Further debate?

As much as I would like to [inaudible] the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke about the difference between hearing “yes, yes, yes” and turning that into “no, no, no,” or his misapprehensions about the values and plans of the NDP, my question is to the member from Elgin–Middlesex–London. I know you’re from the area, so I’m sure you will be able to answer this question well. I understand that Central Elgin, at one point, wanted a different piece of property to be used and wanted to protect farmland, and I think the property that’s being used may have some element of farmland on it. I’m just wondering if you can explain to us—because I’m an outsider to this project—why that particular piece of land is the one that was chosen. I’m sure you’ve got a good reason for it.

My friend from Sarnia said they wanted to choke it. I’m not sure if it was quite that serious, but maybe if they had got another term, they might have done it. But in 2018, our government said no.

So what are we doing now? We’re recognizing that we have to change the ground rules somewhat so that these people have a chance. And what are we doing? Minister Fedeli along with Minister Clark, Minister Piccini and others are making sure that not only the “welcome” sign is out, but that the actions we’re taking are clear, delineated measures that send the message that we’re not only saying we’re open for business; we’re doing the things that allow us to be open for business.

My friend from Elgin–Middlesex–London mentioned that we’ve got two million to three million people coming to this province. You’ve got to bring them to this province, but where are they going to work? We’ve got to make sure that we have the jobs for them. We’ve got 124 members here. We can’t have 25,000 members of this Legislature. We’ve got to give them a real job, I say to my friend from Mississauga. And where are we going to give them those real jobs?

Well, we’re going to start in places like this mega site in St. Thomas and Elgin county. But how do we make that simpler, so that they’re working with one jurisdiction and they’re only working on one set of rules, so it’s not, “Well, Elgin likes it this way, and St. Thomas”—wait a minute. My friend from Elgin–Middlesex–London and Minister Clark said, “Well, we have a solution. Let’s put that land under one jurisdiction so that when people are coming to this new mega site with a hope of being successful in this, the greatest place in the world to work, play, and raise a family, here in Ontario—we’d like it to be simpler.” Isn’t that one of the things I say to my friend from Richmond Hill? We’ve always said, too, “How do you get people to buy into what you want them to be a partner in with you?” Well, make it simple. Let’s not make it complicated.

We have a red tape minister. What are we doing? We’re eliminating burdens. We’re eliminating red tape, unnecessary red tape, while we still protect the people and the environment here in the province of Ontario. We can walk and chew gum at the same time on this side of the House—over there, it’s one or the other. But here, we recognize that in order to be able to provide for the prosperity of the future, we’ve got to start taking care of the present. That’s what we’re doing in this province, with this government.

Those 2.3 million people who are coming here—obviously, some will be at a stage where they’re not working, but most of them will be working, will be raising families, and it would be nice to have a place to live. Well, this is all part and parcel of what we’re doing as a government. We’re bringing more people to Ontario because we’re going to be able to offer them a job. But what good is a job if you haven’t got a place to stay? If you haven’t got a roof over your head and a pillow to put your head on, what’s the point?

We don’t just have this narrow-minded thing about, “Well, let’s do this and everything will be fine.” No. In this province, in this government, we’re saying we have to have that holistic approach to the future—and we’re not looking at the next three years, five years; we’re looking at the next 50 years, because that’s what we’ve got to start thinking about, in those kinds of increments. I’m not saying we can do everything at one time, but we’ve got to start somewhere. What was that—“a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step”? I didn’t write that poem, but I think it’s a good one. We’re looking at this whole picture, and we’re saying we’re going to bring all of these things together, so that we’re doing things one, two, three, four, five; five, four, three, two, one; one, two, three, four, five—they’re all working together.

And do you know what the result of this is and what I’m so confident about? The best thing is that those folks over there continue to stand in the way of everything we want to do—no matter what we do, “No, no, no, no, no, it’s a bad idea,” is what they say. But I am absolutely confident that everything we’re doing, when we take it to the people of Ontario in 2026—because by that time, they’re already going to see the manifestation of our commitment and our actions. We know that Rome wasn’t built in a day, but we’re already starting on the foundations, and we’re going to get it done. By the time 2026 rolls around, this government, because of the leadership it has shown and where Ontario will be as a result, will be re-elected in a resounding way because we never gave up, no matter what they said on the other side.

