Take action now
Take the fight to Queen’s Park and Ottawa.
Toronto has pushed this issue as far as its current powers allow. Ontario controls crucial rules around municipal approval and access to the electricity system. Ottawa controls federal procurement, AI infrastructure funding and the standards used to define sovereign Canadian computing. Sign either petition — or both.
Petition to the Government of Ontario
Require public approval for major data centres.
Ask Queen’s Park to require public approval for major data centres and apply new provincial rules to unfinished expansions.
- Require site-specific rezoning and public consultation for major projects.
- Require an elected municipal decision instead of relying only on delegated review.
- Do not grandfather major new capacity that has not yet been built out or energized.
- Use electricity-connection rules to protect ratepayers and host communities.
Petition to the Government of Canada
Define and enforce Canadian data sovereignty.
Ask Ottawa to define and enforce what qualifies as genuinely sovereign Canadian AI and computing infrastructure.
- Distinguish data residency from genuine Canadian control.
- Set standards for jurisdiction, administration, encryption-key custody and foreign access.
- Tie federal funding and sensitive government contracts to those standards.
- Require consequences when public money is obtained through materially false sovereignty claims.
Why now: governments are writing the rules for major data centres and sovereign AI infrastructure now. Ontario’s current Data Centre Playbook consultation is scheduled to close on September 12, 2026.
Residents have asked me a very reasonable question about the proposed expansion of the data centre at 3650 Danforth Avenue:
If the community does not want a project of this scale moving ahead without proper scrutiny, why can’t Toronto City Council simply vote on it?
The answer exposes a much larger problem with the way major data centres are currently regulated.
Under the existing planning framework, the proposal at 3650 Danforth is proceeding through a delegated site-plan process. It is not being treated like a major rezoning application requiring a statutory public meeting and a final vote of City Council.
That makes very little sense for infrastructure of this scale. STACK markets its Toronto campus as a 56-megawatt facility on approximately 19 acres. Whatever anyone’s view of this particular project, infrastructure consuming electricity on that scale raises legitimate questions about the power grid, surrounding neighbourhoods, employment lands, emergency generators, noise, jobs, public benefit and Canadian control of critical digital infrastructure.
That is why we are launching two petitions. They address two different problems — and two levels of government that have powers Toronto simply does not have.
What Toronto has already done
In July, I brought a motion to Toronto City Council called Ensuring Due Diligence on Data Centres in Scarborough Southwest. Council adopted the amended motion 25–0 among members voting.
Council asked City staff to coordinate the 3650 Danforth application with Toronto’s broader review of major data centres, examine the City’s regulatory powers, investigate issues including electricity, water, noise, environmental effects, employment lands and data sovereignty, and obtain additional independent scrutiny of the project’s noise impacts.
Council also formally asked the Province to work with Toronto on its emerging provincial framework for data centres.
But the motion was not — and legally could not simply become — a City Council order cancelling the project. That is why the next stage of this fight has to involve Queen’s Park and Ottawa.
Queen’s Park
Why Ontario matters so much
Ontario is developing a new Data Centre Playbook for deciding how major data centres should receive access to the electricity system. The Province’s proposed approach already recognizes that these projects should be assessed on more than whether somebody can physically build one.
Ontario is considering economic benefits, electricity-system impacts, community benefits, data security and digital sovereignty. It is also considering special rules intended to ensure that major data centres pay the costs they impose on the electricity system rather than passing those costs on to existing electricity customers.
Ontario has also changed its electricity legislation so that the Province can establish special connection requirements for major new electricity loads. That creates a potentially powerful distinction between an existing lawful operation and future capacity that has not yet been energized.
A company may have a planning application in progress, but that should not automatically give it a permanent right to tens of megawatts of future electricity capacity.
No grandfathering of unfinished expansions
The existing operating phase is not the target. The proposed expansion is. Ontario’s new rules should apply to every major increment of data-centre capacity that has not yet been energized, including projects whose planning applications are already underway.
