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

November 20, 2025

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2025-Nov-20 (PDF)

L039 - Thu 20 Nov 2025 / Jeu 20 nov 2025

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 20 November 2025 Jeudi 20 novembre 2025

Orders of the Day

Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à lutter contre les retards et à construire plus rapidement

Members’ Statements

Community safety town hall

Public safety

Holiday messages

Water services

Indigenous rights

Matthew Galliford

Remembrance Day

Government investments

Tragedy in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound

Trans Day of Remembrance

Introduction of Visitors

House sittings

Question Period

Government accountability

Government accountability

Government accountability

Government accountability

Labour dispute

Autism services

School boards

Supportive housing

Government accountability

Indigenous economic development

Remembrance Day

Government accountability

Public safety

Housing

Trans Day of Remembrance

Business of the House

Notices of dissatisfaction

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Introduction of Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Standing Committee on Social Policy

Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy

Standing Committee on the Interior

Standing Committee on Justice Policy

Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs

Introduction of Government Bills

Buy Ontario Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à encourager à acheter ontarien

Introduction of Bills

Protecting Ontario from Urban Wildfires Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour protéger l’Ontario contre les feux non maîtrisés en milieu urbain

Pickering College Act, 2025

Christopher’s Law (Sex Offender Registry) Amendment Act (Information Disclosure), 2025 / Loi de 2025 modifiant la Loi Christopher sur le registre des délinquants sexuels (divulgation de renseignements)

Jarm Holdings Investments Ltd. Act, 2025

Holy Trinity Restaurant Inc. Act, 2025

Faris Team Mortgage Brokerage Corp. Act, 2025

Motions

Committee sittings

Petitions

Hospital parking fees

Environmental protection

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à lutter contre les retards et à construire plus rapidement

Private Members’ Public Business

Ontario Artificial Intelligence, Talent and Innovation Strategy Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur la stratégie ontarienne pour favoriser le talent et l’innovation dans le domaine de l’intelligence artificielle

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers / Prières.

Orders of the Day

Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à lutter contre les retards et à construire plus rapidement

MPP Hamid, on behalf of Mr. Flack, moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 60,

An Act to amend various Acts and to enact the Water and Wastewater Public Corporations Act, 2025 / Projet de loi 60, Loi modifiant diverses lois et édictant la Loi de 2025 sur les sociétés publiques de gestion de l’eau et des eaux usées.

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

Hon. Zee Hamid: Thank you, Speaker. I look forward to the debate. I’m going to be sharing my time with the member from Perth–Wellington.

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

MPP Catherine McKenney: Bill 60: If there was ever a bill that should not pass into law, this is one of them. It should not pass into law today—it should never. This bill is nothing more than a cruel scapegoating exercise disguised as housing policy, and it is this government admitting failure by attacking victims of that failure. It is this government pointing at renters—34% of Ontarians—saying, “You are the reason that we can’t build homes.”

Let’s go through the failure because the numbers actually don’t lie. Just days ago, CMHC released the latest housing start figures for Ontario. This government’s target is 150,000 new homes. The reality, through October this year: 49,678. That’s less than one third of their goal. They’re 100,000 homes short, with two months left in the year.

And what’s this government’s response? Blame the people in this province who rent. Attack tenants. Attack the protections that they have and make their evictions even faster and easier. So we can’t build enough homes, but we’re going to push more people out of homes. It’s incredulous. And the finance minister called the 1.5 million homes, by 2031 now, a soft target—soft as in we’re never really going to meet it.

Let me be crystal clear about what Bill 60 actually does—and people out there know it: It cuts tenant notice periods from 14 to seven days before a landlord can apply for eviction—cuts it in half; it slashes their appeal times from 30 days to 15 to challenge an unfair LTB decision—two weeks to find legal help, file paperwork and mount a defence before you lose your home; it silences tenants in non-payment hearings; it eliminates compensation requirements when corporate landlords claim they need that unit.

And the Attorney General said the quiet part out loud: They want to end evergreen month-to-month leases. They want corporate landlords to adjust tenancy arrangements based on market conditions. Market conditions is not housing policy. It is stock market policy. Do you not understand what housing does for people?

This government set a target of 1.5 million homes by 2031, and they are failing spectacularly. And now they claim that tenant protections are causing delays at the Landlord and Tenant Board. They claim these delays are discouraging investment in rental housing. But there is absolutely no data to support this—because if there was, we’d like to see it. Just bring it forward. Let us take a look. I’ve never seen a shred of evidence to support that kicking people out of their homes, that making tenant protections less will build more homes.

So do you know what this government does refuse to do? The right thing. And the right thing is legalizing fourplexes, ending exclusionary zoning, just like their expert said, and it is building non-market affordable housing. We used to do it in this province. We had no homelessness in this province. We stopped doing it, and homelessness has increased every single year, and it will continue to. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario has warned us. It will be 300,000 people in this province, that you represent, that this government represents, that will be homeless in a decade if we don’t do something serious. And this is not serious. This is going to accelerate that number.

Speaker, I implore this government to pull back Bill 60 and to do the right thing: build the housing, protect renters and end homelessness. It is not complex. I’ve got the plan. I’ll go over and I’ll share it with you.

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

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I’m pleased to rise in the chamber this morning to speak to Bill 60. Speaker, this bill includes a lot of details that in the time that I’ve got available will be pretty difficult to cover, actually.

It’s important to take a moment here, actually. I want to put this on the record: Almost all the legislation that will have significant impacts on the lives of Ontarians that are being jammed through time allocation, without any scrutiny of committee hearings—this is not normal. Yes, this was introduced less than a month ago, and here we are. It is following the route of so many bills in this Legislature put forward by the government: just pushed through without following the democratic process. We’d include a discussion at committee, opportunity for expert input and consultation and full debate.

Here we are now, which means that the government has just decided to shorten debate and discussion. And do you know in this particular one—I think this is what struck me the most about this bill: This actually touches on 18 pieces of legislation. These are substantial things that actually require some thought. You would think that it would make sense to actually appreciate and respect the consideration at committee.

But I also think it’s important to note that the government released this bill and, within 72 hours, found themselves walking back details that would limit tenant rights. Boy, did I ever hear from constituents quickly that weekend right after it was released. I had a steady stream of people at the community events in my riding seeking me out to be sure I knew their opinions. Subsequently, the government removed that section—as my colleague would say, for now—but it’s clear, as I continue to hear from constituents on that issue, that there’s little trust that the government will do the right thing. I’ll also come back to the Landlord and Tenant Board shortly.

The other thing I just wanted to note in this bill—and I look at everything that comes from the Minister of Housing with hope—is what was not included in this bill, which is a plan to address homelessness. Bill 28, the Homelessness Ends with Housing Act, which I continue to receive signed petitions coming from communities across Ontario advocating for—the most recent one was from St. Catharines. That bill was so basic. I think people are just looking to see it in legislation.

It asks the government to set a strategy and goals to end homelessness, measure progress against them and use evidence-informed ways, like housing-first approaches, that have worked in jurisdictions around the world. All the members of the Conservative caucus voted against that bill, and I thought just maybe we might have some ideas reappear in this huge Bill 60 from the housing minister, but it does not include anything on that plan. In fact, in many ways, putting rents at risk of increases only exacerbates the issue.

Now, as the critic for hospitals, mental health, addictions and homelessness, I have shared many times in this Legislature the need for action in this area. There are rising numbers relying on food banks, faced with the choice of paying their rent or putting food on the table; people with university and college degrees unemployed as the economy becomes more precarious—we know 60% of people who rely on food banks to feed themselves and their families are actually recent university and college grads—and the fact is that three out of five people—three out of five everyday people—are worried about losing their housing if their job situation were to change.

We see the symptoms of increased homelessness in our hospitals and our emergency departments—and this could have been an opportunity to include a strategy to get upstream. That’s what I hear from my constituents: How are we actually going to get upstream of this issue, prevent it, support those today who are living rough but also prevent further homelessness?

I wish that the government—and this is my request to my colleagues, even as you move to implement this bill: Could you please evaluate every housing policy with this lens: Will this help us reduce the chance that someone will lose their housing? Just have that as one of the other questions that you reflect on.

Affordability is a real concern, and it’s on the minds of so many people, not just those at the margins—those losing jobs as plants are closing—and it’s the government’s job to ensure that the policies that are advanced, especially now, don’t exacerbate the situation.

Now, I’m going to move on—because, again, there are so many pieces of legislation in this. There were two that were particularly relevant to my home riding of Etobicoke–Lakeshore, and those are the two schedules related to transit-oriented communities and to the GO Transit Station Funding Act. In the short time I have available, I want to make some comments on these sections.

The government has proposed changes to transit-oriented communities, and I believe it’s giving some relief to developers to not have to contribute to the public infrastructure, such as GO stations, until the time of occupancy, if I’m reading it correctly. They will establish an advisory committee to ensure that the agreements are finalized for the commitments to be made.

Now, how many of you have visited the Humber Bay areas in Etobicoke–Lakeshore? Have any of you seen that? Do you know the area that I’m talking about? It’s got lots of lots of condos. It’s beautiful to go walk by the lake. And you do see it when you drive into the city when you’re coming from the west. There’s an important set of lands there that have been completely redeveloped since I moved into the area 25 years ago. There’s a set of lands there in particular that went through a conversion from being used for commercial use to be used for residential use.

And in 2018, Metrolinx passed a motion that given all the density that was developing there, it met the bar that there should be a GO station in place at that Christie’s site. The building of the GO station was then negotiated by this government as part of the land conversion. Basically, that was, I think, 2019 when some of those decisions were passed. And they’ve been trying to reach an agreement on how to build the GO station since, and nothing has started. Many of the towers and condominiums have gone up. It’s a vibrant area. It’s completely congested.

And when you knock on any door down there during the election, you get only one question: When is the promised GO station going to get started? When are the shovels going to go in the ground?

I think it’s wrapped up in the issues that this bill attempts to address. I’m not sure establishing an advisory committee is going to be sufficient. I’m not sure having developers contribute to cover costs at the time of occupancy is sufficient. Now, if the government is going to be quite willing to make sure that there’s the full investment to see these things implemented in a timely way, perhaps there will be a model there. But I do think that developers should be contributing to the costs of infrastructure in our communities, and many municipalities are trying to negotiate that.

But I will say—and this relates to some other sections of this bill as well—the current theme for many is that the developers will reach an impasse with the city and their municipality, and then they go very quickly to the OLT, reverting back to original plans, ignoring what we were trying to get at in building out full communities, the visions that we’ve got locally. There’s so many examples in our riding of this happening right now. In fact, the development has moved so quickly without the ability for the infrastructure to keep up, especially in the area of Park Lawn GO, that now the city is actually going to be putting a pause on further development.

There was a promise of that station, and it hasn’t been delivered. I am in communications with the Minister of Infrastructure, the Minister of Transportation and his team about it, and I’m grateful that we’re doing that. I think it’s so critical for the constituents in this area, and we need to sort it out urgently. I care a lot about the issue, and I offer to work with the Ministers of Housing, Transportation and Infrastructure on it so that we can be sure that we get to a better place quickly. Should this bill pass, I’m really interested to understand how some of these changes are going to help to solve that issue for our community.

