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

November 4, 2025

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2025-Nov-04 vol. A (PDF)

L033A - Tue 4 Nov 2025 / Mar 4 nov 2025

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 4 November 2025 Mardi 4 novembre 2025

Orders of the Day

Peel Transition Implementation Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur la mise en oeuvre de la transition de Peel

Members’ Statements

Remembrance Day

Government accountability

Bernard Grandmaître

Remembrance Day

Sécurité routière

Mahi Sehmbi

Hospital services

Skilled trades

Nuclear power facility

The Elliot Community

Remarkable Women at Queen’s Park

Introduction of Visitors

Question Period

Government accountability

Government accountability

Government accountability

Government accountability

Government contracts

Government accountability

Municipal infrastructure

Government accountability

Environmental protection

Energy policies

Infrastructure funding

Municipal development

Subventions destinées à l’éducation / Education funding

Road safety

Introduction of Bills

Groves Memorial Community Hospital Act, 2025

Petitions

Education funding

Foreign-trained doctors

Pharmacare

Child care

Energy policies

Foreign-trained doctors

Northern Health Travel Grant

Post-stroke treatment

Social assistance

Tenant protection

University funding

Lupus

Orders of the Day

Protect Ontario by Securing Affordable Energy for Generations Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour protéger l’Ontario en garantissant l’accès à l’énergie abordable pour les générations futures

Resource Management and Safety Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur la gestion des ressources et la sécurité

Peel Transition Implementation Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur la mise en oeuvre de la transition de Peel

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Peel Transition Implementation Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur la mise en oeuvre de la transition de Peel

Mr. Flack moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 45,

An Act to make statutory amendments respecting the transfer of jurisdiction within The Regional Municipality of Peel and the appointment of Deputy Provincial Land and Development Facilitators / Projet de loi 45, Loi apportant des modifications législatives en ce qui concerne le transfert de compétences dans la municipalité régionale de Peel et la nomination de facilitateurs provinciaux de l’aménagement adjoints.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the minister.

Hon. Rob Flack: I’d like to begin by stating that I’m going to share my time with the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the member from Simcoe–Grey.

Today, it’s my pleasure and privilege to speak to Bill 45, the Peel Transition Implementation Act, 2025. Speaker, our government’s proposed Peel Transition Implementation Act represents another important step in modernizing how local services are delivered in one of Ontario’s fastest-growing regions. If passed, this legislation will protect and strengthen communities right across the Peel region while also helping to streamline planning, improve local service delivery, and accelerate the infrastructure needed to support new home construction.

It will ensure that the city of Mississauga, the city of Brampton and the town of Caledon have the necessary tools they need to deliver high-quality, efficient services to their residents, all the while continuing to grow and thrive as strong, independent municipalities. That point bears repeating: while they continue to grow—again, one of the fastest-growing regions in Canada—because that is precisely what this bill is designed to do: to support the growth and long-term prosperity of the people and communities of Peel region.

To support the municipalities as they move into the future, through Bill 45, our government is transferring responsibility for two key public services from the upper-tier region of Peel to the lower-tier municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. Those services are (1) regional roads and associated stormwater infrastructure and (2) waste collection services. If passed, the transfer of regional roads, including stormwater systems, will take effect on July 1, 2026. The transfer of waste collection services would be in effect October 1, 2027.

These dates are local decisions that align with a motion passed by Peel regional council on September 11 of this year, reflecting a locally agreed-upon transition plan among all the impacted municipalities.

Speaker, I want to emphasize that this legislation is not the product of unilateral decision-making. Our government does not believe it is in the best interests of Peel region to take a top-down approach to this legislation. These are changes to services that shared constituents rely on day in and day out. As such, we are working together to ensure we have an agreement in place and co-operation every step of the way. This process reflects months of consultation and close collaboration with all the municipalities of Peel, as well as the stakeholders, experts, and transition board representatives.

Our government’s goal throughout this has been clear: to strengthen local governance, support responsible growth, and help get more homes built faster.

I want to take this opportunity to recognize and thank the municipal representatives, subject matter experts and members of the Peel Region Transition Board for their leadership and their professionalism. Their recommendations were thoughtful, detailed and practical, and they have played a major role in shaping this legislation. On behalf of our government, I want to extend my gratitude for their tireless work in helping us arrive at this point. We could not have done this without them.

I would like to personally extend my congratulations to our partners. Mayor Parrish of Mississauga, Mayor Brown of Brampton and Mayor Groves of Caledon have done an outstanding job working collaboratively together. Working together, Peel region’s leaders have been stalwart partners in advancing the cause of better planning, lowering costs and improving service delivery. Together, we are protecting and moving Ontario forward.

Furthermore, as members of this House will know, our government has introduced a series of housing and infrastructure reforms aimed at tackling Ontario’s housing supply crisis head-on.

Just two weeks ago, I introduced Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025—legislation that builds on the foundation set by the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act passed earlier this year. These pieces of legislation, together, are forming a road map for how services can be delivered more efficiently, saving residents and future residents time and money. That bill proposed to speed up decision-making and accelerate the construction of critical infrastructure, and innovated by introducing a new model: a publicly owned corporate model for water and waste water delivery.

This model is being piloted first in the Peel region and hopefully will become a model throughout the province of Ontario. Peel region is the ideal partner as we continue to innovate and implement the new MSC model of public service delivery. I want to emphasize again: public service delivery, not private.

This is an important connection, because Bill 45 and now Bill 60 work hand in hand, glove in glove. They complement each other. Together, they modernize local governance and create the conditions for faster, more affordable housing construction.

Moving on, Peel region’s water and waste water infrastructure is the second largest in Ontario, representing more than $40 billion in assets and serving over 1.6 million residents. This network supports the economic engine of southern Ontario and must continue to evolve to meet the needs of growing communities like Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon.

As I have said before, the days of failing to plan for growth are over in this province. We are ensuring we have the systems and tools in place to make sure we have the services they need. That is why our government is acting decisively to modernize the way these services are planned, funded and, most importantly, delivered.

Through the Peel water and waste water pilot and the creation of a publicly—again, I emphasize publicly—owned municipal service corporation or public utility, we are reducing red tape, shortening timelines and lowering costs, all the while keeping these essential services firmly in public hands.

Speaker, this public utility model represents a new made-in-Ontario model for delivering large-scale infrastructure efficiently, transparently and sustainably. This model empowers municipalities to jointly deliver water and waste water services through a publicly owned entity that maintains local accountability and democratic oversight. Every aspect of this model ensures that ownership and control remain with the municipal governments and, ultimately, the people of Ontario. By consolidating expertise, pooling resources and streamlining approvals, a public utility can move projects forward faster at a lower cost than the current fragmented system.

Crucially, this model reduces municipal reliance on development charges. Again, this project that we are building is going to help reduce the punitive development charges that fund critical infrastructure. That means lower cost for builders, greater affordability for homeowners, and more predictable funding streams for the municipalities they serve.

Let me be clear once more, undeniably: This is not privatization. They will remain publicly owned. It is public innovation—a smarter, faster, publicly accountable approach to managing vital infrastructure that supports Ontario’s housing and economic goals. It’s in the name, twice, actually—municipal service corporations, because it’s municipally owned, a.k.a. public; and the Water and Wastewater Public Corporations Act, 2025—again, there goes the word “public.” I don’t know how much clearer I can be. Again, this is the direction we’re going, and we will not be feared off this track.

The Peel utility pilot program will serve as a blueprint for how public ownership and efficient delivery can work hand in hand. This public utility will handle water and waste water infrastructure on behalf of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon, ensuring standards and modernized project management are in place by leveraging economies of scale and shared capacity. The Peel MSC will accelerate construction timelines, reduce administrative duplication and deliver long-term savings for ratepayers and homebuyers alike.

The pilot will also demonstrate how an MSC can separate service delivery from political boundaries, allowing for coordinated planning across growing urban areas, all while maintaining strong public oversight and accountability. This is about modern governance for a modern Ontario while giving municipalities the tools they need to deliver faster, smarter and at a lower cost, without ever compromising public control or service quality.

Before looking ahead, it’s important to understand from where we come. The governance of Peel has evolved repeatedly over more than two centuries, adapting to population growth, economic change and new challenges.

Speaker, please allow me to share some relevant history. In 1805, when the British crown and the Mississaugas signed the Toronto Purchase, Treaty 13, and provisional agreement 13A, which together covered over 70,000 acres of land that today form the city of Mississauga—and, no, I wasn’t around when that treaty was signed.

From those early treaties through the establishment of the township of Toronto in 1806 and later the county of Peel in 1852, the story of Peel’s governance has always been one of change responding to growth and challenges therein.

By the time of Confederation in 1867, Peel county had assumed responsibility for local infrastructure, emergency planning and health services, the building blocks of the municipal governance model we know today.

In the decades that followed the Second World War, urban and industrial growth accelerated rapidly, especially in southern Ontario. The population boom placed enormous pressure on county governments, prompting the creation of regional municipalities to deliver large-scale services such as transportation, policing, waste management, and public health.

I’ve got a great cheat sheet here that I’ll dive into. In 1974, Peel followed the model of becoming a regional municipality—I was alive when that took place, and living in the great town of Streetsville, Ontario.

I’ve got to tell you this story: Back in those days, I was in early high school, and I will say that we were quite upset that regional governance was coming to Mississauga, to Streetsville, to Cooksville, to Clarkson, to Meadowvale, to Erindale, to Port Credit, to Malton. We were quite upset. We were fine just the way we were, all our neighbours. By the way, the mayor of Streetsville at the time was none other than Hazel McCallion. She didn’t like it. We didn’t like it. So what did we do? My first political activism was that we held a protest in front of Streetsville Secondary School.

George Carlson, who now works with Mayor Parrish, and I were, I think, in grade 9 or 10. We held a public protest. And what did we do? We held up a sign, and the sign was “SOS.” What did that mean? “Save our Streetsville.” We did not want to be part of regional government.

Hon. Nina Tangri: Port Credit.

Hon. Rob Flack: Port Credit didn’t want to. Clarkson didn’t want to. We did not want any of this. But what we did was finally accelerate through that.

I might add that, a couple of mayors later, Ron Searle lost to Hazel McCallion—was it ward 3, Minister? Anyway, I forget the ward, what Streetsville was. She ultimately became mayor of Mississauga, and you know the rest of the story.

Peel county was my background, my playground. I played along the Credit River. We drove our bikes to Shoppers World in Brampton. I took a dinghy out and floated down from the Cataracts in Orangeville all the way down to Streetsville, hopped out, dragged them back through two backyards right back here. I fished, played and had a lot of fun. It was our background—great memories.

When I drive through that region today, I see what Mississauga looks like, what Brampton looks like, and what Caledon looks like. It’s not how I grew up. I take a look at the great cultural mosaic that exists in that part of the province, the population growth, the density—when I grew up, Streetsville was 6,000 people, and I think the total Peel region was about 300,000 people; today, it’s 1.5 million or 1.6 million people. It has grown exponentially. We all know this.

