Ontario ‘unleashes’ climate catastrophe as scientists warn Paris Agreement ‘no longer attainable’

Brampton resident David Laing was jolted awake at 2 a.m. on November 10, 2024, by an eerie roar tearing through his neighbourhood.

“As I'm lying there awake, thinking, I've never heard wind so strong before, my phone goes off and it's a tornado warning saying, you need to seek immediate shelter,” Laing recalls.

“This is Brampton? In November? This is not natural. This is not normal.” 

November 11 saw a tornado warning issued for Caledon and Brampton, with Bolton lying directly in the path of the storm.

(Instant Weather Ontario/X)

Laing has been environmentally conscious for most of his life, but that night marked a turning point. A creeping fear set in — not just about one storm, but about the broader trajectory of Ontario and the planet. 

David Laing, President of the Brampton Environmental Alliance, speaking before the Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure, and Cultural Policy on November 10, 2022, urging the PC government to make amendments to Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Laing warned that without major changes, the bill could cause widespread environmental harm, particularly in the Greater Toronto Area, and called for balanced, sustainable growth that respects nature, communities and future generations.

(Brampton Environmental Alliance)

That fear is absent from the Progressive Conservative (PC) government’s latest budget, Bill 24, ironically titled “A Plan to Protect Ontario.” Unveiled on May 15, amid a wave of fast-tracked, environmentally regressive legislation, the budget includes no funding for environmental protection, no climate strategy, and no plan for adaptation, even as Ontario faces yet another summer of climate extremes.

An Ontario Chamber of Commerce statement notes that the budget lacks new measures related to land-use planning, which is critical to sustainable growth, housing affordability, agriculture, and natural infrastructure, and is “light on investments to support climate resilience,” an urgent, long-term challenge that will shape Ontario’s competitiveness, growth, and overall resilience.

“With all the attention on bill 5, other things kind of slipped past everyone but the budget particularly fails to meet the need of the interrelated climate and biodiversity crises, and perhaps most disappointingly, actually slashes funding for things like emergency preparedness and forest firefighting,” Ontario Nature conservation director Tony Morris told The Pointer.

“It's quite concerning that again, Ontario continues to kind of cut these essential services that are becoming more and more important with the impacts of climate change.”

So far this year, nearly 30 wildfires are active across the province, and over 3.7 million hectares have burned, six times the size of Prince Edward Island, making this the second-worst wildfire season since 2023.

While Queen’s Park contends only with wildfire smoke, much of northwestern Ontario is actively burning. Red Lake 12, the province’s largest wildfire, has scorched over 177,000 hectares since it was discovered on May 28 and remains out of control, prompting the evacuation of thousands from Sandy Lake, Deer Lake, Keewaywin, and North Spirit Lake First Nations.

(MAP: Ministry of Natural Resources/Government of Ontario, Photo: Sol Mamakwa/Instagram)

June 20, the Summer Solstice and longest day of the year, brought a powerful heat dome that settled over southern Ontario. The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) endured its first official heat wave of the year, marking the start of a punishing stretch of hot days. By June 23, the region recorded its hottest day since 2016, with temperatures soaring above 35 degrees Celsius and humidity making it feel more like 47 degrees Celsius.

Yet instead of responding to this escalating threat with increased support, the PC’s latest budget reduced emergency wildfire funding by $42 million, with a $3.8 million cut from the budget for emergency preparedness and response, further weakening Ontario’s ability to protect ecosystems and communities during natural disasters.

Despite escalating wildfires and a mounting climate crisis, the Ford government offered Ontario’s forest fire pilots the second-lowest wages in Canada. “The skilled pilots we need are not coming to work in Ontario or they are leaving to work in neighbouring provinces who offer fair compensation for this specialized and often dangerous work,” said Chris Eckert, OPSEU/SEFPO Chair of the OPS Unified Special Case Committee, representing water bomber pilots in Ontario. A statement by OPSEU/SEFPO notes: “the most recent offer from the Ford government to the pilots fighting fires in Ontario does nothing to address the real issues driving the recruitment and retention crisis. Instead of tackling the core problem – low wages – the government has chosen to hide behind their announcement of new planes, offering the appearance of investment with no substance.”