Now, there’s a few other interesting schedules in this bill that I’d also like to comment on. Those are the schedules related to banning green roofs in Toronto, prohibitions on lane reductions for biking. I hear from so many young people in our riding—in fact, if you can believe it, I get letters from grade 2 students on some of these issues. They are looking at what we’re doing and saying, doesn’t government see a future for us? Don’t they see a future in addressing climate change? Don’t they see a future in trying to build out communities that actually also promote a healthy lifestyle?

People are just looking for governments to be progressive on these issues. Surely, if cities such as beautiful Paris, centuries old, can figure out how to integrate the ability to cycle, we can figure it out for our cities in Ontario. So many countries have green roofs as part of how they’re creating cleaner cities. It’s a norm for them. In fact, I’ve been reading articles about this. It’s not just roofs, it’s walls etc. But, again, why are we so stuck in the dark ages, Speaker? I just don’t understand it.

I guess I would just say—this government talks a lot about congestion. I know why we have a lot of congestion in our city: We’ve allowed building to happen. We’ve allowed density to increase, and we’ve not kept up with the infrastructure that we need. Again, transit has—we look at some of the projects right here in Toronto. We’re celebrating the 15-year birthday for some of them yesterday here in this House—

Interjection.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Well, no, we started it, but you’ve had seven years to finish it, to the member opposite.

We’ve allowed the development, but we’ve not kept up with our roads, with our transit, with parking, and that’s why we’re jammed in our city streets. I would just like to ask the government to be a little bit more progressive on these issues.

I was also reminded once again—and I would love it if this government could actually give the same attention that they give to these issues that are so Toronto-focused. I don’t know how the members outside of Toronto actually stand for it. I was just in Oxford county last week, and as I talked to people out there, they were like, “Why is there such an obsession with decisions for Toronto by this Premier?” It’s a real issue for people in the rest of the province. Again, we see it in this bill. This is what you’re going to spend your time on.

Do you know what I’d really love for us to do? I talked about this with the fall economic statement. I would really love a government that gets up every day wanting our health care system to be successful, our schools to be successful, our post-secondary institutions to be successful, because that’s how we’ll strengthen our economy in the long run. I would love the same attention, but no, no, we get attention on these issues in these kinds of bills.

There’s another

schedule in this bill which addresses the Photo Card Act, actually. I was happy to see this in here. I’ve had a constituent in my riding who’s been talking about this issue quite a lot. I see both sides of this issue, which is needing to show some proof that you’ve got residency to be able to get the photo card from the government. On the one hand, this individual had had some terrible personal fraud against him, where somebody had stolen his ID, and I actually think that this change could help that individual.

On the flip side, I also hear the example that for those that currently don’t have a home this will only make it even more difficult for them to be able to get access to their ID. So I mostly wanted to point out both sides of this issue and make sure that as the government moves to consider implementation of it that they actually think this through and make sure that those that are looking to get back on their feet and might need the support that they need to get some basic ID are able to do it.

Now, in my final couple of minutes, I just wanted to come back to the Landlord and Tenant Board. There’s been a lot of discussion about this issue. I, too, like many of you, think I have heard both perspectives on the need to make sure that we can resolve issues more promptly. I’ve also heard comments in this chamber from others, but I also did want to quote the data around the way that the Landlord and Tenant Board is currently functioning. This is about returning to in-person hearings. As I understand it, many issues are resolved in the hallways at those hearings.

This is something that actually landlords want, it’s something that people that do leasing want, it’s something that tenants want. When you look at the current situation, right now, we know that more people should be able to have access to that through in-person hearings.

The other thing I would say is that we need to look at how we can reopen regional offices to support applicants before they file their documents and facilitate providing urgent documents to the public, such as eviction orders. There are many others that have concerns about how this is currently functioning: the real estate board, the Human Rights Commission, health care professionals, the United Way, the Ontario Real Estate Association, various municipalities, the Ontario Bar Association, the Canadian Bar Association, many not-for-profits, courts and tribunals. They all are interested in moving back to in-person hearings, and I would really, really request that the government consider that.

With that, I will end my time, as I know that my other colleagues have a lot of interest in talking about various aspects of this bill. If we’d had more time at committee, I would certainly have loved to explore further all the amendments that you’ve got, especially the ones that I talked about related to GO Transit and how that is being integrated with the development process. I’ll look forward to collaborating with you, if this were to pass, on how that can actually affect our own community.

Lastly, I will end with saying there’s a lot in here that’s going to affect renters; there’s a lot in here that’s going to affect every person in this province. So I would ask you, as you move to implementation, please consider the question that I posed to you, which is, how is the implementation of this policy going to help people to stay housed? That’s a critical question. If we start to do that, maybe I’ll see a little glimmer of hope around that strategy that I talked about to end homelessness. But that would help so many.

That would help the three in five people who are concerned that if their financial situation changes tomorrow, their housing goes. That’s pretty frightening for people. So I would just ask you, as you move to implementation, that you consider that question.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate? I recognize the member for Perth–Wellington.

Mr. Matthew Rae: Thank you, Speaker. It’s lovely to see you in the chair this morning, and it’s lovely to be able to finally rise this morning, colleagues, to talk about Bill 60, Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025.

Let me start by saying this bill marks the next step in our plan to protect Ontario’s economic strength by building homes, infrastructure and communities faster and at a lower cost. It builds on the momentum we set in the last legislative session earlier this year with Bill 17, the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act.

As this chamber knows, Bill 17 laid the groundwork. It established the foundation, and it made it clear that in a world defined by uncertainty Ontario would not sit idly by. Today, with Bill 60, we are building on that foundation. We’re strengthening it with practical, common-sense measures that reduce costs, remove delays and keep our province moving forward.

Speaker, we all understand that this is not business as usual in the province of Ontario, and across the province and across the country and the world, uncertainty is shaping every aspect of our economy in every sector. The housing market has felt the impacts of rising global construction costs, ongoing interest rate pressures and the kinds of approval delays that stretch projects into months and years beyond what is reasonable.

Families across Ontario feel the consequences, whether they are young people saving every month for their first-time home, seniors searching for a smaller, more manageable place to live, or workers who want to build a stable future closer to where they work. Builders are feeling it too. As timelines expand, costs rise, and the path from proposal to construction becomes far less predictable than it should be.

That is why our government continues to act. Standing still is not an option. Bill 17 was a crucial first step, and Bill 60 takes that work another step. It strengthens the foundations we have built. It sharpens the tools municipalities, builders, planners and workers rely on, and it moves us closer to a housing infrastructure delivery system that is efficient, fair, predictable and focused on results.

At its core, this bill is about protecting Ontario’s future by ensuring that we can build the homes, the infrastructure and the communities our growing population needs. It’s also about protecting opportunity, making sure workers stay on the job, ensuring families they can find a home that they can afford in the communities that they love and give the builders a clear, consistent path to move projects from concept to completion.

One of the driving factors behind this legislation is simple: It takes too long and costs too much to build in the province of Ontario. The minister says it often, and I will echo it now. We’ll continue to say it because it remains true. But we are changing that, Speaker. Bill 60 is built around a simple principle: Make it easier to build in Ontario—easier for builders, easier for families and easier for municipalities trying to plan for growth.

We are cutting costs, cutting timelines and cutting through layers of red tape that for far too long stood between good projects and the people who need them. Every delay adds costs. Every added cost prices someone out of the market. Every unnecessary barrier slows the progress Ontario needs down. That’s not acceptable at all. It’s not acceptable for our government and certainly not for the people of Ontario, who count on us every single day.

Housing affordability remains one of the defining challenges of our time. Families feel it every day. Young people trying to save feel it. Seniors trying to downsize feel it. Skilled workers who want to build homes, roads, bridges and water systems feel it when projects sit idle waiting for approvals.

That’s why this legislation continues in our mission to lower the cost of building homes. We’re tackling the policies and practices that inflate prices and slow down construction. We’re going to do what it takes to make sure that it is fair, practical and focused on results.

One of the clearest examples of this is municipal development charges. For years these charges have crept higher and higher, adding tens of thousands of dollars to the new price of a home. They were designed to fund real, necessary infrastructure such as roads, sewers and water systems. But too often they have become a catch-all tool that inflates project costs and ultimately pushes the price of home ownership up further and beyond the reach of many Ontarians and Canadians.

Bill 60 brings this back to reality. We’re ensuring that homebuyers pay only for the true cost of infrastructure that they use. It is common sense and it is fair. It protects Ontario’s homebuyers while ensuring municipalities can still fund the necessary infrastructure their communities rely on.

But the cost is only half the story. The other half is time. Time is money. Any builder will tell you that. Every month of delay keeps families waiting. Every layer of approval keeps workers idle, and every unnecessary requirement slows down growth. Bill 60 attacks these delays head-on, simplifying, streamlining and clearing the way for construction to move forward.

One example is communal water and waste water systems. In many rural, remote and smaller communities new housing has been held back by overlapping provincial and municipal approvals that slow projects down before the first shovel ever hits the ground. Bill 60 fixes this by aligning approvals and cutting unnecessary duplication. We’re empowering municipalities to unlock new development faster, expanding service and capacity and cutting months, sometimes years, off project timelines. This is how you build smarter. This is how you build to protect Ontario.

Speaker, these are not abstract policy shifts, these are practical, real-world improvements that will be felt in communities across Ontario. They’re the kind of changes that get shovels in the ground and homes built faster.

Another major innovation in this bill focuses on Peel region. We’re establishing a new publicly owned corporation to deliver water and waste water services across Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon. I would like to emphasize, Speaker, for my colleagues in the House the word “public” in that former statement.

I’ll be honest, Speaker and colleagues, I was rather shocked to hear the leader of the official opposition claim a municipally owned municipal service corp was privatization. This is false. This is laughably false. The word “public” appears in the title of the act. It’s disappointing, but not surprising. When you take common-sense ideas like municipal service corps that have the full support of every single municipality in Peel region, sometimes they need to grasp at straws, Speaker.

And now, let’s talk about what these actually do—

Interjections.

Mr. Matthew Rae: I know they’re heckling me right now, Speaker. But it’s funny: Every municipality I talk to is actually in favour of municipal service corps, because they help them unlock more infrastructure and build more infrastructure across Ontario. I think of York region, which has a potential build-out of $3 billion, just in York region alone. The potential for municipal service corps to help them raise the capital and fund these projects is something they’re excited about and communities across Ontario are excited about.

This model reflects the essence of what Bill 60 is about: smarter governance, clearer accountability and more efficient service delivery. It protects public ownership while improving performance, saving money and enabling more homes to be built, because you are getting pipes in the ground, which leads to toilets in homes, which leads to occupancy permits for those young families. It protects public ownership while improving performance, saving money and, again, enabling more homes to be built. It strengthens local decision-making. It improves financial stability.

