Absolutely, Speaker.

Good morning, everyone. It’s a great pleasure for me to rise for third reading of our government’s proposed Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act. At the start, Speaker, I want to note that I’ll be sharing the government’s time with the Associate Minister of Housing and the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Speaker, before I get into the meat of Bill 3, I want to take this opportunity, on behalf of the government, to express to all of the candidates for municipal office, who are vying for office on October 24, the government’s most sincere thanks for putting your name on the ballot. This is a tremendous time, and I want to thank each and every person for being a candidate in this year’s municipal election.

I also, Speaker—because in addition to being a former mayor, I’m a former CAO—want to take this time to thank all of the municipal staff. An election time is an incredibly busy time at municipal halls right across Ontario, and I know that the staff in all 444 municipalities have been working very diligently to ensure that October 24 goes off without a hitch. I want to thank them as well for their great work in making sure the election takes place.

If passed, our proposed legislation, Bill 3, along with the associated regulations, would give more tools to the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa to move provincial priority projects forward.

Speaker, I just want to say, it’s great to see you in the chair this morning. Thank you so much for the work that you do. Congratulations.

Foremost, Bill 3—among these priorities is our government’s commitment to build 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. This bill is both timely and necessary. Ontarians re-elected our government at a time when they are facing rising costs of living and a shortage of homes. They sent us back to work with a strong mandate because we promised to get more housing built faster, and also because they knew we could get the job done.

It’s no secret—and I think all my colleagues agree that it’s no secret—that Ontario is in the middle of a housing supply crisis. People are desperately looking for housing that meets both their needs and their budget, yet too many Ontarians are frozen out of the housing market. Young people are searching for their first home—a home where they’ll have room to have children, to grow their family, while being close to schools, work and essential services. It’s so very important.

Newcomers to Ontario are looking for a home that meets their needs as they strive to build a new life in this growing, vibrant province of Ontario. Seniors are looking to downsize, and they want homes that meet their needs as they age. Everyone is looking for something different, and that’s why we’re here today: because we believe this legislation is a piece of a larger puzzle that will help get more housing built faster for Ontarians.

We aren’t alone in thinking this legislation is a step in the right direction. I’d like to take a moment to highlight what we’ve heard about this proposal at committee. Before I remind my colleagues of the details of this proposed legislation, I think we have to have a conversation about how we got here. Since introduction just a few weeks ago, we’ve had some very clear support for this proposal.

Mayor John Tory, who has long supported a strong mayor system, noted that: “I always want to make sure city hall is working more efficiently and effectively for Toronto residents and businesses and that we make it as easy as possible to get things done....” I believe this proposed legislation does exactly that.

The Ontario Real Estate Association called this proposed legislation a “critical and an overdue step toward solving the housing affordability and supply crisis.” They go on to agree that the Strong Mayors Buildings Homes Act would “help cut red tape and speed up the local planning process by giving municipal leaders new tools and powers to help reduce timelines for development, standardize processes and address local barriers to increasing housing supply.”

Speaking to the committee of this House last week, the association’s vice-chair concluded that, “These new municipal powers will go a long way in addressing affordability, getting more shovels in the ground, incentivizing developers” to come and build in Ontario’s largest cities.

Meanwhile the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario said in written submission, “The proposed legislation provides a solid foundation to ensure that mayors have tools to combat the systemic barriers that exist at the municipal level that prevent housing from being built.”

I’d like to also share a quote, colleagues, from the Toronto Region Board of Trade from the summer: “Toronto faces numerous urgent city-wide challenges, from housing, land use, transit, transportation, budget, economic development and climate.... Effective, timely solutions require a city chief executive with clear authority to set an agenda, appoint senior city staff, and bring forward policy solutions to council....”

The board of trade goes on to say that for almost two decades, they’ve advocated for stronger powers for Toronto’s mayor, and they say, “Now is the time to act.”

Someone I don’t quote too often in this House—though I have played hockey with him from time to time; he’s a natural left-winger—is Martin Regg Cohn of the Toronto Star. He wrote that this government “got it right” with our proposed legislation, noting “it empowers the elected mayor to put forward his or her own vision for the annual budget, rather than remaining captive to a budgetary document written by committee....” That’s why we’re putting our trust in local leadership in Toronto and Ottawa. We’re proposing to give these mayors more responsibility to help deliver on our shared provincial-municipal priorities. Our government believes that a strong-mayor system would help address the housing supply crisis in these cities, and by highlighting just a few examples of the support that we have received on this matter, it is clear that we are not alone in our belief.

Madam Speaker, I want to talk about the Premier. He said again and again—and I’m using a direct quote: Mayors are “accountable for everything, but they have the same single vote as a single councillor.” That means that mayors, who have been elected by voters across an entire city, often have no more say on an issue than a lone councillor representing just one ward. Yet Ontarians want their mayors to be able to do more. They want their mayors to cut red tape, to get shovels in the ground and end the housing supply crisis. They expect them to be responsible for all of the other major projects and priorities in their city. They’re counting on their mayors to get the job done.

What is concerning is that we’re seeing too many priority projects fall behind. Some of them have been decided to be cancelled altogether. To be truly effective for their communities, mayors need our support. They need specific tools to bring these priority projects to the forefront and to get them complete. That’s why I’m proud to lead off third reading debate on our proposed Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act. The changes included here would, if passed, give the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa the ability to drive policy changes. It would give them the power to select municipal department heads and, perhaps most importantly, the power to present a budget. These abilities would help our municipal partners deliver on our shared priorities such as housing.

