Thank you to my colleague from Markham–Thornhill for this very important question. One of those ways—as we mentioned, I believe, in all of our remarks today—was student housing. We’re exempting that from the Planning Act for our universities.

I think of the University of Guelph, who have lots of students. It’s a great university in Guelph there, but they need student housing. But as the minister mentioned, those students now are in the community, taking rentals out of that stock from the local community. If we build student housing, they can then move into student housing and there is more rental stock for many workers—and because of the investments we’re attracting through our auto manufacturing, I know there are many in Guelph.

It’s wonderful to be here this afternoon with all of you to speak on another very important piece of legislation. I’m pleased to share the government’s time today, as the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and speak to the Planning Statute Law Amendment Act, 2023. I’d like to spend some of my time discussing how this proposed legislation will better support our municipal partners in advancing local planning priorities while helping us address the province’s housing supply crisis.

Speaker, as all members of this House know, one of our most valued relationships is with our partners at the municipal level. They are and will continue to be an integral part of our efforts to build at least 1.5 million homes by 2031. As I’ve said in this House before, the province is on the right path to building more housing, but our municipal partners need our support, and they need us to take some additional steps.

Since being appointed to the ministry, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Associate Minister of Housing and I have been working very closely and meeting with colleagues at different levels of government to find ways to build housing even faster. We’ve been asking our municipal partners what they need to do to ensure we are maximizing opportunities to get shovels in the ground.

One of the ways is through municipal official plans. As you may know, Speaker, official plans set out where offices and shops can be located; where industry and development can thrive; where parks and schools should be located; where infrastructure like roads, water mains and sewers will be needed; and of particular interest to us today, where new housing can be built.

Official plans can help implement the provincial planning statement. This statement sets out the province’s priorities for land use planning, including direction that municipalities must follow when making decisions under the Planning Act for community development and growth. Land use planning helps set the goals for the community while keeping economic, social and environmental factors in mind. Planning helps balance the interests of property owners with the interests of the community as a whole, and municipalities work to reflect the interests of their communities in their official plans.

The official plan process is complex and nuanced and requires balance—a balancing act between long-range and big-picture planning, between long-term infrastructure goals and short-term development pressures and between opposing land uses that need to be managed so they can successfully co-exist. All of this and more brings us to why we are here today.

Our government recognizes that municipalities are in the best position to understand the unique needs and the concerns of their communities. Our proposed legislation would wind back provincial changes to the official plans and the official plan amendments made by the ministry in November 2022 and April 2023, except where these are needed to align with legislation or regulations such as the protections for the greenbelt.

Speaker, it’s my privilege to talk about these exceptions. The provincial modifications we wish to keep were made to protect the greenbelt or protect public health and safety. We also want to retain the modifications that bring official plan boundaries into conformity with existing provincial legislation and regulations.

Let’s look at the modifications we’ve made to ensure municipally approved official plans reflect the policies and mapping supporting the greenbelt. In some cases, the municipality-adopted urban boundary in the official plan may have encroached into the greenbelt when this type of urban expansion doesn’t align with the greenbelt plan. As you are aware, Speaker, we also have before the House—which we also passed recently—legislation to enhance greenbelt protections. We work through the official plans to identify and then address inconsistencies within the greenbelt, and these are some of the modifications we’re proposing to retain in the official plans of the city of Hamilton, the county of Wellington and the regions of Niagara, Peel and York.

Another set of modifications we propose to keep relates to Indigenous communities and their interests. These modifications would strengthen the approach municipalities take in working with Indigenous communities. They would also help to ensure that obligations are met; for example, ensuring that where a marked or unmarked cemetery or burial place is found, Indigenous communities with a known interest in the area are notified. To align with Indigenous interests, we are proposing to keep these provincial changes in the municipally approved official plans for the cities of Hamilton, Belleville and the county of Wellington.