(Mike Schreiner/X)

In July 2024, much of the GTA experienced flash floods that caused over $940 million in insured damages, according to initial estimates from Catastrophe Indices and Quantification Inc. (CatIQ)—all from just two to three days of intense rainfall. 

Nearly a year later, only $66.2 million has been allocated for emergency preparedness and response, down from $70 million the previous year.

Public opinion strongly supports greater environmental protection, with polls showing that 86 percent of Ontarians are in favour of creating more protected areas, and 88 percent agree the province should invest in biodiversity protection, restoration and sustainable use for climate, health, and economic benefits.

On May 8, Ontario Nature wrote a joint letter with 41 organizations to the Ontario’s finance minister Peter Bethlenfalvy requesting the government “significantly increase investments to protect and restore nature as part of the 2025 budget” with an annual investment of $230.5 million, and a total investment of $922 million over four years. A previous investigation by The Pointer has shown it would take much less than that for the government to trigger a widespread improvement to the protection efforts for Ontario’s vulnerable ecosystems and species. 

Instead, this year’s budget included a $60.6 million cut to the Ministry of Natural Resources, while the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) received a $156.8 million budget increase. 

The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks received just over $1 billion for 2025-26, compared to nearly $9 billion allocated to the Ministry of Energy and Mines.

(Government of Ontario)

On the surface, the MECP increase seems positive but is complicated by the fact that roughly $20 million likely stems from bill 5’s controversial proposal replacing the Endangered Species Act’s Species at Risk Conservation Fund.

Morris explained, the “Pay-to-Slay fund” required project proponents to directly contribute to conservation. Now, under the new Species Conservation Account, taxpayers cover these costs, allowing harmful projects to proceed without financial responsibility, effectively shifting the burden of protecting biodiversity onto Ontario taxpayers.

“There is little transparency on how the remaining $136.8 million increase will be spent,” he noted. 

When Ontario Nature requested details, MECP stated the funds would support emissions reductions through the Emissions Performance Program, water services via the Ontario Clean Waters Agency, and phosphorus reduction in Lake Simcoe and other waterways, but “did not provide a detailed breakdown.”

Bill 5 is poised to unleash what multiple experts have described as an environmental “slaughterfest,” threatening already-vulnerable ecosystems across Ontario. This comes at a time of mounting global urgency to halt biodiversity loss, with wildlife populations declining by an average of 73 percent between 1970 and 2020, pushing countless species to the brink of extinction, according to the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) Living Planet Report 2024.

In 2022, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. As a signatory, Canada committed to 23 action-oriented targets aimed at reversing biodiversity decline, with the meaningful involvement of Indigenous and local communities. 

Ontario’s own Biodiversity Strategy includes many of these goals, but the provincial government has yet to commit to fully implementing it. Even a joint Canada-Ontario pledge in March 2024 to support nature conservation led to just $10 million over three years, an amount entirely federally funded and widely criticized as insufficient to meaningfully expand protected areas in the province.

But with the advancement of Ontario’s bill 5 and Ottawa’s bill C-5, the environment is increasingly vulnerable to being sidelined in favour of so-called “national interest” projects. In Ontario, a prime example is the Ring of Fire, likely to be designated a “special economic zone” and central to the PC’s plans for critical mineral extraction in support of electric vehicle (EV) adoption.

In the 2025–26 budget, Ontario has earmarked $92 million within its $232.5‑billion spending plan to boost its public EV charging network, ChargeON, bringing total investment in charging infrastructure to $180 million. The expansion has been widely welcomed, but Environmental Defence programs manager Keith Brooks cautions that the rush to develop critical mineral projects may come at too high a cost.

