Dear Editor,
In recent months, those concerned about the proposed Ontario Pumped Storage Project at the 4th Canadian Division Training Centre have seen encouraging signs.
More than 400 submissions were made to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC), reflecting widespread concern from residents, municipalities, and environmental organizations across the Georgian Bay region. More recently, the Department of National Defence (DND) itself has raised serious questions about the compatibility of the project with its military operations at the Meaford base.
These developments are important. They demonstrate that public engagement matters and that informed, evidence-based concerns are being heard.
But they should not be mistaken for a final outcome.
TC Energy has not withdrawn its proposal. The project remains active within the federal review process. In April, IAAC directed the proponent to respond to the many concerns raised during the public comment period. Those responses are now under review, and no final decision has been made.
In addition to the concerns already raised, the Department of National Defence has identified significant regulatory and operational constraints that would need to be addressed before the project could proceed. These include the presence of federally listed Species at Risk and limitations on the ability to provide compensatory habitat offsetting on DND lands. In its submission, DND notes that it is unable to accommodate additional land use for offsetting outside the project footprint – an issue that may create substantial challenges in meeting federal permitting requirements.
Despite these identified constraints, the project remains active within the federal review process.
There is also a broader context to consider. The project is being positioned, in part, as a climate-related energy storage initiative. In today’s policy environment, projects framed in this way can be advanced as priorities at the provincial or federal level, even in the face of substantial local opposition.
In other words, while meaningful progress has been made, there is no guarantee that this project will be stopped.
If there is one clear lesson from the past several years, it is this: sustained public attention is what drives accountability. The strong response from the community, the positions taken by municipalities, and the scrutiny now reflected in agency and departmental reviews did not happen on their own – they were the result of continued engagement by informed citizens, professionals, community organizations, and municipal governments across the Georgian Bay region, including eight municipalities that have formally raised concerns or opposed the project.
Until the proponent formally abandons this project, continued public engagement remains essential.
Where significant risks remain unresolved, and where even federal authorities have identified fundamental constraints, it is fair to ask whether this project should proceed at all.
Progress is worth acknowledging. But it is not the same as resolution.
The community has brought this conversation to where it stands today. It will take continued attention to ensure it reaches a responsible conclusion.
Sincerely,
Pat Zita, Meaford
