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

November 22, 2022

43rd 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 2022-Nov-22 vol. A (PDF)

L031A - Tue 22 Nov 2022 / Mar 22 nov 2022

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 22 November 2022 Mardi 22 novembre 2022

Orders of the Day

Better Municipal Governance Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à améliorer la gouvernance municipale

Members’ Statements

Food banks

Fern Taillefer

Rebecca Morris-Miller

Orléans football clubs

Events in Markham–Unionville

Municipal development and infrastructure

Seniors’ housing

Varathaledchumy Shanmuganathan

Chambers of commerce awards of excellence

Wearing of pins

Introduction of Visitors

Shooting in Colorado Springs

Question Period

Long-term care

Municipal government

Municipal government

Economic development

Municipal development

Skilled trades

Land use planning

Land use planning

Hydro rates

Education funding

Land use planning

Public transit

Tenant protection

Government services

Member’s grandchild’s birthday

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy

Introduction of Bills

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Building More Homes by Ending Exclusionary Zoning Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant la construction de plus de logements en mettant fin au zonage d’exclusion

Building More Homes on Major Streets and Transit Corridors Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 pour la construction de plus de logements sur les rues principales et le long des couloirs de transport

Petitions

Employment standards

Access to health care

Land use planning

Social assistance

Labour dispute

Infrastructure funding

Health care

Northern Health Travel Grant

Health care

Gasoline prices

Public sector compensation

Long-term care

Orders of the Day

Ed Thomas Philip

Alan William Pope

Better Municipal Governance Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à améliorer la gouvernance municipale

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Good morning. Let us pray.

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Better Municipal Governance Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à améliorer la gouvernance municipale

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 17, 2022, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 39,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006 and the Municipal Act, 2001 and to enact the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act, 2022 / Projet de loi 39, Loi visant à modifier la Loi de 2006 sur la cité de Toronto et la Loi de 2001 sur les municipalités et à édicter la Loi de 2022 abrogeant la

Loi sur la Réserve agricole de Duffins-Rouge.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): When we last debated Bill 39, the member for Barrie–Innisfil had the floor. I believe she still has some time on the clock—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Oh, questions and responses; I apologize. There are questions to the member from Barrie–Innisfil.

Mr. Ross Romano: I’m happy to be able to rise this morning and speak to the importance of building housing across the good province of Ontario. We know that we have such a challenge. We’ve heard time and time again the concerns that we have across this province, this country, in seeking out and finding attainable housing. It is something that is so important, very near and dear, and something that I trust that the members opposite recognize the importance of—attainable housing—but, more importantly than anything, it’s about actually doing something to accomplish that goal.

We’re moving forward in that fashion, and I’m wondering, to the member opposite, if they could please help us understand what they have against us working towards building more attainable housing in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The question is addressed to the member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you to the member for that question. I also don’t understand why the opposition is opposed to building more houses, to get more attainable housing online. There’s not an event or a time that goes by in the riding that I humbly represent where housing as an issue doesn’t come up, whether it’s someone who says, “I’m worried about my kids not being able to find a home,” or someone in their family who has been saving up.

This government, from day one, has become innovative in terms of how we build housing. Just recently I had Minister Clark in the riding of Barrie-Innisfil, where we announced a modular build, which is a really exciting way to get some affordable houses built and get online quite quickly. But we learned these models from other jurisdictions, so if other jurisdictions are doing things well, why not use evidence-based policy in order to improve the way we build here in Ontario and how we, of course, support the governance of the municipalities?

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): The next question.

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the member for Barrie–Innisfil. The province’s own Housing Affordability Task Force, since we’re talking about evidence-based decision-making, said that access to land is not an issue. It’s not the reason why we have a housing supply shortage.

Why is this government choosing to open up the greenbelt when, before the election, you made a commitment to not open up the greenbelt, given that land is not an issue when it comes to dealing with the housing supply crisis?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: It’s always a pleasure to hear the member from University–Rosedale. I know she agrees with many of our policies: for example, fast-tracking the missing middle. In fact, she’s been on record saying that “fast-tracking missing-middle development so we can build two- and three-bedroom townhouses and laneway housing”—and that’s exactly what we’re moving towards, so I’m glad to hear her support for that particular policy.

We’re using every tool we possibly can in order to, again, bring about attainable housing, including things like garden suites and secondary units. We need to continue to build on that progress, and that’s exactly what we’re doing in this bill.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Mr. Will Bouma: Speaker, through you to the member: I know that our government has committed to putting out one piece of housing legislation per year. Here we’ve seen a major policy change and two pieces of housing legislation coming forward. I was wondering if the member could expand further—and even just last year we had a record number of housing starts, I think, in almost 40 years, with 100,000 homes built—on how important it is to be able to get to our target of getting a million and a half homes.

What does that mean with the immigration targets that have been set with the federal government, meaning that the population of Ontario is going to be growing by at least 350,000 people per year for the foreseeable future? How important is it that we just get those housing starts going, and how adaptable do we have to be in order to make that happen?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you for that question. This bill did not come lightly. Our entire housing strategy has been something we’ve been working on from 2018. When we talked to AMO, we talked to different municipalities, we talked to rural Ontario, we talked to the affordable housing task force, they laid out clear recommendations of how to move the pendulum. We’ve seen, from report after report, whether it’s Scotiabank or many others, or the Smart Prosperity Institute, where they talked about how 1.5 million homes is what we need to cool things down. But, even then, some of these reports were saying that we need to build even more than that.

Speaker, what we’re doing today is taking that fine-balance approach, allowing for more attainable housing to be built, but also doing it in a very wise way to still enjoy the amenities that we do and, of course, all of the lovely parks that we enjoy every day.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the member from Barrie–Innisfil about housing in a way that—I experienced this in my riding from constituents. I have a couple who are 90 years old and 80 years old, and they have a daughter who is 50 years old with developmental disabilities. And now the parents are in long-term-care homes. So their daughter, who is 50 years old and has developmental disabilities needs housing, and she needs supportive housing.

Where do the bills for stronger mayors, building homes faster, increasing municipal powers—where is that housing for people, for adult children who need those supports when their parents can’t look after them anymore?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: The member knows that every day we delay housing adds to the cost of that house. We know that on an average house, over six months, we’re adding $17,520 to the cost of that home. When we talk about apartments and condos, there’s $11,640 added to the cost of that particular home with delays.

Since 2018, every housing bill we’ve introduced has been very fine-tuned on the issue of what do we do to ensure that people have attainable housing. I talked to a lady—her name is Cindy—in Innisfil, and she’s very excited about our transit-oriented community development in Innisfil because she knows that that has the potential to create all kinds of attainable housing.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): That’s all the time we have for questions and answers.

We’re going to move to further debate.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’m proud to stand today to speak on Bill 39, because the bill is so important. What I’m not proud about is seeing this government introduce a bill that is a real threat to democratic norms and a bill that will double down on suburban sprawl in areas that we should protect.

I want to explain the bill to you. Bill 39 consolidates power in the hands of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, at the expense of everybody else. The bill consolidates the democratic power in the hands of the mayor of the city of Toronto, at the expense of the 2.9 million citizens in Toronto and the city councillors that were elected to represent them. The bill has very little to do with solving the housing affordability crisis and helping people get a home that is affordable.

There is no evidence that I have seen from this government that Bill 39—or its twin bill, Bill 23—is going to lower housing prices to make homes affordable again or lower rent prices to make homes affordable for lower-income, moderate-income and middle-income people. What this bill is about is bulldozing the province to help the Premier’s wealthy developer friends. That’s what this bill is about. It is an affront to democracy.

I want to go through the three schedules in the bill. It’s a small bill, unlike Bill 23, which was a very big bill. I wonder if you’re going to take this bill to committee, I really do, so that city councillors, citizens, can speak about the consequences of this bill in this region. I wonder if you’re going to take it to committee. I hope you do.

This bill has three schedules.

Schedule one, the City of Toronto Act: What this bill does is, it says that the mayor of the city of Toronto can get a bylaw passed with just a third of the members of city council. That is a slap in the face of representative democracy and majority rule—50 plus 1. Now the mayor can get a bylaw passed with just eight councillors. That’s really astonishing. It is truly astonishing.

I am also really disappointed, and that’s a polite word, to hear that Mayor Tory asked for these powers. That is a real shame. Because he didn’t say anything about asking for those powers when he was running for office, nor did this government say that they were once again going to meddle in municipal elections and local democratic decision-making when this government was running for government in June 2022. So it is, quite frankly, shocking to see this.

The second

schedule that is in this bill is the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act. What this

schedule does is, it eliminates more of the protections that exist in this area, the Duffins-Rouge area, in order to make it much easier for some of this government’s wealthiest donors, developers, to build on this land, even though, for the last 50 years, governments of all political stripes, from Bill Davis to Mike Harris to Dalton McGuinty, understood the value of protecting the greenbelt and protecting our farmland.

This land on the greenbelt is cheaper than land that can be used for development, because it has easements on it to ensure that it is protected as farmland. These developers, including some of the Ontario provincial government’s—the PC Party’s—wealthy developer friends, bought this land cheap over the years, and now they’ve finally got their own way and they get to develop it and make a huge amount of money. That’s what the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act is really all about.

Then,

schedule 3, and this is also very concerning, allows the Premier to hand-pick regional council chairs. That is very concerning because the regional council chairs are democratically elected by city councillors within that region. So we’ve just gone through an election. These city councillors—some of them are new to office.

Some are just getting inaugurated, they’re getting a tour of offices, they’re learning the ropes, they’re finding out the rules, they’re hiring their staff, and then all of a sudden this provincial government bill comes through and says, “Actually, there’s one thing you aren’t going to be able to do anymore: You’re not going to be able to elect your regional council chair, because we have decided that the Premier gets to hand-pick the regional council chair,” and that’s exactly what you’re going to do.

I really hope you take this to committee so that we can hear from regional municipal councillors and get their perspective on the drastic change you have done.

I heard the member for Barrie–Innisfil mention that there has been some consultation with AMO. When I communicate with AMO, I’m not hearing that there has been a ton of consultation on this; they were very surprised about Bill 23. My guess is that they’re very surprised about Bill 39. The letter that they wrote to us about Bill 23 used language that I have never seen a very moderate institution like AMO—I’ve never seen them use this language before.

They use the word “radical” because they’re so concerned about what this government is doing with land use planning in southern Ontario, in rapid-fire succession, without consultation, without considering the consequences on municipal budgets, without considering the consequences on democracy, without considering the consequences on meeting our climate change goals.

Interjection: It’s messed up.

Ms. Jessica Bell: It’s messed up. Thank you very much. It is messed up. You certainly didn’t run on that in the last election.

What I find so frustrating—I want to go back to the City of Toronto Act and the decision to pass what I would call an undemocratic strong-mayors bill on steroids—is that this government, to the best of my knowledge, hasn’t even outlined the provincial priorities that will allow the mayor to pass a bylaw through on eight city council votes. The mayor has this power to use minority rule to get a bylaw passed, and they can only do it on provincial priorities that are identified by this provincial government. But this government, to the best of my knowledge, hasn’t yet identified what those provincial priorities are.

