Back to the minister: Last week, the CBC reported that a group of land speculators purchased 37 hectares of farmland outside Ottawa’s urban boundary last year, and then, earlier this month, the minister overrode the city’s official plan and put these lands within the urban boundary, making these very lucky speculators instantly richer. Coincidentally, these speculators, together, donated more than $12,000 to the PC Party last year and this year.

My question is to the minister. Did the minister or any other government or PC Party official share with any landowner information about the government’s plan to add lands to Ottawa’s urban boundary before it became public?

Interjection.

Last week, Global News reported that Metrolinx has sold eight parcels of land since March 2021. None of these lands were used for affordable housing. Seven out of eight parcels went to private companies, including large-scale developers. This is the same public agency that previously reneged on an agreement with the Jane and Finch community to hand over land for a community hub.

It is clear that Metrolinx thinks it can ignore its duty to serve the public interest. Does the Premier think that Metrolinx, a public agency, can ignore its duty to serve the public interest as well?

Speaker, it is clear Metrolinx does not care about “provincial interests with respect to social, environmental and economic purposes”—all it cares about is selling off public land to the highest bidder. Will the Premier ensure that surplus lands owned by public agencies like Metrolinx are used for affordable housing or, at the very least, for public purposes?

It’s preposterous.

My son-in-law is the head of security in the biggest national park in the country, Wood Buffalo National Park, some 44,000 or 45,000 square kilometres. This is not obviously a park of that nature—not an urban national park but a national park.

What I will commend the member for Windsor–Tecumseh on is he did the research to see what was doable and what was not doable. Unfortunately, the member for Windsor West wanted it her way, which is how she acts in this House—always wants it her way. But we know that you’ve got to work with the partnership.

I want to thank the member for Windsor–Tecumseh for understanding what is actually necessary to get this done. The insinuation, quite frankly, from the member for Windsor West that somehow the way we’re doing it, without transferring the property, puts this land in jeopardy—quite frankly, she invents that scenario because it works for her narrative and she’s very upset that it’s not her motion that is being debated today and that her motion—

This is the motion that the House will get to vote on today. You know, we’re not dealing in the past. We’re dealing with a motion today that will protect that land in a very special way, and I want to thank the member for doing that. He listed all of the criteria. As the member for Windsor West said, her motion was only different in a few words.

Interjection: Eights words exactly.