It ensures growth can continue without pushing excessive costs onto builders, homeowners or families already stretching their budgets to the limit.

This is innovation with purpose, a new approach that each region can look to as well. It demonstrates how smart collaboration and public ownership can work hand in hand to deliver better, faster, more affordable results.

Bill 60 also builds on the success of Bill 17’s zoning reforms, including changes to the expanded as-of-right minor variances. For too long, builders seeking to implement simple, low-impact adjustments—for example, slight height changes, setback modifications or small additions—have been caught in long and costly approvals. These delays benefit no one. Under Bill 60, we are creating a clear, streamlined process for these minor variances. Builders will move forward faster, municipalities can focus their resources on high-impact decisions and families will be able to move into their homes sooner.

Another issue we are confronting directly is the growing use of municipal site plan controls to require—I would phrase it as Cadillac-level boutique—design demands that go far beyond what is necessary for safety. These burdens have added costs and confusion for home builders at the worst possible time. Ontario families are already dealing with high interest rates and record construction costs. Now is not the time to pile on excessive design mandates that serve no real purpose to the structure of the home that the builder is building.

Through Bill 60, we are bringing fairness and consistency back into the planning process. We continue to enforce one clear provincial standard that ensures safety and quality, while removing unnecessary expensive requirements, restoring balance. It protects families from inflated housing costs and protects builders’ ability to deliver homes. This is what protecting Ontario looks like: standing up for fairness, efficiency and opportunity.

We are committed to ensuring the system works for the people that it is supposed to serve. That is why our government is launching a full section-by-section review of Ontario’s building code. We are identifying outdated, redundant or confusing provisions that are increasing the costs without meaningfully improving safety. Since coming into the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing as parliamentary assistant, I know I have dealt a lot with the building code—a very large document, sometimes not a very exciting document, but a very important document for our province.

What I found through that work with the building code officials of Ontario and the ministry is how high of a standard Ontario already has around its building code. Many other provinces look to Ontario to see what we have implemented around structural design, as well, ensuring that it is the top in North America, I would argue, in some instances, and ensuring that other provinces are following Ontario’s lead.

But we can do better, as the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has said many times in this place. We will continue to work to ensure that we’re fixing what does not work and ensuring that we’re supporting what does work, maintaining Ontario’s high standards in our building code. This modernization will ensure that every regulation in the building code serves a real purpose, not a process, because every day saved in approvals is a day closer a family can move into their new home sooner, and every dollar saved in an unnecessary requirement is a dollar that stays in the pockets of hard-working Ontarians.

Bill 60 represents more than a set of reforms; it represents a cultural shift. For too long, Ontario has been hampered by a mindset they equates process with progress. That era is over. We are building a culture of growth, one grounded in accountability, transparency and results; a culture where municipalities, builders and the province work together, not at cross-purposes; a culture where rules are clear, approvals are efficient and everyone is pulling in the same distribution.

This work is not easy, but it is necessary, because Ontario can no longer afford to wait. Every delay costs jobs, homes and opportunity. Through Bill 60, we are changing the way Ontario plans, the way Ontario builds and the way the government delivers. We’re doing it for families, for workers, for communities and for the next generation who deserve the same opportunity to own a home that their parents and grandparents have had.

Ontario faces real changes, from rising costs to an aging infrastructure, from global economic pressures to a growing demand for housing and community services, but these challenges are not insurmountable. The Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, is part of the plan to meet them head-on to protect Ontario’s economy, workers and communities. It builds directly on the foundations of Bill 17—it reduces costs, it streamlines approvals, it modernizes building rules and it ensures every dollar and every day saved can go into building homes faster.

Under Premier Ford’s leadership, our government is delivering results. We’re protecting Ontario, driving economic growth and keeping the dream of home ownership alive, from downtown Toronto to rural communities in my riding of Perth–Wellington. This plan is rooted in common sense—it’s practical, it’s responsible and it’s built to deliver. That’s why I am proud to support Bill 60, and I encourage every member of this chamber to stand with Ontario’s workers, builders and families, and support this vital piece of legislation.

I’m proud to stand with a government that continues to invest in Ontario and continues to put forward legislation that will build Ontario and build the future that we all want to see for our great province. Yes, as I had mentioned, these challenges are great, but they are not insurmountable, and we are going to do the hard work to ensure that we continue to build for tomorrow and the next generation, to ensure that young Canadians and young Ontarians can realize the dream of home ownership.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

M me France Gélinas: I’m happy to say a few words about Bill 60, Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act. Let me tell you what “fighting delays” means in northern Ontario: Not a day goes by that we don’t see those ads on television, “Come to the Ring of Fire” and “the mining” and “the way of the future,” and all this. I can tell you that people in northern Ontario, we all laugh out loud when we see those.

Do you know what “building faster, fighting delays” means? A mine opened up across the street from Gogama. It’s called Iamgold. It’s a gold mine. I worked with the developers for 12 years to go through the permitting and all of this; I worked with a lot of ministers to get this mine to finally open. During that same period of time that a mine was able to go through all of the permitting and open and pour their first bar of gold and all of this, I also worked with the ministry that owns a whole bunch of houses in Gogama across the street from the mine.

The homes in Gogama—Gogama is an unorganized area, like many in my riding; if a house gets abandoned, the government owns it. The government owns those homes, they maintain them—they cut the grass, they trim the trees, they shovel in the winter, they keep them warm, the whole thing. During those 12 years, the government has put zero of them up for sale. There is a lineup of people and of contractors who want a place to stay. The government owns homes that they pay to maintain every single year, but they have to do due process.

Due process to put a $200,000 home has taken more than 12 years, seven of them of this government—to whom I write every six months, to all of their ministers, to say, “Put those homes up for sale.” I get the same standard letter every single time: “We are working on it. We have to do due process.” Due process has taken this government seven years to put a $200,000 home on the market—and it’s not done. The last letter I got said it will be done by December 31 this year. I will believe it when I see it.

So when I see a bill coming forward that says “fighting delays, building faster,” I’m thinking, do you know that northern Ontario exists? Do you know that when you open a mine, there are actual people who live there? People need a place to sleep. They need a place for their kids to go to school. None of that seems to matter to them.

“Building faster”—I can tell you that the forestry industry was quite interested in building faster. We have some of the best wood, in northern Ontario, provided by our forestry industry. We kind of expected to say, “Buy Ontario. Make sure that those new homes that get built faster will use timber from northern Ontario”—none of that. When the NDP tried to put a motion forward to say, “When Ontario spends money, we will make sure that it spends it on Ontario products and services,” the Conservatives voted that down.

So how could we have a bill that says “fighting delays, building faster”? How can we have all those ads on TV saying that the Ring of Fire is the future of Ontario, when basic things—I talked about Gogama. A mine just opened up across the street from Foleyet. The same thing is going on—homes in Foleyet that are owned by the government. How many more decades will it take to put those homes up for sale? I don’t know. But this is not fighting delays. This is not helping the people who need it.

Then, I go to

schedule 12 of the bill. The Ombudsman of Ontario, in 2023, issued their report. The report noted that the dysfunction within the Landlord and Tenant Board was caused by the Ford government, which first refused to appoint adjudicators to the board and then appointed unqualified people. Hearings that once were scheduled within days, prior to 2018, now take months and even years to be heard. This dysfunction and delay has everything to do with the Ford government; it has nothing to do with tenants having too many rights.

Do you know what that means for northern Ontario? You know where everybody has to come and go to work—you’re not allowed to work from home. People who do home care in my community are an hour’s drive away from the office—have to drive an hour to the office, to be in the office. Although they serve an area of my riding that is an hour away from the office, they still have to drive to work. But the landlord and tenant act does not have to be in person. In northern Ontario, where I represent, there is no good Internet; there is no cell service. People have to have their hearings over the Internet. That doesn’t work.

Yet, this is what the government thinks that building faster needs—I don’t agree.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Mr. Adil Shamji: Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to elaborate on Bill 60, the so-called Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025.

I’ll begin my remarks by reflecting on something that the member for Perth–Wellington said. He mentioned—and obviously, I’m paraphrasing—that Bill 60 is this government’s way of tangibly protecting Ontario. How can we say that Bill 60 is about protecting Ontario when this government has not even allowed us the opportunity to stand up for Ontario on this piece of legislation? This legislation has been time-allocated. What should be six and a half hours of debate this morning and over the next few days has been reduced to two hours. This debate was called with only 12 hours’ notice. This debate will terminate without a single public hearing taking place.

How can you proclaim that you’re here to protect Ontario when you don’t even take the opportunity to listen to Ontario, to hear what they have to say in committee proceedings or to hear what the elected officials who represent Ontario have to say about it in a meaningful manner?

But let’s take the time allocation piece out of this altogether. How can Bill 60 be about protecting Ontario when it is the latest in a series of bills that have done nothing but actually neglect Ontario? For a government that says it’s going to protect this province, its record on housing shows exactly the opposite. We face rampant homelessness, encampments; we face tenants who are being inappropriately evicted, renovicted, demovicted. This legislation does nothing to address that—10 pieces of housing legislation to this point, usually each one reversing something that was in the bill previously.

But let’s actually give this legislation more than a cursory review.

In my office, we see the human toll of this government’s short-sighted perspective on housing every single day. I see constituents who are struggling with housing affordability. We see people struggling with access to jobs and even being able to access basic necessities like food. That’s an important thing to comment on, because the number one expense on people’s monthly paycheque or biweekly paycheque is their cost of housing. When rent is too high, when the cost of homes is too high, it makes it impossible for them to be able to afford literally anything else.

Against that backdrop, we have health care access being insufficient and Ontarians being asked to pay for more medically necessary care—almost always with their credit card and not their OHIP card. And, of course, the housing crisis continues to escalate.

We face a crisis that is affecting both renters and landlords, and yet this government has an opportunity with Bill 60 to do something about it and is ignoring the meaningful lasting solutions that could actually make a difference.

Ontario has the worst home building performance in all of Canada, with a double-digit decline in housing starts this year—the only province in our entire Confederation to be in this exact situation. Other provinces are building more while Ontario alone is building fewer homes. Prices are wildly out of reach, and we’re seeing the consequences of that play out in real time: people who are living on the streets, especially as temperatures are dropping and we approach the winter season; encampments, which this government loves to complain about but is the reason for which they exist.

We are seeing a loss of productivity, with young people leaving the province because they have no hope of being able to put down their roots here where they grew up. And, of course, it doesn’t help that we have the worst youth unemployment in the entire country as well.

We’re even seeing the situation deteriorate to the point where it’s impacting our health care system, where hospitals in some cases are being forced into the business of development because that is the only way that they can hope to attract health care workers to work in their institutions.

Ontario’s housing failures are dragging down the rest of the country. While Canada builds 4% more homes than last year, Ontario’s double-digit decline is stopping Canada from achieving substantially better growth. Cities like Guelph, Peterborough, London, Oshawa, Windsor and Toronto are amongst the lowest-performing urban areas in the country. Now, if it was a single urban centre in our province, there’s an argument to be made that it could be blamed on the municipality. But when it is ubiquitous amongst our large municipalities, then that is a failure of leadership by the provincial government.

