role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">

May 7, 2026

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2026-May-07 (PDF)

L071 - Thu 7 May 2026 / Jeu 7 mai 2026

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 7 May 2026 Jeudi 7 mai 2026

Orders of the Day

HST Relief Implementation Act (Residential Property Rebates), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la mise en oeuvre de l’allégement de la TVH (remises relatives aux biens résidentiels)

Wearing of pins

Members’ Statements

Cileana Taylor

Tenant protection

Thalassemia / Karma Jiu Jitsu

Fire Protection Grant

Charitable walks

OKD Field Hockey Club

Volunteer firefighters

Roy Church Memorial Cornhole Tournament

Southlake Health

Introduction of Visitors

House sittings

Question Period

Freedom of information

Automotive industry

Government accountability

Government accountability

Child protection

Avion du gouvernement / Government jet

Northern transportation

Protection for workers

Freedom of information

Mental health and addiction services

Freedom of information

Freedom of information

Emergency preparedness

Protection for workers

Notice of dissatisfaction

Deferred Votes

Building Billy Bishop Airport Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la construction de l’aéroport Billy Bishop

Tenant protection

Better Regional Governance Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 pour une meilleure gouvernance régionale

Business of the House

Introduction of Visitors

Mother’s Day

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Introduction of Bills

Safety and Accountability in Ontario Corrections Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la sécurité et la responsabilisation des services correctionnels en Ontario

Petitions

Collective bargaining

Student assistance

Health care workers

Sexual violence and harassment

AI data centres

Collective bargaining

Homelessness

Collective bargaining

Collective bargaining

Collective bargaining

Highway safety

Highway 69

Orders of the Day

HST Relief Implementation Act (Residential Property Rebates), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la mise en oeuvre de l’allégement de la TVH (remises relatives aux biens résidentiels)

Royal assent / Sanction royale

HST Relief Implementation Act (Residential Property Rebates), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la mise en oeuvre de l’allégement de la TVH (remises relatives aux biens résidentiels)

Private Members’ Public Business

Public transit

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Good morning. Let us pray.

Prayers / Prières.

Orders of the Day

HST Relief Implementation Act (Residential Property Rebates), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur la mise en oeuvre de l’allégement de la TVH (remises relatives aux biens résidentiels)

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 6, 2026, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 114,

An Act to amend the Retail Sales Tax Act to enable credits and payments to be made respecting certain tax paid or payable in respect of residential property and to provide for other related matters / Projet de loi 114, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la taxe de vente au détail pour permettre l’octroi de crédits et le versement de paiements relativement à la taxe payée ou payable à l’égard de biens résidentiels et pour traiter d’autres questions connexes.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Ms. Jessica Bell: I will be sharing my time with the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane for the one-hour lead for this bill.

The bill is entitled the HST Relief Implementation Act (Residential Property Rebates), 2026. Now, essentially, what this bill does is it enables the government to move ahead with offering an HST rebate on new homes between the period of April 1, 2026, to March 31, 2027. This applies to homes that might have already been built but haven’t been sold yet. And it also applies to homes that are in the pre-construction phase. So if a purchase agreement is signed between April 1, 2026, and March 31, 2027, then this bill enables the buyer or the builder to receive that rebate.

Part of that rebate is a federal rebate, and part of that rebate is a provincial rebate, and it is a lot of money. It is a lot of money. For homes up to $1 million, you are eligible for the rebate portion of about the $130,000 you would typically pay in HST. That’s a lot. And then it goes up from there, but the bulk of it is—for homes from under $1 million up to $1.5 million, essentially, you’d get a rebate of about $130,000. That’s a lot of money.

Now, you might be interested to know why is it that we’re introducing a bill and debating a bill for an HST rebate program where the application period has already begun? It began on April 1. The reason why we’re debating this is because the Conservative government made a mistake. They made a mistake because they rushed through the budget bill very quickly, they rushed through the budget motion very quickly and, as I recall, the budget bill didn’t even go to committee.

It didn’t go to committee, which is highly unusual. It’s standard practice for this government to not take a bill to committee, but previous to this government, for as long as the Legislature has been sitting, it’s been standard practice to take a bill to committee.

We all know this: The reason why a bill is taken to committee is because it gives the public the opportunity to provide feedback and for the government to listen. It also provides opportunity for the opposition and the Liberal Party, the independents and the government to introduce amendments to correct the mistakes they made, so that when the bill has gone through the sausage-making process, the bill is pretty good.

Once again, this has happened. I don’t even know how many times this has happened on the housing file, but once again a bill has been passed and then the government has said, “Oops, we made a mistake. Better go back to the drawing board.” This government—you’d think they’d learn because it just keeps happening, and now it has happened again.

I’m sure that there are a lot of people right now who are wondering, “Why is it that I am eligible for the HST rebate but they’re still debating the bill that would allow me to actually get that HST rebate? Interesting.” Anyway, that is what we are doing this morning.

My hope is that this government remembers the old adage that you measure twice and cut once instead of measuring and cutting at the same time—

Mr. John Vanthof: We’re cutting first.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Yes, cutting first. You’ll get your turn; don’t you worry. I’m looking forward to hearing what you have to say—can’t wait. I’m sure you’ve got your one-liners all ready, and we will be entertained.

I have a lot of questions about this bill. One of the questions I have is, who is going to benefit? Who is going to benefit from this $130,000 rebate?

Let me guess. I’m pretty sure that developers are going to benefit from this $130,000 rebate. I’m pretty sure, because they are currently sitting on a lot of unsold inventory, because they built for what can make them the most profit instead of what people are actually wanting. So they’re sitting on a whole lot of homes—500-, 600-, 700-square-foot homes—and they can’t sell them.

Then they probably came over to the government and said, “Look, can you please do something to make it easier for us to sell off this unsold inventory?” and the government said, “I don’t know. How about we give you a $130,000 rebate?” There we go, and here we are. I’m pretty sure that developers are going to benefit from this—I’m pretty sure developers are going to benefit.

Will builders benefit? I’m guessing that builders will benefit. It’s a maybe, but I’m guessing they will benefit because by including pre-construction sales, so you get the rebate before you’ve built the property, it will likely spur construction. Do we know? Have we seen the evidence? Have we got the facts? Have you done the studies? Have you released them? Have you taken it to committee? Will you take this bill to committee? I doubt it, but my guess is that it will probably help spur construction a bit. We don’t know how much, but I guess it will help a little bit. We also know that builders will likely get the rebate because that’s standard practice—don’t know.

Then I have this other question, which is, will home prices go down as a result of this rebate coming into force? It’s an honest question. This $130,000 rebate, is it actually going to lower housing prices? It turns out that we actually don’t know, and odds are it might not.

I want to read an

article that came out in the Star recently that looked at this very issue of if this HST cut on new homes will actually save buyers money. We’re talking about who’s benefiting here. We know developers are going to benefit, builders are probably going to benefit, but are homebuyers actually going to benefit? That’s what we’re talking to now. This is what this study found: “Early Look Finds 78% of Prices Are the Same or Higher” once the expanded HST rebate came in. So that’s very interesting.

There was a study done by an AI-powered real estate brokerage that analyzed pricing for 1,000 floor plans in over 100 active projects in the GTHA and looked at whether the HST rebate announcement affected the prices for these homes that are currently on the market. It took a look and what it found is that the majority of developers kept the listing price unchanged. They’re getting the $130,000 rebate. They know it’s coming because I know they’re already talking to you, but they’re not necessarily passing on that saving to the homebuyer.

I will send this

article to you so you can take a look at it and put your eagle eye on it, and you can critique it all you want. But that’s one initial study that’s coming out—not great.

Now overall, I would say that this HST rebate—$130,000 rebate—is pretty standard practice for the Conservative government. It’s pretty standard procedure. Because it is part of this government’s very long track record of giving big developers and builders and big landlords everything they want. And what we’ve also found is that giving big developers and big landlords and builders everything they want hasn’t actually worked.

I want to give a little

summary here of some of the things the government has done since 2018. They cut developer fees drastically—you cheered that one. Then you had to create a fund to pay for the infrastructure after your development fee cuts hampered municipalities’ ability to pay for the infrastructure these new developers needed. Remember that? And then you claimed it was new money, which it wasn’t.

It also led to very large property tax increases because municipalities were put in this very difficult situation where they had to pay for existing infrastructure and maintain it, as well as pay more for new infrastructure to link up and connect new housing into sewage-providing services, electricity, roads and so on. But they didn’t really have the money to do it, so they had to look at the property tax rate again and increase it. That’s on you.

This government has gutted and changed official plans, including the city of Toronto’s official plan and the city of Ottawa’s official plan. This government has changed the provincial planning statement I don’t know how many times, it’s hard to keep track. This government has made it easier to move employment lands so that they can be used for housing—even the Toronto Board of Trade didn’t like that one.

This government has made it easier to build housing on farmland, which is incredibly expensive and very unsustainable. First on the greenbelt—you had to back down on that one—and then, and you’re doing this in a really quiet way now, insidious way now, which I find very concerning and deserves more attention, which is now the government has made it much easier for municipalities to change the municipal boundary and permit housing on nearby farmland, and much easier for developers to change a municipality’s boundary by going to the lands tribunal to build more housing. All these things, this is what you’ve done. You know—smile away, I don’t mind.

You brought in strong-mayor powers and changed municipal governance structures so you can pass the kind of laws that you want to benefit your friends. You’ve made it harder and more expensive for residents to appeal development at the lands tribunal, including things like quarries, garbage dumps.

The government has gotten rid of green building standards, even though green building standards make housing generally more energy-efficient and ensures they’re better made, so the first-time homebuyer actually gets a better product, and they’re going to save money in the long term with reduced energy bills. But you say, “No, no. We don’t like that.” And we know who asked you to do that.

This government has made it easier to evict tenants. They have stacked the Landlord and Tenant Board, so landlords get heard first, and tenants have essentially given up. When I speak to tenants about how they’ve got the option of going to the Landlord and Tenant Board, they say, “That place is not a place for me. It’s a place for landlords. We’re not going to seek justice there. We’re not going to get justice there.”

This government got rid of inclusionary zoning—also a developer request. So any big new development near a transit station is no longer required to have some—we’re talking just a few—affordable housing units, so we can deal with the housing affordability crisis as well as the housing supply issues that we’ve got. You got rid of that.

The government got rid of parking minimums—something I’m okay with.

And this move, the HST rebate, I believe, is all part of this big plan to give big developers everything they want in order to speed up construction of new housing in order to supposedly lower housing prices and rent.

There are more examples—oh, my God, there are so many, but this is just a few.

You’ve had eight long years to try this experiment, and what have been the results? Let’s have a look.

Well, first off, housing is still incredibly expensive to buy. Before I came here yesterday, I downloaded the Housing Affordability Monitor statistics, just to have a look at how much it costs to buy a home in key markets in Ontario. It’s expensive.

In Toronto, the median home price is over $1 million—$1.96 million—and you need a qualifying annual income of $246,000 in order to afford that home and that mortgage. How many people in Toronto do you think earn that kind of money? I’m guessing that the top 7% of households are able to afford the median home in Toronto. That’s the state of affairs on housing affordability in Toronto.

