Temporary Workforce Housing and Community Impacts

I oppose the Ontario Pumped Storage Hydropower Project because its social effects on Meaford and Grey County have not been responsibly addressed. TC Energy’s own summary says people have already raised concerns about “workforce accommodation and community life,” including where construction workers will be housed, local infrastructure capacity, community well-being, and adverse effects from a workforce influx. The project materials also identify potential effects on local commercial accommodation capacity, the local housing market, regional population, traffic, and demand for social infrastructure and utilities.

This is not a speculative issue. In its Initial Project Description, TC Energy says it is still evaluating labour market capacity, has not yet determined whether temporary workforce accommodations will be required, and will only develop an accommodation strategy later. It also says some workers will need to come from elsewhere in Ontario or Canada to fill specialized roles or meet peak construction demand, and it projects 1,700 construction jobs during the four-year peak construction period. TC Energy even says that if a temporary workforce accommodation facility is required, it will rely on a project code of conduct and harassment-free workplace measures. That tells me the project’s social impacts are foreseeable, not hypothetical.

Grey County and Meaford are already under housing pressure. Grey County’s Housing and Homelessness Plan says demand for affordable housing exceeds supply, and in January 2026 the County reported that its affordable housing waitlist grew from 2,230 in 2024 to 2,545 in 2025. Meaford is separately undertaking Municipal Housing Affordability Measures to identify ways to improve housing diversity and affordability. TC Energy’s own filing also records concern about whether local infrastructure and services can handle an influx of construction workers and, if new infrastructure or services are required, who would pay for them. A project that may import a large temporary out-of-region workforce and possibly require dedicated worker accommodation is not compatible with those realities.

The host region is already described in the project materials as predominantly rural and older than the provincial average. TC Energy’s own socio-economic section says Meaford has a population of about 11,500 and an average age of 48.8, and that Grey County provides health care, emergency and fire services, policing, transit, and road maintenance. The same filing says the region also relies on visitor accommodations and year-round tourism, and that Meaford is focused on waterfront revitalization and downtown renewal. Brightshores says its Meaford Hospital has 15 inpatient beds and already experiences high seasonal emergency volumes. Straining local accommodation, roads, emergency response, and health services to support a multi-year industrial megaproject could undermine residents’ quality of life and the town’s long-term priorities.

This is not anti-worker. It is an objection to shifting the housing, health, traffic, and service costs of a private megaproject onto a small host community. If the project cannot proceed without unresolved workforce housing questions, future traffic plans, future codes of conduct, and future negotiations over community benefits, then its social effects are not under control. IAAC should not allow this project to proceed on the current record. At minimum, it should refer the project to an independent review panel and require a full social-impact assessment covering workforce accommodation, health care, policing, road safety, municipal cost recovery, and protection of local housing and tourist accommodations