The ayes are 27; the nays are 61.

I want to reiterate again to the members across the floor, here in Toronto, we have seen remarkable growth in the bike-share system, and there is a current disconnect between the bike-share system and the TTC and GO systems, like they almost exist in two different worlds. Bikes are a great first- and last-minute transit option, giving riders a healthier and more flexible method to get towards subway and GO stations than just buses. This legislation would compel Metrolinx to adopt that viewpoint, both in how it plans its transit routes as well as for fare integration.

We are also in a major housing crisis. How do they not know that? We are lacking housing for middle-income and lower-income residents alike. Governments have an interest in disposing of surplus land to be built into housing, particularly affordable housing for those of lower incomes. The best place to build new housing is by transit stations, as it reduces those residents’ reliance on automobiles. From the perspective of income equity and also cohesion, there is an interest in requiring affordable housing by transit stations in order to avoid driving low-income residents to far-away car-oriented communities. Let’s not forget our low-income earners.

The third part of this act is the stronger maintenance standards for Highways 11, 17 and 69. I sympathize with my member across from me—the passion, the pain that the people in the north feel, and members on the opposite side not agreeing with this bill. I feel very sorry—very sorry—for the people who are living in the north. This bill is all about having a long-term plan for transportation.

I want to thank the member for Scarborough–Guildwood for introducing this motion for the floor today. I also just want to remark, in the time I have, Speaker, on the reality of the matter for transit and for safety in the province. This is something near and dear to my heart.

So, what we know from facts, Speaker—facts that are gathered—is that today, on average, 20 vulnerable road users will be brought into emergency rooms because of collisions with people who are not driving their vehicles safely. Those could be road construction workers. They could be pedestrians. They could be cyclists. They could be seniors. They could be people with disabilities. But that continues to happen, and I will join the member from Mushkegowuk–James Bay in expressing my frustration, too, that the government continues to live in an alternate universe where they don’t see these families whose loved ones have been struck down, hurt or even killed every single day, all year.

So, I want to thank the member for promoting active transportation through the integration with public transit, but I want to note for the government that we are still having people leave this earth, leave this world, or live their life in critical pain far too often.

I want to also reflect on the fact that the member has noted the need for affordable housing and transit-friendly communities, and has set a mark of 20% of new developments if Metrolinx were to get rid of property for affordable housing. When I followed up with the member, she remarked to me that, for her—as is the case for all housing experts I’m familiar with, Speaker—affordable housing is something that is 30% of one’s disposable income, not 80% of market rent, which has been the gimmick I’ve often seen from the government here and governments elsewhere, where people are priced out of their own homes. I want to salute the member for bringing that metric forward because that’s actually affordable housing.

And that leads me, Speaker, in the time I have left, to talk about the agency at question in that aspect of the member’s bill, and that is Metrolinx. Can I please say, in the time that I have left, Speaker, that I still fail to understand how this government can be happy with an agency that has tripled its number of vice-presidents in the last six years—under its watch, 27 in 2018; 82 today, Speaker. A marketing department at Metrolinx of over 400 people—a CEO that makes over a million dollars that has a reputation for bullying in the workplace, Speaker.

I want to know—just shout it out, members of the government. Can anybody name me one transit project that has been built and finished under your watch? What about the Eglinton Crosstown? What about the Finch extension? What about bus rapid transit in the member’s community of Scarborough? Can anybody name and shout out a single project that has gotten done? You can’t. You can’t, because you know what’s happened, Speaker, sadly, under the government’s watch? Ontario has become the most expensive place to build public transit in the world—in the world.

The Ontario Line right now is on schedule to cost a billion dollars per kilometre. There’s a comparable project in South Korea right now that is costing a third to build a light rail transit system. What has happened, sadly, is that the raven’s nest of consultants has descended upon Metrolinx, and they are siphoning the hard-earned taxpayer dollars of this province for their own benefit, and the meter is still running. I was joking with the member the other day. It’s like we’re all in a taxi and the meter is running and we’re not allowed to get out of the car. But I would expect a Conservative government to not only vote for this member’s bill, but to finally bring Phil Verster and the profiteers at Metrolinx to heel to get public transit built—not to finance massive paycheques to them, but to finance public transit. Thanks for bringing the bill forward.