We know that empowered mayors could better help the province and municipalities to work together on housing and other initiatives that are critical for their communities. It’s something we need as we face record growth in the province of Ontario. Our population is going to continue to increase, and housing needs to keep up with demand. And what’s more, growth isn’t slowing down. In a way, Ontario is grappling with its own success. The high quality of life here and our future prospects have drawn many, many people to the province of Ontario. As our province continues to flourish and as we welcome more newcomers in search of economic opportunity, there will be even more pressure on our housing system. That’s why we need to take bold action, and we need to take it now.

Forecasts show that over one third of Ontario’s growth in the next decade is going to take place in Toronto and Ottawa. The good news is that these cities have shown us they’re shovel-ready for increased population and they’re committed to cutting red tape.

Madam Speaker, before I go further and explain the details of our proposed legislation, I want to answer an important question: How did Ontario get here? How did our province get to a point where we now have to make these steps as a government? Well, there was, and there still is, glaring evidence that municipal planning approvals, including appropriate zoning, have often delayed or hindered opposition from some members of local councils. Some projects have even been abandoned. Even if the project finally gets the go-ahead, a lot of damage has already been done in communities across this province.

The C.D. Howe Institute found restrictions and extra costs on building new housing has dramatically increased the price of housing. These restrictions include delays on project approvals. The institute found these barriers add approximately $168,000, or 22%, to the average cost of a single detached home in Toronto.

The Ontario Association of Architects also looked into the cost of delays. Taking a 100-unit condominium building in Toronto as an example, the association concluded that delayed approvals cost home builders approximately $2,000 per unit, per month.

In 2020, the Building Industry and Land Development Association, or BILD, reported that each month of delay—and this is just in permit approvals—adds $1.46 per square foot to the price of a low-rise project—$1.46 per square foot, and an additional $2.21 per square foot at the end cost of a high-rise development. That kind of cost increase, caused by unnecessary delays, has a significant impact on the lifetime of a project.

These delays are not just felt by developers. They’re felt by homebuyers, new condo owners and renters who are forced to push back move-in plans and, at the very worst, find temporary housing to fill in the gap between the previous lease and the new one. These are not problems that hard-working Ontarians should face, especially when the delays are avoidable.

RESCON, which is Ontario’s leading association of residential builders, also looked into the cost of delays. RESCON says we are now under-producing housing by 12,000 units per year here in Ontario because of delays.

Clearly the evidence and the alarms are there. We need to do everything we can to reduce delays and help ensure that new homes get built as quickly as possible.

I’d like to take a few moments, Madam Speaker, to explain specific ways in which our proposed legislation would support this growth in both Toronto and Ottawa. Our bill proposes changes to the Municipal Act, to the City of Toronto Act and to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. If passed, these changes, along with the associated regulations, would provide the heads of council in both the city of Toronto and the city of Ottawa with additional governance tools and increased powers to align municipal decision-making with provincial priorities.

The increased executive powers proposed under this legislation would allow the mayors of these two cities to better organize city hall. These mayors would be able to hire and fire a chief administrative officer as well as certain department heads. This would exclude, however, statutory positions like the clerk, the treasurer, the chief of police, the chief building official, the medical officer of health—there are a number of others that are used as examples. But they would be able to create or reorganize departments. Madam Speaker, they would also have the authority to appoint chairs or vice-chairs for committees and local boards, which we could identify in the regulations, and they would have the power to establish certain new committees.

The mayors would also be able to introduce items for council’s consideration if the item, in the mayor’s opinion, would advance a provincial priority. That means, if passed, these changes would enable the mayors of Ottawa and Toronto to direct items related to provincial priorities, as identified in regulation, for council consideration. This includes the ability for the mayor to direct staff to prepare proposals for council’s consideration.

I want to take this opportunity to pause and stress that the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa could support priority items, as well as their vision for their communities, through the ability to develop their municipality budget and then table it for council consideration.

Now, I know some on the other side are going to argue that this limits the role of city councillors. I want to stress to you, Madam Speaker, that there is still a lot of room to debate the budget on the council floor, something that I think we all feel is a very positive step. Council would be able to propose amendments to the budget; those amendments could be subject to a mayor’s veto. Again, Speaker, we believe the changes that we’re proposing still maintain a solid working relationship between council and the mayor.

Our proposed changes would also give those two mayors the ability to veto bylaws passed by council. However, and this is a very important point, the mayors could use their veto power on these bylaws only if—and I want to stress only if—all or part of the bylaw could potentially interfere with a provincial priority as identified by a regulation. So at the same time, mayors would still have just one vote at council.

Of course, Speaker, there has to be a system of checks and balances, and my parliamentary assistant, PA Holland, will speak to these checks and balances in more detail a little later on.

I wanted to share my time with my two colleagues, so I’m going to take this opportunity to pass the torch over to the Associate Minister of Housing. I look forward to both of my colleagues providing more details on this particular bill.

I’m just very pleased that we’re here today. This is critical for our government’s priority of building 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. It’s also critical that we work with the mayors of our two largest cities. As I said, over the next 10 years, we believe that over a third of Ontario’s growth will take place in Ottawa and Toronto. We need to give the mayors the tools to get the job done. This is something that the Premier and I heard loud and clear from the big city mayors when we met with them in January. They indicated that it wasn’t just municipal processes; the province needed to give them the tools to get the job done. This is one tool that our government is working on to ensure that that happens.

Madam Speaker, again, it’s great to see you in the chair this morning. I’ll turn it over now to the Associate Minister of Housing.

The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

I want to thank the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for sharing his time with me today. I would also like to thank the Associate Minister of Housing for his comments on this important legislation. When it comes to increasing the amount of housing in our province, our minister’s leadership has been unwavering. This leadership has set the standard for how we can work together to build more housing that suits the needs and budgets of hard-working Ontarians.

