As an Ontario citizen I…

As an Ontario citizen, I oppose Bill 5 and the Special Economic zones act.

This act uses complicated terminology which simply allows complete freedom from environmental regulations for developers, once a special zone is established. The continued biodiversity and ecological stability of Ontario (and Canada) is far more important than any purported increase in the development and construction of any projects, even affordable residential homes and high-occupancy buildings.

I do not believe this act will directly impact the choice by developers to build affordable, efficient housing; nothing I read in proposed Bill 5—nor this act speficially—incentivizes or even encourages the type of residential projects which are desperately needed.

In simple terms, I believe this (de)regulation is designed to service the needs of developers who wish to build expensive, signal dwelling homes on huge plots of undeveloped land surrounding Toronto. This is another attempt to give developers access to Ontario’s “Green Belt” which is land which must be persevered for future generations and the health and longevity of all creatures, as was previously pledged.

This act specifically seems to suggest that building things quickly is worth the potential destabilization (some might say “complete destruction”) of the delicate (some might say “SACRED”) balance of Ontario’s unique ecological habitats. Although I recognize that establishing a special zone would be a process with checks and balances, I am concerned that this tool is uniquely suited to “gift-wrapping” Ontario’s “Green Belt” for preferred developers by reducing oversight and removing the input of specialists and the Ontario public.

Even if this is not a clumsy action by Ontario’s elected officials to collude with specific developers (I strongly suspect undue and inappropriate influence is being applied to Ontario politicians by established, very successful development companies and their owners), even if this is not a blatent attempt to give-away Ontario, I believe it still won’t result in faster build times and won’t encourage the types of homes need.

This act is about saving developers money by reducing or skipping important impact studies and potentially sacrificing entire species at the strong risk of destabilizing our natural environment even further. It’s like y’all haven’t seen a single episode of ‘The Nature of Things’.

As I mentioned above, nothing about Bill 5 seems to put any pressure or onus on developers to finish projects more efficiently or in any way which actually benefits would-be homeowners. The simple supposition that savings to a developer of time and money result in savings to the consumer is ignorant. Privately operated businesses are touted as more effective specifically because those businesses have a primary, singular obligation to make MORE money at ANY cost, yet I’m expected to believe that these same companies won’t keep any potential savings to themselves? Furthermore, the processes by-which land-surveys and impact studies are allowed to concurrently proceed with a developer’s other intial operations already affords the chance to save time (and money) by getting other resources in place. The fact that many developers wait for the completion of all zoning and impact studies before investing any additional resources once-again points to a “profit at all costs” business mentality and suggests that many developers are aware that proposed projects are not environmentally sound and (under current regulations) stand a very real chance of being rejected.

It is the DUTY of the Ontario government to explore broadly and effectively the ways in-which development companies can be incentivized to rapidly produce homes which more Ontario tax-payers can afford, but Bill 5 is not the way.

Ontario must find a way to open the development market to eager, willing new entries, and never at the expense of well-established environmental projections. Ontario needs to do even more to help our entire nation show the World that economic
prosperity can co-exist with the wildlife we depend upon. A beautiful home in a wasteland is not something anyone wants. We can do better. We have the time and resources to find a new way to develop faster, more affordable homes for everyone.