I guess it will be in regulation. You will sit down; you will decide what they are. But we don’t even know what those provincial priorities are. We can guess. I’m sure it will be broad-sweeping to give the mayor a huge amount of latitude on housing, transit, development, development charges. I’m sure it will be sweeping. But I believe those kinds of decisions should be made also by the people of Toronto and the city councillors we elected to represent us.

I was in committee—Bill 23—last night, and then immediately after I went to a residents’ association AGM with my colleague MPP Wong-Tam. What struck us is how all these decisions that city councillors make on behalf of the residents of the city of Toronto are now going to be made by MPPs elsewhere—MPPs who represent other regions of the province: rural regions, Ottawa, Barrie. Now the provincial government gets to decide how much parkland we have in downtown Toronto, where 80% of people live in an apartment in my riding.

Now this government gets to decide development fee charges, gets to drastically cut them, which determines the quality of the transit service that a Torontonian has when they get up in the morning and go to work. Honestly, it is disturbing.

What I also find very difficult to fathom with Bill 39 and Bill 23 is this idea that we’re doing this in order to solve our housing affordability crisis and our housing supply crisis. They are two different things. This government loves to talk about the housing supply shortage that we have. It is very real. It was real even before the federal government upped our immigration targets, which is absolutely necessary. But there’s also a housing affordability crisis, which this government—I can’t even hear—sometimes you say the word “attainable.” But the idea of talking about affordability—this government has a real difficulty in actually saying the word. That’s what I find so hard to fathom.

And what I see Bill 39—and Bill 23—do is that I see it doubling down on suburban sprawl, which is incredibly unsustainable. It will build the kinds of homes that are, on average, about 3,000 square-foot, cost easily over $1 million—which makes them unaffordable for the vast majority of people—and they lock us into unsustainable, soul-destroying commutes and unsustainable transportation patterns.

They also cost municipalities an obscene amount of money to service. When you compare it to increasing the amount of housing that we need in existing neighbourhoods, in the neighbourhoods people want to live in, it’s much cheaper for municipalities to service those areas. It also builds the kind of sustainable, greener, more livable regions and cities that we need in order to move through this climate crisis and adapt to it and respond to it. But instead, this government is doubling down on suburban sprawl.

Schedule 2, in particular—and also

schedule 3—makes it easier for them to do it. I have so many concerns about that.

I recall Peggy Brekveld from the Ontario Federation of Agriculture. She came into committee to express her Concern about the consequences of suburban sprawl and the consequences that this government is moving forward on to take land away from farmland and pave over it. She mentioned that there are 320 acres a day of farmland that’s currently lost in Ontario each day.

We are very lucky. We have some of the best growing area, some of the best growing land in the world. We are one of those unique areas that can produce enough food to sustain Ontario, and then we can export it. But instead, we’re looking at paving over this, and that’s exactly what Bill 39 and Bill 23 are looking at doing, and I think that’s a shame.

If this government was truly interested in tackling the housing affordability crisis, I would recommend that this government actually look at the Housing Affordability Task Force recommendations that you asked a task force to develop. One of the key recommendations they made is that land is not the reason why we have a housing supply shortage. They were very clear about it. They were also very clear—they never mentioned the idea of getting rid of conservation authorities, which is a huge problem, because you are. And they never talked about paving over the greenbelt, which is exactly what, in

schedule 2 in Bill 39, they’re going to do.

I find that deeply concerning, especially when I read reports like what’s here—this is a report from the CBC, which did a deep dive into who actually owns the land in the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve area, the DeGasperis family: how many acres they own, what they bought it for; very concerning. And then I hear reports that the nine top developers who stand to benefit the most from opening up the greenbelt gave over $500,000 to the PC Party. That really smells very fishy. It smells very dodgy. I commend the reporters that are looking into this, and I hope the Auditor General looks into this, because it just doesn’t add up. It really doesn’t add up.

I hope some of your own members are looking into this too, because I’m sure you’re hearing about it. I read the news; I see the protests. Hundreds of people are going to your offices. That’s very surprising; I don’t often see that. They’re concerned about the greenbelt. They want to protect it too. They thought this government was going to protect it, because you said you were going to do it during the last election. And now, all of a sudden, you’re introducing bills like Bill 39 and you’re doing the exact opposite thing. That’s very concerning.

I’m going to conclude by talking a little bit about what I want this government to do to address the housing affordability crisis that they talk so much about. If this government was truly interested in helping people find a home that was affordable—that they could afford to buy, that they could afford to rent—then they would have a comprehensive housing program. They would develop a comprehensive housing program that dealt with numerous things. Yes, we need to build more homes, but we shouldn’t be building homes on farmland and greenbelt.

These should be homes that the member for Barrie–Innisfil mentioned: those missing-middle homes, those townhomes, those duplexes, those triplexes in existing neighbourhoods. Bill 23 goes some way in that direction, and there could be more that could be done. We should be increasing density near transit stations. There are measures in Bill 23 that do that; I support them. But that’s the kind of sustainable housing and sustainable planning patterns that we should be moving forward on.

It is also absolutely critical that this government acknowledge that we are not going to be able to build the homes that meet the needs of Ontarians if we don’t acknowledge that it will require government investment as well. There are low-income, moderate-income, middle-income people who are not going to be served by the private housing market. Many of them are not, because they just don’t earn enough money, which means that we need government investment in programs to ensure we build the housing that is actually for Ontarians; not just for investors, but for Ontarians, so they’re paying off their own mortgage and not someone else’s. That’s what we need.

I see models that we can replicate here. I see what BC is doing, where they’re moving forward with much greater government investment in public housing. I look at what the city of Toronto is doing with their Housing Now program: They have a plan to build 10,000 homes. They broke ground this week. They’re building that on public land near transit stations—a third private market rentals, a third condos and a third affordable—to tackle the housing crisis. It’s so sensible.

What’s amazing is that the Ontario government could do this, too. We have over 6,000 properties that have been identified as being suitable for land—public land. Why don’t we use that land? We could double down on that and build the kind of housing that we need. But I don’t see this government doing that, and they should. They’re selling off public land. They’re giving it to developers. There’s no affordable housing requirements in any of the developments that you’re approving. The Mimico station: no affordable housing requirements. The foundry: no affordable housing requirements. That’s a shame, because that land should be used for affordable housing as well.

What we are also calling for is an acknowledgement that renters need protection too. What this government is choosing to do is eliminate rent controls and renter protections so that renters have to work even harder just to keep a roof over their head and have to make tough choices around whether they can pay for food, whether they can pay for transit in order to cover rent—the escalating rent.

This government is reducing the controls that they have, the renter protections that they have, which I really do find a shame, because we should be going in the other direction and strengthening renter protections so people who rent can pay affordable rent, so they have money left over at the end of the month that they can save up for a down payment and buy their own home. That’s what many people want to do. But if they’re paying $3,000 a month for rent, they’re never going to do that. This government—I hope you acknowledge that, because you talk a lot about attainability.

Nothing is attainable if you’re spending $3,000 a month on rent—nothing. You’re just running to stand still. That’s it.

Then what I find so concerning about Bill 39 and Bill 23 is that there is just nothing to deal with people and help people who are just struggling to get by: people who are sleeping on couches, people who are living in encampments. Encampments are once again returning to my riding, to Toronto Centre, to Spadina–Fort York, to many urban centres. They’ve got nowhere to go. The housing market is—there’s just no place for them. They’re sleeping on the streets. There’s nothing in here to address that.

Instead, what I see in the fall economic statement is cuts—cuts to supportive housing programs that municipalities use. And then I see, in Bill 23, cuts to the amount of development fees that go to supportive housing programs. There’s nothing.

I really urge you to rethink this. We can have homes that meet the needs of Ontarians and respect democracy at the same time. We can have homes that meet the needs of Ontarians and protect the greenbelt, protect the environment and have a healthy, thriving farming sector. You’re heading in the opposite direction. I urge you to rethink it. There are better ways to go.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We’ll move to questions and answers.

Mr. Vincent Ke: I’m happy to say that, across our province, our communities are growing. Ontario’s population surpassed 15 million for the first time ever this year and is projected to grow by another two million in the next decade. We have heard that one third of Ontario’s growth over the next decade is expected to happen in Toronto and Ottawa. We know that we need to plan for this growth.

Speaker, my question is, does the member opposite not agree that we need to provide the municipalities with the tools they need to plan for growth?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you to the member opposite. The Ontario NDP understands that we have a housing supply shortage. We made a commitment in the last election, like all parties, that we need to build 1.5 million homes to meet the need. We get it. But what we also understand is that we don’t need to sacrifice democracy, the environment, municipal budgets and farmland in order to achieve the housing supply targets that we have.

What I find concerning when we’re talking about municipalities and growth is that this government, with Bill 23, has made a decision to slash the amount of funding municipalities have to provide the infrastructure that is necessary for current Ontarians and future Ontarians who are coming here.

In the case of the city of Toronto, we’re looking at losing $230 million in funding that is meant to go to capital expenses to pay for the Yonge line subway expansion so that we can deal with the increase of people coming down on the Yonge North line, for the Ontario Line, for more daycares, for more schools. There are schools in my riding that are full, where there are signs in nearby condo developments saying, “Look, if you move into this apartment, we can’t guarantee that you’re going to have a school nearby because it’s full.”

So when we’re talking about growth, we need to talk about the infrastructure that’s needed for that growth as well and municipalities—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. Further questions?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I just want to ask the member: Right now, our new city council in London is going to be meeting at noon today to add to the growing list of names of the critics of this government’s Bill 23, building homes faster. The new mayor has called a meeting today, of course, because he says he’s worried about the proposed reduction in development charges which are applied to new builds for paying for the city’s infrastructure. The member alluded to that a minute ago. Can she expand on how other municipalities are coming out as critics against this bill because of the lack of planning and foresight when it comes to what cities face today?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Point of order.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): The member for Barrie-Innisfil has a point of order.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Pursuant to standing order 7(e), I wish to inform the House that tonight’s evening sitting is cancelled.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you.

Back to the member to respond to the question.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you to the member from London–Fanshawe. During the Bill 23 committee hearings, we received many written submissions, as well as people who came in to speak to committee about the concerns they have with municipal budgets. What the government is choosing to do is reduce development fees for certain units that they claim are affordable, but they’re not. They’re not affordable.

We had many experts come in and say that this is not a definition of affordable that any government uses in Canada, and the consequences of that are that municipalities across Ontario, especially the ones that are growing very quickly, are going to see a drastic cut in the amount of development fees they have.

Development fees are used to partially subsidize—just partially—the costs of providing infrastructure to new and current Ontarians who are coming in. We’re talking schools, sewerage, transit. So when municipalities don’t have that money to provide those services, then they’re either going to bring in service cuts or they’re going to bring in big tax hikes. That’s a solution, and neither—

The Acting Speaker (Mme Lucille Collard): Thank you for the answer. We’re going to move to the next question.

