I’d like to recognize some of the members that have joined us today from the Ontario Commercial Truck Training Association, OCTTA. They were here meeting with a couple of our ministers regarding some of the issues from their community. I want to recognize Narinder, Burinder. Narinder Jaswal and the entire team, thank you for coming. Burinder, as well, thank you for being here. I hope you enjoy today’s proceedings.

Ms. Jones moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 135, An Act to amend the Connecting Care Act, 2019 with respect to home and community care services and health governance and to make related amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 135, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2019 pour des soins interconnectés en ce qui concerne les services de soins à domicile et en milieu communautaire et la gouvernance de la santé et apportant des modifications connexes à d’autres lois.

Yes. The proposed Convenient Care at Home Act amends the Connecting Care Act, 2019, to establish the service organization. The service organization is a corporation under the name of Ontario Health at Home. The existing local health integration networks are amalgamated to become the service organization.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Erin’s Law amends the Education Act to ensure every board shall develop a policy to engage their pupils annually in all schools under their purview, in a developmentally appropriate manner, regarding the topics of child sexual abuse prevention and reporting, including age-appropriate techniques to recognize child sexual abuse and tell a trusted adult;

“Whereas each board is also required to provide information annually on these topics to parents and guardians, as well as teachers and other staff in schools;

“Whereas to ensure the workforce is prepared, it will include:

“—building upon the mandatory sexual abuse prevention training introduced in September 2022, the zero tolerance for sexual abuse policy by the Ontario College of Teachers and the health and physical education curriculum introduced in 2019; and

“—personnel curriculum must cover the warning signs of child sexual abuse and mandated reporting, how to appropriately respond to disclosure, how to talk to parents, and how to speak to students about child sexual abuse prevention;

“Whereas every board shall ensure that information respecting child sexual abuse prevention and reporting, including information on available counselling and resources for children who are sexually abused, is available to all parents and guardians of pupils enrolled in schools of the board; and

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario support the passage of the Education Amendment Act (Erin’s Law).”

I will gladly sign this and give it to page Clara.

I’m very proud to welcome the faithful from the Marian Shrine of Gratitude. There are many, many, and some of them are here with us today. They are Domenica Forini, Carlo Forini, Matteo Cavellini, Angela Carboni, Johnny Biafore, Stanislaw Sokolik and Lucy Capili. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and thank you for being here.

“Save Our Marian Shrine.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Marian Shrine of Gratitude is a sacred place in our community, where people have been gathering for many years to pray and seek a connection with their spirituality and is believed to be the site of several miracles;

“Whereas the government has an obligation to identify and protect sites of cultural, heritage, and provincial significance;

“Whereas we believe the shrine and buildings on site are of significant provincial heritage, cultural value and meet the criteria outlined in the Ontario Heritage Act;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to designate the Marian Shrine of Gratitude as a property under the Ontario Heritage Act thereby protecting it for future generations” to come.

I certainly support this, will by signing my name and giving it to page Sofia.

This petition is signed by over 1,000 parents, students and people in Ottawa. The petition is titled: “Petition in Support of the Resignation of the Ottawa Student Transportation Authority General Manager and Executive.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ottawa Student Transportation Authority (OSTA) is responsible for all home-to-school transportation on behalf of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) and the Ottawa Catholic School Board (OCSB); and

“Whereas OSTA’s mission is to deliver safe, efficient, effective and equitable multi-modal transportation solutions for students with superior customer service for OCDSB and OCSB; and

“Whereas two days before the 2023 Labour Day long weekend which marks the beginning of the school year for OCDSB and OCSB students, OSTA informed parents their routes were cancelled, negatively impacting thousands of children in the city of Ottawa, including rural Ottawa; and

“Whereas OSTA reported as recently as September 14, 2023, that the route cancellations were due to ‘funding pressure’; and

“Whereas the Ministry of Education confirmed that throughout the summer they worked with the OCDSB, OCSB and OSTA to address the ‘funding pressure’ and committed to supporting the school boards with additional funding;

“Whereas OSTA failed to inform parents that the” additional “funding pressure was addressed; and

“Whereas OSTA refused to give parents a voice at the table and ejected an elected official from a ‘private’ meeting that was intended to provide an update to Ottawa city councillors; and

“Whereas 80% of reported school bus cancellations in the province of Ontario for the 2023–24 school year are attributed to OSTA; and

“Whereas OSTA has year after year” continuously “failed to meet its mission statement to deliver safe, efficient, effective and equitable multi-modal transportation solutions for students with superior customer service for OCDSB and OCSB;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the Minister of Education mandate the immediate resignation of the general manager of the Ottawa Student Transportation Authority as well as all OSTA executives, and the Ministry of Education oversee the hiring of new, competent leadership at OSTA who are capable of doing their job and will commit to being transparent, open and accountable to the public.”