We once heard this government crow about the fact they would build 1.5 million homes by 2031. They don’t like to say that anymore. When I questioned the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing last week in committee, he said, “I don’t like to focus on numbers.” Well, the reason I focused on numbers is this government introduced the numbers. They promised the numbers. And now that they can’t even come close to delivering on those numbers, they’re not interested in that anymore. They’re not interested in that anymore because they don’t know how to get there. They don’t know how to get even close to there.

They know that Bill 60, while they will brand it as ambitious, record breaking, incredible, the solution that Ontario needs—they know it won’t even get us close. In fact, it will only set us back.

To briefly address the substance of this bill: It attempts to do a number of things, such as reducing building code burdens, streamlining municipal applications, modifying development charges and eliminating requirements like green roofs. It introduces measures on transit-oriented communities, as-of-right zoning, ministerial zoning orders and infrastructure.

But I will remind you, not a single one of those things gets us to one and a half million homes, and, certainly, not a single one of those things guarantees one and a half million homes. Instead, it talks about speed, ignores accountability and undermines sustainability and planning standards.

So let’s look at the Landlord and Tenant Board for example, where all members in this House can agree this is a major problem impacting both landlords and tenants. This bill focuses almost exclusively on landlords, reducing eviction review periods from 30 to 15 days, shortening rent arrears notice periods and increasing ways to discriminate against renters.

Now, no one will deny—in fact, those of us on this side of the House have been screaming from the rooftops—that the delays at the Landlord and Tenant Board need to be addressed. But this bill does not have the substantive changes that will actually reduce those backlogs, and certainly not in a way that is fair to both parties.

Given the opportunity, this government could, for example, bring back in-person Landlord and Tenant Board hearings, allowing many conflicts to be addressed in the corridors before the hearing actually happens, dramatically reducing the backlog and allowing things to happen using approaches that are solved by collaboration as opposed to penalization. Under this legislation, good-faith tenants risk eviction for being a day late on rent. Let’s remember that we face an unprecedented affordability crisis where that can happen to anyone.

Now, I’m not talking about standing up for bad-faith tenants, those professional tenants that take advantage of good-faith landlords, but for the ones who are really struggling. If anyone has ever missed a bill of any kind—a cellphone bill, a credit card bill—by even a day, you know that you can be well-intentioned and still make a mistake. This government has nothing for those good-faith individuals.

This certainly impacts people in communities like mine, in Flemingdon Park. My community has already been attacked by this government in their ability to access basic things like photo ID cards and drivers’ licences. This government gave millions of dollars to a foreign big box company, Staples, so that they could open ServiceOntario locations while closing mom-and-pop independent ServiceOntario centres, like the one that is in Flemingdon Park, where it is desperately needed.

Now people in my community have to travel very far away, and then be forced to walk through a store, be invited to purchase things and be subject to advertising that, in short, this government is basically subsidizing—only to get, by the way, inferior-quality service.

There are many other elements of this legislation that are deeply concerning, but, in the interest of time and leaving some time for one of my fellow colleagues, I leave it at that.

In short, what I want to say is that this legislation fails to address the magnitude of Ontario’s housing crisis. It offers incremental and partial measures while ignoring the fundamental solutions needed to build homes, protect tenants and ensure fair access to housing. Our constituents deserve more than endless promises that really amount to nothing. They deserve more than half measures, more than the threat of losing rent protections. Ontarians deserve real, ambitious and transformative action to solve the housing crisis, and with Bill 60, they are not getting that.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Hon. Graydon Smith: It’s great to see everyone this morning, and it’s my privilege to speak to you all today in support of the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, to offer insight into how Bill 60, if passed, will strengthen our province’s approach to housing, infrastructure and environmental stewardship while ensuring Ontario grows in a responsible and sustainable way.

This bill arrives at a moment when communities across Ontario, large and small, are asking for clarity, consistency and a planning system that reflects the realities of today’s housing pressures. Families are feeling the impacts of high interest rates, rising construction costs and limited supply. Municipalities are feeling stretched, and too many good projects are getting stuck behind outdated processes that slow progress without improving outcomes.

Bill 60 builds on the work we’ve already done as a government, modernizing planning frameworks, cutting red tape and tackling long-standing barriers that prevent homes from being built. This bill helps deal with challenges faced by rural and northern communities too, ensuring they’re not left behind as Ontario grows.

As I’ve said many times in this chamber before, I’ve served as a mayor, I’ve served as a councillor, and I’ve served on regional government. I’ve seen first-hand how what the province does—the tools that are provided to municipalities and the direction provided to municipalities—can play a real, enormous

part in the outcomes for those municipalities.

For larger cities, the focus is often on housing supply, but for rural communities like the one I represented as a mayor and the one I represent now in Parry Sound–Muskoka, those barriers are different. Growth is often held back not because of a lack of demand, but because of the limits of local infrastructure, long approval timelines and red tape that slows even the smallest projects. That’s why this bill matters so much. Bill 60 gives our smaller towns and villages the tools to thrive.

When you represent communities like Rosseau or Sundridge or Huntsville or MacTier or Gravenhurst and the dozens of lake-based villages that make Parry Sound–Muskoka what it is, you quickly learn that a one-size-fits-all approach to rules designed for Toronto simply doesn’t work in rural Ontario. Small municipalities have small staff teams. The planner, maybe they’re also the bylaw officer; public works might be a team of four people; and a committee delay of a couple of months doesn’t just postpone a project, it can push construction past that very, very short northern building season and delay it maybe up to an entire year.

I’ve met young families who want to stay, seniors who want to downsize and small builders ready to put shovels in the ground, but they all face the same barriers: long servicing timelines and outdated approval processes and requirements that make sense in the GTA, but as I said, often don’t reflect those rural conditions.

Bill 60 recognizes those realities and respects the unique character of rural Ontario by giving communities the flexibility, the tools and the certainty that they’ve been asking for.

Speaker, one of the most important reforms for ridings like mine is a focus on communal water and waste water systems. In many underserviced areas, new homes can’t be built; just existing, full municipal servicing is too costly and oftentimes completely unrealistic.

But if passed, this legislation will streamline the approval processes for communal systems—professionally managed, safe water and waste water systems that can be built where centralized infrastructure doesn’t exist. It cuts duplication, creates clarity and unlocks new opportunities for development, while still maintaining Ontario’s high standards for health and environmental protection.

For rural communities, this means projects don’t have to stop at the edge of the serviced boundary. It means growth can happen in those villages and hamlets and smaller towns where families have lived and want to live. Speaker, this bill, if passed, will change the trajectory of growth in my riding, in Parry Sound–Muskoka.

In many communities across Ontario, we often see smaller-scale housing proposals facing uncertainty, simply because servicing options are limited or, again, so prohibitively expensive to extend that it really makes it impossible. These constraints have long been a barrier to rural growth. Across my riding, land isn’t the issue. There is a lot of land. There’s a lot of opportunity. Demand isn’t the issue. There’s a huge amount of demand. The barrier has always been infrastructure.

Places like Humphrey, Seguin township, Ryerson, or cottage-area rural clusters simply can’t support large extensions of municipal pipes. Communal systems provide a safe, modern and environmentally responsible alternative that fits those rural conditions. They’re engineered, professionally operated and subject to rigorous oversight—something far safer and more scalable than decades-old septic systems serving multiple units.

These reforms mean opportunities for workforce housing near tourism corridors, for year-round rentals in communities dominated by seasonal cottages and for enabling that “missing middle” that rural Ontario needs. It could mean a cluster of townhomes or a small multiplex and attainable starter homes. Speaker, this is about fairness. It’s for families that want to build their lives in ridings like mine, in Parry Sound–Muskoka. It shouldn’t be limited by whether a pipe extends a mile down the road. With Bill 60, responsible growth becomes possible in places where it has never been feasible.

I can tell you a brief story. During my time as mayor, actually, one of the first things that came up was an older resort on one of our many precious lakes that its time had kind of come and gone as a resort. The infrastructure wasn’t great anymore; the buildings weren’t great anymore. But the property was certainly something that could be turned into a real gem.

And an owner had purchased that property and realized that and had begun discussions with the town and the district of Muskoka at that time on his vision—their vision of what they could do to create homes, drive economic growth and make good things happen in an area that was located not far from the centre of our community but one, again, that was kind of ripe for this type of development.

And those discussions went on and on and on and, ultimately, went nowhere because the rules and regulations in place by the district and what they felt they were allowed to do were just too punitive, too prescriptive and too limiting to allow this proposal to get off the ground.

Because the suggestion at the time wasn’t, “Well, yes, why don’t we take the opportunity of a small communal system that will allow this to happen and service a number of units and service the economic growth components of this project?” It was, “Well, what you really need to do is either build an entire plant to the same standard that was servicing the rest of the municipality and put the pipes in the ground. And oh, by the way, thank you for carrying the cost of that entire plant—and you can pay 100% securities for that entire plant that we will hold in perpetuity in case something goes wrong.”

Speaker, there’s a better way. This type of system would have facilitated that, and today, we could have been looking at more homes and an economic generator in that part of our community. After many years, what the result came to be was a few nice cottage lots got created on traditional water and septic. That’s fine, that’s great, but it could have been so much more. So the approach to communal services and the ability to implement that as a solution is incredibly important.

Another reform that will make a real difference in rural Ontario is allowing certain minor variances as of right. Too often, small adjustments like an extra foot of lot coverage or a very modest change in height or even building a simple shed and its placement on a lot require homeowners and builders to appear before municipal committees. That time needs to be scheduled. Those resources need to be put into preparing reports, getting ready, spending time and spending money.

But, Speaker, these are low-impact changes. They don’t affect neighbours; they don’t harm the environment; they don’t alter the character of the community.

Bill 60, if passed, would remove that red tape. If a proposal meets some very clear criteria—again, if it’s a minor adjustment or a minor variance, we can think of it like that—it can move ahead automatically. No need to get the committee together, no need to write a bunch of reports, no need for somebody to pay their planner because something needs to be six inches to the left or six inches to the right—just simple, effective, red tape reduction that allows homeowners and home builders to get the work done that they do every day in an easy and sensible way.

I’ve talked about that building season in northern and rural communities; it’s short. The last thing you want to do is waste a bunch of time and money on a minor variance where, ultimately, if that doesn’t get done in time, well, maybe you lose a whole season again. We all know that when we lose time, we lose money, and when we lose money, somebody has to bear the cost of that—that’s the homeowner, the home builder, the homebuyer.

