Thank you to the member from Thunder Bay.

I can understand that you say the two projects in Thunder Bay have not been able to work, because we understand that the status quo cannot give us the solution for the crisis we’re facing right now. That’s why this is the fourth time we’re putting together all these actions to help us against this housing crisis. I would hope that, if you go through each and every one of them slowly, then you will really understand the solutions that we’re going to bring.

I also want to point out one thing and see if you can see this through and be able to support us in this bill. As part of our plan, we are consulting on having a cooling-off or cancellation period for new freehold home purchases. First-time homebuyers deserve peace of mind when making what is likely the biggest purchase of their life in their new home. Does the member of the opposition not support consumer-friendly solutions such as this?

I know that the member has an area with a lot of need, and as she had mentioned, there is lots of opportunity and need for investment with struggling populations.

Not too long ago, I visited the Back Door Mission in Oshawa, which does important outreach to street-involved and unsheltered communities. One of the things that I heard—and the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions heard—is that there are housing units available, but there isn’t subsidy available. The government isn’t keeping up with the need, and the cost is going through the roof.

So we have agencies that could house people across Durham region, but they don’t have the subsidy and they can’t afford to. That’s a failure of government, whether that’s a matter of emails getting lost in the chain or whatever.

What is in this bill that would help the folks who are really desperately needing housing—especially with help from agencies?

The member and I both represent ridings from the north. We know that the situation with the opioid epidemic is deadly. We also know that we have a huge problem with people who are homeless, who are not housed. Those are the realities of the north. We have four times more opioid deaths in northern Ontario—in her riding, in my riding—than we do in the rest of Ontario. Lots of it is directly linked to people being unhoused.

Did you see anything in the bill that speaks directly to the hardship that people are facing in trying to find housing in northern Ontario?

I would like to thank the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North for her presentation.

Has the member seen the number of emails from people who have been subject to above-normal rent increases because of this government’s deliberate removal of rent control?

Further questions?

It’s always a privilege and a honour to take my seat on behalf of the good people of Algoma–Manitoulin, I’m going to try to bring a little bit more of a positive outlook, particularly from the lens of northern Ontario and the approach that I’ve received from individuals across my riding.

I like to always give credit where credit is due, and I want to start by giving credit to Bill Orford and Mike Johnston, who are both from the Manitoulin-North Shore federation of agriculture. They approached me in regard to Bill 97, which is a comprehensive bill with seven particular schedules. I’m going to be focusing my discussions today on one or two of these particular schedules. When they approached me, there was some grave concern in regard to some of the changes that this government was looking at and the impacts it was going to have on the agricultural sector. Their major concerns were the severance of the farm parcels that will increase conflicts with non-farming neighbours and limit future farm business growth and expansion. They also had some concerns with loss of protection of specialty crop lands, particularly with livestock, and also urban boundary expansion without community demonstrating needs. These were very well highlighted. And I want to give credit to the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, National Farmers Union of Ontario, Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission, Beef Farmers of Ontario, Ontario Pork, Egg Farmers of Ontario, Ontario Sheep Farmers, Veal Farmers of Ontario, Chicken Farmers of Ontario, Ontario Farmland Trust, Turkey Farmers of Ontario, Dairy Farmers of Ontario, and the Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance. These are the individuals who deserve a lot of the credit as to why certain changes that we hope—that we hear the government is going to be bringing forward.

Again, I’m one who likes to look at things in a positive way, and I’ve heard on a couple of occasions over the course of this week that the Premier is prepared to listen to these organizations and move in a direction that will start answering some of their questions and really addressing their concerns. It’s one thing saying it; it’s another thing doing it. So I will, as well as these organizations, watch what the government will be doing over the course of the next few days or weeks to make sure that these changes actually happen so that there is no negative impacts on the farming community.

