.png)
December 13, 2024
This week, Ontario's Legislative Assembly will conclude its business for 2024. Despite the government choosing to keep the legislature in recess much longer than usual this year, there have been quite a few issues covered at Queen's Park. Unfortunately, more than a few were caused by this government's actions (or inactions in some cases). It can be almost dizzying trying to recap and catalogue everything I've tried to address on behalf of the people in Algoma-Manitoulin who are looking for this government to focus on providing the basics like healthcare, education, housing, and infrastructure.
Luckily, there are offices within the legislature that assist MPPs in holding the government to account, such as the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario (AG). Last year, the legislature appointed a new AG, Shelly Spence, who released her first Annual Report a couple of weeks ago. The AG's Annual Report does both a broad audit of the government programming, as well as a handful of finer tooth audits of certain policy areas. The headline-catching reports from the AG this year focused on the government's redevelopment of Ontario Place, its opioid strategy, the use of Ministerial Zoning Orders, and the Toronto District School Board.
While each of these issues is important, and I encourage everyone to read the AG's full report online, there is one report that I feel is not getting enough attention, which I want to focus on today. It is her report on the operation of the Environmental Bill of Rights.
The Environmental Bill of Rights (ERB) was passed in 1993, which guarantees Ontarians the right to be a part of decision-making on topics that will impact our environment. Previously, we had an independent officer of the legislature known as the Environment Commissioner who was charged with overseeing the government's adherence to the ERB. When that post was abolished by the Ford government, the responsibility was transferred to the AG.
The AG's report this year raises some serious concerns about this government's track record in upholding Ontarians' rights under the ERB. In total, the AG outlines 21 instances where the government failed to meet or intentionally circumvented the ERB, thus ignoring the rights legislated to Ontarians. Again, I encourage everyone to take the time to read over the thorough reporting from Ms. Spence's office. However, I would like to highlight some of the most egregious instances here.
Under the ERB, Ontarians have the right to demand a ministry investigate an instance where they believe there has been harm to the environment. The ministry can then choose to act or not but must respond to the original request with their reasoning. The report found that the Ministry of Natural Resources failed to respond to a request within the timeline. In one instance in which a coyote hunting contest was being held, the Minister's office intervened and explicitly directed their staff not to meet the legislated timeline.
Another section of the report identified instances where the government bypassed the ERB's provisions that guarantee Ontarians the right to be consulted on environmentally impactful changes to legislation. When the government passed the Rebuilding Ontario Place Act, they exempted themselves from their obligations under the ERB. In two other cases, the government passed pieces of legislation before the consultation period had ended without looking at the comments provided by the public. In fact, the AG found that even when the government didn't give itself a get-out-of-jail-free card or end consultations early, they could not show that they had reviewed and considered feedback from the public when finalizing their proposals.
Finally, the report outlined how the government was not adequately informing the public when putting out public notices to request feedback. On certain postings, instead of providing the public with unbiased, accurate information, the government filled the proposal with self-congratulatory rhetoric about their plan and skipped over listing the potential environmental impacts it may have. In fact, dozens of postings either downplayed or did not explain the proposal's potential impacts on which they requested comments. This included stalling protections for endangered species, removing requirements to obtain environmental approvals on specific projects, and changing Ontario's mining framework.
What this report shows, more than anything, is that this government is one that does not obey the rules. Their actions are not based on careful planning with an eye to ensuring Ontarians will benefit from a decision for generations to come.
In our current political climate, there is an emphasis placed on acting immediately to get the most political gain in the shortest time span. This sidelines the responsibility of being in power and leading a government. Resisting the temptation to sell short Ontarians' future by shortcutting or bypassing our rights to make it easier to get the desired result is not sustainable.
It is a topic I've raised on several occasions in this column. What we need now from our leaders is a willingness to undertake the hard work of building consensus around policies that will improve Ontario beyond the lifespan of a single government.
As I said at the beginning, the number of issues we're faced with in Ontario can feel insurmountable sometimes, but cutting corners and circumventing peoples' rights will only compound our problems in the long run.
As always, please feel free to contact my office about these issues or any other provincial matters. You can reach my constituency office by email at mmantha-co@ola.org or by phone Toll-free at 1-800-831-1899.
Michael Mantha, MPP
Algoma-Manitoulin
Comments