Let’s look at Ottawa. In Ottawa, the median home price is a little cheaper, $692,000, and you need a qualifying income of $157,984. That’s still a lot of money, well above average income.

In Hamilton, the median home price is $894,000, and you need a qualifying annual income of $200,075. That’s a lot of money.

So the reason I bring that up is because that’s your track record. This is your track record. You promised to make housing more affordable—you haven’t.

I also recently read—when did it come out? It came out yesterday. It was a study by Statistics Canada, and it looked at millennials and the housing market. No surprises here. You’re not going to be surprised by these statistics. But I think it is worth reading out, because it really gives us a snapshot of how well you’re doing on fixing the housing crisis—which is poorly. This study found that in 2021, the proportion of millennials aged 25 to 39—I think there are a few millennials here. Not me. You?

Interjection.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Yes, a few of you.

What they found is that they are far more likely to be living with their parents than previous—

Interjection.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I know, I know. You’ve got your own family now.

They are far more likely to be living with their parents than previous generations.

When you are 30 years old, you do not want to be living with your parents—maybe there are a few of you who do. The vast majority of people do not want to be living in the basement of their parents’ house. They want their own home. Rent or own—they want their own home.

This study also showed that the number of millennials that are buying homes is at a far lower rate than Gen-Xers and baby boomers, much lower. It is at 49%; so, much lower. We’ve got this whole generation of people who if they were born 10 years earlier, 15 years earlier, maybe would have had a home.

But because of the housing market and the way that it is, they don’t have a home. More of them do not have a home. They’re living in their parents’ basement. Or they’re renting, and they’re paying an astronomical amount to rent, so much that they can’t afford to save. And if they’re saving, they’re not saving enough to get that down payment that they need to buy their home.

In some cases—I regularly talk to renters right now who told me their rent is scary, eye-watering: $3,000 a month. Maybe it’s parents with one kid. They need more than one bedroom. They are paying $3,000 in my riding. That’s enough for a mortgage. But they can’t save enough for that down payment in order to ensure that their monthly payments are going to something they can keep forever, an asset. Instead, they’re paying someone else’s mortgage, and they really don’t want to. They want to pay their own mortgage. They want that stability.

That’s a snapshot of this government’s track record at solving the housing crisis. And if I had to grade you, I’d give you a D. I’ll give you an F; let’s just make it easy for myself. It’s not good.

I’m going to talk a little bit about renting. The reason why I want to talk about renting is because there are a lot of people in Ontario who rent. And they’re not getting a $130,000 rebate from this government. No, no, no—they’re not getting a $130,000 rebate. They’re getting very little. What they’re going to be getting come next month is a notice saying that their rent is going up again. Because this government has made the decision to allow landlords to raise rents on rent-controlled homes every year except for one, and for most of those years, you’ve gone to the maximum amount that you’re allowed under the Residential Tenancies Act, 2.5%.

So while on the one hand you’re giving a big rebate to developers—$130,000—you’re doing very little, I would say nothing, to make housing more affordable for renter households. Many of these renter households want to buy these homes. They want to buy their first home. They don’t want to rent. I often hear in the news, “Oh, people want to be life-long renters.” No, they don’t. They want stability. If they had a home where they weren’t in fear of eviction every year, that would be a little different but in Ontario’s housing market, if you’re a renter, you’re always worried about eviction.

You’re always worried are about rent hikes. You do not have the stability that you see in home ownership. You just don’t.

So rent is prohibitively expensive for too many people. Later on today, I think there will be a vote on my rent freeze motion, a very practical motion—

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Excellent motion

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you very much.

This rent freeze motion is calling for the government to freeze rents for two years, so renters get some relief. Instead of allowing that maximum increase of 2.5% or 2.1%, which it is this year, we, later on today, will be asking the government to cap the amount that landlords can raise the rent to 0% for two years, just to give renters some relief.

I heard the member from Don Valley East last night say, “Whoa.” He deliberately misunderstood and said, “Maybe that means rents will be frozen too high.” That’s just silly. Landlords can always lower the rent and renters are always going to agree to it. This is really about capping increases, not stopping decreases.

We surveyed renters in advance of this rent motion and this rent announcement, and I do want to spend a little bit of time summarizing what we heard in the survey. We heard that renters are really having a tough time out there. These are the ones you’re not giving the $130,000 rebate to. They’re cutting back on groceries and skipping meals in order to afford rent. They’re skipping medical, dental and mental health care because they cannot afford the rent. They’ve stopped saving for emergencies or retirement to pay the rent.

Many are staying in housing that is too rundown and too small or not safe because they cannot afford to move. And at the same time, we heard from renters that are worried they’ll be forced to move because they cannot afford to stay. I’m sure some of these renters would love to buy—they would love to buy.

These are some of the statements we heard from renters:

“Making rent is all I ever think about.”

“I carry a huge line of credit that I can’t climb out of.”

“The thought of how I would pay these costs after retirement is terrifying.”

“A constant fear.”

Now, I’ve heard the members opposite say, “Well, rent is going down.” The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing loves to say, “Well, rent is going down. Rent is going down.” Rent on new builds has softened a little bit. It’s slightly off record highs. But overall, average rent has been going up year in and year out. So when you factor in all renter households, rent has been going up year in and year out, and it is getting pretty bad.

It has gotten so bad that no one working full-time on minimum wage can afford rental housing anywhere in Ontario. That’s how bad it’s gotten. Someone is working full-time on minimum wage, and they cannot afford the average rent in their town or city. And the average rent over the last 10 years has gone up by over 50%, much faster than inflation.

You would expect in these tough times that Ontarians—well, Ontarians expect this—would expect this government to use every regulatory and legal tool in the tool box to make life more affordable, starting with housing. That would include a rent freeze. Should it include a $130,000 rebate to developers? I don’t know. That wouldn’t be my first choice. I’ve got to say that: It wouldn’t be my first choice.

And I hope the renters in your riding and your riding and your riding and your riding and your riding know about some of the decisions you’re making where you’re giving $130,000 to these guys but when it comes to just saving renters $50 a month—$600 a year; $1,200 over two years—you just look the other way. You have all this grand talk about how you want to make Ontario affordable—grand talk—but when it comes to passing legislation that’s in your power to address these issues, you don’t, and that’s a shame.

I cannot wait—the next election couldn’t come soon enough. The polls have to go down a little bit more. I understand, if the election was called today, you still probably would win, but the trajectory is not great—it’s not great.

Mr. Matthew Rae: It’s not great for the NDP.

Ms. Jessica Bell: It’s not great for the Conservatives, because we are not buying $28.9-million jets over here. And I know there are a lot of members who are so mad at the Premier for doing that. I can see it in your faces every question period. Question period right now is quite enjoyable for me. Sometimes I sit here and I’m like, “Ah, God, we’re going to be losing another vote.” But this week, it’s been really enjoyable, because I can see all your faces. You really don’t like it. You hate it. Your bad day is our good day; you know how it works.

Where were we? How long have I got? I’ve only got four minutes. Oh, my God. I guess I should start focusing on wrapping up here.

We talked about the HST, the $130,000 rebate, focusing on giving it to developers and investors and so on. It’s part of your long track record to make housing more affordable by giving developers and investors everything that they want. I gave you a

summary and then I gave you some evidence showing that what the government is doing is just not working. Rent is too high, first-time home ownership rates are plummeting, home prices are still astronomically expensive and homelessness has gone through the roof. It has gone from bad to worse. It’s awful. And it’s not just a big city problem anymore.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: No, it’s everywhere.

Ms. Jessica Bell: It’s everywhere: encampments, people sleeping on couches, people staying in relationships they really shouldn’t be in because it’s not safe because they’ve got nowhere else to go, people living in shelters, people losing access to their kids because they’re homeless—it’s really tough. It’s really tough. A lot of those people working are seniors. We have a bunch of seniors in our riding who’ve been evicted. Now they end up in a shelter. We have one senior, who’s 91, who ended up in a shelter. It’s awful; it’s really awful. That’s your legacy, too.

The final thing I want to conclude on is this HST rebate. Will it increase the construction of housing? Probably. The people who are going to be buying it, will they be first-time homebuyers? No, they’re not. The vast majority of them are investors. That’s what we know. That’s what Statistics Canada is telling us. It’s not first-time homebuyers because you tried that. You actually put the rebate first and you said, “Only first-time homebuyers can have it.” Then you realized it wasn’t working because first-time homebuyers aren’t buying these new homes, so you’re like “Whew, I guess we have to give it to everyone.

Let’s see if this works. Let’s just throw something on the wall to see if it sticks.”

What I would prefer this government do is bring in real measures that actually work, and that includes bringing in stronger renter protections, a rent freeze, banning AGIs, having a real plan to build supportive housing, address homelessness and get government back into the business of building affordable housing.

We have presented a plan, and we will continue to hammer this plan. We have a Homes Ontario plan to set up a public agency that works with municipalities, non-profits and developers to build needed housing, not just tiny little condos. You can make a whole lot of money but build needed housing, supportive housing, affordable housing, housing for seniors, housing for students and housing on public land. What we have found is, we can build a lot of homes because we have a lot of public land and the need is very great.

When we’re talking about this $130,000 rebate—okay, that’s what we’re debating right now—I urge this government to also look at some practical solutions that other provinces are doing. We’re the only province that does not have an agency responsible for building housing—the only one. I urge this government to look at other options because what you’re doing right now is just not working. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): I recognize the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane.

Interjections.

Mr. John Vanthof: I’d like to thank the whip from the government side for his applause. I’d like to thank the member from University–Rosedale for a pretty comprehensive overview of the bill.

I’d just like to start by reading the

short title of the bill. The

short title of this act is HST Relief Implementation Act, 2026. It’s pretty straightforward. I don’t often do this, but I have 30 minutes to fill, so I am going to read the explanatory note:

“The bill amends the Retail Sales Tax Act to enable the minister to, by regulation, provide for credits and payments to be made to a person in respect of all or part of the federal component of the tax that is paid or payable under

part IX of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) in respect of residential property and to provide for other related matters, including measures to recover amounts credited or paid to a person who was not entitled to the credit or payment.”

Do you know what that sounds a lot like? That sounds like something that would be in a budget bill, especially since it’s to provide an HST rebate to people who are buying a new home, especially since the government was talking about that during the press about the budget, but it’s obvious—well, no, it’s not that obvious actually.

When this bill came to light, we asked our research, “Did you see that this was in the bill?” They said, “Yes, but we thought it was going to be in the regulations.” Right? Because often budgets are enabling pieces of legislation, but we don’t have the whole Ministry of Finance to make sure this is done correctly. This is an enabling piece of legislation that is having to be debated separately because the government for some reason either forgot to put it in the budget or just couldn’t get it done on time. So we’re actually re-debating a part of the budget, a budget that this government rushed through.

I think on this side, we all understand or we believe why the government was so focused not on actually—because in one of their platform announcements they pushed this pretty hard, but they didn’t include it in the budget. They forgot.