Good afternoon, Madam Speaker. I’ll begin by making a confession: It was hard to keep my lunch down while listening to the comments from the member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington. He completely ignored the substance of this legislation, and it was rich hearing those comments from a government that has been forced to walk back nearly every major piece of policy that it has put forward, whether it’s the greenbelt, development charges, urban boundary expansion—and all of that within the context of a government that is so preoccupied with talking about the gravy train that it has become the gravy train, and even that in the midst of an RCMP criminal investigation so dire that it has required the appointment of a special prosecutor.

But now I’d like to talk about something that can actually bring a smile to our faces, and that is Bill 184. I want to acknowledge that Bill 184 is an ambitious and important piece of legislation, and for that I want to acknowledge the hard-working, dynamic and relentless member for Scarborough–Guildwood, who is bringing this forward to represent not just her constituents but hard-working Ontarians province-wide, and even—nay, especially—in rural, remote and northern areas.

I want to touch on a few things that this bill will accomplish, if passed. It enhances integration between bike-share services and public transit, and it does so through fare integration, so that people can take advantage of options that are cheaper, healthier and more environmentally friendly. Along the way, it does this and promotes the uptake of public transit by making it easier for people to get to and from bus and train stations, because that is often the biggest barrier to uptake for public transit.

The bill also does a fabulous job of beginning to address the affordability crisis in housing in Ontario. Specifically, it ensures that at least 20% of housing units on provincial land sold to developers are mandated to be affordable. This is crucial because, historically, valuable land that is near transit lines, such as the space near 8 Dawes Road in Beaches–East York, steps from the Danforth GO and Main subway stations, has been sold under this government without any requirements for affordable housing. This kind of lack of oversight has previously allowed private interests to maximize profits while leaving some of our most vulnerable people in this province behind.

If passed, this bill would ensure that, moving forward, developments—such as those at the West Don Lands, East Harbour, Thorncliffe Park and along the new Ontario Line—incorporate essential affordable housing that benefits all Ontarians and all those people living in those communities. We are in the midst of an affordability crisis, Madam Speaker, and this legislation is a critical step to showing that finally someone in this province is ready to take this seriously.

The bill also seeks to establish mandatory, enhanced maintenance standards for Highways 11, 17 and 69. This will ensure rigorous snow and ice removal within hours of weather events as well as timely pothole repairs. These will not only ensure that we maintain our infrastructure but guarantee the safety and efficiency of our transportation systems.

Now, I have spent many years travelling and working in the north. I have seen the consequences of inadequate highway maintenance. When snow and ice is not removed in time, it puts people at risk in the following ways: It increases the risk of accidents; it slows emergency response times; it prevents people from accessing vital services, such as hospitals and fire departments; and when the road conditions are poor, it cripples transportation and, in particular, trucks that are vital for delivering things important for our economy.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, Bill 184 addresses critical gaps in our transportation and housing policies. It ensures that our infrastructure serves the economic and social well-being of our province. It secures the livelihood of our communities and it maintains the integrity of our environment.

I urge all members of this House to support this legislation for the future of our great province of Ontario. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity—

Interjections.

Further debate?

MPP Hazell has moved Bill 184, An Act to Amend the Metrolinx Act, 2006, the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act and the Shortline Railways Act, 1995 with respect to transportation. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion, please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

A recorded vote being required, it will be deferred until the next instance of deferred votes.

Second reading vote deferred.

The House adjourned at 1744.

Je remercie la collègue de me permettre—puis c’est tout le temps intéressant quand on parle en Chambre de la sécurité sur la route et la 17. Les changements qu’elle propose, qu’elle amène, qui vont aider—mais il faut se rappeler que ça fait longtemps que le NPD se bat pour sécuriser les autoroutes.

