The ayes are 33; the nays are 67.

I want to thank, first of all, my colleagues in the official opposition for their impassioned speeches this afternoon and their support of this really important motion. I think you heard here today so many stories, so many stories—the voices, really, of Ontarians brought here into the chamber over and over again—the stories of real Ontarians, regular people struggling to keep their homes, making choices between whether or not they can make rent or put food on the table for their families. And this is a choice that more and more families are making today, Speaker.

Rent is skyrocketing in this province. It’s the highest it has ever been, and the increases we’re seeing—you know, we heard today of 27%, 40%, 30% increases. Who can afford that? Who can afford that? We heard, also, about employers who are saying—we speak to the chambers, Speaker—that this is destroying our communities, our economy, because workers simply can’t afford to live in our communities anymore. They can’t get by. People are leaving this province.

All of those people that leave Ontario, that leave our communities? Those are our future. And they’re gone. They’re going. What’s really astonishing is the lack of other options, right? It’s the lack of other options. If there were other, more affordable options, maybe this wouldn’t be a conversation we would be having today. If Conservative governments of past days gone by hadn’t cancelled 17,000 co-op units that were supposed to be built in this province, maybe we might not be in quite the situation we’re in. But we can’t go back and rewrite history.

I think what I find the most concerning is that this government wants people to think that there’s no way out. That their backroom deals with developers are going to solve the problem. And that is—

There is another way. The government can join us, we can bring back real rent control in this province and we can stop the through-the-roof rent increases that are causing people in this province to lose their homes. We can create an Ontario where people can live a safe and secure life, not worrying about whether or not they’re going to be able to afford to keep the roof over their head.

I want to ask the members opposite: I know that they’re feeling pressure from the people in their communities, and that’s why they get grumpy like that, because they’re feeling the pressure, too. If we’re hearing about it, so are you. It’s time to do the right thing. This is one measure among many that we need to take to address the housing crisis in this province, but it’s a really important one.

Join us. Join us in bringing back real rent control in the province of Ontario.

I want to thank the member from Oshawa for giving us a very detailed debate on this bill.

You talked about the general report at length and said that Infrastructure Ontario’s reputation or performance wasn’t that positive.

In 2020, Michael Lindsay, who was assigned to CEO of Infrastructure Ontario, previously served as head of the strategic partnership and government for the Investment Management Corp. of Ontario. Did he present at the committee about how he’s going to make these changes to Infrastructure Ontario and make it better?

Thank you to the member for her excellent presentation.

Infrastructure Ontario is, obviously, by way of this motion from the government, being offered more responsibilities and more authority. And they’re consolidating a number of different real estate assets under the ministry. I would say that when one gets more responsibility, it should be because one has done a very good job—better outcomes, better timelines, better management of facilities, better management of dollars—but we’re not seeing that. Instead, we’re seeing a ministry that’s rather secretive.

My question to you is, why would the government offer Infrastructure Ontario more responsibility when they seem to be struggling with the responsibilities that they have now?

I’m actually kind of excited about this bill. Bill 69 is about good governance. It’s about cutting red tape and streamlining oversight. And maybe these are things—through you, Speaker—that the NDP just don’t comprehend, because after 15 years of a disastrous Liberal government, hydro rates skyrocketed, taxes soared and, more important, our taxpayers’ dollars were mismanaged.

One of the reasons I put my name on a ballot was because of the mismanaging of taxpayers’ dollars—absolutely unfair to those people who are trying to get by.

So my question to the opposition, if they care to listen, is, why does the NDP want to add more red tape and slow down government?

Thank you to my colleague from Oshawa for her hour-long presentation. I appreciate the work she put into it.

The member opposite touched on the environmental assessment, and in Bill 69, we’re helping it be predictable for infrastructure projects, letting us build them faster. As everyone in this place knows, we need to build more infrastructure. More people are moving to Ontario. We need to build subways, highways, other transportation as well, and I know these changes will help us do that more effectively.

My question to the member opposite simply is, why are members on that side of the House against building infrastructure the people of Ontario need and deserve quickly?

