During a global climate and biodiversity crisis, Ontario’s 2025 budget, introduced as Bill 24, Plan to Protect Ontario Act, fails to deliver critical investments in nature protection and conservation. Instead, it slashes funding for essential services like emergency preparedness and forest firefighting while passing environmental conservation costs from proponents to taxpayers. Here’s what you need to know and why Ontarians should be concerned.
Ontario Nature’s Recommendations Ignored
In May 2025, Ontario Nature, along with forty other organizations, published their collective 2025 Budget Recommendations calling on the government to fund the Ontario Biodiversity Strategy, and to match Quebec’s $230 million annual investment over the next four years.
Instead of addressing this need, Bill 24 does not increase overall conservation funding, leaving critical habitats and species more vulnerable, especially with Bill 5 weakening habitat protections.
Funding Cuts Threaten Ontario’s Natural Spaces
Ontario’s natural spaces are under threat as recent funding cuts weaken the province’s ability to respond to climate change-induced natural disasters.
Bill 24’s $60.3 million cut to the Ministry of Natural Resources, in addition to a $42 million reduction in emergency wildfire funding, is dangerously reckless as climate change fuels more frequent and extreme fires. These cuts also come as Manitoba and Saskatchewan currently battle blazes, and after Canada’s worst wildfire season on record in 2023, proving we need more investment, not less.
Additionally, Bill 24 cuts $3.8 million from the budget for emergency preparedness and response, further weakening Ontario’s ability to protect ecosystems and communities during natural disasters such as the flash floods that hit Toronto in July of 2024.
Lack of Transparency as Taxpayers Stuck Paying for Proponents Environmental Damage
Under Bill 24, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks will see its budget grow by $156.8 million. While on the surface this may appear as a win for conservation in Ontario, the reality of the situation is less clear.
For example, $20 million of this increase likely stems from Bill 5’s proposal to replace the Endangered Species Act’s Species at Risk Conservation Fund, a controversial program critics dubbed “Pay-to-Slay,” because it allowed proponents to bypass environmental protections by paying into the fund, with a new taxpayer-funded Species Conservation Account. This change means proponents would no longer have to contribute to conservation efforts for at-risk species, even as their projects continue to threaten vulnerable habitats. Instead, the financial burden would shift entirely to Ontario taxpayers, who would now foot the bill for protecting biodiversity while proponents operate with fewer restrictions.
There is little transparency on how the remaining $136.8 million budget increase will be allocated. Ontario Nature reached out to MECP for program allocation clarification. In their response, the MECP claims that the money will support emissions reductions through the Emissions Performance Program, water services through the Ontario Clean Waters Agency, as well as phosphorus reduction in Lake Simcoe and other lakes and rivers. However, they provided no breakdown of how much will be allocated to these various programs. By bypassing committee review, Bill 24 avoided public scrutiny and accountability.
Take Action
As provinces across the country begin to implement meaningful conservation plans, Ontario is falling behind. Rather than undermining environmental protections and offloading conservation costs to taxpayers, the Ontario government must prioritize long-term funding for real conservation solutions.
Stay informed, contact your MPP, and demand better protections. You can also sign one of our Action Alerts for nature here.
Growing up between the mountains and the ocean in Vancouver B.C., Luke developed a deep love for nature that shaped his passion for environmental conservation. He holds an MA in Political Science from York University where he studied the political economy of the environment in Mexico’s petroleum and mining sectors, with an emphasis on sustainable development and indigenous land rights. His research fuels his commitment to equitable and impactful conservation policies. When he’s not advocating for nature, you’ll likely find Luke exploring Toronto’s urban green spaces, camera in hand, or brushing up on his Spanish.