My parents still live in Streetsville. They’re going to be 94 and 89 years old. We grew up on 3 Plainsman Road. It was a great place to grow up. It still is a great community.

The great thing that happened in Mississauga is that those communities still have their own identity. You can go to Streetsville and drive downtown, and you still get that flavour of it being a village. Timothy Street started it back in the 1800s, after the War of 1812. It is great, tremendous history.

When I go up to Credit River now—and where is the member from Mississauga–Malton? His backyard literally backs onto the Credit River, where we used to play. It has changed. It has evolved.

That is why this act is so important to implement. Streetsville, Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon have grown up. The need for the same services of regional government no longer exists. That is why we’re devolving somewhat the services of Peel region and going to continue to work closely with all stakeholders in that region to make sure we deliver great service.

I know the members here in our caucus who represent all the ridings within Peel support this advancement. And we will continue to act in the best interests of all the people in Peel region. It really is a tremendous place in Ontario. Again, I want to thank them for their support.

The county was dissolved and replaced with a two-tier structure, where the upper-tier region handled the common services and the lower-tier municipalities managed the local needs. At the time, this structure made sense. It allowed for Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon to have a coordinated planning process, while avoiding duplication of service. But what happened in 1974 is not the reality today. That is why the Peel Transition Implementation Act, Bill 45, is being presented in second reading today.

Back then, as I said, Peel’s population was 335,000; today, it stands at 1.45 million—I think maybe even more, Minister—more than four times larger than it was back in 1974. Again, it’s one of the fastest-growing in all of Ontario.

Again, I’ll just reflect on what we’re trying to accomplish here. We’re growing in this province—16 million people now. As I have often said here, when I was in high school, the population was somewhere between seven million and eight million people. We have grown tremendously. Keeping up with that growth has been really hard. When we talk about infrastructure—which is near and dear to my heart, because without critical infrastructure, we can’t build the homes we need for the people coming to this country and the people growing up in this country.

The dream of home ownership has to be kept alive, and part of the Peel transition act helps keep that dream alive. Why? Because we’re looking at new, bold and creative ways to implement infrastructure—critical water and waste water infrastructure. What is important to note is that this municipal service corporation, this public utility, I think will act as a catalyst to get that job done.

When I talk to other mayors in other municipalities across the province, they look at this in great anticipation. We’re confident this pilot will work. In fact, others have already asked me if they can join in on the pilot and create new actions and new opportunities for that to grow.

Speaker, let me conclude by simply saying that we’re committed. We’re on board to get this legislation put through and get on with the important transition in the Peel region and ultimately create the conditions—not build; create the conditions—to get more homes built faster, support the great people of the Peel region, and keep the dream of home ownership alive in this province and in this country. After all, it is the quintessential Canadian dream, and we must keep it alive. The Peel transition act will help us get that job done.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Graydon Smith: It’s great to be with you all this morning to talk about this bill. As the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing said, today I’ll be outlining some of the details in the proposed Peel Transition Implementation Act. As I go over the measures in the proposed act, the members of the House will see how they would, if passed, help the lower-tier municipalities in Peel to better accommodate the growth pressures they’re experiencing.

I hope members will also gain an appreciation of the complexities that had to be sorted out by the municipal representatives, other stakeholders, subject matter experts and the Peel transition board, who made recommendations to the government regarding Bill 45. And as the minister did, I also wish to thank the transition board members and the municipal representatives, stakeholders and experts for their time and their hard work that ultimately led to the recommendations to our government. Some of those recommendations are reflected in the bill before us today.

Speaker, one of the more detailed pieces of this bill involves responsibility for waste collection services. If passed, Bill 45 would support the transfer of waste collection from the region of Peel to its lower-tier municipalities: Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. I want to be clear: This isn’t something we are imposing. The municipalities themselves have already reached a local agreement on how and when the transfer should take place. The bill simply gives the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing the authority to make regulations that align with those local agreements, including their agreed-upon effective date of October 1, 2027.

I want to stress what the minister said earlier: These waste collection services will remain under public ownership. This legislation supports local decision-making. It provides the framework to make sure that what municipalities have agreed upon is locked in and respected. To add certainty, the bill also makes it clear that once the transfer happens, waste collection services can’t revert back to the region for 10 years.

So how did we get here? What happened behind the scenes to get us to this point today? For a bit of background—back in March, the four municipalities came to a local agreement on transferring these services from Peel region to the lower-tier municipalities. At the time, they had set an effective date of January 1, 2026—happy new year—supported by bylaws at the local level and a resolution change at regional council. Since then, the date has been updated to October 1, 2027, again by local agreement.

The transition committee, made up of representatives from all four municipalities, worked through a lot of details, such as service delivery, employee transitions, financial planning, and cost-sharing. Out of that work came a partnership between Brampton and Caledon for joint delivery of waste collection.

It’s also worth noting that community recycling centres were not included in this transfer. Those centres handle more than waste collection. They are involved in processing and are staffed by unionized employees, while local collection uses contracted, non-unionized staff.

Speaker, as mentioned, the municipalities agreed to push the effective date to October 1, 2027. That decision, approved by Peel regional council in September, was made for very practical reasons. That decision to push out the transfer date was to avoid compliance and operational risks for the municipalities, and lines up with the end of the current waste collection contracts on September 30, 2027. It also gives the municipalities more time to set up their new programs to hire and train staff, and to align IT and operational systems.

Importantly, it avoids overlap with the transition of the Blue Box Program to Circular Materials on January 1, 2026, and it keeps the changeover out of the peak winter and high-volume waste collection periods. So there are many very good reasons why the proposed change to the transfer date is a good idea.

Another point about Bill 45, which I want to repeat, is the stipulation that the waste collection services transfer cannot be revoked for 10 years. It gives municipalities stability and the time to make the new arrangement work. It also provides certainty across municipal election cycles and allows for the negotiation of new long-term waste collection contracts, which typically last eight to 10 years. That’s exactly the kind of steady local planning we want to support through this legislation—local solutions driven by those municipalities.

That’s what Bill 45 proposes regarding waste collection services.

Let’s look at the current situation. The region of Peel operates the second-largest waste management program in Ontario. Peel provides collection services to approximately 347 curbside households and 107,000 units within 834 multi-residential buildings. The region handles some 555,000 metric tonnes of waste annually from the 1.5 million residents of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. And 70% of Peel’s waste services are delivered by third-party contractors. That gives you an idea of the scale and complexity of this transfer of services.

Now let’s look at the other service that’s being proposed to be transferred from Peel region to the lower-tier municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. That is the transferring of jurisdiction over regional roads, including related stormwater infrastructure, from Peel region to the lower-tier municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. If the proposed Peel Transition Implementation Act is passed, under the legislation as currently written, the effective date of the regional roads transfer would be July 1, 2026.

I want to add that unlike the transfer of waste collection services, which were locally negotiated, the transfer of the regional roads and associated stormwater infrastructure would be facilitated by the Office of the Provincial Land and Development Facilitator. The costs associated with the provincial land and development facilitator’s services would be covered by the province.

Before I get into more detail, I want to say that one of the major factors that brought us to this point today was our government’s More Homes Built Faster Act, or Bill 23. That legislation made several important changes, including transferring land use planning responsibilities from some upper-tier municipalities to their lower-tier partners. To put it simply, the act created two classes of upper-tier municipalities: those that still handle planning, and those where planning authority now rests entirely with the lower-tier municipalities. This shift began with Halton, Peel and York on July 1, 2024, followed by Durham and Waterloo on January 1, 2025, and Niagara on March 31, 2025.

That earlier transfer of planning authority is key to understanding why we’re now proposing to transfer regional roads and related stormwater infrastructure to Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. Once local municipalities are responsible for planning how their communities grow, including the layout of their transportation networks, it only makes sense that they also take on responsibility for building and maintaining those roads and systems. This approach streamlines decision-making, reduces overlap, and gives councils greater control over how they manage growth and infrastructure in their own communities.

Peel region has a 1,682-kilometre network of regional roads. These corridors carry about $1.8 billion worth of goods every day, and 36% of all truck trips in Ontario start or end on Peel’s road network. Those goods represent about 21% of Ontario’s GDP—a reminder of just how vital these roads are to our economy.

All three lower-tier municipalities already maintain their own local and arterial roads. For instance, Mississauga and Brampton manage their own major routes, and Mississauga has been maintaining 20.4 lane-kilometres of regional roads since 2008. That experience gives us confidence that they are well prepared for this next step.

As for the related stormwater infrastructure, the region of Peel’s regional stormwater infrastructure is primarily located along regional roads. It consists of both traditional systems and emerging low-impact development—or LID—facilities. I should explain that LID facilities include bioswales, which manage stormwater more naturally by improving filtration and infiltration. Infiltration—for the benefit of the members of this House—is the seeping of stormwater into the ground to recharge groundwater. This removes pollutants from the stormwater, slows runoff velocity and decreases the volume of stormwater runoff.

The infrastructure includes ditches, underground storm sewers and specific LID facilities. The infrastructure can also be categorized as minor systems or major systems. Minor systems include ditches, storm sewers and certain LID facilities. These systems are designed for frequent lower-intensity storms. Major systems include overland flow routes and high-capacity watercourses for larger storm events. This regional stormwater infrastructure mostly runs along regional road corridors and is therefore an obvious accompaniment with the transfer of regional roads.

Speaker, Bill 45 is not the first time that the subject of transferring jurisdiction over regional roads in Peel has been considered or proposed. In 2004, a provincial facilitator, Justice George Adams, made recommendations to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on governance reform, including roads and land use planning.

Since 2005, Peel region and the three lower-tier municipalities have engaged in efforts to rationalize regional roads. Those efforts included, following an arterial road rationalization review in 2011, Peel regional council recommending transferring seven arterial roads to the lower-tier municipalities. This decision aimed to put the arterial roads under the appropriate municipal jurisdiction, although the full transfer process continued for several years.

The roads involved were the Bolton arterial road, also known as Emil Kolb Parkway; Colerain Drive; Castlemore Road; Kennedy Road; Winston Churchill Boulevard; Embleton Road; and Mavis Road. Additional studies in 2016 and in 2019 also included looking at regional road transfers.

What must be kept in mind is that all of these earlier studies and analyses were done before land use planning was invested wholly in the lower-tier municipalities.

As I mentioned earlier, our government will provide the assistance of the Office of the Provincial Land and Development Facilitator, often referred to as the PLDF, regarding the transfer of these regional roads.

For the benefit of the members of this House, I’ll explain that the PLDF was established in 2005. The facilitator and deputy facilitators of that office are appointed under the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Act. The PLDF is an advisory agency under the Agencies and Appointments Directive and reports to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Its services include impartial mediation, facilitation and negotiation.

These services are offered to municipalities to help resolve issues about growth management, land use and infrastructure planning, environmental protection related to land and development, municipal boundaries, economic development, and streamlining approvals to support provincial surplus lands projects to facilitate housing. Furthermore, the PLDF ensures that the following are considered as part of issues resolution: provincial land use policy, financial interests, and environmental objectives.

As you can see, the PLDF would be a valuable resource and aid to the municipalities of Peel if this proposed legislation is passed.