Je sais que moi, j’ai amené à maintes reprises de nettoyer les routes, de mettre ça dans le standard de la Queen Elizabeth et la 401—le standard 1. On sait que le gouvernement ne voulait pas faire ça. C’était de nettoyer les routes après huit heures. Ils ont même créé un autre standard : c’est 12 heures. Même avec l’hiver qu’on a eu, le peu de neige, nos routes ont fermé. Qu’ils se pètent les bretelles ou que le gouvernement se vante que ça va si bien sur nos routes—il y a plus de monde qui meurt aujourd’hui sur la 11 et la 17 qu’il n’y en a jamais eu. Ça fait que, nos routes ne sont pas aussi sécuritaires qu’ils le disent. Nous, on le vit au jour le jour.

Je voulais remercier la collègue d’avoir amené ça. Je sais que ce qu’elle propose, c’est que le pavé soit nettoyé après quatre heures, quatre heures d’une tempête de neige. Je trouve ça un petit peu irréaliste. C’est certain, pour moi, que quatre heures, ça va être bienvenu, mais je ne crois pas qu’ils vont être capables de délivrer le quatre heures, parce qu’ils sont déconnectés sur la distance qu’on doit parcourir dans le Nord. C’est pour ça que le huit heures était beaucoup plus réaliste que le quatre heures, mais elle propose quatre heures. C’est sûr que si c’est passé, ça va améliorer nos conditions, ça va sans dire.

Aussi, quand on parle de nettoyer la glace, on parle de « ice clearance » et « clearance standard ». Mais souvent, ce qu’ils ne réalisent pas, nos autoroutes—c’est pour ça qu’il y a une réalité que souvent le monde du Sud ne comprend pas. Dans le moins 40, ça ne fond pas, même si tu mets du sel. Même si tu mets ça, la glace reste permanente jusqu’à temps que ça devienne une température où le sel peut faire effet. Sinon, la glace va rester sur l’autoroute. Puis, ça, je peux vous dire, c’est certain cet hiver on en a eu moins, parce que c’était beaucoup plus clément. La température était beaucoup moins froide. Ça fait que la glace ne restait pas, parce que le sel agissait beaucoup plus vite.

Mais c’est clair qu’on doit adresser la sécurité sur la 11 et la 17. C’est pour ça que je l’ai remercié de l’avoir amené. Mais je pense qu’il faut qu’on dise c’est quoi la réalité du Nord : demander quatre heures, ça serait bienvenu, mais je ne crois pas que c’est réaliste.

Comme je disais, ça fait des années que le NPD demande plus de priorisation sur le déneigement. Mais je ne peux pas parler de déneigement sans parler d’un peu d’historique, là. Puis, je veux parler de l’historique et aussi des libéraux et des conservateurs.

La privatisation qui est venue dans le déneigement, c’est les libéraux qui l’ont faite quand ils étaient au pouvoir. Ils ont privatisé le déneigement. Puis, on a vu que la baisse de l’entretien des routes est descendue au point de ce qu’on vit aujourd’hui. Les conservateurs n’ont rien fait. Ils n’ont changé rien. Ils ont gardé ça privé. On sait, c’est un gouvernement qui est fort sur la privatisation. Puis, on a entendu du collègue du gouvernement qui parlait que nos routes sont sécuritaires, que tout va bien.

On s’en est sorti cet hiver—même avec un hiver clément, comme j’ai dit, comme on a eu, c’est que nos routes ont fermé pareil. Puis encore, il y a du monde qui sont morts sur nos routes. C’est quoi le prix d’une vie, là? On semble oublier qu’il y a du monde qui meurt sur nos routes aujourd’hui. Puis, on prend ça pareil comme si c’était normal. On normalise du monde qui meurt sur nos routes à cause des conditions hivernales. Il y a quelque chose qui n’est pas correct dans ce portrait-là. Il y a quelque chose qui ne sent pas bon, et le monde est tanné.