These are not major planning decisions. These are everyday, common-sense improvements that shouldn’t require a committee hearing, extra studies or thousands of dollars in fees. Rural councils, many of them, have part-time members and, as I said, limited administrative support, so they benefit enormously from reduced committee loads. You’re freeing them up, not having to do the work of the tiny, tiny stuff—the stuff that doesn’t really make a difference to the municipality in one way or another. That time can be better used elsewhere. Those resources can be better used elsewhere.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member, but unfortunately, it is now time for members’ statements.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Community safety town hall

MPP Silvia Gualtieri: It has been a very special month for me both personally and in the community. I’m overjoyed to share that I became a grandma for the fourth time. We welcomed a beautiful baby girl, Amelia Valentina, and my heart is full.

I am also so proud to share that this month, my constituency office hosted our second community safety town hall. This session, anchored by Peel Regional Police, focused on helping families stay protected from emerging crime trends. I’m pleased to report that more than 100 residents joined us for this important conversation.

We were joined by an exceptional team from the Peel Regional Police, including superintendent Joy Edwards and officers from 12 Division, crime prevention services, and the community intervention and response team. Residents truly appreciated hearing directly from front-line experts who keep our neighbourhoods safe every day.

My constituency office team is here today, and I want to give them a shout-out for putting on another great show: Dianne Lawson, Leslie Silvestri, Saurabh Kapoor, Moazzam Reza and the newest member of our team, Joseph Pillegi. Thank you for your unwavering—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Members’ statements?

Public safety

Mr. Jeff Burch: Earlier this year I wrote to this government offering to work together on improving community safety following a brutal sexual assault in our community of Welland that left families, parents and residents horrified.

Today, I am again calling for action to address the systemic failures that continue to put public safety at risk. We should strengthen the Ontario Sex Offender Registry by enhancing tools like Christopher’s Law to improve the monitoring and tracking of known offenders.

The Attorney General of Ontario has the authority to issue prosecution guidelines. The government must use this power to strengthen bail and sentencing practices for violent offences, ensuring that public safety remains the top priority.

We must end court delays and expedite proceedings so that dangerous sex offenders and violent criminals are not released due to procedural backlogs or prosecution delays. This province needs to hire more crown attorneys, many of whom are already facing overwhelming caseloads that slow down justice and increase the risk of serious cases being dismissed or mishandled.

Additionally, we should hire more court staff and increase compensation to attract and retain qualified personnel, so that courtrooms can operate at full capacity. The province must complete long-overdue courtroom repairs, consider reopening shuttered courthouses and invest in new facilities where infrastructure is lacking.

This is not a partisan issue. It’s a matter of safety, justice and moral responsibility. We cannot allow bureaucracy, underfunding—

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

Holiday messages

Mr. Adil Shamji: I would like to wish everyone in Don Valley East and across Ontario a joyful Christmas filled with peace, gratitude and time with loved ones.

May this season bring hope, kindness, and renewal to every family and community across our province.

As we welcome the new year, may 2026 bring renewed energy, good health and meaningful opportunities. I hope the months ahead strengthen our communities and inspire hope, progress and connection across our province.

This Hanukkah, let the lights guide us towards hope, joy and togetherness, celebrating resilience and community across Ontario.

Over this holiday season, I want to make special mention of the many health care workers, first responders and essential personnel who will remain on duty so that families in Ontario can rest and come together over the holidays. Thank you for your tireless service and sacrifices so that our community can stay safe and healthy.

Across Don Valley East, many of my constituents worry about crime and safety. For some, they’re concerned about whether they will get help in a timely manner if they call 911. They worry that ambulances are literally getting stuck in traffic caused by Ontario Line congestion. They want to know how police can respond to increasing violent crime, especially now that officers have to spend more time keeping children safe in front of schools because automated speed enforcement has been banned.

This Christmas, many of them are hoping—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Members’ statements?

Water services

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: As I reflect on the meaningful work that we do as individual members in this House, bringing forward private members’ bills and motions are important initiatives. I know we all put tremendous thought, research, consultation and collaboration into what we bring forward because we understand that opportunities are limited, the process can be challenging and the outcomes are never guaranteed. We want these initiatives to be impactful, to make life better for people in a real and positive way.

This is why I am thrilled with the results coming out of my private member’s motion this week calling on the government to adopt modernized measures to streamline the development of communal water and waste water systems, an initiative aimed at unleashing innovative building solutions in small and rural communities, including in York region, while protecting our environment.

Speaker, I am incredibly humbled that every single member of this Legislature voted unanimously in support of this motion. Imagine, it just took a little waste water to bring us all together. With the utmost sincerity, thank you to every single member for your engagement and your support. We are protecting and building a stronger Ontario.

Indigenous rights

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: ᒥᓄᑭᔐᐸᔭ

I saw a lot of families out on the land this fall. For families across Kiiwetinoong, hunting is a way of life, and it’s an important source of food. The people of Kiiwetinoong understand how to live on the land. The land is where the teachings are, the land is where the history is, the land is where the languages are learned. It’s where the identity comes from. Hunting is one of our inherent rights, given to us by the Creator, and it is part of our treaty rights. These rights and the land must be protected. We uphold these rights through our traditional hunting and fishing practices. Going on the land is part of who we are.

Growing up, I spent a lot of my time out on the land—until I had to go to high school—hunting, fishing, trapping, learning my language, the history and the teachings. I continue the ways of life, passing them down through my children, grandchildren and the next generation, and to learn the way of the land.

It is vital that our ways of life are respected and that our treaty rights are upheld.

Matthew Galliford

Mr. Joseph Racinsky: Today I rise to recognize a great man that was taken from us far too soon. Matthew Galliford, the incredible Downtown Acton BIA coordinator, passed away suddenly on October 31, 2025, at the far-too-young age of 50.

Speaker, this was a terrible shock for our entire community. Matt was a community champion. From the Acton Outdoor Market to the Leathertown festival, Matt played a critical

part in making these important events a great success. Matt loved Acton, and Acton loved him.

He led the downtown BIA with passion and kindness, and it thrived under his leadership. From new Christmas lights to cleaning up graffiti, Matt took pride in making Acton beautiful. Many people have described Matt as Acton’s biggest cheerleader, and that’s absolutely true. Wherever you went in Acton, Matt was there, and he and I spoke regularly. In fact, he shared some information with me regarding an event in Acton just two days before he passed away.

I always appreciated his advice and counsel regarding what was important to the Acton community. I will truly miss this great man and Acton hero.

To quote an Acton resident, “Matt’s passion for Acton was like no other.”

To Matt’s wife, Lorie; his parents, Marianne and Gord; his sister, Diana; and niece, Leah: We are here for you. The community that Matt gave so much to is here for you. Acton has lost its biggest cheerleader and champion. He will be dearly missed.

Remembrance Day

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I am proud to be a co-sponsor of the Remembrance Day Observance Act, and I thank the member from St. Catharines for her leadership on this bill.

Our bill will ensure that Remembrance Day is honoured with the proper dignity and respect it deserves in every school across our great province, and it will grant workers everywhere the time to attend a ceremony to pay their respects to our veterans. Our freedom, our democracy and our way of life would not be possible were it not for our veterans and those who stand on guard for us today and especially those who paid the ultimate sacrifice, giving up their lives so we could continue to live ours in freedom.

We must develop our curriculum to best teach our students about the history and sacrifices of our veterans and instill within our young ones the principles of honour, duty, courage and sacrifice that our heroes signify, lest we forget. They must know that freedom came at a price paid by others, and that it must be respected and protected, or that great sacrifice was made in vain.

I urge the government to join us and pass this bill so we can ensure that everyone has the opportunity to pause, reflect and honour the sacrifices that our soldiers, veterans and their families made to secure the freedom we cherish today.

Government investments

Mr. Andrew Dowie: Every day, thousands of drivers travel through Windsor–Tecumseh’s busiest intersections along Banwell Road, areas long plagued by traffic jams, delays and safety concerns. That’s about to change. In just two years, the Banwell Road corridor will be completely transformed thanks to major provincial investments delivered under the leadership of Premier Ford, Minister Sarkaria and Minister Surma.

This support unlocks the full potential of this growing part of our community and eliminates some of the biggest traffic bottlenecks in our city. Our government is providing $68.8 million to the city of Windsor for game-changing upgrades, including a brand new overpass to the EC Row Expressway and widening Banwell Road from a narrow two-lane route into a modern multi-lane urban arterial.

The project also includes new water mains, storm sewers, lighting and a multi-use trail, critical infrastructure that will help make 3,030 new homes possible through the Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program.

And we’re not stopping there. Ontario is investing $15.1 million in the Tecumseh hamlet area, just east of Banwell Road, through the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund that adds 1.8 kilometres of trunk water main and 1.7 kilometres of sewer capacity, unlocking room for 4,059 homes in the town of Tecumseh.

These investments will cut congestion, improve safety and support long-term growth, strengthening the transportation and transit options families rely on every day.

Thank you to Mayor Dilkens, Windsor city council, Mayor McNamara and Tecumseh town council for driving these projects forward.

Tragedy in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound

MPP Paul Vickers: I rise today to pay tribute to the victims of a tragedy in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound. On November 11, around the noon hour, three students from John Diefenbaker secondary school in Hanover tragically lost their lives in a single-vehicle accident in West Grey. One other was airlifted to hospital and has since been upgraded to stable condition.

Madam Speaker, these are tough times for students in Grey and Bruce. JDSS is located a mere 10 minutes away from Walkerton District Community School, where just this spring, four students and a teacher passed away in an accident near London while they were away at a school event.

I want to rise today to recognize Damon Davis, an aspiring auto mechanic and volunteer for the St. Matthew’s Lutheran church; to recognize Haley Keffer, the spunky 16-year-old daughter of Stacy and Sarah; to recognize Tyson Varley, a big brother who loved anything with an engine; and I wish Landon Preiss-Hillier the best on his road to recovery.

These teens were beloved community members and cherished by their families. Their stories captivated the hearts of Grey and Bruce counties.

Madam Speaker, my heart goes out to the Hanover community as they mourn Damon, Haley and Tyson. May their memory be a blessing and may they rest in peace.

Trans Day of Remembrance

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’m going to ask for the attention of the House. The time being 10:29 a.m., as provided for by the Trans Day of Remembrance Act, 2017, the assembly will now pause and observe one minute of silence in honour of trans people who have died as a result of anti-trans violence.

I will now ask members to please rise.

The House observed one minute’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): You may be seated.

I recognize the member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington on a point of order.

Mr. Ric Bresee: If you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to make statements of recognition of Transgender Day of Remembrance, with five minutes allotted to the government, five minutes allotted to the official opposition, five minutes allotted to the third party and two minutes allotted to the independent members as a group.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington is seeking unanimous consent to allow members to make statements in recognition of Transgender Day of Remembrance, with five minutes allotted to the government, five minutes allotted to the official opposition, five minutes allotted to the third party and two minutes allotted to the independent members as a group. Agreed? Agreed.

I recognize the member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington.

Mr. Ric Bresee: Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the government to honour Transgender Day of Remembrance, a time when we remember transgender, non-binary, gender-queer and two-spirited individuals who lost their lives to anti-transgender violence.

In the summer of 2017, Alloura Wells, a 27-year-old Black and Indigenous transgender woman, went missing here in Toronto. Months later, her body was found in a ravine.

