It’s a pleasure to rise this morning and speak to this legislation before the House, the New Deal for Toronto Act.

I want to acknowledge some breakthroughs in this legislation, despite the fact that I have some lingering concerns. One of the breakthroughs, I think, about this legislation is beyond what’s actually in the bill. It’s a lesson for anybody that wants to get into politics. Let me explain what I mean by that, Speaker.

We began this morning with a prayer, with the directive, as we have often heard, to use power wisely and well, to create a society where freedom reigns and where justice rules. I love that prayer. It’s a terrific prayer. But often in the five years I’ve served in this building for the great people of Ottawa Centre, I’ve heard us collectively offer that prayer, and then the moment we tumble into debate, we start doing the opposite. We start saying and holding forth in a way that disrespects each other, that insults the integrity of this place and that puts Ontario on a bad footing, in my opinion.

I believe the Premier of this province did that when, on June 21, 2023, he called Mayor Olivia Chow an “unmitigated disaster.” Those were the words that tumbled out of the most powerful office-holder in this province. The Premier is entitled to his opinions. His speech, like all of our speech, is charter-protected. But I don’t think he set a very good example for people who are thinking about getting into politics in the way he characterized someone like Mayor Olivia Chow as, again, for the record, on June 21, 2023, an “unmitigated disaster.” The Premier was making the argument, I guess, that Mayor Chow—now Mayor Chow—would create too great a toll on the revenues of the city of Toronto and was too ambitious in her plans. Well, the people of Toronto thought differently. Thankfully for us, the Conservative-supported candidates in that mayoral race would appear to have been split at least three ways because they couldn’t get their act together.

So what Mayor Chow has done since then is not respond in kind with ritual denunciations to the Premier—that’s more his gambit. What she has done is take the higher road in speech after speech. Her choice was not to fire back at the Premier and call him a bunch of names. She certainly could have. Her choice was to say, “What do the people of Toronto deserve?” They deserve good transit. They deserve community safety. They deserve money for housing; money for community services; the after-school programs that so many children in this city rely upon; the city staff, who work hard every single day, whether it’s collecting the garbage or the recycling in this city or monitoring the safety of our streets, roads and enforcing the bylaws, or making sure the beautiful parks of this city are well-maintained. That was Mayor Olivia Chow’s priority—not responding in kind to ridiculous assertions from the Premier. There’s a lesson in here for how we do politics.

And do you know what also is informative for me, Speaker? What’s informative for me is: This week, as the Premier was promoting this particular bill in the House, I saw him describe Mayor Olivia Chow as the greatest NDP leader in history. Colleagues, did you see that too? So it’s an interesting leap of logic for a man to go from categorizing somebody as an unmitigated disaster to calling her the greatest NDP leader in history. What’s happened since? Well, I want to believe that what’s happened since is that one person showed humanity in politics and the other did not. One person showed how you lead in a moment, despite the arrows slung by your critics, and the other did not.

It reminds me, Speaker, of a quotation often used by the great Nelson Mandela, someone who had the pleasure to visit this particular building twice. I have a picture of one of those occasions proudly in my office. Mandela once said, “The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall.” Who would know the lesson of that better than him? Someone imprisoned for 27 years by an apartheid regime that dehumanized him.

And I think about Mayor Olivia Chow and the roads she walked to the mayor’s office: losing a mayoralty race that many people predicted she was pledged to win, getting knocked down, dusting herself off and getting back up again to serve not yourself, but to serve the community that you live in.

I had great pleasure, Speaker, to knock on doors in the mayoral by-election. I came a day early one weekend. It’s always a negotiation, I’m sure, for all of us when we come to this city from out of the city a day early. I had to plead with my family: “Hey, let me go a day early to Toronto. I want to go knock on doors for Olivia in St. James Town, where she grew up.” And when I knocked on some of these apartment buildings, they are, in Ottawa-Centre terms, like twice or three times the size of apartment buildings back home—massive apartment buildings. But when I said the words “Olivia Chow,” faces brightened because those are the buildings Olivia grew up in. That was the community she proudly served as an immigrant kid coming to this country at the age of 14, with a family divided by violence and difficulty. She persevered to the office of school board trustee. She persevered to the office of city councillor. And now, St. James Town has a mayor—a mayor, in the seat of power, serving this great city. That’s not an unmitigated disaster, Speaker; it’s a Canadian success story. She withstood the arrows from this Premier. She clearly has turned him around.

