Farmland, forests, wetlands, and waterfront are shared public assets—not parcels waiting for a private operator. Under the current provincial government, major land decisions have repeatedly favoured well-connected proponents: opaque processes, weak consultation, and deals that are nearly impossible to unwind once signed.
Public waterfront, private operator, 95-year lease—and less Environmental Bill of Rights scrutiny than comparably large projects elsewhere
95 years
Private lease term7
Publicly owned
Waterfront land (province)6
~50% smaller
2025 spa footprint vs original8
Bill 5 carve-out
Reduced EBR participation9
The deal at a glance
Ontario Place remains provincially owned waterfront on Lake Ontario—not a private parcel sold off, but public commons handed to a private operator for generations.6
Therme Canada would operate a large thermal spa and waterpark under a 95-year lease—pools, slides, saunas, and paid day passes on a site many Torontonians treat as public waterfront.7
The province promotes rebuilt free parkland on the West Island—beaches, trails, and open space—alongside the commercial spa complex.6
A generation-long private hold is hard to take back. Critics argue the public gets less waterfront control and less recourse than the scale of the project deserves—especially with Bill 5 limiting normal EBR scrutiny.9
What changed in Therme's proposal
What the government emphasizes
Hard to unwind
A 95-year lease locks in private control of waterfront for generations—far longer than most political cycles or council terms.
Less public scrutiny
Bill 5 exempts Ontario Place from the usual Environmental Bill of Rights participation requirements for comparably large projects.
Same playbook
Streamline first, consult later—the approach critics tie to the Greenbelt scandal, now applied to public waterfront.
Bill 5 and the Environmental Bill of Rights
Ontario Place redevelopment is carved out from the normal public environmental participation Ontarians expect under the Environmental Bill of Rights—less notice, less recourse than for similar-scale projects elsewhere.9 For species protection, special economic zones, and Ring of Fire impacts, see wildlife & Bill 5; for treaty rights and consent on northern development, see Indigenous rights.
Unlike the Greenbelt, this deal has not been reversed—it is still moving forward.
That makes Ontario Place one of the most consequential live fights over public land in Ontario right now. Public pressure reversed the Greenbelt carve-out; whether the same happens here depends on whether Ontarians treat waterfront the way they treated protected countryside.
Biased process, developer windfall, criminal investigation—and proof that public pressure can win
In late 2022, the government moved to remove 7,400 acres from the Greenbelt—the protected band of farmland, forests, and wetlands around the Greater Golden Horseshoe—and open it for housing. The move was framed as necessary to build more homes. The Auditor General and integrity commissioner found otherwise: the process was "biased and lacked transparency," favoured developers who had lobbied for the removals, and proceeded without evidence that Greenbelt land was needed to meet housing targets.14
$8.28 billion
Estimated value of land removed—much of it held by developers who had acquired it while it was still protected, with access to decision-makers before the swap was announced.
The selection of which lands to remove was "biased and lacked transparency."
Of 15 sites removed, 12 had been requested by developers in the months before the decision. Senior political staff drove the process; housing need was not the basis for the choices. The government had advice that enough land was already designated for development—carving up the Greenbelt was not necessary.1
The integrity commissioner later found the former housing minister violated ethics rules in dealings with developers—not evidence-based policy, but privileged access built to deliver a windfall to a small group of landowners.4
Status
Criminal investigation ongoing
No charges laid—as of early 2025, federal probe continues
The RCMP launched a criminal investigation into the Greenbelt land swap, interviewing current and former PC aides. A provincial land-use decision under federal criminal probe underscores how seriously the process has been questioned.2
Faced with public outrage, journalism, and AG findings, the government reversed course in September 2023 and restored the 7,400 acres.35
That retreat mattered. It showed bad land policy can be beaten when it becomes politically impossible to ignore. It did not end the fight over who controls Ontario's land—only proved the public still has leverage when it uses it.
Demand full public scrutiny for Ontario Place, no more developer favours on protected land, and accountability while the Greenbelt probe continues