Thank you very much, Speaker, and I thank my honourable colleague for the question. Yet again, you will see the NDP find any excuse to object to building houses. After the previous government failed the people of this province, we made a commitment to the people of this province. We will not follow their path. We will not let down the people of this province. We have a shortage of homes here in this province right now. We will have a further shortage if we don’t do something about it. After they failed—they held the balance of power for years. Was housing a priority, colleagues, for this government? Never. It took this Premier, this party to say, “We’re no longer going down that path.”

We will not let down the people of this province. We will build homes for the people. We will build. As newcomers come in, we will build the homes that they need. We will not let them down. We will find ways to make sure that the people of this province have a home to go to every night.

Interjections.

Whether it’s in Niagara, whether it’s east, west, north, in Toronto, the GTA, the people of Ontario will not be let down by this government, Mr. Speaker. We will build homes for them.

At the federal government’s recent announcement, with 500,000 new Canadians coming here—we will not let down the new Canadians that are coming here to look for homes, Mr. Speaker. We will not let down the previous generation.

We will expand the greenbelt. We will build homes in every corner of this province, because that’s what we promised to the people of this province.

Unlike the opposition—it doesn’t matter what the previous government did; they supported them along the way. With us, it’s a little different: We’re actually for housing in this province.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Mississauga–Erin Mills, there is a growing need for more supportive housing.

While our government has committed to supporting vulnerable and at-risk populations, the need in my riding is urgent. Many of our most vulnerable not only need a place to live, but they also require additional care and support.

Stated plainly, there is not enough housing supply. There is currently a lack of affordable housing availability that meets their specific needs, a situation which creates additional stress and pressures on those who are already facing challenges and difficulties.

Speaker, can the Associate Minister of Housing please share what our government is doing to meet the supportive housing demands in my riding?

I thank my honourable colleague for the question, Speaker.

This government has always been and will always be focused on making the lives of Ontarians better, particularly when it comes to finding a home. We’ve committed every resource available to ensuring families and individuals have a place to call home and a roof over their heads. That includes making sure that every person has access to the assistance and support they need.

Speaker, I was just in Mississauga alongside my colleague from Mississauga–Streetsville for an announcement for 40 supportive housing units with an investment of $4.5 million. We’ve invested $2.25 million in Brantford to create 26 bachelor units for vulnerable people experiencing homelessness, $3 million in Guelph to create 16 units, $2.5 million in Barrie to create 14 units, $1.8 million in Windsor to create 26 units, and $1.1 million in Simcoe for 18 units.

These are just a few of the examples of how we are building 3,100 housing units. We’re making the capital investments through the Ontario Social Services Relief Fund so that—

Thank you to the Associate Minister of Housing for the answer. It is clear that the lack of housing supply is one of the main barriers preventing Ontarians from finding a home. We have heard directly from experts that high fees are the main obstacle to building more supportive housing units in Ontario.

Speaker, again to the Associate Minister: What is our government doing to provide relief for the high fees imposed on builders to ensure more supportive housing units are available for those who need it most?

Thank you to the honourable member for the follow-up question. Not only are we investing the funding to make it possible to build supportive housing, we’re cutting red tape that’s blocking developers, non-profits and community partners from getting shovels in the ground. With our latest bill, we address concerns related to development charges. But I must emphasize all the supportive housing units that we’ve built thus far, Mr. Speaker, whether it’s investments in St. Thomas, where we built 20 units, or the $2.9 million in Thunder Bay for 98 units, $5.5 million in London to build 30 accessible modular home units—and there is much more to come.

This is a government that doesn’t leave anyone behind in this province. We will always make sure that every Ontarian is not only housed but has a home where they feel safe and supported.

That’s equity; that’s right. So to see the education dollars be the same, really, as the summer budget was pretty disappointing.

I want to end on the housing piece, because a lot has been said about the importance of housing. I think that we actually all agree that the value and the importance and the key factor of shelter in an economy cannot be underestimated. But to see the housing starts really costed out and downgraded already, Madam Speaker, is—I mean, I go back to process. Those 444 municipalities that got really shut out of the consultation process—I don’t think that that can be ignored.