Further debate?

It’s always an honour to speak in this House—today, on Bill 63, the St. Thomas-Central Elgin Boundary Adjustment Act. And it’s always a pleasure to speak in the House and listen to the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke. We disagree on many things, but he is one of my favourite speakers.

In his speech, he took a few potshots at the NDP, and I’ll give him his due—but a lot of people misunderstand the NDP. Sometimes when I talk to business people, the chamber of commerce, they say, “John, what’s with you and the NDP?” And I say, “Well, do you know what?”—a very famous member of the NDP passed—it was the anniversary of Tommy Douglas’s passing a few days ago. I usually say, “Do you want to know what kind of NDP I am? I’m a Tommy Douglas NDP.”

What’s the first thing that Tommy Douglas did when he became Premier of Saskatchewan? He balanced the budget, because he knew that to progress as the leader of his province, he needed to have a solid financial foundation.

What’s the second thing that Tommy Douglas did as Premier of Saskatchewan? No takers? He electrified Saskatchewan. He made sure that the people on the rural roads of Saskatchewan—because Saskatchewan is an agricultural province. He knew that farmers needed access to the most modern technology available at the time to make their economy flourish, and at that time, it was electricity. As a former dairy farmer, I can imagine the huge advancement—it went from milking cows by hand to milking cows with a machine, or actually having a cooler to cool the milk. Tommy Douglas knew that.

The third thing that Tommy Douglas did as Premier of Saskatchewan, and what he is most renowned for—Saskatchewan was the first province in this country to have publicly funded, publicly delivered medicare. When he became a federal member of Parliament, he drove that, so that we have it right across this country. And every day, we have to fight to protect it. We’re in that fight right now with Bill 60.

When people ask me what kind of New Democrat I am—I’m a Tommy Douglas New Democrat. I said this yesterday in the House, and I’ll say it again: Some people see me as a small-c conservative—not the current group of Conservatives, but a small-c—very socially progressive, but careful with funds, because you have to invest your money or the funds of the people wisely. As a businessperson, you always invest your own funds wisely, too.

Back to the bill: Just to be clear, I announced that on second reading we were going to support this bill. We are going to support it on third reading as well, and for several reasons—

Thank you very much to my colleague for the question. He hit the nail on the head, as my colleague from Elgin–Middlesex–London did—shovel-ready. This mega site that encompasses a part today of east Elgin—is it east Elgin or Central Elgin?

It’s shovel-ready. So when Minister Fedeli talked about the competitiveness around the world—all of these manufacturers like what they see in Ontario. They like the skill of our workforce. They like our transportation network. They like an awful lot about Ontario. But if they’re going to make this jump—“How soon can we actually be into production? How soon can we actually be providing those jobs”—not the construction jobs, but the manufacturing jobs that are so vitally important for the long-term health. To have a piece of land that is ready to go, shovel-ready—we’ve got it here, in St. Thomas.

The north is going to be a tremendous beneficiary of what this government is doing with regard to the largest EV battery plant anywhere in the world, which is going to be built in the Windsor area, and the critical minerals that will be coming out of the north in order to service that plant as we transition into more and more of an electric vehicle province.

They’re great opportunities for Ontario—great opportunities for Sudbury and the north.

Our transportation strategy and our long-term planning here in the province of Ontario pay complete attention to the needs. We’re doing it every year. If you look at what we’re doing every year with the highway-building program here in Ontario—it’s number one in the world, including if you look at what’s invested in the north.

I say to my colleague from Mushkegowuk–James Bay that I realize he’d like to see six-lane highways going through every part of the north.

But if you look at what the investments of this government are doing in the north to ensure highway safety in the north, we’re far ahead of any previous government, because our commitment to the north is not just about mining, it’s not just about forestry; it’s to the people of the north—and that includes highways.

That’s a very good question.