Speaker, I know I’ve covered a lot of ground today, but I think it’s important that we receive the full picture on the complexities of this bill—a bill that represents careful, coordinated work aligning responsibilities so that Peel’s municipalities can plan, can build and can grow efficiently. These changes will support local decision-making, streamline services, and provide the certainty needed for long-term success.

Speaker, for a number of years, I was involved in regional government in Muskoka—four of those years as the deputy chair of the district of Muskoka, and 16-plus in total as a councillor.

That importance of the relationship between upper and lower tiers, and the analysis of what occurs in terms of function between the upper and lower tiers, is certainly extremely important to review from time to time.

When we look at when regional government was established, thanks to the Robarts and Davis governments and Minister Darcy McKeough a long time ago, they did an incredible amount of work with an incredible amount of foresight to ensure that local services were delivered effectively for the residents of the multiple regions in Ontario, including Peel region.

We are decades later, and it is always a good time, when you get decades down the road, to be taking a careful and close look at what that arrangement looks like today and ask the question: Is it effective for the residents of the region?

As the minister has talked about through his words of detail and his anecdotal stories this morning—which were great, by the way—we know that in Peel, it is definitely time to make some changes to ensure that the good people of Peel region and Mississauga and Brampton and Caledon are getting services delivered to them in the most effective way possible. They’ve done a lot of work on their own, and we’ll continue to work with them, through the provincial land facilitator, to do the rest of the work on the table, should this bill pass.

Speaker, thank you very much for my time. I’ll turn the rest of my time over to the member from Simcoe–Grey.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the member from Simcoe–Grey.

Mr. Brian Saunderson: I want to thank the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for sharing some of his time with me this morning, and to commend him for his hard work on this important initiative.

I also want to thank the Associate Minister of Housing for his background.

I would like to start just by picking up on parts of their comments. Where I am repetitive, I apologize, but what they’ve said is worth repeating.

I am the same vintage as the minister, so I can remember a time when you went out the door, you went to play in the golf course or the back fields of your area, and you were told to come home when the street lights went on. At that point in time, our population was, as the minister said, between seven and eight million; we’re now 16 million people. Ontario has 40% of Canada’s population, and we’re growing faster than any other province in Canada and state in the US. We have huge growth pressures.

If we look in the context of the Peel region, when it was created in the 1970s, it had a population of less than 500,000. Now two of the municipalities, Mississauga and Brampton, far exceed that, and Caledon is quickly closing in on that mark. One of the critical pieces of this legislation, and the suite of legislation that we’re bringing forward involving the Peel region, is that we need to evolve to recognize the demands that are changing on the ground in both of those municipalities, given the size, growth, growth pressures, the infrastructure pressures and everything that flows from that.

So we want to make sure that we push down those responsibilities that should be local, and that we change service delivery for those services that should be raised up, such as water and waste water. The minister spoke at length about the municipal service delivery corporation that we’re bringing forward in Bill 60, which is a complementary piece of legislation to this.

With that being said, I’d like to add a little more context and detail regarding Bill 45, the Peel Transition Implementation Act, 2025, in addition to what has been outlined by the minister and the associate minister. I want to reiterate that this piece of legislation is designed to help lower-tier municipalities in Peel more quickly and more efficiently plan for housing and new neighbourhoods in their communities, as they continue to grow at an incredible rate.

Let’s start with that: How fast is the Peel region growing? We know the Peel region continues to be one of the fastest-growing and most dynamic areas in Ontario, with over 1.6 million residents today and projections showing growth of another 600,000—so it will be more than 2.2 million by 2051, which is the planning timeline. The energy, ambition and diversity of this region truly represent the best of Ontario’s future.

To put that in perspective, let’s look at the growth that happened between July 2023 and July 2024. Peel’s population grew by approximately 4.4%, adding roughly 70,000 new residents. That’s faster than Ontario overall, which grew by 3.2%—as I said earlier in my comments, we are one of the fastest-growing provinces in Canada and one of the fastest-growing regions in North America. It’s also faster in relative growth than Canada, which grew by 3% during that same timeline.

This growth demonstrates both the opportunity and the pressures that come with that growth, and the need to get more homes built to meet that demand. This growth also emphasizes the importance of integrating public transit and community services alongside new housing to ensure sustainable and livable neighbourhoods.

We’ve seen that energy reflected in the leadership of Peel’s three municipalities: Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon. They have all stepped up in meaningful ways to create the conditions for new housing growth. Their mayors have shown real commitment and creativity in meeting this challenge. In particular, I want to acknowledge Mayor Carolyn Parrish in Mississauga, who took the bold step of being the first in the Peel region to reduce development charges in support of our shared housing goals.

As we know from discussions in this House, getting that price point down for first-time homebuyers and homebuyers who are downsizing—a critical piece in that puzzle is the reducing of development charges to reduce that bubble. That’s the type of leadership that’s going to get these results for us, get the homes in the ground, and make home ownership affordable. We all know that not everyone has shared that spirit of co-operation in the past. But we’re focused on moving forward. These three mayors are exemplars to the province in how to get that done.

The people of Peel expect progress, and that’s what this government is delivering. We believe in Peel, in its people, in its local governments, and in its potential. We believe we can create the efficiencies necessary to help those governments, at all levels, work together collaboratively to meet the needs. We’re committed to supporting innovative housing solutions, including mixed-use developments and affordable housing projects, to meet the diverse needs of these communities.

Through Bill 45, the Peel Transition Implementation Act, and through our broader action, we’re giving these municipalities the tools and flexibility they need to build more homes faster. Whether it’s supporting new infrastructure, modernizing local governance, or cutting unnecessary red tape, our government will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with Brampton, Caledon and Mississauga to help them reach their housing targets and keep pace with their incredible growth.

One example of this collaboration, and as has been mentioned by the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: The three municipalities of Peel have already taken steps to make sure future growth planning and servicing are faster and more streamlined. That growth planning and servicing includes waste collection services for planned housing. The three municipalities have already agreed on transferring curbside and multi-residential waste collection services, which this bill supports. This is, in fact, a huge achievement.

We must consider that Peel region has the second-largest waste collection system in the province; only Toronto’s is larger. Peel’s waste systems collect approximately 555,000 metric tonnes of waste annually.

I think we can all agree in this House that initiating, guiding and managing the transfer of authority and jurisdiction related to waste management systems is and will be a testament to the collaborative skills and strengths of all involved. Our government wants to help these municipalities with the transfer of this important service.

Let’s begin by reviewing how waste collection in the three Peel municipalities has evolved.

In 1991, Peel regional council began discussing the opportunity and implications of the region assuming full responsibility for waste management operations—by “waste management operations,” I mean not only curbside and multi-residential collection, but also the transfer, processing and disposal of residential waste. At that time, Peel’s population was approximately 850,000 residents—slightly larger than the current population of Brampton—highlighting the smaller scale of the transition the region was considering in 1991.

Three years later, in 1994, Peel council formally approved the transfer of waste management responsibilities from the lower-tier municipalities to the region, enacting a bylaw to authorize staff to implement the change in advance of a new regional waste collection and processing contract. Once that contract began, the region assumed responsibility for collecting, processing and disposing of residential waste across Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon.

It is important to note that this applies strictly to residential waste, not industrial or commercial operations, ensuring that Bill 45 remains focused on the services that directly impact residents’ daily lives.

Today, as indicated before, Peel’s population has grown to over 1.6 million residents and is projected to exceed 2.2 million by 2051, creating new demands and challenges for residential services.

Bill 45 responds to this growth by transferring responsibility for curbside and multi-residential collection to Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon, while maintaining processing and disposal at the regional level. Again, it’s an opportunity to maximize the efficiencies and co-operation between the two levels of government. This ensures that municipalities can tailor collection services to their residents’ needs, plan for future growth, and deliver efficient, high-quality service, all while leveraging the region’s decades of experience.

Over the years, Peel has introduced modernized fleet vehicles and new routing technologies to increase efficiency and reduce emissions in waste collection. I know that in my upper-tier government in Simcoe county—which has waste management control in our area—by reducing and rerouting the routes across the 16 member municipalities, we were able to save almost a quarter of a million kilometres a year, which has a huge impact on the greenhouse gas emissions and the efficiency of the process. That is what we’re working with the Peel region to do amongst those three municipalities.

By doing so, Bill 45 provides the tools, flexibility and support necessary to meet the demands of Peel’s rapidly growing population. Bill 45 ensures that residential waste services remain reliable, responsive and future-ready.

What we must also look at are the arrangements that the lower-tier municipalities of Brampton and Caledon have made to share curbside and multi-residential waste collection services once the transfer from the upper tier has been made. All three municipalities in Peel have been working to ensure that this transfer of services goes smoothly.

They have set up a transition committee, including representatives from Peel, Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon, which has been actively working on the transfer process and defining future operational and service delivery models, employee transition, financial planning and cost-sharing considerations moving forward. Staff training programs are being implemented to ensure a smooth integration of teams and continuity of service during the transition.

Mississauga will be looking after waste collection services in its communities, and expects to find efficiencies, while, through discussions, Brampton and Caledon have agreed to partner to provide joint waste collection services in their communities to find similar efficiencies. This will ensure that current service levels are maintained, while also safeguarding long-term cost efficiency, stability and service continuity for all three municipalities. This partnership between the two municipalities will come into effect in the fall of 2027, and that is when the regional waste collection contract is set to expire.

As the city of Brampton said in a news release, “By restoring a responsibility that was previously managed at the municipal level prior to regionalization in the 1990s, this transition will improve service efficiency, streamline decision-making and empower Brampton and Caledon to tailor waste collection services to meet the needs of their growing populations.”

Speaker, our government could not agree more. Our commitment to Bill 45, if passed, would do more than support the transfer of waste collection services; it would also support the transfer of regional roads, as indicated by the associate minister. This transfer to the lower-tier municipalities will provide the services—and working together with the Office of the Provincial Land and Development Facilitator to assist in those road transfers.

And Bill 45 would not be alone in supporting Peel region housing starts. Legislation introduced last month by our government would, if passed, help bolster further housing starts in Peel. The legislation I’m referring to is our government’s proposed Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025. If passed, Bill 60 would, among other initiatives, cut red tape, get shovels in the ground faster and support the construction of homes, roads and other infrastructure.

As the minister indicated in one of his comments about the legislation, “Our government is building a more prosperous, resilient and competitive economy by fighting costly delays and regulatory burdens that slow the delivery of homes, roads and infrastructure that communities need. With tariffs and economic uncertainty taking aim at our economy, we’re working with municipal leaders and home builders to get shovels in the ground faster so we can build more homes and keep workers on the job.”

Speaker, Bill 60 aims to reduce barriers to building homes and infrastructure by streamlining approvals and site plan control in time for the spring building season.

As indicated in the minister’s comments, one of the key aspects of that legislation is the creation of a municipal service delivery corporation, which will change how the critical infrastructure in waste water and water is delivered to our residents to enable the housing. Currently, it’s done by municipalities, so it’s governed by their debt-to-own-source-revenue restrictions that are set out in the Municipal Act. It’s also subject to their financing arrangements that are also set out in the Municipal Act.