They were much more focused on stifling people’s ability to get to government information, freedom of information. They were more focused on that. This should be known as the “Let’s stop FOIs budget,” because that was the main focus of this budget. There was lots of stuff wrapped around. There are lots of programs, but this is one of the signature programs, and I’ll get to it a little bit later, why it’s not quite as robust as it would appear, but this was one of the signature programs, and it’s not even in the bill. That is a big problem.

I’ve been here a while. You can tell by my grey hair. This isn’t the first time that a government has forgotten to put something in the budget. Just to make the Conservatives feel better, this isn’t the first time. The first time that I witnessed something like this was under the Liberal government. It was the Fair Hydro Plan that was touted as part of the budget process. I distinctly remember because I was finance critic—amazingly.

That might not be the adverb that everybody else is going to use, but anyway, I was the finance critic, and people were looking for the Fair Hydro Plan in the budget, and it wasn’t there. The minister at the time said something like, “Well, you know, it’s expensive to print a budget, and it takes extra paper.” He had all kinds of explanations. We all know who the minister was at the time, and you could look it up.

We all remember the Fair Hydro Plan because the Fair Hydro Plan was a scheme to hide how hydro rates were being subsidized. That’s what it was, and they rushed it. They tried to get it through, and that’s why the Liberal government didn’t pass their audits. That’s one of the reasons.

On the same token, with the Conservative budget under Premier Ford, they are so focused on hiding their records that they seem to have forgotten what budgets are really about. I can assure you that the part about hiding FOIs so that no one can ever access an FOI—I am sure that all the i’s are dotted and the t’s are crossed. I am sure that that is as bulletproof as possible—I am sure. They didn’t forget because that was the goal.

You know what? You put so much effort into that, I think the jet is probably one of the least of your worries. We’re all talking about the jet, but something much more sombre than the jet is being hidden by that FOI blocking—something. And we’re all talking about, for some reason, this crazy jet.

This morning, when I got into the elevator in my building to go to work, you know how they have those TVs on? What is the first thing I saw? Protect Ontario, paid for by my tax dollars, advertising the Ontario government. And they had the little jingle; I can’t even do the jingle, but “doot-doot-doot-doot-doot-doot.” What it should have now is, “Leaving on a Jet Plane.” You should change the jingle.

And maybe you didn’t get a big enough one, right? Steve Miller: “Big ol’ jet airliner.” You could fit the whole caucus in. Like, why didn’t he get a big enough jet if he can’t land it anywhere in northern Ontario anyway? Get a big enough jet that everyone can go on the ride.

But the fact that a plank of your budget was forgotten or didn’t get done on time? I’m not blaming anybody. Everyone on all sides works hard, and I’m not blaming anybody in the Ministry of Finance. I’d like to commend the government House leader: We had a really good briefing from the ministry. It was a really good briefing. I am sure they all worked very hard and they’re diligent.

But for some reason, for some reason, this was left out and we’re debating it a week after the budget was rushed through the House. If the government had actually taken the time to maybe let it go to committee, they maybe could have amended it during committee, and we wouldn’t be having this debate because it would have just been part of the budget process.

Running a province is a tough job; we get it. Writing a budget—tough job; we get it. Everyone can make a mistake or an oversight. That is what the committee process is for: to make bills better. The government has the right to put forward their agenda. They won a majority. But the committee process is to catch things: “Oh, wait a second. This might not work.” Like not including the HST rebate in the budget: “Hey, excuse me, but have you checked that?” Right? That’s what the committee process is for.

Why they didn’t go through the committee process, why they did actual debates during night sittings—because they did not want anybody coming to the committee and talking about FOIs. That’s why they didn’t want to have a committee process, full stop.

This government—and I don’t even think it’s this government. Certain people who control this government want to do those things, because I don’t think that the majority of the people I talked to—that the biggest thing on their mind is stopping people from accessing government information. Good government should have nothing to hide. Does government make mistakes? Absolutely. Does government have to make decisions that can’t be made public at the time? I get that. But if someone really wants to know, should those decisions be able to be accessed after? Absolutely.

Anyone who has ever run a business, a farm, anything: You learn from your mistakes. You’re not proud of your mistakes. When I plant a crop and I—look, I can’t do a speech without doing a farm thing, okay? I bought a new seed drill. That’s how you plant, right? My old seed drill was 10 feet wide and my new seed drill was 12 feet wide, but I kind of screwed it up and I kind of assumed my new seed drill was 12 and a half feet wide.

So my fields looked beautiful when they were seeded, but when they came up, every 12 feet there was a six-inch strip of nothing. I was very embarrassed. I was super embarrassed. All my friends teased me and I came up with all kinds of excuses. “Oh, those are tram lines so it’s easier to”—like, they all knew it was that I just screwed up.

But what you’re doing for some of the members of your government is you’re hiding your mistakes, or hiding things that weren’t mistakes, and you’re hiding them forever until a new government shows up—because you all think you’re going to be government forever and you’re not. And you’re going to end up wearing them. It’s just like, you’re all ending up wearing the plane—and because people like me help you wear it. But you’re going to be wearing much worse things. I don’t see how you can be proud of the fact that you’re covering up the FOIs.

Now, the minister from Oakville stood up many times. He said, “No, no. We’re just modernizing because we didn’t have email when the FOI rule was put in. We didn’t have cellphones.” That’s not the point. And then he’ll say, “Well, we’re going to release 95% of what was before.” It’s the 5% that we’re worried about.

It’s when you treat the province of Ontario’s budget and the province of Ontario’s assets like they’re your own and you look at how it benefits your friends and, hopefully, benefits the people of Ontario—but it’s friends first, and that is what you’re trying to hide. You’re trying to hide—oh, what? No, not trying—what you’ve hidden.

And the fact is, now that whoever wrote the budget and whoever compiled the budget forgot to put the HST

part in, you’re having to listen to it again. And you know what? It looks good on you, and you’re going to have to listen to it for a while, because that is what this budget was about. It was about hiding, it was about the FOIs, making sure that was as ironclad as possible, and you just forgot to put in one of the signature planks.

Now, if we want to talk about the HST rebate—I guess I do want to talk about it. It’s for new homes, including condos, right? So, the home cannot have been sold already. So all the people who did assignments and who bought condos to get them built, they’re not part of this. That pain out there is not part of this bill. There will be people who—they’re not building a lot of homes in my region, but they build some, and some people will benefit and rightfully so, right? So if you go to a contractor and say, “I want to build a house,” and that contract—the HST will not be part of the cost. That’s not a bad thing.

One of the things that the government says took longer is because they don’t want that you have to pay the HST and then have to apply to get it back. That’s a point. The only caveat I would give to that is, when the buyer pays the HST and gets it back, you know for sure that the buyer is getting the benefit and not the builder. And I’m not saying that all builders do this. I deal with a lot of builders, and they’re great. But if the HST is taken off the top, the price of the home could creep up, the selling price could creep up. That’s just natural, right? As with many things, if you don’t control who gets the benefit, the benefit often goes to the larger player. That’s an issue.

So what the government is talking about—and they’re giving examples like an individual buys a house, a builder benefits. But what this bill is really doing is trying to clear out the massive backlog of unsold condos. It’s kind of a clearance sale on condos. But who’s paying for the clearance sale isn’t the developer; it’s the taxpayer, the feds and the province.

I’m not opposed, actually, to the GST rebate holiday on new homes. I think it should be administered much differently because there are a lot of people who aren’t going to qualify or think they’re going to qualify and aren’t, and there are a lot of people, like first-time homebuyers, who maybe can’t afford to buy a new home but could buy something existing. This is not going to benefit them. And it’s not going to benefit them by trickle-down either, really, because you’ve got this big block of condos that are unsold and they’re empty. If they’re empty, you’re not going to have a big swell of people. It’s just not going to happen.

But is the principle wrong? I would have done it differently, maybe. This is actually a finance bill, because it should be part of the budget, but it’s actually a housing bill, right? It’s one of their many housing bills. At one point, if you keep putting out this many housing bills, you might have more housing bills than houses. But what you’re doing each time is you’re not looking at the problem, and you’re not looking at the solution. You’re looking at the issue through a very narrow lens of how it can help your friends first.

When the greenbelt act first came out, I remember the speeches: We needed this to unleash housing because the reason houses weren’t getting built is because you couldn’t build them on the greenbelt, right? That was going to solve the housing crisis: “Greenbelt, greenbelt, greenbelt—whoa, whoa, whoa.” I guess they had to back up on that. The greenbelt was never about the housing shortage. It was about getting big houses where people could make the most money. That’s what it was about.

MZOs—same thing. And we’re very opposed to the greenbelt, as Ontarians are. I’m not saying all your projects, all your initiatives, are bad, but they’re not actually aimed at solving the problem. They’re not. They’re aimed at solving what your backers identify as a problem. Those are two totally different things.

If you look at what’s going on in the housing market—the one part of the housing market under your government that is booming? Tents—tents are booming. When I started here, yes, there were homeless people in Toronto and in cities, but I didn’t see it in my riding. I didn’t see tent encampments until this government. I’m not saying it’s all this government’s fault, but there’s no real, concerted effort to address what is basically happening here.

When I walk home—I go the same route—there’s a lady living in a cardboard box. We walk by her all the time. She could be my—well, now I’m a grandpa, but she’s not that much older than me. When I stopped to talk to her—if she would like something to eat—she said, “No. I have enough to eat. I have a pension.”

You know when you think of homeless people who have done terrible things with their lives: “Everybody makes life choices, blah, blah, blah”? This lady’s not like that. This lady is emblematic of a lot of people we’re dealing with now. This lady has a flower on the outside of her cardboard box. You know what her problem is? She can’t afford rent anywhere. That’s her problem.

And she is not alone. You’re not looking at that at all because you’re not looking at housing through the provincial lens. We all have friends, I get that, but you’re looking at housing through your friends. Your developers who wanted to open up the greenbelt weren’t going to build affordable housing for that lady and for all the people in Ontario like her. They were going to build housing for people who could afford the big houses.

Even this rebate, 130 grand on a million-dollar home: The people who can afford a million-dollar home, are those the ones really struggling in the housing crisis right now? I don’t think so; in fact, I know so.

Again, does this policy do something? Yes. Is it going to be as beneficial as you’re trying to sell? Time will tell.

Interjection.

Mr. John Vanthof: A member said, “Well, the NDP has a better plan?” You know what? Your plan isn’t much either because you forgot to put it in the budget. When we ask questions about how much the jet costs, nobody can answer the question, so I question what you actually know. Did you know that this wasn’t in your budget, that we would have to be debating it after? So what about the Conservative plan, my friend? Did you know?

But I bet you knew that the FOI—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Through the Speaker, please.

Mr. John Vanthof: Sorry, Speaker. I bet that member knew that the FOI changes were in the budget. I bet you his caucus was very well versed on that. But I bet you his caucus maybe didn’t know that they forgot to put in their signature plank, so I question that.

You can criticize the opposition for holding you to account. You want to talk about an NDP plan? We have proposed time and time again that the government should get involved in supporting housing. I get that developers, contractors, carpenters—in my area they’re more independent contractors and carpenters—are not going to build housing that is not going to be profitable. I get that. But the housing that lady just around the corner needs—it needs to be built. Maybe the government needs to say, “Okay, we’re going to help with that.

