ONTARIO—Despite vocal opposition from Indigenous Nations, environmental organizations, and the Ontario Federation of Agriculture (OFA), the Ford government is pushing ahead with Bill 5—the “Protecting Ontario by Enabling Economic Growth Act, 2025.” The bill, which amends multiple environmental and land-use statutes, including those that attempt to overturn nation to nation treaty with First Nations in Ontario, has passed committee and is now on its way to third reading in the Ontario Legislature.
The legislation has been widely criticized for weakening key environmental safeguards, limiting public input, and undermining Indigenous rights to consultation and consent. Among its most controversial provisions are amendments to the Endangered Species Act, the Planning Act, which opens up threats to any and all lands, private or otherwise—and the Conservation Authorities Act—changes critics say would expedite development while reducing oversight and accountability. The omnibus bill is deliberately vague, leaving many questioning provincial governmental over reach.
On Manitoulin Island and across Northern Ontario, concern is growing. Zak Nicholls, a longtime environmental advocate, recently penned a letter to Algoma–Manitoulin MPP Bill Rosenberg outlining the dangers posed by the bill, including the greenlighting of projects like TC Energy’s proposed pumped storage facility in Meaford.
| Read our related story: |
| • Ontario’s Bill 5, meant to accelerate mining starts, concerns Indigenous leaders, conservationists (2025) |
“This project threatens the ecosystem of the Niagara Escarpment, a UNESCO World Biosphere, the precious waters of Georgian Bay, and more than 36 Species at Risk, including nine listed as Endangered,” Mr. Nicholls wrote. “Bill 5 proposes to strip away the very protections that keep projects like this in check.”
Notably, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture—an organization not always aligned with Mr. Nicholls and some environmental groups—has also expressed concern. In its formal submission to the Standing Committee on the Interior, the OFA urged the province to maintain “strong, science-driven species protections” and ensure reforms “respect both ecological integrity and farming activities.”
Indigenous Nations across the province have been unequivocal. The Anishinabek Nation, Saugeen Ojibway Nation, Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council, and others have issued statements condemning the legislation, citing a failure of Crown consultation and violations of treaty and constitutional obligations. They warn that the bill advances without Indigenous consent and threatens Indigenous stewardship over traditional territories.
More pointedly, Indigenous leaders have indicated that if the bill is passed, they are prepared to take coordinated direct action—including litigation at the Supreme Court level, while grassroots advocates are calling for road closures and economic blockades—to defend the land and water. “We’ve tried every legal and diplomatic channel,” a land defender told The Expositor. “If the province continues to legislate without us, we will respond in ways that cannot be ignored.”
Premier Doug Ford, in comments made to the press late last week, appeared to acknowledge the growing resistance. “If they shut down the roads, it’s not going to be good for them,” he said, in remarks that some have interpreted as a warning, while others have criticized as inflammatory.
Environmental Defence, Ecojustice, and the Canadian Environmental Law Association have all released detailed critiques of the bill, warning that it “undermines the very framework that protects Ontario’s natural heritage.” Legal analysts have also noted that fast-tracking development without meaningful Indigenous consultation could expose the province to court challenges — and to a level of civil unrest not seen since the Wet’suwet’en solidarity actions of 2020.
In the meantime, cross-sector coalitions—including Indigenous nations, farmers and environmental groups—are preparing to respond. Organizers say road closures, legal action, public demonstrations and potential municipal resolutions are all on the table.
While the government insists the bill is about “streamlining approvals” and “unleashing economic growth,” opponents argue the long-term ecological, legal and social costs have not been meaningfully addressed.
As Bill 5 moves toward final passage, Ontario appears headed for a political showdown, not just in Queen’s Park, but on the ground.