Delivering the services through a separately operated, publicly owned municipal corporation will allow the corporation to operate a different debt ratio as well as enter long-term financial arrangements and commitments that would generate a better yield for the residents, while the long-term viability of the system is more sustainable and viable moving forward. It will also put the planning of this critical infrastructure on an upper level so it’s not done on a municipality-by-municipality basis.

As we’ve seen and the minister has stated many times, on a conservative estimate, there’s approximately $200 billion of infrastructure that needs to be put in across the province to enable the sustainable, intentional planning of communities moving forward. So the change proposed to the municipal service delivery corporation in Bill 60 aims to change that model to make it more affordable, to make it longer-term planning, to make it more resilient and allow the municipalities to move that debt load off their desks. That opens up opportunities for them, moving forward, to invest in other critical services that also will help to reduce development charges.

During the recent AMO conference, when meeting with municipalities, I learned that, on average, in those municipalities that do charge development charges, between 35% and 55% of those development charges relate to infrastructure like water and waste water. By removing that from their desks, we can lower development charges, which will help lower price points. We will get infrastructure in the ground in a faster, more efficient way so that municipalities can grow. And when municipalities grow, we can meet our housing numbers but also provide our municipalities with a feasible plan, moving forward, by increasing their tax base.

For the benefit of the members of this House, I will explain that site plan control is a planning tool that municipalities use to evaluate certain site plan elements, such as parking areas and landscaping.

I would add that our government is proposing to streamline site plan control to create consistent standards among municipalities across Ontario and, again, to lower the cost of building new homes.

In addition, Bill 60 aims to streamline road construction by moving forward with a common set of road construction standards across all municipalities.

Even more relevant to the goals of Bill 45 is that Bill 60, introduced last month by the minister, has items specific to Peel. If passed, Bill 60 will speed up decision-making and get shovels in the ground faster for water and waste water in Peel region by enabling a new public corporation model, as I referred to. That would change dramatically the delivery of those critical infrastructure systems, linear infrastructure systems, in Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon.

We must keep in mind, too, that like waste collection, Peel region’s water and waste water infrastructure is the second-largest in Ontario. It has assets of more than $40 billion and services approximately 1.6 million residents. A corollary to that is, in the asset management planning that each of those municipalities must go through, it adds another burden to the municipal budget as they must plan for that maintenance and repair of that $400 billion in infrastructure. Again, if that comes off the municipal books, moves up to a municipal service delivery corporation, very similar to the models of the LDCs we have in the electrical world right now, it takes that burden off the municipality.

Currently, the water and waste water systems are under the purview of Peel region. That includes setting user rates, development charges for growth-related water and waste water infrastructure, financing and project prioritization, and also asset management planning. Peel region owns and operates these water and waste water systems, although some of the water systems are operated by the Ontario Clean Water Agency, OCWA, under contract.

Bill 60 also encourages innovative funding models and public-private partnerships to accelerate infrastructure projects while maintaining fiscal responsibility. All of these changes will be made while maintaining the water and waste water system as a publicly owned asset.

What our government is proposing in Bill 60 is to transfer jurisdiction over water and waste water from Peel region to the lower-tier municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. That’s similar to how our Bill 45, which we are discussing today, transfers the jurisdiction of waste collection and regional roads to lower tiers.

Our approach, through Bill 45, focuses on enabling local governments to manage growth more efficiently by aligning planning decisions with service delivery responsibilities. This proposed legislation is designed to align local infrastructure responsibilities with the planning authority of municipalities. By establishing clear lines of responsibility for housing-enabling services such as roads and waste collection, communities can better manage growth and respond to changing needs. Infrastructure such as regional roads, stormwater facilities and waste collection are fundamental components of housing delivery.

Effective management of these services ensures that communities can grow in a sustainable, cost-effective way while maintaining a high service standard for residents.

The proposed transfers recognize that Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon are best positioned to make local decisions on behalf of their residents.

This legislation builds on previous efforts to modernize governance and improve service delivery across the region, ensuring that Peel’s communities are well prepared to accommodate future population growth that we know is coming. In doing so, Bill 45 will help to make sure our communities are more viable and—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Thank you.

Questions?

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the member for Elgin–Middlesex–London.

Thank you for the

summary of this bill. From how I understand it, the government is looking at downloading the responsibilities of delivering waste water and regional roads from the region to the municipality. In addition, in a separate bill that used to be in this bill, you’re looking at establishing a water corporation that combines Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon into one separate water corporation.

My question is this: Have you done an assessment on what impact these changes are going to have on an individual’s water bill and waste water bill, and if you’ve done that assessment, could you share what you have found?

Hon. Rob Flack: We have done some assessment, but to be perfectly blunt, that is why we’ve set up a pilot project in Peel, to assess exactly what this is going to mean.

One thing we do know is that it takes too long and it costs too much to build housing in the province. I think the member opposite would agree.

I think she would also agree—through you, Speaker—that we need to get the costs of these development charges down. Growth no longer pays for growth. You can’t expect new home construction or a new home buyer to pay for the massive infrastructure we need—not only new infrastructure, but aging infrastructure in this province.

That being said, we think this model, which exists in some places in Ontario, makes a lot of sense. That is why we set Peel up as a pilot project.

Ultimately, if we can capture private capital, public capital, pension plan infrastructure into this fund at good rates—and we’re confident it will be. What we’ve seen—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further questions?

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Thank you for that speech, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

I was on the regional governance review committee, and we went all over Ontario, meeting local politicians from small communities, and it was very insightful. People are divided on their stance about kind of shaking this up.

In your speech, you mentioned that Peel is almost done now, but you might be rolling this out. I’m just wondering if you’re considering this type of movement for other municipalities and regions as well.

Hon. Rob Flack: Obviously, as I think I said in my remarks, there are other municipalities that have phoned and been interested in creating their own pilot themselves or getting involved in the process. I think it’s a little too early to jump into that. We want to make sure the Peel pilot is working and getting up to speed. This isn’t going to happen overnight. As they say, measure twice, maybe three times before you cut. We really want to make sure we get it right.

Again, I want to emphasize: With the massive infrastructure we need in this province—not only for new infrastructure, but for aging. I’ll give you an example in your own city of Toronto. I was with Mayor Chow and Minister Robertson, the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure for Canada, a few weeks ago, and we were talking about this exact initiative. One of the city managers said, “Well, Mayor, for example, we had a water main break”—I forget where; downtown—“and guess what? That infrastructure, that pipe, was put in in 1875.” It’s not only new infrastructure; it’s aging infrastructure.

This program is going to work.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the member from Whitby.

Mr. Lorne Coe: As a former highly successful municipal politician yourself, you know the importance of empowering local decision-making, don’t you?

For years, residents and local councils in Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon have called for a governance model that better reflects their size, growth and capacity to lead.

This legislation, if it’s passed, responds directly to those calls by giving municipalities more authority over the services that matter most, from roads to waste collection.

Will the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing share how empowering lower-tier municipalities with these responsibilities will help them better plan for growth, serve their hard-working families and make decisions that are truly locally led?

Hon. Graydon Smith: I would like to thank the extremely high-performing member from Whitby for the question.

As a moderately successful municipal politician, I will say that—and I said in my remarks—the split between upper and lower tiers is really critical, because what it comes down to is about service delivery for the people in these communities.

This bill acknowledges that the region has been around for a period of time, but change is necessary and change will be beneficial for the residents in Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. It has been discussed for a long time. At the end of the day, we know that when we take the time to work with all the parties involved and do this work thoughtfully and carefully, we get a good outcome. And we know that’s what this bill is going to deliver for those people in those communities.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Questions?

Mr. Chris Glover: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

The minister was talking about what they’re doing in the Peel region. Right now, their water and waste water is run directly by the region. The other bill is going to be creating a corporation to run that.

The only real difference that we can see between the current system and this other system is that the current ratepayers will be responsible for subsidizing the development—the creation of the infrastructure for water and sewers in new developments. So ratepayers are going to see their utility rates go up in order to subsidize costs that were previously incurred by developers.

Do you think it’s fair for Peel ratepayers to see their bills go up to subsidize developers?

Hon. Rob Flack: That’s a good question.

The water and sewer main construction association—I’ll make sure I get the name right—estimates that in this province, over the next 15 years, we’re going to need $200 billion to $250 billion of infrastructure to replace aging and new infrastructure. Development charges are not going to cover that. Municipalities don’t want to raise taxes. We’re not going to raise taxes. The feds don’t want to raise taxes. So where is it going to come from? We have to find a source of revenue to fund that infrastructure. Amortizing it over seven or eight decades—rather than just new home builders—I think is fair and, at the end of the day, is a more equitable way to get the infrastructure in the ground.

We pay enough tax in this province. We pay enough tax municipally.

Development charges, while needed in their time, have become a cost barrier to getting shovels in the ground faster. We’re going to change that.

This program is going to work.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): New questions? I’ll go to the Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism.

Hon. Graham McGregor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You look great this morning, by the way.

I want to thank my colleagues, all three of them, for their speeches and for their work on the file.

Being a Brampton boy, we know our region is fast-growing, fast-changing—1.7 million people in Peel region. Brampton actually outpaced Mississauga last year to be the third-biggest city in Ontario. Because of that growth, obviously, there are a lot of changes that have taken place. I know the minister has been very diligent in putting this plan together to help manage that growth.

Could the minister give us a little bit more of that due diligence and talk about the work that has been put in, the experts that we’ve consulted with, and provide some reassurance to my residents that this is a thoughtful plan that the government is putting forward?

Hon. Rob Flack: I would say, simply, that Brampton is a great example of why this is going to work. Brampton, when I was a kid, I think, was 20,000 or 30,000 people. What is it now? Close to a million people?

Hon. Graham McGregor: It’s 800,000, yes.

Hon. Rob Flack: Close to a million people. It has changed; it has evolved.

That is why we need to look at new sources of creating funding, investment, for infrastructure. Again, as I said earlier, I think amortizing these costs over a period of time is important.

In terms of the due diligence, we have put a pilot together that brings expertise, brings people who have done this before, finance—again, strong expertise, who understand this.

We are not ready to hit the “go” button. We are ready to consider this, put the plans in place—again, measure twice, three times, maybe four times—before we hit the “go” button.

The bottom line is, it has got to work for residents—it will work for residents, and it will download these services.

Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon have grown up. They can do this. We’re confident in this.

We will always continue to look out for the residents, their costs, and the benefit they get from their municipalities and their province.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Remembrance Day

MPP Monica Ciriello: Every November 11, Ontarians pause to honour the brave men and women who have served and continue to serve our great country. We remember those who gave everything—their youth, their future, their lives—so that we could live in peace and freedom.

For me, Remembrance Day is deeply personal. My grandfather proudly served in World War II, and my grandmother was a nurse caring for those who returned home. Their courage reminds me that service isn’t just on the battlefield; it’s found in compassion, in sacrifice, and in love of country. Their stories remind me that remembrance isn’t just about the past, but about the values we carry every day.