We’re not going to do the hammering ourselves.” The same people who build housing now can build that housing, but maybe they need incentives to build actual affordable housing for people. That is part of our plan.

This government is all about business. They say they’re all about business, but if I’m an investor and I’m coming to this province and I see massive tent encampments, I’m not sure. All the billions of dollars that you keep saying is getting invested here—I’m not sure that the province is as inviting as you claim, because that lady on the corner worked her whole life, but her kids are working too. We need a more—and I have never used this word; this is a pretty big word—holistic approach to this.

The one thing that really disappoints me about the current administration—there are several things, but the one thing is, true Conservatives—it’s not a surprise; sometimes I’m one of them—used to believe in small government and that government creates the conditions where everyone who wants to can prosper or can decide—I don’t know how to word it, but it’s not the government’s job to pick winners or losers. That’s what true Conservatives believe.

That’s not what the current administration believes at all, and that’s your problem. You’re so busy picking winners that the rest of the people of Ontario are becoming losers. You’re so busy picking winners, and that’s what this bill is kind of doing too. Is it going benefit some people? A hundred per cent, but you’re picking a winner.

With the greenbelt, you weren’t trying—the Premier; I think this is the Premier—to fix the housing crisis. He was picking a winner. I don’t really know much about Billy Bishop airport, but I think somebody’s picking a winner. The big Jumbotron on the garage mahal—you know what my prediction is, that’s going to be coming attractions at the downtown casino where the spa was supposed to be. It’s that kind of stuff. Why do you do that?

In the end, just like the Fair Hydro Plan killed the Liberal government, it’s stuff like that that will end your reign. That’s when all the FOI stuff that you tried to hide is all going to come percolating to the surface. I get along very well with most of you, and I hope that you don’t get caught up in that FOI slime, but it very well could happen that you could because when the Premier got caught with the plane, he threw you all under the bus. Mark my words, they’re going to do that every time. Thank you, Speaker, for your time.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Questions?

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: I’d like to ask the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane—we’re talking about the spa at the waterfront and connecting it into this HST rebate—what does the member think is going to happen down on Toronto’s waterfront, and how might that impact home building?

Mr. John Vanthof: Although I live pretty close to the waterfront when I’m here, I don’t know a lot about the waterfront. I do know on the Port Lands, they’re spending a lot of money to make it all really nice, and they’re going to attract housing. My son works there. He’s a diver. He works there a lot.

But I question whether running jets over there is going to make that as prime a housing spot as it could have been. Again, the government is picking winners and losers instead of looking at the whole issue.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Questions?

Mr. Dave Smith: I’m actually going to have a series of questions. I’ll start with a simple one, though, for the members opposite on this, and either one of them can answer. It doesn’t make any difference on it.

This bill is about the provincial portion of the HST. Could the member opposite tell me, does the CRA collect the HST, or is there something on the provincial side that collects the HST?

Mr. John Vanthof: Actually, that’s what this bill deals with, to allow the province to work directly with the CRA so that they can get the money back without having to pay it first. That’s what this bill is about.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Questions?

MPP Catherine McKenney: Thank you to my colleagues for that debate this morning—either, actually, could answer.

When we think about what the HST rebate is costing, $1.3 billion over the next year, and that is actually seven times more than what the province is spending on building and subsidizing affordable housing—so you’ve got $1.3 billion on the HST, and you’ve got something like $176 million on building affordable housing and supporting affordable housing. Do you think that most people in this province would agree that the way to tackle our housing and homelessness crisis is to underfund affordable housing in this way?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you for the question from the member for Ottawa Centre. It’s really concerning; the government has had eight years to improve and increase the number of affordable homes that are built in Ontario, and it’s gotten so bad that the federal government came in a few years go and said, “We’re going to pull the money that we give you because you’re so far behind on your affordable housing targets. You’ve built maybe a thousand over six years.” And given that there are 85,000 people who are currently homeless in the province, that’s pretty abysmal.

I think lot of people in Ontario don’t want to be homeless, and they don’t want to see people struggling. They expect the government come in to provide supportive housing and affordable housing so that people can get stability and rebuild their lives, and it would have been good to have seen a budget that had funding for those kinds of initiatives.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Questions?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I’ve been listening to the member from University–Rosedale talk about affordability, but when we reduced the gas tax by 10 cents, you voted against it. When we got rid of the sticker on cars, you voted against it. When we took tolls off the highway, you voted against it. When we had One Fare saving people $1,600 a year, you voted against it. Carbon tax: You voted against it. The $200 cheque: You voted against it.

Why are you against giving back $130,000 to anybody buying a home of a million dollars and keeping the construction industry—hard-working labour people, unionized workers—working in the province of Ontario?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Goodness me. We’re very much in support of keeping the construction industry going, and we’ve been pretty concerned over the last few years when we have seen housing starts plummet under this government and their very interesting measures that are just clearly not working. They’re clearly not working.

What we would like to see are measures to get government back into the business of partnering with municipalities and non-profits and developers to build needed housing. So that means less 600-square-foot condos and more 1,000-square-foot apartments, where you can raise a family in them; starter homes; seniors’ homes; student housing; supportive housing—the kind of stuff that we need.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): I recognize the member from St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I want to thank my colleagues here on this side of the House for the debate this morning.

This government stood in their place and voted for the budget, which actually buried the FOIs, buried a fancy price tag on the Premier’s fly-by-common-sense jet, and now, this government thinks Bill 114 is so important. The residents of Ontario should be asking why did they forget to include it in the budget legislation in the first place, and how can they justify threatening mayors across Niagara with funding cuts for missing housing targets while their own housing policies are failing to get affordable homes built in communities like mine of St. Catharines?

Do you think the residents deserve more transparency when debating important bills like the budget or even Bill 100 when they are destroying democracy in the Niagara region?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you to the member for St. Catharines for that question. You raise a lot of issues about what has been happening in the last few weeks in the Legislature. We have a bill, the budget bill, that brought in very drastic changes to the freedom-of-information process so you can’t access government documents back until 1988. What happened in 1988? I don’t know, although there’s a lot of bad stuff that happened between 2018 and 2026 that is eventually going to come out.

At the same time, given this government’s very authoritarian impulse, we are debating a bill right now that replaces elected regional chairs in some regions, including Niagara, with hand-picked Conservative government appointees who have the power to tax. It’s taxation without representation. I can’t believe that’s happening under a Conservative government.

Who is benefiting? Voters aren’t.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): There is time for one more quick question and response.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: It was probably about a year ago that I stood up in this chamber and called for the province to remove the HST on new builds. It shouldn’t be a surprise to this provincial government because other folks have been doing this and making this call as well for quite some time.

Ontario Liberals called again on the government to do this back in September of last year, and it only took going into this budget for this government to do it in order to ensure that we’ve got more supply in the marketplace. Because supply is one element of housing. There’s a lot of other elements of housing, as both members have mentioned.

I guess my question to either is, why do you think it took the government so long (

a) to do this, but (

b) to figure out how to do this?

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you for the question. It’s taken them eight years, but I’m not sure they’ve figured out how to do housing yet. Again, in my remarks I said that this issue has some benefits, but is it going to make a major difference in the housing crisis we’re facing in Ontario? No.

What it might make a difference in is, the last quarter of this year is the first time that they’ve kept statistics that there have been no new condo builds started—the first time in Toronto since they’ve kept statistics. The condo industry has crashed and that’s what this bill is trying to revive. That’s what this bill is trying to revive and that’s why this government continues to fail. They don’t look at the whole issue; they just look at one—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): We are moving to members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Wearing of pins

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): The member for Peterborough–Kawartha on a point of order.

Mr. Dave Smith: I’m seeking the unanimous consent of the House to wear this specific Red Dress pin for my member’s statement.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): The member for Peterborough–Kawartha is seeking unanimous consent for the member to wear a specific pin for Red Dress Day. Agreed? Agreed.

Members’ Statements

Cileana Taylor

Mr. Dave Smith: I made a promise to Savannah Taylor that I would ensure her sister Cileana is never forgotten. Today I am reminding everyone of Cileana’s story. Cileana was born on March 10, 1998, and grew up in Curve Lake First Nation in my riding. She is roughly the same age as my own children, which is probably why her story resonates with me so much. What happened to her could have happened to my own daughter.

On September 3, 2020, she was at a house party with her boyfriend. He got angry at her and he attacked her. The attack put her in the hospital in a coma, and she succumbed to her injuries on February 26, 2021.

In February 2024, her attacker was found guilty of aggravated assault—not murder, not manslaughter—and was sentenced to four years in prison. But with the credit for time served while on bail, the sentence was reduced to 550 days, of which he served 185.

Cileana was a beautiful, young soul who had her entire life ahead of her. Our legal system failed her. We cannot let her simply be a statistic. We need to remember the beauty of Cileana’s soul. We need to remember Cileana loved to do the things that young girls love to do. We need to remember that Cileana’s family loved her. We need to honour Cileana by remembering Cileana.

Tenant protection

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Data released in 2022 showed that Homestead is one of five companies responsible for 25% of all above-guideline rent increases in Ontario.

In May 2021, Homestead sent tenants at 2001 Carling notice of an AGI of 5.67%, which they said was required for capital expenditures, including—and you can’t make this up—the purchase of a floor-cleaning machine. However, despite being one of the top five requesters of AGIs, they did not fill out the application form to the Landlord and Tenant Board correctly.

Almost four years later, in January 2025, the LTB reached out to Homestead and told them they could just fix their mistakes and send it back in. The LTB then rubber-stamped the application without a public hearing and approved the rent increase dated back to 2021, rather than to the date the correct application was filed. In fact, the LTB approves 88% of AGI applications, Speaker, including, apparently, AGI requests for floor-cleaning machines.

Meanwhile, for the tenants of 2001 Carling, many of whom are seniors on fixed incomes, their housing costs have just increased retroactively to 2021, by far more than the rate of inflation. They’re worried about more AGIs coming from Homestead, given that nothing prevents Homestead from doing this all over again. They’re worried about being homeless. They deserve better from this government.

We need immediate action to protect renters and to put an end to exploitation by large corporate landlords.

Thalassemia / Karma Jiu Jitsu

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: I rise today ahead of May 8, Thalassemia Awareness Day in Ontario and International Thalassemia Day, to raise awareness about this serious genetic blood disorder. Thalassemia affects the body’s ability to produce healthy hemoglobin, and many patients rely on regular blood transfusions and ongoing medical care to survive.

I want to recognize the important work of the Thalassemia Foundation of Canada and Josephine Sirna, who has supported research, patient services, education and awareness for more than 40 years. Awareness is essential to improving care and ensuring patients and families receive the support that they need.

I also want to recognize the athletes from Karma Jiu Jitsu in Ajax, who recently competed at the Ontario open. Karma Jiu Jitsu had 28 athletes compete, and brought home an impressive three gold medals, eight silver medals and eight bronze medals.

