February 1, 2025
The following is a summary of the chapter "Unravelling Ontario's Environment" from Against the People, edited by Bryan Evans and Carlo Fanelli (Fernwood 2025).
The Ford government’s approach to environmental matters needs to be understood in the context of its overall ‘market populist’ approach to governance. This has been defined by:
- a disregard for the environment, climate and other matters requiring long-term perspectives on environmental, social and economic costs;
- a distain for democratic norms and limits on executive authority;
- a willingness to eliminate stable, long-term revenue streams and embed major long-term costs; and
- decision-making models based on connections, access, and political whim, favouring certain well established interests, notably in the development, energy, for-profit health, and resource extraction sectors.
Specifically with respect to the environment, the Ford government has:
- Turned the province's internationally heralded planning process into an instrument wielded by the province on behalf of the developers against municipalities, conservation authorities and communities. Failed to provide new truly affordable housing or protect existing affordable rental housing. Attempted to open the GTA Greenbelt to development, while dismantling protections for prime farmland, wetlands, endangered species, and natural and build heritage sites.
- Dismantled the province's climate change strategy, at a cost of $1 billion year in lost revenues. Ignored the province's own climate impact assessment report, outlining a future of extreme weather, forest fires floods, lost infrastructure, and public health risks, if action was not taken.
- Cancelled 758 renewable energy projects, including having wind turbines literally ripped out of the ground, at a cost of more than $230 million and bringing renewable energy development in the province to a halt. Terminated the province's successful energy efficiency strategy.
- Pursued a high-cost, high-emission and high-risk nuclear and gas focused electricity pathway. Electricity-related greenhouse gas emissions have more than tripled since 2018, and are continuing to rise, as are electricity costs. Embarked on a $400+ billion nuclear expansion program, having ignored offers of low-cost hydroelectricity from Quebec, and the falling costs for renewables.*
- Systemically eliminated provisions for public participation, transparency and accountability under the guise of eliminating 'red tape' in planning and environmental decision-making processes. Removed the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario as an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly.
- 'Streamlined' the province's environmental assessment process to the point of meaninglessness, and eliminated substantive reviews for highways, power plants, mines, and other major projects.
- Pursued a series of major infrastructure projects totalling $10s of billions in potential costs, including 413 and Bradford Bypass highway projects through the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine, and the Pickering B nuclear refurbishment, that had already been assessed as uneconomic, unnecessary and destructive.
- Dismantled the province's Municipal-Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA) industrial water pollution control regime. Failed to deal with the cumulative effects of air pollution in highly impact areas, like Sarnia's 'chemical valley.'
- Weakened what remained of the province's mine closure regime, intended to protect taxpayers from the costs of cleaning up abandoned mines. Aggressively promoted the development of the 'ring of fire' and other mining projects ecologically fragile areas, over the objections of many of the affected First Nations.
Taken as a whole, the Ford government has dismantled much of the province’s regime for environmental and natural resource management, turning the clock back, in some cases, nearly a century.
* The $400 billion estimate for nuclear capital costs includes:
- $50 billion on refurbishments of the Bruce (6 units), Darlington (4 units) and Pickering B (4 units), based on current Darlington cost estimates ($12.8 billion for 4 units), with additional allowance for the age and condition of Pickering B.
- $25 billion for the Darlington 4-300MW Darlington SMR project, based on the cost estimates for the BWRX-300 reactors from the Tennessee Valley Authority
- $100 billion for the proposed 4800MW new capacity Bruce C plant, based on the actual costs of the Vogtle 2200MW project completed in Georgia USA, in 2024 (USD$34 billion/CAD$50 Billion),
- $225 billion for 10,000MW new capacity proposed for Wesleyville, based on the actual costs for Vogtle.