“We’re glad the government is still supporting EV manufacturing,” Brooks told The Pointer. “Becoming a player in critical minerals isn't inherently bad; Ontario, as a manufacturing hub, clearly offers immense clean‑economy opportunities.”

The Ring of Fire, which not only contains valuable mineral deposits but is also home to fragile, low-lying swamp ecosystems that store vast amounts of carbon in their waterlogged soils and peat layers, plays a critical role in climate regulation. Lorna Harris, a carbon and peatland researcher with Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, estimates that the proposed Ring of Fire development area holds roughly 1.6 billion tonnes' worth of stored carbon, equivalent to the emissions of 1.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide.

(Wildlife Conservation Fund/Josef MacLeod)

“But I do think there are some problematic elements as well. In particular, the Premier seems very focused on the Ring of Fire, and I don't think that's the critical mineral project we would advocate starting with. I worry that the province’s approach to critical minerals may run afoul of First Nations and could actually delay or set back any real progress on that front.” 

The Ford government now faces a summer likely filled with legal battles and protests from “Idle No More 2.0”, which could stall its plans to ‘unleash Ontario’s economy.’

Between June 18 and 21, members of the Attawapiskat and Neskantaga First Nations launched a historic mobilization, “Here We Stand,” along the Attawapiskat River to defend their sacred waters and oppose the proposed Northern Road Link. The road is meant to connect future Ring of Fire mines to provincial highways.

Grassroots delegations from Attawapiskat and Neskantaga First Nations surveyed the site by canoe, float plane, and air due to unusually low water levels. “The shallow river this year is yet another sign of the impacts of climate change—a direct threat to the land, water, and traditional land users throughout Treaty No. 9,” a statement shared with The Pointer highlighted.

(Neskantaga First Nation)

“The Attawapiskat River is not a corridor for extraction—it is a lifeline,” Chief Gary Quisess of Neskantaga First Nation, said. 

“This river has never been for sale. And it never will be.”

Quisess told The Pointer that he’s disappointed, but not surprised, that the Ford government went ahead with the 2025 budget without ever consulting Neskantaga First Nation, calling the lack of engagement yet another example of being left out of decisions that directly affect their people.

“The budget for Indigenous peoples is already set. It’s the same year after year, there’s no adjustment for inflation or the rising cost of living. For over 30 years, it hasn’t changed,” he added.

Neskantaga First Nation councillor Lashaunda Waswa recalled receiving only a $40 monthly allowance while attending high school. “It wasn’t enough, sometimes I had to buy my own medicine or personal products. Boarding parents get money for rent and food, but there are other essentials youth need when they’re away from home. It turns into a matter of survival,” she said.

Waswa stressed the urgent need for the government to consult with First Nations “on everything, including the budget,” and to recognize that communities consist of both on-reserve and off-reserve members. “It’s not just those living on reserve who need funding and programs.”

In an interview with The Pointer, Ontario Green Party leader Mike Schreiner noted, “The only mention in the entire budget about climate was that it would negatively impact agriculture. But then there is nothing to help the farming sector protect itself from climate impacts.”

Ontario is losing roughly 319 acres of agricultural land every day to non-agricultural uses such as urban development and aggregate extraction, according to the Ontario Farmland Trust, the National Farmers Union of Ontario, and the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

“In order for future generations of Ontarians to have access to fresh, local food, Ontario’s farmland must be protected,” a statement by Ontario Farmland Trust noted.

Environment Defence’s water program manager, Rebecca Kolarich, pointed out that the budget also lacks necessary funding to protect and restore the Great Lakes.

“At a time when U.S. president Trump is threatening freshwater in Canada, Ontario should be stepping up to invest in the health and future of the Great Lakes. Without critical investments, including financial support to farmers and effective research and monitoring, the future of these precious freshwaters is at risk,” Kolarich said.

The PC government has instead committed nearly $30 billion over the next decade to highway expansion and rehabilitation projects, including Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass, despite repeated warnings from experts that these projects won’t ease congestion and will cause lasting ecological damage.