And now, before the House, we have a piece of legislation that is proposing some significant investments that I want to talk about this morning. One of them is something that I have had occasion to talk about many times as the transit critic for this province: funding for operational transit. In this legislation is $300 million in a one-time transfer for subway and transit safety recovery and sustainable operations. Another is a $330-million investment over three years—that funding accumulates over three years—for operating support for new integrated provincial transit projects.

People have been rising in this House for years, encouraging this government, encouraging governments before it, to not come to the people of Ontario and say, “We have a wonderful transit plan. Billions of dollars of aspirational transit projects”—be it the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, the Finch West LRT, the Confederation LRT in my city. “Look at the wonderful products we have. Look at the consultants we’re hiring. Look at the beautiful ticker tape we’re going to cut at press announcements.”

This is what I call aspirational transit. That is what governments have been seized with in Ontario for years, but it hasn’t moved a single human being, and the only person who has been employed by aspirational transit are the consultants hired to come up with the dreams. Meanwhile, the women and men who woke up this morning early to move people around this great city have been struggling with a poorly funded transit system.

But again, what precedes this bill? What precedes this bill is a mayor of the city, Olivia Chow, who said on September 20 that as this government’s aspirational transit plans continue to fail, the Finch West LRT, the Eglinton Crosstown LRT—both over budget, both delayed, both being built by consultants who rake huge salaries from the taxpayers despite delivering nothing. Mayor Chow announced that she was going to reallocate, based on advice from staff, $10.3 million from these delayed aspirational transit projects to the TTC that actually exists. She said in that press conference that 160 more staff could be hired with that $10.3 million to make sure staff were visible on our trains, to make sure neighbours who are having mental health challenges, whatever they may be—feeling themselves unsafe, making other people feel unsafe—they would visibly be interacting with staff so transit could be safer.

While we’ve had a government for years that has gotten up in this building and talked about aspirational transit, here we had a mayor of this city who said, “Actually, I’m going to redirect money from your failing transit projects”—I’m adding the editorialism; Olivia is a bigger person than me—“I’m going to reallocate money to make sure that people are safe in our subways, because the aspirational transit systems of this government and governments before it are failing.” That’s leadership.

But what’s also leadership in this bill is the fact that we have finally convinced the Premier of this province to take an interest in operational transit. But as the member for Orléans just said, the transit needs in this province are much bigger than the city of Toronto. We need a new deal for transit all over this province. We need it for Sudbury; we need it for Niagara Falls; we need it for Windsor; we need it for Thunder Bay; and we absolutely need it for Ottawa, Speaker. I can tell you that. Because what we just learned at city council in Ottawa is that in 2024, we are going to have 74,000 fewer service hours in our public transit system—74,000.

I took the bus over the weekend, as I was finding my way around community events. I took the number 6 down Bank Street, headed back to home near where I live, near Billings Bridge—packed to the gills, barely a place to sit or stand. But do you know what was great, Speaker? You could always see, as I’ve seen on so many buses, so many subways, neighbours helping elderly folks, people with children finding safe places to sit.

But you ask yourself the question, “Why isn’t there another bus right behind this bus at peak hours? Why is there one staff member on this entire elongated bus sitting in the front, behind Plexiglas, and no other staff members that are available, dispersed across stops to help people figure their way on and off the bus who have mobility challenges?” Cutbacks, Speaker—cutbacks from this government.

What we know is, we’re $500 million short in operational funding for transit across the province of Ontario. We have been making the message very clear to this government that in their upcoming budget, they need to put that $500 million back into the system so the buses, the subways, the streetcars can run safely and run effectively to get people to work and get people back home, get people where they need to go. But that hasn’t happened.

So who has been the stopgap, as this government loves its aspirational transit but neglects its operational transit, loves its dreams but disrespects the people who deliver every single day? I’m going to tell you: It’s the riders who are organizing to get together to bring messages into this place and, close to my heart, it’s the workers who operate the public transit system.

