Bruce County staff are putting together their response to send to the province over Bill 5.
The Bill, known as the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, was tabled in the Ontario Legislature on April 17.
Planning and Development Director Jack Van Dorp shared with county council what raised concerns with county staff about the proposed bill.
“Bill 5 is intended to provide more tools for the province to advance provincial priorities. If the province creates these tools, municipalities may need to follow provincial directions or orders, where they affect our processes,” shared Van Dorp. “We may need to understand the services and cost implications that may be unaddressed due to exemptions associated with the province exercising these authorities, and also engage the province on its use of new tools to advance those priorities.”
In the report presented to council, two main issues came up with staff.
They had comments regarding The Special Economic Zones Act, which is a regulation framework that would establish criteria for projects that advance provincial priorities.
“And those regulations would also define how the regulatory process would be streamlined – so what’s the benefit of being in a special economic zone?” said Van Dorp.
The second area of concern is that Bill 5 also makes amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act.
In particular, it would contain its own immunity provisions when it comes to archaeological assessments. Typically, such assessments would be required both for the Planning Act, and through the Environmental Assessment Process.
The concern lies with aligning exemptions from assessments involving Indigenous ancestral sites, and land included in Treaty rights.
Van Dorp added, “We note the work of the Archaeological Management Plan and its positive results in identifying archaeological resources in Bruce County. Our efforts with Saugeen Ojibway Nation to identify the most critical archaeological potential, and that the proposed bill does not appear to provide for Indigenous engagement in the decision making process for archaeological assessment exemptions.”
Having met with SON, staff was advised that they would be submitting their own comments to the province, and that if Bruce County implemented exemption orders, it could jeopardize relationships and efforts of reconciliation between the county and the First Nations community.
He concluded that while county staff appreciates the Ontario government’s moves to stimulate the provincial economy, they are concerned with the implementations of new tools that may take autonomy from municipal governments.
Councillors Jay Kirkland, Mark Goetz, and Don Murray initially wanted to take a wait-and-see approach for which direction the province ultimately decides on before making comments.
The deadline for submitting comments to the province is May 17th.
The general consensus was based on numerous changes to the province’s plans for developing housing, and stimulating the economy with construction, council wasn’t comfortable to make comments, or though that it might be prudent to put the county’s official plan on hold while waiting for the provincial government to set clear direction.
Warden Luke Charbonneau said that council should voice concerns about the Ontario government’s approach.
“We’re basically saying to the province, ‘make sure when you do these things to pay attention to these issues…Make sure to pay attention to the needs of municipalities, make sure you’re paying attention to this liability issue… make sure you’re paying attention to the First Nation issues’,” Charbonneau said. “We’re not saying we oppose these changes, we’re just saying, ‘here are some concerns that you need to flag as you’re doing this.’”
Council then decided to send all of the comments outlining staff concerns to the province.
