I totally object to this…

I totally object to this proposed reduction in the oversight and number of conservation authorities.

Fewer eyes means much less information garnered, much less expertise, and protection. This danger is obviously present when one looks with open eyes at what the conservation authorities are responsible for generally, and the many detailed hazards and details of the large land area, and surface waters and wetlands that are present.

I am particularly concerned that the primary purpose is to allow the speeding up of more development applications and permissions. In my experience, it is a fact that the conservation authority oversight is what needs more protection, not less. This proposal is a radical reduction in oversight, and will for certain lead to multifaceted radical effects.

It is also certain that reducing eyes, observations, factors, and natural processes, will result in missed impacts and certain disasters somewhere.

Development in Ontario is already much favoured with regulatory laxity in a world that is rapidly showing the steady loss of environmental integrity, and needs stricter oversight, but this proposal is in effect giving the already very wealthy and politically favoured development industry yet another pecuniary subsidy and monetary value by cashing in more of the services of the the environment and ecological integrity of water.

I say that the only real beneficiary is the development industry, and that is the only reason this proposal is being brought forth.