Thank you for that interesting speech you just did.

My question is, do you have faith in this government with their climate action? Are you proud of their climate action?

Interjections.

I would like to ask a really simple question to the member for Sudbury. He mentioned that he actually uses natural gas to heat his home. I was wondering how much he paid to get it connected to the natural gas network.

It’s a pleasure to join the debate. I really do enjoy the member opposite, and I’ve had an opportunity to be in Sudbury, when I was cabinet minister, to do some announcements with him.

What shocks me is, he is saying one thing to his constituents and another thing to this Legislature.

What I think is a problem with the New Democratic Party, obviously, is the two-headed monster that they’re wrestling with, which is the environmentalists and then those who are from northern Ontario, like the member from Nickel Belt, like the member from Sudbury.

I want to know from the member from Sudbury, Mr. West—he has asked in this Legislature, he has asked the minister for expansion of natural gas. We’re offering the expansion of natural gas, and he is speaking, now, against natural gas expansion. We all know from those who live in rural Ontario and those who live in northern Ontario that they need natural gas because of the escalation in prices in the province of Ontario.

So my question to the member opposite: Is he going to vote for this act so his constituents can gain access to reliable and affordable energy in his community?

Okay.

So this really is coming down to a point where people are going to pay more, and it doesn’t make sense. There isn’t a rational argument. I know there are a bunch of spinning plates they’re trying to distract people with, and they’re basically flicking laser pointers to distract people, but at the end of the day, you’re going to pay more; you’re going to see it on your bill.

Independent organizations have said consumers should not pay for this. Enbridge should pay for this. And instead of standing up for the consumers, the Conservative government has rushed in to stand with Enbridge and say, “No, no, what we’re going to do is we’re going to overrule this. We think the independent agency is wrong. We think that these independent decisions are wrong. Coincidentally, it helps one of our friends. But we think they’re wrong, and so we’re going to overrule it.”

Ultimately, in debate, they’ll say, if this bill is passed—they have a majority government; this bill is going to pass. But I don’t know if they can withstand the backlash from the communities when they find out that they’re downloading more fees to them. They did this already with municipal taxes. Anyone who’s frustrated with the amount that your municipal taxes have been raised over the last year—what they did is, they downloaded developer fees to municipalities. Municipalities cannot run a deficit, and so that means they lower services or increase taxes—or a mix of both. So if you are upset with your municipal services or your property taxes going up, I want you to take some of that anger and rage away from your city council, and I want you to point it where it belongs: with a provincial government that decided that developer fees should be borne by the taxpayer.

The Premier is very proud of often saying there is only one taxpayer. He’s basically saying, “You’ll pay for it in the taxes.” And when you look at property taxes, you’re looking at seniors on fixed income; you’re looking at homeowners; you’re looking at rank-and-file regular people paying more and more because the Conservative government is balancing their books on the back of the municipalities and saying that you as property taxpayers can pay it. And they’re hoping you’re going to keep your rage in the municipality and not where it belongs with this Conservative government.

This bill is going to drive up energy costs. It is not going to bring them down. This is about raising your gas bill. I said it in the beginning. I said it halfway through. I’m going to say it again. I’m going to say it to everyone I speak to because they need to know. This bill is nothing more than a way to raise your gas bill up, to have you pay so that a billionaire company can make even more profit. That’s all it is. That’s not my opinion. That’s the opinion of independent regulators. That’s the opinion of independent voices who look at everything. They don’t really have a stake in the game—just that they’re experts. If you’re not listening to experts saying, “This is the wrong thing to do and an unfair thing to do,” you have to at least look at the math and say, “I don’t think that you should be paying for services that you’re not getting, and you should not be paying for a billion-dollar company like Enbridge”—a $16.507-billion company. They can pay their own way.

It makes no sense. This is an organization that is incredibly wealthy—and hats off to them; more than $16 billion for Enbridge. I think, “Good attempt.” You went for it and you were saying, “Hey, we want to give more money to our shareholders. What if we got our ratepayers to pay for part of this infrastructure, instead of us?” They tried to sneak one past the goalie, and the goalie knocked it out and said, “No, we’re not going to allow this, as the OEB.” That’s where it should have ended. I don’t blame Enbridge for trying. They’re trying to maximize their profits; they absolutely should try.