Les communautés du Nord demandent qu’on devrait mettre un standard. Elle propose un standard de quatre heures. Nous, on veut poser un standard de huit heures. Le gouvernement a mis un standard de 12 heures, mais qui était 16 avant.

Mais je veux revenir sur l’historique, puisque je sais qu’il faut que je donne la parole à mon collègue. Les libéraux l’ont privatisé. C’est important de le dire, puis je vous le dis-là : sous le gouvernement libéral, il y a eu un rapport de l’auditeur général en 2015 qui montrait que le niveau de déneigement des Ontariens avait diminué depuis la privatisation du service. Et ce rapport dit—je vous en lis un extrait, là : « The bottom line is that the ministry has been successful in reducing and containing escalating winter maintenance costs, but this has been achieved at the expense of a reduction in the timeliness of ensuring Ontario highways are safe for motorists in the winter. »

Ce que ça dit ici, en français, c’est que le ministère a réduit ses coûts, parce qu’il l’a privatisé. Mais aux dépens de quoi? De la santé et la sécurité du monde sur l’autoroute. C’est qui, ce monde-là? Mais c’est des personnes comme moi. C’est ma famille. C’est les jeunes, parce qu’il ne faut pas oublier, les routes 11 et 17—on a une artère, là. On n’est pas comme vous autres qui bâtissez des routes partout, que vous avez accès pour vous faire des détours. Nous, on a la 11 et la 17.

On a la 11 pour se rendre à nos appointements de médecin. On a la 11 pour se rendre à nos écoles. On a la 11 pour se rendre au travail. On a la 11 pour se rendre au travail. On a la 11 pour tout faire. Puis, aujourd’hui, j’entends le gouvernement se péter les bretelles encore, et dire que nos routes sont sécuritaires. Moi, je peux vous le dire : je le vis au jour le jour. Vous avez une réalité que vous ne comprenez même pas. Les municipalités vous le disent. Ils passent des motions pour que vous l’ameniez à huit heures, ce qui est standard, comme la 400. C’est une Transcanadienne; ce n’est pas une « trail » à vaches, ça, là. Ce n’est pas ça qu’on a. C’est une Transcanadienne.

On parle de millions. Quand la route ferme, ce sont des millions que la province perd puis que le Canada perd. Mais c’est qui qui l’a privatisé? Ce sont les libéraux, mais ils aimeraient qu’on l’oublie, cette partie-là. Et là, on dit, on nous propose de quoi de même, et je trouve ça un petit peu sarcastique, mais c’est une amélioration qu’il faut considérer.

Mais ceci dit, les conservateurs n’ont pas fait mieux. Même, ils ont empiré la chose parce que je peux vous dire que pour nous, les personnes du Nord, quand moi, j’ai mes commettants qui viennent, qui ont peur de voyager ces routes—on a rien qu’à voir les vidéos sur la 11 et 17 qui tuent, que les camions dépassent où ils ne devraient pas dépasser. Puis le ministre de la transportation nous dit que nos routes sont les plus sécuritaires de l’Amérique du Nord—mais qu’il sorte de sa tour d’ivoire, qu’il vienne se promener chez nous, qu’il vienne sur nos autoroutes l’hiver, qu’il fasse face à deux trucks qui s’en viennent sur la même ligne.

Mon commettant, de Chad’s Law, a quasiment perdu sa voix quand je lui ai dit qu’on voulait juste mettre les lignes solides, les mettre comme dans tout le reste des provinces au Canada, puis ils ont voté contre. Puis ils disent qu’ils sont là pour notre sécurité. Réveillez-vous. Réveillez-vous. Venez dans le Nord puis venez vivre ça au jour le jour, venez dire au gars comme Chad, mon commettant, qui a quasiment perdu sa vie, qui est arrivé face à face avec un truck dans une côte. Puis vous dites que c’est sécuritaire, les routes les plus sécuritaires? Vous êtes déconnecté pas à peu près.