I don’t understand what he’s talking about. This is not a government that is building infrastructure quickly. This is not a government that even knows what that would look like. We have black holes of money and time. When my colleague the member who is the critic for transit—I have every faith that he could talk about the lack of infrastructure and transit infrastructure being built and the mess that it’s in.

Again, this is a two-schedule bill. This is not about building infrastructure faster—that’s nowhere in this. This is about pulling 13 existing agencies underneath Infrastructure Ontario, because of what? It’s not about building anything faster. So maybe he can ask it again and clear it up for me.

I know that the folks who made written submissions were very concerned about the government’s changes by getting rid of this 30-day waiting period. So it was a focus on environmental concern—the people who came before the committee or made submissions.

Putting more in the Infrastructure Ontario bucket, maybe it’s not that problematic, but we’re not—we know that Infrastructure Ontario is not really good at property management, and there’s a whole report on just that. So maybe work on some of those things. The government should address those.

Interjection.

Schedule 2 of this bill has nothing to do—if it has anything to do with streamlining, then I think that the minister and the government should make it clear on how. It’s not just a bumper sticker—“We’re making things better.” How? Which part of the report are you fixing?

Here is something from the real estate services, on the Ministry of Infrastructure: “Infrastructure Ontario’s management of government properties was impacted in part by weaknesses in the ... agreement between Infrastructure Ontario and the Ministry of Infrastructure. The agreement does not set out any mandatory, minimum standard of performance for managing the costs of capital projects. It also does not set out timelines for meeting the accommodation standard for office space designed to ensure that existing government properties are used efficiently, and timelines for maintaining the state of government-owned properties to the agreement’s standard.” That’s from page 1. Basically, it’s a mess. That’s between the Ministry of Infrastructure and Infrastructure Ontario.

The Ontario Science Centre is a beautiful example of what happens when nobody looks after—

That is such a good question.

The government has said that they are looking at the recommendations from this particular Auditor General’s report, but certainly not most, certainly not all—arguably one that I could figure out, in terms of the use of office space.

There are so many recommendations—“Better oversight of external project managers’ procurement methods for capital projects is needed.... Infrastructure Ontario is using preliminary estimates to prioritize which capital projects to do.” They highlighted why that’s a problem. It is so thorough, and it’s very clear that the government could support Infrastructure Ontario with its existing properties. They could fund things using the industry standard, as I have raised, rather than using the government standard.

So why is the government putting more on their plate? I don’t know how much more work they’re putting on their plate. I don’t know exactly what they’re making Infrastructure Ontario responsible for, because again, it’s not clear.

Great question.

In terms of the importance of building infrastructure—it’s not just building infrastructure; it’s building well-planned, needed infrastructure, and it’s meeting the needs of growing communities and meeting the needs that the government can actually prove exist. It can’t just be what Frank asked for, and it can’t just be what you promised somebody else. It has to be what the experts and planners have outlined as what is needed, and it has to be transparent. We’ve got black holes of funding and time, when it comes to these absurd P3 messes. So the government should probably be pulling some of that public—

I appreciated hearing from the member opposite in what was a good hour in which she participated in debate this afternoon. I know that sometimes on a Monday afternoon an hour-long leadoff on third reading of a bill can go down a lot of different ways, but she was able to keep it definitely focused on the legislation at hand, which I appreciated.

I’m wondering if she could speak a little bit about how important it is to get infrastructure built in the province of Ontario and why she believes there might be some merits to this bill after all.

Further questions?

I’ll just be succinct and ask my colleague from Oshawa, given that this bill is supposed to be about making things more efficient, could she take a stab as to why the cost of subway construction under this government has tripled in the last five years?

I’m pleased to rise today to speak about Bill 69, the Reducing Inefficiencies Act, 2023. As the Minister of Infrastructure and the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks outlined this morning, this bill, if passed and proclaimed into force, would create a framework to improve the management of real estate, and it would bring efficiency changes to the Environmental Assessment Act.