I will sign my name to this petition and give it to page Constantine.

I received hundreds of signatures across Ontario about the following petition to support access to spine care in Ontario. It reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas people waiting for complex spinal surgeries, including scoliosis, are forced to wait for years in debilitating pain for the care they need, risking lifelong consequences and deterioration in function;

“Whereas surgeons are willing and able to help, but the system puts up many barriers. Surgeons face the difficult choice of offering routine spinal surgeries—which guarantee compensation—over complex spinal surgeries, further lengthening the wait times for patients with complex cases;

“Whereas the lack of collaboration between the Ministry of Health adjudicators and providers has led to challenges in conducting fair and accurate assessments of complex cases;

“Whereas Ontario’s funding for complex cases for spinal surgeries, derived from the general funding bucket, deprioritizes complex spinal surgeries, over routine/simple surgeries;

“Therefore, we the undersigned petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

“—address the ever-increasing wait times and make complex spinal surgeries available in a timely manner;

“—immediately improve access to surgery for complex spinal conditions by increasing and equitably funding spine care in Ontario hospitals.”

I support the petition, and I am signing it as well.

J’aimerais Jess Montgomery, de Lively dans mon comté, pour ces pétitions.

« Attendu que les enfants francophones ont un droit constitutionnel à une éducation de haute qualité, financée par les fonds publics, dans leur propre langue;

« Attendu que l’augmentation des inscriptions dans le système d’éducation en langue française signifie que plus de 1 000 nouveaux enseignants et enseignantes de langue française sont nécessaires chaque année pour les cinq prochaines années;

« Attendu que les changements apportés au modèle de financement du gouvernement provincial pour la formation des enseignantes et enseignants de langue française signifient que l’Ontario n’en forme que 500 par an;

« Attendu que le nombre de personnes qui enseignent sans certification complète dans le système d’éducation en langue française a augmenté de plus de 450 % au cours de la dernière décennie;

Ils et elles demandent à l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario « de fournir immédiatement le financement demandé par le rapport du groupe de travail sur la pénurie des enseignantes et des enseignants dans le système d’éducation en langue française de l’Ontario et de travailler avec des partenaires pour mettre pleinement en oeuvre les recommandations. »

J’appuie cette pétition. Je vais la signer, et je l’envoie à la table des greffiers avec la page Ella.

I am pleased to be able to read this position entitled, “Save Ontario Place.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario Place has been a cherished public space for over 50 years, providing joy, recreation, and cultural experiences for Ontarians and tourists alike and holds cultural and historical significance as a landmark that symbolizes Ontario’s commitment to innovation, sustainability, and public engagement;

“Whereas redevelopment that includes a private, profit-driven venture by an Austrian spa company, prioritizes commercial interests over the needs and desires of the people of Ontario and it is estimated that the cost to prepare the grounds for redevelopment and build a 2,000-car underground garage will cost approximately $650 million...;

“Whereas meaningful public consultations with diverse stakeholders have not been adequately conducted and the Ontario NDP has sent a letter of support for a public request to begin an investigation into a value-for-money and compliance audit with respect to proposed redevelopment of Ontario Place;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to halt any further development plans for Ontario Place, engage in meaningful and transparent public consultations to gather input and ideas for the future of Ontario Place, develop a comprehensive and sustainable plan for the revitalization of Ontario Place that prioritizes environmental sustainability, accessibility, and inclusivity, and ensure that any future development of Ontario Place is carried out in a transparent and accountable manner, with proper oversight, public input, and adherence to democratic processes.”

That sounds great. I am happy to affix my signature to this and will send it to the table with page Erin.

