I just want to remind the members opposite that every year, the government spends historic amounts on whatever it is we have to do for people. It’s just the way it works. If there are more people, we have more needs. We always spend more money. I’m getting tired of hearing the word “historic.”

I’d like to ask the member a question—and it goes off my colleague from Windsor West. Would it not be a simpler thing to do than to pass a piece of legislation to actually say, “There’s this much money, and here’s how the program works”? That’s the way government does it most of the time. “Here’s the program. Here are the rules. You have to apply. You have to spend it this way.” Why not just actually invest in it, make the policy, let it go, and not worry about all the words that we’re putting in here that we don’t really need—because we can do it without having to do this.

I just want to get this right. I know that the long-term prospects for giving the minister this kind of power over OEB decisions is just not a good idea. Maybe we’re thinking it’s a good idea today, but five years from now, is it going to be a good idea? Ten years from now, is it going to be a good idea?

But here’s the thing: I think people are having a hard time thinking about the future. What’s going to happen here? More and more people are going to buy heat pumps. They’re going to go off natural gas, just like happened in the 1960s and 1970s. That’s what’s going to happen, and what will happen with what you’re proposing is, those few people who are left are going to pay more and more and more. Right now, everybody’s going to pay more.

I just want to understand why we’re not thinking about the future and the kind of pressure that we’re going to put on people economically. Like, it’s all good to think about today and try to spread that all over four million people, four million users, but there’s going to come a point—

It’s six years of failure, Premier.

I guess Santa came early this year.