Congratulations to gold medallists Nathan Larrea, Tiana Storie and Raechel Bandurchin, and to all the athletes who represented our community with dedication, discipline and sportsmanship. Our community is proud of your accomplishments. Congratulations to the entire Karma Jiu Jitsu team.

Fire Protection Grant

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I have more great news from Essex county: Every firefighter in Essex county is now safer thanks to our government’s Fire Protection Grant.

Our government’s Fire Protection Grant assists fire departments in purchasing gear such as gloves, helmets and other protective gear. But not only that, Speaker, it also helps fire departments upgrade their facilities so that they can have things like a gear washer-extractor for the decontamination of equipment and a decontamination shower facility so that firefighters can reduce their exposure to harmful substances.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the Premier and the Solicitor General for providing this important grant, and for doubling the grant so that firefighters in Essex county and across the province of Ontario can be safer.

We are protecting firefighters in Essex county and we are protecting Ontario.

Charitable walks

Ms. Peggy Sattler: In London and across Ontario, spring marks the season of charitable walks that unite our community around shared causes. These events not only engage Londoners in supporting the causes and organizations that matter most to them but are a major source of revenue for many non-profits.

Last weekend, Threads of Life held its Steps for Life walk in Byron to honour workers killed or injured on the job. This annual event raises critical funds to support families affected by workplace tragedy and also raises awareness of worker health and safety.

Next weekend, the Walk to Defeat Duchenne will take place in Wortley Village. Now a national event, the walk was founded 31 years ago by Londoner John Davidson to honour his son Jesse, who was diagnosed in childhood with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, a fatal, rare genetic disorder.

The last weekend of May will see L’Arche London’s Walk with Each Other walkathon, celebrating the leadership, joy and contributions of people with intellectual disabilities, as well as the London Walk for Lupus, raising vital funds for research, education and advocacy.

On June 6, Londoners will walk to remember the hate-motivated Islamophobic terror attack on our London family and will also walk to end ALS.

Big shout-out to the organizers, staff, participants and donors who put so much effort into organizing these walks and so many more. They show the true heart and strength of our community.

OKD Field Hockey Club

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: Brampton continues to make its mark on the global stage through sport. From hockey to basketball, cricket, soccer, wrestling, kabaddi and field hockey, Brampton and communities across Peel region continue to produce talented athletes proudly representing Canada around the world.

Today, I want to recognize the growing success of field hockey in our community and the incredible work being done by the OKD Field Hockey Club in Brampton and Mississauga. Recently, Team Canada won the Junior Pan American Championship in Santiago, defeating the United States in a final to qualify for the upcoming junior field hockey world cup.

I’m proud to recognize three Ontario athletes from the OKD Field Hockey Club who represented Canada during the championship and previously represented Canada during the Junior World Cup that happened in India: Gurwinder Singh Brar from Brampton, Navdeep Singh Chandi from Mississauga and Leighton De Souza from Etobicoke. Their success reflects the dedication and hard work of athletes, coaches, parents, volunteers, sponsors and organizers who help grow field hockey across Brampton and Ontario.

Speaker, I want to take this moment to congratulate those three players and thank OKD Field Hockey Club for their hard work in promoting and their leadership and commitment to the sport of field hockey in Brampton and across Ontario. I know they’re helping foster young, bright, talented individuals and helping them grow to be world athletes.

Thank you again to the OKD Field Hockey Club, and congratulations to those three players.

Volunteer firefighters

Mr. John Vanthof: Last weekend, I went to the Iroquois Falls Sports and Trade Show, and I had a long discussion with the chief of the Iroquois Falls Fire Department, Dan Boucher. He brought up an issue regarding certification of volunteer firefighters. They want to be fully trained, but most volunteer firefighters have full-time jobs, and the certification process doesn’t always work with that. As a result, fire departments across many rural areas are actually losing members.

Something that a lot of people don’t realize: The jaws of life auto extrication on the Trans-Canada Highway in many areas are provided by volunteer fire departments.

They’re losing members—not because they don’t want to be trained; they want to be trained, and they are trained. But they can’t live up to the certification process that the professional firefighters have, because they do it for a job. You can’t work in a mine for 40 hours, be home one week out of four and expect that you have to take time off to go for the certification. That does not make sense.

They have solutions. Please, I implore the government and the Solicitor General to actually work with them so we don’t lose our volunteer fire departments.

Roy Church Memorial Cornhole Tournament

MPP Billy Denault: This past week, I had the privilege of attending the Roy Church Memorial Cornhole Tournament in Cobden. With more than 50 teams participating this year, the event was nothing short of a tremendous success. I want to thank Lieutenant Nathan, firefighters Steve and Joel and the entire Haley Station fire service for organizing such a meaningful day. Having taken part myself, I can say the event was filled with fun, laughter and perhaps a few poorly thrown beanbags.

Roy Church was a cornerstone of the Haley Station fire department, serving the community for decades. He mentored generations of firefighters and built a legacy of service that continues to be felt throughout the region following his passing in 2024. This tournament, held in his honour, was supported by Roy Church’s family—Liz, Ben, Shane and the entire Church family—standing alongside Haley Station firefighters and celebrating his memory.

Proceeds from the event will support graduating students in Renfrew county pursuing post-secondary education in emergency services fields. It was especially fitting to take

part in this event on the heels of First Responders Day and just before Emergency Preparedness Week: a reminder of the selfless individuals who remain on call for our communities in both the best and most challenging of times.

I want to sincerely thank the Haley Station fire service for the invitation. I, of course, look forward to this great event again next year.

Southlake Health

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: It was an extraordinary, memorable occasion last week for the residents of Newmarket–Aurora. Southlake is a pillar in our community, a pillar that has been needing to expand to meet the demands of our growing population in the catchment area that Southlake Health serves. It was the day after our annual run for Southlake, a day when the community comes together to support our local hospital.

Last Monday, our government came together—with Premier Ford and Deputy Premier and Minister of Health Sylvia Jones at the helm—and announced an investment of $10 million to advance the plans for Southlake Health’s new acute care hospital in East Gwillimbury, as well as the redevelopment of Southlake Health’s existing hospital in Newmarket. Together, these projects will connect more than 250,000 people across our communities to more convenient, high-quality care, close to home.

My commitment to the people of Newmarket–Aurora in my first campaign in 2022 was to advocate for the expansion of our local Southlake, to see this project move forward to fruition. And, four years later, oh, boy, that fruition has been realized. Thank you to Premier Ford and Minister Jones for listening to the voices in Newmarket–Aurora.

Introduction of Visitors

MPP Jamie West: I would like to introduce today’s page captain from the riding of Sudbury, Onyioza Salawu. She’s joined by her mom in the gallery, Temitope Salawu. I look forward to having lunch with you guys.

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: I would like to welcome the College of Opticians of Ontario and the Ontario Opticians Association: Fazal Khan, Amy Stein, Kevin Cloutier, Derick Summers, Omar Farouk, as well as Jennifer Wicks.

Today, at 12 noon, is the opticianry day at Queen’s Park lunch reception, in rooms 228 and 230. All are welcome.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: On behalf of the Minister of Health, I would like to join my colleague in welcoming the College of Opticians of Ontario and the Ontario Opticians Association.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I’d like to welcome, from the riding of Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, Janice and Kevin Ho, the very proud parents of Evalyn Ho, who is today’s page captain. Welcome.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: It gives me great pleasure to welcome the Dunbarton High School economic class and their teachers from my riding of Pickering–Uxbridge. I look forward to meeting you this afternoon. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: I would like to welcome to the chamber some members of my incredible team: Maria Henein, Maya Silverstein, as well as our new intern, Talitha Ferro. Thank you for your tireless work. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I’m delighted this morning to introduce Irene Campo and Pamela Hart. Pamela is the executive director of the Native Women’s Resource Centre of Toronto.

Pamela is Anishnawbe Kwe, Muskrat Clan, a member of the Chippewas of Georgina Island and a mother of one. She has worked on the front line for over a decade, offering client care and support services to address issues such as addiction, mental health, violence against women, trauma and homelessness.

Pamela is here today with Irene to take

part in a reception that will showcase her organization’s 4,000 Cover Stories project, a sobering tribute to the memories of missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people. I invite everyone in the House to join us at the legislative library following question period to visit and share some traditional Indigenous treats.

MPP Alexa Gilmour: I’d like to welcome a number of refugee service providers, community leaders and organizations from throughout Toronto. They’ll be taking

part in a refugee round table today. Thank you for your important work and welcome to your House.

Mr. Deepak Anand: Speaker, it’s always a pleasure to have people from Mississauga–Malton. I’d like to welcome Gurpreet Rai, Aman Preet Rai, Gurnam Rai, Gurveer Rai, Tarsem Rai and Navraj Lehal—and Aman is actually a nurse. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

House sittings

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Steve Clark: Good morning, everyone. I just want to let the House know that the night sitting scheduled for this evening has been cancelled.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Ajax on a point of order.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: I seek unanimous consent to move a motion without notice that in the opinion of this House and in support of Ontario’s critical manufacturing, auto and agriculture sectors, the government of Ontario should request the timely opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge and support all necessary measures in partnership with other levels of government to facilitate the successful opening and operation of this vital transborder link.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Ajax is seeking unanimous consent to move a motion without notice that in the opinion of this House and in support of Ontario’s critical manufacturing, auto and agriculture sectors, the government of Ontario should request the timely opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge and support all necessary measures in partnership with other levels of government to facilitate the successful opening and operation of this vital transborder link. Agreed?

Interjection: No.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): It is now time for question period.

Question Period

Freedom of information

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Families are saving up, but they still can’t afford their first home; young people are working hard at school, but they still can’t find a job; and everybody is playing by the rules, but this Premier is making it impossible to get ahead.

Recently, when the courts told the Premier that he had to start playing by the rules, with the stroke of a pen, he changed the law so that he could hide his phone records. So to the Premier: Does the Premier think the rule of law does not apply to him?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: I appreciate the opportunity to speak.

I find it ironic when you talk about the affordability of housing—I just heard, for an hour, the members opposite suggesting that they’re not going to support our HST reduction on new homes. That’s unbelievable to me.

You talk about affordability. You voted against the budget. You voted against capping the tickets for resales in the province of Ontario. You voted against small business taxes—small business owners are thrilled with a 30% tax reduction, Speaker. That’s a lot of money for small businesses here in the province of Ontario. You voted against that, not to mention so many other things that you voted against, whether it’s affordability measures like One Fare, which saves transit riders every single day; the LIFT Tax Credit, the largest tax credit in the history of Ontario—you voted against it.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’ll tell you that, obviously, that member did not listen to the question.

If there is nothing to hide, why change the law to keep things hidden, right? We know that more than 200 records of meetings with developers have been buried and hidden from the public with the changes that the Premier has made to the laws. There is no question that this government rushed through the budget bill just so that they could stop those records from coming out.

Back to the Premier: What meetings is the Premier trying to hide from the public and why?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: Again, as I’ve said many times in the House, we’re modernizing an outdated FOI system which is almost 40 years old. Written in 1988, this legislation didn’t contemplate the technologies and the modern world that we’re in today, Speaker. It’s also, quite frankly, bringing into motion what courts in this country have stood for, which is cabinet confidentiality, the importance of government decisions being candid, but government decisions being open and transparent. That’s exactly what this legislation does.

