We would like to thank all of those who came to the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario’s booth at the Green Living Show last weekend to learn about your rights under the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 (EBR). Many of those who came to our booth had questions. Here are some of the typical queries and their answers.

1. What do you do? What is this all about?
2. Are you part of the Ministry of the Environment?
3. How many people are in your office?
4. Are these books on your rack free?
5. You say we can comment on proposed government decisions. How do you ensure the ministries consider our comments?
6. There is a litter problem in our neighbourhood park. My mom and I have to pick up garbage there every two weeks. How do I stop this littering problem?
7. I am a high school teacher. What are some great resources for my students?

1. What do you do? What is this all about?
Required by a law called the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 (EBR), the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) is an independent officer appointed by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. His role is comparable to the Auditor General, the Ombudsman, and the Information and Privacy Commissioner, in that he is non-partisan and is an arms-length officer of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The ECO oversees 13 Ontario ministries’decision making as those decisions relate to the environment.The ECO monitors and reports on the 13 ministries’ compliance with the EBR, the government’s progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and its actions towards achieving greater energy conservation at all three levels of government. The current Commissioner is Gord Miller, who is in his third 5-year term.The EBR allows residents of Ontario to participate in environmental decision making in three main ways:

• The Environmental Registry: The Registry is a website database where the government is required to post for public notice information about proposals, decisions and policy changes that affect the environment. You have the right to comment on these proposals and the ministries must explain the effect your comments had when making their final decision.
• Application for an Investigation: Any two residents of Ontario who believe that a prescribed Act, regulation or instrument has been contravened may apply to the Environmental Commissioner for an investigation of the alleged contravention by the appropriate ministry.
• Application for Review: Any two residents of Ontario who believe that an existing policy, Act, regulation or instrument of Ontario should be amended, repealed or revoked in order to protect the environment may apply to the Environmental Commissioner for a review of the policy, Act, regulation or instrument by the appropriate ministry. Any two residents of Ontario may also request a new policy, Act regulation or instrument in order to protect the environment.

2. Are you part of the Ministry of the Environment?
No, the ECO is not a part of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. In fact, the Ministry of the Environment is one of 13 ministries, prescribed under the EBR, which the ECO oversees.

3. How many people are in your office?
There are 24 staff in our office including the Commissioner.

4. Are these books on your rack free?
Yes. The ECO releases three annual reports each year: the Annual Report, the Annual Greenhouse Gas Progress Report and the Annual Energy Conservation Progress report. The ECO also releases special reports as he sees fit. In 2012, the ECO released two special reports:  Biodiversity: A Nation’s Commitment, an Obligation for Ontario and Ready for Change? An assessment of Ontario’s climate change adaptation strategy.All of the ECO’s publications are available free of charge to the public. There are a limited number of paper reports and USBs (containing PDF versions of our reports) available. EPUB and PDF reports are always available for download on our website.

5. You say we can comment on proposed government decisions. How do you ensure the ministries consider our comments?
A minister who gives notice of a proposal on the Registry must consider the comments in reaching a decision. It is the ECO’s role to ensure ministries prescribed under the EBR comply with these rules by way of monitoring the Registry and reviewing all comments.

6. There is a litter problem in our neighbourhood park. My mom and I have to pick up garbage there every two weeks. How do I stop this littering problem?
Congratulations on helping to preserve the environment through your individual action. Litter and waste management are a municipal issue so you want to contact your local councillor and/or your local Public Works department to see what can be done.

7. I am a high school teacher. What are some great resources for my students?
You might start by looking through our Annual reports, Energy Conservation reports or Greenhouse Gas reports which are available on our website. There are many articles that relate to your curriculum. Sample articles from the 2010/11 Annual Report are:
Snapping Turtles: To Hunt or Protect?
What a Waste: Failing to Engage Waste Reduction Solutions
Less and Less: Budgets for MOE and MNR not Meeting Needs
Shale Gas and Hydraulic Fracking
 Print This Post

In Southern Ontario, we’re very fortunate to have approximately 560,800 hectares of wetlands. These important natural heritage features are home to a wealth of species such as fish, birds, mammals, amphibians and insects – including many species at risk.  Wetlands also act as filters to clean our drinking water by absorbing excess nutrients like phosphorus. They also act like natural pieces of our infrastructure in protecting properties from flooding as they soak up and slowly release stormwater runoff.

Despite their ecological and hydrological importance, the protection of wetlands in Ontario is often at odds with urbanization, agriculture, and other types of development.  Since pre-settlement time, we have lost 72 per cent or 1.4 million hectares of the wetlands in southern Ontario. Historically, wetlands were viewed as wastelands and were drained for other land uses such as crops, livestock pastures and urban development.  Unfortunately not much has changed today.  In 2010, Ducks Unlimited Canada released a report, Southern Ontario Wetland Conversion Analysis, which showed that wetland loss is continuing at an alarming rate.

