Location aggravation

Opposition is flying fast and furious to the Liberal government’s decision not to bring Forest Tenure Act meetings to Northern Ontario.

The Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association, the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce and the provincial NDP all voiced concerns about the decision, along with changes to Bill 151 introduced publicly in January.

Harold Wilson, TBCC president, expressed grave concerns that hearings will be held next week in Toronto, said a letter sent to the province’s standing committee on general government has ignored requests to bring the hearings to other regions of the province more heavily affected by the forest industry collapse.

“We are most affected by this legislation,” Wilson said, calling on the province to hold a hearing specifically in Thunder Bay.

“Our biggest concern is the legislation appears to have changed from what was delivered in January. When they were in our offices they were talking about two pilot projects, they were talking about five to seven years to assess what happened with those local management committees for forestry.”

Three months ago industry experts praised the province for not unilaterally imposing local forest management corporations to govern Ontario’s woodlands and instead promised to test them out over five to seven years in two locations.

The measured approach put the forest industry at ease, but the latest news, combined with the limited consultation the province is offering, has people like Wilson up in arms all over again.
 
“They’re saying it’s enabling legislation to be bringing in these crown corporations, but I still think it could have been restricted to the two they talked about, and the five to seven years to see this thing true.

“They also were supposed to involve industry much more in making sure the language was in keeping because this is about companies being able to attract investors. This is about being able to get bank support to do what they have to do. That was our objection to forest tenure reform last May when it came out,” Wilson said.
 
NOMA’s executive vice-president David Canfield said it makes no sense not to allow for regional consultation.

“Once again we see that this government is more focused on getting legislation passed than they are on getting it right for the people of Northwestern Ontario,” he states in a news release.

Forestry Minister Michael Gravelle countered that while public hearings are an integral part to the formation of the legislation, there have been two levels of consultations to date, including stops “all across Northern Ontario.”

“We then went out and consulted again. Certainly in an ideal world I would like very much to be able to continue to consult across the North. We have set the public hearings up so there will be the opportunity for any Northern community or leader to, via video-conferencing, hook up with all-party committee,” Gravelle said.

The minister added that it’s difficult to facilitate hearings outside of Toronto when the legislature is sitting and he doesn’t want to delay the process.

“I think it’s important that we move this legislation forward,” he said.

Gravelle said there’s no question the industry has expressed concern, specifically about the powers of the forestry minister in terms of the ability to unilaterally cancel forest sustainability licenses.

“It’s something we would not do except under the most extreme circumstances,” Gravelle said. “But having said that, that’s why we’re continuing to consult with industry. We did come to an agreement and I believe we can get back to that place.”