Growth, but at what cost?
Last year the City of Kawartha Lakes announced the osprey as its Official Bird. This wasn’t simply a catchy branding exercise. The designation celebrated the city’s vibrant natural heritage and the community’s own conservation efforts to help the bird’s populations rebound from dangerously low numbers. It expressed a commitment to conservation of our natural environment.
Who would have thought that one year later, this sort of commitment would be belittled as the concern of “radical environmentalists” by none other than Ontario’s Premier, Doug Ford. This was his response to the opposition of a broad range of individuals and organizations to his government’s Bill 5.
Bill 5 is one of those omnibus bills that amends many pieces of legislation. This one amends environmental protection and assessment, and heritage protection laws. It repeals the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and replaces it with a weaker law. It amends various laws to push energy, infrastructure and mining projects, regardless of environment, Indigenous, and community concerns. It conjures up “special economic zones” to drive growth at all costs.
Open season on endangered species
Similar to Donald Trump’s targeting of the U.S. Endangered Species Act as an impediment to development, Bill 5 will require decision-makers to include socio-economic considerations and the need for growth when considering protection of endangered species. And, like Trump’s proposed change to the definition of “harm”, which would result in a narrow definition of ‘habitat’, Bill 5 changes the definition of habitat in the ESA to one, that for an endangered bird would just mean its nest and immediate surrounding area. (More than 100 conservation groups have written a letter opposing the Bill’s changes to the ESA)
If this was just a summary of the Bill’s impact on efforts to protect endangered species and improve biodiversity, that alone would be reason to jettison it. Unfortunately, there’s more.
“Special Economic Zones” – a power grab
Rather than spelling out what is actually meant by Special Economic Zones – which were not even mentioned in the recent Ontario election – the Bill lets a cabinet minister decide on the “designated projects” and who will be “trusted proponents” of these zones. It allows for these projects to be exempted from provincial laws and regulations and even municipal by-laws.
Much concern has been expressed about individual ministers or cabinet, rather than the entire government make these sorts of decisions. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association described the Bill as a “power grab” that lets cabinet “do away with legal safeguards that protect vulnerable communities and Indigenous people, paving the way for corporations to bypass labour and environmental laws.”
The “Ring of Fire” in the treaty lands of the James Bay Lowlands of Northern Ontario is a government priority for a Special Economic Zone, to mine critical minerals there. This is an area known to Indigenous peoples as “the Breathing Lands.” It is one of the largest carbon sinks in the world. The Bill was drafted without consultation with the Indigenous communities. After weeks of opposition from Indigenous leaders, Ford’s government announced it will amend the Bill to add the duty to consult with First Nations, but is forging ahead to pass the bill without actually meeting with these communities.
What could Bill 5 mean for communities like Kawartha Lakes, where preservation of nature and agricultural land are important concerns?
One example in the Bill is its treatment of the proposed expansion of the privately-owned Dresden landfill in the municipality of Chatham-Kent. While not actually designating it as a “special economic zone”, the Bill exempts the proposal from an environmental assessment. This erases the decision of Ford’s previous Environment Minister that there would indeed be one.
Is it a coincidence that the landfill’s owners, family members and people associated with their businesses have donatedmore than $200,000 to the Progressive Conservatives since they came to power in 2018? Who knows. But to say the people of Chatham-Kent are upset would be an understatement. (“I’m really pissed about this”, said the Chatham-Kent Mayor.) Understandably. The proposed expansion involves increasing the daily waste rate from 75 tonnes to 6000 tonnes, and moving operations to 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The Chatham-Kent Council unanimously passed a motion calling on the provincial government to reject the landfill’s application, or, at the very least, allow an environmental assessment to go ahead. So far, their concerns have fallen on deaf ears.
Could something like this happen here?
– Moya Beall is a member of SCAN! Kawartha
I wonder if it is also a coincidence that the City of Kawartha Lakes chose a predator for its official bird. What if it eats all the fish and begins to prey on small pets? Pretty unlikely, right? Like Ontario creating an environmental disaster.
It is important to consider all sides of the issue. We rarely hear the voices of Indigenous residents of Ontario who desperately want the jobs that development can bring to their communities. (Just like the voices of IRS graduates who credit the education they received to their success are never heard, silenced by politically-interested censure.)
it is easy to forget too why development has been fast-tracked in Canada. It is to create independence from the USA so that we don’t get gobbled up as another state.
It is hyperbolic to call development an “open season on endangered species”. Were that true, we’d see trophy hunters coming to (and from within) Canada to hunt to extinction all our endangered wildlife.
Comparing Premier Ford to President Trump is also a fetch too far; they are oil and water; they don’t mix.
Sometimes the keepers of the green move into rural communities, develop their own little pieces of paradise, then work like crazy to make sure no one else enjoys what they do, all in the name of conservation.
So, a little give and take is in order. All development projects will consult with Indigenous stakeholders who hopefully listen to their youth entrepreneurs who want a place at the table as CEOs and owners of development corporations.
We humans are part of nature, not its owners. We must give and take accordingly.