At the same time, when I met with Bill and Mike on Manitoulin Island—and I think it’s important that you here in the House understand the contributions that come directly from Manitoulin Island and that snapshot, and along the North Shore. On the island and on the North Shore, there are 189 farms; there’s 112,315 acres of farmland—they are over 280 acres, which is an average-sized farm. They provide, as far as local farm sales—24% sell farm products directly to the consumer. Three farms operate with community-supported agriculture. Eight farms sell at farmers’ markets, and 38 farms sell directly from their farms at stands or pick-your-own. As far as their contribution, based on numbers, to the economy in 2021, the local agri-food sector employed 650 people through 178 local agri-food business establishments, with $20 million in farm cash receipts, and they were placed top three in cattle, dairy, and grain and oilseed.

Across the province, you are looking at farm cash receipts generated by local farms—supported by $44 million in the GDP and 655 employees in the agri-food sector, from farm to fork across Ontario. Just in my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin—and this was just the North Shore in Manitoulin Island—they are providing some significant contributions to the GDP of this province. So when they come to the table—again, I am one who likes to look at the positives and hope that the government is actually listening to them—it begs me to ask a different question. I am happy that they listened to the farming and agricultural sector, but there are many other occasions when this government should have been listening to people from this province. There were many other opportunities and many other pieces of legislation that weren’t given the same attention as this group was.

It’s important for the farming community to know that, banding together, doing the efforts that they have done, they have caught the ear of this government. It sets a very good example for other organizations and affected individuals across this province of how to approach issues that affect them negatively.

The one thing I do want to say is, based on this—the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force said that there were plenty of lands that were already existing, to build up areas on undeveloped land outside of the greenbelt. The government recently approved more than 14,000 hectares of land for urban development and municipalities in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area that are not farmland and protected lands. We heard from students who came to the committee and actually demonstrated to this government that there were plenty of available lands ready to develop.

I am looking at this government. There are plenty of opportunities for development across this province. Do not touch the greenbelt. Do not put our food security for this province—because not only are we being affected by this, but the global world, people across this country are looking at what Ontario is doing. They are really looking at the decisions we are making with this pristine basket of land that we have in this province, because if we tamper with it, if we build on it, that land is gone forever. It’s not just housing that is going to go there. There is going to be some further development that is going to be there. We’re going to lose more lands to roads. These are things that will really hinder our food security, going forward, in this province.

Again, on behalf of the good people of Algoma–Manitoulin, it is always an honour and a privilege to stand here and voice their concerns on the floor of the Legislature.

I’m listening to the member opposite, my colleague from Thunder Bay, speaking with regard to this bill not having any funding in it for affordable housing. We addressed that in our budget document. We increased the Homelessness Prevention Program funding and the Indigenous affairs funding by $202 million.

We saw in Thunder Bay that the amount of money has increased by over $10 million—almost tripling the money for affordable housing and assisted housing in Thunder Bay. I just wanted to point out that you do recognize that that investment has been made, although it’s not in this bill.

Point of order.

Bruce, it’s great to see you in the people’s House. Thank you for everything you’ve done for Ontario.

Per year.

Following up on my previous question about the Landlord and Tenant Board: This government has taken steps to clear up the backlog. We’ve put $6.5 million into the board, and we’re hiring 40 more adjudicators, essentially doubling the number of adjudicators, to clear up the backlog, because we recognize that needs to be done. My question to the member is this: Number one, does she recognize that that needs to be done? And the second part of my question is, while that member and myself disagree on what created the backlog—I say the backlog was created by the pandemic and the inability of people to meet in person, because that’s the way that those adjudications were done, so we had to introduce a new system and that took time. Although she and I might disagree on that, now that we’ve introduced the 40 extra adjudicators—does the member support that specific measure?

It’s an honour to rise this afternoon for the third reading of Bill 97, the Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act. I want to thank the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the associate minister and the parliamentary assistant and their team for all their work on this bill.

Speaker, before I begin, I should note that I will be sharing my time today with my friend the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

As the minister said, this is another bill that will help support our government’s goal to build 1.5 million homes by 2031, including 120,000 in Mississauga. It will continue to lay the foundation for growth to build the housing that we desperately need.