Mr. Will Bouma: I always enjoy engaging with the member from University–Rosedale. Her comments are always thoughtful, and I know that we have the same goals at heart. I appreciate hearing from her today that the opposition also wants to build 1.5 million homes; I think that’s an excellent point that we can work off of together.

I’m just curious: A question that I’ve had when I have conversations with farming advocates is that number of the 300 acres that is going into development every day. When I ask those people—and I haven’t been able to find that statistic yet. I’m hoping you may have it. You may not, which is fair. But I’m just curious: How many of the 300 acres that are being converted to development every day in the province of Ontario are not already in a locally approved official plan for development?

For example, in my community, we have large settlement areas that have been designated for 20 years. As that land is converted, I don’t know if that’s exactly a tragedy that that’s going from farmland when it’s already been decided and in official plans and everything else for that long.

I’m just wondering, because I haven’t been able to find that statistic, if you might have that statistic about how much of that 300 acres is just raw farmland? Because my feeling is, based on the planning principles that we have in place in the province of Ontario, that number is probably zero, but I’m wondering if you have any insight on that.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you for asking that question. What I do know is, the statistic of 320 acres a day came from Statistics Canada data, and the OFA broke that down to get that figure. I don’t believe Statistics Canada has drilled into the details of whether that’s within an area that’s already zoned for development or if it’s an area that is zoned for farmland. So I can’t answer that question for you.

But what I also know is that the Housing Affordability Task Force has been very clear that access to land is not a reason why we have a housing supply shortage. I also know that there are many municipalities that are making the decision to keep growth within their existing boundary, which is kind of what you’re getting at, instead of being forced—in the case of some municipalities—to expand their boundary and be required to have development in areas that are currently farmland or green space.

I’m very much in support of keeping the boundaries where they are and using examples of Halton and Hamilton, where they’ve decided to meet their job growth and population goals by increasing density within their boundaries. Thanks for allowing me to raise that.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: It’s apparent that this government has a deep fear of democracy because, with every bill that has come before this House, the government has attempted to undermine core democratic processes, shifting power and resources away from ordinary working people and their elected representatives to those with deep connections to the Conservative Party.

I have a question though, because in Thunder Bay we have two shovel-ready not-for-profit projects. My question is: Is there anything in either of these bills that would provide the necessary financial support so that these projects could go ahead? Because they could be building in April, and the province is missing in action.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you to the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North. That’s an excellent question.

There is nothing in Bill 23 or Bill 39 that allocates funding to go for supportive housing and affordable housing projects, which are critical in all of our ridings; they’re absolutely necessary.

In fact, Bill 23 has cut the amount that development fees can be used for all buildings, for all units, not just affordable ones. They have cut the fee that should go to supportive housing programs, just like the one that you’re talking about.

When we look at the investigation that the Financial Accountability Officer does into the government’s books each year, we also see that over time there has been a cut in the amount of funding this government has allocated to affordable housing and supportive housing overall. And that’s a shame, because it means people in your riding and my riding suffer.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): I don’t think we have time for another question and answer, so we’re just going to move to further debate.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise today to speak to the second reading of Bill 39. Speaker, I just don’t even know where to begin with this bill, other than to state the obvious: This is an outrageous attack on democratic principles, the principle of majority rule. Where is it in any democracy, anywhere in the world, that we say a minority of elected officials get to make the decision?

You think about this: Imagine if Prime Minister Trudeau got up today and said in Parliament, “Moving forward, from now on, one third plus one of parliamentarians get to decide yea for legislation.” People would be outraged, and rightfully so. As a matter of fact, it would be unconstitutional for the Prime Minister to do that. But here we are in the Ontario Legislature today, debating a bill that brings in minority rule in the nation’s and the provincial capital. As one journalist, who is an expert on housing, has said, “It’s nuts.” Yes, it is. Literally democracy—we are literally debating the centuries-old democratic principle of majority rule within an elected body today. Think about that.

And you know what, Speaker? It’s not even needed. The government’s own hand-picked housing task force never once—never once—said we need strong mayors, let alone minority rule to address the housing crisis. As a matter of fact, not once—actually, explicitly, the task force said, “We don’t need to open the greenbelt for development.” But here we are, in

schedule 2 of this bill, opening the Duffins—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Stop the clock.

I apologize for interrupting, but pursuant to standing order 50(c), I am now required to interrupt the proceedings and announce that there has been six and a half hours of debate on the motion for second reading of this bill. This debate will therefore be deemed adjourned unless the government House leader directs the debate to continue.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you, Speaker. Please continue. The member is very passionate.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. We will continue the debate.

The member for Guelph will continue. Start the clock.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I appreciate the opportunity to finish this. I’m hoping to answer some members’ questions.

In committee, when we were talking about estimates for the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, government members questioned whether the greenbelt land that’s being opened for development was actually prime farmland. Well, we actually learn in this bill that the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve is one of the areas that’s being opened for development, especially cropland—some of the best cropland in North America. As a matter of fact, the government sold it to farmers at well below market prices because it would be saved forever for farming.

And then some land speculators bought it up cheap and now they’re going to turn millions into billions with the stroke of a pen, and the rest of us are going to foot the bill for this. This is raising questions among the farm community: Is anything sacred when it comes to protecting farmland in this province?

Speaker, this bill should just be pulled. Not even go to committee; let’s just pull it.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We’ll now turn to the questions and answers for the member for Guelph.

Mr. Will Bouma: I always enjoy engaging with my friend from Guelph. I saw him at an event just a couple of Saturdays ago and it was very good to see him.

I would like to pose to him—I know it’s a little off topic from where he was going, but he did bring in farmland, and so I would like to pose to him the same question that I asked the member from University–Rosedale just a few minutes ago. We are told, and I believe the statistics, that there’s 320 acres of farmland that’s going into development on a daily basis in the province of Ontario. I believe that statistic is accurate.

I was wondering if the member knows—because I have not been able to find the answer to that question yet, and that might be a little bit of a dig at the parliamentary assistants to agriculture, to see if they can find me that number. But how many of those acres are not already in established settlement boundaries that have been well-established, and approved official plans that have been approved at municipal council and at the provincial level, of that acreage that’s not yet in the settlement boundary? I was wondering if he had any insights on what that actual number might be.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I appreciate my colleague’s question. He asked me this question in the hallway a couple of weeks ago, so I asked the Ontario Farmland Trust. They’re the people who came up with the statistic. It is derived directly from Statistics Canada data and I’m happy to provide that to government members: 320 acres a day.

Unfortunately, to get into the level of detail that the member is asking for is very difficult through StatsCan data, so it would have to be something that the Ministry of Agriculture, or maybe the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, should know. But it seems to me the government would want to know this information before they actually expand and develop on even more farmland. And as a matter of fact, experts have shown there are 88,000 acres of land already approved for development in Ontario within existing urban boundaries that we can use to address the housing crisis.

The question I would ask is: Why are we opening the greenbelt for development? Why are we expanding urban boundaries when we have enough land already within existing urban boundaries to build the housing we need?

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): The member for London–Fanshawe for the next question.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I’m getting emails daily on this issue. Last week, the theme was about the democracy attack on education workers. Now it’s on Bill 39. This is what he writes:

“Bill 39 will repeal the bill that protects the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve and give ultimate power to mayors. This is a direct threat to our democracy! This is going to allow land developers and mayors to pave over massive expanses of valuable ecosystems and farmland that is irreplaceable! This is going to mean my city councillor that I voted for may not have a voice at the table if the mayor chooses to strong-arm their way to enacting policies as they see fit.

“Please do what is right. Stop these bills. Stop this government from completely ruining this province. This is nothing more than greed and bullying” tactics.

Is the member getting emails like this as well in his office?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Yes, I’m getting a number of emails like this. First of all, we’re literally bringing in minority rule. We’re talking centuries of democratic principles are under threat in Bill 39.

When it comes to the greenbelt, I don’t know if I have ever heard a Premier be so explicit so many times, promising not to do something when it comes to the greenbelt. I can tell you, we looked it up in the Hansard, and there are multiple occasions, just in this House alone, that the Premier said that we will not open the greenbelt for development, and that the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing said that we would not open the greenbelt for development. Of course, we know the infamous campaign video where the Premier explicitly said, “I will not open the greenbelt for development.”

So what so many people are asking me is: Why doesn’t the Premier keep his promise to protect the greenbelt? Because we don’t need that land to build the housing we need. We already have it approved for development.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We have time for another quick question.

Mr. Will Bouma: I would never waste an opportunity to interact with my friend from Guelph, Madam Speaker. I’m just trying to think of where I was going now, because I had a good question stuck in my head somewhere. It’s rattling around.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: We’re in trouble.

Mr. Will Bouma: Exactly. I can see the smoke coming out of my ears. Thank you to my friend from Kiiwetinoong.

But I was wondering—again, a little bit off topic—but if we are able to decrease development charges to get more purpose-built rental housing online—I know it’s not in this bill, but I was wondering if I could pick the member’s brain on that.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Yes, I think if the province replaces that lost revenue to municipalities, then it’s something we can consider if it is truly affordable, and in perpetuity being affordable. But the bottom line is, we can’t ask existing property taxpayers to foot the bill for that.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We’re going to move to further debate. I recognize the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you very much, Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to Bill 39, the Better Municipal Governance Act.

I would think everybody in this Legislature would very quickly agree that Ontario is the best place in the world to call home. I know that everybody in my community—that, I think, we can all agree on. Unfortunately, there are a couple of issues. Fast-pacing demand and a lack of supply: Those are the two things I’m going to talk about today. That is what has driven house prices out of reach for many families in Ontario. Again, it’s fast-increasing demand, which I want to talk about for a moment, and then lack of supply, which I’ll also address.

Think about the fast-increasing demand. What has happened in Ontario in the last five years? What has changed in Ontario that has caused this demand? We need to go back a few years ago to 2017, 2018, when the previous Liberal government gave up on manufacturing in Ontario. They just gave up.

I’m going to read you two sentences from their long-term report on the economy. It told you what the Liberal government saw coming up. It said, “The structure of the Ontario economy will continue to shift from goods-producing to service-producing sectors,” and, they went on, “shifting employment from goods-producing industries, in particular manufacturing, to service-sector industries.”

The previous government gave up on manufacturing. They hiked hydro rates, they hiked taxes and they added red tape, and as a result we saw a loss of 300,000 jobs in the province of Ontario. That’s in the past. That’s what happened. That’s how we started.

I’ll give you one more reference, because I think it’s important that we hear. Unfortunately, Sergio Marchionne has since passed. He was the chair of then-called Fiat Chrysler, in Windsor. The headline in the Toronto Star was, “Fiat Chrysler Chief Worries about Ontario’s Competitiveness.”

