Our colleagues know very well that enabling water systems is key to housing and a critical part of the construction process. This budget allows for a system fund of $200 million to $825 million over three years, which is quite substantive.

I’m just wondering if the member will stand with our government to support these endeavours so we can get building going.

I’m going to change the dial as well. I think I heard the member from Sudbury say that they support the bill. We’ve heard the Leader of the Opposition as well as the housing critic say that they share our goal of increasing supply and building the homes that we need by 2031. So I’m going to dial back to a time when the member from St. Paul’s said building more homes may not necessarily be the answer. Now, the member from her party is saying that building more homes is the right answer but that the taxpayers should pay a minimum of $150 billion to build a maximum of 25,000 homes a year. So my question to the opposition is, what’s their plan to build 1.5 million new homes by 2031, and how much will it cost the taxpayers?

I want to congratulate my friend, who was able to acquire his dream home. We also talked about being a landlord and tenant, and some of us have also discussed what modifications are required for the system to continue, the challenges that have been faced, the long delays and the unethical actors who take advantage of the LTB system. I’m pleased to see that we’re finally getting this fixed to address these issues.

But can the member elaborate on what steps the new housing supply action plan takes to protect both the landlords and the tenants and the critical issues reported by the Landlord and Tenant Board?

I respectfully listened to the member opposite and appreciate small towns as well. Thornhill, my own riding, borders on some areas that we can get to pretty quickly, but we’re always aware of the farms and the areas that are just outside of our reach, so hopefully she will appreciate that the newly proposed provincial planning documents will allow the residential lot creation on farms. I’m just wondering if she has an opinion on this, because we will not have—it means that a farmer will be able to sever his lot to a son or daughter to build on a house, and it also means there can be more housing to accommodate farm workers. I’m wondering what the opposition’s opinion is on this.

Thank you to the member on the other side, and I want to thank him for his statement.

One of the things that is part and parcel to this new issue—obviously, it’s not a new issue; we’ve had 15 years of a previous government that did very little to deal with this issue. It’s not a new issue, but attainable homes is a massive problem, and Ontario is launching the housing supply action plan, along with this. This team will work to implement the recommendations that we’ve heard from the Housing Affordability Task Force.

Does the member on the other side have any comments with respect to this affordability issue and the task force? Does he not think that it would be important to have them at the table to help with this issue of affordability that has just been brought up?

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and congratulations on your new role.

I want to thank the member for providing so much information, specifically about his own neighbourhood. I respect and understand that, as we suffer with the same issues in my own area of Thornhill. We know that more and more experts agree—and this is solid information—that supply and demand go hand in hand. The major driver of a housing crisis—it’s pretty simple: When there’s not much going around, the price goes up. Can the member please share with us and the House how this critical policy that you talked about will affect not only Ottawa and Toronto, but future locations?