I’d like to thank my colleagues from Humber River–Black Creek, from Don Valley West and from Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas for their remarks this evening.

I think it’s clear that the academic, the mental health and the physical health benefits of playing sports, of participating in extracurricular activities, are clear. The opportunities to improve academic results and test scores as a result of kids being more active after school, whether that’s in sports or other extracurricular activities, is clear. The health benefits of kids who play sports, who become adults who play sports and stay active, should be abundantly clear. When we’re trying to deal with a health crisis, when we’re trying to deal with a crisis in our schools, when we’re trying to ensure that we have the workforce that we need for the future, everything that we can do to enhance academic success, everything that we can do to enhance health outcomes and health benefits, should be a no-brainer.

The member from Oakville criticized the bill because not everyone will benefit, or it won’t be exactly $1,000. Well, if the litmus test to legislation in this place was that it was perfect, nothing would ever pass. I would like to propose a refundable tax credit. The rules of Parliament don’t allow me to do that. I would prefer to have the government create a fund to directly help parents pay for sports registration so you can get those families that can’t afford to pay it on the front end into sports. But I’m not allowed to do that, Madam Speaker.

I would encourage the government to consider those kinds of options for their budget next year. And if they actually had real measures in next year’s budget that would provide real relief for middle-class families, that would provide opportunities for families of all income levels to put their kids in more sports, then maybe they would get my support.

But tonight, I’m asking for their support to help some families keep more of their kids and put more of their—

Interjections.

I’d be happy to talk about the raw deal the city of Ottawa is getting from this province.

Let’s break down the numbers. Last November, the city of Toronto signed a deal with the province to get $1.2 billion over three years; Ottawa is getting $197 million over three years. Basically, Toronto is going to get $396 for every resident; Ottawa is going to get $181 for every resident. That’s per capita funding. That’s corrected for population.

I guess my question back to the member for Nepean is, why does she think her constituents in Nepean are only worth 46% of the Premier’s constituents in Etobicoke?

My question is for the Premier. The Premier says he wants judges who will be tougher during bail hearings, and on this we can agree. That’s why we worked with the government last year on bail reform. But the Premier also says he wants to abolish the independent judicial system in exchange for a politicized one with like-minded judges—one that’s used and abused south of the border. So he has appointed biased, unqualified political insiders, notably his former deputy chief of staff, to lead the panel that makes judicial recommendations.

But the problem with politicizing the judicial system, Mr. Speaker, is that the Premier’s former deputy chief of staff is also a paid gun lobbyist for Colt’s. How can we expect judges to get tougher on gun crime when the guy recommending them for the job is the guy who sells the guns?

Gun crime is no laughing matter. Police in Ontario reported 4,791 violent gun crimes in 2014. That’s 1,000 more than the previous year. Homicide by gun crime is at an all-time high. The Premier has nice catchphrases like “stop the crime” and “get tough on bail reform,” but he has asked the guy who sells the guns for advice.

Mr. Speaker, there is a violent gun crime in Ontario every two hours. How can we believe the Premier’s tough-on-crime stance when he has asked the guy who sells the guns to appoint the judges?

Education should be the great equalizer, not the great divider in Ontario. Schools should be a source of hope, not of fear.

Mr. Speaker, I recently met with parents, teachers, teachers’ associations and school boards, and one thing that they all said to me was that there has been a noticeable increase in classroom violence. A teacher from my riding recently wrote that, from grade 6 down to kindergarten, classroom violence is present at every level. She has been punched in the face, bit, kicked and hit numerous times by students.

And while classroom violence has increased, the number of educational assistants has decreased. There’s a lack of educational assistants, a lack of resources and programs for students with special needs, a lack of mental health supports, and overcrowded classrooms. This has all led to an increase in violence and disruptions in our schools, putting the safety and well-being of our students, our kids and staff at risk. This is absolutely unacceptable in a province as prosperous as Ontario.

I’m calling on the government to reverse its cuts to education and invest that money to keep classrooms safe by hiring more educational assistants, reducing class sizes, expanding special education services, supporting mental health initiatives and bringing character education back to our schools. Let’s respect our students and our educators by keeping them safe in the classroom.

My question is for the Premier. The RCMP has announced a criminal investigation into the $8.3-billion greenbelt land giveaway. Yesterday, the Minister of Municipal Affairs announced he would reverse the controversial changes to urban boundaries that were imposed by his predecessor. The minister admitted that there was too much involvement from the previous minister’s office in these decisions and that they failed to meet the standard of public trust.