When the minister set out the job site challenges, municipalities had a chance to apply. St. Thomas was chosen. Remember, part of the original lands that were acquired butted up against land that St. Thomas already owned. So it just complemented that piece, and the infrastructure that St. Thomas has is going to service that site. That is why. Then, as time moved on, an opportunity presented itself—understanding, as I said earlier, we’re competing with 40 states. Many opportunities and investors presented themselves and, as such, we needed to be shovel-ready, and to do it we needed to act quickly, with speed, to ensure that we could act in a timely manner to meet their specific timelines to close any potential deal now or a year from now. That’s why the added lands, again, butting up to the original lands that were bought were acquired.

At the end of the day, it’s important for us to remember that this is the best site in all of Ontario, and, I might even argue, North America—

I think we’re planting the garden for success. So if we can prove that we can get this done, this legislation passed—and I appreciate the members opposite’s support, and I’ll say that publicly. I take yes as yes. The bottom line is that if we do this well, I think it will set the stage for attracting further investment throughout all areas of Ontario.

Well, that makes one of us.

I always enjoy listening to the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke—

With the infrastructure that’s happening—and we know the conditions of our roads up north and what’s going to happen with all these mines being developed. Speaking to the president of the road builders of Ontario—they recognize that our infrastructure is not there, as we stand.

I’d like to hear from the government what they are going to do to make sure that our highways—Highway 11, in particular. With the way that our highways are right now, how are they going to support all this extra travelling on our highways? Right now, we are suffering because, as you know, we have many accidents happening. Some of the roads that are being cleaned still are problematic. I’d like to hear from the government their position on—

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s good to see you in the chair.

I’ve been reading a book at night—which is all you do when you get to my age—about how 85 years ago, right in this chamber, there was a great debate going on about a man from Central Elgin. Mitch Hepburn was the Premier at the time. I think about it because of the gentleman from the other side there talking about his dad working at GM in Oshawa. It was a great debate going on. I’ll go into it sometime, when I’ve got a lot more time. I found it quite interesting that you’re from Elgin and Hepburn was from Elgin. Anyway, it would be interesting times if he was still here.

My question is, how have the investments that this government has already made set up the province for success, like this project in Elgin you’re talking about?

Thank you for my colleagues’ wonderful presentations.

With our government’s policies, Ontario has seen more than 600,000 new jobs created since the province elected us in June 2018. It is clear that this government has a plan and it’s working. In 2022, the government’s plan to cut through excuses, get shovels in the ground and create new jobs with bigger paycheques once again shows that we have a clear direction for the future of this province.

Speaker, would any one of my colleagues please speak to where this legislation falls in the government’s plan to build Ontario and what else we can expect to see in the near future?

Further questions?

Further debate?

The 1950s.

There’s hope.

And I’m going to point to the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke. There was a broadband bill a while ago—and that’s why I talked about Tommy Douglas. We would have supported that bill, but in the middle of that broadband bill, there was a planning section about a ministerial zoning order for some place where we didn’t believe it should be. When I questioned the member, he said, “Well, if you don’t like it, just pretend it’s not there,” and he tore it out of the bill. It was very theatrical. It didn’t really get the response that he was expecting. To be quite open and forthright, I was going to try to repeat it, but I only have one thumb, so I couldn’t tear it out.

Laughter.

But this bill is not like that. This bill has a clear purpose, and actually, this bill speeds up a process that already exists, because annexation is possible within the Municipal Act. As a former municipal councillor in a small municipality—we shared some services. We shared water with another municipality, and we shared other services with a third municipality. It was really hard to come to an agreement on who should pay what and how it should be paid. It was really hard, and they were small municipalities. So we can fully understand that when an investor—and it’s a major auto manufacturer—is looking at this area, coming back to St. Thomas, they want to deal with one municipal entity. That makes complete sense to us. They want to deal with each issue once—with the planning, with the zoning, with the infrastructure. This is speeding up the process.