Speaker, I’ve said this before, but it’s worth repeating that Canada has the least housing per capita in the G7, as Scotiabank reported in 2021: There were an average of 471 homes per thousand people across the G7; in Canada, there were 424; in Ontario, it was under 400; and in the GTA, we had only 360 homes per 1,000 people. At the same time, Ontario grew by 445,000 people in 2022—more than every US state, including faster-growing states like Florida and Texas. Just to stay at 400 homes per 1,000 people, Ontario would need 178,000 more homes for their 445,000 new residents in 2022. And this growth will only continue with the new federal immigration targets to bring 500,000 people to Canada each year. Of course, we know that most of them will come to Ontario and the GTA.

Many years of neglect under the previous government and many years of mayors and councillors pandering to NIMBYism and BANANAism—far too many Ontario families and new Canadians are being priced out of the housing market, through no fault of their own. I spoke about some of them on Monday who have given up hope and are looking for housing outside Ontario.

But we are making progress. As the minister said, in 2021, there were over 100,000 housing starts in Ontario, which is the highest level since David Peterson was the Premier in 1987; last year, there were almost as many: 96,000 housing starts, 30% higher than the average over the last 20 years. There were also 15,000 rental housing starts last year, which is the highest level in Ontario’s history. As the minister said, there are more cranes in Toronto right now than there are in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington, DC, Seattle, and San Francisco combined. Still, we recognize that there is much more to do.

If passed, Bill 97 would help to speed up the approval process for new housing by updating the provincial policy statement and A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, to create a single province-wide land use planning policy document with a special focus on housing. The public consultation on this began on April 6, and I want to thank the minister for extending the comment period from 60 to 120 days. I urge everyone to read the policy. It is available online at the Environmental Registry, and you can submit your comments until August 4. Michael Collins-Williams, the CEO of the West End Home Builders’ Association, said this proposal “will help get shovels in the ground faster.” He said, “These policy changes will move us towards more of the only thing that really matters”—building more homes.

As I said on Monday, Mississauga is Ontario’s third-largest city, but over the last 10 years, the city approved an average of 2,100 new homes each year, far below the 12,000 we need. Mississauga was the only major city in Canada to actually shrink in the last census—from 722,000 in the 2016 census to 718,000 in the 2021 census. We were the sixth-largest city in Canada, but we have fallen to the seventh, behind Winnipeg, which grew from 705,000 to 750,000, or about 9,000 each year. On Monday, I said that’s the growth we need to see in Mississauga. Mayor Hazel McCallion understood this. Our city grew by about 12,000 people each year for 36 years under her leadership, but we have lost almost 1,000 people every year under Mayor Crombie. In the Globe and Mail, Oliver Moore wrote that the city is “shrinking because of deliberate municipal policies.” He said that the hollowing out of our neighbourhoods makes it harder to run businesses, fill schools or justify spending on city priorities. This week, we’re granting the city’s request for independence with Bill 112.

But as I said on Monday, we need all levels of government, including our municipal partners, to do their part and allow more homes to be built where it makes sense, where there are existing services, infrastructure and transit. We expect the city of Mississauga to keep their pledge of at least 120,000 new homes over the next 10 years. But this message might not have been received, because later on Monday night, the Mississauga planning and development committee rejected more applications for new housing, including 530 new units and a daycare centre in a shiny tower on a transit corridor, just south of the Port Credit GO station, just west of the Port Credit LRT station and just east of the Mississauga Transit bus terminal. There would be three transit lines about 30 to 40 metres away from this building. The councillors were actually concerned that the building might be too close to the Lakeshore West rail corridor. Mayor Crombie said last night that she’s not opposed to building height and density “in the right locations,” but it’s hard to think of a better location.

As the minister said, many years of NIMBYism and BANANAism have created Ontario’s housing supply crisis. Our government is fighting back, and we will continue to use every available tool to support the construction of new homes that Ontario families need and deserve.

Speaker, we also recognize that renters need help, and I’d like to take a moment now to speak about schedule 7 of Bill 97, which would strengthen the protections against renovictions and also clarify the right of tenants to install air conditioning.

As Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario president Tony Irwin said, “From protecting tenants’ ability to use air conditioning as we approach the summer season to enhancing right-of-first-refusal protections after renovations, to doubling fines for bad apple operators, the NDP should have no reason to vote against this bill.”