I want to take this opportunity to echo the minister’s point that this bill is both timely and necessary. Ontarians, young and old, need our support to get the right housing built for their families. The harsh reality is that housing construction has not kept up with our growing population. This has been the case for far too long. We know that more needs to be done. Most of this growth is happening in our big cities. In fact, as has been noted, over one third of Ontario’s growth over the next decade is expected to happen in Toronto and Ottawa. We need to take action to ensure that there is no political logjam hindering the potential that these cities offer. We need these mayors to cut red tape and get housing built faster so more families can realize the dream of attainable home ownership. Both current residents and those who are choosing to make Ontario home are counting on us. They want us to take bold action to increase the housing supply.

As you have heard, Speaker, our proposed changes to the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act and associated regulations would provide the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa with additional governance tools and increased powers to align municipal decision-making with provincial priorities. That is because, along with their projected population increases, Ottawa and Toronto are shovel-ready and committed to growth. We know that working together with municipalities on shared priorities will not only move things along faster but it will be tailored to the needs of local communities.

Municipalities are on the front lines of the housing crisis and they see the harmful impacts that a lack of homes has on their communities, from young professionals who can’t find housing close to where they work to parents who can’t afford a home for their growing families to seniors who can’t afford to downsize. That is why we believe this collaboration will help us to make the dream of home ownership attainable for Ontarians.

Of course, this is not the only time we have reached out to our municipal partners to help address housing supply. Speaker, let me take you back to earlier this year: We held our virtual Ontario-municipal housing summit in January so we could find ways to coordinate our efforts with big city mayors and regional chairs. We discussed the bold recommendations of the Housing Affordability Task Force, including proposals on planning approvals and removing the politics from local planning processes in order to make housing easier and less expensive to build.

We have also rolled out programs such as the Streamline Development Approval Fund, which is providing more than $45 million to help large municipalities streamline, digitize and modernize their approach to applications for residential developments.

We’re also engaging with all municipalities to discuss ways they can unlock housing. That’s why we also met with smaller, rural, northern and remote municipalities earlier this year at our rural housing round table. Understanding the full spectrum of experiences with the housing supply crisis, such as the cost of supplies, helps us to align housing and infrastructure needs based on the unique ways Ontario’s population continues to grow and change. Since then, we have kept the lines of communication with municipalities open.

Of course, just a few weeks ago, I was honoured to be one of the members of our government who met with municipal leaders at the Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference. It is a perfect forum to share new ideas and best practices as well as to promote discussion around policy recommendations that support increasing our housing supply. We’re happy to work with our municipal partners at conferences like this and also through proposed policy changes. That collaboration is what brings us here today.

If passed, the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act would empower a mayor to build a team that would help to bring forward shared municipal and provincial priorities—that is, get shovels in the ground faster for more housing and for the infrastructure that supports residential development. I will go into a little more detail on both of these priorities shortly, but I want to first focus on the specifics of how the mayors of both Toronto and Ottawa would be able to do this.

Step 1 is forging the path to empower these mayors. This proposed legislation would make changes to the City of Toronto Act in order to empower the mayor of Toronto, and the proposed changes to the Municipal Act, along with supporting regulation, would empower the mayor of Ottawa.

Step 2 is outlining what tools these mayors could access to take decisive action on our shared priorities. As we heard from the minister, if passed, this legislation would give the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa the power to hire and fire the chief administrative officer of the municipality, as well as certain department heads. This would not include positions such as clerk, treasurer, integrity commissioner, chief of police, chief building official, medical officer of health and others.

The mayor would also have the power to create and reorganize departments to better address the needs of their communities. The mayor would also be able to appoint the chairs and vice-chairs of identified committees and local boards as well as establish identified committees.

They would have the power to direct matters that further provincial priorities to council for consideration, and they would be able to direct staff to prepare proposals to support these matters.

This bill would also give the mayor the ability to direct a municipality’s budget and table it for council to consider. The council would then be able to propose amendments to the budget. These amendments would then be subjected to a mayor’s veto.

Speaker, those critical of our legislation would have you believe that we are sidelining the city councillors of Ottawa and Toronto, but nothing could be further from the truth. The system of checks and balances that we have built into this bill would keep councillors engaged in the process of local government and provide an important restraint on mayors. Council would be able to override the mayor’s veto of council amendments to the budget with a two-thirds majority vote. They would also have a certain amount of time to do so. Once that period of time is up, the municipality would have adopted the resulting budget.

The bill proposes a similar veto-override system with regard to bylaws passed by council. A mayor could use their veto power if they are of the opinion that all or part of the bylaw passed by council could potentially interfere with a provincial priority as identified in regulation, like building more housing for Ontarians, or if it prevented related infrastructure from being built.

The council override process is a counterweight in this instance as well. Just like with budget amendments, council could override a mayoral veto of bylaws related to provincial priorities with a two-thirds majority vote. To be clear, the mayor’s new ability to veto bylaws could only apply to matters that the mayor believed to potentially interfere with identified provincial priorities.

We trust Ontarians to elect the leaders that best reflect the needs and values of their communities. By extension, we trust these leaders to use these powers fairly when it comes to driving forward our shared priorities. That is why we’re holding them accountable for their choices. As an extension of this, mayors would be required to provide written documentation when using any of these new powers, in accordance with any associated regulations.