I did raise in second reading that—yes, I bring up the loss of agricultural land every time I speak; if I have to speak on something, I bring that up. We believe, in the NDP, that there should be a process where you can assess, frankly, whether there’s a better use for that land than producing food. I think in this case, although we never want to lose agricultural land, the benefits to the economy, the benefits to the environment—because this will, from what we understand, provide clean auto—automobile manufacturing, the overall—that’s a big word for me. It will be a benefit to the economy and to the green economy. We believe that, in this case, based on what we know, the loss of agricultural land, in this case the loss of farmland, is—although all farmland is precious, and we have to treat it as so, we have to look at it in the bigger picture. On this one, the bigger picture says this is a worthwhile project.

I was thinking, when I was—it was a long time ago, when the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke was young, in the 1970s—

I do remember, in the 1970s, going to visit my aunt and uncle who lived close to Fingal. He worked at the plant in Talbotville—so that’s that neighbourhood. That family built a quality life from that job.

We in the NDP want people in Ontario; I think we all do. It’s hard for me to really take offence to people, but I sometimes take offence when they say, “One political-philosophical belief doesn’t want jobs, and another one does.” I’m of the firm belief that we all want this province to be the best province it can be. We often disagree on the best way to get there, but we all—otherwise, if we didn’t believe that, we wouldn’t be here. This is an incredible job, an incredible experience. I’m happy to represent the people of Timiskaming–Cochrane. To be here, to want to work as hard as we all have to do to get here, to stay here, you have to believe in our system and in our province.

Before I veer off too far again—I was looking for my glasses, and then I realized I never use notes anyway.

I think this bill is an example—we do have some issues with the way the bill was. If we had had a bit more notice, we would have been more comfortable. When you have a bill introduced one day with no warning and you have to debate it the next day, you’re always looking for the poison pill—we’re getting used to it, so every time, we look for it. I’m going to give you the biggest example: I’m probably the only small-c conservative here who didn’t vote to use the “notwithstanding” clause to take away people’s rights. That was a big poison pill. I’m proud that I didn’t vote for that. But this bill, Bill 63, is straightforward. It makes economic sense. It not only helps the people in the St. Thomas area; it helps people across the province, across the country. The auto sector is important to people across the province.

In my riding—I am between the towns of Temiskaming Shores and Cobalt—we have a refinery that can refine rare-earth metals. It’s going to recycle batteries. It is going to provide the basis for electric vehicles, for the batteries. And our riding is going to benefit from it big-time. Around Timiskaming–Cochrane, both within and around—in Sudbury, there are big nickel deposits, but we’re finding nickel all around our riding. Nickel is very important in the manufacture of electric vehicles.

I do take exception sometimes when the government says that this will be the first time that northern Ontario has ever contributed to the auto industry, because that is not accurate. We have had iron ore mines in my riding that have fed the steel mills of southern Ontario, and those steel mills also played and still play a critical role in auto manufacturing.

Speaker, you’re from the Hamilton area. Iron ore from Timiskaming went to Hamilton—a lot of it. And when those mines closed, it caused a huge—we know what it’s like to have one of your main industries go dormant.

And now that we’ve had a resurgence in mining—forestry is doing well, agriculture is doing well—we know what it’s like. Now we have an area in Timiskaming–Cochrane where, like many other parts of the province, we can’t find the people to fill the positions. Before, we lost a lot of population. All our children went somewhere else, because there was no work. And now we’re looking for people to come, as many other parts of the province are. There are jobs. There is a quality of life in Timiskaming–Cochrane. We all say we have the greatest ridings in the province, and we all feel that way, because we all believe in Ontario. But there’s a quality of life in Timiskaming–Cochrane that is unparalleled. You have to like snow, but if you like snow—and we have a beautiful summer. We have a beautiful winter. We don’t have much spring and fall.

A while ago, we had the owner of the Canadian Tire in Cochrane, in the north part of my riding—he moved from a franchise in southern Ontario, and he moved to Cochrane. I was talking to him, and I asked about southern Ontario—as a farmer, I love Timiskaming–Cochrane, but if I could move my 500 acres from Timiskaming–Cochrane and plunk them in Oxford, I’d be there. He said, “Well, the one great thing about northern Ontario, about Cochrane, is that we actually have four seasons.” If you’re a Canadian Tire owner-manager and you load up on snow shovels, toboggans, snowsuits or whatever, and you have one or two big snowfalls like we have in this area or farther south, you might not sell your inventory. But in Cochrane, you load up for winter; we’re getting winter.