This petition is entitled: “Safe Roads for All.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas drivers with inadequate training are being licensed to drive transport trucks in Ontario;

“Whereas audits of carriers, and the qualifications of their drivers, are not taking place on a systematic basis in Ontario;

“Whereas drivers are experiencing wage theft from unscrupulous carriers;

“Whereas many prospective drivers are paying for training they are not receiving;

“Whereas drivers are being pressured to meet unrealistic delivery deadlines in order to access their full pay;

“Whereas OPP statistics show the number of accidents involving transport trucks has increased dramatically, putting all road users at risk;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, call upon the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to improve road safety:

“By requiring ministry enforcement officers to audit carriers to ensure they are operating at the highest possible safety standards;

“By investigating and cracking down on carriers engaged in wage theft;

“By bringing charges and significant fines against carriers that fail to meet safety standards;

“By establishing, monitoring, and enforcing the required number of one-on-one hours of behind-the-wheel training, including practice with loaded trailers and practice with winter driving;

“By restricting immediate driver test retakes;

“By having weigh scales and inspection stations open during a substantial amount of time each week, in every region of the province;

“By establishing a reporting system for unsafe driving.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my signature to it and give it to Sophia.

I didn’t think I’d use the whole minute, but apparently that’s what the clock tells me, and I’ll have to go with the clock.

I want to begin, Speaker—and if I get ruled out of order, I’ll abide by the rulings, you know that. You know me, I never do anything off-centre in this place.

I do want to begin, because the other day—and I want to thank the government House leader for recognizing myself and MPP Scott for having served in this Legislature and served our constituents for 20 years. I do just want to touch on that for a moment and how grateful I am.

Last week, I had the opportunity—on the day that it would have been 60 years that my father was elected as the member for Renfrew South—to speak for a moment or two, but I didn’t have a speaking slot, so it was very short. I do want to say, Speaker—and I know you know this better than anybody having been here since 1990—what an honour it is and how grateful we are to be sent to represent our constituents in this great chamber. I want to thank them. Particularly, I want to thank my wife and my family for their support. I could tell a million stories. People have said to me, “John, you’ll have to write a book one day,” and my wife has said, “No, no. I’ll write the book.” So I’m a little worried if it ever comes to that about what stories may make the book.

I know that everybody here that serves is grateful and honoured to be here. I just want to say, for 20 years, it’s been a special honour for me so thank you very much for allowing me to address that today.

Now, here we go again—another housing bill. I almost fell off my chair this morning when I heard the opposition critic say that they would be supporting Bill 134, because, you know I did a little work—to tell you the truth, no, I actually had my staff person do a little work. We just went back to 2018 so there’s—one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15—16 bills that our government has brought forward dealing with the housing crisis. How appropriate is that, Speaker? I know that there will be disagreements of what is the existential crisis of our time, but the one that faces us right now that must be dealt with now—and doesn’t have a 20-year time frame, a 40-year time frame, or anything like that—is the housing crisis. You know, when we went through our campaign in 2022, you heard it repeatedly. You heard our Premier, who was seeking re-election, repeatedly say that the priority of our government, after we emerged from the COVID crisis, was going to be building homes for the people of Ontario.

Since the election of 2022, I think it’s fair to say that it’s only gained greater importance and urgency, because we see every day what’s been happening. I thank the people for their campaign, on the other side, because it certainly helped us win a historic second majority for Premier Ford. Since that time, the world has changed: Our world here in Ontario and certainly in Canada has changed if you’re trying to solve a housing crisis—not for the better.

We have federal policies. Our House leader has touched on that repeatedly, about how the federal policy vis-à-vis, for example, the carbon tax and how inflationary that is. What does inflation do? It forces the Bank of Canada to say we’ve got to do something to pound this down somewhat. We can’t exist with 8%, 6%, 5%, or whatever the case may be, and we are working to get that down. What did that do to the economy? Well, it drives up interest rates. You fight inflation, you drive up interest rates. What is one of the biggest negative forces if you’re trying to build or do anything that costs money? It’s the cost of borrowing that money. So if you can’t borrow the money at a reasonable rate, you’re going to be faced with significant pressures against what you’re trying to do.

I have talked to people all across this province—not as many people as my House leader would talk to and certainly not the Premier, but I’m sure they hear the same stories all the time, where people who have planned to build a housing project have said, “I don’t think we’re going to proceed.” Why? Because of the interest rates, the cost of building that project. Even: Are they going to be able to get the financing? But even if they do, John Q. Public and this generation that is looking for their first home, where in the name of Sam Hill, as they say, are they going to get the money to buy that place? It ain’t happening. It’s just not happening.

We as government—this government, our government, your government—I say this to the people of Ontario: Your government has been seized upon the task of doing whatever is necessary, whatever is within the realm of possibility to encourage homebuilding in this province. What did I say, 16 bills? Tennessee Ernie Ford had a song, “Sixteen Tons.” I might bring out one: “sixteen bills.” Sixteen bills, and what do you get? Lots of yeses over here. Over there? “Nyet, nyet, nyet.” Hey, that rhymed, didn’t it? What do you get? Nyet. That’s what you get over there when you have 16 bills: You get “nyet,” because those folks over there really don’t want to see us succeed in our housing plan.

