their operations. A proponent, however trusted they are, cannot be counted on to protect the public good when their opposing priorities are threatened. People ignorant of the land they wish to benefit from sitting in board rooms many kilometres away are not the best judges of what is best for the public.
We have heard for decades how business success will flow down to the people and yet, now, having two incomes in a family is not enough for many to have the better life that previous generations attained.
Putting significant changes to a number of laws into one bill reduces the time for consideration that changes like this are due without extending the time for consultation. There is not a life periling emergency that might justify such an approach. The phrase “measure twice, cut once” comes to mind as once the cut is done there is no going back.
The proposal suggests there are regulations which are not included with the proposal material. I wouldn’t put my own personal resources at risk without knowing the fine print and it causes alarm bells to ring in my mind when I see this. Minimum information is being provided to explain a huge risk.
The line ups at food banks, the homelessness, the lack of health care services, the housing crisis and the crumbling of our public, secondary and post secondary education point to a government that cannot manage what it already has. Why would we allow it to put more at risk when it, apparently, can’t clean up the mess in front of it.
That the Ford government would suggest that they have a mandate for this bill goes to a flawed approach to governing. There was no mention in their platform of special economic zones and there is no life threatening emergency to justify such an approach.
The Ford government has made no attempt to layout the case for any of the changes being proposed. When I think of special economic zones I think of the UAE and the stories in the press describing what are, effectively, indentured servants doing construction work without safeguards to their safety.
There is a term for when a leader alone determines the law of the land without oversight, accountability and limits and the term is not special economic zone.
I oppose this act and all of it’s changes and I ask that it be stopped. This law is not good for the people of Ontario. I can’t imagine, in any circumstance, where this law is the will of the people.