In late 2025, Ontario’s government introduced the Water and Wastewater Public Corporations Act, a controversial move that allows the provincial minister to take control of local water and wastewater services. the legislation, part of Bill 60, has drawn sharp criticism from healthcare professionals, environmental advocates, and utility workers, who see it as a backdoor to privatization. despite amendments in Bill 98 aimed at limiting private ownership, legal experts warn that loopholes remain, leaving the door open for public-private arrangements.

The $30 million toe in the water

According to the report, the Peel Region—one of Ontario’s most diverse areas—will be the first to feel the impact of this shift. By 2029, the region’s water and wastewater services will be dismantled and handed over to three lower-tier municipalities, which must then funnel these services through a new water and wastewater public corporation. the transition is fraught with financial risk, as the infrastructure in Peel was developed using decades of public investment. Moving these assets into a corporate structure potentially exposes public wealth to private interests, prioritizing shareholder value over the health and equity of the region’s diverse populations.

An echo of Sydney’s 2024 institutional buy-up

The shift toward corporatization in Ontario mirrors a global trend where international financial institutions, such as the World Bank, encourage reforms that prioritize bankability and risk-return profiles over social mandates. In many parts of the Global South, this model has been used to shift financial risks onto local communities while ensuring that private profits are extracted from basic needs, transforming public service into a revenue stream for global markets. By shifting water services into a corporate framework, Ontario aligns itself with this troubling trend , risking the erosion of accountability that has been carefully built over decades.

Who is the unnamed buyer?

The report highlights that the term “agent” in the amendments is dangerously vague, potentially allowing private entities to operate under the guise of state agency. Legal experts, including Professor Joel Bakan from the University of British Columbia, argue that these restrictions are insufficient and that the door remains open for various public-private arrangements that could eventually lead to full privatization. The lack of transparency in the legislation raises questions about who will ultimately benefit from this shift in control.

What auditors flagged in the May filing

Expert Lina Taing from Brock University has highlighted that the consolidation of water services into arm-length corporations removes the local oversight necessary for safety.. This is particularly concerning given the history of Ontario’s water management. The multi-barrier approach to water safety was established as a direct result of the Walkerton tragedy in 2000, where contaminated water led to several deaths. By removing site-specific knowledge and replacing local governance with distant corporate boards, the province risks repeating the mistakes of the past in the pursuit of corporrate efficiency and profit maximization.