While there are some policies in Ontario aimed at protecting wetlands, there are many loopholes that need to be fixed.  For example, the Provincial Policy Statement (2005) restricts development and site alteration in provincially significant wetlands designated by the Ministry of Natural Resources.  Unfortunately, this protection only applies to wetlands that have been evaluated and designated, and many remain unevaluated.  Even if a wetland is designated as provincially significant, the Provincial Policy Statement allows municipal drains and infrastructure like wastewater and water systems, highways, and roads to be built within its boundaries.  Local conservation authorities also regulate development and site alteration in and around wetlands, regardless of their significance, to protect life and property from flooding and erosion hazards.  Unfortunately, provincial funding to conservation authorities has not increased since the 1990s, which severely constraints their ability to maintain existing levels of flood protection and to deal with emerging threats like climate change.

Today is World Wetlands Day – the date on which the international Ramsar Convention on Wetlands was signed in 1971.  The treaty is a framework for countries to conserve and plan for the “wise use” of all the wetlands in their territories and designated Wetlands of International Importance.  Canada is a signatory to this convention and eight Wetlands of International Importance are located in Ontario. Aichi Biodiversity Target 5 under the International Convention on Biological Diversity, to which Canada is also a signatory,  calls upon governments to reduce the rate of loss of all natural habitats at least in half and where feasible, close to zero by 2020. In my recent special report, Biodiversity: A Nation’s Commitment, an Obligation for Ontario, I identified that the constitutional responsibility for meeting the Aichi Biodiversity targets lies with Ontario and the other provincial governments.  Today, and every day, we should remember how valuable Ontario’s wetlands are.  The provincial government should ensure that the small fraction of wetlands that remain in southern Ontario are conserved and protected and that the rate of loss is reduced or eliminated altogether.

Toronto, January 10, 2012 – The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario says the Government of Ontario must come up with a new strategy to stem the continuing decline in Ontario’s species and natural spaces.  In a special report released today, “Biodiversity: A Nation’s Commitment, an Obligation for Ontario,” Gord Miller says unless Ontario and all other provinces take action, the international commitments made by the federal government will be meaningless.

“The Ontario government did adopt a Biodiversity Strategy in 2005,” says Gord Miller. “Unfortunately, it expired in 2010, and the government has so far chosen not to adopt an updated plan.  Our government cannot avoid its obligation,” says Miller, “to guide Ontario’s response to this urgent crisis.”

In 2010, Canada met with almost 200 nations in Nagoya, Japan and agreed on 20 biodiversity conservation targets that should be achieved by 2020.   But the Commissioner says most of the constitutional responsibility for meeting these targets lies with Ontario and the other provincial governments. “Efforts to halt the loss of biodiversity must be implemented at the provincial level if they are to be effective. And Ontario won’t be able to do that unless it has a new Biodiversity Strategy.”

In Ontario, the most significant threats to the province’s species and natural spaces are habitat degradation, climate change, invasive species, overexploitation and pollution.  The Commissioner has previously warned about the lack of action to safeguard the province’s 200 species at risk such as snapping turtles, cougars, and Jefferson salamanders. Gord Miller has said the government also needs to address the threats from invasive species like Asian carp, and protect wetlands and woodlands in southern Ontario.

The Environmental Commissioner says, “the federal government has promised, during the current International Decade for Biodiversity, to conserve biodiversity on behalf of all Canadians.” It is imperative that the Government of Ontario acts quickly and come up with a plan to implement those commitments.  This requires a new Biodiversity Strategy. Rhetoric alone will not suffice.”

-30-

 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.

Download the special report “Biodiversity: A Nation’s Commitment, an Obligation for Ontario” and the Commissioner’s opening remarks to the Legislature at http://www.eco.on.ca/

Watch the Commissioner’s comments of this report here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U-6mWZcio4

For more information, contact:

Maria Leung

Communications and Outreach Coordinator

Environmental Commissioner of Ontario

416-325-3371

1-800-701-6454

maria.leung@eco.on.ca

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

Aussi disponible en français 

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.

These are the remarks I made at the press conference for the release of a special report to the Legislative Assembly called “Doing Less with Less” on April 24, 2007. It deals with the chronic and prolonged underfunding of the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Natural Resources. It received considerable attention at the time and has been widely cited and endorsed.

