ARA review tabled in legislature

Details

Published on Wednesday, 06 November 2013 23:19

Hits: 1327

ARA review tabled in legislature

Orangeville Banner

Changes suggested for the Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) would still permit a mega-quarry application if implemented, according to Carl Cosack, chair of the North Dufferin Agricultural Taskforce (NDACT).

On Wednesday (Oct. 30), the all-party committee reviewing the ARA tabled a list of 38 recommendations at Queen’s Park.

However, none of the suggestions protect farmland or water sources from becoming quarries or pits.

“There’s no doubt we’re disappointed. There’s no protection for the water underneath the land and no protection for the land itself,” Cosack said.

“Bottom line, it’s just unacceptable. We expect better representation from an all-party committee.”

Ontario’s Standing Committee on General Government began the process of examining the ARA more than one year ago. The review included numerous public hearings throughout the province, including Orangeville.

The committee heard from a variety of stakeholders in the land and the aggregate industry, from municipalities to farmers to engineers.

Cosack, who attended several of hearings throughout the province, said change was a reoccurring theme for aggregate legislation.

“There were all kinds that said this needs to be different. It all got ignored,” Cosack said. “It’s really quite remarkable.”

The committee recommends that farmland transformed into an aggregate extraction site is rehabilitated “where practical.” As well, improved monitoring of agricultural capability is suggested.  

On prime agricultural land, the committee recommends the Ministry of Agriculture and Food receive the application to evaluate rehabilitation plans and the potential reduction of local food production.

For water sources, the committee recommends the government, conservation authorities and aggregate producers assess the risk, and avoid damaging surface and ground water sources “where warranted.”

Cosack takes exception to the wording of the review.

“The language is so suggestive. They use clauses that are ‘if possible’ or  ‘where practical’,” he said. “That’s in essence, I hate to say it, useless language.”

The review’s wording is necessary, according to Dufferin-Caledon MPP Sylvia Jones, who sat on the committee during its public hearing in Orangeville.

“Some of that is because we’re not lawyers. We get an overview of what we see and what we heard,” Jones said.

“Does there have to be further study on some of the recommendations? Yes there does.”

Jones added she is proud of the 38 recommendations made in the review.

“It’s not often you get NDP, PCs and Liberals in a room together that can come up with concrete suggestions on how to improve a piece of legislation,” Jones said. “I wish we would do more of this pre-emptive stuff.”

As far as recommendations for agricultural protection, Jones said the suggested changes are sufficient.

“I think there are some concrete recommendations that cover it,” she said. “Did everybody who presented get what they asked for? No. That’s the nature of a consensus report.”

The promotion of aggregate recycling is one of the 38 recommendations, an idea first floated at Queen’s Park by Jones. In April, the MPP introduce a private members bill that would allow contractors to use recycled aggregate when bidding on construction projects paid for with public money.

“I’m happy to have it included,” Jones said. “The fact they have made reference to it, I’m pleased.”

Cosack said he is pleased to see the inclusion of promoting recycled aggregate. However, NDACT plans to continue include farmland protection in legislation.

“We’ll be fully engaged and we expect the minister (of Natural Resources) to make meaningful changes to this,” Cosack said. “Our attitude has always been that we want to work with people.”

By Bill Tremblay
Published in the Orangeville Banner, Nov. 6, 2013

• < Prev
• Next >