Je veux donner la parole à mon collègue.

It’s now time for further debate.

I’m pleased to rise today and take this opportunity to discuss the Supporting Mobility, Affordability and Reliable Transportation in Ontario Act, as proposed by the member from Scarborough–Guildwood.

I’d like to start by addressing the proposal for Highways 11, 17 and 69. We are working with those communities and listening to their feedback. The Ministry of Transportation ensures that Highways 11, 17 and 69 continue to receive investments that strengthen their safety. Ontario has nation-leading standards in place when it comes to winter maintenance, and our government will never compromise on safety. Operations are active 24 hours a day, seven days a week, until bare pavement is restored, so road safety will always be a priority for this government.

The member opposite’s bill also proposes to introduce more integration between transit agencies. However, this is the same party that voted against removing double tolls for transit riders. That will save commuters up to $1,600 a year per person. There has never been a government that has invested more in our transportation network than under the leadership of Premier Ford.

Our government has the most ambitious infrastructure plan in Ontario’s history. We’re making historic investments, including over $100 billion over the next decade to build roads, highways and public transit that our growing province desperately needs. This includes more than $70 billion as part of the largest public transit expansion in Ontario’s history.

The people of Ontario re-elected our government to build Ontario, and under the leadership of this Premier, we’re getting it done. Unlike previous governments, we’re getting shovels in the ground faster than ever before.

In 2020, our government brought forward the Building Transit Faster Act, which introduced measures to streamline and accelerate the construction of critical transit projects. I will remind the Liberals and the NDP that they voted against the Building Transit Faster Act. But again, that’s why the people of Ontario turned their backs on the Liberals and the NDP: They have no solutions to make life better.

As a part of the Get It Done Act, our government is proposing changes that will allow us to get shovels in the ground faster on new housing projects for cities all across Ontario. Under the leadership of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, we will continue to work with our municipal partners as we build a better future.

After years of inaction by the previous Liberal and NDP government, our government is working hard to build new infrastructure as fast as possible. The Liberals and the NDP left people crowded on subways and buses and failed to deliver critical projects like two-way all-day GO, or a new subway for downtown Toronto.

They sat by as our population grew over a decade. Their record is clear: They do not support public transit. They voted against the largest expansion of public transit in Canadian history. Speaker, we are the only party that is serious about building Ontario.

When the Liberals were in office, they cut passenger rail service for northern Ontario. They abandoned communities like Timmins and Cochrane who absolutely relied on that Northlander. We know how important the Northlander is for families in the north, and that’s why this Premier and our government are bringing back the Northlander with brand new trains and passenger coaches.

The Liberals had a chance to reverse their mistake, but instead, they doubled down and they voted against our plan to restore public transit in the north after they cut it. So whether it’s the Ontario Line, GO expansion or the Ontario Northlander, Ontario Liberals vote against building transit time and time again.

Since our government took office, we have made it a priority to get things done for the people of Ontario. That’s why we introduced the Get It Done Act, which will allow us to plan, approve and build projects faster than ever before. The Liberals and the NDP, they seem to love red tape, and it’s part of the reason they got nothing built when they were in office. That’s why Ontarians rejected the Liberals and the NDP overwhelmingly in the last election.

The people of Ontario want to see new infrastructure built and built without delay. We can’t let more red tape get in the way of our getting shovels in the ground on the roads, the highways and the public transit that our province so desperately needs. Unlike governments of the past, we’re not just talking about transforming our transportation network; we’re getting it done.

Thanks to the leadership of Premier Ford, Ontario’s economy is strong, attracting investment and attracting new families from around the world. In fact, Ontario is one of the fastest-growing regions in North America. It’s predicted to grow by five million people over the next 10 years. The greater Golden Horseshoe alone is expected to grow by a million people every five years, reaching almost 15 million people by the year 2031.