Another set of modifications we propose to maintain relate to incompatible and sensitive land uses. A stark example of an incompatible land use would be a heavy industry facility next to a long-term-care home. In that example, an official plan would need to reconsider not only the long-term-care home but also the industrial plant. The plant, which might be a major employer and a significant contributor to the community’s prosperity, would likely find its operations hampered because of its proximity to a long-term-care home. And the residents of a long-term-care home would find their quality of life negatively affected by the plant.

These examples show us where official plans have an important role to play, in this case, to ensure that land is used in a way that works for everyone. To this end, the provincial modifications would have added language to some official plans to clarify that the municipality would need to follow provincial guidelines so that we don’t end up with long-term-care homes next to heavy industry, to continue with that example, and if it proves impossible, the official plan includes language to ensure measures are taken to mitigate any potential adverse effects.

To align with these sensitive land uses, we are proposing to keep these types of modifications to the municipally approved plans of the cities of Hamilton, Peterborough, the regions of North York and Niagara.

As we’ve seen that provincial modifications were made to address health and safety as it pertains to sensitive land uses, other modifications were made to address safe drinking water. Municipally approved official plans must include provisions for wellhead protection areas, and this requirement is in alignment with the Clean Water Act.

Many municipalities across Ontario rely on wells to supply safe drinking water to their residents, and we must guard against the risk of pollutants seeping into the ground and contaminating well water. That’s the purpose of wellhead protection areas. These are the areas around a well where landowners and the municipality must manage any activities that could become sources of contamination, and these wellhead protection areas must be identified in official plans. To that end, we’re proposing to keep modifications like this to the municipally approved official plans of the cities of Barrie, Belleville, Peterborough and the regions of Peel and York.

Recognizing the province’s investments in infrastructure and the need to plan and protect for new infrastructure corridors, we are maintaining a set of modifications related to infrastructure and planned corridors. These corridors are reserved for large linear infrastructure projects such as new highways or hydro transmission lines. Once potential future corridors are identified by the province, they need to be included in official plans. As a result, we’re proposing to keep modifications that protect the Highway 413 corridor and the northwest GTA transmission corridor. These affect the official plans of Halton and Peel regions.

As I have said, reversing the provincial official plan decisions that were made would better reflect the local priorities and support the needs of local communities, needs and priorities that are consistently evolving, which means that the plans that shape them must evolve as well.

We recognize that in some cases the province may have modified and approved an official plan more than a year ago. And a lot can happen in that time. Plans might need to be adjusted to account for local priorities and planning for 2051 and potentially to support our province-wide target of building at least 1.5 million new homes by 2031, and that is why we’re also looking for feedback on potential changes that were originally made by the province that the municipality would like to keep.

We’re also interested in what projects might already be under way, and we have given impacted municipalities until Dec 7, 2023, to provide these updates to the official plans. Municipal staff can also reach out to the staff from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to provide additional information.

Speaker, I should also add, the immunity provisions in the legislation would apply not just to the provincial government but also to our municipal partners. These strengthened immunity provisions will mitigate any legal risk that may arise as a result of this legislation.

As the Associate Minister of Housing has said earlier this afternoon, the proposed bill has generally been well received by the impacted communities. By focusing on items that we all agree on, we’re able to leverage the municipal official plans to help meet our shared priorities. This collaboration will address changes to accommodate circumstances or projects that are already under way or to maintain changes that the province made.

Speaker, we must not lose sight of the impetus for our proposed legislation. Ultimately, we want more homes in Ontario—a lot more homes—and not just homes in downtown Toronto but homes across communities in Ontario, whether it’s in my riding of Perth–Wellington or in the riding of Ajax or in Ottawa. We want to achieve our goal of building at least 1.5 million new homes by 2031 by supporting our municipal partners. And this is not just an aspiration; this is a practical objective we’re already delivering results on.