I’m going to give a plug for Cochrane right now. If you want the best snowmobiling in the province, start in New Liskeard or Temiskaming Shores or Temagami or maybe a bit farther south, in Marten River—but the longest season and the best trails are in Cochrane. The trails in Timiskaming are beautiful—the Tri-Town Sno Travellers are putting out a contract on me as we speak. I’m a proud member of the Tri-Town Sno Travellers, and the trails are beautiful, but even in Timiskaming we are feeling that the weather is not quite the same as it was 25 years ago; our winters aren’t quite the same. If you want to be guaranteed good ice, guaranteed enough snow, guaranteed a four-month season for snowmobiling, you’ve got to go a bit farther north. Right now, that’s Cochrane.

So anyone who wants to go snowmobiling, right now you can snowmobile in many, many parts of the province—and I know I’m far away from the car plant in St. Thomas, but it is economics.

I am happy to be able to support this bill. We in the official opposition support bills that don’t contain poison pills and that push this province forward. It is a bit tiring on our ears when we hear that we voted against this and we voted—yes, we voted against many Conservative budgets because, in our opinion, there were many bad things in those budgets.

There are actually in many parts of the province—at least in my part of the province, there are two Ontarios: the Ontario that’s doing very well and the Ontario that is feeling left behind.

I spent a few minutes talking about Cochrane—and I’m going to do this stat again. In the region serviced by the Cochrane District Social Services Administration Board, the rate of homelessness per 1,000 people is higher than anywhere else in the province. Remember, I just said that if you want to go snowmobiling, go to Cochrane because they have long, cold winters. The highest rate of homelessness is there, and it’s increasing.

We’re happy to support this bill. We’re happy the jobs are coming to St. Thomas. We’re happy that we can all work together to support the automobile industry, that we can all work together to support businesses in Ontario, but we are going to continue to push that everyone can benefit from the bounty of Ontario—because that’s what Tommy Douglas did, and at the end of the day, I am a Tommy Douglas NDP.

That’s a pretty tough question.

I support Tommy Douglas’s dream of having publicly delivered, publicly funded health care. That’s what I support. I support that that health care—that there’s not portions of it that are publicly funded and other portions that you need that you have to pay for yourself. I don’t support that. I wish that Tommy was still alive and that we could have a discussion on that. When I listened to Tommy’s speeches and when I listened to Tommy’s discussions in the Legislature—he had good discussions, like we’re having.

I appreciate the question.

I love to listen to the member across speaking about Tommy Douglas, and I like that he’s supporting the automotive industry.

As the member said, he was a big supporter of Tommy Douglas. But Tommy Douglas supported user fees for health care. In October 1961, in the Saskatchewan Legislature, he said, “I think there is a value in having every family and every individual make some individual contribution. I think it has psychological value. I think it keeps the public aware of the cost and gives the people a sense of personal responsibility.”

I want to give the member the opportunity to clarify: Does he agree with Tommy Douglas about supporting user fees in health care?

Questions and answers?

I appreciate the member opposite’s remarks in debate this afternoon. In particular, when he talks about the north, I very much appreciate it. I have property in the Ottawa Valley, right near my colleague here from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, and I appreciate that economic development needs to take place right across this province.

Maybe the member opposite could explain, in his opinion at least, when we think of the Ring of Fire and the natural mineral resources we can use—I know the Premier said, “Let’s not export them. Let’s put them to good use, and we can build our own supply chains and build our own EV plants, whether it’s in Windsor or whether it’s going to be wherever in Ontario.” Who knows what’s going to happen in St. Thomas? Who knows if it’s going to be EV, if it’s going to be an automotive plant, if it’s going to be food or food processing? It’s going to be great. The bottom line is, talking about automotive—how does EV help northern Ontario and the Ring of Fire help complement what you’re trying do in northern Ontario for economic development?