What’s wrong, though, is the Conservative government overruling this independent agency, these experts, and saying, “No, you got it wrong. Take care of my buddies for me.” That’s not about politics. That’s not what’s best for the people of Ontario. That’s what’s best for Enbridge. That’s what’s best for donors to the Conservative Party.

All I can remember over the last four years is the Conservative government having a litter cleanup day. A long time ago, I was a Cub Scout, and we had a litter cleanup day.

We need to take action on climate change. We have to take it seriously. We have to do it in some way.

So I don’t have a lot of faith—I don’t have a lot of faith in a lot of things they do, but especially not on this issue.

The member is right; the Ontario Energy Board did the review, they looked at the facts, and they said to Enbridge, “You cannot bill the four million customers that you have in Ontario for development fees for new homes. This is not the way things should go.”

I can tell you that in my riding the natural gas pipe goes to the end of my street. None of us are connected to natural gas—and we won’t be, because Enbridge is saying, “Oh, if you want us to come down, you will have to pay thousands and thousands of dollars.”

How could it be that an agency—they are the only providers that make $16 billion a year—needs to go into the pocket of all four million of their customers in order to stay in business?

I’m sorry; I’m just going to interrupt the member. According to the rules, you can’t refer to the Premier by his name—so the title of the riding, please.

Interjections.

Thank you to the member from Sudbury for his debate on Bill 165, titled Keeping Energy Costs Down Act. It’s the title that concerns me right off the bat—typical of this Conservative government—because, really, it’s keeping the costs down for who? It’s keeping the costs down for Enbridge, which the government is protecting over the ratepayers. We hear day in and day out how expensive life is for people being able to heat their homes, and now this government is literally going to allow Enbridge to put a bigger cost on our heating bills to protect Enbridge profits.

Can the member give his comments on why he thinks the government is so angry?

Interjections.

Next question?

My friend alluded to something that I still have a very huge curiosity on. Since the launch of the 2019 natural gas expansion program, we’ve supported projects that are supposed to connect over 17,000 customers in 59 communities across Ontario. We talked about the choice between heating and eating, and we’ve reached out to local government to expand natural gas to the ridings—and I know the member from Sudbury has some of these communities.

So I am going to continue to ask, would you stop your constituents from heating their homes with natural gas if that was the fuel source that they chose for themselves, given they’ve already made an application for the natural gas expansion?

To begin, it’s a bit of a strawman conversation. Sudbury is fortunate enough that we have access to natural gas in every area of my riding. But when you talk about access to natural gas, I think it’s fine, and I was clear in my debate—

Interjections.

I was clear in my debate that if people want access, that’s fine. I don’t think everyone else should pay for your access—it’s not just that I didn’t think that; the Ontario Energy Board didn’t think that. Independent experts said, “No, do not do this.”

And if I were to go out in my riding and I were to talk to people in my riding and say, “Do you want to pay an extra $300 for this billion-dollar company to be more profitable?”, every single one of them would say no, and they would be outraged that the Conservative government is trying to pass this off as good for them. It’s not good for them.

What we’ve heard many times during the debate from the Conservative side, the government side, is that this money is going to be passed along to the homebuyer, this money is going to be passed along to the condo buyer. I think it’s laughable.

On the drive down here, around Barrie, there are condos available from the mid-$800,000 range.

There is not one person looking at a condo, looking into a home, who thinks that Enbridge is going to pass the savings along to them. You guys have lost the thread. Honestly, there is nobody who thinks the price of their house is going to come down because of this incentive.

What’s going to happen is, this multi-billion dollar company is going to have a couple more billion dollars in their pocket that the existing ratepayers are going to pay for. It’s lose-lose. Everyone in the province will pay more, plus that fee won’t be passed along to the consumers who are buying new houses for the first time.

Merci à la députée de Nickel Belt, quelqu’un pour qui j’ai un grand respect dans cette maison.

Il faut croire que les gens des circonscriptions et puis les personnes à la tête des municipalités que j’emporte ici au plancher de la municipalité—eux autres croient, avec la présente régulation ou la présente décision que le gouvernement est en train de faire, qu’elle va avoir un impact négatif sur eux. Et puis, ils veulent faire certain que leur opinion est partagée avec le gouvernement pour que la décision qui soit prise ne les mette pas en désavantage pour faire le développement de leurs communautés pour offrir du logement, des nouveaux logements, pour les gens qui viennent aux communautés.