A public decision for infrastructure of this scale
Major data centres and major expansions should require site-specific rezoning, public notice, a public meeting and an elected municipal decision. Ontario can also require municipal concurrence before significant new electricity capacity is allocated.
No grandfathering for unfinished expansion: if major new data-centre capacity has not yet been energized, it should have to meet the new provincial rules.
Consultation should happen before the important decisions are made
Residents should receive understandable information about the size of the project, its electricity requirements, noise and backup generation, environmental impacts, expected employment and the benefits being offered to the host community.
Residents should be able to ask questions. The proponent should have to respond. And local elected representatives should have to make a decision on the record. For infrastructure of this scale, that should be the minimum democratic standard.
Ottawa
The federal government has a different responsibility
The federal petition addresses a different issue: Canadian data sovereignty.
Data centres are increasingly described as critical infrastructure for Canada’s AI economy. Governments are investing public money in domestic computing capacity, and Ottawa is working on sovereign Canadian cloud and computing infrastructure.
But a server being physically located in Canada does not necessarily mean Canada has full control over it. A company operating here may also be subject to another country’s laws. Corporate control, administrative access, encryption systems, subcontractors and foreign legal obligations can all affect who ultimately has power over Canadian information.
Data residency is not necessarily data sovereignty.
So what should “Canadian sovereign” actually mean?
If infrastructure is going to be described as sovereign Canadian infrastructure — particularly when federal money, sensitive public information or government contracts are involved — there should be a clear and enforceable standard.
- Where is the data stored?
- Where is it processed?
- Who can administer the system?
- Who controls the encryption keys?
- What foreign laws apply to the company or its parent?
- Can workers or subcontractors outside Canada access the system?
- Who ultimately controls the company?
- What supply-chain dependencies can affect Canadian control?
And the rules need consequences
Standards without consequences are only suggestions. The federal government can connect sovereignty requirements directly to its financial and purchasing power.
If a company wants federal funding for sovereign AI infrastructure, wants to host sensitive federal information, or wants preferential access to sovereign-cloud contracts, it should have to meet the sovereign-compute standard.
And if public money or contracts are obtained through materially false claims about Canadian control, there should be consequences — including loss of certification, termination of contracts and repayment of public funds.
Why the two petitions work together
No single government controls this entire issue. An effective response has to use the powers that actually exist at each level.
Toronto
Local planning, development, environmental review, noise scrutiny and the municipal framework now under development.
Ontario
Municipal legislation and, critically, the rules governing access to Ontario’s electricity system and major new electrical loads.
Canada
Federal procurement, AI-infrastructure funding and the standards used to determine what qualifies as sovereign Canadian infrastructure.
The provincial petition says: do not allow major data centres to bypass public approval, and do not grandfather unfinished expansions out of new rules designed precisely because governments now understand the scale of these projects.
The federal petition says: if Canadian sovereignty is going to be used to justify building and publicly supporting massive digital infrastructure, define sovereignty clearly and enforce it.
These are not anti-technology positions. Canada needs computing infrastructure, and artificial intelligence will require enormous computing capacity. Those facts make good public policy more important, not less.
Why signing now matters
The rules are being written now. Ontario is deciding how major data centres will access the electricity system, what community benefits and protections will be required, and whether unfinished expansions will be subject to the new framework.
Ontario’s current Data Centre Playbook consultation is scheduled to close on September 12, 2026. This is the moment to put a clear public position on the record: major new capacity should face public approval, unfinished expansions should not be grandfathered out of the new rules, and host communities should have a meaningful say.
Ottawa is making a parallel choice about sovereign Canadian AI infrastructure. If public money, sensitive government data and federal contracts are going to be tied to the word “sovereign,” Canada needs an enforceable standard for who actually controls the systems.
A strong public response gives both governments a specific mandate while those decisions are still being made.
Add your name
Choose one petition — or sign both.
Major infrastructure should require public accountability. And if infrastructure is promoted as Canadian sovereign capacity, it should have to prove meaningful Canadian control.