I’m glad to ask the member a question. We put our focus very differently in our debates on this bill. I focused on schedule 2 and the unbelievable redevelopment plan of this government. But because the member focused on schedule 1, I will as well.

I have concerns. I’ve never in my nine and a half years seen before a legislated discussion, which doesn’t need to exist. There can be a discussion; there doesn’t need to be legislation that says, “Thou shalt have a conversation.”

Where I see concerns in here is that financial support for the city of Toronto for shelters and other homelessness programs and services is conditional on financial support from the government of Canada. The money is, of course, conditional upon money from the feds. This is a schedule that repeals itself once those legislated discussions have been had, and yet there is, indeed, no commitment for any outcomes from these discussions.

I’m holding my breath and hopeful. What does the member say?

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’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.

I am honoured this morning to announce that Well Grounded Real Estate’s dedication has elevated them as leaders in purpose-built housing, where from being a finalist in the North American division, they are now winners of the 2023 Holcim gold award in the global competition for excellence in sustainable architecture and design in Venice, Italy. It gives me great pride to report that this project is taking place in my riding of Scarborough Centre at 1925 Victoria Park.

This purpose-built is a mid-market rental building that fulfills a critical void in the marketplace, representing a scalable strategy for solving Ontario’s housing crisis, which our government, under the leadership of the Premier, is tirelessly working to solve.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome Jonathan and Gabriel Diamond, both vice­presidents of Well Grounded Real Estate, for taking us to the world stage. Welcome to your House. Your accomplishments not only bring pride to yourselves, but to all Scarborough Centre residents, all Ontarians and all Canadians.

Thank you and congratulations for your success, but also for elevating Scarborough Centre on the world stage.

I stand today to honour firefighters like Captain Sean Coles, who served as a firefighter for 24 years—nearly half his life. He was diagnosed with stage 4 esophageal cancer and is not expected to see Christmas. He is the father of two kids, and after his diagnosis, Sean not only had to fight cancer, but also fight to ensure his family was supported, because even though he had dedicated 24 years of service, he was one year short of qualifying for benefits for his family.

The blue bracelet I am wearing was created to raise funds for Captain Coles’s family, who would have been left without their father and unsupported. Thankfully, just last month, the latency period for esophageal cancer, the mandatory period of service before qualifying for financial supports, was reduced from 25 years to 15 years.

Sean has the relief of knowing his family will be financially supported. As well, his name will be added to a memorial, showing he gave his life for something bigger than himself.

But more needs to be done. The risk of kidney and skin cancer is also incredibly high, and their latency period must be lowered. The restrictions for eligibility for colorectal cancer must be changed. It makes no sense that once a firefighter reaches 61, they’re ineligible for supports, even though they can serve on a truck until 65.

Firefighters die of cancer at two to four times the rate of the general population. They are at the highest possible occupational risk for cancer. We must step up for firefighters the way they step up for us.

I was pleased to join members of the Lebanese community and my colleague from Ottawa–Vanier yesterday to raise the Lebanese flag in recognition of Lebanese Independence Day. On November 22, 1943, Lebanon was declared a sovereign nation, following 23 years of mandate rule.

November is Lebanese Heritage Month here in Ontario. It recognizes the many contributions of the Lebanese community across our province. I was proud to introduce Bill 60 here in the Legislature, the Lebanese Heritage Month Act, and I would like to thank the member from Nepean and the member from London West for helping to pass that into law in 2017.

In my riding of Ottawa South, we have a very strong, deeply rooted Lebanese community. Every year, there are wonderful celebrations in our riding, celebrations of Lebanese culture, such as the annual St. Elias festival. It’s one of the biggest festivals in Ottawa. Actually, one of my friends, Michael Qaqish, met his now-wife there at the Lebanese festival. I always like to say about the festivals that they combine the five Fs, which are faith, family, food, friends and fun. If you’re ever in Ottawa in the middle of July, please come.

Lebanese Heritage Month is an opportunity for Lebanese Canadians to celebrate their culture and traditions. It’s also a great opportunity to recognize and educate future generations about the great contributions the Lebanese community has made to our community, to our province, to our country and to the world—contributions made to, but not limited to, law, science, politics, business and culture.

Happy Lebanese Heritage Month.

It’s an honour today to speak in front of the House. I would like to speak about the people in my riding of Cambridge who are truly fortunate to be cared for by countless organizations dedicated to making their lives better.

Among those organizations is the Southwest Ontario Aboriginal Health Access Centre on Coronation Boulevard, which provides quality health care and services to Indigenous peoples. With six locations in southwestern Ontario, the organization recently marked its 25th year of caring for First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, from Windsor to Waterloo-Wellington and north to Owen Sound. In that time they have provided care to more than 35,000 people. A highlight of the 25th anniversary was a grand opening of the location on Dundas Street in London, Ontario. However, celebrations will continue in the next couple of months.

The Southwest Ontario Aboriginal Health Centre was founded in response to epidemic, systemic health disparities and things that were not equal within the Indigenous population of Ontario. Its mission is to empower Indigenous families and individuals to live in a balanced state of well-being by sharing and promoting holistic health practices. The centre provides innovative, Indigenous-informed care through a combination of health and social services.

This past summer, myself and MPP Dawn Gallagher Murphy were honoured to attend the grand opening ceremonies at the Cambridge location, where we were treated to the traditional sights and sounds of Indigenous culture. We were privileged to have a meal with the centre, and they served buffalo meat, which my EA Grace Camara had never tried before. Now she is a lover of that meat.

I would like to welcome to the people’s House, from Brantford’s North Park Collegiate Student Anti-Racism Coalition, Bhumi Shah, Alicia Melick, Lily Song, and Cordelia Simmons. Welcome to the people’s House.

I’m pleased to welcome Krupesh Shah, a member of the Brantford Police Services Board. Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

Thank you to the member for the question. Funny that she’s speaking about the business case but yesterday she was calling it a “shell game” and a “scam.” There is no scam here. We made the business case public, and the numbers are very clear that we would be saving $257 million over a 50-year period and up to $600 million in tomorrow’s dollars over a 50-year period.

Now, I know what the Leader of the Opposition is doing. She doesn’t want children to have a science centre for the next 50 years. That is what she is saying, because she’s not thinking about the long-term sustainability of that facility.

Mr. Speaker, the evidence was clear yesterday. I was super happy to share it with the public. And I’m sorry, but they have nothing to say.

But let’s talk about the size of the science centre: 18% of the size of the science centre is actually used for exhibits today. The new facility, although smaller in size, more energy-efficient, would actually be more sustainable and will have 10,000 more square feet of exhibition space for the children to enjoy.

Interjections.