It is astonishing that a law as fundamental as the Law on the protection of land and agricultural activities (LPTAA) can be substantially amended by an omnibus bill affecting 15 laws, “mainly for the purpose of reducing the administrative burden. “.
However, this is what is happening with Bill 103, currently being studied by the Committee on the Economy and Labor of the National Assembly. For the LPTAA, we can immediately see that several articles go much further than simple administrative simplification.
In our opinion, the LPTAA, which “celebrated” its 43 years on November 9, deserves a real debate before an appropriate body, such as the Commission for Agriculture, Fisheries, Energy and Natural Resources (CAPERN) .
Over the years, this pillar of our food potential and land use has undergone several modifications, the net balance of which has unfortunately left it weakened.
While the LPTAA averted disaster, the recent documentary Quebec, asphalt land by Nicolas Mesly brilliantly illustrates how land speculation has persisted and insidiously eroded our best agricultural land. Others also underline this incessant pressure, such as columnist Mickaël Bergeron of The gallery.
A bargaining regime
Like several organizations which testified in parliamentary committee, we are particularly concerned by certain provisions which risk trivializing the intrusion of the political in the application of the LPTAA.
They introduce the idea of compensation (mitigation measures or agreement with the Minister) when the government avails itself of a power under the current law allowing it, after having taken the opinion of the Commission de protection du territoire agricole (CPTAQ ), to replace it to decree an exclusion or authorization of non-agricultural use.
Long exceptional, recourse to this power has increased in recent years (REM files, Vaudreuil hospital, then Google, etc.). Almost every time our agriculture has lost out.
Without questioning the good faith of the legislator, how can we be sure that we will not witness the gradual establishment by politics of a bargaining regime to monetize exclusions and authorizations? The creation of the CPTAQ in 1978 was precisely aimed at avoiding political interference.
And how can one be convinced of the dissuasive effect of the obligation to pay sums inflated by speculation for agricultural land? Think of financial compensation for the destruction of wetlands; far from discouraging it, they seem to accentuate the phenomenon. In addition, urban sprawl is depleting the water tables, as in Saint-Lin – Laurentides.
Other aspects of Bill 103 are irritating, such as the restrictions on access to CPTAQ files and the addition of a “development of agricultural activities and businesses” mandate for this commission, whereas this rather it is up to MAPAQ to see it.
In addition, the complex issue of fragmentation in agricultural zones cannot be treated in such a summary fashion to take into account the diversity of farm models and regional contexts.
For a serious reform of the LPTAA
Rather than making piecemeal modifications, without an overall vision or in-depth debate before the appropriate body of the National Assembly, the time has certainly come for a serious reform of the LPTAA. It must be strengthened where urban sprawl is wreaking havoc, and it must be relaxed with caution where devitalized villages need new blood.
We therefore ask for the withdrawal of the numerous provisions relating to the LPTAA which are not administrative reductions, as noted in the brief from the Jean-Garon Institute.
Instead, the government must initiate a reflection for a concerted reform, orchestrated by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and leading to a new bill.
It is essential to reaffirm the primacy of agriculture in agricultural land, especially at a time when the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is drafting a National Policy on Architecture and Land Use Planning.
The passage of Bill 90 in 1978 was a matter of national interest. With the need to strengthen our food autonomy shaken by COVID-19, as well as the need to deal with an emerging environmental and climate crisis, this law is becoming a national security issue. It must have a significant weight in the policies affecting the territory.