I want to spend some time this morning talking about someone who has got a message for this House. His name is Cory MacLeod; he’s the president of ATU 1320, which is in the great city of Peterborough. In Peterborough, Cory MacLeod just presided over a terrific campaign that sadly had to lead to a strike, in which he told the city of Peterborough that 2%, which was the original wage offer being offered by the municipal authorities in Peterborough—2% is good for milk, but it’s not good for people fighting to make a living.

The member for Peterborough–Kawartha will come to order.

Except there’s no strikes.

The member from Peterborough–Kawartha just said there’s no strike. Do you want to know why, Speaker? Because the women and men who stood up and fought—the 125 operators and the eight folks who work in the garage fixing that transit actually stood up and fought for their transit system.

But it’s funny, Speaker—as the member for Peterborough–Kawartha heckles me—I don’t think he’s once called Corey MacLeod to congratulate him on the agreement that they just won. I don’t think he has once taken an interest in his public transit system to talk to the elected leadership of the transit authority at the municipal level. Isn’t that a curious thing, Speaker? I wonder why the member from Peterborough–Kawartha has nothing but disinterest and disrespect for the people who run and work in the public transit sector. That’d be a good question for him to answer his constituents.

It might be the fact that Laurie Stratton, who is a disgraced former Metrolinx executive, was sent to his city to run the Peterborough transit system, and it may be the fact that Ms. Stratton was fired in March, because she—among many transit executives—had been pushing this on-demand transit system to try to eat into the schedules and the jobs and the operating hours that serve his city and many great cities.

But unfortunately the member never found it worth his time to contact Corey MacLeod once, to visit the transit workers once, to find out about their concerns, to raise them in this House. Let’s look through the Hansard, Speaker, and see if the member has once stood up for his community.

Now the members of that union, however, they stood up for Peterborough. They care about the people of Peterborough.

Interjection.

But do you know who has? Mayor Olivia Chow. Mayor Olivia Chow has stood up for the transit workers in this great city of Toronto. Mayor Olivia Chow cares about the operating efficacy of transit in this city.

The member for Peterborough–Kawartha may think that people will forget how he behaved in this moment. They may think that people will forget that he wasn’t there as Laurie Stratton and that team drove that transit system into the ground—or attempted to. But people won’t forget, Speaker. People won’t forget. They won’t forget the fact that, as the member sat on his hands and watched a transit disaster almost unfold, as people were pushed to the brink of a strike, as people pushed and fought and tried to get the attention of decision-makers like him, they stood up for their community. And I tip my hat this morning to ATU 1320. I thank them for their public service.

I hope this government extends its new-found empathy for the city of Toronto to the rest of Ontario, because the great people of Peterborough, the great people of Sudbury, the great people of Windsor, of Thunder Bay, of Niagara Falls, of Oshawa, of London—they deserve great, functioning transit too, and it shouldn’t have to come to the fact that women and men working in a struggling operational transit system have to go nearly on strike to make sure that we get their attention.

I wonder, Speaker, how do you contrast a government that manages to find over $600 million in funding for a luxury spa, for an Austrian-owned conglomerate, but that will watch operational transit systems fall apart; they will watch people suffer instead of helping the people that make our communities work.

I wonder how big the cheques are, Speaker, that are coming out of Therme into the Progressive Conservative donations department. I wonder how big the cheques are coming out of various real estate conglomerates for the various projects this government pushed. Meanwhile, Speaker, the women and men operating transit in this great city impacted by this bill, operating transit in Peterborough, operating transit in Ottawa—they don’t get the attention and the love. There’s no new deal for them, and you have to ask yourself why.

Interjection.

It doesn’t matter. It really doesn’t matter, because whatever opinions that member over there and this government may have of transit workers in this province, they will persevere. They will persevere. They will persevere in Peterborough, will persevere in Ottawa. We’ll persevere in a great city like Hamilton, where ATU 107 just negotiated an agreement.