Today I am releasing a special report to the Legislative Assembly about a problem that I have identified and documented which is seriously limiting the ability of our public service to properly protect and manage our environment and natural resource heritage. This is something that must change because our present course puts our ecosystems, our biodiversity, our health and parts of our economy at serious risk of deterioration and catastrophic events.

But, there are two unusual things about this special report. First, I am releasing the report in Northern Ontario away from Queen’s Park because the problem I am addressing and the resulting consequences more profoundly impact the day-to-day lives of people outside the urban centre. And, secondly, unlike my usual practice, this report is not focused particularly on the government of the day. I have documented the problem as it has emerged over the period 1992 to this last fiscal year and consequently it has evolved and persisted through governments of all three political parties. Thus, if I have made the case that there is a serious problem, in one sense one could say that all three parties share the “blame” but alternately I would suggest that these governments have just been responding to the perceived concerns of the people of Ontario over the past 15 years and the root cause is that public attention has been diverted away from what is going on in the areas of environmental protection and natural resource management. If the people knew what was really happening, or perhaps what is not happening with regard to their natural heritage they would have expressed other priorities.

During that period, the once world renowned Ontario Ministries of Environment and Natural Resources have been allowed to atrophy and deteriorate such that:

• we no longer know or are capable of knowing the state or the health of Ontario’s natural environment
• we are not in a position to anticipate and prevent imminent environmental impairment
• we are not keeping pace in developing laws and procedures sufficient to protect our natural heritage from degradation
• where we have such laws we are not inspecting and confirming that they are complied with – in fact, in some cases we know and acknowledge that there is substantial non-compliance

This is because we have so constrained government spending in these ministries for so long that in my opinion they have lost the capacity to carry out the duties that the public expects and the law requires to protect our natural heritage for future generations.

The term “capacity” in this report has three components. For a ministry to have the capacity to meet its obligations it must have sufficient operational money, a sufficient number of people to do the work, and staff with the appropriate expertise to address the complex problems of our times. A shortage of any one of money, staff or expertise can lead to a ministry failing to meet their obligations. And, in this report I document in a series of case studies that both ministries are faltering in all three components of capacity.

This is not a call to fix a few ailing programs here and there. This is a call for a strategic rebuild of MOE and MNR over the coming few years. My intent is to make the case for the Legislature and the public of Ontario of how desperate the funding situation is for the men and women working so diligently in these ministries to do what we expect of them.

It is not just that the funding of these ministries has failed to keep pace with inflation. The face value of the operating budget of the MOE in 2006/07 was actually lower than the allocation in 1992/93. When one corrects for the effects of inflation, the MOE budget was 34% lower than 14 years previous. MNR saw an 18% loss of operational budget over the same period. These constraints have produced huge cuts in the staff of these ministries, crippling their ability to perform their functions and draining them of expertise.

And it is not as if there isn’t the need. The responsibilities of both of these ministries have been growing. There are thousands more discharges to air and waterways for MOE to approve and inspect. There are hundreds more parks and conservation reserves for MNR to plan and protect. There are dozens more regulations and laws to enforce. And, there are more people, over 2 million more people to respond to, to assist and to regulate. Yet during the study period the per capita funding fell from $39 per capita to $22 for MOE and from $72 per capita to $49 for MNR.

And it is not as if we don’t have the money. Over the 15 budget years examined, overall operational spending increased 34 thousand million dollars, a 67% increase. Yet, spending in MOE and MNR decreased. Together, they barely amount to 1% of last year’s operational budget. This is far too little to get the job done.

I submit that it is time to refocus our priorities in this province. We say that we are concerned about health care. Our emergency wards clog with children having asthma attacks. But the solution is not just more emergency wards; it includes giving MOE the resources to make the air cleaner. The same is true for cancer. With a significant portion of cancers being environmentally induced, why aren’t we giving these ministries the resources to develop better standards and empower them to detect and reduce carcinogens in the environment? There is conflict on the landscape over pits and quarries, loss of forests, and loss of biodiversity. Yet, we cripple the ministry responsible for dealing with these challenges. We have to refocus our priorities.

We are not talking about a lot of money. It is not up to me to recommend an actual amount needed to correct this problem but for arguments sake if we were to double the spending on these ministries it would involve re-allocating only 1% of the provincial operational budget. Surely there is that much flexibility in the budget system.

The environmental challenges facing our society are increasing. Beyond our historic problems our natural systems are being stressed by climate change, waves of invasive species and the accumulation of dangerous and persistent substances in our ecosystems. We need to give these public servants a clear signal that we value and appreciate their role and their efforts by rebuilding the capacity of their ministries. We need the Ministries of Environment and Natural Resources to be up to the job of protecting us.

Download the report (.pdf – 387KB)