At the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 163 on Hamilton Mountain, veterans, families and neighbours come together not just to remember, but to support one another.

This Remembrance Day, I encourage everyone to visit your local Legion, take a moment to thank a veteran, wear your poppy with pride, and make sure that the sacrifices of those who served are not forgotten.

Government accountability

Ms. Jessica Bell: Down south, President Trump is dismantling democracy day by day—defying congressional votes, ignoring court rulings, and directing law enforcement to target American cities and citizens.

We are not the United States, but here in Ontario, the Conservatives have taken many steps to undermine democratic norms.

Let me give you some examples: ramming through far-reaching omnibus bills at breakneck speed; banning public participation in committee hearings; stripping school board trustees of their job to oversee the operation of our schools; setting up special economic zones exempt from democratically decided local rules and regulations; forcing municipalities to bring in strong-mayor powers so one mayor can overrule decisions made by the majority of city councillors; eliminating fixed election dates, giving themselves the sole and distinct advantage of choosing when Ontarians go to the polls; overriding democratically negotiated collective agreements and imposed wage suppression on public sector workers.

This growing list reveals a troubling disregard for the democratic principles that are fundamental to Canada and Ontario.

Dismantling democratic institutions, concentrating power in the hands of cabinet and the Premier, shutting down public input, secrecy, and a refusal to be accountable—this is not how democracy is supposed to work—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Members’ statements?

Bernard Grandmaître

M me Lucille Collard: Mardi dernier, la francophonie ontarienne a perdu un géant. Bernard Grandmaître, ancien ministre responsable des Affaires francophones, nous a quitté.

M. Grandmaître a consacré plus de 30 ans de sa vie à la politique, tant au niveau municipal qu’à l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario. Il a toujours placé les défis et les aspirations des Franco-Ontariens et des Franco-Ontariennes au coeur de son engagement public.

Bernard Grandmaître était un homme de conviction, d’une grande gentillesse et d’un profond respect pour les autres. Il a inspiré toute une génération de leaders francophones et son influence se fait encore sentir dans notre travail ici, à Queen’s Park.

La communauté franco-ontarienne a perdu un véritable champion. Au nom de tous les Ontariens, je voudrais offrir mes plus sincères condoléances à sa famille et à ses proches.

Remembrance Day

Hon. Laurie Scott: As we approach Remembrance Day next week, I rise to recognize and thank the members of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve today, the veterans who have served before them, and to honour those who made the ultimate sacrifice for the peace and freedoms we are privileged to enjoy in Ontario and in Canada.

Over the coming days, I will be visiting the many Legions and cenotaphs across Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock to pay tribute to the men and women who answered the call of duty.

Our communities have a proud and deep military history.

During the First World War, the 109th battalion drew its ranks from Victoria and Haliburton counties—Company A from Lindsay, Company B from Omemee, Company C from Fenelon Falls, and Company D from Haliburton county. Many of these men were later deployed to the Somme, Hill 70, Passchendaele, Vimy, and Amiens—including my grandfather Wallace Scott, who fought at Vimy Ridge and Amiens.

I also want to acknowledge the men from Brock township who served in the 116th battalion and fought in France and Flanders.

Additionally, men from Millbrook served in the 39th battalion and others.

Let us remember those who have served, those who continue to serve, and those who gave their lives so that many may live free.

Lest we forget.

Sécurité routière

M. Guy Bourgouin: La semaine dernière, nous avons présenté le projet de loi 49, la

loi sur la sécurité des routes 11 et 17 du Nord, un projet de loi essentiel pour protéger les familles, les travailleurs et les communautés du nord de l’Ontario.

Malheureusement, le gouvernement a choisi de ne pas soutenir ce projet de loi. C’est profondément décevant, car il ne s’agit pas seulement de politique, il s’agit de vies et de moyens de subsistance.

Chaque jour, des camionneurs, des automobilistes et des familles du Nord affrontent des routes étroites, des conditions hivernales extrêmes et des camions qui ne respectent pas les normes de sécurité.

Le refus du gouvernement d’appuyer ce projet de loi envoie un message clair : que les préoccupations de la sécurité communautaire du Nord ontarien ne sont pas des priorités. Nous continuerons à apporter la voix du Nord à Queen’s Park, à défendre des routes plus sécuritaires, des conducteurs mieux formés et de l’entretien hivernal fiable. Les familles du Nord méritent des routes sécuritaires et un gouvernement qui prend leurs besoins au sérieux.

Imaginez à quel point nous pourrions rendre nos routes sécuritaires avec un minimum de 12 heures de personnel dans les postes d’inspection de camionneurs; avec une formation, une certification, délivrée par le ministère du Travail, des permis de conduire; à ramener la gestion des opérations d’entretien hivernal dans le ministère. Imaginez seulement à quel point nos routes seraient plus sécuritaires.

Je continuerai à me battre pour que nos communautés ne soient pas oubliées.

Mahi Sehmbi

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I rise today to recognize the courage and resilience of a remarkable young girl from my riding of Brampton West, 12-year-old Mahi Sehmbi.

Mahi lives with McCune-Albright syndrome and fibrous dysplasia, rare conditions that cause severe bone weakness and have led to repeated fractures, leading to surgeries throughout her life. She underwent a full liver transplant at only 10 months old, making her the first and only child in the world who had a liver transplant due to McCune-Albright.

Yet, despite these challenges, Mahi continues to face each day with a bright smile, a hopeful spirit and unwavering determination.

Recently, at the 12th annual co-ed charity softball tournament organized by Clubhouse Charities in support of SickKids hospital, Mahi’s story was shared with hundreds of community members who came together to show their support.

Her strength serves as a reminder of the power of hope and community, and the difference compassion can make in the lives of children and families facing rare diseases.

Madam Speaker, it is truly heartwarming to see our community come together to stand behind Mahi and her family. Their courage and the community’s kindness reflect the very best of Brampton West.

Hospital services

Mr. Jeff Burch: Last week, I spoke about the urgent need for rebuilding and modernizing the outdated Welland Hospital. Recently, the Welland Hospital operating room required extensive repairs after being forced to close in May due to a severe water leak caused by aging infrastructure. These repairs were not only costly, but also significantly disruptive, resulting in 263 surgeries being affected by the closure, including 215 ophthalmology cases, 38 orthopaedic cases, and 10 general surgeries. Other procedures had to be directed to the Marotta Family Hospital in St. Catharines and the Niagara Falls Hospital.

Unfortunately, we can expect this pattern of disruptions caused by outdated infrastructure to continue until this government takes meaningful action.

After repeated attempts to get a clear answer last week, the Minister of Health still refused to say either yes or no to providing the necessary planning grant. Each time, the minister deflected, speaking instead about hospitals in Lincoln and Niagara Falls, ignoring Welland, Port Colborne and Fort Erie.

Every time the minister mentions the Lincoln hospital, I’m reminded that it’s actually part of Hamilton Health Sciences and not even part of the Niagara Health System. Perhaps the minister needs a map of Niagara.

The minister even had the nerve to tell people in Niagara that they should feel “blessed” for the work this government is doing for health care in the region. Ask anyone in Niagara if they feel blessed by this government when it comes to health care.

The time for excuses is over. It’s time for the minister to stop deflecting and start delivering. Our communities and the Welland—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Markham–Thornhill.

Skilled trades

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: This week marks Skilled Trades Week in Ontario.

I’m proud to share some good news from my beautiful riding of Markham–Thornhill. Enercare Home Services has received $186,170 through the Ontario government’s $8.6-million Skills Development Fund to support women in skilled trades. Last year, I visited one of the eight boot camps that this fund supports for young women from grade 7 to grade 12. I was inspired by their passion, commitment and enthusiasm. This program opens doors to rewarding careers and builds their confidence through hands-on experience and mentorship in plumbing, electrical and HVAC trades.

Our government has also supported other innovative training programs in 2024-25 in Markham–Thornhill. Voyzant Inc. created 160 jobs in travel and tourism with $1.144 million through the Ontario leads the way program. JVH Masonry Ltd. will deliver a 12-month practical masonry training program for 100 workers, including francophone and Indigenous participants, with $1,031,303 in funding.

Under Premier Doug Ford and Minister Piccini, Ontario is strengthening its skilled workforce.

Thank you to the member for Scarborough Centre for passing—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Whitby.

Nuclear power facility

Mr. Lorne Coe: Speaker, as part of our plan to protect Ontario and build a more competitive, resilient and self-reliant economy, the province is investing $1 billion through the Building Ontario Fund in the first small modular reactors in the G7, at Darlington nuclear station in Mr. McCarthy’s riding.

Ontario’s SMRs will create 18,000 jobs during construction, with 3,700 jobs during operation, while contributing $38.5 billion to Canada’s gross domestic product over the next 65 years.

As we navigate tariffs and global volatility, it has never been more important to create a more competitive, more resilient and self-reliant province that can withstand whatever comes our way.

The investment to support the first SMRs is a down payment on Ontario’s nuclear energy future.

We’re protecting Ontario by supporting good-paying, long-term jobs for Ontario workers and building the energy infrastructure—including both SMRs and new, large-scale nuclear—needed to make Ontario an energy superpower.

The Elliot Community

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise today to recognize the Elliott Community in Guelph for its ongoing commitment to transforming long-term-care environments into homes that prioritize dignity, connection and quality of life.

This summer, I attended the Elliott Community’s Butterfly Approach accreditation celebration. Not only are they the first long-term-care home in Guelph to be accredited in the Butterfly Approach, but they were also recognized with an “excellent” level accreditation from Meaningful Care Matters. MCM describes an “excellent” outcome as a highly engaged service that prioritizes meaningful moments, where emotion-focused care is consistently seen, felt and heard in the interactions with people. Individuality and self-expression are encouraged.

The Elliott Community is a municipally owned, non-profit, long-term-care home.

My constituents tell me over and over again about the positive impact the Elliott Community has had on their loved ones and their families.

I’m so grateful for the important work they do to make our community a better place. I’m proud of the level of excellence they’ve achieved, and I look forward to working with them to expand the butterfly model.

I especially want to thank the front-line staff who adjusted their approach to care in order to make the butterfly model work.

Remarkable Women at Queen’s Park

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Colleagues, as you will recall, I recently launched the Remarkable Women in the Workplace initiative, a monthly recognition program celebrating the outstanding women who work for the Office of the Assembly. These individuals exemplify dedication, professionalism and leadership in their roles, and this initiative is a small but meaningful way to honour their contributions to the Legislature.

Today, I am pleased to draw your attention to the Speaker’s gallery and introduce our newest honouree: Sheila Alfonso, accounts payable team lead in the financial services branch. Sheila’s commitment to excellence is unwavering. She is constantly going above and beyond to ensure her team meets critical deadlines, even in high-pressure situations. Her mentorship and support of her colleagues foster a culture of growth and empowerment, and her integrity and problem-solving skills make her a role model not only in financial services, but across the assembly.

Sheila, I know you are very uncomfortable with all this attention, but it is well deserved.

On behalf of all members and staff, I extend our heartfelt congratulations and gratitude to Sheila.

