Environmental Assessment in Ontario:
Rhetoric vs. Reality
Richard D. Lindgren* and Burgandy Dunn**
Ontario enacted the Environmental Assessment Act in 1975, and substantially
amended the legislation in 1996. However, there has been long-standing concern
about how to make Ontario’s environmental assessment program more effective,
efficient and equitable. In this article, the authors summarize Ontario’s current environmental
assessment program, and review recent trends and developments that
warrant further reform initiatives.
1. INTRODUCTION
In 1973, Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment released a discussion paper,
which boldly proposed the establishment of a new environmental planning process
to ensure “an integrated consideration at an early stage of the entire complex of
environmental effects which might be generated by a project.” To achieve this
laudable objective, the Ontario Legislature enacted the Environmental Assessment
Act2 (EAA) in 1975 and proclaimed the EAA in force in 1976 after considerable
public and political debate over the appropriate nature, scope and content of the
ground-breaking legislation.
The newly enacted legislation was noteworthy for requiring proponents subject
to the EAA to: (a) consider a reasonable range of alternatives; (b) assess the
environmental effects of such alternatives; and (c) demonstrate that their preferred
alternative is environmentally superior and necessary. Moreover, the EAA required
proponents to systematically address these matters with public input at key
stages of the EA process, which was intended to be traceable, rational and iterative
in nature.
Since 1975, however, there have been periodic attempts by the Ontario government
to review and revise the EA program in order to address stakeholders’
concerns about cost, timing, complexity, inconsistency, and uncertainty. For example,
major amendments to the EAA were enacted in 1996, and various regulatory
and administrative reforms have been implemented since 2006.
In his 2006-2007 Annual Report to the provincial Legislature, the Environmental
Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) was highly critical of recent EA reforms
undertaken by the province:
For years, the ECO has pointed out that an effective EA process — a process
with both integrity and teeth — is essential to protect Ontario’s environment.
The EA Advisory Panel similarly recommended that the ministry
develop guiding EA principles that embrace, among other things, the precautionary
principle and the concept of “avoidance first”. MOE’s own language
promises “a faster yes or a faster no for applicants while completely
protecting the environment.” The changes unveiled thus far seem weighted
towards delivering the “faster yes”. But the ability of the system to deliver a
“faster no” — or indeed any “no” at all — remains unclear so far.
Unfortunately, it does not appear that MOE’s reform initiatives will address
a number of the ongoing weaknesses described in recent ECO annual reports,
including inadequate transparency and public consultation provided
under the Class EA process, and the need for better enforcement of the
EAA.
Similarly, in his 2007-2008 Annual Report, the Environmental Commissioner
again criticized the current state of the EA program, despite recent changes implemented
by the Ministry of the Environment. Among other things, the Environmental
Commissioner concluded that “Ontario’s EA process is broken” for a variety of
reasons:
Richard D. Lindgren & Burgandy Dunn – Research Paper – 2009.
Want More Investigative Content?