I was moved deeply, Speaker, when, just before the Grey Cup that was in that terrific city of Hamilton, the transit workers were pushed into a position of having to threaten job action that would have impacted that terrific celebration, the Grey Cup celebration, because they were pushed to the brink. Cassie Theaker, who is a single mom, told the press with tears that she had no money in her bank account after two weeks, despite serving that city for 25 years. The costs of living have increased so much that with what she is paid to operate public transit in the great city of Hamilton, she couldn’t feed her kids; she couldn’t pay the rent. So that should be a cautionary tale for all of us.

I want to congratulate the Premier for having a change of heart about Mayor Olivia Chow. I want to congratulate the fact that finally, this government seems to have taken an interest in operational transit instead of aspirational transit. They finally looked into the eyes of a leader who had more humanity than them, who suffered the arrows of the moment to win the victories that come later, and that’s a lesson for all of us in politics. That is a lesson for all of us.

Now, we have a bill before the House that is proposing some funds for operational transit for this great city, but we need funds for operational transit all over Ontario. That’s what this government needs to recognize, and if they’re not prepared to do it, there will be a consequence for them. If they’re not prepared to fund the transit systems of Peterborough and Windsor and Niagara Falls and Sudbury and Thunder Bay and Ottawa—the residents of those communities care about those buses. The residents of those communities care about the operators and mechanics that fix those buses, and we’re prepared to stand up and advocate for them.

So, is this bill a useful step in the right direction? Yes. It has taken them a long time. Meanwhile, we somehow find a million dollars to pay Phil Verster at Metrolinx. Meanwhile, we somehow find the money to pay his 59 vice-presidents and 19 C-suite executives. Meanwhile, we have projects like the Eglinton Crosstown, which is a billion dollars over budget and three years late.

We’ve got some work to do to get transit back on track. There are elements of this bill that I like that move in that direction, and I’m happy to rise as the transit critic in this province to speak to those. But I remind this government again: The province of Ontario is bigger than the city of Toronto. It’s a wonderful place, and I agree with the government members who said we have to recognize Toronto’s special place in Ontario. But the rest of this province needs a new deal for transit too, and we need to see it now.

It was great to hear the presentation this morning from my colleague from Ottawa. I was, however, slightly confused during parts of the presentation, because on one hand, the member rails against one of the primary features of the deal between the Premier and the mayor of Toronto, which is the completion of the Ontario Place partnership and the building of a water park and what he describes as a luxury spa, and on the other hand, he tries to take credit for the NDP in negotiating such a great deal with the Premier of Ontario. That’s certainly the tack that the leader of Ontario’s New Democrats has taken the last number of days.

So I’m wondering, is he going to vote against the bill and support the leader of Ontario’s New Democrats, or is he going to vote for the bill and support the most powerful New Democrat in Ontario, the mayor of Toronto?

Before we move on to questions, I want to recognize that Peter Meligrana from the riding of Kingston and the Islands is today’s page captain, and he is being visited by his grandparents: his grandmother Hiltrudis Meligrana and his grandfather Francesco Meligrana. They have been married for 60 years and have lived in Parkdale–High Park the entirety of their marriage, and are excited to be here today to support Peter during his page captain day. Welcome.

Questions?

I want to congratulate my colleague from Ottawa for his comments. Speaker, the people of this province have serious trust issues with this government and for very good reason. This is the first time, I think, in the history of this province that we have a government that’s being investigated by the RCMP for potential criminal wrongdoing.

This bill gives the government extraordinary powers to indemnify itself against legal action from a number of things: government misrepresentation, misconduct, misfeasance, bad faith, breach of trust, or breach of fiduciary obligation. The government is giving itself these powers so it can push through a luxury spa and this $650-million parking lot. My question is: Why do you think the government is giving itself these extraordinary powers?

I find it really rich when someone from Ottawa Centre starts giving advice on transit. That’s special. Then the member from Ottawa Centre is trying to give the NDP credit for this deal. What Olivia Chow did is that she decided to sit down with the Premier, with mutual respect, and come up with this deal. It is so many good things for Toronto, but it’s also good things for Ontarians. The Premier is known for deals for the benefit of Ontarians. The Minister of Economic Development speaks about it almost every day.

My question to the member is, does the member not know or believe that deals require two people, two parties with a focus—and the focus is for the benefit of Ontario—and is he going to support this bill?