Thank you for your remarkable service to Ontario’s Parliament.

Introduction of Visitors

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: It is my pleasure to take this opportunity to welcome the members of the Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association who are joining us today at Queen’s Park.

Since 1971, the OSWCA has represented over 850 companies across Ontario. They build water and waste water infrastructure as well as roads and bridges across our province.

Please join me in welcoming OSWCA to the Ontario Legislature and thanking them for all that they do in building a stronger Ontario.

M. Stéphane Sarrazin: J’aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue à plusieurs membres de différents conseils scolaires francophones qui sont ici avec nous pour la journée de représentation de l’ACÉPO, l’Association des conseils scolaires des écoles publiques de l’Ontario : M. Denis Labelle et son équipe.

Aussi, représentant le conseil CEPEO de ma circonscription sont Samia Ouled Ali, la présidente; Gilles Fournier, vice-président; Christian-Charles Bouchard à la direction; et Guylaine Scherer, directrice des communications.

J’ai bien hâte de me joindre à eux pour participer à la première pelletée de terre d’une nouvelle école à Rockland vendredi. J’aimerais leur souhaiter la bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

M me Marit Stiles: Aujourd’hui, nous somme rejoints par l’Association des conseils scolaires des écoles publiques de l’Ontario as well as the Ontario Book Publishers Association and the Council of Ontario Universities. I want to thank you so much for bringing your work to Queen’s Park, and bienvenue à l’Assemblée législative.

M me Lucille Collard: J’aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue aux représentants de l’ACÉPO et souligner quelques conseillers scolaires qui ont peut-être été manqués : Denis Labelle; Michel Faucon; Samia Ouled Ali; Gilles Fournier; Anne-Marie Gélineault; Francine Vaillancourt; Régis Desrochers, un étudiant-conseiller; Geneviève Oger; Emmanuelle Richez; et Jeannette Labrèche. Bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s an honour today to welcome the recently installed University of Guelph president and vice-chancellor, Dr. Rene Van Acker, who is here with the Council of Ontario Universities. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I’d like to introduce, from Balance Support and Self Care Studios, Sara Klodnicki and Myra Zettel.

Welcome to Queen’s Park. I look forward to meeting with you after question period.

Mr. Billy Pang: I’m pleased to welcome the Ontario Book Publishers Organization for their made-in-Ontario book fair. I invite all members to join them in room 228 for the lunch event.

Ms. Doly Begum: This morning, I’m very pleased to welcome our page Taylor James, who is actually our page captain today, from Scarborough Southwest. I would also like to welcome her parents, Patrick James and Mara Trokova, who are joining us in the gallery.

It is a pleasure to have you all in your House. Welcome to the House.

Hon. Sam Oosterhoff: I have the privilege of welcoming today to the Legislature Dave Peters, coming all the way down from Vineland. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Stan Cho: We have, from the OBPO, Emily Ferko, Noelle Allen, Christine Handley, Karen Boersma, Karen Brochu, James Saunders, Heather Campbell, Crystal Sikma. They’re here for their day at Queen’s Park.

Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. Adil Shamji: I’d like to welcome Dr. Muneesh Jha to the Legislature today. He’s the president of the Medical Staff Association at Michael Garron Hospital. He’s joined by his children Maya and Jaiyan.

Jaiyan turns 13 tomorrow, so I want to wish him a happy birthday.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I’d like to welcome to the Legislature my staff members: Destinee Taylor, Micaela Krawczuk, and Riley Williamson. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

M. Guy Bourgouin: J’ai deux personnes qui viennent bien de chez nous. Je voudrais présenter Natalie Joncas-Raymond et Guylaine Scherer. Bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

Mr. Chris Glover: I would like to welcome to the House the staff, parents and students from Medical Staff Association at Michael Garron Hospital.

Hon. Nolan Quinn: I would like to welcome the Council of Ontario Universities’ Steve Orsini, Catherine Bruce, Jacques Beauvais and Kevin Wamsley. I’m sure I missed a few names, as well. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

M. Stephen Blais: Je voudrais souhaiter la bienvenue aux membres de l’Association des conseils scolaires des écoles publiques de l’Ontario qui ont été avec nous aujourd’hui. Particulièrement, je voudrais reconnaître Samia Ouled Ali, Gilles Fournier, Christian-Charle Bouchard et François Laperle. Merci pour notre discussion ce matin.

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: Welcome to the members of Innovative Medicines Canada. Thank you for the great work you’re doing for patients across the country.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier.

As Ontario continues to face what is an unfolding jobs disaster, people are wondering why tens of millions of dollars are going to organizations that just cannot meet their targets. The Trillium reported that despite missing key targets, the majority of the applicants from the first round of the SDF grants funding kept receiving that funding in later rounds. I want to be very clear: They did not meet their targets in terms of how many participants were enrolled or how many completed the program, let alone the number of participants who actually became employed.

Can the Premier explain why organizations that failed to meet their targets continued to receive funding from your friends-and-family fund?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Looking back, the fund was first established in the pandemic to support critically affected sectors, with one goal and one goal in mind, and that’s to support employers and support training. Since then, over successive rounds, we’ve taken steps to improve what was a pandemic-response program and add things like social insurance number tracking—something I mentioned yesterday—which tracks, six, nine, 12 months out, the long-term employment outcomes.

We’re working hard to support men and women who are trying to access better training in Ontario. When we think to why this is so essential, we need look no further than tariff-affected industries like the steel sector, sectors like automotive, and then, moving beyond that, the need for sectors like the skilled trades.

I was with the elevators union this morning. We’re getting a next generation of young men and women into elevator training. Our stats are showing it’s working, because apprenticeships are up, getting more young men and women into the trades.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, let’s talk about one grant recipient. Since 2022, Zlatko Starkovski’s enterprise, which is called—and you can decide whether this is aptly named—the Social Equality and Inclusion Centre, has received close to $10 million. You may remember them, Speaker, because this is the Premier’s favourite nightclub owner, getting $10 million to run his clubs and venues—venues that have hosted many Conservative fundraisers and now host an adult entertainment operation. Even the Premier’s campaign manager Kory Teneycke’s wedding was hosted there.

Interjection: Oh, wow.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Yes. The connection between this government and this company is a straight line. You can’t even make this stuff up.

Speaker, can the minister tell us exactly how that $10 million of public money was spent?

Hon. David Piccini: That specific reference is unfounded.

What I can say is, when we’re in the middle of a global pandemic, supporting sectors like the hospitality sector does matter. This is a sector that was hit hardest during the pandemic and that all experts said would take the longest to recover. That’s why we’ve worked with partners. Hundreds received training; over 400 achieved employment, looking at recent rounds.

And then, when we think broadly—I’ve mentioned organizations like Unite Here. They’re doing incredible work training and supporting hospitality workers. As Toronto welcomes the world with the World Cup, as we think to important sectors like the tourism sector, it’s important that we have a talent pipeline to support people into meaningful training. It has taken people who were previously underemployed or unemployed and offered them training into employment. I think it’s important that we stay rooted and stay focused on just that.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, I wish we could say that this government was focused on jobs and training.

Anyway, no answer—no answer over there because they’re not tracking the outcomes.

We saw in the Auditor General’s report that the government doesn’t even follow up with the companies that are getting public funding.

Let’s follow this thread. The government is doling out public tax dollars to their friends and insiders, and they’re not even holding these projects to any reporting standard or following up to make sure that the money is being properly used.

Does the Premier believe that it is acceptable for millions of dollars of public funding to be doled out without any checks and balances?

Hon. David Piccini: As I’ve said, that is simply incorrect. After every successive round, we’ve implemented and strengthened measures through the program. I referenced tangibly tracking social insurance numbers. Most colleagues know there are few programs in Ontario that actually track long-term employment outcomes through social insurance numbers. It’s able to track those who are unemployed or underemployed, those on Ontario Works, on ODSP, and it’s able to track them and their employment outcomes long-term. That’s important.

We’ve also accepted recommendations of the Auditor General, who noted the strength of the KPIs—meaning we do follow up and assess those KPIs, make sure they’re met. And we’ve publicly committed to publishing programmatic KPIs publicly for all Ontarians to see, as well.

We’ll continue to support Ontario workers with rapid training. This is the first time in Ontario that we’re offering rapid training in an organized, meaningful way to support people with better training for better jobs with bigger paycheques.

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: Back to the Premier: On the one hand, we have programs that clearly fail to meet targets, funding that is going to very questionable companies with very close ties to this government—adult entertainment spaces/wedding venues. I can’t make this up.

And then you see, on page 24 of the Auditor General’s report, that she says very clearly that the minister’s office was repeatedly providing inaccurate rationales for the funding to her. They presented applications as being scored high by the professional ministry evaluators when in fact they had been ranked, actually, very low—very low, or even medium.

My question is, how bad does this scandal have to get before the Premier puts an end to this pay-to-play scheme?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Again, that’s simply incorrect. Calling organizations like LIUNA questionable, like Carpenters questionable, like Unite Here questionable is completely unfounded. Calling hospitality sector employment and training partners questionable—again, unfounded.

We have to, again, look back, in the origins of a global pandemic, when people were all at home. Nobody was working. We came up with a fund designed to instill confidence in employers and employees alike, to train workers in sectors all across Ontario’s economy, because they all matter to this Premier.

Hospitality workers matter to this Premier. That’s why we’ve taken steps to ban taking tips—when employers would take tips from hospitality workers. We’ve taken progressive steps there to publicly post salary disclosures, benefiting the lowest-wage earners. These are steps we’ve taken to support that class of worker. They all matter in this province.

That’s why we’re working hard with employment training providers and non-profits in every corner of this province to support meeting the priorities of this government and the people of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Do you know what, Speaker? There are children in the room, so I’m going to be very careful how I talk about this. But just so we’re all clear, I think LIUNA knows perfectly well what I’m talking about here, and they would be ashamed to be associated with a minister who would support an enterprise—and would give $10 million to an adult entertainment club.

What kind of training are we talking about here, Minister?

Interjection: One time.

Ms. Marit Stiles: This was not a one-off; I wish it was. This is a pattern of behaviour in this minister’s office, and it has raised more than a few red flags.

It seems like the staff in the minister’s office gave the Auditor General the wrong scores. They knew it. They knew what they were doing.

I’m just going to ask again: What is it going to take for this Premier to clean up his government and fire this minister?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, that is incorrect.

The hospitality sector, writ large, does matter, and that’s what I’ve said here; that’s what everyone on this side of the House would believe.

Training a next generation of workers, supporting in the government’s build agenda—that’s a $200-billion articulation of our priorities to build hospitals, to build roads, highways, bridges. These are things that the member opposite fought against. That is why those aforementioned organizations I mentioned abandoned them in the last election. They know that their men and women, their members, get real paycheques thanks to investments this Premier has made in infrastructure—roads and bridges. These are roads, highways that they fought against.

Then the people went to the polls and elected PC members in every riding in Brampton. People went to the polls, they elected members to get hospitals done, to get transit done, to build energy infrastructure, new nuclear. Folks in my community know they wanted to close those very investments down.

