According to the London Free Press, residents fighting a proposed five-storey office building on undeveloped privately-owned land at the southwest corner of Riverside Drive and Wonderland Road are facing two obstacles: "[r]ules and bureaucrats who favour development."
Incomplete and arbitrary prohibitions favour developers? Bearing in mind that the developer is the owner of the property, over whom are they so "favoured?" By implication, the answer can only be: people who don't own the property. In practise, because this can mean anyone at all, it means that political cliques can take over the claim to represent them at no cost and little scrutiny. Rules, it must be recalled, were once made to protect people's property from such interference — now they are made to oblige interference. The man who wants to use his property for his own profit faces far more obstacles than his detractors.
The rules favour developers because they don’t always prohibit building near waterways, says Monica Jarabek, chairperson of the Oakridge Riverside Community Association.
One must suppose, according to Jarabek's logic, that only total prohibition of property rights would be fair. With friends like rules and bureaucrats, who needs enemies?