More housing is no explanation for Ford's attack on the Greenbelt - The Globe and Mail

Open this photo in gallery:

Houses back onto a farmer's field in Binbrook, Ont., an area within the Greenbelt, on June 7.Chris Young/The Canadian Press

Doug Ford’s maneuvering on the Greenbelt has always smelled bad. Now we know the source of the odour. The Ford government directly manipulated a 2022 process to open up some of these lands around Toronto to development, and delivered an $8-billion windfall to well-connected owners.

Those are the conclusions of a special report that Ontario Auditor-General Bonnie Lysyk released on Wednesday. Ms. Lysyk was both clear and blunt in her conclusions. The government removed 3,000 hectares from Greenbelt protection under questionable circumstances in December; 92 per cent of this land was reclassified to the benefit of just three developers.

None of this followed standard procedure. None of it is defensible. It’s the kind of scandal that ought to bring down a government. But Ms. Lysyk makes another point that’s nearly as important: Opening up the Greenbelt wasn’t needed in the first place. Solving the province’s housing crisis does not require more sprawl.

The details of the affair are stark. Of the 15 large sites removed from the Greenbelt in December, 2022, 14 were brought forward by Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Steve Clark’s then-chief of staff, Ryan Amato (though Ms. Lysyk does not name him). Mr. Amato, in turn, was following suggestions he received at a development-industry dinner. Ms. Lysyk’s narrative suggests a classic case of private actors influencing policy to their own advantage.

Ford’s Greenbelt plan favoured certain developers, Ontario’s Auditor-General report says

But what does it all mean? Here the Premier is attempting to create a smokescreen. During a press conference on Wednesday, Mr. Ford said his government is simply trying to address the province’s blistering population growth and huge housing shortage.

It’s important to parse this correctly. Ontario does, in fact, need to build much more housing very quickly. But as Ms. Lysyk puts it, “a shortage of land is not the problem.” The province does not need to threaten the agricultural and ecological resources of the Greenbelt to meet its housing goals.

In February, a report from the non-profit Environmental Defence noted that the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area already has more than 350 square kilometres of unbuilt “greenfield” land approved for development.

But the province shouldn’t even be building much on those suburban spaces, either. Instead, it should be encouraging new housing on built-up areas in cities. This means replacing existing strip malls or houses with apartment buildings.

Right now, apartments are banned in most places in our cities. Last year, the government’s Housing Affordability Task Force proposed several tools to change that, including legalizing four-storey apartment buildings everywhere.

And what did Mr. Ford do with those recommendations? Ignored them, mostly. While Mr. Clark’s ministry accepted the task force’s aggressive target of 1.5 million additional new homes over a decade, the government has not forced the detailed changes to municipal planning that would make those targets plausible. They have generally left these reforms to municipal governments, who want nothing to do with them.

In short, the Ford government has identified a critical public policy issue – the need to build more housing – and then punted on it and used the ensuing chaos to attack the Greenbelt and serve the interests of a select few.

If Mr. Ford really cares so much about the housing crisis, he should be pushing aggressively to make sure that cities, especially Toronto and Mississauga, are rapidly increasing their rate of growth. These places have wide swaths of low-density neighbourhoods that could easily absorb more people in a manner that is cost-effective, convenient and reduces the province’s carbon emissions.

Much more housing in cities is necessary. The principal obstacles are planning regulations and local politics. Mr. Ford could use his power to overcome these. If he did, it might be unpopular, but it would be the right thing – similar to the efforts of California Governor Gavin Newsom and B.C. Premier David Eby to overcome NIMBYism and create new housing.

Such reform would create far more homes, and far more financial value, than attacking the Greenbelt. But Mr. Ford apparently prefers to turn wetlands into McMansions. That means the real work of rezoning and intensifying our cities must be done by others – ambitiously, quickly and honestly.

Adblock test (Why?)

More housing is no explanation for Ford's attack on the Greenbelt - The Globe and Mail
Read More