Last Tuesday, the Government of Ontario presented its proposed budget in an omnibus budget bill. The Minister of Finance, the Honourable Dwight Duncan, tabled for first reading in the legislature Bill 55 – Strong Action for Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2012. This budget bill is effectively the mother-of-all pieces of omnibus legislation.
Bill 55 amends 69 different statutes in its schedules. For example, many environmentally significant laws that are administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources are proposed to be amended. These laws include the Endangered Species Act, the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, the Public Lands Act, the Crown Forest Sustainability Act, and the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act. Laws such as these are prescribed under the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 (EBR).
Normally, when the government proposes to amend legislation that is prescribed under the EBR, it would post a proposal notice on the Environmental Registry and solicit public comments for a minimum of 30 days. The government then considers the public comments and makes a decision. These steps help make for a transparent and accountable process.
However, budgets bills are specifically exempt from the posting and public consultation requirements of the EBR. Moreover, the Ministry of Finance is not prescribed under the EBR either. As a result, the public does not have the same opportunities to contribute to decision making when a number of environmentally significant laws are changed in a budget bill.
I wrote about a very similar situation in my last Annual Report regard the use of omnibus legislation: “At best, using omnibus legislation to amend environmental laws complicates the EBR process. At worst, it can obstruct the public’s right to participate in environmental decision making.”
I’m disgusted by this. It was bad enough already that useless foreign owned industrial wind turbines had more “rights” than I do. Now they have more protection than the Niagara Escarpment, Endangered species, Crown forests and our parks.
To the Liberal cowards, if you believe in this so much create a separate Bill and follow the proper procedures as laid out by the Environmental Commissioner.
To the NDP, if you feel you are the voice of the environmentalists there is no way you can support this Bill. Any NDPers that support turning over control of our most precious natural areas to foreign owned corporations should be ashamed.
[Reply]
Pingback: McGuinty paves the way for Wind Industry to kill endangered species without any consequences! « The Big Green Lie
First there was Bill 150, the Green Energy Act which “eliminated” all Democratic Rights of Ontario Citizens to have any input into Industrial Wind Development in their respective Townships.
Now it’s Bill 55 which eliminates any prosecution to Industrial Wind Developers who kill or harm Endangered Species with their destructive and totally “useless” Industrial Wind Turbines.
If McGuinty treated Ontario Citizens with as much respect as he does the unwanted and anti-environmental Wind Investors then we would be living in a wonderful place and not a dead-end Province that will take decades to recover from these actions!
[Reply]
Under Section 19 of the Budget Bill 55 it appears that the Endangered Species Act of 2007 will be useless.
In the year 2007, a coalition of groups including the David Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence, Ontario Nature et al, lobbied the government of Ontario to establish “the best Endangered Species legislation in Canada” http://www.ivey.org/news/EndangeredSpecies_v7.pdf
The government stated that it ‘recognized that Ontarians would expect nothing less’, and in the Premier’s own words citizens wanted an ‘environmental legislation with teeth’. Under those guidelines the Environmental Species Act of 2007 was adopted.
It will be gutted under Bill 55. The widespread exemptions from prohibitions enhances the eradication of species, not their protection.
Section 19
Exemptions from prohibitions – Endangered Species Act under Budget Bill 55
10.1 (1) Despite subsections 9 (1) and 10 (1) and subject to subsections (6) and (7), a person who is engaged in an activity described in subsection (2), (4) or (5) may, in the course of the activity,
(a) commit an act that would otherwise be prohibited under clause 9 (1) (a) or under subsection 10 (1); and
(b) possess or transport anything that the person would otherwise be prohibited from possessing or transporting under clause 9 (1) (b).
Infrastructure maintenance, repair, etc.
(2) The exemptions described in subsection (1) apply to a person who is engaged in maintaining, repairing or replacing infrastructure described in subsection (3) if the maintenance, repair or replacement does not,
(a) change the location of the infrastructure;
(b) extend the area the infrastructure occupies in any way; or
(c) alter the way in which the infrastructure is used or operated.