Madam Speaker, our government has a bold, transformative plan to build Ontario. That is why we’re continuously looking at new and innovative ways to improve efficiencies, save taxpayers money and improve quality of life across our province. Bill 69, Reducing Inefficiencies Act, 2023, is an important next step in our plan. If passed, it would support long-term economic growth. Our proposed measures have the potential to allow for faster deployment of critical projects. It would support timely decision-making. It would help reduce duplication and burden. And by making minor changes to the Environmental Assessment Act, we are helping to ensure that some critical construction projects can move faster, without compromising environmental safety.

Bill 69, if passed, would help cut red tape and streamline processes so we can continue to practise good governance on behalf of the people of Ontario. This is all a part of our plan to enhance fiscal management and save taxpayers’ dollars.

As part of this plan, I would like to take a few moments to highlight and echo the Minister of Infrastructure on the work we have been doing over the past few years to support our communities and Ontario’s economy.

Madam Speaker, the Ministry of Infrastructure plays a critical role in the quality of life enjoyed by people across our province. Infrastructure is the backbone of a strong and healthy economy, and it supports our communities, both today and in the future. When a new road, highway, transit line or bridge is built, we are helping hard-working people get home to their families safer and faster. When new infrastructure is installed to improve access to high-speed Internet, we provide families with the opportunity to work, educate their children from home and connect with loved ones. And when we build hospitals and long-term-care homes, we’re ensuring our most vulnerable members are provided the care they deserve. That is why our government is building Ontario like never before, laying the foundation for a stronger and more productive province.

Madam Speaker, we’ve dedicated over $184 billion over the next decade to support priority projects such as transit, highways, schools, hospitals and long-term care. This is the province’s most ambitious plan in its history, and it includes so many projects that will help build a stronger, more resilient Ontario.

It also includes more than $27.9 billion over 10 years to support the planning and construction of highway expansion and rehabilitation projects across the province, projects like Highway 413, the QEW Garden City Skyway rehabilitation project, the widening of Highway 17 from Arnprior to Renfrew, and the Timmins connecting link. These are just a few of the highway expansion and rehabilitation projects in our province that will improve the movement of people and goods in Ontario.

It also includes $70.5 billion over the next 10 years for public transit projects to get people to where they need to go, safely, efficiently and on time. Projects like the GO expansion will transform the GO rail network into a comprehensive two-way, all-day rapid transit network. We have already made progress on our government’s bold transit plan for the greater Toronto and Hamilton area, including the Ontario Line, the three-stop Scarborough subway extension, the Yonge North subway extension, the Eglinton Crosstown West extension and the 14-kilometre Hamilton LRT, delivering on our promise to provide better access to fast, affordable and more reliable transit.

Our plan also includes more than $48 billion over the next 10 years in hospital infrastructure. These investments will build new health care facilities and renew existing hospitals and community health centres. This includes more than 50 major hospital projects that would add 3,000 new beds over 10 years. I’m proud to say that we have also made progress on construction of four new long-term-care homes through the accelerated build pilot, a new and innovative approach for infrastructure delivery established with the support of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Infrastructure Ontario.

In fact, one of these projects, Lakeridge Gardens, a state-of-the-art, 320-bed long-term-care home located next to Lakeridge Health’s Ajax Pickering Hospital, opened in the spring of 2022—that, we delivered it in only 13 months.

This pilot program leverages hospital-owned land and accelerated construction techniques to deliver urgently needed long-term-care homes more quickly in urban areas, where costs are high and availability of land is in short supply.

Madam Speaker, the pandemic has reinforced that now more than ever, everyone in Ontario needs access to reliable high-speed Internet. In response to this incredible need, we made a historic investment of nearly $4 billion to bring high-speed Internet access to every community across the province by the end of 2025.

Madam Speaker, this is basic infrastructure, having high-speed Internet. Imagine: We live in the 21st century, and people are still without high-speed Internet. So our government is making historic investments to ensure that every household, every business in the province will have access to high-speed by 2025.

We’re doing everything we can to support the idea that no matter where you live, you’ll be able to participate in the online world, and I’m proud to say that we have already made a commitment to supporting high-speed Internet access in hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses in communities across the province to close the digital divide.

