• Download the ECO’s 2010/11 Annual Report Engaging Solutions (.pdf).
• Download the Supplement to the Annual Report (.pdf)
• Click to download the Commissioner’s Remarks to the Legislature (.pdf)

(Toronto, November 29, 2011) Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner is worried that Ontario has lost momentum when it comes to the province’s pressing environmental issues.

In his 2010/2011 Annual Report “Engaging Solutions” released today, Gord Miller says there’s no shortage of talk about the problems such as climate change, waste diversion, and the loss of biodiversity. “But when it comes to doing something” says Miller, “there doesn’t seem to be a lot actually happening.

The Environmental Commissioner cited a number of examples of this lack of inertia in his annual report:

• On waste, the Ministry of the Environment has written four different reports and discussion papers outlining options for increasing waste diversion in the province. But this has resulted in little action on what Miller says should be one of the government’s top environmental priorities.

• On species-at-risk, the Ministry of Natural Resources is not doing enough to protect and recover species at risk. Much of what the ministry is doing has become an empty bureaucratic exercise that does little on-the-ground to tangibly benefit endangered species.

• On funding, the Government of Ontario has passed notable legislation such as the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, 2008, the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and the Green Energy Act, 2009, but has not given the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of the Environment the additional resources they need to oversee and monitor new legislation while also covering their previous core responsibilities.

• On the Great Lakes, lengthy negotiations between Ontario and the federal government threaten to paralyze progress towards further clean-up, and Ontario is allowing its existing policy tools to idle. Meantime, the Obama administration has promised $2.2 billion over 5 years.

Miller says this lack of action is not accidental: it’s actually the goal of critics of environmental protection. “We respond to people who say they don’t believe there’s a problem”, says the Environmental Commissioner, “by going back to the research findings to debate and explain it all over again. And then, when it looks like progress is being made, others say the proposed solutions won’t work, or are too costly. And so we go back to the beginning again.”

“We have to find a way to get to a point of action on these issues” says the Environmental Commissioner. “We don’t see ourselves as having a culture of inaction and procrastination. Yet that would be a fair criticism from any impartial observer.”

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario is appointed by the Legislative Assembly to be the province’s independent environmental watchdog, reporting publicly on the government’s environmental decision making.

Click here to download the full report (.pdf).

Accompanying media releases:

MOE and MNR Can’t Handle Core Responsibilities

Ontario Government Failing Endangered Species

Government Failing to Reduce Ontario’s Waste

• Download the full report (.pdf).
• Download the Supplement to the Annual Report (.pdf)
• Click to download the Commissioner’s Remarks to the Legislature (.pdf)

Have you noticed that as a society we seem to have lost momentum on dealing with environmental issues? There is no shortage of talk about our current and impending challenges of climate change, high energy costs, water shortages and loss or disruption of our biodiversity, but there doesn’t seem to be much actually happening to address these problems.

Probably the best example of such lack of progress is the international stalemate on climate change, but I see this pattern of inaction reverberating through a range of topics in this report. Why can’t we get on with things? We don’t see ourselves as having a culture of inaction and procrastination. Yet that is how a remote impartial observer might quite reasonably characterize us. Perhaps something is not working in our policy system. I know the word policy evokes glazed eyes and bored yawns from many people but it should not be that way. Policy is about finding a way forward through unknown and challenging territory. Good policy, like a good path through a dark wood, allows you to progress with confidence toward a destination or objective.

Developing and applying policy for an environmental issue is, in its essence, a simple process. First you recognize that there is an issue or problem and define its nature. Then you analyze all aspects of the problem in order to get a level of understanding that will allow you to evaluate possible approaches or actions and perhaps figure out some metrics to measure progress. And in a third stage you take action. You try to do things to solve the problem based on what is known. If you follow through on those three steps – recognize, analyze and engage – the process leads logically to a solution.

It seems we often get stuck at the second step or sometimes the first. Take climate change for example. Over decades of research and international scientific consensus we have certainly recognized and defined the problem. All aspects of the methods of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions have been analyzed and an array of actions proposed. But then it stops; at the international level we engage no solutions. Instead we respond to voices that say that they don’t believe in climate change by going back to the recognition stage to debate and explain it all again. And, if it looks like progress is being made toward taking action other voices say that the proposed solutions won’t work or are too costly and the discussion reverts back to start the analysis again.