Bill 97 and the changes to the regulations the minister has proposed in regulation 332/12 would also freeze 74 provincial fees to help reduce the cost of housing. This includes fees related to new developments like land use planning and building fees, including fees related to the building code and Ontario Land Tribunal and fees paid to renters and landlords at Tribunals Ontario. Again, this is only one of many steps this government is taking.

In closing, again, I want to thank the minister and his team for all their work on another important bill to help increase the supply of housing to provide more affordable options for Ontario families. I hope that all members will support this bill going forward.

In my own riding of Mississauga–Lakeshore, there is a lot of NIMBYism and BANANAism going on there—that we cannot be building buildings at a GO train station. That’s where we should be building more density, but there are a lot of community groups that are against that, and I really do not know why.

We’re going to continue building the homes for our children and our future immigrants who are coming to this country.

Speaker, I have tons of respect for the member who just asked the question. We get along. If we would be alone in a room, we’d probably resolve a lot of the things that are debated on the floor of this Legislature.

The comment that I was making is, this government’s own Housing Affordability Task Force that was implemented actually told this government that the lands that are required in order to build additional homes are already available. We don’t need to go onto the greenbelt. That was the point that I was stressing through a lot of my presentation today—there’s already available lands, plenty of room to build on. Let’s use those lands before we go anywhere else or we consider anything else, because putting the greenbelt in harm’s way is going to be a loss forever.

So when the farming community is coming out to the government and saying, “Hey, you should reconsider these actions because they’re going to negatively impact not only me, but the future of the farming community and those who are coming in behind me, like my children who are looking at building their own farms or coming into the field”—and the changes that this government was proposing were going to increase costs on them immensely.

The member from Algoma–Manitoulin talked quite a bit at the beginning of his speech about farms and farmland. The dairy farmers are here at Queen’s Park today; I encourage you to go and visit them. He has a big dairy operation in Algoma–Manitoulin, Farquhar’s Dairy. They need land to have pastures for those cows that give us the milk, that feed the people of northern Ontario, including in my riding. Farquhar’s is a very well-loved milk producer.

I was wondering if the member could share with us the importance of listening to farmers. They are the ones who feed our communities, who feed our cities. They were not listened to. I would be curious to see what the member has to say about that.

Questions?

I want to thank the member from Algoma–Manitoulin for his address today.

This morning, Minister Clark, in his very, very good opening remarks, talked about housing starts being at a 30-year high and rental starts being at an all-time high. Last year, more rental starts—and this year, we’re on target to even exceed that. This year we’re doubling—double, already ahead, from the trend of last year. So our plan is working.

I ask the member from Algoma–Manitoulin, when a plan is working and the most important thing right now that people talk about all the time is building more homes, as the population of our province is up to 15 million people—400,000-and-some came here last year. It’s absolutely paramount that we build more homes.

Are you telling me today that you can’t support our housing supply action plans, when you speak today in this Legislature, or can you support them because it is of paramount importance that we build those 1.5 million homes?

I know there’s not much time left, Speaker, and I’ve got to figure these things out better—where I put myself into the timing and the lineup—but I did want to comment on a couple of things before you shut me down.

I heard the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North talk about—she says supply and demand is a myth. Well, I’m going to put this to you: If it’s a myth—and I want you to sleep on this tonight. If you’ve got 10 shovels and 50 people want to buy a shovel, are those shovels going to cost more than if you have 50 shovels and 10 people want to buy the shovels? The reason I’m asking about shovels is because what they’re trying to spread over there—there aren’t enough shovels in that store to do it.

Speaker, tomorrow I’ll be able to elaborate a little bit more about the fantasy that’s going on over there, when they think that homes can be built by snapping fingers or putting water on a chia home and all of a sudden, they appear. This party over there has really lost it when it comes to reality.

Interjections.

The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

The House will come to order. Order. Order. Thank you.

It is now time for private members’ public business.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government should reject the “defund the police” position and continue funding police, seizing illegal guns, suppressing gangs and supporting victims of violence through the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy.

Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for their presentation.