For weeks, she was only known as “an unidentified woman.” During that time, her father searched for her, her friends organized and community members demanded to know why no one seemed to be looking for her. Her story should have filled headlines.

Instead, most Ontarians were hearing about a teaching assistant stirring a national debate about pronouns and gender ideology. The student was given a name, a face, a voice and empathy; Alloura was described as a body.

This contrast reveals something profound about how we treat transgender people. Too often, trans lives are discussed as policy rather than full human stories of people who live, love and contribute to their communities.

Alloura’s death exposed real failures in how our systems treat missing persons, especially those experiencing homelessness or discrimination, but it also exposed how public narratives can erase people twice: once in life and once again in coverage.

Although I never had the privilege of meeting Alloura, her friends described her as funny, smart and loved. She was part of Toronto’s queer community and part of Ontario’s story.

I mentioned her today because it was the death of Alloura Wells that brought the urgency of this day into sharper focus here in Ontario. Her memorial was taking place only a few blocks away when the Trans Day of Remembrance Act was debated in this House in 2017.

That act was supported by all parties of this House. It was a unanimous statement that hate has no place in the province and that every Ontarian deserves to live and deserves safety and dignity, no matter their gender identity or expression. Because of that, Ontario became the first jurisdiction in the world to officially recognize November 20 as Transgender Day of Remembrance.

Ontario is home to a diverse and brave transgender community: trans men and women, non-binary and two-spirited individuals who enrich every corner of our province with their courage, their honesty and their contributions to society. Their lives matter, their voices matter, and our work must reflect that truth.

I’m very happy to say that this House extended protections for gender identity and expression under our Human Rights Code and expanded anti-hate initiatives like the Anti-Hate Security and Prevention Grant, helping community organizations protect their spaces. Our schools uphold inclusive codes of conduct and equity frameworks that make every student feel safe and valued.

But let us be honest: Laws and funding are the foundation, not the summit. True inclusion demands education, accountability and everyday allyship. It’s every Ontarian’s responsibility to listen, to learn and to lead with empathy. Allyship means stepping up when it’s uncomfortable, not just when it’s convenient. It means ensuring that our workplaces, our schools and our communities are safe for everyone.

Progress is never made in sweeping gestures alone. It’s made in everyday moments of courage. Each of these moments helps build the kind of Ontario that this Legislature, across all parties, aspires to protect.

Speaker, when the Trans Day of Remembrance Act passed, its sponsor, MPP Cheri DiNovo, said that she looked forward to a day that we would no longer need such a commemoration; a day when every parent’s child could grow up to be safe, celebrated and at peace with their own identity. That day is not quite here yet, Speaker, but every year, through our actions, we can bring it closer.

Today, as we honour the memory of all those lost to anti-transgender violence, we recommit ourselves to the unfinished work; to building a province where equality is not an aspiration, but a lived reality. So let us remember and let us continue. Let us ensure that remembrance becomes responsibility, that empathy becomes action and that every Ontarian, regardless of gender identity or expression, can live, learn, love and thrive without fear.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Toronto Centre.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Good morning. Today is the Trans Day of Remembrance. On this day we reflect and mourn the trans, non-binary, two-spirited community members we have lost, and we celebrate those who are still with us. As a member of the trans and non-binary community; a person who uses they and them pronouns; and the first non-binary, gender-diverse MPP to do so in this House, I’m honoured to bring the official remarks from the opposition. But this year, I’m joined by a new member, the member from Ottawa Centre, who is also a member of the non-binary trans community.

So often in Ontario, we think about people on a daily basis, people who have had tremendous impact on us. And I think about Cheri DiNovo, who’s in this House today, the good reverend doctor, whose bill is the reason why we are standing in this House, who has given us our moment of silence, our moment of contemplation.

Being trans is beautiful and gender-diverse expansiveness has existed across time and culture. We know that expansive gender identities have been formally recognized by Indigenous communities for thousands of years. There’s nothing that politicians can say, do, fail to say or fail to do that will erase trans people, no matter how hard we or they try.

Being trans has often been a complex, sometimes beautiful and sometimes painful experience. But after several seasons of progress, we are now seeing right-wing backlash targeting trans people once again. It’s scary now. Our trans siblings in the US are under attack by a President who continues to use them as a distraction and a scapegoat. But we don’t have to look south to the US to know what is happening here in Canada.

The Alberta government used the “notwithstanding” clause to push forward three harmful pieces of legislation only yesterday: laws that will expose trans kids at school and restrict all Alberta children’s access to comprehensive health education, ban trans children and youth from accessing life-saving health care and ban trans women and girls from participating in women’s sports. This is the use of the “notwithstanding” clause that follows Justice Allison Kuntz’s ruling in favour of five brave trans youth and their families, who challenged the laws blocking their access to health care.

Unfortunately, it seems like Danielle Smith has nothing better to do than to strip away the court-affirmed human rights of trans kids in her province. But lucky for her, I know thousands of people who’ve got nothing better to do than to defend trans kids with every ounce of their energy.

Unchecked, the Alberta anti-trans laws are cruel and discriminatory. They will create a hostile environment of disinformation, hostility and hatred towards trans children and youth, and their parents fighting to protect and support them. Parents are forced to make painful and costly decisions to uproot their entire families and move to other states, provinces and countries when they cannot protect their trans child in their own community.

The new government of New Brunswick moved quickly to reverse a policy that would have outed trans children in schools and prevented them from choosing their own names and pronouns, while putting their lives at risk. This is a bright light in a sea of bad news.

We are not immune to transphobia here in Ontario. In 2023, this very government voted against my bill to improve and expand access to gender-affirming health care in Ontario, which I will be re-tabling this afternoon. I hope that the government will support us in passing it, a bill which will be introduced for the third time.

The truth is that most people who receive gender-affirming health care are not trans people. They are cisgender people: those whose gender assigned at birth matches up with their internal understanding of their gender. They’re men and boys with gynecomastia; women who undergo mastectomies and reconstructive breast surgery; and people receiving hormone replacement therapy, due to natural hormone imbalances. For these types of gender-affirming health care, there is no need to sign petitions, table legislation, fight for funding or even debate it at Queen’s Park.

Those medical interventions and others offered by OHIP are not only offered because they are necessary for physical survival of the patient, they are offered because they affirm their gender. That patient is then alleviated from the mental health disorders that would come with it.

I want to thank every trans activist, every parent who has stood with trans youth, every teacher who has taken a trans student aside to tell them that it’s going to be okay. I want to thank this House for this opportunity.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Nepean.

MPP Tyler Watt: Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here today on a day that calls us to pause, to reflect and to recommit ourselves to the dignity and safety of transgender people in our communities.

Transgender Day of Remembrance is not just a date on the calendar. It’s a solemn moment to remember the lives that were taken by violence, discrimination and hatred, and to honour the strength of those who continue to live authentically despite immense challenges. Today, we say their names: Sam Nordquist, Alice Carrier, Blake Quinlan, Shelby Tracy Tom, just to name a few. We honour their stories and we acknowledge the pain that far too many transgender people face for simply being who they are.

We also stand here to affirm something fundamental: that every person, each and every one of us, regardless of who you are or who you love, has the right to live safely, openly and without fear. That is not a political statement; it is a fundamental human right.

We know that transgender people experience higher rates of harassment, homelessness, unemployment, violence and, sadly, murder rates. We know that transgender youth today are afraid that the few but hard-fought-for rights trans people have today are going to be stripped away. For too many, their daily lives are shaped not by opportunity or acceptance, but by constant fear. And yet, despite this reality, the transgender community continues to show resilience and courage that should inspire all of us: courage in telling their stories, courage in living their truth, courage in building community even when the world feels unwelcoming and overwhelming.

On this day, we also recognize the families, friends, advocates and organizations who show up every single day to support their loved ones who also just happen to be trans. We see that love and solidarity through dedicated groups, local service agencies, educators and health care providers, who work to ensure that transgender people feel affirmed and cared for: those like LGBT YouthLine, Rainbow Health Ontario, Trans Health Ottawa and The 519, just to name a few.

Transgender Day of Remembrance is, at its heart, a call to action, a reminder that remembrance must lead to responsibility: responsibility to speak out against transphobia in all of its forms; responsibility to listen to transgender voices, to uplift them and to believe them; and, yes, responsibility to ensure that trans people don’t just survive the day, but truly thrive.

To the transgender members of our community who are here today or who may be listening at home: You matter. Your life has value. You have a place in this community exactly as you are. You deserve safety. You deserve joy. You deserve love. And you deserve a future filled with possibility.

Let us honour those we have lost not only with memory, but with action. Let us build a world where no one has to fear walking down the street—a world where every person feels safe being themselves; a world where diversity is not just accepted but celebrated.

Transgender Day of Remembrance asks us to grieve, yes, but it also invites us to hope—hope for a better tomorrow, shaped by compassion, hope that is strengthened each time we choose understanding over fear and love over hate.

Thank you for being here, for remembering and for standing together. May we leave today ready to do the work that honour truly demands.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Kitchener Centre.

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I stand here today to honour the trans people who were murdered just for living their lives as their authentic selves.

As a school social worker, I spent my career encouraging youth to discover who they are and to live authentically, because I know that’s how they can be healthy and happy—but for that, trans people risk harassment, bullying and even being killed.

Right now, a trans youth from Kitchener Centre named Eli Wood is missing. Foul play is suspected. He moved to Kitchener from New Brunswick to study social work at Laurier and was months away from graduating, to start a job working with at-risk youth.

My heart is with Eli, his parents, his friends, his peers, his co-workers and community—to his mom, who’s pleading to anyone with information to “help me find my baby.”

Eli was followed and intimidated by strangers. Last month, his house was burned—a suspected arson—and he went missing. Our community is shaken and worried.

In the last few years, we’ve seen a rise in trans and anti-queer hate.

Waterloo region has the highest police reports of hate in the country.

The impact of hate on people’s lives is immense. The threats lead to fear, health consequences, mistrust and isolation. We have to do better to fight hate in our communities, across Ontario and online.

So much has been done by the 2SLGBTQIA+ community and allies to fight for equity—rights at work, support to transition and to be safe. But we know more needs to be done.

Today, I hold in my heart those who have died simply for being who they are—because baby, you were born this way.

Let us never forget any life lost, and let us fight hate, toxic masculinity, misogyny, misinformation and disinformation, and lead with love, humanity and respect for human rights for all, today and every day.

Applause.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): We have with us, in the Speaker’s gallery today, Myriam De la Roca Alvarez, the consul general of the Republic of Guatemala in Toronto.

Please join me in warmly welcoming our guests to the Legislature.

As mentioned earlier, also joining us today is Cheri DiNovo, the former member for Parkdale–High Park in the 38th, 39th, 40th, 41st Parliaments.

Also in the Speaker’s gallery: the former member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke in the 38th, 39th, 40th, 41st, 42nd, 43rd Parliaments, John Yakabuski.