Some people really are very good at casting doubt or confusion in the public’s mind on the nature of environmental problems and their possible solutions. After all, they are often complicated issues. And, some of these people may be legitimately sceptical. But there are others who are public relations professionals and are deliberately confusing the issues to serve the agenda of one or another vested interest. These people understand the policy process and are adept at resetting the discussion back to the recognition and analysis stage. Their job is to stop society from engaging solutions. And, regrettably and increasingly, we let them.

I don’t know why this short circuiting of our policy regime exists. Perhaps it stems from a lack of champions to lead the charge on some of these important environmental initiatives. Perhaps there is some failing in our media system such that the public remains uninformed on the truth of these matters. Perhaps the public is just too overwhelmed by the complexity of today’s society and can’t deal with these concerns in a thoughtful way. Perhaps it is all of the above. But we must get over this malaise because the environmental challenges of our times are not going away.

We have to find a way to get to a point of action on these issues. Only when you engage solutions by trying something does the full potential of human ingenuity and creativity kick in. Certainly there will be errors, but innovation feeds on errors by spawning new ideas and new approaches. We learn by doing, and doing involves failing but it also involves opening our eyes to new solutions. And some of those solutions may be engaging indeed.

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, Gord Miller, will release his 2010/11 Annual Report, Engaging Solutions, at a media conference in the Queen’s Park Media Studio at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 29, 2011.

The report will be made available online at www.eco.on.ca at the start of the conference. Accredited media can obtain a printed copy of the report at the Legislative Press Gallery, in Room 387A of the Ontario Legislature Building.

Media who wish to participate in the media conference but are not currently accredited by the Legislative Assembly (Queen’s Park) Media Gallery must register with the Press Gallery Coordinator, Gerald Christopher – Room 387A or 416-325-7922.

Topics covered in the 2010/11 Annual Report, Engaging Solutions include:

• Waste reduction
• Budgets for the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Natural Resources
• Species at Risk
• Great Lakes
• Growth in the Far North
• Oak Ridges Moraine

A webcast of the conference will be broadcasted via www.eco.on.ca starting at 10:00 a.m. on November 29. Please note an up-to-date version of Windows Media Player is required to view the webcast.

The Environmental Commissioner will not be taking questions via webcast, but will be available for individual interviews after the news conference. Bilingual support will also be available at the event. For more details, please visit www.eco.on.ca.

- 30 –

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario is appointed by the Legislative Assembly to be the province’s independent environmental watchdog, and report publicly on the government’s environmental decision-making.

Aussi disponible en français.

For more information or to schedule interviews, contact:
Maria Leung

Communications and Outreach Coordinator
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
416-325-3371 / 416-819-1673
maria.leung@eco.on.ca

For bilingual support, please contact Jean-Marc Filion at 705-476-9665.

November, a month where conversations tend to lament the long lost days of summer, has seen a remarkable number of conversations about a similarly depressing topic: overcrowded transportation infrastructure in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area (GTHA).  At the beginning of the month, the Canadian Urban Transit Association held its fall conference. Sponsored by TTC and Metrolinx, the title was Public Transit: Investing in Quality of Life. This was followed up with Toronto Talks Mobility, a session organized by the Pembina Institute, Councillor Joe Mihevc and the University of Toronto’s Cities Centre. Coming up later this month is a “Mobility Pricing Stakeholder Forum” sponsored by Transport Futures.  These conversations are driven by projections that the GTHA will add close to 3 million new people in the next 20 years. Given current car ownership trends, this will result in an additional 1 million automobiles trying to access roads that are already hopelessly congested.   But isn’t the GTHA already at “peak car” with traffic congestion rates among the worst in North America? And aren’t vehicles already the largest sources of greenhouse gases in Ontario (see chart below)? Can we afford to put all these additional vehicles on the road, you ask? Good question.

The message emerging from these conversations is that we need to get serious about moving people out of their cars and onto mass transit. But with the GTHA’s public transit system in its own state of chronic underfunding, significant investment – $80 billion dollars was the amount being tossed around at the Toronto Talks Mobility session – is required to make it a viable alternative.  That is a huge sum of money for cash strapped governments in a time of fiscal austerity, and so innovative funding mechanisms will be required. Metrolinx is required to release an investment strategy to find the money by no later than 2013; why the delay? Let’s get this strategy released for public discussion sooner so that it can influence and inform transit planning and decision-making in 2012. The longer we wait, the greater the chance that we’ll continue to make planning decisions that will lock-in our commuting patterns for decades to come.