Sergio was sitting on a stage in Windsor with former Premier Wynne. They were talking auto because auto was declining in Ontario. Every single auto company was reducing, closing, stopping certain vehicles in their production line. Sergio Marchionne was sitting with the Premier and she mused about Chrysler expanding. He delivered a very blunt message directly to Premier Wynne, who was sitting beside him. He said, “This is not what I would call the cheapest jurisdiction.” He was referring to hydro rates, red tape and higher taxes. He said to her, “I think you need to create the conditions to be competitive.”

So exit Premier Kathleen Wynne, enter Premier Doug Ford and our party. This is fundamentally why there is fast-increasing demand in housing today. We looked at the situation that the previous Liberal government left, of high taxes, high hydro rates, 300,000 jobs that had left, Sergio Marchionne saying that you’ve got to create the conditions to be competitive, and Premier Ford said, “All right, this is what we are going to do. We are going to lower the cost of doing business.”

We visited Ford and GM and Stellantis. We visited Toyota. We visited Honda. We visited all of the auto companies, the engine manufacturers and the parts makers. There are 700 parts makers in Ontario and 450 tool and die makers. We visited as many as we could. There are 300 companies that are in connected and autonomous vehicles: GM up in Markham, Ford in Ottawa and BlackBerry QNX in Ottawa. They each employ hundreds and hundreds of people designing the cars of the future, these connected and autonomous vehicles. We visited them all and they all gave us the same message: You’ve got to lower the cost of doing business.

And we did, Speaker. We began by reducing WSIB premiums—workplace safety costs—by 50%. That is a $2.5-billion annual savings to business. We put in an accelerated capital cost, which means they can write off the cost of their new equipment in a year. That’s a $1-billion savings. We reduced commercial and industrial hydro rates by 16%; that’s $1.3 billion. We lowered the provincial share of local property taxes by $450 million. We reduced the burden of red tape on business—at that time it was $400 million and it’s now over $550 million. All in, we reduced the cost of doing business by $7 billion annually.

So when I say to you that yes, Ontario is the best place to call home, but fast-increasing demand and lack of supply is what the problem is, the fast-increasing demand comes from the fact that we reduced the cost of doing business by $7 billion, and because of that, companies have flocked back into Ontario.

I’ll start just with the automotive because that was the immediate response. Premier Ford and myself, we went to Washington; we met with Ford. We went to Plano, Texas; we met with Toyota. We went to all of the companies and we said, “We did what you asked. We lowered the cost of doing business in Ontario. We are now competitive. What are you going to do for us?”

Ford, in Oakville—$1.8-billion investment; Honda, in Alliston—$1.4-billion investment; LG-Stellantis, in Windsor—$5.2-billion investment, their first investment in North America; GM, in Oshawa and Ingersoll—$2.3-billion investment; Stellantis, in Windsor and Brampton—$3.6-billion investment; Umicore, out of Brussels and now in Loyalist township—$1.5 billion. There’s $16 billion in new investment, just in auto—in EV—that has created tens of thousands of new jobs.

To build LG’s plant in Windsor—just to build that plant—are thousands upon thousands of employees. It’s a 4.5-million-square-foot building. To put it in our terms, in Canadian terms, it’s the size of 112 hockey arenas. That’s what’s being built down there. It needs thousands of people to build that facility down there, and once it’s built it will employ 2,500. Look at GM in Oshawa: 2,700 men and women—in fact, 50% women, 50-50—showed up at work today, in Oshawa, in a plant that was closed. All these people need a place to live, so when we say “fast-increasing demand,” you can see that just the auto sector alone has created tens upon tens of thousands of jobs. That’s why there’s demand.

Since we were first elected, pre-COVID, there were 300,000 new jobs created in Ontario. Those people need a place to live. Since the pandemic—yes, of course, like everybody else, we lost 1.1 million jobs, but we gained 1.3 million back. We added 200,000 jobs, just since the pandemic, throughout the pandemic and now. That’s 500,000 new men and women who went to work in a job this morning—more than when we were first elected, only four and a half years ago.

So when we say that fast-increasing demand is causing a problem—why we need Bill 39, the Better Municipal Governance Act—it’s because we have so many people here who are working, who need a place to live. So it’s not just automotive.

I made a couple of notes while I was sitting here, listening, earlier. I’ll just rhyme off a few to show that this is so diversified around the province and around the sectors:

—AXYZ Automation, a company in Waterdown: $25-million investment, hired 50 people. I think they mentioned the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook in their news release;

—Barry Callebaut, a chocolate manufacturer in Brantford: $104-million investment; they hired 200 people;

—Laurysen Kitchens, in Stittsville: $26-million investment, hired 20 people;

—Dot Foods, in Ingersoll: $39-million investment, 200 people;

—Justworks, in Toronto, an HR management platform in Toronto: $20-million investment, 75 new people;

—Lastman’s Bad Boy built a new facility in Pickering: $70 million, 200 new employees;

—Trusscore, in Palmerston—they make plastics and paint—$10-million investment, 68 people. They all need a place to live.

On some bigger numbers:

—Telus, $23-billion investment; they’re hiring 9,500 people over the next five years;

—Tata Consultancy Services, from India, is here today on University Avenue; 5,000 new employees they’re hiring over the next four years;

—Nokia—we did the announcement in Ottawa—hundreds of millions of dollars, 340 new employees and 100 interns that they’re hiring. All of these people need a place to live.

So when we talk about what’s happened—“Why all of this now? Why, all of a sudden, are you doing this?” Well, good heavens, there are 500,000 people working today who weren’t working just a few years ago, and I’ve just rhymed off a list here of about 20,000 more people who—these announcements are only made in the last couple of months, from Telus’ $23 billion and 9,500 employees all the way through to the Nokia one. All of these; that’s 20,000 employees I’ve listed.

Every single morning of every single day, I send Premier Ford what he calls and what I call his “one-a-day vitamin.” It’s the name of a company, where they’re locating, how many millions they’re investing, how many people they’re hiring and whether the province has any skin in the game or not. Every single day of every single week, that’s what’s happening in the province of Ontario. Every single day there are millions of dollars of investment coming into the province of Ontario. That hasn’t stopped.

Speaker, I’m going to take a moment and I am going to read yesterday’s—this is fun. Oh, that hasn’t been announced yet. But there’s good news coming in Niagara. MPP Sam Oosterhoff is going to make a $6-million announcement and 30 new jobs.

That hasn’t been announced yet either. Well, I’ll have to go back. Cambridge is getting some very good news about 40 jobs coming.

Every single day we’re reading—Unbun in London, $4 million. They are creating to provide gluten-free products to Mr. Sub and Pizza Pizza and Burger’s Priest. They’re going to sell all of these products—23 new jobs. Very nice.

Every single day of every single week, Speaker, there are great announcements coming, millions coming. So when you ask why there’s fast-increasing demand—what I’ve said—that’s why, because we’ve created the climate in Ontario for job seekers and job creators to build these jobs. They all need a place to live.

When you now look at the other side of the coin, the lack of supply—Minister Clark, my great friend Steve, has said the word “NIMBY.” He has talked about NIMBY.

Hon. Steve Clark: I’m right here, buddy.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I didn’t even know you were here. Not in my backyard—NIMBY. He’s got a new one now. He’s got a new one, and I’ve got to tell you, I’ve been sharing it every day. BANANA: build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone. That is exactly what is happening.

So when you want to know why there’s a lack of supply, there’s a lack of supply because we’ve got all of this NIMBYism that is happening, all of that activity. I look in my hometown of North Bay, and there’s one project—we had the civic hospital and St. Joseph’s General Hospital. They were both demolished and we built a brand new, billion-dollar hospital in North Bay. On the civic hospital site—now, I was mayor at the time these buildings were demolished. I was mayor from 2003 to 2010. So these buildings were demolished. Since then, there’s nothing built on the civic site. At least on the St.

Joseph’s site, there’s a new long-term-care facility that’s under way, but on the civic site it’s just been blocked and blocked. It’s an entire city block. The hospital is gone, but there’s not one thing built on that because it continues to be blocked. For a decade, it has continued to be blocked.

That is exactly the issue. We’ve got that “build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone.” That is exactly what’s happening. As a result of it, I can drive to the Commanda, which is in the southwest end of my riding, I can drive to Powassan—the little town of Powassan, 3,200 people; their first house to hit $500,000 in Powassan. That’s what’s happening when you can’t build anything, anywhere, near anyone. That’s what’s happening. In Port Loring, they’re having bidding wars for houses. That’s absolutely unheard of north of the French River.

That is just absolutely unheard of, and that’s what’s been happening, Speaker. Because there is a lack of supply, it’s driving the prices out of reach of families, and so we, through Bill 39, intend to resolve that.

We look at last year’s 100,000 housing starts. I think that was the highest since 1987, far greater than the 30-year annual average of 67,500. But that was just the start. We need to have this bill in place so that we continue to work hard so that all Ontarians, both newcomers and long-time residents, can actually, for the first time, have the dream of home ownership become a reality.

So we’re taking steps to fix the problem. It’s bureaucracy. It’s the red tape. All of that stands in the way of the much-needed housing.

Speaker, I’ve talked about the fast-increasing demand. I’ve told this Legislature all about the $16-billion investment in the auto sector that’s created tens upon tens of thousands of new jobs. The 2,700 people that went to work in Oshawa this morning for the first time in a long time since that plant was reopened, the 2,500 people who are coming to Windsor after the thousands—it’ll likely be 10,000 people that work in that building there. All of these people need a place to live.

We will continue to make sure that we expand the strong-mayors powers to the municipalities that are shovel-ready, municipalities that are committed to growth and municipalities that are committed to cutting red tape. We want them to look at what we’ve done as a province.

We listened to Sergio Marchionne tell Premier Wynne that you’ve got to become competitive, you’ve got to cut costs, you’ve got to cut red tape, and that’s what will help us. Because I can tell you, Speaker, by the emails and texts that I send the Premier every night, that fast-increasing demand? That’s not going to slow down. That is not slowing down in the province of Ontario.

They look at us. I was in Germany and Austria and Japan and Korea earlier this year; every one of those countries, every business that we visited, said to us, “In this turmoil, in this tumultuous world that we’re facing right now, we look at Ontario as a sea of calm.” They can’t wait to get here, not only to work here but to open companies here.

I’m going to India on Friday, and I will meet with about a dozen companies, and they have all told us the same thing: “We just need to hear from you the facts. We believe Ontario is safe for our workers, safe for our families, safe for our executives. We believe that about Ontario. We want to hear that from you. And we believe that our investments will be secure. Ontario is stable. They promised low costs; they promised low energy rates; they promised to reduce the red tape”—all promises that we’ve kept. They need to hear that from us, every single company in every single country; they’re ready to invest here.

We think there will be great news out of the trip to Germany. We think there will be spectacular news out of the trip to Korea and Japan. We’re looking for really solid results coming out of India as well. We’re there to thank Tata for the 5,000 employees that they’re hiring here. We’re there to thank HCL and Infosys for the 500 employees each of them hired in Mississauga.

These are thousands of people, Speaker. It’s not slowing down. The demand will not slow down in Ontario. Now we need to work on the supply.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We will move to questions for the minister.