Over the past three years, housing starts have been robust and, despite a recent slowdown, this has continued well into 2023. From January to October of this year—the latest figures that are available—Ontario saw almost 75,000 housing starts. That’s essentially unchanged when compared to the same period in 2022. And for rental accommodations, 2023 saw an increase in rental starts of almost 41% compared to the same period in 2022. In 2022, Ontario saw nearly 15,000 rental starts, which was an all-time high. And I’m pleased to report that in 2023 we had already surpassed that figure at the end of October of this year.

Speaker, as I’ve said, all levels of government need to work together to address the housing crisis. Our proposed Planning Statute Law Amendment Act, 2023, is another way that we are collaborating and engaging with municipal partners to support their communities as they develop and grow. We are committed to increasing the housing supply in Ontario. Our call to action is to get shovels in the ground across this province, from Windsor to Mississauga to Kingston, Speaker. We need all hands on deck, but we need to move forward in a way that is reasonable, responsible and strikes the optimal balance between local interests and provincial priorities.

I know when the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing came into his role, he reached out to our municipal partners on the housing task force recommendations. Our government has already implemented full or partial recommendations—23 of the 74—and we continue to work on those that are remaining with our municipal partners. I know my local municipalities appreciate the opportunity to provide that feedback, to share with the minister what they believe could be the next steps in our housing supply action plan, which I know the minister has mentioned is coming in the new year—something to look forward to in 2024.

As we continue to move forward, to get more homes built across our province, Speaker, it is about ensuring that the dream of home ownership is there for the next generation and for future generations that come to Ontario—no matter where they come from, whether it’s another province or another country in the world. We will ensure that our communities remain vibrant places to live, work and raise a family. This is why I urge all members of this House to support this bill.

Thank you to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and our great associate minister, as well, for their remarks this morning. I’m pleased to speak on our government’s proposed Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act and its corresponding plan.

Specifically, Speaker, I’ll be speaking on our proposed changes regarding the future of land use planning in our province. They would support our government’s initiatives to produce a single land use planning document for the province. This would be a great improvement over the current situation we have with the provincial planning statement and A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

This layer upon layer of planning rules is inefficient, Speaker. It causes great delays, which many government colleagues have heard through a variety of stakeholders: municipalities, builders and everyone else in Ontario. It’s not helping us get more homes, which Ontarians desperately need built. That is why our government launched consultations on April 6 seeking opinions, advice and ideas on how key elements of these two sets of planning rules should be combined into one overall land use planning document for all of Ontario.

I want to emphasize that we are paying close attention to the consultations that we are hearing and we appreciate the interest of the public so far. This is crucial to our government’s efforts to get the housing built that Ontarians desperately need. That’s why we’ve made great headway in tackling Ontario’s housing crisis. But, as the minister and associate minister have said, more needs to be done. A streamlined set of land use planning rules will go a long way in helping our partners in the municipal sector and the building industry to reach approval on new housing projects in a much more rapid manner.

What I also want to emphasize is that a single set of planning rules will benefit all of Ontario, not just the greater Golden Horseshoe. When proponents of a new housing project have one set of rules to follow, no matter where they are in Ontario, that translates into a simpler, quicker and less costly housing project. But right now, that is not the case. All of Ontario is subject to a set of planning rules detailed in the provincial policy statement, often referred to as the PPS. However, in the greater Golden Horseshoe, there is an additional set of rules contained in A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

The greater Toronto area, which is just one area of the greater Golden Horseshoe, is expected to grow by 2.9 million people by 2046. And I want to say that again: We need more housing to accommodate the additional 2.9 million people in the next—Speaker, this is not just a housing issue; it’s an economic problem that can affect the entire country. The greater Golden Horseshoe generates more than 25% of Canada’s gross domestic product. It is literally the economic engine of Ontario and the country. But this economic engine needs workers who in turn have a place to live.

