The Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association is pressuring the province to narrow its proposed anti-SLAPP legislation.
The Protection of Public Participation Act (Bill 52) would fast-track libel lawsuits to a judge who would decide whether dismissing the claim would be in the public interest. The governing Liberals argue the bill would protect free speech by limiting the ability of wealthy parties to drag out frivolous libel claims in the courts.
Atikokan Mayor Dennis Brown wants to know what "public interest" means.
Brown presented at Bill 52's committee hearings at Queen's Park on Thursday, arguing for three amendments NOMA hopes the province will take under consideration.
He demanded the province either define or remove the term "public interest" from the bill. He also wants to limit eligible defendants to organizations whose operations costs are less than $100,000 per year. He also wants reassurance the bill won't be applied retroactively.
"It could be devastating," Brown said to Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, Bill Mauro on Friday.
"It looks like you're going to go ahead with Bill 52, which would give all groups the right to stand up and say what they want without being afraid of being sued or criticized."
Brown's concern is based in statements certain environmental organizations make about the business practices of resource extraction companies. He feels anti-SLAPP legislation could open the door to a misinformation free-for-all and have dire consequences on the forestry industry.
One such example is Resolute Forest Products, which has filed a defamation lawsuit against Greenpeace for exaggerating forestry's environmental footprint and asking environmentalists to fabricate product reviews that would pressure paper companies to change suppliers.
Mauro assured NOMA the bill would not be applied retroactively. He added his staff is looking into NOMA's other concerns.
"It (the bill) doesn't stop anyone from launching a lawsuit against another party if they believe it's been libeled or slandered," Mauro said in defence of the bill.
"Having said that, we do understand the concern in the room. It has been a consistent concern for a number of years. We've brought that concern forward."
Mauro's ministry has been holding meetings with paper companies in Vancouver, New York and Minneapolis who are the targets of environmentalist divestment campaigns. He said when brands are being attacked, defending forestry companies is the province's responsibility.
"They're not so much criticizing the companies as they are criticizing the government. The companies are only allowed to harvest their wood based on the legislation that exists in the province of Ontario. So if they're criticizing the companies, they're criticizing us.
"That's why it's easy for me as Minister and for our government to put forth a very strong argument: no, we do sustainably manage our forests in the province of Ontario and we're as good at it probably as anyone across the globe."