In fact, speaking of cabinet confidentiality, perhaps it’s something that the members opposite don’t understand because I don’t think there has been a member on that side who has actually been in cabinet.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Ouch, Speaker.

Anyway, Speaker, I’ve got to tell you, it is a shame, really, such a shame that this Premier built his whole career—well, at least the more recent part of his career—pretending that he is just like everybody else, he is for the little guy, he’s going to fight back against corruption and government waste, and then he turns around and he takes $30 million out of the public purse, out of the taxpayers’ pockets, to buy a luxury private jet. Shame. Shame on that government. Now what is happening is that the walls are closing in around him, and right when we get close to the truth, he directs his government to change the law so he can hide his backroom deals. That’s what’s happening.

Does the Premier believe he is truly above the law?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: The Premier of Ontario has been the most open and transparent Premier, not only in the province’s history but across Canada. He has put his phone number out. He receives hundreds if not thousands of texts from everyday Ontarians discussing issues of importance to them, whether it’s affordability, jobs, the economy. His number is out there in the public record. I encourage the Leader of the Opposition—I encourage you right now—pass your phone number around. Tell the people of Ontario so they can connect with you and talk about their concerns. This Premier has been very, very open, speaking to the people of Ontario.

What this legislation is doing, for the umpteenth time I’m here in the Legislature speaking about it, is modernizing a privacy framework that is almost 40 years outdated. I encourage the member to also bring up the NDP legislation out in BC if she’s got concerns about this legislation.

Automotive industry

Ms. Marit Stiles: Wow. All right.

Look, Speaker, let’s talk about jobs. This week, we all learned that the thousand jobs that the Premier promised the people of Alliston are not coming—they are not coming. We hear from this government all the time about the so-called record investments that they’re attracting to this province, but they’ve got nothing to show for it. The government is a jobs disaster: 700,000 Ontarians are looking for work, and every day more bad news.

Why is this government letting Ontario’s auto industry fall behind?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Bay of Quinte.

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: I would be happy to remind the Leader of the Opposition that it was under the previous Liberal government, supported by the NDP, that they chased 300,000 manufacturing jobs out of this province and they said, “We want to be out of the automotive manufacturing business.”

This government and this Premier stood up, drew a line in the sand and said, “We are going to support our auto workers. We are going to continue to ensure that good-quality vehicles are made right here by the best labour force in the entire world.”

We are not going to back off it. We continue to draw in investment: just last year, $35 billion of investment from 750 companies creating 64,000 jobs. I think we’ll stick with our record over the record of the Liberals and the NDP.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I remember when the Premier was out there making this announcement with Justin Trudeau. Remember that? I remember that. The bottom line is, the government promised 1,000 new jobs for the people in Alliston. That promise has been broken, and that is the truth.

Look, it is not just Honda. This is the latest in an ongoing EV pullback. The government has totally abandoned their electric vehicle strategy, which I gotta tell you, was the closest thing we’ve ever had to a climate or job plan from this government. The companies are shipping out. They are taking equipment, they are taking jobs, they are taking tax dollars with them. The Premier can’t let automakers back out of these communities without consequences.

To the Premier: Why has the Premier abandoned our auto workers?

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: Every day in this province, we are welcoming new jobs and new investments from local companies, from companies abroad and from small businesses. I know that’s not something that the members on the other side of the House would understand, as none of them has ever owned a small business or created a job in their lives.

Madam Speaker, we continue to draw in investments, including $2 billion in life sciences investments: Sanofi, just this week, announced $294 million of investment in Mississauga, creating 50 jobs; Chapman’s: $205 million in Markdale, creating 200 new jobs; and Marvell, the global semiconductor leader, just invested $238 million in Ottawa and North York, creating 350 jobs.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I will ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Thank you.

Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Brampton: 3,000 jobs—gone; 30,000 spinoff jobs—gone. Ingersoll, Oshawa, Alliston—every time the Premier has promised good jobs, he has broken that promise.

The way I see it, if you want to sell it here, you need to build it here. Ontario is home to the best autoworkers in the world, and we need a provincial government that is committed to a strategy to sustain the domestic auto sector, those workers and their communities.

Speaker, back to the Premier: When will the Premier come up with a “sell here, build here” policy that’s actually going to save jobs in the auto industry?

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: I’m happy to talk about our plan for the automotive industry and the fact that, in Alliston, the 11 millionth Honda just rolled off the line, supporting 4,200 great-paying jobs in that community—hard-working men and women who get up every single day to produce top-quality vehicles right here in Ontario.

That doesn’t include GM’s announcement, just a few weeks ago—a $691-million investment in next-generation V8 engines in St. Catharines; Toyota’s $1.1-billion investment in RAV4 production; and Ford investing billions of dollars to retool their Oakville plant to produce vehicles here in Ontario.

We are continuing to support the automotive sector. We are continuing to generate good-paying jobs and great investments in the province of Ontario.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. We learned this morning from The Trillium that the government—Metrolinx—settled a $500-million lawsuit put forward by the Premier’s big donor and billionaire bagman, Carmine Nigro, who’s also chair of the LCBO and also a Ford government appointee to Invest Ontario, and also with connections to the greenbelt. There are no details.

Speaker, through you: Did the Premier direct Metrolinx to make this lawsuit go away?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: As that member knows, the Premier nor anyone here gets involved in any of those discussions. Those are independent matters.

But what we are focused on is building transit. For 15 years, those Liberal members sat on their heels and did absolutely nothing. We see record gridlock across this city, across this province, because of their inaction.

We’ve got shovels in the ground on some of the largest public transit projects across this country—not only this country, but across North America. The Ontario Line: the first time we’ve got shovels in the ground in downtown Toronto in over 60 years. That line will move 400,000 people every single day.

We’re going to continue to ensure that we’re building transit for the future. We’re going to continue to ensure we get shovels in the ground and deliver on our mandate to build Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: Carmine Nigro has been rewarded with some of the most powerful appointments by this Premier. He’s the LCBO chair. He’s an Invest Ontario board member, Ontario Place Corp. chair—anybody seeing the connections?—and a past VP of the Ontario—wait for it—PC fund. Interesting combination. And I’m willing to bet he has a luxury private jet as well.

Regular Ontarians don’t get secret deals behind closed doors, but somehow the Premier’s well-connected friends are getting them. So, Speaker, I’ll ask the Premier: Why should the people of Ontario believe that the Premier’s secret settlement with somebody who is so well-connected is above board?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Regular Ontarians want us to build in this province. That’s what we were elected on our mandate—three consecutive majority governments to build Ontario. That’s transit projects across this province.

Let’s talk about the Hazel line, the first time that we’re going to get rapid transit for the residents of Peel, Brampton and Mississauga. It’s going to move thousands of people every single day.

For 15 years those members across the aisle sat on their heels and neglected the people of Scarborough. For the first time we’re going to be building rapid transit for Scarborough residents and ensuring that they get access to the public transit that they deserve.

We’ve been elected on a mandate to build. We’re going to continue to get shovels in the ground and we’re going to continue to deliver on the largest mandate to build public transit in the history of Canada and North America.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: Carmine Nigro, the Premier’s big donor and billionaire bagman, sued the government for air rights that he actually never really owned, and somehow the government has secretly settled behind closed doors.

Ontarians are being asked to trust yet another secret deal. We can’t even find out what happened with the Premier’s luxury jet and now we have this. And it’s involving, once again, one of the Premier’s closest insiders, with no transparency, no accountability.

A simple question to the Minister of Transportation: How much was the settlement that Mr. Nigro received for air rights that he never really actually owned?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: We need to build transit in Ontario. That’s exactly what we were elected to do and that’s exactly what we will do moving forward. We can’t afford to have the status quo, and we especially can’t afford what the Liberals did in the last 15 years that they were in government. They have nothing that they can account for on infrastructure spending or infrastructure dollars in the ground. We lose almost $54 billion a year to lost productivity because of gridlock and the lack of investments that they made when they were in government, Madam Speaker.

But we took a different approach. We are getting transit built. We have put legislation in this House to ensure that we can move these projects faster, quicker, so we get shovels in the ground quicker and faster. Because people expect us to build for the future and that is exactly what we are doing. The Scarborough subway extension, the Yonge North subway extension—every one of these projects will change the face of this city, of this province and will move people quicker and faster—

Interruption.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize.

I recognize the leader of the third party.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: Guys, when the Raging Grannies appear, you’ve gotta be scared. Trust me, I know that.

You know what Ontarians can’t afford? They can’t afford a government that rewards its rich friends for things that they actually never really owned.

Let’s tell the story. In November 2018, Carmine Nigro entered into an agreement to buy these air rights. It’s important to remember that this agreement was never settled. Mr. Nigro never paid for those air rights, and they never actually belonged to him. So, in 2021 and 2022, Metrolinx began expropriation. In 2024, Mr. Nigro’s company sued for $500 million and in 2025 it settled. And now we’re just finding out about it.

What exactly is the Premier hiding?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: As that member knows and I’ll repeat, these are legal processes and these are processes that have been through our independent agency at Metrolinx. What we are committed to doing is building public transit, a mandate that we were elected to do. Ontarians cannot afford to go back to the 15 years of neglect by the previous Liberal government, where no transit was built, where no highways were built, Madam Speaker. The status quo does not stand.

We will continue to build, and that is why the people of this province have trusted us to move forward on this mandate, to build highways like the 413, the Bradford Bypass, to develop the Ring of Fire and to develop the roads that lead to the Ring of Fire, or public transit in this province. For 15 years, they did absolutely nothing to move people. The Ontario Line will move over 400,000 people every single day. The Crosstown, which is now open, is moving thousands of people and saving them over an hour, getting an hour back into their day every single day.

These are real challenges that we are solving and we’re going to continue to move forward on getting transit—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: The real challenge is getting answers out of this government of any substance. Any reasonable person would listen to what I just said and say, “There’s something fishy here.” Getting money for rights that you never actually owned—it just doesn’t sound fair. I think that’s a reasonable thing to say. And then you have to ask yourself: Why did Mr. Nigro buy these air rights in the first place? And then why did he actually never pay for them, over four years? So then it makes me think, maybe he knew something that not everybody else knew.

So my question to the Minister of Transportation is, did the Minister of Transportation or the Premier or anybody in this government let Mr. Nigro know in advance of November 2018 that Metrolinx would be expropriating the rights for which he is now being so richly—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: We were elected, once again, on a mandate to build public transit, because the status quo just does not cut it. We need to get people moving across this province, Madam Speaker. We need to get shovels in the ground, and that’s exactly what we are doing. Whether it’s the Bradford Bypass, the 413; whether it’s the Ontario Line, the Scarborough subway extension, the Eglinton West extension—none of those projects would have happened if it wasn’t for this government taking the initiative to move forward to get these projects built. And that’s exactly what we want to do.