Same
(3) The infrastructure referred to in subsection (2) includes any infrastructure that is part of or related to,
(a) a communications system;
(b) an electric power system, oil or gas pipeline, alternative energy system or renewable energy system;
(c) a transportation corridor or transportation facility;
(d) a waste management system; or
(e) water works, wastewater works, drainage works, stormwater works and associated facilities.
Non-commercial activities
(4) The exemptions described in subsection (1) apply to a person who is engaged in a non-commercial activity on lands, other than public lands, that are within 50 metres of the person’s primary residence or in any other area prescribed by the regulations
Why even have an Endangered Species Act or the EBR? ….
This section needs to be struck down, and I only hope that Andrea Horwath who holds the balance of power will see fit to seek the removal of Section 19.
[Reply]
The 2012 budget bill is circumventing due process, undermining both good environmental governance and our ability to be good environmental stewards and ensure that we have an environment that can sustain current and future generations. Please contact your MP and ask him/her to make a stand to eliminate all references to amendments to Acts administered under the Environmental Bill of Rights from Bill 55, and failing that turn down Bill 55 in its entirety.
[Reply]
Obviously this government will stop at nothing to ram home it’s Green Energy Act agenda. Allowing industrial wind turbines and solar farms to be built on environmentally sensitive areas is unconscionable – and UNNECESSARY. If this policy doesn’t bankrupt Ontario first, it will in 20 -30 years leave a legacy that is anything but green. pLEASE STOP THIS INSANITY WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME
[Reply]
The idea that people can kill endangered species near their house is offensive. Charitable nature reserves are subject to such vandalism, but not “public” lands.
Using a budget bill to hide important discussion from the EBR is a travesty that must be stopped. This US-style or Mike Harris style under the rug sweeping is not like Dalton McGuinty.
[Reply]
This is yet another outrageous abuse of power by government. Not that the Ontario government is the only perpetrator. Canadians need to start showing more backbone.
[Reply]
I consider BILL 55 a serious threat to the integrity of Provincial Parks, Crown Forests and all Public Lands. I believe the governments support of Industrial Wind Turbines is leading them to use Bill 55 to try and secure industrial access to our Provincial Parks, Crown Forests and Public Lands.
I’ve itemized below the components of Bill 55 which I’m concerned would provide the government with the power to have Industrial Wind Turbines installed in our Provincial Parks, Crown Forests and Public Lands.
Schedule 15, page 55 .. changes to Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994
It sounds to me like the government wants to be able to delegate private parties with the right to operate and manage in Crown Forests with an unspecified range of powers, the consequence of which the government wants to absolve itself of responsibility for. This sounds to me like the government wants to give private parties free reign to operate in Crown Forests. To me, this equates to being able to give over Crown Forests to alternate energy project operators (such as industrial wind turbine corporations).
Schedule 58, page 294 .. changes to Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserve Act, 2006
Despite the original act’s limitations regarding “issuing of the land use permit or licence of occupation .. consistent with this Act and the regulations” (as per subsection 14 (2.1)), this change will give the Minister control over both the circumstances and terms of such permits! I’m seeing this as absolute discretion to grant land use permits within Provincial Parks to anyone, including alternate energy project operators (such as industrial wind turbine corporations).
Schedule 59, page 295 .. changes to Public Lands Act
Given that Public Land is synonymous with Crown Land, and given that Provincial Parks are a planning distinction of Crown Land Use Designation, I believe the Public Lands Act holds a serious foundation of authority under the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserve Act. Again there’s the same issue of delegation of power to other than government workers, with the same rejection of liability on the part of the government.
[Reply]
Pingback: Enjoy Your Last Earth Day in Ontario | lsarc
Pingback: Urgent – Tell Ontario Premier To Protect Endangered Wildlife | Niagara At Large