Ms. Doly Begum: Good morning, Minister. Thank you very much for your presentation.

I have a very simple question. You mentioned a lot of investments. I wanted to ask—and I know we talked about numbers and statistics today—how much of those investments were in affordable housing?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I would continue to say—we’ve got the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing right here—

Hon. Steve Clark: They voted against all of these.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: You’ve taken the words right out of my mouth. All of the things that we’ve done, all of that list that I’ve read—every single piece of it needed to go through a budget item that you voted against every time. The 2,700 new jobs in Oshawa? Sadly, you voted against it. I think of Redpath in North Bay, an $8-million investment in their workers.

All of these investments, by the way, created jobs and have new workers in them. I think of you voting against the expansion of the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp. dollars—a portion of that $8 million went to J.S. Redpath in North Bay, one of the mining companies that we expect to help us dig the lithium out of the ground in northern Ontario. All of these provided 500,000 workers in the province of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question.

Ms. Laura Smith: I want to thank the minister for his statement bringing to light this important issue.

Three weeks ago, I had the pleasure of touring Macrodyne Technologies. This company creates very specialized hydraulic presses in the riding of Thornhill. I was absolutely amazed to see what they do and what they create for the international market. When I sat down at the table with them and we talked about their biggest issues, employment and a place for their people to live was their biggest issue. This is such an important issue, because if we’re creating an environment for our economy, we also have to create an environment for our employees. Could the minister talk about this balance?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Young families, newcomers, anyone who has come to Ontario with the dream of having their own home, hopefully near where they work—that dream is falling out of reach. We delivered an historic 100,000 new housing starts last year—that’s the single greatest increase in housing starts since 1987—but there is much, much more work to be done if we want to reach our goals and have these families have a place to call home.

This bill will increase the pace of construction and make housing attainable for all. That’s what this bill will do, by providing efficient local decision-making that will speed up the approvals. A sped-up approval makes a lower-cost house.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I might be an idealist, but changing the municipal legislation should have happened before the residents of this province just voted for their city councils, like we did right in St. Catharines.

Why does this government think it’s okay to introduce bully-through legislation that changes how municipalities are run after a municipal election? It flies in the face of democracy and voter empowerment.

Ontario just had a historically low turnout at municipal polls; Just over 36% of all Ontario residents cast ballots. Instead of instilling a sense of empowerment about their vote, this government is taking it away.

My question is, why not make changes over the summer instead of this Ford-style bait and switch on municipal democracy?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Ontario is expected to grow by two million more people by 2031, and one and a half million of those residents will end up in the greater Golden Horseshoe region. The federal government’s recent immigration target of a half a million new residents per year will put even more pressure on the housing market.

Our government has been very clear that we will expand the strong-mayor powers to municipalities that are shovel-ready and committed to growth and cutting red tape.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): There’s no more time for questions. We need to move to members’ statements. It is 10:15.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Food banks

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: The cost of living in Ontario is unbearable for most individuals and families. The basic necessities of life in Ontario have become out of reach for so many. Energy bills, rent, gas, car insurance and food prices have all skyrocketed and this government hasn’t reined it in. Families on fixed incomes suffer the most when their bottom-line expenses go up. They’re forced to make impossible choices between which bills to pay or to go without any money whatsoever when ends just don’t meet.

Life is getting so hard that families, now more than ever, are relying on food banks to feed themselves. The figure will shock you: One in seven employed Canadians are currently accessing food banks. I’ll say it again: These are employed individuals working hard to try and make ends meet in Ontario, but just can’t do it. One in seven—imagine. And, of that, over a third of all food bank users are children. Speaker, this is unacceptable.

But what are Ontarians to do when even the food banks in their communities are being pushed out by the rising cost of rent and can no longer afford to operate in the neighbourhoods they serve? This is the case in my own community. A long-serving food bank, Society for the Living, has found itself priced out of their home where they have operated for 24 years. Imagine that: an important source of relief for many families, priced out and looking for a new home. If local food banks are closing, what does this mean for those that need them the most? This government needs to act now, because talk is cheap, but living in Ontario is not.

Fern Taillefer

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I’d like to commemorate Fern Taillefer in this Legislature today. He is an outstanding constituent who is always out and about, who just celebrated Remembrance Day, where he is often parade marshal, wearing his red sash. I know I can always go to you, Fern, and can count on you to tell me where I need to be and what I need to do.

But so does our entire community. We’re so lucky to have you at Barrie Legion 147 and everything that you do with the poppy campaign. You help so many families and touch the lives of so many people through the poppy campaign, and you go above and beyond. Because of you, and, of course, your friend Bob, we have now the Peacekeepers Park, which you were fundamental and instrumental to. That was turned from a grassy park that not many people visited to now the annual Peacekeepers Day parade on August 9 of every year because this park came to fruition.

Most recently, I wanted to ask the Legislature to give a round of applause for Fern, because he is going to be receiving the Veterans Ombudsman Commendation award. So, congratulations, Fern. This will add to so many of your achievements, in addition to your being the recipient of the Sovereign’s Medal for Volunteers and the Minister of Veterans Affairs Commendation.

Congratulations, Fern. Thank you for everything you’re doing in your community, and I look forward to seeing you around the Legion.

Rebecca Morris-Miller

Miss Monique Taylor: I rise to pay tribute today to the loss of a difference-maker in Hamilton, Rebecca Morris-Miller. Less than four years ago, Becky, as we know her best, took her vision and her lived experiences and began a journey to bring light to the desperate need for programming. As the founder and operations director of Grenfell Ministries, Becky brought together her team to provide wraparound services for so many who have been pushed to the margins of our society. She devoted all she had to every project she touched, including the National Overdose Response Service and Connections in Corrections, just to name a few.

Becky never stopped searching for ways to “love people where they were at.” Every time I saw her, she reminded me of those words. She was always talking down the road farther than any others could see. Becky could make you visualize the light before the path. If Becky could see it, you would too, largely in part to her charisma and activism.

In speaking with Becky’s fellow colleagues, they share such fond memories of her. She was their light, their spark, their flame of hope. She was one of their dearest friends and confidantes. You see, Becky was always doing what she herself called “revolutionary work.” It really did change the lives of those living with addictions, mental health issues and homelessness. She once told the media, “We are all one decision away from a new life.” Rebecca Morris-Miller had faith in people when they didn’t have faith in themselves.

Becky, even though the world got a little darker when you left us in late October, I promise you: We will leave the light on through your work, your legacy, your children, your family, your friends and your community. We will carry on in your grace and continue to advocate for all who continue to benefit from the work and your giving soul. May you rest knowing we will carry on your passion and love for all.

Rest in peace, my friend.

Orléans football clubs

Mr. Stephen Blais: As we come to the end of the Canadian football season, I want to congratulate and recognize the dominance of Orléans football clubs at all ages and levels this year.

First, I’d like to congratulate the Tigers from St. Matthew Catholic High School. From what looked like would be a missed season due to a lack of equipment, the Tigers rallied and won the tier 1 Ottawa varsity football championship. Ranked inside the top 20 in the province, the Tigers are looking to roar their way into an OFSAA title next Wednesday in Guelph.

In community football, I’d like to recognize the utter dominance of the Cumberland Panthers Football Club. The Panthers led the way in creating a vibrant division for U18 women and girls to experience tackle football this year, and they won the inaugural provincial title, defeating York.

On the boys’ side, the Panthers took home city titles in three of four age groups. The U12 Mosquitos went undefeated, also winning the fall provincial title, defeating the Vaughan Rebels. And to top it all off, Mr. Speaker, former Cumberland Panther Kurleigh Gittens Jr. put the cherry on top of a breakout season in the CFL, winning the Grey Cup last weekend with the Toronto Argonauts.

I’d like to thank all of the coaches, trainers, team managers, photographers, referees, moms and dads and everyone else who volunteers to make Orléans football the hotbed that it has become. Congratulations to all the boys and girls on their hard work and success. I look forward to seeing you on the gridiron again next spring.

Events in Markham–Unionville

Mr. Billy Pang: I am excited to share some of the many wonderful events in Markham–Unionville. In October, I was delighted to celebrate CEFS Centre’s Harvest Festival and Victoria Square United Church’s 190th anniversary. I also celebrated the grand openings of Agora Prep Learning Centre and Brown Academy. Thank you for investing in our students in Markham–Unionville.

On behalf of the Premier and MTCS, I attended and was proud to announce our government’s $74,000 support towards the DanceSport Grand Prix competition that took place in Markham–Unionville.

In November, I joined with my Hindu community and friends to celebrate Hindu Heritage Month. I was happy to share friendship and memories with the Toronto True Light Alumni Association as they celebrated their school’s 150th anniversary in Hong Kong.

Organized by the Markham District Veterans Association, I joined their Remembrance Day service and paid tribute to our veterans. I also laid a wreath at the Crosby cenotaph. Thank you to the many residents who came together to honour our heroes for their bravery and sacrifices.

Mr. Speaker, safety has always been one of our government’s top priorities. That’s why I hosted a crime prevention round table for our Markham–Unionville residents. Thanks to our law enforcement partners at YRP, we have learned so much about crime prevention and will continue to watch out for our neighbours.

Last Friday, about 40 residents from Markham–Unionville took a Queen’s Park tour. They admired the unique architecture and experienced and explored Ontario’s Parliament. I thank our government for this beautiful structure and the hard-working officials who ensure that Ontario is operating efficiently.

Municipal development and infrastructure

Ms. Marit Stiles: Good morning. I’ve been out on the road these past weeks, meeting face to face with Ontarians and hearing what matters to them. Last week brought me to Kingston and Sudbury, and just this past Sunday, I spent the day in Brampton, meeting with many, many community leaders.

Brampton has been promised a lot by the Conservatives. But what are Bramptonians actually getting from this government? Take health care, for example. Brampton has seen promise after promise, but the fall economic statement included no mention of the expansion of Peel Memorial, not to mention the construction of a new hospital. In fact, the statement included no new money for health care, despite the staffing crisis and surge in respiratory illnesses.

People in Brampton raised concerns with me about housing and growth, and they’re wondering how replacing their elected regional chair with someone appointed by this government will make sure that growth is managed successfully or how overriding official plans to the benefit of developers will make sure new developments are actually serviced by water and sewer or not built on flood plains.

Brampton needs a strong voice in this place to push this government to do more for people. New Democrats will continue standing up for the people of Brampton. You can count on us.

Seniors’ housing

Mr. Ric Bresee: In 2018, when I was a new mayor in Loyalist township, I had the opportunity to work with a gentleman by the name of John, who’s been a local developer in that area for more than 40 years. In my community, there’s a large number of seniors, many of whom have been living in the same bungalows since the 1960s or 1970s and are reaching an age when they’re looking to move to something less labour-intensive. Unfortunately, there are very few spaces for seniors to move into and still stay in their own communities.

In fact, there have been no small format and purpose-built units developed in more than 40 years. I’m told that this is a fairly common situation across the small towns in rural Ontario.

