I do not support the…

I do not support the proposed amendments to the Greenbelt area regulation as the government has made easily accessible to the public the process of selection and the selection criteria used to identify the proposed areas of the greenbelt and other protected areas that will be removed from their protected status for future development. What can be inferred from the areas selected and the information provided on the government website, these areas were selected based on their proximity to already developed areas and infrastructures. There seems to be no consideration of the environmental and social-cultural values of these sections of land to local communities. From the maps provided, it is unclear as to what types of lands have been selected and whether these lands are suitable for agricultural purposes or provide significant ecological services to those (human and non-human) that use them. It is also unclear whether these lands contain significant habitats for species protected in under the Species at Risk Act or contain significant stopping places for migratory birds - many of which are protected under the federal Migratory Birds Convention Act. Furthermore, there appears to have been no publicly available analysis is of why the area that will be added to the Greenbelt is sufficient enough to offset any future impacts from the development of the areas that will be removed from the Greenbelt. Is the area that will be added of equal or significantly greater ecological, social, economic, cultural, and environmental value that all of the areas that will be taken away from the Greenbelt? Or is it merely the same surface area? Answers to these questions should be readily accessible to the public.

To the knowledge of the public, the government has not conducted sufficient or any analysis of the environmental impacts of removing the proposed areas from the Greenbelt and other protected areas on both a local and regional scale. Moreover, there has been no indication of a potential regional or local environmental impact assessment of the development of the proposed areas into residential/urban environments. Most, if not all of the proposed areas occupy the head waters of the many watershed that feed into Lake Ontario. Future development of these areas can result in a decrease in water quality and have impacts of drinking water resources as well as impacts on aquatic ecosystems.

Lastly the proposed amendments set a dangerous legal precedent for the further reduction of the Greenbelt and other protected areas. These areas should remain protected as they have significant environmental, ecological, and social-cultural benefits. While the need for more affordable housing is entirely valid and timely, this need cannot be used as a means of pushing through changes to legislations and regulations to avoid accountability for proper decision making processes. The hyper-focus on economic and social benefits and the willful ignorance of environmental and long-term costs is a constant flaw in decision-making processes at all level of governments and it is disappointing to see it continued by the current provincial government.