“They talk a lot about transit infrastructure, but most of those projects are over budget and behind schedule. At the same time, they’re encouraging more car use, scrapping license fees, building new highways, banning bike lanes. Where’s the strategy? By 2040, Brampton will have over a million people. The GTA will be even more crowded. How are we supposed to fit all those cars?,” Brampton resident David Laing shared.

“I can bike places faster than I can take the bus, even though I have free transit as a senior.”

Beyond its blatant disregard of the province’s natural and agricultural lands, the emissions caused due to the highway construction are also expected to slow Canada’s progress toward its climate goals under the Paris Agreement, including the 2030 target of cutting emissions by 30 percent from 2005 levels.

On June 19, a group of prominent French scientists and former contributors to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) collectively and unequivocally claimed that the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, a central aim of the Paris Agreement established a decade ago, “is no longer attainable."

The #ShowYourStripes campaign, first launched in 2019 by IPCC climate scientist Ed Hawkins, uses ‘warming stripes’ graphics to visualise over 150 years of rising global temperatures; each stripe marking a year, shifting from cool blues to deep reds. On June 21, new data was released, which revealed that the planet has warmed by 1.3 degrees Celsius.

(ShowYourStripes)

Against this grim backdrop, the provincial government’s continued disregard for climate realities feels not only out of step but increasingly surreal.

“It’s hard to really find anything positive in the budget,” Schreiner said, though he welcomed the government’s $10.9 billion, 12-year investment in energy efficiency programs, which aims to restart support for homeowners upgrading their homes or investing in solar energy.

But there’s a catch: he noted the program’s design primarily favours wealthy households, limiting broader participation. 

The Independent Electricity System Operator’s 2024 year-in-review shows that in 2024, 16 percent of Ontario’s electricity came from natural gas, reducing the grid’s emissions-free share to 84 percent, down from 87 percent the previous year and a peak of 96 percent in 2017.

(Canada Energy Regulator)

“I'm hearing from folks in the solar sector that, although the program has some provisions to provide people with incentives to use solar installations, these are designed in a way that actually hinders solar projects from delivering the kind of financial returns you would expect because they disallow net metering if you participate in the program,” he said. 

“So even the one good thing in the budget…is actually designed in a way that I don’t think will be effective. And it certainly won’t help the people who need it most, low- and middle-income Ontarians trying to save money by saving energy.”

Beyond affordability, access to energy-efficient housing is also under threat due to bill 17, which strips municipalities of their ability to enforce Green Development Standards, local policies that set requirements for energy performance and sustainable design.

“While we agree Ontario’s housing build-out should pick up speed, this must not come at the cost of energy efficiency and affordability—two priorities this government has emphasized. Green Development Standards in leading Ontario municipalities play a vital role in unlocking these opportunities. Taking this authority from municipalities, as proposed in bill 17, without implementing strong provincial standards for building clean, energy-efficient homes, will cost Ontario families more in the long run. We already have options to build with cleaner materials at similar costs and to reduce household bills by electrifying homes and allowing people to power their cars with cheap, clean electricity,” Clean Energy Canada executive director Rachel Doran wrote in a statement.

“Building our economy, strengthening the resilience of our supply chains and protecting household affordability are the right intentions for this political moment. But thoughtful execution is what will truly protect Ontarians and set our workers and economy up for long-term success.”

That's the kind of disconnect that keeps Laing up at night. This year, his property taxes surpassed $9,000, and he worries they’ll only keep rising, forcing him to question whether he can afford to stay in the city much longer.

“I’m on a fixed income—how long can I afford that? We keep talking about housing prices and building more, but we’re ignoring the rising costs of property taxes and long-term home operation. That’s where energy efficiency and climate resilience make the difference,” he said.

“This government has never painted a vision as to what they want Ontario to become. I’m not a climate scientist, but even I can see that we’re pushing the planet into territory we can’t control.”

Email: [email protected]

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you