The people of this province deserve world-class transit. That is exactly what we want to deliver on, whether it’s LRTs in Hamilton, in Mississauga, in Brampton, in Toronto, or our GO expansion at work across this province; setting records last year—over 76 million people using GO Transit last year. We are going to continue to invest in public transit, we are going to continue to build and we are going to continue to ensure that we deliver a world-class transit system.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: So the minister is shovelling something, but he’s not putting a shovel in the ground.

Speaker, today at committee, we brought forward a motion, and we’ll be bringing forward another motion today, to ask the chair and the CEO of Metrolinx to appear before committee, to answer questions with regard to this air rights settlement scandal.

When you think about it, we just gave millions of dollars—millions of dollars—for air; air that somebody didn’t own, that was ours. It just doesn’t make any sense. We can’t give schools the money that they need, our hospitals are hurting, people are out of work, but we’ve got money for somebody who doesn’t own something that we’re compensating him for: Mr. Nigro.

Can somebody tell me how that makes any sense to anyone over there? Can the minister try to do that without picking up a shovel?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Madam Speaker, no one in this government was involved in that. That’s an independent agency that builds transit, that moves forward on these transit projects. Not the Premier and no one in this government was involved in that process.

What we are doing is continuing to build transit in Ontario. The Ontario Line, for example: 4,700 jobs that are supported by that project; thousands of jobs supported by the Scarborough subway extension. These are jobs that those members opposite have voted against every single time.

We were elected on a mandate to continue building public transit, on a mandate to continue investing in these projects that will create thousands of jobs for people across this province, and that’s what we want to do. We want to get people moving—whether it’s highways, whether it’s public transit and bringing in programs like One Fare that are saving families $1,600 every single year. That’s our commitment, and that’s exactly what we want to do—affordability, and ensure people move.

Child protection

MPP Alexa Gilmour: This week, two foster parents were found guilty of murdering L.L. and torturing J.L., two Indigenous brothers zip-tied into wetsuits, confined in a dungeon-like basement as they wasted away. Teachers, doctors and social workers sounded the alarm for five years—five years—and this government heard them and did nothing.

This government knows that one child connected to government care is dying every three days, and their response is to stop tracking the numbers. Our children need protection, not secrecy.

To the Premier: Why did the government stop tracking the number of children dying under your care?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I thank the honourable member for the very important question.

Madam Speaker, the loss of any young person in care is profoundly tragic and heartbreaking. No caregiver or parent should ever have to deal with such heartbreak.

It’s why our government took action from the day we formed government. We said the status quo was not acceptable. We’ve taken action. We’ve said from the beginning that the time for talk is over. We have introduced measures that never existed before. We have increased the frequency of visits, from 90 days to every 30 days. We hired more inspectors on the ground. We increased the number of unannounced inspections. We introduced monetary penalties to hold bad actors accountable.

This is a subject that I would appreciate no one play politics with on this side of the House. And certainly, I expect all my colleagues in the opposition to support us on making sure no child or youth in this—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Parkdale–High Park.

MPP Alexa Gilmour: Speaker, this government says that they had a visit every 30 days for five years, and children who wasted away in a basement were never removed from the home. It is shameful.

On Saturday, the Rosedale community gathered to mark two years since another CAS child, four-year-old Neveah, was found dead in a dumpster—two years ago this Saturday, and still no systemic accountability; only a government that hides data.

These were children. These were children with names and people who loved them and a government that was supposed to protect them.

If this government won’t protect them, will they reinstate the provincial advocate for youth and children who will?

Hon. Michael Parsa: Madam Speaker, let me make it very clear to every member in this House, including the members in the opposition: No more time for talk. The office that the member is referring to wrote over 700 pages—report, report, report. That time is done.

We’re now taking added action. We will hold every single person accountable—including monetary fines.

Madam Speaker, the opposition did nothing when the previous government was in power.

I and the members of this caucus will not have kids left behind. It’s why we introduced measures. I would encourage the member to stand up and support us on these initiatives, not to come here and politicize the issue. The measures that we’ve introduced never existed before.

No, we’re not going to have an office that sits down and writes reports.

We will be happy to take action to make sure every child and youth in this province is supported—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member from Parkdale–High Park will come to order.

Hon. Michael Parsa: —and if they don’t, every single person in this space is put on notice: We will hold—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

I recognize the member for Kingston and the Islands.

Avion du gouvernement / Government jet

M. Ted Hsu: La ministre des Affaires francophones, dont le ministère a subi des compressions budgétaires cette année, est aussi présidente du Conseil de Trésor qui a approuvé une dépense de 29,8 millions de dollars pour l’achat d’un jet privé de luxe.

A-t-elle déjà approuvé la revente du jet privé de luxe? Peut-elle nous dire quand les documents liés à cette revente seront rendus publics?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the government House leader.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thanks, Speaker. Through you to the member for Kingston and the Islands, I think it’s very important for this House to go back to what we know. What we know is the Premier heard the concerns of Ontarians and decided rightly that it wasn’t the time to make this purchase and acted by selling the aircraft. The aircraft was sold—the Premier has asserted it many times—for the same price that it was purchased for.

As the member will know, transferring ownership and completing that hand-off does take some time. But I’m pleased to inform the House that, as of last week, possession of the aircraft was transferred back to Bombardier. The province no longer has it. The maintenance service provider is reviewing final servicing; we will also make that information available once it’s finalized.

But just to recap, Speaker, through you to the member, the Premier listened. The aircraft was sold back at the same price. We are no longer in possession of that of that jet.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Kingston and the Islands.

M. Ted Hsu: Ça fait 14 fois qu’elle n’a pas pu répondre. Laissez-la parler, tout simplement.

Le 25 mars 2026, lorsqu’elle a présenté la Loi des crédits de 2026, la présidente du Conseil du Trésor déclarait, et je cite : « Au Conseil du Trésor, notre responsabilité envers les contribuables de l’Ontario est toujours au premier plan de chacune de nos décisions. Ce sens de responsabilité est indissociable de notre engagement envers la transparence. »

Quand fera-t-elle enfin preuve de transparence au sujet de la revente secrète de ce jet privé de luxe?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Treasury Board president.

L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: Madame la Présidente, ils sont certainement très persistants.

Madam Speaker, they certainly are quite persistent. I understand why the Liberals are so persistent after three devastating electoral defeats where they were wholly rejected by the voters of Ontario. After three different failed leaders—Kathleen Wynne, Steven Del Duca and Bonnie Crombie—were also rejected, they’re here and the member opposite is the interim leader for the third time. And so, they have had to learn persistence over all of these failures.

They won’t accept the answers that the government House leader has provided or the Minister of Finance has provided. We have been very clear. They want to lecture about accountability and they want the receipts. Well, let’s check the receipts. We have received eight consecutive clean audit opinions year after year. They received two unqualified audit opinions. The Auditor General would not even sign their statements.

Northern transportation

Mr. Billy Pang: My question is to the Minister of Transportation. For 14 years, families and workers across northern Ontario paid the price for the Liberal government’s decision to cancel the Northlander passenger rail service. As a result, communities in the north saw their access to jobs, health care and opportunities significantly reduced.

Speaker, our government made a commitment to restore passenger rail to the north, and we have been making meaningful progress to deliver that promise.

Can the minister please tell this House what our government is doing to restore reliable passenger rail service to northern Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington.

Mr. Ric Bresee: I want to thank the member for Markham–Unionville, my friend, for the important question.

Speaker, while the Liberals cancelled the Northlander in 2012 and the NDP offered nothing but silence, our government got to work. We’ve invested more than $100 million in rail infrastructure north of North Bay, completed the North Bay rail bypass and acquired 205 kilometres of dedicated railway between North Bay and Washago with a $138-million investment that means faster, more reliable passenger service. And now, for the first time in 14 years, the Northlander is being tested along the full route from Timmins to Cochrane all the way to Union Station right here in downtown Toronto. This is what delivering for northern Ontario looks like.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Markham–Unionville.

Mr. Billy Pang: Thank you to the minister for the answer. Our government is delivering real results for families and workers across northern Ontario. People in the north deserve reliable, accessible passenger rail that helps them get where they need to be faster and easier, whether that’s for work, school or important medical appointments. This is about making travel simpler, more convenient and more reliable for communities across the region, while supporting economic growth and better connection between communities. Through these efforts, we are helping to build a stronger, more connected north.

Speaker, can the PA share what our government is doing to ensure the Northlander truly works for people across northern Ontario?

Mr. Ric Bresee: Thank you again to the member for Markham–Unionville. Our government is focused on delivering a passenger rail service that is affordable, accessible and built to meet the needs of our northern communities. Each train set offers 169 seats, including accessible seating, wide aisles, accessible bathrooms and even charging ports. The Northlander will connect 16 communities over 740 kilometres from Timmins and Cochrane to Union Station here in Toronto.

Speaker, we’re going even further. Our government is proposing a northern rideshare framework so that residents in the communities without local transit can still reach the Northlander stations. Northern communities deserve world-class transportation and, under this Premier’s leadership and this Minister of Transportation, that is exactly what our government is delivering.

Protection for workers

MPP Jamie West: I have a question for the Premier. Ron Rousseau is a miner in Sudbury, and two years ago he was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. Ron has a tumour in his lung the size of a mandarin, and the WSIB has confirmed that it’s work-related. Ron is going to lose his WSIB coverage in June, not because his cancer is cured but because of his age. So now Ron is not only worried about having cancer; he’s worried about how he’s going to support his family after his birthday.

My question: In June, will Ron have to return to mining while fighting lung cancer, or will the Premier scrap the WSIB age cap?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for York South–Weston.

MPP Mohamed Firin: I’m really sad to hear that, and I do hope for the best recovery for him.

But what I will say, Madam Speaker, is that no government has taken more action on protecting workers than this government, led by this Premier. Recently, the Minister of Red Tape Reduction introduced legislation where we’ve increased the age cap of WSIB, and it’s something, unfortunately, that I wish the NDP and other members of this House supported, but, unfortunately, they didn’t.

When it comes to WSIB, we have the best rates, you know what I mean? We’ve increased our benefits, we’ve given more back to employers that are doing great work, and we’ll continue to support the workers of this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Sudbury.

MPP Jamie West: According to Ministry of Labour data, 87% of all fatalities in Ontario are caused by occupational disease in mines. Speaker, Ontario’s diesel and silica limits are too high; Ontario’s miners are forced to breathe more diesel than miners in comparable nations like Europe and Australia. Our silica limits are four times higher than occupational health expert recommendations. I’m from a mining town. I love mining. I’m excited for the expansion of mining in Ontario, but we have to protect Ontario’s miners.

My question: Will the Premier protect Ontario’s miners or will he pave the path to critical minerals on their lungs?

MPP Mohamed Firin: I thank the member for the question. Over five million workers receive benefits from the WSIB, and the WSIB has reduced the average premium rate to the lowest rate in almost 50 years in this province, saving businesses over $60 million. Madam Speaker, 60% of claimants have not lost any time at all, and of the 40% of those who miss work, 87% of them return to work within the first three months. In 2025, WSIB unlocked over $400 million to invest into the health and safety of the workers of this province.

As I said earlier, no government in the history of this province has done more to protect workers than this government. We’ve introduced over seven of the Working for Workers legislation and we’ll continue to protect the workers of this province.

