海角社区官网

Environmentalists say the proposed聽changes聽could destroy endangered species’ habitats and curtail consultations with First Nation communities, though the government says that’s not the case.

Anna Baggio, conservation director for Wildlands League, said “the pretence is gone 鈥� we’re not even trying to save species anymore.

“You don’t even need to be much of an expert to see they’ve just taken us back like 50 years 鈥� repealing (the Endangered Species Act), narrowing the definition of habitat 鈥� basically, forget science. This is just a supercharged development agenda.”

The bill would allow the province to create “special economic zones” exempt from the usual laws to get shovels in the ground on projects, which Ford has said can take years to start because of the necessary 30-plus permits or approvals.聽

In a statement to the Star, the premier’s office said “we are maintaining high environmental standards, labour laws and duty to consult. Any assertion otherwise is false,” adding working with First Nations and communities across the province has “never been more important” and will continue.

But opposition critics said the government is doing little to ensure necessary safeguards are there.

Indigenous New Democrat MPP Sol Mamakwa (Kiiwetinoong) told the legislature the bill should be called “‘Ontario first, First Nations last,’ because we are just an afterthought.”

Bill 5, he added, “will severely undermine constitutionally protected Indigenous rights to consultation, accommodation and consent for any kind of project before it starts. The very concept of fast-tracking infrastructure on Indigenous lands, on our homelands, contradicts the legal principle of free, prior and informed consent.”

He said there are many projects in his riding where mining companies “do not consistently engage with affected First Nations from the beginning of the projects. We have to understand that consultation is not just checking a box.”

New Democrat MPP Jamie West (Sudbury) said聽there’s nothing wrong with a more co-ordinated approach for permitting projects, but there have to be guardrails.

Last Friday, more than 100 environmental and conservation groups submitted a letter to the province outlining their concerns. Among the biggest: Redefining species 鈥渉abitat鈥� to immediate dwellings like dens and nesting sites 鈥� which will remove protections from large areas of habitat upon which species depend for survival.

“We can鈥檛 support scrapping the Endangered Species Act and bringing in an act that just talks about where they live today, right now 鈥� it鈥檚 like saying that your house is protected, but it鈥檚 OK if we tear down everything around your house,” West said in the legislature.

” 鈥� You can鈥檛 replace something solid with something incredibly watered down. Can you improve it? Yes, absolutely. But don鈥檛 pretend this is improving it. This is destroying the Endangered Species Act.”

Giving the province responsibility for providing a list of endangered species instead of leaving that to an independent body is also cause for concern, allowing developers and industry to potentially remove species at will, makes it impossible to 鈥渁ssess, mitigate and avoid harms to species,” said the letter.

鈥淏ulldozing their protections is only going to unleash more problems for future generations,鈥� the letter signed by groups including Ontario Nature, Ontario Biodiversity Council and the David Suzuki Foundation.

In a statement to the Star, the Ministry of the Environment said the legislation that replaces the Endangered Species Act will include “improving enforcement to limit activities that have negative impacts on species” and “introduces tougher penalties, including hefty fines, jail time and additional compliance tools, ensuring no tolerance for bad actors.”

The government also plans “an enhanced Species Conservation Program, which will directly invest $20 million each year in projects to conserve and protect species across Ontario, quadrupling current funding,” the statement said.

The proposed Bill 5 legislation, now at second reading and heading to a committee for input, has also received widespread criticism from civil rights groups, labour groups and First Nation communities.

鈥淭his (bill) will give cabinet the power to ignore laws, skip consultation and approve development without consultation,鈥� said Cristina McCoy, with McCoy Archeological Services. 鈥淚t鈥檚 saying Indigenous consultation is red tape, and environmental protection is bureaucracy.鈥�

But Ford said last week May 14 that “you can’t change (the process) without working collaboratively with all sorts of sectors, groups of people.”

“If we just stand still, we’re dead in the water,” he said.

Economic Development Minister Vic Fedeli has accused the opposition of “fear mongering.”

The special economic zones “especially with the Ring of Fire, will help pave the way for these projects to go ahead 鈥� You just simply cannot have projects that take 10 or 15 years to come to fruition.”

But the bill “essentially gives the cabinet the power to override any law or change any law 鈥� within these zones,” said Laura Bowman, a lawyer with Ecojustice, an environmental law charity. 鈥淎nd within those zones, to exempt any trusted proponent or project from any applicable law.鈥�

She said that because it is so broad, it could mean that any environmental, labour and municipal laws could be overridden.

鈥淲hat we have seen with the Greenbelt, MZO鈥檚 and Ontario Place, the potential for the law to be abused is very high,” she said, referring to development controversies the government has faced.

“The potential for there to be favouritism toward certain groups or certain proponents without any policy rationale 鈥� is very high. That is really concerning.鈥