Summary#

This bill amends the Canada National Parks Act to create the Ojibway National Urban Park of Canada in Windsor, Ontario. It adds seven mapped land parcels to Schedule 1 of the Act, which brings them under federal park protections and management. The bill does not include funding, land transfers, or governance details.

• Establishes a new national urban park by listing seven parcels totaling about 323.4 hectares (Bill, Schedule 1, Part 5, paras (a)-(g)).
• Brings the area under the Canada National Parks Act, which puts ecological integrity first in management (Canada National Parks Act, s.8(2)).
• Triggers a requirement for a park management plan within 5 years, with public input and tabling in Parliament (Canada National Parks Act, s.11).
• Does not authorize spending, set fees, or specify how current landholders transfer lands to the federal government (Bill text).
• Identifies boundaries that reference Ojibway Shores and a shared boundary with Black Oak Heritage Park (Bill, Schedule 1, paras (a)-(b)).

What it means for you#

• Households and visitors
  • The mapped lands become a federal park managed by Parks Canada. Park rules under the Act apply, such as protecting plants, wildlife, and natural features (Canada National Parks Act, s.4, s.8(2)).
  • A formal management plan must be developed within 5 years, with public consultation, which can shape trail access, programming, and permitted activities (Canada National Parks Act, s.11).
• Local governments
  • Day-to-day land-use control for the park area shifts to Parks Canada once lands are under federal administration. Municipal bylaws no longer set uses inside park boundaries (Canada National Parks Act).
  • The bill does not address municipal servicing, road access, or payments in lieu of taxes. Data unavailable.
• Businesses and developers
  • New industrial or resource-extraction uses inside the park would be prohibited under the Act’s conservation-first mandate (Canada National Parks Act, s.8(2)).
  • Any commercial services in the park (for example, concessions or tours) would require Parks Canada authorization. The bill itself does not create or guarantee such opportunities (Bill text).
• Current landholders
  • The bill lists boundaries but does not set out how ownership or administration will transfer to the federal government, nor does it provide compensation terms. Separate agreements or processes would be needed (Bill, Schedule 1; Bill text).
• Indigenous communities
  • The bill does not set co-governance or specific Indigenous rights provisions. Any recognition or harvesting arrangements would need to follow existing law and future park planning. Data unavailable.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No appropriation or spending authority is included in the bill (Bill text).
• No official fiscal note identified. Data unavailable.
• Operating and capital costs to manage the park would fall to Parks Canada once lands are under federal administration; the bill does not provide amounts. Data unavailable.
• Any land acquisition or transfer costs are not specified in the bill. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Provides durable, legislated protection by placing the area under the Canada National Parks Act, which makes ecological integrity the first management priority (Canada National Parks Act, s.8(2)).
• Clearly defines seven parcels, about 323.4 hectares, including areas adjoining Ojibway Shores and Black Oak Heritage Park, creating a connected protected space in an urban setting (Bill, Schedule 1, paras (a)-(g)).
• Requires a management plan within 5 years, tabled in Parliament, ensuring transparency and public input (Canada National Parks Act, s.11).
• Advances public education and recreation purposes stated in the Act for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations (Canada National Parks Act, s.4).
• Does not raise taxes or authorize new spending in the bill; funding decisions can be handled through the normal budget process (Bill text).

Opponents' View#

• Commits to a new federal park without cost estimates for start-up, operations, or infrastructure in an urban setting (Bill text; Data unavailable).
• Implementation risk: the bill does not address how lands will transfer to federal administration or how existing leases and uses will be handled, which could delay implementation (Bill text).
• Potential constraints on future infrastructure or industrial projects within the mapped area due to the Act’s conservation-first mandate (Canada National Parks Act, s.8(2)).
• Urban enforcement and maintenance could be complex; the bill does not outline staffing, policing, or coordination with municipal services. Data unavailable.
• Governance gaps: the bill does not specify Indigenous co-management or municipal roles, leaving key decisions to later agreements and the park management plan (Bill text; Canada National Parks Act, s.11).