My question is really—a bit of a confusion that I’m sensing here in the members opposite. The member referred to the 42nd Parliament; we started off with a bill at that point in time that reduced the size of Toronto city council. I’m not sure if anybody can help me, but I don’t think the sky fell when that bill passed. In fact, as far as I remember, it seems like things actually worked out a lot better.

Now we’re proposing another measure to deal with a crisis that is out there. We need the million and a half homes we want to build in Ontario over the next eight to 10 years. We need a lot of housing right across the country, and we are really, really struggling with being able to find that housing, so we’re trying to [inaudible] a measure here to try to remedy that situation, and all I hear is “no.” All I hear is complaining from the opposition.

Now, we went into this last election, and the opposition party has been reduced to the teeny, tiny little caucus that we see before us today. I’m just wondering if the member opposite will ever learn to say yes. That’s my question, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to thank the member from Hamilton Mountain for her comments. Like the member from Hamilton Mountain, I heard a lot on the doorsteps about the need for affordable housing. I heard it from families of all types and sizes, whether they owned their own home or they were renting. Another thing I’ve heard a lot about was tenants who risked being evicted from the housing that they had, because their landlord was trying to push them out, knowing that the landlord could jack up the rent to whatever they wanted for the next tenant.

What I did not hear anything about from any of my constituents—I did not hear it from my Conservative opponent, either—was a demand for any additional powers for the mayor. Even the mayor of Ottawa said he’s not interested in additional powers. So I’m wondering if the member can comment on whether it would have been a better option for the government to in fact introduce real rent control and vacancy control to address the housing crisis, rather than giving mayoral powers nobody is asking for.

Questions?

It should have been health care, and it should have been housing for real—real issues to fix housing, real issues to ensure that those same students I just talked about are not sleeping in closets with a single bed and less than $50 a week to eat. I’m sure none of your kids are doing that. Let’s make sure other kids in this province have the opportunity too.

Interjections.

His priorities are backwards. We should be talking about health care. We should be talking about real solutions to housing. We should be talking about affordability. There are so many things that we could be talking about instead of increasing the power of a couple of mayors, which aren’t even going to cover the whole entire province. How are they going to deal with regional chairs? How are they going to deal with those unelected folks who are appointed to these positions? I guess we’re going to have to wait until we see the regulations to actually understand fully the impact that this legislation is going to have on the people of this province.

So he’s looking for more power. This is all this is about. There is nothing in here that benefits the people of this province. The only thing this bill does is benefit the Premier.

The rental market is a big enough problem. We have people who are literally piling up into rooms to be able to have a roof over their heads. We have tents that are building up and building up and building up, because people do not have affordable housing. That could have been the first measure that came before this House—making sure that we were dealing with the renovictions, that we were dealing with rent stabilization, rent control. Instead, this government has removed any protections that there were in front, and then their first course of action is to provide the strong-mayors bill, which is nothing—I’m curious, actually. I would hope that maybe with the next question that comes forward, the member could take the time to tell me that their constituents specifically asked for this bill over health care and housing.

I want to thank the member for her submission today. I want to draw a parallel to what this bill would be like if this was the province. I would like all people to consider this fact: The Premier of Ontario, arguably the most powerful person in Ontario, has one vote in this chamber—a single vote, no veto power—and yet despite this, through appointments and through the power that he has over his own government, he’s able to win every single vote in this chamber. He doesn’t require these other additions to his power; he’s able to do it in all the same ways that mayors do it to win all their votes in their own municipalities. Now, super powers are being given to mayors only if they fall in line with what the Premier of this province wants, who already gets everything he wants.

Do you see any concerns, given the priorities this government has shown to give these powers to mayors who are not even asking for it?

Last week, the Toronto Star columnist Martin Regg Cohn wrote in support of Bill 3. He wrote that the Premier “got it right with” our stronger mayors plan:

“A weak mayor system keeps Toronto weak..... municipal amalgamation, paired with mayoral emasculation, equals political gridlock.

“By restoring balance to the equation, Ontario can help Toronto balance its budgets, sparing us the” usual fiscal crisis on council.

I want to give the member an opportunity to comment on the article that Martin Regg Cohn wrote.

It should have been health care.

Mr. Speaker, as someone who came to this country as an international student, I can tell you from experience how difficult and challenging it is to buy a house in the province of Ontario because of the inaction of the previous government, because they didn’t do anything to fix this crisis. We are the government that believes in action and that is why, this past election, we made a commitment to the people of Ontario that we would keep costs down and build 1.5 million new homes over the next 10 years, so that more people can afford to buy a house in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I don’t understand why the opposition continues to say no and oppose giving the tools to our local leaders to get things done. Why?

One of the things that I’ve definitely been talking to constituents in my riding about—because I border onto Mohawk College and McMaster is right there, and we have a lot of international students who are paying the highest tuition rates in the country right here, and this government has done nothing to support that. They also have to be able to afford to pay the rent. There is nothing in this legislation to support that. They’re barely able to keep up with meals and food. There are food fridges on campus, there are food banks being put up on a regular basis to help support these same students.

Why is the member supporting legislation that’s going to do absolutely nothing to address the concerns that he knows that he himself, his constituents and other international students who come to our country are also facing?

The member for Brampton West.

