Supreme Court to hear challenge of law allowing Ontario Place redevelopment

The Supreme Court of Canada will hear an appeal from a coalition challenging the constitutionality of legislation that opens the door to major changes at Ontario Place.

The urban park on the Toronto waterfront, opened in 1971, included a theatre that showed movies on a huge screen, children’s play areas and several pavilions suspended above the water.

The Ontario government plans to redevelop Ontario Place to include an elaborate spa operated by a private company.

The coalition Ontario Place Protectors challenged the provincial Rebuilding Ontario Place Act on the basis that it insulates state action from scrutiny by the courts and therefore violates the Constitution.

The coalition also argued that exemptions from environmental and heritage laws and municipal noise regulations amount to a breach of public trust.

“Many Ontario residents, and people all over the world, view Ontario Place as iconic, so there was obviously a very direct threat to Ontario Place as a result of the government’s actions. Beyond that, this appeared to be just the first step of the government trying to impose this kind of legislation right across the province,” said Eric Gillespie, an attorney for group bringing forth the challenge, tells 680 NewsRadio.

The Ford government has said in the past that the legislation helps eliminate red tape, which prevents them from building new things and building them faster.

“In this case, I think the problem is balance,” explained Gillespie. “Clearly, people want projects to move ahead efficiently, but at the same time, to remove every single right of every Ontario resident to do anything in our court system other than a judicial review, the bottom line is many people believe that’s just going way too far.

A judge dismissed the application, and a challenge of the ruling in the Ontario Court of Appeal was also unsuccessful, prompting an application to the top court.

Gillespie says it could be a year or more before the high court renders its decision.