I say to my friends over there—and I consider them friends—maybe not close friends. But I seriously ask them: Would it not be better for us to succeed in bringing 1.5 million homes to the people of the province of Ontario over the next seven years to 2030? Isn’t that more important than politicking on every single initiative that we bring forward to increase the supply of homes?

I’m going to tell you, I’ve got great admiration for my friend and colleague, and I’ve known him for many, many years, Steve Clark, the former minister, and of course today Minister Calandra, who has taken over the file—because we have left no stone unturned when it comes to trying to figure out and find ways that we can get the job done when it comes to building homes. And we’re going to get it done. That is the way we work here; we get it done. In spite of what we’re hearing from the opposition, when they would like to—as I say, Speaker, it is disappointing, because we’ll all be better off, including the members on the other side, especially if they have children or grandchildren or friends or relatives that would like to have their name on the deed of their first home too. It is going to help everybody.

We have four children. We’ve got 12 grandchildren—

The member for Essex has a point of order.

I’d like to introduce representatives of TT4ever, a Ping-Pong group helping people with Alzheimer’s. They are Lucas Zhang, Jabril Zarita and Isaac Luo. Welcome to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 4, 2023, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 134, An Act to amend the Development Charges Act, 1997 and the St. Thomas-Central Elgin Boundary Adjustment Act, 2023 / Projet de loi 134, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur les redevances d’aménagement et la Loi de 2023 sur la modification des limites territoriales entre St. Thomas et Central Elgin.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Save Ontario Place.

“Whereas Ontario Place has been a cherished public space for over 50 years, providing joy, recreation and cultural experiences for Ontarians and tourists alike and holds cultural and historical significance as a landmark that symbolizes Ontario’s commitment to innovation, sustainability and public engagement;

“Whereas redevelopment that includes a private, profit-driven venture by an Austrian spa company, prioritizes commercial interests over the needs and desires of the people of Ontario and it is estimated that the cost to prepare the grounds for redevelopment and build a 2,000-car underground garage will cost approximately $650 million;...

“Whereas meaningful public consultations with diverse stakeholders have not been adequately conducted and the Ontario NDP has sent a letter of support for a public request to begin an investigation into a value-for-money and compliance audit with respect to proposed redevelopment of Ontario Place;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to halt any further development plans for Ontario Place, engage in meaningful and transparent public consultations to gather input and ideas for the future of Ontario Place, develop a comprehensive and sustainable plan for the revitalization of Ontario Place that prioritizes environmental sustainability, accessibility and inclusivity, and ensure that any future development of Ontario Place is carried out in a transparent and accountable manner, with proper oversight, public input and adherence to democratic processes.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my signature and pass it to page Sophia Rose.

Well done.

Thank you very much.

Home ownership is so important. It is really something that—I live in the first home that my father built—well, with my wife too. That was built in 1960. I was three years old when we moved into that house. It was a different time then. My father never borrowed money. He put it away and saved and saved. There were 10 children at that time and two parents living in, I’m going to say, maybe 800 square feet on the top of our old store, on the second storey: 10 children and two parents living in there, getting by, because he wasn’t going to be borrowing money. You know that’s really not feasible anymore today.

We bought our first home in 1983. It was a bungalow, nothing too fancy, a nice lot. In the city, the lot would probably be worth a couple of million dollars. We bought that home for $47,500 in 1983. The last four vehicles I’ve bought, none of them could have been close to being bought for $47,500. In fact, one time when I bought a little better truck, and my wife mentioned, “For the price of that truck, you might be living in it.” But it was a lot more than $47,500, but, of course, I had to finance the truck.

This is the world we’re living in today. How are we going to—I read something in the newspaper the other day, that we need—how many homes was it that we needed to build? We needed a stock of 22 million homes in Canada before we would see an appreciable reduction in the cost of homes. And I know, and I heard from one of the members over there one time when they were speaking—again, I was already in my chair, so I didn’t have far to fall. They said that the theory of supply and demand is a myth. Speaker, it is the most basic rule of economics, absolutely the most basic rule of economics. That is why those experts—and I know my friends on the other side often like to quote experts, but they quote the experts they like. An old saying—and I’m going to be guilty of it myself—but there’s an old saying: Do you know what an expert is? That’s anybody with a briefcase more than 25 miles from home. So those are who they quote as experts sometimes, because it suits their narrative, right? Somebody rolls into town with a briefcase: “He must be an expert.”