What I’ll say to my friend from Orléans is this: This bill is before the House now, before debate, and our job in that debate is to scrutinize this bill heavily. That’s the job of the official opposition.

So really, this bill, in the end, as my friend from Oshawa was just telling me, is about committing to a conversation, and I think it’s a good thing that that conversation—so far, at least—is committing to real money going into operational transit. Do I have a problem with the fact that the government would seem to have a greater priority for a wellness spa that would cost $650 million to taxpayers in Toronto? That investment is greater than the investment contemplated for operational transit in this bill. So yes, I’ll say to my friend from Orléans, yes, I have a problem with that. But am I happy that this conversation is moving in a direction of more funding for transit? Great. He knows and I know, though, that the transit needs of Ontario are much bigger than the city of Toronto. We need a new deal for transit everywhere.

The richness of advice from Ottawa Centre on transit has not been lost on this government. I know, because we fought for two years for a public inquiry into stage 1 of our LRT system and we won. We won. We finally got the government to listen to us. So we’re happy to offer the richness of that advice every day.

The member is right: The Premier is known for his deals in this place. Half the time I wonder, as I hear government members talk about red tape, if I’m going to walk into this building one day and see police tape wrapped around the Premier’s office because of the kinds of deals that have been publicly exposed that this Premier has been privy to negotiate. That’s on them. That’s their caucus meeting. That’s the presence they have to live with.

I am happy that in this bill before the House there is contemplation of real investments in operational transit. Am I happy about that, member? Yes, I am.

So, are we potentially moving into a good place with this commitment to a conversation? Yes. Is there a chance that there will be more money for operational transit in Toronto? Yes. Do we need it everywhere else in Ontario? Yes.

I heard the member from Niagara Falls say, as the member from London West was asking that question, “Well, it’s exactly what happened in long-term care,” and he’s right. The government indemnified long-term-care operators, set the bar so high for tort that people who had family members killed in the for-profit institutions had no legal recourse. That was one of the greatest shames I have seen in my five years in this place. So no surprise that we see aspects of this bill indemnifying people from seeking redress in court—I’m not surprised.

It makes me ask the question, on an attempt at humour: What could we do to have the government take as great an interest in operational transit as they do in a private, for-profit luxury spa? Maybe if we put a wellness centre in the back of the bus, they would be prepared—maybe a massage table. What have we got to do to make buses and transit out of the city of Toronto interesting enough for you to warrant public investment?

Do I hope we get to the bottom of this 95-year lease with this private, for-profit Austrian company? Do I hope that we get some disclosure into the private consortiums this government likes to sign secret deals with? Yes, I do. That’s incumbent upon the people in this building.

What I’m confident is that the mayor of Toronto has a leader that will get the best deal possible for their city, and I tip my hat to her for it this morning.

I’ll just respond to my colleague from Ottawa Centre: I think the only way he can do that is through cheques. Apparently, that’s how it works around here.

I would like to ask the member—

Interjection.

I would like to ask the member: Why do you think, with all the pressure that has been put on about Ontario Place and the concerns of the community, that the mayor of Toronto decided to make the deal that she did?

Next question?

It’s a pleasure to rise and discuss this new deal for the city of Toronto. It’s great to see everyone this morning—a little bit warmer today than it has been in the last couple of days here in the Big Smoke, and maybe that’s because of this deal that the city has now entered into with the province and is trying to get through.

I think, if I was a resident of Toronto, which, of course, I’m not, or if I was a politician in Toronto, if I was a member of provincial Parliament from Toronto—especially one from maybe downtown Toronto—and I was a New Democrat and my New Democratic mayor had just negotiated this deal with the Premier of Ontario, I would with think that this is a really good deal, because it’s going to support investment in affordable housing. It’s going to support investing in transit. It’s going to upload highways off of the backs of property taxpayers in Toronto and free up even more cash for the mayor of Toronto to be able to do with as she and her council pleases.

Unlike other New Democratic leaders, the mayor of Toronto has demonstrated that she can bring disparate elements together into a common cause. There are Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats and probably others on Toronto city council that she’s been able to bring together. Obviously, she’s made a deal with a Conservative Premier in Ontario. I think that’s an example for other New Democratic leaders in the province who are currently having a little bit of difficulty bringing people together, who are having a little bit of difficulty keeping the team rowing in the same direction. I think there are some lessons that could be learned there.

