The subjective language in…

The subjective language in the guidelines should be clearly defined or replaced with language that sets out clear criteria. For example, the guidelines currently state:

“Activities are taking place in the area or are being proposed that, in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, are or will be economically significant or strategically important to the Ontario economy.”

The area is, in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, no larger than necessary to encompass the activities described in paragraph 2.

At present, the above language means that cabinet can approve anything it deems important, at any size.

The disproportionate reliance on the “opinion of the Minister” to make key determinations fundamentally undermines the purpose of developing criteria in the first instance.

The environment minister must be of the opinion that the project will benefit communities in Ontario, but wildlife communities are not specifically taken into consideration, even if they are at risk.

The minister considers whether a “trusted proponent” has a plan for engaging and working with Indigenous communities, but the criteria do not require that the “trusted proponent” uphold Canada’s commitment to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and, in particular, the duty to obtain free, prior and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples regarding initiation of projects.