We’re going to make those—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Oh, man. I’m just going to look out at the members of this government and say to you, is this what you want to be associated with?

If we were really talking about building roads and highways and training the skilled workers we need with this fund, I’m all for it.

But what has happened under this minister and your government is, there is a cloud hanging over skills development right now. It is shameful. The government members should be ashamed of this.

We’re not talking about innovation here. We’re talking about $400 private rooms in an adult entertainment venue, and you’re trying to hold that up as somehow defensible spending for skills training.

So I want to know, once again, when is this Premier going to fire this minister, or is he going to continue to stand by his man?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, that’s just, again, simply incorrect.

What this fund is doing—as I mentioned, through every successive round, we’ve taken measures to improve the integrity of that program.

The member opposite mentioned LIUNA. Let’s actually quote them: “The Skills Development Fund has invested in real people, real jobs, real second chances and real pathways forward”—no matter your pathetic attempt to smear otherwise. I quote Victoria Mancinelli: “These are programs that change lives, giving justice-involved youth, women in trades, newcomers, marginalized communities and workers across hospitality, health care and construction a chance to build their future.” That’s Victoria Mancinelli from LIUNA. That aptly summarizes, as I said, in the wake of the pandemic, a fund that can support rapid training.

Through every successive round, we’ve improved the program, and we will continue to do take steps to do that.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: I never thought, never dreamed, I’d be saying these words in this place: Did the Premier actually give $10 million of taxpayer money to the owners of a strip club?

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

Hon. David Piccini: No.

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

Mr. John Fraser: Well, I think you’ve got some explaining to do, Minister.

Speaker, I think most reasonable people who read the Trillium article—and some of you have it here—would say that we can do better than this. We can do better than giving millions of taxpayer dollars to the owners of a strip club. Does the Premier agree?

Hon. David Piccini: Again, we did not.

What I referenced was meaningful training, for example, in the skilled trades, a priority of this Premier. Young men and women between the ages of 15 and 24, who, statistically—we’ve seen an increase in apprenticeship registration thanks to the Skills Development Fund. We’ve seen an increase in under-represented groups statistically, according to Skilled Trades Ontario, because of programs like the Skills Development Fund.

We’re going to stay focused on making sure we have a next generation of men and women who can nation-build. We’re talking about one Canadian economy, about breaking down barriers to nation-build, once again, as we are less reliant on our friends south of the border. We need to do that, and we need a program that supports rapid training linked with employers, that leads to jobs, that leads to training, and we’re going to keep staying focused on that.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary?

Mr. John Fraser: That’s not the answer that Ontarians deserve.

The Skills Development Fund was set up for good. It was supposed to be there to lift people up. It was supposed to be there to lift young women up. It was supposed to be there to lift up newcomers. It was supposed to be there to lift up people who needed a new career. That’s to lift people up. Instead, the Premier has let us all down.

Does the Premier not agree that giving $10 million to the owners of a strip club is the wrong thing to do?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, he has asked that question; I’ve given the answer: No.

What this Premier, what this government is focused on, is meaningful pathways into careers. The member said that, yet they voted against this fund. They said this fund isn’t good—so that’s all aspects of this fund—and they voted against it every time. But it’s not surprising, because they vote against the very things that this fund is supporting: building new hospitals, building new roads, building new bridges, building new nuclear plants, building new hydroelectric dams—these are all the things that require rapid training and rapid training programs to support.

We’re going to keep supporting the Ontario workers who elected us to do that—organized labour that supported us in great numbers to keep delivering on that plan to nation-build, to build a strong economy. We’ll keep doing that. These parties don’t support that initiative.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: Back to the Premier—and it’s a simple question, and Ontarians deserve an answer from the Premier.

If you read the article, which some of you have, you’ll read that a worker is quoted as saying, “They did not want to work at a place like that.” Another quote said, “Both women said some of their fellow trainees left after seeing what they were expected to wear.”

Premier, if they didn’t want to work in a place like that, why did you fund them?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’ll remind members to ask your questions through the Speaker.

The Minister of Labour.

Hon. David Piccini: Again, that’s incorrect.

What this fund is focusing on is supporting people with meaningful training opportunities—whether it’s the hospitality sector, whether it’s the construction sector, whether it’s health and safety training.

This morning, we were down with the elevator union, and they know that the only party with a plan to build is this Ontario PC Party, when they look to Toronto and they look to the skyrises. This morning, we talked about health and safety training. We talked about Skills Development Fund initiatives; in fact, Jim Miller mentioned that this morning, at our Safety Stand Down—the second initiative. We’re working with them to build.

We’re not going to apologize for meaningful training opportunities—that we are strengthening that program, after every round, as I mentioned: key programmatic indicators, improving our IT tracking, improving the SIN tracking.

This Premier recognizes that training at any age matters—has a fund to do it, to support building a stronger Ontario. And that’s exactly what we’re doing.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Mr. John Fraser: I don’t know how this minister is defending $10 million to the owners of a strip club. It defies reality. This is really serious.

I’m going to remind you of what I said in the last question, which is, “Both women said some of their fellow trainees left after seeing what they were expected to wear.” They wore red corsets, high-cut black thong-like bottoms and fishnets.

Are these the jobs for young women the Premier had in mind in the Skills Development Fund?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, if the member actually read that article, he’d realize no skills development funding went to this. So let’s talk about what it actually goes to.

The member opposite mentions how we can support young women, young men alike.

In my community, they’re treating the exterior facade of a building in a heritage downtown as a real training opportunity, recognizing that at any age, it matters. I met a young guy there from my hometown who’s getting better training. I met someone mid-career who’s getting better training.

A Women’s Work—she was here; that member didn’t take an opportunity to talk to her.

The Premier and I met two young women, mid-career, who are getting training.

If that member wants to talk about young women getting training, he could meet those actual women who have come to this place.

That’s what we’re going to stay focused on—training at any age, at any stage, and in every corner of this province to support, with meaningful opportunities.

Whether you’re young and looking to join an apprenticeship, whether you’re mid-career, we have a fund to support you.

We’re not going to stop supporting Ontarians.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary.

Mr. John Fraser: Your skills development money, $10 million of it, went to the owner of a strip club. That’s a fact.

Here’s another quote from the article—there were lap dances: “Access to private rooms was offered, too, at a fee of $400.” We all know what that means.

We all also know that there is a personal connection between the owners of the strip club, Kory Teneycke, and the Premier.

There is no possible world in this universe where the Premier can explain this away: $10 million to strip clubs, from a fund that was supposed to lift people up.

Instead, the Premier let all of us down. Why?

Hon. David Piccini: Again, Speaker: Incorrect.

Let’s talk about the food and beverage sector, contributing over $15 billion to our economy—the hospitality sector. These are important sectors of an economy—an economy that this Premier and this caucus are working to grow through creating a low-tax environment to attract investment.

Manufacturing investments: We’ve helped create the conditions for over a million new jobs.

They don’t want to talk about that because they support a high-tax agenda, a high-government-spend agenda.

We’re making those investments in real infrastructure, real projects, and putting real people to work. You heard from Victoria Mancinelli—real jobs, real impacts. That’s what this government is focused on.

We’ll see the fall economic statement this week that’s going to continue these investments in hospitals, in schools, in bridges, in highways. For those projects to succeed, we’ve got to support training. We know that training occurs in colleges, universities, union halls and non-profits, and we have a fund to support that. We’re going to continue doing just that.

Government contracts

MPP Jamie West: Speaker, I’m a fan of Candu nuclear. They are Canadian, with a 94% Canadian supply chain, and they’re best known for projects that come in on time and under budget.

Meanwhile, GE Hitachi is a US company. They don’t have a 94% Canadian supply chain. According to the Globe and Mail, GE Hitachi originally promised that their SMRs in Ontario would cost about $1 billion per reactor—that’s $4 billion for four. But instead of $4 billion for four, it will now be over $20 billion. That’s more than five times the original estimate.

Why is the Premier paying a US company five times more than estimated?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Associate Minister of Energy-Intensive Industries.

Hon. Sam Oosterhoff: I want to thank the member opposite for his question.

I was very pleased to join the Premier and the Prime Minister a couple of weeks ago at Darlington, where we announced a historic investment of $1 billion going into the small modular reactors. We were joined by partnership from the federal government—some $2 billion being invested into these projects.

We can ask the question of why these investments were made. It’s because we know that these projects are good for ratepayers, they’re good for taxpayers, and they’re good for our economy, with over 80% of the entire supply chain being kept here in Ontario, supporting 18,000 jobs—thousands of workers across this province who are being supported as a result of this. The best part: It’s going to ensure that power remains affordable, reliable and secure for many, many decades to come.

That’s a far contrast with what we saw under the previous government—the Liberals, propped up by the NDP—when they were in power and you had a chance to make a change.

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

MPP Jamie West: The Premier is not just buying American; he’s paying almost $16 billion more to buy American. I don’t know how that helps taxpayers or ratepayers.

Let’s review.

GE Hitachi: American SMRs, American fuel source, with an estimate that has already ballooned from $4 billion to over $20 billion.

Candu nuclear: They’re Canadian. They have a 94% Canadian supply chain. Their fuel comes from Saskatchewan. And their projects come in on time and under budget.

My question: Instead of buying American, will the Premier buy Canadian and prioritize Candu nuclear technology?

Hon. Sam Oosterhoff: We are very proud of the robust nuclear supply chain that has been built here in the province of Ontario.

Today, Minister Lecce is giving a keynote address at the world nuclear foundation, where he’s speaking about the fact that we have demonstrated world leadership. We are the first sub-sovereign jurisdiction in the G7 to build out these small modular reactors, providing tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars to our GDP in the years to come.

Don’t just take my word for it. Speak with the Power Workers’ Union; speak with those who are in the skilled trades, those from communities around Darlington and across the province.

I know there are small businesses in my riding, there are small businesses in yours that help supply—that over 85% of the components that are in those small modular reactors support good Ontario, made-in-Canada jobs.

We’re going to be unapologetic about our commitment to a world-class industry we have built right here in this province. Small modular reactors are part of that industry, ensuring that jobs are being protected.

When will the member opposite stand up and support those workers, support those jobs, and keep rates affordable for the people of this province?

Government accountability

MPP Tyler Watt: This is serious. This is $2.5 billion in this Skills Development Fund that was supposed to go towards training people to help them build up Ontario—a premise and goal we can all get behind. But while Ontario’s public colleges and universities are cutting programs and laying off thousands of workers, this government is funnelling millions through the Skills Development Fund to private career colleges and insiders connected to the labour minister.

We’ve recently learned that those close to the labour minister have been lobbying for private colleges, some of which have received millions of dollars from the Skills Development Fund.

Madam Speaker, how can this government justify pouring education dollars into private institutions with PC Party political connections while Ontario’s public colleges and universities are left to crumble?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Nolan Quinn: I always enjoy standing up to highlight the investments we made in budget 2025.