The Liberals knew this growth was coming, and yet they did nothing and left our highways in gridlock. That’s why we’re building generational projects hike the Bradford Bypass and Highway 413, both of which will be toll-free and bring much-needed relief to some of the most congested traffic corridors in North America, shortening commuter times by 30 minutes per trip.

The reality is, the gridlock commuters face every day costs us more than $11 billion a year in lost productivity. Gridlock not only increases the cost of things we buy, but it also makes it harder to access good jobs and affordable housing. Highway 401 is already the most congested highway in North America, and with other major highways quickly reaching their capacity, doing nothing is simply not an option. That’s why we’re building roads, highways, bridges and public transit to get people where they need to go and keep our economy moving.

Unlike the Liberals, we’re investing in every corner of this province, including northern Ontario. When it comes to highway safety, our government will continue to take action. That’s why we’re the first government to introduce new maintenance standards for Highways 11 and 17. Under our government, Highways 11 and 17 is cleared four hours faster after a winter storm.

And we’re making critical investments to improve highway safety. We’ve added more winter maintenance equipment to our fleet. There are currently over 1,100 pieces of winter maintenance equipment ready to be deployed to keep our highways clear even on the harshest winter nights.

Over the past few years, we’ve hired 20 new inspectors and coordinators and provided them with the tools to effectively ensure that our contractors are meeting those high standards. These are investments that the Liberals and the NDP voted against. They voted against funding to complete the twinning of Highway 69. They voted against funding to build the first 2+1 highway in North America. They voted against funding to twin the Trans-Canada outside of Kenora. This is typical for the Liberals. They say one thing but then do another. We are the only party that’s taking real action to improve the highways in the north.

Speaker, when it comes to investing in our transportation network and in housing, we won’t take lessons from the opposition. As the former mayor of Mississauga, carbon tax Crombie balked at thousands of units next to the future Hazel McCallion LRT. Let me repeat that: Bonnie Crombie said no to 4,690 units next to an 18-kilometre transit line that would connect Mississauga to Brampton. It’s because of policies from NIMBY politicians like Bonnie Crombie that costs continue to rise.

Our government is about saying yes to building. Unlike the queen of the carbon tax, Bonnie Crombie, we’re saying yes to homes, to transit and to the highways that we need. My colleague Minister Surma is leading the way when it comes to connecting communities to transit. Our Transit-Oriented Communities Program will ensure that people have access to jobs and to transit while being closer to home. We’re going to see new communities along the Ontario Line: 1,490 units in Corktown, nearly 4,000 units in East Harbour and over 2,600 units in Thorncliffe Park. These are only some of the communities that we’re building through the TOC Program.

And yet, Speaker, again, the Liberals and the NDP voted against this plan. They voted against building new homes for families next to transit. They voted against housing projects that increase transit ridership, reduce carbon emissions and provide much-needed housing in the GTA.

Since day one, our government has made affordability our number one priority for the people of Ontario. Now, more than ever, we need policies that help Ontario families keep more of their hard-earned money in their pockets, and we’re giving them the confidence that they will continue to keep that money.

That’s why we introduced legislation which, if passed, would ban any new tolls on provincial highways. This would not only apply to the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway once both of those highways are uploaded to the province, but also to the province’s 400-series highways. Any future government would be required to conduct public consultations before enacting tolls because the public has a right to know if it’s going to enact tolls that can cost up to $5,000 a year for a family.

But it’s not only families that benefit from fewer tolls. The tolls add to the price of commercial goods because it adds to the cost of trucking, and that cost is reflected in the prices that we see on store shelves. Hard-working Ontario families deserve better than that. Preventing new tolls on provincial highways will connect communities across the province, making jobs more accessible, and drive our economy forward.

We know from experience that making highways toll-free provides significant savings to Ontarians. In April 2022, we eliminated the tolls on Highway 412 and Highway 418, a move that will save drivers $68 million between 2022 and 2027. By introducing a ban on any new tolls on provincial highways, we’re going a step further to make sure it stays affordable.