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: I want to welcome great leaders from Local 1-2010 Steelworkers: Jason Lacko, Wes Ridler, Roger Beland.

Most importantly, Speaker, I want to introduce you to my great son, Jérémy, and his partner, Katelin Kozlovich, who will start on December 1, following in her father’s footsteps to become an OPP. We are proud of you. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Laura Smith: I’d like to welcome Brenda Sky, Jennifer Mak and their group from Simple Coaching, helping the community from Thornhill and beyond. Welcome to the House.

Hon. Graydon Smith: I’m pleased to recognize some special guests from the riding and elsewhere today here to watch one of our pages, Luke Hu, in action. Please join me in welcoming his grandparents Shirley and Grant Bartlet from my riding and his parents, Ian and Leah Hu, and brother, Ben Hu—delighted to have you all here today in Queen’s Park.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’d like to join everyone else in also welcoming, of course, former MPP Cheri DiNovo, member for Parkdale–High Park from 2006 to 2017. Welcome to your House.

It is also my pleasure this morning to introduce a young education advocate for my riding, Alice Ahern, and her mom Leila to the Legislature.

We are also joined by a number of Ontario veterans here in support of MPP Stevens’s private member’s bill, the Remembrance Day Observance Act. Thank you for your service and welcome to your House.

MPP Billy Denault: I want to introduce and recognize the various representatives in the gallery from my riding of Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke who are here with the county of Renfrew as part of their Renfrew county advocacy day. It’s a privilege to represent the Ottawa Valley here in Queen’s Park, and it’s equally honourable to get to introduce Queen’s Park to the Ottawa Valley today. To each and every one of you, welcome to Queen’s Park and enjoy question period.

M. Stéphane Sarrazin: J’aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue aux membres de l’AFO, l’Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario. On a ici avec nous M. Fabien Hébert, président; Peter Hominuk, directeur général; et Sonia Behilil, directrice des politiques et des relations gouvernementales. J’ai bien hâte de dîner avec vous aujourd’hui, et merci pour ce que vous faites auprès de la communauté francophone.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I’m incredibly honoured to have almost 50 veterans and comrades from Legion branches across St. Catharines and Toronto here with us today in the gallery. I want to thank all service members, past and present, that are here with us today in the gallery. Thank you for your service.

We have Branch 138, 24, 350, 344 and 101 present today in the gallery along with representatives from the 10th Battery Association, Lincoln and Welland Regiment Association, OSSTF, True Patriot Love Foundation, HMCS York, my constituency staff team, and a few other very special guests that I want to introduce—and I have to get this through—my cousins Joanne and Dennis Duquette, service members from the Canadian Armed Forces, and the most wonderful woman here tonight, who’s been behind me every step of my political career, my mom, Pat Lindal. Welcome to your House.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: It’s my honour to welcome Dr. Suanne Wong from EHN Canada and Monika Frejlich from the Canadian Addiction Counsellors Certification Federation. Welcome to your House.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: I’d like to welcome super smart youth from U of T’s Munk school who are here today to watch us, so hopefully we behave, and a member from beautiful Beaches–East York, a young whippersnapper here with TMU, Galiba Mobassira Bornona.

Mr. Chris Glover: I’m pleased to introduce retired Master Corporal Iain Hamilton. Master Corporal Hamilton served with the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders of Canada and as a UN peacekeeper in Cyprus, where he was among the Canadian blue berets awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1988. He later completed tours in Norway and Germany and has continued serving Canada as a civilian at Base Borden.

Alongside these many accomplishments, he is also the father of my executive assistant, Sam Hamilton. I want to thank Master Corporal Hamilton for his over 40 years of service to our country. Welcome to your House.

Ms. Jess Dixon: It gives me great pleasure to welcome the Ontario women’s coalition, particularly Jean Tweed Centre director, Belinda Marchese, and from YWCA Cambridge, Nataleigh Ballantyne.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Welcome to Camille Quenneville, the CEO of the Canadian Mental Health Association, Ontario; Michael Anhorn, the CEO of the Canadian Mental Health Association; Belinda Marchese, the executive director of the Jean Tweed Centre, who is also here with the Ontario women’s coalition; the students of Humber College, bachelor of public relations program; and the mental health partners. Welcome to your House.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Unfortunately, we are out of time for introduction of visitors. However, I want to apologize if you have not been introduced; it’s my fault, not your member’s fault. But there is a time again at 1 o’clock if you’d like to join us to introduce your guests to have their name recorded in Hansard.

House sittings

Hon. Steve Clark: Point of order: I’d just like to announce to members that the night sitting scheduled for this evening has been cancelled.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): We can change that.

Laughter.

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

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question this morning is to the Premier. The Globe and Mail reported that Keel Digital Solutions was receiving payments from the government as recently as last month. This is contradictory to what the Premier told us earlier this week, when he said that funds to the company were frozen in light of the audit and the OPP investigation.

Can the Premier explain this contradiction?

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

Hon. Nolan Quinn: As I’ve mentioned many times in this House, within 24 hours, in the first week of November, when we received the forensic audit, we reported it right to the OPP. I don’t know how I can be any more clear on how quickly we swifted upon the forensic audit results and reported them to the OPP.

But what I will speak about is our funding, our historic investments into our post-secondary sector, whether it’s the $1 billion that the Leader of the Opposition voted down in budget 2025 or the $1.3 billion that was invested last year into the sector, which, again, the opposition voted down.

But, Speaker, we’ll continue to be there for the sector, investing into labour market needs. Whether it’s STEM, skilled trades, teaching or nursing as well, we’ll continue to be there for the sector time and time again, as we always have done.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, Speaker, it might be hard for the government members to follow along with this, because the thing is that this company has received funding from so many different ministers and so many different grant programs as part of this government’s pay-to-play scheme.

But look, Keel Digital Solutions received about $240,000 a month from the Skills Development Fund. They continue to receive that. They told journalists, actually, that they are expecting funds to hit their bank account again later this month.

Can the Premier confirm if Keel Digital Solutions is going to continue receiving funding from the Skills Development Fund?

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

Hon. David Piccini: No payments have been made in November, and as the Premier has said, we’re reviewing all payments.

It’s inappropriate for me to speak on this further, but what I can say is we’re continuing to support meaningful training in every corner of this province. As we face economic headwinds, we’ve got to look to Ontarians to say we’ve got programs to support them with reskilling, with retraining to join our nuclear fleet—18,000 jobs with SMRs, new jobs expected with new nuclear—to join critical infrastructure projects like the Bridgecon project over Rosedale Valley Road that I visited earlier this week. These are the programs that we’re supporting, helping people change lives to land a better job with a bigger paycheque.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, the Premier said he had frozen the funds to this company when the money was still flowing—the same company that was hand-picked by the Minister of Labour while he was going to the Leafs game with their CEO and taking trips to Paris with the lobbyist that lobbied for them.

Every single morning, we wake up to new scandals and new headlines about this Minister of Labour and this government. When is the Premier going to clean up his act and fire this minister?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, it’s this Premier that took to the people in January a plan to protect workers and to protect their jobs, to make sure we’re investing in the things that we need to stand up and build a stronger Ontario—an Ontario ravaged by massive tax hikes, by a manufacturing fleet that was fleeing this province under the previous government propped up by the NDP—300,000 jobs that left this province.

We’re standing up—in fact, Speaker, over $40 billion in investment this year alone. Do you know what the number was when the Liberals were last in office? It was $8 billion. That’s what’s grown under this Premier’s leadership. It’s putting men and women to work. We’ve got to retrain, we’ve got to reskill, and we’ve got a fund to do it. It’s helping train people on the lines of a construction sector that they wouldn’t support.

It’s not just organized labour and construction that left them; it’s groups like the hospitality workers’ union whom I’m meeting for lunch today, who are helping train a next generation of men and women in our tourism sector. We’re going to have their backs and continue supporting them.

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: Do you know what, Speaker? I’m going to go back to the Premier, but this is about priorities. This is what this is really about.

Yesterday, the government suspended debate early to make sure that all of these government members could make it to the Premier’s $1,500-a-plate birthday party. Do you know what? I’ve got to tell you, you could all come to my birthday party, and I won’t charge you a cent.

Today we are surrounded by health care workers, front-line workers, who are seeing their jobs disappear around them. And instead of supporting these workers and workers all across this province, this Premier is more concerned about his own friends and his own donors.

So why is the Premier willing to spend taxpayer dollars enriching his friends and donors instead of nurses and health care workers?

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

MPP Mohamed Firin: I can speak to the countless individuals who have donated to the leader’s party, but that’s not what I’m going to focus on today. I want to talk about what the Skills Development Fund is doing in my community of York South–Weston.

I went to the Hammer Heads Program, where they’re training young men and women in the skilled trades, and I’ve come across over 100 young individuals who have been trained by skills development. And what is success for these individuals, Speaker? I will tell you what success is: I’m proud to say to the House today that 80 of those individuals, young men and women who have lived in community housing, have now put a down payment on a home and they’ve been able to purchase a home. That’s what this program is about. It’s about impact, and we’re doing that. We’re protecting the workers and we’ll continue to do so.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’d love to see the source on that one.

Look, if this government had any clue about a jobs plan, there wouldn’t be 700,000 people unemployed in the province of Ontario right now. We know that this Premier only listens to CEOs. He stood here in this place just a couple of weeks ago, when he actually showed up here, and he said—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The government House leader will come to order.

Ms. Marit Stiles: We know that the Premier only listens to CEOs. He only listens to the people who are going to show up for his $1,500-a-plate fundraisers, and that’s the reason he shut down the Legislature yesterday.

But do you know what’s interesting? Guess where those dollars go, and guess where salaries do go up, Speaker: Executives of the companies that receive SDF money, because this government is the party of big bosses, not workers.

What did the Premier do to make sure that government funds were used to support workers, not C-suite executives?

MPP Mohamed Firin: Speaker, I can tell you that the NDP has lost its way with workers and I can show you the results in my riding of York South–Weston, where they’ve lost 30% of the vote share. It’s because of that type of ideology that they’re losing their vote share.

To protect the workers of this province, you have to support the workers of this province, and the member and her party keep voting—their record shows they vote every single time against the workers in this province.

Speaker, what I will tell you is the story of a woman that I met at A Women’s Work. Janet, who came—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas will come to order.

MPP Mohamed Firin: —to this country, is now getting double her paycheque and is providing for her family. To protect the workers in this province, Speaker, your voting record has to show it, and unfortunately for the leader, it just doesn’t show it.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’m going to go back to the Premier again. I know that he only listens to CEOs, but he really should try listening to workers for once, like the nurses and the health care workers that are here today in the galleries. They learned that 40 of their colleagues at the North Bay Regional Health Centre are going to be laid off. The hospital is at full capacity, the patients are seeing longer and longer wait times, and this Premier is more focused on delivering results for his friends and for lobbyists through his pay-to-play schemes like the Skills Development Fund than he is on delivering health care, and that’s the truth.