It is crucial that we get land use planning right so that new housing can be built quickly and without unnecessary costs and delays. Compound those demands with the current situation we have in planning rules on top of planning rules which builders must navigate on their own, and it’s easy to see how delays and costs end up adding up. A streamlined set of planning rules will help us meet all of those challenges more quickly with less cost. That’s why we plan to integrate the provincial policy statement and A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe into a new province-wide streamlined and housing-focused land use planning policy instrument. This new simplified and streamlined planning policy document would be called the provincial planning statement—still PPS, Speaker. It would give direction to all of Ontario and give specific direction tailored to the needs of Ontario’s 29 fastest-growing communities.

Our proposed new provincial planning statement would be based on five pillars.

The first pillar is generating an appropriate housing supply. For this, our new PPS would give specific direction to 29 of Ontario’s largest and fastest-growing municipalities with regard to planning for major transit station areas and greenfield lands. This will help us ensure an adequate supply of housing. Simpler and more flexible policies would apply to all other municipalities to accommodate more local conditions but would still encourage growth, Speaker. For example, our proposed policies would promote more rural housing by allowing greater flexibility in smaller communities. Smaller and rural municipalities would also engage with the private sector to provide the infrastructure needed for new housing. As well, municipalities would be encouraged to establish density targets for undeveloped land.

The second pillar, Speaker, on which our new PPS is based is making land available for new homes. This is part of our plan to build homes for Ontarians in urban and suburban areas, as well as rural parts of the province, while still maintaining strong environmental protections across Ontario. We would require municipalities to have enough land with water and sewer access ready to meet their communities’ forecasted housing needs for three years into the future. We would also require municipalities to adhere to an at least 25-year planning horizon, and we would continue to encourage municipalities to build where it makes sense, such as locating office, institutional and residential development near transit, and mix retail and commercial areas with housing, schools and other community uses to create complete communities, Speaker. At the same time, we recognize that housing needs must be balanced against other necessities. That’s why we would require that large parcels of land be preserved for agriculture and heavy industry that are best separated from residential areas to lessen the effects of noise and odours that may result from their operations.

The third pillar, Speaker, is focused on the need for infrastructure to support residential development. This means, for example, that school boards and municipalities should work together—I know, Speaker, in your role, you are very well aware of that need—and be innovative in finding new ways to integrate schools into new developments.

Infrastructure corridors are an important consideration that must be protected for hydro, transit and transportation to build the housing we need for the future and the industries that we continue to attract to our province. However, we recognize the growth demands being placed on large and fast-growing municipalities, so our proposed PPS would give special direction to them to offer some flexibility.

The fourth pillar is balancing housing with the need to protect resources. For example, we would require municipalities to designate prime agricultural areas to support our province’s productive and valuable agri-food network. We would also maintain all greenbelt protections, including policies on environmental and agricultural lands. Water resources must be protected, so municipalities would be encouraged to adopt watershed planning approaches, rather than requiring watershed plans. Similarly, aggregate resources must be protected to ensure we have the supplies we need to continue to build Ontario. If we’re to make it easier and less costly to build housing, we must protect these aggregate resources, such as the sand and gravel that goes into making cement. We must also allow access to these deposits in more cost-efficient locations and streamline the approval process needed to extract these deposits.

Lastly, but certainly not least, our proposed PPS would encourage municipalities to focus on improving air quality and consider the impacts of climate change.

I now want to speak about the legislative measures in our bill that will support our aim to create housing-focused, land use planning systems. Our proposal is to enable the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to require landlords to enter into agreements for projects assigned to the Provincial Land and Development Facilitator. I know we hear this a lot from the opposition members on requiring landlords to enter these agreements for these projects, and so we are putting that in this bill right now. Our goal is to help ensure that commitments made by property owners are fulfilled, and they honour those commitments. A good example is in cases where a ministerial zoning order may be contemplated.