At the time, the average price of one of these bungalows was selling for about $300,000 in early 2019. So, with that information, the developer designed a community of 56 units, or, more precisely, 14 fourplexes, with each unit over 1,000 square feet, single-storey, modern HVAC, ensuite laundry and modern appliances. The complex would be condominium and so the external structures of those homes, the yard and snow maintenance, would be taken care of, and they were selling for less than the average price of the homes they were moving out of. This has been a great success.

The private developer continues to build a range of housing, including purpose-built rental and middle income, and he tells me that his greatest challenge with these projects has to do with the red tape, the bureaucratic delays and the administrative uncertainty in both the cost and duration of these permitting processes.

I can tell you that with the new initiatives proposed by this government, this will get better and the people who build the homes, the people who actually make our homes, will be further motivated to build more homes that we need in our community.

Varathaledchumy Shanmuganathan

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: It is my honour to welcome Ms. Varathaledchumy Shanmuganathan amma to the Ontario Legislature today. At the age of 87, Varatha amma has earned the distinction of being the oldest person to graduate with a master’s degree from York University and is one of the oldest women to earn a graduate degree in all of Canada. To add, Mr. Speaker, this is her second master’s degree.

She began her academic journey at the University of Madras in India, where she completed her undergraduate degree. She later also earned a diploma in education from the University of Ceylon. She earned her first master’s from the University of London when she was in her fifties. She immigrated to Canada in 2004 and decided to make her dream come true when she learned that York University offers Canadian seniors over the age of 60 with waived tuition fees.

Despite the pandemic and the challenges it posed to learning, she persevered, put the difficulties aside and powered through it all.

Mr. Speaker, this woman who is sitting in front of us today in the Legislature is an inspiration to us all. To all the young people who are just beginning their academic careers, she reminds us that learning is a lifelong journey. I want to congratulate Varatha amma for her lifelong commitment to education.

Chambers of commerce awards of excellence

Ms. Laurie Scott: I would like to acknowledge and thank the local chambers of commerce in my riding of Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock. Chambers of commerce staff provide various methods of assistance, guidance and support to our local businesses and not-for-profit organizations. They help with things like networking, assistance in advertising and promotion, and community support.

I have had the distinct pleasure of attending in-person award ceremonies recently for two of my local chambers, the Lindsay and District Chamber of Commerce, which represents approximately 330 businesses, and the Haliburton Highlands Chamber of Commerce, which represents approximately 270 businesses. On November 10, the Lindsay and District Chamber of Commerce held their awards of excellence event. This event celebrated many individuals and businesses from the area, recognizing, for example, the Employer of the Year award, the Tourism Excellence award and the New Business of the Year award.

The Haliburton Highlands Chamber of Commerce held its business and community achievement award ceremony this past Saturday, November 19. This event recognized community leaders, with the Highlander of the Year, the Young Professional award and the Innovation and Creativity award, just to name a few.

I would like to congratulate the nominees and winners and, in particular, the many young, innovative and creative entrepreneurs I met. Truly, thank you to the chamber staff for their continued contribution to help businesses be successful and continue to thrive during these uncertain times. Everyone in the community benefits from their support. Keep up the great work.

Wearing of pins

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: If you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to wear forget-me-not pins in support of Alzheimer’s awareness.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Cho is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to allow members to wear forget-me-not pins in support of Alzheimer’s awareness. Agreed? Agreed.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m very pleased to inform the House that we have with us in the Speaker’s gallery today Mr. Panayotis Antonatos, consul general of Greece in Toronto. Please join me in welcoming our guest to the Ontario Legislature.

Ms. Catherine Fife: It’s my pleasure to welcome Michelle Martin from the Alzheimer Society. She’s a leader in Waterloo. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: From the beautiful riding of Essex, a pillar of the community: She just received the Order of Ontario last night. Please welcome to the Legislature Ms. Elise Harding-Davis.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I’d like to welcome my good friend Larry Gibson, who’s a business owner of the Fort Erie golf course, and it’s his first time to question period. Welcome to Queen’s Park, my friend.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome the honorary consul general of the Republic of Lebanon, Mr. Greg Bostajian; the head of executives of the consular team, Manal Saidoun; and one of the consular team, Roy Yehia. I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate them for the independence day of Lebanon. Today there will be a flag-raising and there will be a reception after that. You are all welcome to join, please.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I would like to welcome my long-suffering partner of 30 years, Jordan Berger. He’s joining us today in the members’ gallery.

Mr. Rob Flack: I’d like to recognize my friends from the London St. Thomas Association of Realtors, Bill Madder, Jack Lane and Adam Miller, and a special shout-out to Adam’s mother, Cheryl Miller, a long-time friend and municipal politician in London.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: My colleague from Niagara Centre and myself would like to welcome Teena Kindt and her special team of colleagues from the Alzheimer Society of Niagara. Welcome to Queen’s Park. We’re looking forward to a meeting with you after question period.

Hon. David Piccini: I’d like to welcome, no stranger to this place, a good friend of mine from the Durham Region Association of Realtors, Travis Hoover, also a big fan of Premier Ford’s. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Travis.

Ms. Doly Begum: Speaker, it is an absolute pleasure of mine to welcome WoodGreen community services, who serve close to 40,000 people each year across 40 different locations, with over 75 programs and services that tackle the social determinants of health. We have here with us today Ansley Dawson, Qazi Hasan, Sarah Ibrahim, Eric Mariglia, Alexandra Goth, Sonya Goldman, Naureen Choudhry, Talia Fine, Amenah Abusara, Amanda Hadida and Danielle Maillet. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’d like to welcome Roger Bouma and Travis Hoover from the real estate association to Queen’s Park.

M me France Gélinas: We have three guests from the Sudbury real estate association: Tanya Vanden Berg, Tyler Peroni and Ashley Sauvé. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

We also have a member of the Sudbury Alzheimer Society, Stephanie Leclair, who is here with us, and Dr. Sharon Cohen from the Toronto Memory Program. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: I don’t know if they’ve actually arrived yet. I’d like to warmly welcome the dedicated members of the Alzheimer Society of Ontario. There was a good breakfast meeting this morning. I’m sure they are coming.

Mr. Joel Harden: I also want to welcome our Lebanese friends who are here today. Ottawa Centre is home to a proud Lebanese community. It’s great to see you here today. I’ll see you at the flag-raising.

I want to recognize Jordan Berger, a good friend of mine, who is here today.

I also want to say thank you to the people from the Good Roads group who will be meeting with many of us today and have a reception later tonight. I look forward to seeing colleagues there.

Shooting in Colorado Springs

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I understand the member for Toronto–St. Paul’s has a point of order that she would wish to raise.

MPP Jill Andrew: Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for a moment of silence so we may recognize the five members of the Colorado 2SLGBTQIA+ community and allies who were killed last Saturday night, hours before the Transgender Day of Remembrance on Sunday, by a hate-filled shooter inside a nightclub described as a safe haven for LGTBQ community members in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Their names are Daniel Aston, Raymond Green Vance, Kelly Loving, Ashley Paugh and Derrick Rump.

Seventeen others were also wounded in this attack against queer, trans and non-binary communities and their families.

We must all remember that violence against any 2SLGBTQIA+ community member is felt across borders. May we stand today in a moment of silence for all victims of transphobia, homophobia and biphobia everywhere, always.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to have a moment’s silence now for all victims of transphobia, homophobia and biphobia everywhere. Agreed? Agreed.

Members will please rise.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Members may take their seats.

Question Period

Long-term care

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Premier. This week, elderly and frail patients in alternate-level-of-care beds will start being charged $400 per day to remain in hospital. Advocates told this government yesterday that the $400 fee is a “bludgeon” and used “to coerce [seniors’] consent.”

To make matters even worse, this government is willing to move frail, elderly patients into homes that could actively be in COVID-19 outbreak or that had a large number of deaths during the pandemic.

Speaker, does the Premier think it’s acceptable to move elderly patients into homes with poor pandemic track records or homes with active COVID-19 outbreaks?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply for the government, the Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Paul Calandra: In fact, Mr. Speaker, what we’re doing is helping seniors who are on the long-term-care waiting list, who are in hospitals and want to be in long-term care, move into that long-term-care home.

I was just in a long-term-care home on Friday. The daughter and a resident came up to me and said that, after four months of being in a hospital, moving into the long-term-care home was a game-changer for them. It has meant the world. The mother and daughter are now able to visit easier. They’re able to get more social activities. They are making friends. She said that it has been a game-changer and she wished that she had done it sooner.

This is a testament not to the bill that we brought in that allows this to happen, this is a testament to the hard work of the people who are working in long-term care across the province of Ontario. It is made possible because of the investments that we have made in long-term care, over $13 billion worth of investments, to improve long-term care, to turn a patient into a resident of a home.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: It’s interesting that the minister is willing to move patients into a home with an active COVID-19 outbreak—extraordinary; very interesting.

Again, to the Minister of Long-Term Care: This government should have the health and safety of every Ontarian on their mind each time they put forward new policies. But with Bill 7, the government is asking frail, elderly Ontarians to shoulder the burden of an underfunded and understaffed health care system. That’s simply not fair.

The government should be investing in the health care system, in our nurses, and in our health care workers. That’s where they should be putting dollars. Ontario seniors and their families deserve to know that when they choose to go to a home, their needs will be met.

To the minister: What criteria are hospitals directed to follow to determine if a long-term-care home has suitable staffing levels, equipment and care protocols for a patient to be moved there without compromising the quality of their care?

Hon. Paul Calandra: It’s interesting that the NDP now somehow care about long-term care. They didn’t care about long-term care when they held the balance of power. Of course, it was of no interest to them. They didn’t care about long-term care when we were bringing North American-leading investments into long-term care. They voted against those investments.

We’re building 60,000 new and upgraded beds in every part of the province. We’re bringing long-term care into small communities across the province because our seniors—you know what they have said to us? They have said that they want to be in communities that they have helped build, closer to their family and friends. That’s what they said, and that’s exactly what we’re doing. We are investing in long-term care—four hours of care per day for residents, a North-American-leading standard, Mr. Speaker.

Those are the investments we’re making, and we’re doing it with our residents in long-term care, with the professionals who are working in our long-term-care homes, and we will get the job done because—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you.

The final supplementary. The member for Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: My question is to the Premier. I want to say it again: 5,000 seniors have died under this government’s watch in long-term-care facilities. Bill 7 was rammed through the House with no public comment period and no consultation. There was no opportunity for workers, family members or stakeholders to raise their concerns with this government effectively forcing elderly patients into long-term-care homes they didn’t choose.

We know that care varies across the sector, and we know that workers are burned out and leaving the sector. Families should never have to worry that their family member will be moved to a home where they don’t have enough staff—big issue. Will the minister guarantee that patients will not be forced into homes whose staffing levels are lower than their own provincial standards?

Hon. Paul Calandra: It’s unsurprising to me, colleagues, that the member actually asked that question, because had he read the Fixing Long-Term Care Act that he voted against, he would know that that can actually happen. It is right in the bill. A patient who’s wanting to become a resident of a home cannot be discharged into a home that doesn’t have the resources needed to care for that person. It is a hallmark of the Fixing Long-Term Care Act.