We are also proposing changes to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act that would require a mayor to declare any financial interests related to the use of their new powers. Speaker, they would not be able to use the new powers where any financial conflict exists. For example, if a mayor’s spouse applied to be the head of a certain department, the mayor would not be able to hire them as a department head because this would be a conflict of interest. It is also important to remember that council members, including the mayor, are already subject to legislated accountability and transparency rules.

Another point I want to raise is that because of this increased authority that we are proposing for mayors, we want to ensure that voters have their say if a mayor leaves office earlier than expected. That is why we propose requiring a by-election to replace a mayor with these increased powers if the office becomes vacant. That is distinct from the current practice, which is to give council the choice of either a by-election or an appointment by council.

The existing rules for how by-elections are run would still apply: for example, rules like how a municipality is not required to fill the position if a mayor’s seat becomes vacant within 90 days before voting day in the year of a regular election. And if a mayor’s seat becomes vacant after March 31 in the year of a regular municipal election, the municipality would be required to appoint a mayor, who would not have these new powers.

This would not impact the flexibility that these municipalities currently have in deciding how to fill other vacant council seats. They would have the choice to appoint someone or have a by-election in that case. I’d like to note that our proposed changes are intended to come into effect on November 15, 2022, in Toronto and Ottawa, right as the new term of council begins.

As I mentioned previously, some of these proposed changes to empower the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa pertain to matters of provincial priority. These provincial priorities would be laid out in a supporting regulation. I would like to highlight what these proposed provincial priorities could be in more detail.

Our government is committed to keeping costs down and building 1.5 million homes in 10 years to address the housing supply crisis. As the minister has mentioned on several occasions, the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act is not the first step we’ve taken to support this province-wide initiative, and it will not be the last. We’re making good on our promise to increase the number of homes for all Ontarians since 2019, when we introduced our first housing supply action plan, More Homes, More Choice. That plan is producing results.

In 2021, Ontario broke ground on a record number of new homes being built, with more than 100,000 new homes in only 12 months. This is the highest level of new housing starts in a single year since 1987. Last year, Ontario reached a 30-year record for new rental housing construction, the most units built in a single year since 1991.

To build off this momentum, we introduced More Homes for Everyone this year. It focused on targeted policies for the immediate term that would make housing fairer for hard-working Ontarians and make it faster to build the homes that families need and deserve. But with our commitment to build 1.5 million homes in 10 years, we are thinking long-term. That is why we plan to develop a new housing supply action plan annually for the next four years.

When we build more homes, we also need to consider the infrastructure that will support it. Another provincial priority we could lay out in regulation would speed up the planning, approval, construction and maintenance of infrastructure to support new and existing residential development. This is the infrastructure that you use every day, the things we don’t often think about but that we require, like running water, the road you commute to work on, the electricity you use in your home. Actioning the expansion, construction and maintenance of these services is absolutely essential, and we need to work to eliminate any barriers on delays. This will help us lay the foundation for building homes now and into the future.

As is now abundantly clear, our government is steadfast in our commitment to build new housing. That is why we are moving forward with more collaborative efforts with a variety of housing experts. Our new housing supply action plan implementation team will provide advice on market housing initiatives, including building on the vision from the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force, More Homes for Everyone and other government consultations that the minister referenced.

We recently appointed Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens as the team’s chair and Mayor Cheryl Fort of the township of Hornepayne as its vice-chair. They will lead a diverse group of experts in finding additional ways to build more market housing. The team will also be supported by additional stakeholders and industry experts who, if needed, may provide technical advice on specific topics, and they will be hitting the ground running. The team’s first meeting is scheduled for early fall.

Speaker, our government is committed to supporting municipalities and remains focused on improving planning policies and cutting red tape to get more homes built faster. We need municipal leaders to work more effectively to help reduce timelines for development, standardize processes and address local barriers to increasing housing supply.

We have set out a clear goal of building 1.5 million homes in 10 years, and we are working tirelessly to meet it, but we cannot do this alone. We need the support of our local partners, and by empowering the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa to move forward on our shared priorities, we are doing just that. We are counting on these mayors to help get things done at a local level so more families can realize the dream of attainable home ownership.

Madam Speaker, through you, I want to thank the member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke. He’s been a tremendous champion. I’m proud to have served with him in this Legislature.

He has also had some experience at the municipal level, and he knows that there has to be a coordinated plan by government to move forward. At the same time, we need to make sure there are checks and balances at the local level. As someone who served this province in municipal government, both as a mayor and as a CAO, I understand that there has to be that relationship.

But the one thing—and again I want to stress to the member—when we brought big city mayors and regional chairs together in January, when we followed it up with a rural round table on housing, over and over and over again, mayors and municipal leaders asked us to ensure that they have tools to get the job done. Bill 3 does exactly that.

We need to ensure that mayors have the tools to get it done, and I’ve met with the member opposite’s mayor. I’ve met with many municipal politicians in Niagara, and I know that housing is a huge priority. The regional chair and I have had many, many conversations about the chair’s vision for ensuring that those that need housing have a plan in place.

We need to work with municipalities. Bill 3 builds upon the success of More Homes, More Choice and More Homes for Everyone.

What our government has tried to do in every regulation and all the legislation we’ve tabled is to provide that climate for housing to be built faster, for municipalities to cut through some of the red tape that blocks development, that forces excessive delays. And our policies have been working. Last year, we had the highest year of housing starts—over 100,000—in over 30 years, but we have to build upon that success. We have to do more, build—

This Bill 3 provides the mayors of our two largest cities with the tools that they need to fast-track these types of developments.

Interjection.