We also recognize that there’s a need to provide municipalities with stable funding to support critical local infrastructure projects. That is why our government is also investing $400 million this year in critical infrastructure for 425 small, rural and northern communities through the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund.

As many of you know, building Ontario is a team effort. All levels of government, our partners and communities work together to support critical infrastructure projects across the province. This level of partnership makes programs like the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program, also known as ICIP, possible. This program represents up to $30 billion in combined federal, provincial and partner funding over 10 years for local infrastructure projects, which includes $10.2 billion in provincial investments. These include transit, green, community, culture and recreation, and rural and northern infrastructure projects.

We have also continued to build Ontario by delivering major infrastructure using a spectrum of delivery models and strategic approaches that continue to evolve to reflect changing market conditions. The delivery models used by the province range from a traditional, direct approach, which is used by a number of ministries, to dynamic approaches such as working with the private sector through a range of public-private partnership models. P3s are often used to deliver major projects like bridges, highways, hospitals, subways and correctional facilities through partnering with the private sector.

In 2019, under Premier Ford’s leadership, the government and Infrastructure Ontario announced the biggest project pipeline in Ontario’s history. Since then, we have been relentless in bringing those projects to market and refreshing that pipeline with additional new government priorities.

As you have heard, there are so many infrastructure projects to look forward to in 2023 and beyond. These are some of the many initiatives that we are working on. Despite the many challenges we have faced, including labour shortages, inflation, ongoing supply chain disruptions and a global pandemic, our government stepped up to the plate. We expedited our efforts and forged ahead on our capital plan to build Ontario. We continued to do what was necessary to protect lives and support families and businesses, all while prioritizing long-term economic growth for generations to come.

The benefits of these meaningful, high-quality infrastructure projects cannot be ignored. We are building vibrant, strong communities, improving health and safety, creating meaningful jobs and stimulating our economy.

By introducing Bill 69, the Reducing Inefficiencies Act, 2023, we are taking the next step in our bold and transformative plan. If passed, this bill would reduce red tape, save taxpayer dollars, enhance fiscal management and boost the economy. It would help our government continue to make strategic decisions and investments that people across this province need and deserve.

As the Minister of Infrastructure mentioned, the bill contains two initiatives that are part of this plan. One of the proposed initiatives would establish a framework to remove or modify the real estate authority of 14 entities and provide the Minister of Infrastructure with the ability to oversee and manage this real estate. The other initiative within this act would help reduce delays with changes to the Environmental Assessment Act, while ensuring continued environmental oversight to class environmental assessment projects.

I would like to reiterate some of the benefits that this bill, if passed, would bring to Ontario’s economy and future. Ontario’s real estate portfolio is one of the largest in Canada, and while real estate is one of our government’s greatest resources, a holistic approach to decision-making and real estate management is needed. Provincial oversight is distributed through existing legislation amongst five ministries and 54 entities that operate under individual processes and protocols relating to real estate decisions and transactions, which means that real estate decisions are being made without a strategic or holistic approach.

Our government is taking initiative to help improve the governance and management of our real estate portfolio. If passed, our proposed measures would establish a framework to remove or modify the real estate authority of 14 entities and provide the Minister of Infrastructure with the ability to oversee and manage the real estate previously under the control of those entities. By creating this framework to centralize the real estate authority of these organizations, our government would help reduce red tape and create a more efficient process so that these entities can focus on the important work they do for the people of Ontario. This is the first step in allowing our government to increase operating efficiency while supporting our objective to act more as one holistic organization when it comes to overseeing and managing the real estate portfolio of entities.

Madam Speaker, our proactive and innovative approaches through this proposed bill, if passed, would allow us to:

—implement a more structured, holistic framework to manage our real estate;

—promote government-wide decision-making;

—reduce red tape and regulatory burden by consolidating the real estate authority of prescribed entities and enabling some projects to proceed without the 30-day waiting period following completion of a class environmental assessment process; and

—save time and money through increased efficiency measures and enhanced planning abilities.