Speaker, on average, with the new One Fare, average transit riders will save up to $1,600 per person, and yet again, the Liberals and the NDP voted against it. I don’t understand.

As many Ontarians struggle to make ends meet, now is definitely not the time for the federal Liberal government to raise taxes, so we will continue to fight the government of Canada on the carbon tax.

Now, more than ever, we need to build infrastructure to save people money. We’re the only party that is serious about that. We were elected to get it done, and we will.

Further debate?

Mr. Speaker, I am so honoured and delighted to debate my second piece of legislation in this House. I was elected to this chamber to bring positive change to Ontario, to present good policies that would improve people’s lives, to bring new ideas that would make Ontario a safer and kinder place—ideas that are bold, ideas that move the province forward, ideas that are smart.

Well, Mr. Speaker, this bill has not one, not two, not three but four smart ideas to improve transportation in our beautiful province. This legislation, if enacted, would address four sections where the government could be doing more. These are the promotion of active transportation, construction of affordable housing near public transit, improving safety standards on dangerous northern highways, and protecting crucial rail infrastructure with support to the economy and impact to the environment.

Here’s my first smart idea: People are cycling more than ever, particularly in more urban environments. In 2023, Toronto saw over 5.7 million bike-share riders, and that number is only growing. We are on the brink of a new golden age of cycling. It is the healthiest form of transportation. You can get your daily exercise just through pedalling. It is environmentally friendly, with zero carbon emissions, unlike gasoline and diesel cars and buses. And often, cycling can be faster than public transit, so it is no surprise that people are pedalling more every single day.

One of the biggest advancements in cycling is this bike-share system implemented in Toronto and Hamilton. These systems are game-changers, providing convenient and easily accessible transportation for thousands of people. This system is expanding quickly, with plans for every riding in Toronto to be connected by the system. It is time to move forward into the next phase of it.

As it stands, there is minimal coordination between bike-share systems and public transit. That interconnectivity is hampered by a lack of fare integration or discount for using both, meaning that commuting with both bike-share and public transit is more expensive than just by public transit. For example, someone who commutes from Hamilton to Toronto for work would pay $11.44 to take the Hamilton bus to West Harbour, take the GO train to Union and take the subway to their office. They might prefer to use the bike-share to and from the GO system, but that would cost them $20.50. Just imagine: $9 more for the healthier and often quicker option, which does not make sense, especially when it would likely be cheaper for the province to cover the bike-share fare and the Hamilton Street Railway and TTC fares.

My legislation would amend the Metrolinx Act to require them to consider bicycle infrastructure in route and fare integration planning. Bike-shares are public transit, and we need to start treating it as stuff. The SMART Ontario Act makes Metrolinx adopt that viewpoint. A policy shift to integrate fares will not only benefit the 5.7 million-plus riders in Toronto, but it will also encourage commuters to use a healthier and more environmentally friendly transportation option.

The second part of the SMART Ontario Act also amends the Metrolinx Act to require 20% affordable housing whenever Metrolinx sells land to residential property developers. Metrolinx is one of the largest landowners in all of Ontario, and it currently has multiple properties up for sale. Let’s get this right.

I’m going to use Scarborough for an example: 4142 Sheppard Avenue in Scarborough—this location is a five-minute walk from Agincourt GO, as well as the future Sheppard East TTC extension. This is prime real estate to redevelop for transit-oriented living, and we need to see some proactivity from Metrolinx to ensure that the redevelopment includes an affordable component.

I have seen the impact that this housing and affordability crisis has on the people of Scarborough–Guildwood. We are in a generational housing crisis, and when we sell government land off for housing, we should be ensuring there is an affordability component. But you don’t have to trust my words, because this government’s very own Housing Affordability Task Force recommends the same measure. Requiring 20% of units to be affordable at these sites is a slam-dunk way to get affordable housing built, but this government has already missed the boat on this at a number of sites. Metrolinx sold land in Beaches–East York and Mississauga–Lakeshore that will not have an affordable component, and that is a major missed opportunity.