While I have pointed to the potential for road pricing to bridge the funding gap in both my 2010 and 2011 annual greenhouse gas progress reports and in a recent blog, most decision-makers in the region are reluctant to entertain it as a possibility. Most of the speakers at the Toronto Talks Mobility session danced around the issue of road pricing. Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion did suggest, however, that road tolls and related road pricing will have to be evaluated as a funding option. She stressed repeatedly that this will be tough to sell to the commuting public, especially those traveling to work in single-occupancy vehicles. She conceded however, that if the monies were put towards funding rapid transit – and only rapid transit – this would be an easier sell.  The elephant in the room is making its presence known.

If you are participating in the 2011 A.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium this week and are interested in biodiversity, don’t forget to attend Water as Biodiversity (Session W1C) on Wednesday (November 16) at 2 pm in Room 10. Commissioner Miller will be speaking about biodiversity in Ontario and what we must do by 2020. For more on what the ECO has said about biodiversity, click here.

The ECO also has a new booth and interactive touch screen. Come visit us at Booth #6 in Exhibitors Gallery A – Crystal Ball Room. We will be there to answer questions about the Environmental Bill of Rights, the Environmental Registry, our Annual Reports and other questions related to the ECO.

We will also be tweeting at the conference. Follow us at @ONT_ECO.

View Larger Map

Image taken from U.S Fish and Wildlife Service National Digital Library

Canada’s Environment Minister, the Honourable Peter Kent, announced today that polar bears will be designated a species of special concern under the federal Species at Risk Act.  ”Canada is home to two-thirds of the world’s polar bear population and we have a unique conservation responsibility to effectively care for them,” said Minister Kent.  I sincerely agree with his statement.

Our province of Ontario is home to the southernmost population of polar bears in the world – a species that is widely recognized as suffering the most immediate impacts of climate change. Scientists warn that there is a high probability that Ontario’s population of about 1,000 polar bears will be gone from the province within 45 years due to decreases in sea ice in Hudson Bay, which constitute an integral part of their habitat.

Polar bears were listed as a threatened species under Ontario’s Endangered Species Act in September 2009; this designation constitutes a higher risk level and even more of an imperative for action than the federal listing announced today.

Our provincial law obligates the Minister of Natural Resources to ensure the preparation of a completed recovery strategy within two years of the species’ listing.    Right now, only a draft recovery strategy for polar bears exists – without a finalized strategy, the process of planning for conservation action is at a standstill.  It is critical that the Ontario government properly follow the Endangered Species Act process, a topic I discussed in my 2009 Special Report.

At the next step in the process, the Ontario government is meant to lay out all the options and we begin the public dialogue which likely involves making some difficult decisions.  It’s here where we can weigh socio-economic considerations and even make moral choices.  But if we don’t even get to that stage, the public is deprived of a transparent and accountable process.  That’s the core purpose of our Environment Bill of Rights and my job as Environmental Commissioner to warn when it’s off track.

What’s lost if this process isn’t followed is public confidence in how our laws are meant to work.  Also, in this case, we haven’t been given the chance to publicly debate what we’re going to do about an iconic and imperilled species, which may be gone from the Ontario that our grandchildren will inherit.  I hope we get back on track quickly.

The Australian Senate passed its carbon tax legislation this past Tuesday as a key component of its Clean Energy Legislation Package. It’s the first stage in the country’s plan to reduce carbon emissions to five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020 and 80 per cent below 2000 levels by 2050. It will fix a tax of A$23 ($24 CDN) per tonne on the country’s top 500 emitters starting in July 2012 with a plan to transition to a cap-and-trade system from July 2015 onward. Industries including mining, airlines, steel and power generation are covered. After July 2015, companies in these industries will need a permit for each tonne of carbon dioxide they emit.

As the title of the legislative package suggests, the Australian government has linked the emergence of a clean energy economy with the establishment of a price on carbon. I’ve taken a similar position in my most recent Greenhouse Gas Progress Report as well as in a recent blog. For one thing, pricing pollution is one surefire way to ensure a more level playing field so that renewable energy can compete in the marketplace.

South Africa is also considering legislation to place a tax on carbon emissions. Meanwhile, the Ontario government has indicated it won’t move on pricing carbon until at least 2013. While Ontario continues to delay, other jurisdictions are taking a leadership role while kick-starting their green economies. If Ontario wants to accelerate the growth in green energy and a low-carbon economy, putting a price on carbon will need to happen sooner rather than later.