That’s not what I said at all—

Thank you for your speech today and for talking about the UN climate report, where they said we need action on climate change—everything, everywhere, all at once.

What I have to say is what we see from this government—everything, everywhere, all at once is building on the greenbelt and building on protected lands, and that’s not the direction we should be going.

I was just at an announcement from the federal government, and they’re going to study the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve, which is where the government wants to build houses. There are many people there advocating against this, including people from Ontario Farmland Trust who said we are losing farmland and our watershed that’s integrated—it protects farmlands.

Can you talk about how this government is destroying farmland—building in the Holland Marsh with the Bradford Bypass, building near farmland—and not having a plan as to how we’re going to protect ourselves from climate impacts and actually feed ourselves?

Tomorrow I’m going to bring a motion to the Legislature that is going to ask this government to eliminate discriminatory practices for people on ODSP according to living conditions, for people who live in room and lodging. This government talks about eliminating red tape, and I think this regulation could actually alleviate some of the red tape concerns under schedules 2 and 3.

Can the member speak to some of the experiences he has heard from people who have reduced ODSP who live in a room-and-board situation—$867, compared to someone who lives independently, at $1,228. How could that red tape help alleviate the juries’ and the judges’ red tape that the government is proposing?

I would like to introduce six of my constituents who came down from Newmarket–Aurora today to hear second reading of my private member’s bill. I would like to welcome Donna Evans, Bob Evans, Carole Mirkopoulos, Lori-Ann Seward, Jean Bouchard, and Daniel Niesing.

Welcome to the chamber.

Report continues in volume B.

I would like to thank the member for Ottawa Centre for his passionate comments.

In your definition of red tape, you also pointed out the barriers that people face on the Ontario Disability Support Program.

During the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs discussion of the progress on the Plan to Build Act, Bill 36, on November 24, I added the words of Lane Sargeant, a constituent of mine. Lane wrote, “Worse yet, ODSP is even a hindrance when it comes to forming relationships. In many instances, disabled people lose benefits if they marry or cohabit, having to wager the value of the roof over their head against the chance at a stable relationship. We have to fill out questionnaires about our love lives to determine if we are worthy of groceries? The state has no business indeed.”

The government understands the red tape that has been created through the ODSP program yet chooses not to fix it. Why does the member think that they have chosen not to fix this within Bill 46?

We’re going to move to questions for the member.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion that the question be now put, please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion that the question be now put, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Interjection: On division.

We now move to third reading. Mr. Gill has moved third reading of Bill 46, An Act to enact one Act and amend various other Acts.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

Third reading agreed to.

Point of order, Speaker.

I want to thank the member from Whitby for that question.

Any time you are in Ottawa, I would love to introduce you to our farm-to-table movement. The farmers and our farmers’ market, the rural and the urban and the suburban, have a great, strong relationship, and they are critically important.

I would invite the member to consider that it’s not necessarily a good move to be moving into arable land, whether it be the greenbelt or whether it be other forms of land that can be used to grow crops, can be used for animal husbandry, can be used to make sure we can nourish and sustain the province that we want going forward. But I take the member’s point: These are critical industries.

I would also say—and I keep getting a reminder of this when I go to farmers’ market after farmers’ market—that the smaller operations are at a distinct disadvantage still and they are supported less in Ontario relative even to Quebec and other provinces in Canada. I think those smaller family operations are giving us a diversity of product for the consumer that deserves the government’s further support—something to work in the future.

As I think I’ve said in this place many times before, I really would invite us to not look at ODSP recipients as anything other than our neighbours, who have an enormous amount of talent to share with us.

There is no festival in the city of Ottawa that functions without ODSP recipients. To qualify for ODSP, you have to demonstrate that you can’t maintain a connection to full-time employment, but you can volunteer. I think about a fantastic organization like Bluesfest in our city. I invite any member to go with me this summer, if you want to see it for yourself. It gives people on ODSP and OW enormous opportunities to make new friendships, volunteer, be part of something, and that’s extremely valuable. But I would like to see an Ontario in which those folks can earn double the ODSP rate they currently have so they wouldn’t be showing up to do that voluntary work dishevelled, in obvious poverty, nursing injuries. That’s rough, and I know we can do better.

I thank the member for her work in spotlighting the issue, for sure.

On the issue of costs for business: My goodness, yes; we—both of us from Ottawa—could introduce you to hundreds of small businesses, through the pandemic and now—whatever moment we’re in now; we’re still in the pandemic—that have gone through a wrenching, difficult process and need help and support. I think everybody in this place would agree to that.

Reducing WSIB costs for big employers like McDonald’s and Loblaws and Home Depot—that was a handout, in many respects, to enormously profitable employers engaging in pandemic profiteering, often at the expense of workers.

So we have to really, when we think of supporting small operations—and the member has run one, so he knows. Let’s make sure the support goes there. McDonald’s and Loblaws and Home Depot—Galen Weston does not need our help, but main street needs our help, for sure.

What I can say is this—pro tip: I love this book. It was recommended by a community kitchen provider at home, Karen Secord from the Parkdale Food Centre. If you’re listening and you’re looking for something to read, pick up the book by Rutger Bregman, Utopia for Realists. It is one of the best cases for a universal basic income I have ever read. One of the chapters of that book says, “Give away money to the poor and watch economic growth happen.” It’s counterintuitive, I know, but here in Ontario—we had Feed Ontario in this building this week. They told us that poverty costs Ontario $33 billion a year—and if we doubled ODSP and OW, that’s about another what, members? About another $9 billion? Think about less strain on our hospitals and more dignity for people, less police interactions, less people incarcerated with multiple police interactions. We could give people dignity and give people opportunity, but we have to get over that hurdle of thinking that it’s coddling folks; it’s not. What’s expensive for Ontario is poverty.

Let me be just succinct at the end of my time: This is a debate about capitalism. This is a debate about whether or not we tell the very, very powerful folks in our economy that they can’t have everything they want. They make powerful cases to this government: “You need to give us access to this land, despite what you said previously about the greenbelt, despite what you said previously about not doing what the Liberals did.” They’ve been convinced that they need to, but this is a moment when the government has to use its influence to say no, because the evidence that I’ve read suggests we don’t need to develop into the greenbelt.

You don’t need to do what the Liberal government did once upon a time—what you’re poised to do now. You can save that arable land. You can intensify urban neighbourhoods like mine and save Ontario.

I’d like thank my colleague from Ottawa Centre for his presentation. He would have heard me earlier talk about the agriculture sector and agri-business for a couple of reasons. Durham region is not unlike other parts of Ontario. Beef farmers are really an integral part of the agri-food sector.

A couple of stats I want to leave with you, Speaker, before I move to questions: The beef cattle value chain is an estimated $1.41 billion, supports over 51,000 jobs, and represents $2.65 billion in gross domestic product.

Can the member from Ottawa Centre agree that ensuring the success of the Ontario Feeder Cattle Loan Guarantee Program is critical to supporting the Ontario beef farming sector and, in fact, our economy?