It’s a very good sign, this legislation, that the Premier and his government are open to investing more in municipalities. We’ve seen over the last five years—and certainly since the pandemic began and is now behind us, we hope—that cities are struggling. They’re struggling with declining public transit ridership because of the nature of people’s workplace. There aren’t as many people travelling into downtowns of our cities and, therefore, there’s an enormous reduction in the number of people using public transit.

We’re dealing with an affordability crisis where the price of groceries is up, the price of provincially regulated hydroelectricity is up, the price of provincially regulated natural gas is up. The price of most of the things in our lives is up, and so the ability to provide some financial relief to Toronto taxpayers, whether that is through some kind of property tax action or investing in social services that will help people, is obviously very good for the city of Toronto.

But my question, as someone who lives in the city of Ottawa, is, does the government understand that there are more cities in the province than just Toronto? The Premier was very clear that he made a one-sided deal. He made a great deal for the city of Toronto, which he admitted was one-sided, because he loves his city. And I don’t blame him for loving his city. He grew up here. He represents a part of Toronto. I think we would all be silly to not say that we love our cities. Of course we love the communities that we all represent and the communities that many of us were born in.

The real question is, though, are other cities going to see some love? The city of Ottawa is the second-largest city in the province. There are a million people in Ottawa. If you include the metro region and if you include Glengarry, Prescott and Russell and going to Kemptville, and heading out into the Ottawa Valley into Renfrew, Nipissing, and Pembroke, you’re getting into 1.2, 1.3 million people. So, there are a lot of people in eastern Ontario as well that would like to see some love from the Premier, and I think part of our ongoing frustration is that over the last number of years, it doesn’t seem like that love has been there. There was an absence of love.

There was an absence of presence during the convoy protests. The government really didn’t take notice of what was happening in Ottawa and didn’t really say anything about the protests overall until the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor was being blockaded. That’s when the government decided to talk about the convoy situation.

When the derecho windstorm ripped through eastern Ontario in the spring of 2022, there was an absence of love from the Premier then. He came to Orléans. He came to the fire station on the Charlemagne Boulevard. It’s a fire station I know very, very well. He thanked those firefighters for their efforts in the recovery and he said that he would be there for the city of Ottawa. He said to the mayor that he would be there for the city of Ottawa. And as of the city’s budget process, which is ongoing right now, we’ve heard from the president and the chair of Hydro Ottawa that they’ve received no funding from the province to cover the—I think it’s $30 million or $40 million in costs they had to clean up from the derecho. The city of Ottawa itself has received no funding to help with its cleanup costs for the derecho. So again the question is, where is the love? Where is the love for Ottawa?

And it has continued since then. We know that Ottawa, as the second-largest city in the province, isn’t represented in the Premier’s cabinet. There are many—well, maybe not many, but there are certainly a few government members from Ottawa and the Ottawa region, and yet we don’t have a cabinet minister in the cabinet. We don’t have someone who can be that cabinet champion for investment in the National Capital Region, who can be on the phone with the mayor every week or occasionally to talk about the issues that are important to the city that relate to the provincial government and how they might move forward on them. We don’t have that representative who can be in contact with the federal minister for the National Capital Region to work on those issues collaboratively. So again, residents in Ottawa are wondering, where’s the love for Ottawa there?

An important part of this deal that the Premier has made with the mayor of Toronto is, of course, the uploading of the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway. I think that’s a very good deal for the property tax payers in Toronto. Property taxes aren’t really designed to pay for urban expressways like the DVP and the Gardiner, and that money that’s used on policing those highways, that’s used on repairing those highways, that’s used on snow-clearing for those highways, that’s used for lighting those highways—all of that money could be better spent on local roads, on side streets and collectors and main arteries that perhaps don’t get the care and attention that they need. Those policing resources can be better spent in the community to deal with the increase in violence that we’ve seen around the TTC and other areas of downtown Toronto. So there’s a great benefit to the city of Toronto and to taxpayers in Toronto for that upload.