Another hallmark of the Fixing Long-Term Care Act is four hours of care—27,000 additional health care workers. We increased the food allocation. We’re building 60,000 new and upgraded beds. In his own riding—in his own riding—he voted against $50 million of additional support for health care workers in homes with over 450 new and upgraded beds in his own riding—voted against it, voted against the staffing.

We’ll get the job done, because they have never, ever cared about the sector. We care about the people who are in those—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. The next question.

Municipal government

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier. Five former mayors of Toronto have joined the chorus of people speaking out against Bill 39 and this government’s latest attack on a fundamental democratic principle: majority rule. Majority rule is a core value in council chambers and legislative assemblies, not just across this country but around the world. But instead of respecting the voice of voters in Ontario, this government is doing an end run around democracy, shifting power away from people and into the hands of wealthy developers.

Speaker, why does the Premier think our democratic institutions can be swept aside whenever they’re just inconvenient for him?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And to reply, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Today, November 22, is National Housing Day. It’s a day to reflect on our government’s action to get shovels in the ground faster, and one of those commitments that we made to Ontarians during the election—we also made it to big city mayors and regional chairs in January when the Premier and I hosted a summit—was that we were going to give those mayors the tools to be able to get shovels in the ground faster, and we did it.

Immediately after our election, we tabled the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, which was passed by the Legislature, again without the support of the party of no, the New Democratic Party. Then Premier made it crystal clear that we were going to continue to extend those strong-mayor powers to other communities because we need mayors in those six regions, along with the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa, to be able to have the tools to get shovels in the ground faster. That’s why we tabled Bill 39, and that’s why we’ll continue to table a housing supply action plan every year in our mandate.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, back to the Premier: This government was just forced to repeal a bill in Olympic record time when they tried to take away the charter rights of workers in this province.

But I’ll tell you, if Ontarians thought that we were dealing with a changed Premier, they were mistaken. This government was willing to use the “notwithstanding” clause to suppress the wages of the very lowest-paid workers in our province. They’re willing to change the law to carve up the greenbelt for sprawling development. And now, they’re willing to undermine democracy again, letting just eight people of 26 pass laws that affect over three million people in Toronto.

Does the Premier recognize how dangerous and how reckless this government’s actions are to our democracy?

Hon. Steve Clark: Well, Speaker, I’m not going to take any lessons from the New Democrats in terms of housing policy. Nobody is interested in their leadership race. Nobody is interested in their policies. Again, they presented these same policies during the election; they were rejected.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Opposition, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: We’re going to continue to build upon the success of our housing supply action plan. We’re going to continue to work with mayors, to listen to Mayor Tory, to deliver on changes that Mayor Tory has asked for to be able to get shovels in the ground. We’re not going to take any lessons from this acclaimed leader and this failed New Democratic Party.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members of the opposition, I’m having a bit of difficulty hearing the minister answer the question.

Member for Davenport, supplementary.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s like a bunch of little kids realizing that they’re losing a game, and in the middle of it, they try to change the rules. You know, it’s really embarrassing.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Government side, come to order.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, we don’t agree on everything in this House, that’s for sure. But I would have thought we would all agree on the basic tenets of our democratic system. The government is also giving themselves the power to appoint regional chairs in Niagara, in Peel, in York—a move that is completely undercutting local decision-making.

People, whether they live in Toronto or Peel or Niagara or York, deserve to have their voices heard and their concerns represented by their locally elected representatives. Will the Premier do the right thing and just withdraw Bill 39 today?

Hon. Steve Clark: Do you know who’s losing, Speaker, because of the NDP’s style in Ontario? Young families who don’t have a path to home ownership right now; new Canadians who will choose Ontario as the best place to come in our country to raise a family—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Davenport, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: —and create opportunity; for that senior who wants to live in the community that they grew up and raised their family in, but don’t have a path to downsize. That’s who is losing because of New Democrats voting against every single, solitary policy that this government is putting in to deal with housing supply. We’re in a housing crisis. We need to build housing supply. Why do you keep opposing—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Davenport, come to order. Member for Niagara Falls, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: —all of the measures that we’re putting forward? Again, we’re going to stand at all times for that young family who wants to have a home that meets their needs and their budget. We’ll always stand for that senior who wants to have a housing opportunity where they live, and we’ll always stand up for that new Canadian—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. We’re all pleased that there’s a great deal of enthusiasm in the House today, I think. If you repeatedly ignore my requests to call you to order, I will warn you, and then we’ll progress from there. We have to be able to have our discussion, and the Speaker has to hear what is being said by the member who has the floor.

Start the clock. Next question.

Municipal government

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Last week, the outgoing Waterloo council asked the province to defer Bill 23 until the incoming council has had a chance to review it. Councillors have expressed legitimate concerns that the bill was introduced the day after municipal elections and “seems aimed at limiting comment from incoming duly elected officials.” Councillor Bodaly also called the legislation environmentally problematic, citing flooding concerns and protections for wetlands.

Waterloo is not alone in their request to defer Bill 23. Councillors in York, Niagara, St. Catharines, Collingwood and Burlington have all passed motions requesting deferment of Bill 23 and more fulsome municipal consultations. This is a reasonable request. Understanding the full impact of this legislation is important.

Will the minister respect the request of municipalities and defer Bill 23 until newly elected municipal councils have a chance to review the legislation?

Hon. Steve Clark: I’ve stood in this House and talked about what defer and delay does to the high price of a home. You look at the fees that add over $116,900 to the cost of a home in the greater Golden Horseshoe, you look at the amount of time—the studies that have been tabled show that the time it takes to get shovels in the ground has increased some 30% or 40%. It takes way too long to get housing built in the province.

We are a prosperous, growing province. It’s the best place to live in Canada, and we want to make sure that our municipal partners do their part. We’ve given them a housing pledge. We want them to buy into our 1.5 million homes plan over the next 10 years, and each and every one of them ran on a platform of building housing.

Now is not the time to defer; now is the time to get shovels in the ground faster and create opportunity across Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Ms. Catherine Fife: This government has made so many mistakes. They’ve gone to court over a dozen times, and you lost every single time because you rushed through legislation. New councils are just getting sworn in and won’t be able to review the legislation until their first meeting in December. AMO, representing 444 municipalities, has told this government that preliminary analysis of the bill indicates a transfer of over $1 billion a year in costs from private sector developers to property tax payers, without any likelihood of improving housing affordability. It’s not going to work. We’re actually trying to help you by getting it right.

Will the minister respect the voices of the citizens of Waterloo and across this province and provide these democratically elected councils time to review the legislation that impacts their environment, their communities and budgets? It is a reasonable request on behalf of municipalities, and this minister, who has that responsibility, should at very least listen to them.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, come to order. The Minister of Labour, come to order. The Minister of Energy, come to order.

Start the clock. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to reply.

Hon. Steve Clark: More homes built faster is part of our strong foundation for transformative change in Ontario. We know that last year was the best year in over 30 years in the province—we had over 100,000 housing starts—but we know, given the economy and factors that are outside of our control, that we’re not going to get there this year. So we need to put a strong foundational plan in place. More homes built faster is that foundational plan.

We need to get to our goal. Especially now that there are so many new Canadians coming because of the federal government’s decision, we need to make sure that transformation happens at the municipal level. Transformation isn’t easy. We need all of our municipal partners to do their part. They need to work with us and they need to work with the federal government on ensuring that we get shovels in the ground faster.

We’re in a housing crisis and we need everyone to be working collaboratively moving forward. Now is not the time to delay.

Economic development

Mr. Nolan Quinn: My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. In my riding of Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry, the city of Cornwall continues to be a hub for economic investment opportunities. Today, Cornwall is proudly home to one of our country’s largest and most advanced logistics and manufacturing operations. Many of our companies have succeeded in Canada and worldwide, but in order to remain competitive, our manufacturers and businesses need a government that works with them.

Will the minister please explain how our government supports manufacturers and businesses who are creating jobs in Cornwall and across our province?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Cornwall isn’t just a great place to live and work and raise a family, it’s one of the most competitive places to invest as well. In the last two years, $100 million has been invested there with help from our regional development programs. Biscuits Leclerc has an $80-million project creating 76 jobs with $1.5 million of our support. This is a sweet deal for Cornwall, for Hawkesbury and for Brockville. They’ll all see upgrades to their plants as they enter new markets.

We also supported Cornwall’s auto sector through an O-AMP investment for Morbern’s $429,000 project to implement Industry 4.0 technologies.

Speaker, this is how we’re supporting businesses in Cornwall.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Nolan Quinn: Thank you to the minister for his answer. Initiatives like the Regional Development Program and the Ontario Automotive Modernization Program are significant for businesses across Ontario as they contribute to our province’s economic prosperity.

It is long overdue that businesses in southwestern and eastern Ontario receive their fair share of support, and our government is stepping up and showing leadership.

I am proud of the entrepreneurial drive evident from the business community in my riding. Many individuals are ready and willing to work hard to create successful businesses.

Speaker, will the minister explain how our government is helping entrepreneurs in my riding start and grow their businesses?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: When our government got elected, we vowed to provide entrepreneurs with all they need to succeed. This meant eliminating mountains of the Liberals’ red tape. It meant fixing the Liberals’ unaffordable hydro and lowering taxes. Now, Speaker, entrepreneurship in Ontario is alive and well.

We support a network of Regional Innovation Centres, small business centres and Futurpreneur Canada.

In Cornwall, we fund the small business centre with almost $500,000 annually. We provide $85,000 for their Summer Company and their Starter Company Plus programs, and that helps students and young entrepreneurs turn ideas into businesses. And we provide almost $33,000 in Digital Transformation Grants; it went to local businesses to help them get their businesses online.

Speaker, this is just the start that entrepreneurs in Cornwall need to succeed.

Municipal development

Ms. Doly Begum: Speaker, the government’s own Housing Affordability Task Force outlined that “a shortage of land isn’t the cause of the” housing crisis. “Land is available, both inside the existing built-up areas and on undeveloped land outside greenbelts.”

At our emergency town hall on Bill 23 last week, we heard from community members and experts—including a member of the original task force that drew up the greenbelt plan—who shared how dismayed they are by the government’s undermining of the purpose of the greenbelt and its permanence. In fact, there is a designated whitebelt specifically for development and growth, Speaker, but this government still continues to target the greenbelt.

Despite all the evidence, and the fact that the Premier actually promised this province in 2018 that he wouldn’t do that, and the vehement opposition from experts, from housing advocates, from community leaders and much more, why is this government opening up the greenbelt for development?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thanks for the question. I’m going to start with the first part of her question, which was her meeting regarding the More Homes Built Faster Act.

That bill, which is making its way through the Legislature, if it passed, contains about 50 actions that the government has put forward to tackle our housing supply crisis, right from requiring an opportunity for gentle densification within urban and rural communities moving on to something that I think is very exciting, and that’s our attainable housing program that I’m working with the Minister of Infrastructure on.