Again, we have to realize that there is no silver bullet for housing. We have to continue to build upon the success of this government’s legislation in the past Parliament. We need to ensure mayors of our two largest cities have the tools to get it done. This tool builds upon the success this government has had. There’s much more work we need to—

In Niagara, we are in the midst of an affordable housing crisis. Residents in St. Catharines are living in fear. They are seeing the near-futureness of being homeless here in St. Catharines.

But giving mayors in Toronto and Ottawa more powers is not a solution to the affordable housing crisis in Niagara. In the Strong Mayors, Buildings Homes Act, there is no mention of the word “home” in the bill except the title, nor do I see a bold action plan to address affordable housing within the changes of the Municipal Act.

Will your government put in the provincial priorities and include affordable housing within Bill 3?

Minister, Associate Minister and PA, I want to thank you for your address this morning.

Since we were elected in 2018—the Ford government—we and you as the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing have incrementally and in a progressive way brought in legislation to try to address what we all see in this province as a housing crisis, where we need to build the homes to provide accommodation for the people we know are coming to the province of Ontario.

This latest bill, Bill 3—the opposition would have us believe that it is creating the emperor of mayors. And if they would read the bill, there’s all kinds of checks and balances put into this bill to ensure that council carries on as it should, but that the mayor has the ability to get past that red tape and ensure that it supports—

It’s a pleasure to rise again and speak to Bill 3. Before my critique of the bill, I want to join the minister in thanking all of the candidates who have put their names forward for municipal office across Ontario. There’s a troubling trend out there. We saw record low voter turnout in our provincial election and we’ve seen a real decrease in the number of people coming forward to run for municipal office. After a long pandemic and some of the difficult issues that are out there, I really commend folks who have put their name forward for office.

I would also join him in thanking municipal staff across the province. I don’t want to forget about the front-line staff who have worked so hard through the pandemic and municipal employees. My friends from St. Catharines and Niagara Falls joined me a couple of weeks ago at a rally in Niagara; over 1,000 workers with CUPE, with less than 2% on the table and trying to negotiate a collective agreement when there’s 7%, 8% inflation out there. We have to make sure our municipalities are well funded and that we can keep up with our obligations to those hard-working municipal staff all across the province.

I also want to thank the delegations that came forward to present. We had our committee last Monday, and despite the fact that there were only a couple of days for delegations to put their names forward for the committee, there was actually quite a bit of interest and a number of folks came forward. I want to thank people from the Ontario Home Builders’ Association; Myer Siemiatycki, a professor of politics and public administration at Toronto Metropolitan University, who I’m going to be quoting a fair amount today; the Association of Municipalities of Ontario—of course, we appreciate all the work that they do and their presentation.

We heard from the Residential Construction Council of Ontario and the Ontario Professional Planners Institute, who we had a good conversation with regarding the government’s plan to allow mayors to unilaterally hire planners, which I’m going to be talking about.

We heard from the Ontario Real Estate Association. The Ontario big city mayors’ Cam Guthrie spoke, and I’m going to be talking a little bit about his presentation. We heard from the Toronto Region Board of Trade—we want to thank them for presenting—the Federation of Rental-Housing Providers of Ontario and the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario, who also talked to us about the government’s plan to allow mayors to hire and fire CAOs and top managers in the municipality. We heard from the Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods, Indwell Community Homes, the Ontario Municipal Administrators’ Association—again, on this troubling plan by the government to allow mayors to hire and fire unilaterally—and Compass Refugee Centre.

Thank you very much to all of those who came and presented, delegations, and also to my colleagues from Ottawa Centre and University–Rosedale, who I’m sure will have a lot to say about housing and about the resistance to this bill in Ottawa and the many, many concerns from the city of Ottawa, where virtually no one is in favour of it, that I’ve heard, from city council, including the mayor.

All of the delegations agreed that we need more homes—that’s one thing that everyone agreed on—and we all agreed that we need more affordable homes.

Some of the things that we’re not agreed upon that I’m going to be talking about are whether this bill will actually do anything to create homes, because I don’t think that that connection has been made, and how a mayor will use these powers. It’s interesting that the government assumes that mayors will automatically use these powers to build more homes, but it’s up to the discretion of the mayor or their politics. What happens if we have a NIMBY mayor? With this legislation, you can have a strong NIMBY mayor who can unilaterally hire a NIMBY CAO and a NIMBY planner. Just giving someone powers doesn’t determine how they’re going to use those powers. That’s something that many of the delegations raised, and this government, I don’t think, has really explained how that’s going to work.

No one seems to understand what the provincial priorities are specifically and how they would be promoted by a strong-mayor scheme. How does that translate from the province to getting the mayor to do what, presumably, the Premier or the minister want to happen?

There’s also a great deal of confusion, I think, on the government’s part in distinguishing between the Canadian and the American municipal government systems, which they should understand are fundamentally different. One does not necessarily translate to the other. City managers are not CAOs. City managers in the US are not CAOs in Canada—very different. And of course, the financial structure is different. American municipalities can go bankrupt, so the financial structure—

Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

The supplementary.

There being no further business at this time and it being Tuesday, this House stands in recess until 3 p.m.

The House recessed from 1141 to 1500.

MPP Wong-Tam moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 18, An Act to proclaim Consent Awareness Week / Projet de loi 18, Loi proclamant la Semaine de sensibilisation au consentement.

First reading agreed to.

Thank you to the member for that important question. We all need to make sure that we are going in the right direction. We want to build 1.5 million homes in 10 years. This is a requirement, that we need to have it, but at the same time, we want to make sure that we elect the right local leaders, and that is the reason I said that in my remarks as well. We have trust in the people of Ontario that they are going to elect the right people.