Just to go back: Where we are right now is the FAO is forecasting a $100-million surplus this year. That surplus is expected to grow to $8.5 billion in 2027-28. He’s actually projecting surpluses for the foreseeable future.

The formula that the Financial Accountability Officer uses and the finance minister uses—they both consult with various economists, but those formulas are not that different. You look at job creation, you look at revenue through personal tax and corporate tax, and then you look at the expenditures that you’ve already allocated.

And then you have this little thing called the COVID fund, which actually is interesting because it was tucked away in the Ministry of Finance, and then it was sort of scattered out—which I had questions about, where it was being scattered out to. But remember that that COVID funding, originally, the goal of it was to help the province stabilize. Stability is having a very strong health care system with guaranteed resources which acknowledges the importance of paying people a fair wage so that you can actually retain them. And this seems to be the piece that the government is not willing to acknowledge, the importance of retention.

Retention is important not only because going through a hiring process and going through another recruitment process is costly and takes time away from patients, from clients, but you actually lose the expertise. Then what does the government do? The government looks at agency nurses, and those agency nurses don’t have a connection with the unit. They are dropped into a work environment where they don’t have connections, where relationships are not there. All I know is that they’re making sometimes double what our nurses who are on the regular roster in hospitals are making. What is that doing to the entire staffing human resources issue in our health care system? It’s drawing people out to work in the private sector, which the government is also funding at twice the rate.

Imagine if we had a government in Ontario that was truly committed to public health care. Imagine if when they used the word “innovation,” then people would say, “When they’re talking about innovation, they’re actually talking about investing in health care and ensuring that the people in our system are respected, and that the resources are there for children and for seniors in long-term care.” Imagine if innovation meant that for this government. It would be incredibly refreshing.

The government, as I mentioned, for the first time in 14 years—in the last quarter, so much money came into this place through high inflationary costs and through tax revenue that we saw, for the first time in 14 years, a surplus—first time, right? You remember what was going to happen, and that is that the former government had tied ending the operational deficit to our compensation. Of course, that should not be any priority for any of us here in this place, especially given what’s happening in Ontario, but that’s part of the piece of the legislation as well, that MPPs won’t be seeing any raise or any increase or even a third-party independent review of remuneration.

But that didn’t stop the government from—88% of them became parliamentary assistants, which comes sometimes with between a $13,000 and $16,000 increase. That didn’t stop the government from ensuring that their caucus was well cared for. That seems to be the trend. They like to take care of their people, and we try to remind them that we’re elected to take care of Ontarians. Ontario is not Ford Nation; Ontario is Ontario. We’re elected to treat those citizens with respect.

The reason why the fall economic statement, in our opinion, is so irresponsible is that it’s another missed opportunity for this government to acknowledge what’s actually happening outside of this Pink Palace to people in the health care system, in the education system. The move from an environmental perspective around the greenbelt has really galvanized many people in many rural ridings, because nobody is buying this narrative that, because of immigration, we have to build these mansions out on the greenbelt. That’s a misnomer.

Process matters. Denying us the opportunity as the official opposition to do our due diligence through the estimates process is truly something that actually hasn’t happened in this place. You’re in new, unchartered territory. Given Bill 28, you’re obviously comfortable creating chaos, but we are very determined to ensure that we bring the voices of Ontarians to this place each and every day, and to ensure that your budget and your investments actually match the needs of Ontarians.

Don’t take the risk. Don’t gamble with people’s health in Ontario. We can’t afford another economic downturn. If you paid attention to what the Financial Accountability Officer had said, it’s not worth the risk. Let’s make sure that we avoid another economic shock. Let’s try to stabilize.

I’m not sure if we’re even going to get a chance to try to make this piece of legislation better, but we’re certainly going to try. Thank you for your time and your attention today.

I noticed that the Ontario government has made a decision to change the definition of affordable housing. Currently, the city of Toronto has a definition of affordable housing that would put a one-bedroom unit at a purchase price of $190,000; that means you could buy that if you were earning about $58,000 a year. Well, now the Ontario government is looking at changing the definition of affordability so that a one-bedroom unit would cost $444,000, requiring a household annual income of at least $130,000, which is really shocking.

What is this government’s plan to build more affordable housing in Ontario?