The modifications are part of our commitment to Ontarians. We looked Ontarians in the face in the June election and said, “If you re-elect us, under the leadership of Premier Ford, we are going to move the Housing Supply Action Plan—in terms of policies, procedures, legislation—every year of a four-year term.” We’re acting on that.

As well, the member opposite knows that that Housing Affordability Task Force is our long-term road map that will help guide us with the other changes we’re going to make. It’s a very simple yet very transformative exercise—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Ms. Doly Begum: Speaker, destroying the greenbelt is not the answer. We know what happened after the Hurricane Hazel devastation and how it devastated our province. In fact, it was the provincial government that amended the act to enable conservation authorities to retain and regulate lands for the conservation and safety of our communities. It is not the answer.

But this minister wants to talk about housing? Let’s talk about housing. Popi, a young woman in my riding who escaped unimaginable domestic violence—almost died—has been waiting, has been struggling, actually, to breathe because she lives in a basement apartment where it’s hard for her to breathe. The doctors have said that she might actually need another surgery—she’s had multiple surgeries—because she lives in a basement apartment. She has been waiting for years for affordable housing. This is just one of the many stories of those who are waiting for affordable housing.

If this bill is actually about affordability, why isn’t there anything in this bill that specifically calls for building affordable housing for people like Popi and those who are waiting for affordable housing?

Hon. Steve Clark: Well, Popi should know that the billions of dollars we spent over the last four years on affordable housing—that that member and her party voted against it every single, solitary time.

I want to correct her record, Speaker. She talked about the greenbelt—and the proposal that we’re consulting with Ontarians right now would, in effect, add 2,000 acres to the greenbelt and would provide an opportunity to build a minimum of 50,000 homes. Why is that number appropriate? Well, it goes back to an answer that I gave earlier in question period. The best year in this province’s history—in over 30—was last year, when we had 100,000 starts; that is even higher than the 69,000 homes that were built, on average, per year for the last 30 years. So 50,000, at a minimum, is very important.

The proposal that we’re consulting on provides that opportunity but also an opportunity to grow the greenbelt by over 2,000 acres. It’s good public policy.

Skilled trades

Mr. Trevor Jones: Speaker, a recent 3M Canada survey shows that although 96% of Canadians believe that the country’s workforce needs more skilled trades workers, 76% also said they would never pursue a career in the skilled trades. This is worrisome news for Ontario. Skilled trades are vital for our economy.

Current projections show that by 2025 one in five new jobs in Ontario will be in the skilled trades. Our government must continue to act by addressing the ongoing labour shortage in the skilled trades.

Can the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development tell the House what our government is doing to get more people working in the trades?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I want to thank the member from Chatham-Kent–Leamington for his leader-ship in southwestern Ontario promoting the skilled trades.

Speaker, our government has an ambitious plan to build, working together with Ontario’s leading construction unions and builders.

Last week, I joined leaders representing 14 private sector unions from across our province, including Marc Arsenault, business manager for the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario, who represents over 150,000 hard-working tradespeople who are building our future. Alongside our Minister of Finance and the Solicitor General, we announced an additional $40 million for our Skills Development Fund. We’re expanding the fund to include training for high school students for the first time in Ontario history. We’re on a mission to get more young people into our skilled trades.

I’ll have more to share in our supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?

Mr. Trevor Jones: Thank you, Minister, for that response.

I am pleased that our government is making the necessary investments in our skilled trades system. That said, we must make sure that these good, meaningful jobs are within reach of everyone. Unfortunately, the apprenticeship process has lacked diversity, as demonstrated by the low percentage of apprentices from under-represented groups. A diverse workforce is an important asset for Ontario’s economy. Ensuring diversity is essential for many reasons, including promoting individuals’ different strengths and skills, which leads to better outcomes and problem-solving on the job site.

Can the minister please explain how the Skills Development Fund will provide opportunities for those wishing to pursue a career in the trades?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I want to thank the member again for this very important question.

Our Skills Development Fund is investing $3.5 million to support four building trades province-wide training initiatives. These programs will help nearly 2,000 young people launch rewarding careers in the skilled trades and put them on a path to union-sponsored apprenticeships. Training like this is how we’re preparing the next generation for six-figure salaries, delivering our ambitious infrastructure plans, including building 1.5 million homes by 2031. Within two years, we funded 388 training projects and trained nearly 400,000 workers for in-demand jobs across every sector.

Mr. Speaker, to build an Ontario that leaves no one behind, labour, government and business must work together. We need all hands on deck, and we’re not slowing down.

Land use planning

MPP Lise Vaugeois: My office has been overwhelmed with phone calls and emails from organizations and residents of Thunder Bay–Superior North expressing their deep concern at the environmental damage that Bill 23 will bring. I will read an excerpt from one of those constituents:

“By far the greatest and most significant threat facing Ontario today is the threat of climate change and loss of biodiversity. Sacrificing wetlands to provide more housing start locations is a very short-sighted solution to an immediate housing issue but will result in much more significant long-term impacts on the future of the Earth for us and for my children and my grandchildren.”

Will the Premier remove the parts of Bill 23 that undermine regional conservation authorities’ ability to protect wetlands needed for everyone’s survival in the face of climate change?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Bill 23 contains, as I said earlier in question period, about 50 initiatives that the government has put forward to really supplement our housing supply action plan. We went to Ontarians with a clear plan, that they accepted, to build 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. We’re implementing that plan with bills that we’ve already passed in this session, bills that are before the House, bills that will be debated today in the House and have been debated today in the House. All of those measures, put together, will help get shovels in the ground faster.

In terms of some of the issues that the member talked about, we believe we need to work collaboratively with conservation authorities. We believe that their work is of value and they should concentrate on those measures like flood mitigation, which really was part of the foundation of their creation originally. We think we can work collaboratively, ensure that those checks and balances are in place, but at the end of the day we’re in the middle of a crisis and we need to get shovels in the ground and build more housing.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Premier, recreating wetlands, which is one of the things you’ve offered with this additional 2,000 acres in a different area or watershed, is a little bit like cutting off an arm and saying, “Oh, don’t worry about it. I’ve got a spare arm over here. We’ll just use that one.” It doesn’t work. There’s no logic to it; there’s no science to it. At the same time, as you are removing the ability of conservation authorities and municipalities to manage the lands in their regions, you are downloading millions of dollars in costs to them and leaving them with legal liabilities should there be future problems with flooding or drinking water.

Bill 23 is a direct attack on the well-being of all communities for the short-term benefit of those who will profit from building where they should not build. I can tell you, the builders will be long gone when the consequences of these bad decisions come knocking.

Again, I ask: Will the Premier restore the ability of conservation authorities to fulfill their mandate to protect the integrity of local watersheds?

Hon. Steve Clark: I’ve already answered about the mandate, but I want to emphasize to this member and her party of no that we’re in the middle of a housing crisis. Too many Ontarians have lost hope in the dream of home ownership, and our government is going to restore that. We’re going to restore the hope that that young family—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Steve Clark: They can do their NIMBY chants all they want on that side of the House. They’ll continue to stand up and be the party of NIMBYism and BANANAism in the province. That’s what New Democrats are—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The official opposition, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: We’re going to continue, Speaker—regardless of their howls and their yells in the chamber—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Brampton North, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: —we’re going continue to stand up for seniors, for new Canadians and for young families that don’t have that—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Windsor West, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: We’re going to restore their hope. We’re going to get shovels in the ground faster, and we’re going to be successful in getting 1.5 million homes built over the next decade.

Land use planning

Mr. Stephen Blais: My question is for the Premier. The government has chosen and the Premier has chosen to flip-flop on their promise to allow over 7,000 hectares of the greenbelt to be developed, much of it high-quality farmland.

Now, Ontario is blessed with some of the best and most productive farmland in the world. In 2018, when this government was elected, the average weighted price of corn in Ontario was just about $197. This year, Mr. Speaker, it’s over $331; it’s a 67% increase. Soy has gone from $472 to $745—57%; barley from $244 to $390, a 63% increase. When you pave under farms, crop prices go up. That means higher prices at the grocery store—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government side, come to order.

Mr. Stephen Blais: It means higher bread prices, higher vegetable prices, higher prices for chicken and beef and milk.

Now, Mr. Speaker, Fordflation—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Just a second: I’m having difficulty, for some reason, hearing the member for Orléans’s question. It could be the physical distance; it could be some other factor. I need to be able to hear the member who has the floor.

Start the clock. The government House leader to reply.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, what an odd question for the member opposite [ inaudible ] party to pave over and to evict farmers from the greenbelt was the Liberal Party of Ontario. And they did it in my riding, Mr. Speaker. A family that had been farming for over 200 years was evicted so that they could create a park—a park that never opened. That is the legacy of the Liberal Party.

Now, he gets up in this House and talks about increasing costs of food. Well, how about those farmers who have a carbon tax that you support each and every day in this place? That is what is causing the price of food to go up. That is what is costing our farmers. We said it the day we got elected, didn’t we, colleagues? We said, “A carbon tax would cost the people of Ontario in everything they did.” We took the federal government to court. We asked them, “Join us to stop a carbon tax that will hurt our farmers, that will hurt people of the province of Ontario.” They laughed at it and instead supported their federal—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I remind the members to make their comments through the Chair.

The supplementary question.

Mr. Stephen Blais: Thanks, Mr. Speaker, and, of course, they didn’t stop at the greenbelt. The city of Ottawa recently added about 1,200 hectares to their urban boundary with a clear intent to provide lands for housing growth, while ensuring sensitive ag lands and those that were difficult to develop were not included.

The minister, after delaying for more than a year, has decided to add 50% more land to the boundary. He’s adding—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Stephen Blais: —207 hectares in Findlay Creek in the Carleton riding that were not recommended because of the lack of city infrastructure, and 65 hectares in Fernbank that were not recommended due to servicing problems, including the absence of road connections.

After delaying for a year, after driving up housing prices in Ottawa for a year, why does this minister feel that the residents of Findlay Creek and Greely and Stittsville should have to endure higher property taxes while sitting in gridlock because of the lack of infrastructure?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. I’m sure most members appreciate applause in the House when they say something, but not when it’s intended to deliberately interrupt or embarrass another member. Let’s stop doing that.

Start the clock. Minister of Municipal Affairs to reply.

Hon. Steve Clark: A lot to unpack, Speaker, on that, but I’ll try my best. First of all, on the greenbelt comment: Don’t take my word for it. I’ll just quote Charles Sousa, the former Liberal MPP for Mississauga South and finance minister under Kathleen Wynne, who’s a member of our greenbelt council: “‘I recognize the importance of the greenbelt,’ Sousa said, ‘but growth will be happening north and south of the greenbelt and we have to make sure it’s done right.’”

On his second comment regarding the city of Ottawa’s official plan, just like all official plans, we’re in the middle of a housing crisis. We have to ensure that those residents of Ottawa, including the ones that are represented by our exemplary member for Carleton, need to have that opportunity to realize the dream of home ownersh