Je ne veux pas qu’on se fasse d’accroires : il y a une transition qu’on doit passer à travers dans la province. La transition, il faut qu’elle arrive aujourd’hui. Il faut qu’on commence à prendre des étapes aujourd’hui à faire une transition pour nous ôter à travers les gaz de carbone. Et puis, ces décisions-là devraient être prises avec une transition où elle ne va pas impacter les gens négativement.

C’est intéressant d’écouter le membre d’Algoma–Manitoulin. Je veux vraiment qu’il clarifie la différence entre aller chercher de l’aide pour des communautés qui veulent être connectées. Ça, ça ne fait pas partie du projet de loi. Le projet de loi, c’est vraiment pour les nouveaux développements où on va aller demander aux quatre millions d’Ontariens et Ontariennes déjà connectés de payer pour la connexion de ça.

Donc, dans son comté, est-ce qu’il y a des municipalités qui auraient aimé ça, être connectées? Oui. Est-ce que ça, ça va les aider? Non. Et est-ce qu’il pense qu’Enbridge, qui fait 16 milliards de dollars par année, pourrait aller chercher le 1 milliard de dollars—qu’on veut aller chercher des quatre millions de contribuables—dans leurs profits plutôt que d’aller chercher ça dans la poche des quatre millions d’Ontariens et Ontariennes qui sont déjà connectés?

I want to thank the member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for his question. I’ve always been engaged with municipal leaders, community members, organizations and so on. Sometimes there are particular sensitive issues that come up that require a little bit more engagement, and this is one of those engagements.

No, it’s not the first time that we’ve talked in my riding when it comes to natural gas. I can tell you I was a huge advocate in order to help the community of Prince township. Just a couple of years ago we were able, and successful, to make a connection to bringing reduced rates to those individuals to get them off of firewood and oil and to get them to provide new options from electricity.

But anyway, this is not going to be an easy issue for any of us in this room. Again, I look at the government, and you’re overstepping your role as a government on an independent agency, and that is not sitting well with many Ontarians.

We’re going to move to questions.

Thank you to the member for Algoma–Manitoulin for representing his constituents. I know, because as a parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Energy, I have some municipalities all across Ontario that reach out to us about having more natural gas expansion projects. I believe some of your municipalities are part of that and I see that some of your municipalities agree with what we’re doing right now.

I’m wondering, have they been reaching out only since you became an independent member? Or did they want natural gas when you were part of the opposition?

Thank you to the member for Algoma–Manitoulin. I appreciate the balanced conversation, because this has been framed as, either you’re going to have natural gas or you won’t, and that’s not what’s happening here. What we’re saying is that an independent organization, the Ontario Energy Board, has said that ratepayers should not have to pay for this. And that’s the stance we’re taking as New Democrats. The Conservative government is saying, “Well, they should pay for it.”

So just for the member for Algoma–Manitoulin: If this bill passes, or if this bill fails, do you think it’s going to affect access to natural gas for the people of your riding?

We hear a lot from members opposite and the independent members. They talk about the PCs and their buddies. I’ve been thinking about some of my buddies. I’ve been thinking about a buddy of mine. He lives in St. Catharines, works in Milton, drives about 80 kilometres there; I just googled it. It’s about an hour to commute and back. That’s why I was so proud when we cut the gas tax, why I’m so proud to fight the carbon tax.

I thought about a buddy of mine who lives in Cambridge, a renter who is paying the carbon tax on natural gas, which is why in my member’s statement this morning I talked about fighting the carbon tax.

I thought about a buddy of mine, 29 years old, a service manager at a Ford dealership—a pretty good job, a middle-class job—who, quite frankly, would have to save up for 20 years to afford a down payment for a new home, living at home with his parents because he can’t afford a home. And I think about the thousands of dollars that the OEB decision would make that guy pay upfront, increasing the cost of buying a home.

These are some of the stories of my buddies. I’m wondering if the member opposite would think about them and maybe decide to vote with the government, stand up for new home buyers.

Next question?

We’ll have to move to the next question.

I want to thank the member for his presentation and his speech today. The member was here when the Conservative government, their members, were actually in the official opposition at the time. And at the time, they were very, very critical, from what I hear, about the politicization of energy, energy delivery, the entire energy system. Liberals at the time used a lot of politics to influence decision-making, not listening to experts, not listening to regulators, just making decisions based on phone calls possibly from donors and others.

How do you feel, considering what the Conservatives are doing now in light of their criticisms before?