Having said that, Madam Speaker, I just want to say that it would not limit the powers of the members of the council. They will continue to play an important role, and along with that, every planning department would have a say in this process. What we are changing is that we are making sure that we are cutting the red tape and we are giving the right tools with the right powers to the mayors.

Going back to what the member said: Our priority is to address Ontario’s housing shortage, and as we committed in the last election, we promised 1.5 million homes built in 10 years, and we know this will only be possible if we work closely with our municipal partners. And that is exactly what this bill is doing. We’re making sure the mayors have the tools to make sure that they are able to help our provincial priorities.

I’m happy to have the opportunity to rise today to speak on Bill 3, the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act. The title is a real misnomer, Speaker, since the bill doesn’t actually do anything to support the building of new homes, particularly homes that people can afford. But I’m always happy to talk about the need for affordable housing and what the government can and should be doing to make sure that everyone can find an affordable, adequate, high-quality place to call home.

But let me come back to this point, because first I want to talk about what this bill does do, which is to undermine local democracy. This bill and the government’s failure to actually consult mayors and municipal governments clearly show what little respect this government has for democracy and accountable government in general.

Let’s take Ottawa, for example. Ottawa is one of the two municipalities targeted by this bill, but no one in Ottawa wants this bill, no one in Ottawa asked for this bill, no one in Ottawa needs this bill and no one in Ottawa was consulted on this bill. Just last Wednesday, every single city councillor in Ottawa, and the mayor, voted unanimously against this bill. The government can’t even get one single city councillor from Ottawa to support this bill—not even one—and it’s not easy to get unanimity from the Ottawa city council these days. The government has made it absolutely clear that they want to push this bill through with no consultation with affected city councils and communities, and no compromise—just like they did with Bill 7, just like they did with the budget. There is a clear pattern of behaviour from this government regarding unpopular, unnecessary legislation that we’ve seen time and time again. They come up with a piece of legislation that no one asks for, don’t consult the people it might actually affect and then push it through the chamber with as little possible debate as they can get away with.

In response to the perfectly valid and reasonable objections of city council, the government predictably says, “Well, of course, city councillors don’t want this bill. They get in the way of developers building housing. We’re giving the mayor the power to fix this. We’re doing this so the mayor can have almost total executive control, work around city council and get more housing built.” But guess what, Speaker? The mayor doesn’t want the bill either. The person they’re arguing needs these powers to be able to build more housing isn’t just opposed to the legislation, but he says it makes no sense at all.

The mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson himself, said, “It’s really a stretch to try to think you’re giving more powers to the mayor, it’s going to magically create more housing units in the City of Ottawa—it’s just a little of a bizarre situation.”

He added that he doesn’t feel it is right to give the mayor of a city “extraordinary powers” at the expense of all other members of council.

Watson has also called it “a solution looking for a problem.”

Catherine McKenney, candidate for mayor of Ottawa and a very strong supporter of more affordable housing, said of these powers, “I’ve never supported strong-mayor model. It’s undemocratic. It takes away the democratic rights of residents who elect both a mayor and the councillors.... To be able to overrule any decision by council with only 33% of the vote essentially and it’s not what we need to move forward to make our city more affordable for everyone.

“What we need really is a strong-city model where actual cities have more power. Very little has been denied. Applications come to us and most have been accepted. I find it hard to understand how this will allow developers to push projects through any quicker.”

It’s not just the mayor, mayoral candidates and city councillors who oppose this legislation. The head of a federation of 70 Ottawa community groups representing residents across Ottawa has called on the provincial government to scrap its proposed Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, calling the bill “unwarranted and undemocratic,” and noting that it will do nothing to build more affordable housing.

Robert Brinker, the president of the Ottawa Federation of Citizens’ Associations, wrote to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing that the organization “opposes Bill 3 as unwarranted and injurious to our well-established democratic practices in Ottawa.” Brinker said, “While ‘building homes’ forms part of the bill’s title we see no provisions in this bill that would accomplish this.”

The Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods, which represents community associations across the province, said of this bill: “This legislation is unprecedented and marks a huge shift in governance of Ontario’s municipalities. Urban municipalities are governed by democratically elected city councils. The decisions of civic governments have been the collective responsibility of those elected city councils, not the singular responsibility of one member. While democracy isn’t always perfect, citizens of urban municipalities have generally been satisfied with their form of representative government.”

So there we have it, Speaker. City council doesn’t support this bill. The mayor doesn’t support it. Community associations don’t support it. It’s undemocratic, irrelevant to the needs of Ontarians. This bill does not build more housing.

But what’s not in dispute is the need for more affordable housing. What the mayor of Ottawa and city councillors and other stakeholders are pointing out is that the province already holds a lot of tools that they could use to expand affordable housing any time they want to. As Mayor Watson says, this government could provide more funding to support the development of housing and expand inclusionary zoning to cover the entire city. The government could be implementing real rent control and vacancy control to make sure that people aren’t squeezed out of the housing they already have.

But while the government could be doing all these things, they’re not. There’s nothing in this bill that actually expands the supply of affordable housing, nothing that takes steps to make sure people can afford the housing they’ve already got. Constituents in my riding are crying out for affordable housing, but this bill does nothing to help them.

I’d like to share a few stories with the government about what life is really like for my constituents when it comes to housing.

In June, two constituents in my riding of Ottawa West–Nepean reached out to my office pleading for help. For their safety, they wish to remain anonymous. While they were at work, their landlord changed the locks. Because they had no protection under the Residential Tenancies Act, as they were boarders, not renters, the police were of no help. These constituents, one a former military service member with 12 years of service, became homeless overnight.