Again, though, I ask, where’s the love? Because in Ottawa and in eastern Ontario, we have a very similar situation. We have an urban expressway, Highway 174/17, that travels from the centre of the city of Ottawa all the way out to basically the border of Quebec, through Orléans and through the riding of Glengarry–Prescott–Russell that is the responsibility of property tax payers of Ottawa and Glengarry–Prescott–Russell. That’s a highway that takes millions and millions and millions of property tax dollars each and every year to maintain. It requires additional policing. It requires an additional snow-clearing operation. When there are major events like the flooding we experienced in Ottawa or the sinkhole that we experienced on Highway 174, we’re talking about tens and tens of millions of dollars in both unforeseen but enormous costs to maintain that urban expressway, which is really a regional highway. The 174/17 in fact used to be part of the Trans-Canada Highway system, which I think should just in and of itself tell everyone that that’s not the kind of road that property tax payers should be paying for with property taxes. Property taxes should be used to pay for your local infrastructure: for the street that you live on, for the streets that your bus drives on, for the parks around the corner and for the rec centre your kids learn to swim at. It should not be paying for urban expressways.

So the upload of the Gardiner and the DVP in Toronto, I think, is a very good step. It’s a step in the right direction. It’s obviously a very good deal for the residents of the city of Toronto. But for the residents in Ottawa and the residents of other cities across the province who have similar situations, I think they are and will continue to ask, “Where is the love for our communities?” Because we have these same financial pressures.

I want to continue to talk about the city of Ottawa a little bit more because the government doesn’t have that member in cabinet to maybe share with their caucus the challenges that Ottawa is facing. I want to spend the next three or four minutes sharing some of those.

OC Transpo, which is the second-largest transit agency in the province, is running a $40-million deficit this year. They are cutting back bus routes—and I’m not talking about a bus route at 11:30 at night that’s got one person riding it; I’m talking about suburban connection routes that feed into the hub-and-spoke system of OC Transpo, two in particular in Orléans that travel past a community rec centre. It travels past a library, and it travels past a high school. These are the kinds of bus routes that are now being cut in the city of Ottawa because of the financial challenges that the city is facing.

The city is also facing challenges when it comes to affordable housing. In fact, right now, as the city is going through its budget process for the next fiscal year, it is contemplating and debating the purchase of those white military refugee-style tents. Imagine that—

I stand today to talk about the incredible history of volunteerism in my riding of Simcoe–Grey. Indeed, it is part of the DNA of our residents. As we get close to entering the month of December and we reflect on the end of the year and the start of a new one, I think about a full year of successful events, charitable fundraisers, community gatherings and sporting events that have brought the people of Simcoe–Grey together.

Like communities across our great province, the communities of Simcoe–Grey are filled with kind, caring, compassionate and dedicated individuals who give their time freely to many worthy causes. The impact that this has across our communities, the ripple effect that it has, it goes to show the saying a high tide raises all boats.

The word “community” in my mind is derived from two root words: “common” and “unity.” Our communities work together to ensure that they are supporting their residents in a compassionate way, growing community spirit that can only happen when we work together.

Recently, I was notified by the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism that over 30 residents of Simcoe–Grey are being recognized with Ontario Volunteer Service Awards. I want to thank each and every one of those individuals. This year’s recipients truly represent the qualities that make Simcoe–Grey so strong. Each in their own way has their own story of how volunteerism has made our community stronger, more resilient, more inclusive and more compassionate. Thank you to each of those volunteers, and congratulations.

I’m sorry to interrupt the member, but it is now time for members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

I’ve got a message from St. Paul’s for this Conservative government: Hands off Ontario Place. Keep Ontario Place public.

This government has quietly taken down the Ontario Place statement of heritage value from its website. It’s not the first time this government has disregarded culture and heritage. Last year, Architectural Conservancy Ontario and other key heritage stakeholders were not consulted on the disastrous Bill 23, which served as a slap in the face to our Ontario heritage system.