This bill is about allowing our government to increase operational and fiscal efficiencies. But most importantly, this is about good governance, which people in Ontario expect from us. This is a step forward in our promise to continue doing everything to be open and transparent with the people of Ontario about what we have done and what we will do. We’ll keep pushing forward by coming up with new, innovative plans to support our growing province, and we’ll continue to invest in infrastructure projects that support communities, create good jobs and contribute to Ontario’s economic goals. By building, upgrading and modernizing our infrastructure, we’ll ensure that our communities continue to thrive now and well into the future.

Madam Speaker, our plan and proposed measures would not only protect the progress we have made. It looks beyond to the stronger Ontario we want to build for today and for generations to come, and it demonstrates our commitment to supporting jobs, economic growth, and health and safety. This legislation, with the changes that we are proposing, is important to Ontario’s future prosperity. Madam Speaker, I look forward to working with all of you to build a stronger, more prosperous Ontario today and for generations to come.

I have a question to the member opposite that was similar to a question my colleague from Ottawa Centre had posed to my colleague from Oshawa, and it was around P3s. So we’re talking about reducing red tape or eliminating red tape, but what we have consistently seen with this Conservative government is transit projects, especially those here in Toronto, are way over schedule and way, way, way over budget. So I’m wondering where in this bill and where in government policy is the accountability? Where is the accountability to the taxpayers to ensure that when you hand over a P3 project—no surprise, we don’t support those over here, and for good reason, because they go over time and over budget with absolutely no recourse and no accountability.

So I’m wondering where in this bill does it bring back that accountability to the people of the province of Ontario who are actually paying for these contracts that are costing them even more through their taxes. Where is that accountability in this bill, or when will you be bringing a bill forward that does that?

We have time for questions.

I’d like to thank the member from Brampton West for the amazing work that they are doing, not only for his constituents but for the people of Ontario.

Speaker, my question for the member: The last Auditor General’s report that came out, the conversation of centralizing decision-making and moving things forward in a more progressive manner—there’s a lot of things that the Auditor General identified. I know that the member and his team are working hard to deliver those changes and deliver good things for the people of Ontario. My question for him is, how will the centralization of real estate under these agencies help the government achieve its priorities?

I want to thank my colleague from Brampton West for his comments today on this important piece of legislation. Two aspects he spoke of in his presentation today were partnerships and investments. In my riding of Simcoe–Grey, we’re seeing significant investments by this government in critical infrastructure as my riding continues to grow, with the growth pressures we’re under. We have hospital redevelopment projects in Alliston at Stevenson Memorial and in Collingwood at Collingwood General and Marine Hospital. The town of Blue Mountains has a 160-bed licence to develop a long-term-care facility. And Collingwood recently received over $2 million to repair and rehabilitate a section of Highway 26, which is a critical piece of infrastructure for my area.

My question to member is, how does he see this legislation bettering the lives of Ontarians across the province?

Further questions?

I just want to give the member an example. Peterborough built a brand new hospital. It cost $364 million. St. Catharines, which was a P3 hospital 10 years ago, cost a million dollars—$700,000 more, almost the exact same hospital. That was under the PC model.

Now you listen to my colleague from Ottawa talk about the LRT. And you made a statement which I thought was very interesting. You said the reason why you like P3s is because they’re delivered on time. Well, my understanding is that the LRT is 430 days late. They’ve had three derailments.

So my question to you is, why are we wasting billions of dollars more of taxpayers’ money with P3s when you can invest that money back into hospitals, schools, roads, infrastructure?

With respect to the Auditor General’s report—which was quite scathing, talking about the mismanagement of Ontario real estate assets by Infrastructure Ontario—being able to cause such a rift in the Auditor General’s report, and now the government is actually suggesting that this ministry be given more responsibility when they’ve mismanaged the assets so poorly.

I’ve heard repeatedly now this government talk about the Ontario Science Centre falling apart and how Ontario Place is being mismanaged, but all of that happened under their watch. How can the member across justify more responsibilities now consolidated in the hands of Infrastructure Ontario when they’ve done such a poor job with the responsibilities they have?