We’re also proposing two changes to the City of Toronto Act and the Planning Act regarding site plan control. The first change would delay the date on which municipalities must begin to refund at least a portion of zoning bylaw and site plan application fees if they don’t make a decision within a specific period of time. This process was set to begin on January 1 this year, as set out in the More Homes for Everyone housing supply action plan. However, we propose to move that date to July 1 of this year to better align with municipal processes and it’s also, as the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing mentioned, something we heard from our municipal colleagues at AMO and ROMA around these changes in Bill 23, and so we continue to listen to our municipal partners and work with them in adjusting these timelines to ensure, really, Speaker, that we get more housing built quicker.

Our second proposed change would enable municipalities to use site plan control for residential developments of 10 units or less in specific circumstances. More Homes Built Faster, our housing supply action plan released last fall includes changes to the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act to limit municipalities’ ability to use site plan control for residential developments with 10 units or less. We now propose further changes to the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act that would give the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing the authority to make regulations to permit municipalities to use site plan control for residential developments of 10 or fewer units on a single lot in specific circumstances. If our bill is passed—and the minister did make regulations—those regulations would outline specific conditions where site plan control could be used for residential development of 10 units or less. These conditions are proposed to be circumstances where the site is near a shoreline or near a railway.

Speaker, I know the minister has mentioned—we’ve heard a lot mentioned around our proposed provincial planning statement, and it’s great to hear that feedback and those important proposals we are making to get more housing built in Ontario in all communities: rural Ontario, suburban Ontario and downtown Toronto, and we’ll continue to work with our municipal colleagues and our industry and home-building colleagues and all stakeholders to get more housing built. Our policies and proposed legislation changes are necessary if Ontario is to solve its housing supply crisis and also meet future demand for even more housing.

Speaker, before I conclude, I want to again mention our government’s proposed consultation on our proposed planning statement. That consultation began on April 6 and has been extended—again, hearing from stakeholders across Ontario, extending that consultation period by another 60 days. August 4 now, I believe, is the deadline for submissions. I encourage anyone who is watching this morning and I encouraged all those who reached out to my office to submit feedback through the Environmental Registry of Ontario, and that feedback is very well regarded and read.

The plan, as I’ve outlined in my remarks, is—and of this legislation is to support our ambitious goal to build 1.5 million homes by 2031. I know our government has an all-of-government approach to get those homes built in Ontario—again, communities across Ontario. As I mentioned in my remarks, the economic value is also something that is overlooked sometimes.

Many, many employers in my riding of Perth–Wellington are looking for workers. They’ve been looking for workers since the pandemic has subsided, whether that’s in advanced manufacturing, in our growing agribusinesses, in home construction, in skilled trades, even in health care.

But the number one need is housing. The nurses and the doctors need a place to live, as well; the accountants need a place to live—and ensuring that we have the mixed range of housing in communities across Ontario to meet those growing needs.

The Minister of Economic Development and the Premier continue to attract many, many businesses to Ontario, and I know one of the second questions they most likely get in their deliberations is, “Where are we going to find the employees?” So our government is proposing ambitious proposals to meet that and build more homes to ensure that Ontario continues to grow and continues to be a great place to live, work and raise a family, to ensure that our economy continues to grow. As I mentioned in my remarks, it is the economic engine of Canada. And ensuring that the many, many new Canadians coming to our shores are welcomed and have a place to grow and have a place to—if they choose to own a place, to rent a place, but a place to call their own and to raise their family and to contribute, as so many before them have contributed to our society and our communities across Ontario.

In conclusion, again, I encourage everyone to submit a comment through the provincial planning statement, PPS, by August 4; we’ve extended it by 60 days based on the feedback we’ve heard from stakeholders across Ontario.

Our government continues to listen to Ontarians on a variety of issues, especially our ambitious goal to build 1.5 million new homes by 2031.

Now, Speaker, it’s my pleasure to turn it over to the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery, or the minister of peanut butter sandwiches, as I like to call him.