They had no options for affordable housing, and the Ottawa Community Housing wait-list has people waiting an average of eight years. And that’s just the average; many wait much longer. The lack of affordable housing has pushed them into a precarious living situation, as it does with many people across Ontario. These constituents told my office that they don’t have any other options for housing, and, because the government is making life so difficult for them, they have decided to leave Ontario. They said, “Every system is broken, and we don’t have enough working years remaining to justify staying.”

Homeless veterans on the streets of Ontario. These aren’t just numbers on a page or statistics; these are real human beings experiencing the consequences of this government’s decisions.

Jocelyn, a resident of Ottawa West–Nepean, is living with a brain tumour. She is in constant pain, dealing with headaches and fatigue which does not allow her to work. She applied for ODSP but was told she was ineligible because she didn’t fit the criteria. With no other options, Jocelyn turned to Ontario Works and was approved, but this meant she could no longer keep up with her rent payments. She applied for Ottawa Community Housing and was approved for the urgency list, but with the urgency list averaging a two-year wait, she had to find another living situation immediately. The only affordable option for Jocelyn was to live in a shared space with a roommate.

Jocelyn’s living situation left her in turmoil because her new roommate was abusive. Her only saving grace was her small 14-year-old dog who had been with her for this entire journey. Jocelyn exhausted every effort to find another affordable living situation, but the only option left was to move into a women’s shelter until she could find affordable housing.

Today, Jocelyn is living in a women’s shelter in the east end of Ottawa, but she was forced to separate from her dog, which is causing her a lot of anxiety. She was just approved for ODSP, but it is still not enough to pay for first and last months’ rent on an apartment. Instead, she is forced to wait at least another year until an affordable unit becomes available.

Another constituent in my riding, Eloise, had reached out to me with fears that her landlord is trying to evict her from her unit. She has lived in the same unit for 44 years and is seeing similar units become vacant and get listed at almost double what she pays.

Over the past several years, as she has become aware of this issue, she has witnessed a number of older tenants coerced into moving out, only to see their units re-rented at much higher rates. She fears that she is her landlord’s next target.

Recently, the landlord has been visiting her unannounced, requesting entry and searching for ways to file claims with the LTB against her based on the arrangement and upkeep of her unit. She has complied with every demand and has ensured that her unit is safe, yet the visits continue. She is finding that this is having a huge impact on her physical and mental well-being. Her doctor has even noted a significant decline in her health since this began, because of anxiety associated with harassment from her landlord.

At 68 years old, on a fixed income, she knows that if she is evicted from this unit her housing options will be incredibly limited, and if she applies for affordable housing, she will be 76 before she gets into a unit. At her age, an eight-year wait is too long.

So how is this bill going to make life any easier for the people in my riding? How is this bill going to help the homeless veteran? How is it going to help Jocelyn and Eloise? How is it going to help the many, many residents of Ottawa West–Nepean who are struggling to find affordable housing or to cover the costs of the housing they are desperately trying to retain right now?

Speaker, the government is not fooling anyone. This bill does not do anything to make life more affordable. It doesn’t build affordable housing. It doesn’t make our local government more accountable to residents who are in desperate need of affordable housing. In fact, it makes local democracy less accountable.

The solutions we need to the housing crisis don’t require a bill to centralize power in the hands of one all-powerful figure. We need to build more affordable housing and more co-op housing. There’s a crisis with a lack of genuinely affordable housing in our cities, towns and rural communities, especially for low- and limited-income households, racialized and Indigenous households, newcomers, people with disabilities and other marginalized communities.

Ottawa has a particular lack of affordable housing that is getting worse. Most of the affordable housing supply in Ottawa is rent-geared-to-income units within not-for-profit developments that are specifically built and operated to support affordability. We continue to have a very low vacancy rate for market-rate housing in the city, and very high rent. There are 500 families in hotel and motel rooms around the city right now. Some of them have been there for two years—two years with kids—waiting for affordable housing.

There are around 10,000 households alone on the centralized wait-list for social housing in Ottawa, with wait times for social housing often as long as eight years or more because the demand is so much greater than the supply. We need to increase the supply, with a special focus on increasing non-profit housing and the funding that non-profit housing organizations receive, not a bill that turns our mayors into all-powerful CEO figures who will somehow magically create housing units out of thin air through sheer force of will.

And when we’re talking about affordable housing, we also have to look at the income side of the equation, because how are you going to pay for housing if you don’t have the money to pay for it to begin with? This government has already thrown Ontarians with disabilities under the bus by legislating a paltry 5% rise in ODSP payments. Inflation this year alone is 8%, and that doesn’t take into account the fact that ODSP has been frozen for the last four years.

A person on ODSP gets $1,227 a month. A person on Ontario Works gets only $733 a month. The average one-bedroom apartment in Ottawa costs $1,100 a month. That leaves a person on ODSP with only $127 after rent. A person on Ontario Works doesn’t even get enough income to cover rent. So how are folks on social assistance going to afford one of the Premier’s new McMansions if they can’t even afford rent, let alone enough money left over for basics like food and heat?

The government also cancelled the increase to the minimum wage when they took office, putting minimum-wage workers years behind where they should be. That move cost a full-time minimum wage worker more than $5,000. That’s a lot of money that could have helped with rent. And now, when we have a cost-of-living crisis, the Premier is only increasing the minimum wage by 50 cents. That’s a 3.3% increase when inflation is 8%, so you can do the math on how far ahead workers will be. The government could start helping low-income households by progressively raising the minimum wage to $20 an hour and put more money in working people’s pockets, but they’re not going to do that, because it cuts their buddies’ profit margins.

