{"id":914319,"date":"2022-12-09T17:54:22","date_gmt":"2022-12-09T17:54:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/environmentaldefence.ca\/?p=36893"},"modified":"2022-12-09T17:54:22","modified_gmt":"2022-12-09T17:54:22","slug":"important-things-you-should-know-about-the-ontario-governments-six-major-recent-attacks-on-farms-forests-wetlands-and-livable-communities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2022\/12\/09\/important-things-you-should-know-about-the-ontario-governments-six-major-recent-attacks-on-farms-forests-wetlands-and-livable-communities\/","title":{"rendered":"Important things you should know about the Ontario government\u2019s six major recent attacks on farms, forests, wetlands, and livable communities"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"growth<\/div>

There is some understandable confusion about what-is-what in the complex package of attacks being undertaken by the Ontario government on environmental protection, municipal planning, livable communities and the Greenbelt.<\/p>\n

So we thought it would be useful to lay it all out in one place in an abbreviated form to help you understand how it all fits together \u2013 and where you and your community can best engage to take action against these attacks on the environment.<\/p>\n

What is the goal of this package of the Ontario government\u2019s anti-environment actions?<\/h3>\n

In simple terms, the provincial government\u2019s rapid dismantling of Ontario\u2019s systems for flood prevention, regional land use planning, infrastructure financing and for the protection of habitat and farmland, is designed to force municipalities to abandon efforts to grow sustainably, and redirect investment and scarce resources to the least efficient, most environmentally harmful forms of development.<\/p>\n

While the Ontario government has tried to present this onslaught of upheavals as if it were a response to the very real shortage of low-cost homes, and \u201cfamily\u201d homes in particular, that narrative is so clearly incompatible with the facts that the government cannot plausibly believe it is true.<\/strong> These changes are likely to deliver fewer homes, not more, especially in the places where they\u2019re most desperately needed and in the types that are most needed and affordable.<\/p>\n

Our view, based on all the evidence available, is that the government is trying to take advantage of the very real crisis in housing affordability and use it to deliver their actual agenda: creating a pretext for rapid car-dependent sprawl onto large areas of rural farmland owned by well-connected land speculators, and freeing those who own prime pockets of urban land from any obligation to build in a socially and environmentally sustainable way.<\/p>\n

While Ontarians desperate for homes they can afford benefit from rules that direct housing to existing neighborhoods and built up areas, and mandate efficient use of land and floor space, land speculators who have recently stockpiled vast swathes of the Greater Golden Horseshoe\u2019s best remaining farmland wetlands and wild places want just the opposite.<\/p>\n

More broadly, the most useful way to understand the entire package of anti-environment attacks is to recognize it as nothing more than a grab-bag of made-to-order laws and policies designed to fulfill the self-interested \u201cwish lists\u201d of the best-connected real estate investors. There is a vast chasm between the forms of development that maximize the supply of homes people need, fight car-dependency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and conserve farmland and natural places, and those forms of development which maximize profit for the best-connected landowners.<\/p>\n

Likewise, when it comes to what gets built in existing neighborhoods, meeting housing need and enhancing affordability would require policies aimed at quickly adding large numbers of low-cost homes that are practical for all household types to existing neighborhoods, including large numbers of purpose-built walk-up apartments, townhomes and stacked townhouses, on what are now \u201csingle detached\u201d lots in low-rise neighborhoods. It would require a strengthening of protections against displacement for existing tenants, and inclusionary zoning provisions designed to maximize the number of deeply affordable homes included in the developments closest to public transit and amenities.<\/p>\n

By contrast, the most deep-pocketed and politically influential urban land speculators benefit from policies which concentrate new homes on the small swaths of \u201cprime\u201d urban land that they already own, and which free them from design standards and up-front payments required to protect the environment and improve affordability for residents long-term.<\/p>\n

In each and every case where the interests of the best-connected real estate investors come into conflict with those of Ontarians who simply need access to a dignified home, with the environment, and with the public interest more broadly, the Ontario government is siding with very wealthy and well-connected investors.<\/p>\n

What are the main anti-environment laws and policies of the Government’s package of changes?<\/h3>\n

There are six main legislative or policy initiatives that are being used to attack the environment, facilitate sprawl, and make housing less affordable. Below is described the focus of each of these major anti-environment legislative and policy initiatives.<\/p>\n

\"\"1. Bill 23, \u201cMore Homes, Built Faster Act\u201d<\/strong>
\nStatus: Passed into Law, Some Parts Have Royal Assent<\/strong><\/p>\n

Bill 23, which has now been forced through the Ontario Legislative Assembly (but which can and should still be repealed) is an \u201comnibus bill\u201d which packages together several disconnected changes to existing laws.<\/a><\/p>\n

It advances the goal of accelerating car-dependent sprawl onto rural land owned by well-connected land speculators in at least three main ways:<\/p>\n