A billion dollars have gone to our post-secondary institutions: $750 million went to STEM programming—another 20,000 world-class STEM graduates on top of the 70,000 we are graduating every single year; $75 million in construction-related programming—whether that’s in planning or in the skilled trades, that’s another 7,800 new seats that we brought online this year; another $56 million to expand nursing seats—another 2,200 spaces for nursing seats across the province; as well as $55 million for teaching seats, another 2,600 new teaching seats. This is on top of the $1.3 billion we invested into the sector last year, when the federal government made many unilateral changes.

I recommend that member, when he meets with Prime Minister Carney, which he does often, to maybe suggest to stand up for our post-secondary education system.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Member for Nepean.

MPP Tyler Watt: That all sounds like great statistics, right? Billions here—

Interjections.

MPP Tyler Watt: Okay. But here’s—

Interjections.

MPP Tyler Watt: No.

Here’s the reality, though: Colleges and campuses are closing down. Algonquin College closed their Perth campus altogether. Hundreds of programs are being cut.

So while you pretend that these investments are creating an exceptional post-secondary system, that’s not the truth.

The Auditor General has said that political staff overrode non-partisan advice to give millions of dollars to low-scoring applications—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Excuse me. You’ll have to withdraw.

MPP Tyler Watt: Withdraw.

Incredibly, $10 million was given to a non-profit that then funnelled the money into a company that operates an adult entertainment club.

Speaker, this is not just bad optics. This minister is in direct conflict of interest.

Meanwhile, 700,000 Ontarians are out of work—record high unemployment and youth unemployment in this province. A quarter of all visits to food banks are done by students. Private colleges are receiving millions while our public colleges and universities wither.

Why does this government always find money for insiders but never for students?

Hon. Nolan Quinn: Let me be abundantly clear: We’ve invested a billion dollars in budget 2025 for our post-secondary education system.

Speaker, I know it has been a while since the Liberals or NDP had to balance a budget—and I know that member is really good on TikTok.

We’ll ensure that we’ll continue to be there for our post-secondary system.

That member knows that the federal government made multiple unilateral decisions without interacting or consulting with the sector. Whether it’s Ontario, BC, Alberta—nobody was consulted under the unilateral changes that the federal government did to the international student market.

That is why we are going through a funding formula review right now. We are listening to the sector. We’re listening to our stakeholders and our partners to understand where the funding formula needs to go.

We’ll continue being there for the sector. You can continue making TikToks all day, but we’ll continue to meet with the sector stakeholders and ensure that—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. Order.

A reminder to direct your questions through the Speaker.

Question?

Municipal infrastructure

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Speaker, building homes isn’t just about bricks and mortar. It’s about making sure every community has the critical infrastructure needed to grow. That means reliable water, waste water and servicing systems that can keep up with demand.

Across Ontario, municipalities are ready to build. They want to get shovels in the ground and bring new homes online, but to do that, they need faster approvals and modern tools that remove delays and cut red tape.

Great organizations like the Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association have been strong advocates for this approach to meet the urgent needs of housing-enabling infrastructure.

Can the minister please explain how our government is protecting Ontario’s future by strengthening the infrastructure needed to build more homes faster?

Hon. Rob Flack: Thank you to the member from Brampton West.

Really, what we’re doing is laying the foundation for success. In the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, Bill 17, we started that. We’re debating Bill 60 now to get that job done.

We’re doing a pilot project in the region of Peel to ensure that we get meaningful public utility in place to build the infrastructure we need over the decades to come. It will remain in public hands. Unlike others who are saying that we’re going to privatize—it will not be privatized. Let’s get that straight. Accountability will remain in local hands.

Ultimately, what we’re going to do is reduce the burden of development charges in this province. They’re punitive. They hurt first-time homebuyers. They hurt new home construction.

Speaker, growth no longer pays for growth. We’re changing that, and under the pilot project in Peel, we’re going to get it right.

Ultimately, we’re going to build more homes faster and keep the dream of home ownership in this province alive and well.

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

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I want to thank the minister for his response.

Every community, large or small, depends on strong servicing infrastructure to build new homes.

Across Ontario, municipalities have told us that outdated and duplicative approval processes are holding projects back. These delays make it harder to build the homes families need and drive up costs for everyone.

We know that faster approvals, modern tools and strong partnerships are key to unlocking more housing. By removing barriers and supporting local governments, our province can help get shovels in the ground faster.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how our government is helping municipalities deliver the water and waste water systems needed to build more homes across Ontario?

Hon. Rob Flack: The member from Brampton West is absolutely right; infrastructure is the key ingredient to get more homes built faster. And there’s an insatiable need in this province to get infrastructure built—water and waste water, in particular.

As the member said in his opening question, the Ontario Sewer and Watermain Construction Association estimates, over the next 15 to 20 years, 200-plus billion dollars will be needed to replace aging infrastructure and put in new infrastructure in this province.

Aging infrastructure needs to be replaced. What the project we’re looking at in Peel does is it amortizes the cost of that massive investment over decades—not just on the backs of new home buyers or new construction buyers. It’s logical. It makes sense—again, keeping the dream of home ownership alive.

Costs have to come down. New construction costs are too high, and it takes too long.

That’s what Bill 17 did. That’s what Bill 60 will do once we get this approved—please, goodness.

At the end of the day, we’ll keep the dream of home ownership alive. It’s the quintessential Canadian dream.

Government accountability

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is for the Premier.

Ontario lost 38,000 jobs in the second quarter of 2025, and there are currently 700,000 people unemployed in Ontario.

The Skills Development Fund was supposed to be helpful to workers and to businesses. In fact, the ministry website makes this claim, but it fails to note that the selection process would not be fair or transparent or, as we were learning, even ethical. The selection process needs to have integrity, and we all know that.

The minister has already admitted that he wasn’t tracking the actual performance measures or the job numbers, although I’m sure he was tracking some donations.

How can the Premier guarantee that with the remaining $700 million that’s in the Skills Development Fund, the preferential treatment will not continue? And why, after everything that we’ve learned, do you trust this minister when he has been compromised?

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

Hon. David Piccini: As we heard from the Auditor General, strong KPI metrics are in place, and through successive rounds, this program has improved.

This program is delivering real results. You heard the quotes I read earlier—real results for real Ontarians with real training. That is a concept foreign to the member opposite.

The folks who actually deliver that real training long ago abandoned that party. They abandoned it because they saw in this PC government a government that’s building; a government that’s going to ensure that their members—men and women—have a paycheque, have a meaningful job to go home to feed their family with.

We’ve got the sewer and water main association here today. They know that the infrastructure commitment this government is making is going to support contractors, workers and employers alike. It will ensure generational prosperity for Ontario—for a Premier and a government laser-focused on building a stronger Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Waterloo.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Madam Speaker, the owners of strip clubs were never supporting the NDP, and we’re actually okay with that.

The Skills Development Fund needs a reboot, which means the minister needs to resign.

In fact, there was a time and place in Ontario when a minister who has been so compromised would actually do the right thing and resign.

This fund has been tainted, trust has been lost, and this is compromising our economic potential. We need to ensure that the remaining $700 million in this fund is used for high-ranking applications to address Ontario’s labour market needs, which is what the fund is supposed to do.

To the Premier: The economy is at a standstill. Our underfunded educational institutions, which have supported the economy, are actually cutting jobs. We can’t afford to waste the potential of the Skills Development Fund by a minister who has been compromised.

Premier, will you fire the Minister of Labour?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, again—an

article that itself cites the inaccuracy.

This matter is before the Integrity Commissioner, someone I will continue to work closely with.

We’re going to keep working hard for Ontario workers, to make sure we’re investing in their training. And that’s exactly the impact that this fund is having. It’s supporting key pillars of our economy—be it infrastructure, be it health care, be it our hospitality sector, our tourism sector. It’s supporting vital sectors of this economy with rapid training.

I’ve referenced so many stories, but later this month, we’ll be going to northern Ontario, where we’ll see first-hand the mining investments; the new training centre with boilermakers that this fund is supporting in Sudbury; the expanded supports for drywalling in communities like Sudbury.

We’ve got to build homes to support a growing north and a mining sector that those members just don’t support.

Environmental protection

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Speaker, there’s an old adage: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. So, for the life of me, I cannot comprehend why this government is obsessed with messing around with great programs and organizations that are already working well in Ontario—the Skills Development Fund, road safety, green development standards. And now the new focus is flooding—slicing and dicing the 36 conservation authorities, rolling them into seven entities, supposedly redeploying senior officials, and all the while expecting Ontario not to flood?

My question to the Premier: How will you ensure that local watershed-based protections are maintained with these new entities covering vastly different parts of the province, and what is the expected cost compared to the successful program you are erroneously eliminating?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: I am proud to confirm to this House that our government is leading a transformational change in conservation authorities to ensure that, more than ever, they fulfill their core mandate of preventing floods, of managing watersheds. We are proposing and consulting on potential legislation that would consolidate or amalgamate conservation authorities from the current 36 into seven regional watershed-based conservation authorities.

And guess who, among so many, is supporting it? The mayor of Vaughan, the former leader of the Liberal Party, the member’s party, the Honourable Steven Del Duca. We welcome that support because there are times when a non-partisan approach to making a system better is the best approach. We welcome that non-partisan support, and we will get it done. We will get it done right.

We will support conservation authorities. No community—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I will caution the member for Ajax on outbursts.

I recognize the member for Beaches–East York.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Just a quick flooding refresher for this government: For every dollar invested in climate adaptation, there is a savings of $3 to $8 in cost avoidance.

Speaker, 10% of homes in Canada are no longer insurable relative to flood risk. Flooding is the number one cause of public emergency in Ontario. There is a high cost of inaction, with $1.2 billion in total insured catastrophic losses in Ontario in 2022.

My question to the Premier: Instead of blowing up these important conservation authorities, why not give them the support they deserve—electronic permitting systems, flood mapping, planning? Why not help them with modernization? Heck, why not give these conservation authorities some of that skills development slushy fund?

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: Let me be clear: The regional conservation authorities that we proposed, watershed-based conservation authorities, will continue, better than ever, to focus on managing natural hazards and watershed health, consistent with the current mandate for conservation authorities, drawing on decades of local knowledge and partnerships. We’re taking action to improve conservation authorities, to deliver faster and more efficient outcomes for the communities they serve.

And we are creating, for the first time, a new central agency to guide those regional watershed conservation authorities. The new Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency will help standardize processes and procedures among Ontario’s conservation authorities. This will include introducing a one-window permitting and approvals platform to support faster, more predictable approvals of new housing and infrastructure, to serve Ontario better.

Energy policies

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: This month, electricity prices went up again—29%, actually. Life just got more expensive and stressful for millions of Ontarians.

Meanwhile, this Premier is pursuing a pipeline pipe dream, which isn’t about reducing energy costs but is a massive giveaway of taxpayer dollars to oil and gas companies.

You say you believe in a fair market, yet you make it challenging to build renewables—the fastest and cheapest way to bring costs down and create jobs now, not in 15 years. Ontario is virtually absent from the $2-trillion green tech economy. We should be creating jobs now, using Ontario steel to build made-in-Ontario, low-cost renewables.

Speaker, my question to the Premier: Will he make life