The Housing Affordability Task Force report has been out for two years now, but this government has stalled or refused to implement the vast majority of its measures. By voting for the SMART Ontario Act, this government can fulfill one of those crucial measures to address the housing crisis.

The third part of the SMART Ontario Act is new standards on Highways 11, 17 and 69, which form the backbone of the northern road network. These roads are dangerous and not well maintained; it is putting drivers and transporters at risk every single day as they drive on these highways.

As part of the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs, I travelled through northern communities such as Sudbury, Thunder Bay and Dryden, where I heard not just about the difficulties regarding these highways but how this government has stalled on their promises to complete the twinning of these highways. Much of the routes in these northern communities are single lanes going in each direction. When one of those lanes closes because of a snowstorm or a car accident, travel is crippled, which means people can’t see their families, businesses can’t make their deliveries and residents cannot access crucial services like the hospitals when they need it the most. There have been an alarming number of deaths caused by horrific accidents on these highways because of poor road conditions.

The new standards through the SMART Ontario Act will mean that potholes are fixed sooner, and snow and ice are cleared quicker, allowing for safer and more reliable roads. When you are driving down along northern roads in the dead of winter, you need to trust the asphalt beneath you. People’s lives are threatened and even lost by the poor standards of these roads. Mr. Speaker, the standards that are held for the 400-series highways should also be held for Highways 11, 17 and 69. Let’s fix that by voting for the SMART Ontario Act.

The last part of the SMART Ontario Act is about protecting shortline railways. It’s not difficult. This is not a hugely visible part of people’s lives, but it’s a major part of this economy. These rail lines connect business to the main freight lines, support thousands of jobs across the province, and could be used towards advancing transit in the future. These rails provide first-mile and last-mile connectivity to customers and industries that are located in rural and remote communities.

Many local businesses would not exist or could not survive without access to shortline freight rail services. When a shortline rail shuts down, businesses are forced to either close up shop or move, often to other jurisdictions, including the United States. Let’s not forget that.

The sales of shortline railways are not protected right now, which puts our economy at risk and limits our options for the future. If we protect these railways, we could repurpose them for public transportation, such as for the GO, which would save millions of dollars. Existing rail corridors are unique assets, and building new transit on them is much more cost-effective than building LRTs or subways. We are allowing shortlines to be abandoned and sold off, which means Ontario is losing vital opportunities to expand our transportation sector.

The almost funny thing is that there used to be great protections for shortlines in this province, until this government removed it in 2019 in a misguided so-called red tape reduction measure. That’s why, in my bill, we are just bringing back the old law—very easy to fix. Bringing back these protections doesn’t just protect jobs; it is also protecting the shortline right-of-way of future generations, which keeps the door open to future passenger rails on these routes.

We as MPPs do not need to just plan for a better Ontario. We need to make sure we are planting the seeds for a brighter future too. I strongly encourage every member of this chamber to support this bill. These proposed changes are simple and non-controversial, and will improve peoples’ commutes, bring good homes to the families of Ontario, support businesses big and small, and save lives on northern roads.

Let’s get it done with the SMART Ontario Act.

Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for their presentation.

This bill amends several acts.

The Metrolinx Act, 2006, is amended to add a new object for Metrolinx requiring it to promote and facilitate the integration of routes, fares and schedules of municipal bike-share systems. Section 29 is amended to require Metrolinx or a subsidiary corporation to ensure that any assets sold or disposed for the purpose of building residential units include at least 20% affordable residential units.

The public transportation and highway maintenance improvement act is amended to specify mandatory maintenance standards for Highways 11, 17 and 69.

The Shortline Railways Act, 1995, is amended to re-enact section 10 of the act, which was repealed by the Getting Ontario Moving Act (Transportation Statute Law Amendment), 2019. The re-enacted section establishes requirements that apply to shortline railway companies that wish to discontinue the operation of a railway line.