I know that throughout Ontario, people need a place to live. People need a place to grow, grow their families. And I keep hearing “crisis—the housing crisis.” The housing crisis, I said earlier, is a mental health crisis. The housing crisis is a suicide crisis in our communities. I know, in far northern Ontario, the First Nations, the 49 First Nations in NAN territory, their backlog of homes is 4,500 homes. How does this plan address the housing issue so we actually can have affordable housing?

Thank you to the member opposite for the question. As I said in my remarks, a home is foundational for a stable society, and if I look at, really, the time under the previous government, and supported by the NDP, there was no emphasis on building homes in general. There was no emphasis on building hospitals. There was no emphasis on building long-term care. There was no emphasis on building the skilled trades workforce that we needed to address this very, very necessary endeavour of creating more homes for people. In fact, I really don’t know exactly what we have to show for all the billions of dollars that were spent.

Look at the situation that we’re in with the homeless. Again, we look at families to try and make things affordable for them. So we’re building the skilled workforce. We’re building the homes. We’re building the hospitals. We’re building the long-term-care homes. I think about ODSP and I say, we’re creating historic amounts for ODSP. It’s the largest increase in decades.

I am very proud of the effort that we have made as a government acknowledging that Indigenous communities may have different needs. Our government’s policies have delivered historic results, getting more housing built faster, and complement our more than $4.3-billion investments over three years to grow and enhance community and supportive housing for vulnerable Ontarians and Indigenous people and address homelessness.

So this is something that everyone deserves: a place to call home. Everyone deserves to live in dignity and respect, and we must continue as a society to work towards that. I’m very proud of our government’s efforts in that regard.

Questions and answers?

I listened with great interest to the minister’s debate. She touched on some figures, and I think that was very important. She talked about some of the supply and how that affects the values of rent in Ottawa.

Rent is an important discussion. We don’t need to think back very far to actually think about how numbers affect that rental market. Think back to the spring of 2020 and all the way through to the following year in the spring of 2021. We weren’t talking about rent prices in this Legislature. Now, why was that, Speaker? Because the demand cratered, and that supply-demand imbalance corrected it, albeit temporarily. But the point is, supply and demand is the fundamental part of this equation that is leading to the high rent prices that we see. There’s no doubt supply is important on the rental side.

Two million more people are coming to this province in less than a decade. If status quo was working, we wouldn’t need changes. Can the minister talk about some of the urgency required in correcting this imbalance in supply and demand?

I’d like to thank the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services for your remarks. The minister noted that we have a housing crisis in Ottawa, and we certainly do. I’ve heard from many constituents over the course of the last year of the challenges they face in obtaining affordable housing, particularly rental housing.

The people I heard these remarks from the most are people who are receiving Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program payments. A person on ODSP gets only $1,169 per month. The person on Ontario Works gets only $733, when the cost of an average one-bedroom apartment in Ottawa is now $1,100. So someone on ODSP has only $69 left after acquiring housing. A person on OW doesn’t even get an income the level of rent in Ottawa.

We’ve already heard this afternoon that mayors across Ontario are saying they didn’t want this legislation. They didn’t ask for this legislation. They don’t need this legislation. It won’t make a difference for housing.

Doesn’t the minister agree that it would be better to double social assistance rates in order to actually increase the supply of affordable housing rather than legislation nobody is asking for?

Zero.

Interjection: Zero to 40.

I’m happy that I have the opportunity to ask the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services why she thinks this bill will actually help the people she has sworn to serve. She is responsible for ODSP. She’s responsible for Ontario Works, and those folks cannot afford a single apartment. They can’t afford the rent currently. What is it in this legislation that is going to help people on ODSP, people on Ontario Works, to be able to have safe, affordable housing?

We’ve heard about housing. We’ve heard about market rent. We’ve heard about everything. We have not heard the words “affordable housing” out of this government’s mouths. Could the minister please tell me what in this legislation is going to create affordable housing?

I listened to the minister’s speech intently. I want to thank the minister for sharing her thoughts. My question to the minister—who also happens to be a neighbour of mine in the great city of Ottawa—this past election, we made a clear commitment to the people of Ontario that we would keep costs down and build 1.5 million new homes over the next 10 years so that more people can afford to buy a home. So how would the proposed changes in this legislation lead to more shovels in the ground?

When we look at the legislation, you understand that our checks and balances are very important for our democratic system, but the complexity of problems has increased. I think if we look back to 100 years ago, the issues surrounding those people and those who came before us would seem complicated as well, but the level of complexity that we’re dealing with nowadays is increasing, and so time matters. I said that before. By streamlining this process and making sure that the checks and balances are there with the mayor and the council, we can get more shovels into the ground.

I just want to comment because it’s been a bit misleading. It’s making it sound like the councillors have no control in this at all, and that just isn’t the case. This includes robust safeguards and an important role for municipal councillors. We know councillors have a critical job representing the interests of their constituents, which is why this legislation gives council the ability to override vetoes with the support of two thirds of council members. This is an important check and balance.

In any case, if you understand supply and demand, these are basic economic principles, and as my colleague on this side mentioned, it is supply and demand, and if we cannot create an environment where homes are affordable because the supply exists, it won’t matter how much we give people; the supply still won’t be there.

The supply must be created. Time matters. That’s why the process that we go through at the municipal level to approve developments, to get shovels in the ground—as my colleague across the hall just mentioned, it is absolutely critical that the supply be there, that we’re training people to be—