Back to the Premier: When is he going to clean up this mess and fire this Minister of Labour?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, let’s talk health care and the Skills Development Fund, which is helping train health care workers, nurses, PSWs, thousands of people. We’ve had 100,000 workers across Ontario receive employment within 60 days of this fund and of this program that’s helping change lives—change lives for people who are building. You heard about the projects we’re building, from new nuclear, to new mines, to new public transit, to new hospitals, to new schools. It’s going to require a workforce.

We want to make sure we’re training that workforce to build and to achieve our ambitious infrastructure plan of over $200 billion. That’s why we’ve launched this fund, to help change lives, and it’s working. It’s working for the union training centres, for the unions who abandoned that party. They abandoned them because they know their future is better under Premier Doug Ford, who’s going to secure their future by building, and that’s going to guarantee their paycheque.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: In the words of the great Yogi Berra, it’s déjà vu all over again. Another day, another revelation about Keel Digital Solutions. As we’ve heard, they have been receiving $240,000—that’s right, $240,000—a month, while they’re under a forensic audit.

And I’ll remind the minister and everybody on this side of the House, the forensic audit literally says, “They’re hiding something from us.” They’re hiding something from us. Shouldn’t the money have stopped once they started that audit? They received a payment in October. That’s right: October, last month. They’re expecting one this month, but I have a feeling they might not get it after all of this.

But the question is, why would a company that’s under a forensic audit, that’s now been referred to the OPP, still getting money? It should have stopped, Minister, when it had an audit, but at least when we were alerted to having a forensic audit. Why didn’t that happen?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, you heard from my colleague within 24 hours when this was referred. As I said, no funds from our ministry have flown this month. In our Skills Development Fund, we have strict risk assessment measures, monthly expenditure reporting, spot audits, clear TPA conditions within the program. These controls are critical to improve the integrity of the program.

That program is changing lives—as I mentioned, for 100,000 Ontarians, employment within 60 days or less. Some of those Ontarians have been transformed through the incredible work of the Unite Here action centre, Local 75. I’m meeting with them for lunch today where we’re going to talk about the life-changing work they have done. I’ve attended some of their graduation ceremonies. I’ve invited that member opposite; he hasn’t shown up. He won’t attend those unions because they’ve abandoned his party, because they know that thanks to this fund, it’s changing lives.

It’s changing lives for the young women and men who are being transformed at their action centre. I’d ask that member, where is the action centre? Does he know?

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

Mr. John Fraser: The Minister of Colleges and Universities was giving the money after the audit anyway, and so was health, so I’ll try to put this in simple terms. It’s not when you found out the results of the audit; it’s when the auditors said, “They’re hiding something from us.” If you were dealing with somebody that felt that you were hiding, wouldn’t you say, “We need to put a pause on this because you’re not telling us what we need to know”? That is a reasonable thing. I can see the Minister of Finance nodding in agreement. He understands that.

Let’s look at some facts. Let’s stick to the Minister of Labour’s involvement. His best friend was Keel’s lobbyist, the one he went to a Paris wedding with. The ministry said the company was going to buy its own software from itself, in an out-scheme. It was flagged for an audit, then a forensic audit, and now it’s with the OPP anti-rackets squad. And they continue to get money every month.

I guess the real question is, why won’t the minister—or anybody on that side—take responsibility for the continued payment of money to this company while they are under—

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

Hon. David Piccini: In fact, Speaker, it was I that ensured we audit all programs under the Skills Development Fund, something we brought in. Every program gets audited—every one. So it’s not unique to have an audit, Speaker. Every program gets audited.

We’ve got robust tools in place to help train workers, to give them a shot. When we’ve got a President who has launched an all-out assault on key sectors of our economy, Ontarians want to know that they’ve got a Premier who’s going to support them with better training, better training to help build a more prosperous Ontario. We’ve got to stand on our own two feet.

It’s this Premier who said we’re going to procure and buy Ontario. It’s this Premier, after they left us with expired Chinese PPE, who said we’re going to build that stuff here in Ontario. It’s this Premier who said we’re going to build hospitals, schools, bridges, new nuclear so we can be energy sufficient.

It’s the men and women who work in the unions who get that job done that abandoned them and backed this Premier, because when they get to work and earn a paycheque, their future is secured. That’s what this Premier is going to continue to—

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

Mr. John Fraser: I don’t think the minister is auditing everything, and if he is, he’d better get some new auditors. And he’ll read the Auditor General’s report that will tell him that exactly. Don’t take it from me.

Keel’s lobbyist is the minister’s close personal friend—the Paris wedding. Is that why the payments continued? Is it because his seatmate at the Leafs game was a director at the company? Is it because the CEO of Keel Digital Solutions has deep connections to the Conservative Party? Is it because of donations?

Why would you continue to give somebody money that you didn’t trust—any of us, in anything, at home, your family and business? It’s unbelievable, Minister.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Through the Speaker.

Mr. John Fraser: Reasonable people would just simply say to the minister, “Why will you not take responsibility for what happened?”

Hon. David Piccini: I have. I’ve stood in this House every day taking responsibility for our program. It’s a shame he’s denigrating the very public servants who do audits for all of our programs, who conduct monthly visits, who go to the training programs and visit the workers who are doing the training, the trainers who are leading the training. We’ve met. We visited training centres in every corner of this province.

My parliamentary assistant mentioned A Women’s Work. We were recently there with them at IBEW Local 353. We could talk about how members of their executive donate to the NDP, but, again, as my parliamentary assistant said, that’s not what this is about. This is about changing lives. This is about a next generation of electrical workers working on transmission lines to build affordable energy in every corner of this province, after the previous government left people choosing between heating or eating.

That’s what we’re doing: changing lives. Mobile training units going into Indigenous communities, helping training, supported by the SDF. Helping break down barriers for underrepresented communities to enter the skilled trades—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Kingston and the Islands.

Government accountability

Mr. Ted Hsu: I looked carefully at the numbers in the Auditor General’s Skills Development Fund report. Low-scoring projects got only 51% of their target for participants getting a job. High-scoring projects got 68% of their targets. So high-scoring training projects were way better at getting you a job.

The minister went in and he chose low-ranked proposals over high-ranked proposals. The result? Some 7,000 people who could have did not get jobs. Speaker, how is this Premier going to tell 7,000 unemployed people that he blew their chance to get a job in order to fuel the PC gravy train?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, one million net new jobs since this government came to office—one million. In communities like mine, when I went to manufacturers who were ravaged by the previous government, moms and dads who were sent home, furloughed from their job because of their irresponsible actions—raising taxes, driving businesses out—construction workers who were left scratching their head because, of course, the previous Premier wanted Ontario to be a service economy.

All of that’s changing under this Premier. We’re building in every corner public transit: so many subway extensions I can’t even name them all; the Northlander; the two-way, all-day GO to communities like mine; the Ontario Line; the new Union Station that I recently visited, where I met Marvin, who’s a Hammer Heads grad, something the member from York South–Weston mentioned. Every day we stand in this House referencing tangible projects that are changing lives for people like Marvin—

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

Mr. Ted Hsu: Speaker, the ranking system for skills development really worked according to the Auditor General. Low-ranked projects got only 70% of the number of people they promised to complete the program; high-ranked projects got 90% to complete training. High-ranked projects got more people trained and got more people employed, yet so many were not chosen, passed over and given to friends who had low-ranked projects.

How can the minister defend the scandalous meddling in skills training which cost jobs for 7,000 unemployed people?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Associate Minister of Women’s Economic and Social Opportunity.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: I worked at a time when the Liberals were in leadership and there was mass job loss. So many families that were dual-income families turned into single-income families. And you know who was suffering the most? They were women. Women suffered the most under the Liberal leadership. So many jobs—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: —province, and they didn’t even support women getting into industries like construction, like welding, like the trades.

But that’s what our government is doing. They didn’t do it, but we are, and I’m incredibly proud, Madam Speaker, of the investments and the work that our Minister of Labour has done to see thousands of women enter into the skilled trades. A Women’s Work is a skills development recipient, and they are training thousands of women getting into the skilled trades, something the Liberals didn’t do. We won’t take—

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

Mr. Ted Hsu: These numbers I looked at from the Auditor General’s report cover rounds 1 to 4 of the Skills Development Fund. The data isn’t in for round 5, and there’s still $700 million of gravy to come in rounds 6, 7 and 8.

I hope the government members had a good time at their event yesterday after they adjourned the House early. I’d like to ask the Premier, how did funding for round 6 go last night?

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: I’m going to look at our numbers: 390,000 women are working in the skilled trades industry right now, an 11% increase this year alone; 10,000 women have been able to access the supports and wraparound supports to ensure that they complete the training in skilled trades.

Madam Speaker, we are seeing more women being able to leave industries and go into jobs that are transforming their lives. This is our record. It’s not the record of the Liberals, who chased away thousands of jobs and put so many women’s lives at risk because of it. So we won’t take—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: —them.

We’re going to keep training women, and the Skills Development Fund is going to keep funding the transformation of men and women in the skilled trades and so many other sectors, like STEM. I’m very proud of our work, and we’re going to continue to keep doing it.

Labour dispute

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé. Forty-four front-line primary health care workers from North York Family Health Team are here today in the gallery. They have been on strike for five long weeks. They’re on strike because they have not received any recruitment, retention or pay increases for a very long time.

What is the government doing to ensure these workers at North York Family Health Team are compensated fairly?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I think everyone in this House would like the North York health team to be operational and serving patients in their community, but we also have to understand that collective agreements are negotiated between the employer and the employees. I don’t think there is anyone in that party who would suggest we should be inserting ourselves into those negotiations.

Having said that, to suggest that we have not expanded and enhanced recruitment, retention and investments in our community care health care system is simply false. We know through investments that we’ve made through $2.2 billion—not only increasing the number of primary care multidisciplinary teams that are operating across Ontario but also enhancing and ensuring that the existing operating teams have those funds available to them.

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

M me France Gélinas: The primary health care system has been flatlined for about 12 years. A 2.7% increase is not keeping up with the cost of living.

Speaker, while these hard-working people are on strike, 95,000 patients do not get the care that the family health teams uniquely provide. That’s the cancer survivor program, mental health counselling, nutrition therapy, smoking cessation, high-risk foot and wound care, and the support that keeps their family members healthy and out of hospital and emergency rooms.

What is the government doing to ensure primary care funding is used for the intended purpose and that these primary care workers who are here today receive proper pay for the hard work they do?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: The member opposite knows full well that our primary care enhancements and our investments, $2.2 billion, include not only increasing the number of primary care multidisciplinary teams that are available to operate in the province of Ontario but are also enhancing and giving money to the existing primary care multidisciplinary teams.

I am frankly shocked that the NDP is suggesting that there is an opportunity or any desire for our government or any government to insert themselves into a negotiated settlement between an employer and an employee. How far you have fallen.

Autism services

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Speaker, a month ago, I asked the minister when will the more than 64,000 children stuck on the Ontario Autism Program wait-list finally receive core clinical services. One month later, still no answers.

Speaker, how much longer