Again, both the Integrity Commissioner and the Auditor General have confirmed the same, so I would suggest to the members opposite that if they don’t have faith in either of those two officers of Parliament, they should table a motion in front of this House saying that they don’t have confidence in either of those two—

Interjection.

That is just the start. We are seeing purpose-built rentals at record levels in this province—record levels. For the past 30 years, they have never hit the targets that they are hitting today. And that’s what we continue to do: double down on policies that bring housing to the people of the province of Ontario. They’re against it; we’ll remove the obstacles and remove the taxes—

When the Minister of Finance brings in a bill to reduce, to eliminate taxes on purpose-built rentals, they will vote against it. When the Minister of Infrastructure brings a bill forward to build transit faster, they vote against it. When we bring a bill that would build homes around transit—transit-oriented communities—they vote against it. When we bring a bill forward to eliminate the lowest-income earners from tax rolls, they vote against it. When the minister brought in a bill to increase ODSP rates and to put it towards inflation, to mark it towards inflation, they vote against it.

They vote literally against everything. They stand for literally nothing, and that is why that party is so divided and spending more time fighting each other—

Interjections.

But what we’re doubling down on is this: building more homes for the people of the province of Ontario, eliminating red tape so that we can get more shovels in the ground, eliminating taxes so that we can have more purpose-built rentals—ensuring that the people of the province of Ontario can share in the exact same dream that millions of people who came to this country have always had: the dream of home ownership.

Mr. Speaker, we know that the party opposite—they’re against immigration; they’re against building homes; they’re against working people.

The member for Sudbury can’t get the smile off his face, because he voted against the miners in his own community time and time again.

If it was up to them, our economy would sink, there would be no homes built, and the people would only rely on government.

We want the—

Interjections.

We know from the sound work of the Auditor General and Integrity Commissioner on the $8.3 billion greenbelt scandal that this government has been meddling in land development processes to benefit their friends. The government is now under criminal investigation by the RCMP for potential wrongdoing related to these development changes.

The public knew and opposition members knew from the beginning that the greenbelt changes and municipal boundary changes smelled bad. Similarly, changes to Toronto’s Midtown in Focus plan smell bad too. The midtown plan for Toronto, developed with extensive consultation, was thrown out by this government without any consultation with the city or its residents.

My question to the Premier: Given the government’s track record of political interference in land development, can the Premier assure the people of Don Valley West and Toronto that there was no political meddling in the decision to overturn the Midtown in Focus plan, yes or no?

My community had a plan in place to ensure thoughtful, deliberate density, but now the proposed developments in my community have big signs from the TDSB and Catholic school board warning future residents that their children will be unable to go to school in their own communities. That’s not responsible development, it’s not good for community building and it’s not good for safety.

City staff, residents and elected officials did not ask for this change to the official midtown plan; in fact, quite the opposite. They continue to be shocked and outraged by the irresponsible development taking place in my community.

Once again, I will ask the Premier through you: Who advised him to overturn the Midtown in Focus plan, eliminating height restrictions and increasing the underlying value of the real estate, and are they the same people who stand to profit from these changes?