Then we have the CUPE education workers, who provide such dedicated and necessary support to our kids, but half of them have to work two jobs just to make ends meet. They’ve taken an 11% real wage cut over the past decade. The government is driving them into poverty. On $39,000 a year, these educational workers are struggling to afford housing when costs are escalating rapidly. But instead of negotiating with them, the government is attacking them. Instead of hiring more educational assistants to support our kids, the government is pumping money into private tutoring and services outside of the school system.

We’re also seeing in real time the dramatically negative effects of Bill 124 with our nurses and health care heroes, but it’s the whole public service that has been feeling the pinch: real wages down, resources down, more private outsourcing, more profits for middlemen, and a two-tier system for public services where if you’re rich and wealthy, you can buy high-quality health care or private education for your children. But it’s middle-class and working-class families that are paying the price. It’s seniors and marginalized citizens who are feeling the pinch as they can’t afford to go private. They can’t even pay their rent when they’re forced into legislated poverty.

This government’s new slogan, created by their spin doctors, is that they get it done. Well, they’ve gotten a lot done. They’ve driven our health care system to the brink of collapse. They got that done. They’ve legislated those on ODSP and Ontario Works into poverty, so got that done too. They’ve devalued, disrespected and underpaid our health care heroes, causing them to leave their profession in droves. Anyone that’s trying to get care for themselves or a loved one in our province can see just how clearly they’ve got that done. They’ve pushed through Bill 7 without any public consultation or hearings so that they can tear families apart and send seniors and persons with disabilities far away from their loved ones and their communities. Well, mission accomplished, Speaker. They certainly got that done. And now they’re going to do it to our municipal government, too.

No new measures to address affordable housing, but mayors who can veto the democratic will of the people’s representatives: That’s quite an accomplishment. I urge this government to drop Bill 3, stop legislating those on low incomes into poverty, and use the tools you have available to build affordable housing provincially, instead of vandalizing our local democracy.

Members of this chamber might be forgiven—and their laughter demonstrates it—for not paying day-to-day attention to the planning decisions and debates at Ottawa city council; I can forgive you for not paying that close attention. So let’s make sure we know what we’re talking about.

Last fall, after literally years of work, after countless public delegations, negotiations with the home-building industry, consultations with community associations and other stakeholders, after extensive discussions and debates, Ottawa city council came to consensus—without a veto, without a carrot and a stick—and approved a new official plan. That was October 27, 2021, almost a year ago. Within this official plan, there are proposed plans for urban expansion to help create more neighbourhoods by partnering with the Algonquins of Ontario, an important part of Ottawa’s efforts towards reconciliation. In addition to adding these development lands, the official plan includes a direction to achieve the majority of growth through intensification and growing the city around rapid transit systems. It recognizes the city’s climate change master plan and seeks to reduce Ottawa’s greenhouse gas emissions by 100% by 2050. It includes higher density around higher-order public transit. The city, through the official plan, is embracing the idea of 15-minute neighbourhoods, not just in the downtown or inside the urban core, but in the suburbs as well. New communities in Orléans and Barrhaven and Kanata and Findlay Creek are now more dense than inner urban areas like the Glebe and Old Ottawa South.

Ottawa has the vision to address major issues facing us as a society. Creating livable communities with active transportation is a step towards dealing with Ontario’s affordability crisis. It’s a step towards the climate crisis. It’s a step towards addressing the physical fitness crisis. And it’s a step being held back by this government. The plan laid out in Ottawa’s official plan clearly provides the solution to tackling some of Ontario’s most serious social problems. It’s a plan that will spur growth and move housing forward—housing of all types—not just in Orléans, but across the city of Ottawa. And it’s stalled by this government. When council approved the plan last fall, the law said that the minister had 120 days to approve it. That would have left the decision until about March. Ottawa’s official plan continues to sit on the minister’s desk, collecting dust, waiting for approval. So, despite this minister and this government claiming that red tape is their enemy and that cutting it is imperative to solving the housing crisis, they’ve wrapped Ottawa’s aggressive housing goals in an enormous ball of red tape, and that ball of red tape is the minister’s signature.

If this government is serious about addressing Ontario’s and Ottawa’s housing crisis, the minister should first approve Ottawa’s official plan to get housing built, to bring in new lands for new communities, to address density and intensification around transit infrastructure.

As I’ve said, this is not a housing bill or a housing plan; this is a municipal governance bill.

I pointed out the important work that the city of Ottawa has done to measure its progress on so many critical elements of change.

I found it interesting that, in committee, an amendment to allow for the measurement of new housing built as a result of this bill was ruled out of order. It was ruled out of scope for the bill.

It was ruled out of scope, not late. It was ruled out of scope, Madam Speaker, for the bill. So, if tracking the supposed results stemming from a piece of legislation is out of scope, then I don’t know what we’re doing. If we’re not going to track the results of what we do, what are we doing at all? It was ruled out of order because even the government knows that this is not a housing bill. It was ruled out of scope because it doesn’t address housing and the amendment was about housing. So even the government knows that this isn’t a housing bill. It’s a municipal governance bill, and one that doesn’t address the most important governance issues facing Ontario municipalities.

Given that this bill is about the city of Toronto and the city of Ottawa, the first thing they should do is to approve Ottawa’s official plan: to bring new lands into the urban boundary, to change policies around intensification and density around transit, to address the missing middle, and to help Ottawa build more and better 15-minute communities for all the residents of the nation’s capital.

I know that the mayor was caught off guard. We were at the Navan Fair a day later, and he told me that he had yet to be called about this bill.

Certainly, if you’re going to make change and work collaboratively with municipalities in Ontario, the easiest thing you can do is pick up the phone and have a chat before you go to a microphone.