Freedom of information

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Speaker, we have been asking the Premier and his cabinet to share the invoice and the bill of sale for their luxury private jet that they bought, but the Premier, his finance minister, the President of the Treasury Board, they have not shown us the documents. This evasive Conservative Premier and his finance minister used the budget bill to rip apart freedom-of-information laws so the Premier could keep these kinds of records hidden.

If the Premier has nothing to hide about his private jet or his calls with his greenbelt friends or the recent Metrolinx settlement with his friend Carmine Nigro for probably millions of dollars of taxpayer money, then he should have nothing to fear in sharing his records. But this Premier is hiding records, so he must be afraid of what they will show.

Through you to the Premier, Speaker: What is in these documents that makes him so afraid?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Madam Speaker, the NDP and the Liberals that destroyed our province, they want to focus on that; I’ll tell you what we’re focusing on. We have a plan for jobs, anchored by building our nuclear energy right here at home. We’re leading the world when it comes to nuclear. Ontario is moving forward with Bruce C project, creating over 18,900 jobs and powering over 4.8 million homes. Once it’s done, there will be 10,100 good-paying jobs.

They wanted to close the nuclear sector. They wanted to make sure they closed Pickering and Darlington; we’re building the largest-scale nuclear at Bruce C on the continent. We’re leading when it comes to SMRs, creating thousands and thousands of more jobs. We’re shipping those out around the world. We have a list from here to the floor about more opportunities, more jobs for the people of Ontario.

That’s what we’re focused on. They can focus on their stuff; we’ll focus on job creation and making sure—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Don Valley West.

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Speaker, question after question on this topic and that’s the answer we get from a government under RCMP investigation. They have lost their way, and that includes the Premier, the finance minister and the Treasury Board president. They all said yes to the jet. They don’t want to say the word, they don’t want to talk about it, because it’s their Achilles heel. The jet and the FOI changes show this government’s true colours: They’re more interested in protecting themselves than in protecting Ontario.

Under this government, under this Premier, unemployment went from 5.8% when he took office to 7.7% now. That’s not protecting Ontario. The only people believing what the Premier has to say are the Conservative members sitting in the government benches. The people of Ontario aren’t buying it and neither are we.

Back to the Premier: What are you trying to hide?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Finance.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: That imagery of those 300,000 tail lights leaving Canada, all those manufacturing jobs south of the border—the million jobs that have been created since we took power, that is what a government does.

And while the member opposite raises jobs, the Premier talked about Bruce C. What a great opportunity that is for new jobs.

Why don’t we talk about my riding of Pickering, the refurbishment? Over 20,000 new jobs being created: There’s an opportunity for you—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Ottawa South, come to order.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: —in our communities.

While we’re at it, for Toronto, where were you when we had $83 million for affordable student housing at Toronto Metropolitan University? She voted against it, in Toronto, where she represents her citizens.

Madam Speaker, this member and all the others should support growth and good jobs in Ontario. That’s what they should do.

Mental health and addiction services

Mr. Joseph Racinsky: Speaker, my question is for the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. This week is Mental Health Week, an important time to raise awareness about the importance of prioritizing mental health and checking in on our loved ones. I’ve spoken to many families in my community who have experience with depression and anxiety, whether they are struggling themselves or supporting their loved ones going through a tough time. They deserve access to programs that will help them get the care they need.

Speaker, our government has made historic investments in expanding mental health services through our $3.8-billion Roadmap to Wellness. We are continuing to work on building a comprehensive system of care and filling gaps in communities across our province.

Speaker, can the associate minister share with this House what progress we have made in expanding care through the Roadmap to Wellness for those who need it most?

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member from Wellington–Halton Hills for this important question and his passionate advocacy on this issue.

There is no question that too many in our communities have and will face mental health challenges in their lifetime. That is why this government, under the leadership of Premier Ford, has made transformational investments through the Roadmap to Wellness.

We are investing in programs that treat depression and anxiety-related disorders such as the Ontario Structured Psychotherapy Program that offers free therapy services to adults experiencing stress, depression, OCD, PTSD and other anxiety-related concerns. As of last month, there are over 25,000 people enrolled in this program.

We are also investing in intensive services such as rTMS—magnetic stimulation to better treat severe cases of depression.

We take mental health as health and treat everyone, Madam Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Wellington–Halton Hills.

Mr. Joseph Racinsky: Thank you to the associate minister for his continued work on expanding mental health care in communities like mine.

Speaker, the pain of addiction has touched too many lives in our province. People in Ontario want to see services that will help their loved ones on their path to recovery. HART hubs are doing exactly that. They work to provide wraparound supports for those struggling with homelessness and addiction. From withdrawal management and addiction counselling, primary care, all the way to supportive housing, HART hubs are saving lives in communities across our province.

Speaker, can the associate minister update the House on the important work our government is doing to help individuals struggling with addiction on the path to recovery?

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: The member is exactly right. HART hubs are having an enormous impact in communities across the province. Over the past year I’ve had the opportunity to visit HART hubs across the province from Windsor to Ottawa to Sault Ste. Marie and countless more in between, seeing the incredible work that is being done on the ground to offer meaningful mental health and addiction support for the most vulnerable among us. HART hubs are supporting over 45,000 people annually, helping break the cycle of addiction, Madam Speaker.

We also established 500 addiction recovery beds, serving over 7,000 people across the province.

All these important investments are to help those who are struggling with addiction, to make sure we provide the recovery and treatment towards a path towards recovery.

Freedom of information

Ms. Marit Stiles: What a rare sighting; it’s like a blue moon.

My question is for the Premier. Families are saving up, but they can’t afford to buy a first home. Young families and young people are working so hard at school—this may sound familiar—but still can’t find a job. Everybody out there is playing by the rules, but the Premier makes it impossible for them to get ahead.

Recently, when the courts told the Premier that he had to start playing by the rules, he used his own pen to change the law so that he could hide his phone records. I would love the Premier to stand up in his place and answer this question: Does the Premier think the rule of law does not apply to him?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: I find it ironic when the member opposite, the Leader of the Opposition, speaks about affordability. That party voted against the budget that we just passed a few weeks ago, which helps and supports consumers in the province of Ontario, which reduces the cost of a new home. They go on and on about the cost of a new home in this province. They voted against it, Speaker. They have absolutely no problem doing that. They speak one way when the cameras are on; they do something else when the camera is off.

Speaker, we are focused on building an economy, building an environment to create investments. We’re getting it done. We’re building roads to the Ring of Fire. We’re getting investments in various sectors, including the tech sector—the second-largest tech sector here in North America. We’re building a financial industry. We’re building a manufacturing industry. We’re focused on getting the jobs and the people of Ontario to work.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: It really is actually quite sad, because this is a Premier who built his whole career—well, most of it, anyway—pretending that he was just like everybody else, that he was out there for the little guy, that he was going to be the one who was going to fight back against corruption and the gravy train and government waste. And then he turns around and he reaches deep into the taxpayer pocket and pulls out $30 million for a private luxury jet. And he makes deals in the backrooms with developer friends.

Now, as the walls are closing in around him, he directs the government to change the very laws so he can hide his backroom deals. That’s what has happened now. I really hope that this time the Premier has the backbone to get up and answer the questions that the people want answered.

Why is the Premier so afraid to come clean about why he changed these laws?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Premier of Ontario.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Madam Speaker: I talk to the little guy and little gal every day, more than anyone in the entire world.

I’ll tell you what we’re doing, Madam Speaker. Ontario is leading the world when it comes to nuclear, creating 150,000 jobs. They wanted to close the plants. There would be no one employed in nuclear right now. We’re building on the largest scale on the continent.

They talked about housing. They vote against the HST. We made an agreement with the federal government to get rid of the HST, saving people $130,000.

Madam Speaker, you see the gas prices going through the roof. They voted against that 10.7 cents a litre that we’re putting back into people’s pockets.

They vote against absolutely everything that will create prosperity and make sure we have the strongest province in the world—which we are. And we’re going to continue focusing—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Don Valley North.

Freedom of information

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: My question is for the Premier. Speaker, for years Ontarians have used freedom-of-information laws to drag the truth out of governments and hold them accountable, whether they liked it or not.

These laws exposed the greenbelt scandal, and the RCMP got called in. They exposed the Skills Development Fund scandal, and the OPP got called in. They exposed the unacceptable conditions in long-term-care homes during COVID-19, and the army was called in. But when a judge was called in and ordered the Premier to turn over his cellphone records, he decided to change the rules in the middle of the game.

So, to the Premier, what is on your cellphone and why are you so desperate to hide it?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: Our government updated legislation that was almost 40 years old, Speaker. It was in bad need of refinement, updating. When this legislation that it updated first came about, we didn’t have cellphones; there was no artificial intelligence, no compound computing. Nothing like that existed. The world has changed.

We’re updating a law that aligns itself with the majority of governments right here in Canada, including your federal cousins in Ottawa. I encourage you—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Ottawa South has been warned.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: —to go to the federal government about that.

But what I will say: This government is focused on economic growth. It’s focused on affordability. With economic growth, we are building a nuclear industry second to none in the world. We’re building the first small modular reactor in the G7, creating tens of thousands of jobs.

I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Don Valley North.

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: Speaker, the minister can spin all he wants, but he cannot hide. There is simply no defending the indefensible.

This morning, we learned about the secret settlement with the Premier’s bagman for untold millions. So maybe, maybe, we’re getting closer to the truth now as to why he wants to hide his cellphone records.

Speaker, let’s call a spade a spade. The courts were about to expose the Premier’s phone records, and now he’s moving heaven and earth to stop it.

So here’s the question every Ontarian wants to know right now: What is on that phone, and why are you so desperate to hide it?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: I’ve touched on this subject many, many times. I’ll give the same answer. We’re aligning legislation with the other Canadian provinces—including your federal cousins in Ottawa.

Speaker, what the people of Ontario do care about is—they want a good-paying job, they want lower taxes. And that’s what we’re doing.

We’re focused on building a nuclear industry that is second to none in the G7. We’re focused on building an energy industry. We’re focused on getting manufacturing jobs back to the province of Ontario, when 300,000 left, under the Liberal government that you supported—that you were a part of, in fact. Jobs left the province. We’re building a financial industry. We’re building the manufacturing industry. We’re building an industry focused on technology—400,000 tech jobs right here in the province, building and incubating a tech sector that is second to none. We are focused on reducing taxes: small business taxes—a 30% reduction.

That’s what the people of Ontario want—lower taxes and economic growth and a good job to come home to every night.

Emergency preparedness

Mr. Brian Saunderson: My question is for the Minister of Emergency Preparedness and Response. When emergencies like the 2025 ice storm—which impacted the residents of my riding and the minister’s—hit, it is important that our residents feel supported and safe.

Residents, municipalities and local organizations are all stepping up, but we know that coordination, training and access to equipment are essential to an effective response.

That is why our government is building an emergency response network across our province to help communities respond to local emergencies and deploy critical resources at a moment’s notice.

Through you, Speaker: Can the minister tell us more about Ontario Corps and what investments have been made to strengthen training and equipment?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Under Pre