Their Ontario Place redevelopment deal, or scheme? Same old deal: no meaningful consultation with community, Indigenous land keepers, environmentalists. Even its own landscape architect has stepped away from this government’s ill-fated project due to its attack on climate change, including tree-clearing which would essentially kill decades-old wildlife habitat. I oppose this government’s new “no deal for Toronto” act. It stinks of preferential treatment for friends and wedding guests, and disregards comprehensive environmental and heritage assessments that should be necessary for large-scale infrastructure projects. Bill 154 allows for a government power grab bypassing and breaking multiple provincial laws in order to complete the Ontario Place redevelopment on behalf of their private luxury buddy firm—and don’t forget, folks, the secretly publicly funded garage.

We stand with Ontario Place for All, the Future of Ontario Place Project and thousands more across Ontario saying, “Hands off our Ontario Place.”

I first want to say happy Scottish Heritage Day to everyone in Ontario of Scottish heritage.

As member of provincial Parliament for Oakville, I’m proud to discuss yesterday’s passing of the fall economic statement. I’m honoured to highlight some of the significant strides that our government is making for the people of Ontario and my riding of Oakville. This plan features some of the most ambitious capital spending in our province’s history, totalling $185 billion over the next 10 years.

Let’s dive into some of the initiatives that will make life better for the residents of Oakville. We are extending the cuts to gasoline and fuel tax rates, maintaining them at nine cents per litre until June 30, 2024. This initiative will continue to provide financial relief to the residents of Oakville.

We are also enhancing the Ontario Focused Flow-Through Share Tax Credit to maximize opportunities in critical mineral exploration. This will not only improve access to capital for small mining exploration companies, but support industries such as the Ford auto plant in Oakville, which is critical to critical minerals in Ontario here.

We’ve expanded the provincial eligibility for breast cancer screening for women ages 40 to 49, to underscore our commitment to health care and early detection. This expansion will directly benefit the women of Oakville, ensuring they have access to vital health care in our community.

And as auto theft has increased in Oakville and across Ontario, our investment of $51 million to fight auto theft and assist police in identifying and dismantling criminal networks will help make the residents of Oakville live in a safer community.

I’m rising this morning to pay great thanks to Dr. Danielle Brown-Shreves, who is a family physician in our community who has just been recognized by the Ontario College of Family Physicians as being a regional family physician of the year. She just won a Dr. Reg L. Perkin Ontario Family Physician of the Year award from her colleagues, and let me tell you why, according to her colleagues.

Dr. Brown-Shreves leads the only Black-led team-based family physician clinic in our city. Dr. Brown-Shreves opens up “wellness day” opportunities for people in our city who do not have health coverage because of their citizenship status. Dr. Brown-Shreves spends her own time meeting directly with settlement agencies in our city, above and beyond what we would expect health practitioners in our province to do.

That’s what leadership looks like to me, Speaker. That’s why I want to thank Dr. Brown-Shreves and her team from the bottom of my heart for all you do to keep our city healthy. Our city is living in a context where at least 150,000 do not have attachment to a nurse practitioner or to a family doctor. This government has only allocated $30 million in the next two years—that’s two bucks per Ontarian—to expand primary health care. They should sit down with Dr. Brown-Shreves, they should sit down with the Restore clinic and they should listen to other initiatives from Ottawa Centre I’ll be talking about in this House in the next two weeks to put us back on track.

Dr. Brown-Shreves, thank you for your service.

Giving Tuesday was earlier this week—the world’s largest generosity movement. It was created in 2013 in Canada with a simple goal of encouraging people to do good in their own communities. Giving Tuesday has spread to over 90 countries, including thousands of non-profit organizations participating in whatever ways they can.

Many organizations in my riding of Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston participated this year, highlighting their missions, asking for donations and gaining new supporters, organizations like the Perth and Smith Falls District Hospital Foundation, who are seeking donations to their MRI campaign. Lanark County Interval House is requesting donations to its Christmas holiday program, as well as becoming a volunteer. The Lanark County Community Justice program is appealing for socks, mitts or gloves, which will be donated to someone in need, and Southern Frontenac Community Services celebrated Giving Tuesday by acknowledging their wonderful volunteers and thanking the public for rallying behind its mission to work with others to provide health and social services.

I would also like to congratulate the Perth Lions Club. I had the pleasure of attending their 70th anniversary celebration last weekend—70 years of service and giving back to its community.

Let’s all think about how we can lend a hand to one favourite non-profit, not only on Giving Tuesday but throughout the year.