A quantity of experts are saying clearly that if we don’t increase the supply of homes, we cannot bring down the price of homes, and it really is basic common sense, Speaker. So, what does our government do? As I said, 16 bills, each and every one of them since we got elected in 2018 is designed to do just that: to increase the supply of homes. Because without increasing the supply, if there are 20 people looking for a house and there’s one house—I mean, you’ve seen it; everybody has seen it here. It’s crazy in a place like Toronto, but it’s even happened up where I come from, in little old Barry’s Bay, as the House leader mentioned yesterday. Even in little old Barry’s Bay, if there are more people who want a home than there are homes available, the price of the homes go up. It’s basic math, basic economics.

And you’ve seen these—what do you call them? Bidding wars—bidding wars on houses in Toronto and elsewhere, where the price just goes crazy. So, how does that help? It doesn’t. But why does it happen? Because there aren’t enough homes for sale. There are more people wanting the homes, and we’re living in a situation, Speaker—and I know that even at the federal level, they’re beginning to talk about how they might address it. When you have hundreds of thousands of people coming to Canada and the majority of them coming to Ontario and the majority of those coming to the greater Toronto-Hamilton area, that puts more pressure on the reality that if we don’t have enough homes to serve the current population, how are we going to serve the increased population?

So I am very excited about what the minister has done here in Bill 134. I know we’re addressing the changing of the St. Thomas boundaries legislation. I think that was Bill 63, if I’m not mistaken. That was a bill that the opposition actually supported. And as I say—and I know you can’t question the motives of anybody here, but I think we all know where some of that pressure came when the time came to support that bill.

But let’s get back to Bill 134, which I’ve been, of course, speaking on all along. So, Speaker, this bill, which is going to define and put more clarity on what affordable housing is, or what qualifies or can be defined as affordable housing, is going to be tremendously helpful in areas like mine. I’m not sure how many of you people have ever been to my riding—probably not very many—but we have some significant pockets of good jobs. Canadian Nuclear Laboratories exists in my riding. That’s a very high-tech nuclear facility. There are a number of people who have very, very good incomes, but we also have a portion of the population that simply does not. This new definition that the minister has brought forward is going to be hugely helpful in allowing those municipalities to be able to approve building permits and developments that will not be subject to development charges.

I can tell you, development charges, when you’re a young person—we weren’t as young as a lot of people, but when we bought our first home, there was no such thing as development charges in the communities then.

I did say to one person who was talking about development charges—

Point of order.

I do want to say, 20 years of service is commendable, and, actually, every time this member has talked about his father, it has been very emotional.

I’ve been here, serving with you, for 11 years.

To the housing issue: Your government has moved forward in a very unconventional way, I would have to say. I’m looking at the leaked document that your members received from the Premier’s office, and it goes on to say, with regard to Waterloo region, “some concerns about the lands proposed to be added including third-party requests”—if the Liberals had tried this, this member, I know for a fact, would be saying, “Who are those third parties? Who is requesting that the urban boundary be expanded? Why are they asking for that? Where is the motivation?” It goes on to say that 2,380 hectares is likely to be met with opposition by Indigenous communities. The ministerial modifications to expand the region’s settlement boundary were not shared with Indigenous communities.

The member knows full well we have a duty to consult. What do you say to this leaked document in—

Thank you very much, House leader. I’ll be there—or here, or wherever.

What I don’t remember is where I was.

I remember some person telling me that they think development charges are just fine, and I asked them—I think he was a guy older than me. I won’t use his name. I said, “So when you built your nice home”—it’s a nice home—“did we have development charges?” “Oh, there was no such thing as development charges then.” I said, “Bingo. But you think maybe the folks today should be subject to those development charges? I say, not so, not fair.” And he said, “Well, the municipalities need the money.”

The municipalities should find other ways of gaining that money. The municipalities can also be aware that if there are a hundred homes not built because people can’t afford development charges—you know what they’re getting? As the minister says, squadoosh, nada. But if there are a hundred homes built because there are no development charges, well, that municipality is just—it’s a little bit of a windfall for that assessment, because each one of those homes now is going to be a revenue source for that municipality.

So let’s get together. Let’s get together. I know you’re going to support this bill. But there are so many things—stop talking about the greenbelt. We made a mistake. We’re moving on. Let’s get building homes. We can do it together, to help everybody right here in the province of Ontario.

No development charges for your first house.