Mr. Speaker, given the criminal investigation into the greenbelt and the similarities with the decisions on the urban boundary expansions, will the Premier take responsibility for leading the government under a shroud of secrecy, leading to criminal investigations, or will he continue to throw his ministers under the bus and back it up again?

The government delayed the approval of Ottawa’s official plan by a year, dragging it out throughout the election, and it seems that they spent that time fundraising on changes, or potential changes, to the plan that could be seen if they won re-election. Not only did they get caught with their hand in the cookie jar; they took a giant bite out of the cookie and are trying to put it back in without anyone noticing.

Mr. Speaker, given the criminal investigation into the greenbelt and the similarities with the decisions on the urban boundaries, will the Premier invite the RCMP to expand their investigation to include these urban boundary decisions as well?

I’ll be sharing my time this afternoon with the member from Don Valley East.

It’s an honour to speak to Bill 135, the Convenient Care at Home Act, today. When I first saw the bill being introduced, I thought to myself, “Finally. The government is going to do something about the state of home care in Ontario.” But, Madam Speaker, I don’t think this bill does what is needed.

Most Ontarians, and certainly those that I speak to, would like to stay at home as long as possible as they age or as medical conditions arise. There’s comfort in being at home where you raised your family, where you live your life. As the scourge of illness or disease and the impacts of Father Time affect us, sometimes taking our dignity, it’s essential to hold on to everything that we can, to maintain that sense of normalcy, to maintain our dignity as much as possible. Home care services are essential for those who may need assistance with their daily activities: bathing, dressing, eating, using the washroom, taking medications, amongst many other things. It should be and must be a top priority for our government to ensure that Ontarians can stay in their own home as long as possible and can do so with dignity and respect while receiving world-class health care.

However, as a result of this government’s underfunding of health care, home care services in Ontario are facing a crisis. They’re underfunded, understaffed and, as our population ages, they are overburdened. The government has failed to address the issues head-on—including by imposing Bill 124, which continues to add to Ontario’s health care retention issues.

Madam Speaker, I’d like to share the story of a constituent of mine, Martine. Martine is impacted by the chronic underfunding of home care services each and every day and is not being treated with the dignity and respect she deserves from this government.

Here’s Martine’s story. Martine is an active 50-year-old. She’s smart, articulate and funny. She enjoys movies and concerts, good food, great company, and sometimes just a quiet night in. She has a family life, friends, interests and hobbies, just like the rest of us. She has much to contribute to her peers, her family and the community at large. The only difference is that she is not able-bodied. Martine requires a wheelchair and help with daily living tasks. Throughout the day, Martine receives home care services from two separate home care agencies. But as a result of the continued underfunding, mismanagement and lack of prioritization, Martine routinely goes without the home care services she needs—services she is entitled to. Martine needs help getting in and out of bed. Like any vibrant adult, she has an active social life. She enjoys going out with friends, hosting dinner parties, and all of the other social activities we take for granted.

Routinely, Martine is told that she needs to make a choice: continue to be a vibrant, active adult or receive home care. How is this choice given to Martine? By being told she can only receive service with help to bed at 8 o’clock, or sometimes as early as 5 o’clock in the afternoon. Imagine being told that you have to go to bed at 8 o’clock every night and cannot get out of bed again the next morning until 7:30 or 8 o’clock. Imagine the indignity of being told that you cannot enjoy the same life we all enjoy because you’re being put to bed early. Imagine what it would be like to have plans with friends and family and to get that last-minute call saying the PSW is no longer able to put you to bed when you get home—or how you’re going to go to work on time in the morning when the last-minute call comes in that morning saying there’s no one to get you out of bed.

Madam Speaker, I look around the room. There are many with us at the moment who, I would guess, are 50 years or perhaps a little bit older right now.

How many of you can go 12 or 13 hours without using the washroom? That’s what Martine faces routinely.

She is incredibly lucky. She has support from family and loved ones who, at the last minute, can drop everything to help her in these situations. But it shouldn’t come to this. Not everyone has that support network.

Martine and other Ontarians should have the confidence in our health care system to provide the care they need at home and to live healthy and dignified lives.

I had the pleasure of meeting Martine at her home a few weeks ago, and I was amazed at the changes she has made to her home to adapt to her illness and how her illness will progress. As a result of her physical condition, every day is already a challenge, but she works hard to navigate life with a positive mentality. After spending some time with Martine, hearing her story, I don’t think I could be that positive. Surely we need to help Martine maintain her dignity and live a productive and fruitful life, and that includes a social life. I wish she was here to be able to explain to all of you the things that she has had to go through and how she has had to adapt her life to this medical condition.

Tragically, Martine’s story and situation is not unique. Too many Ontarians who require home care services are in similar circumstances.

Bill 135 is nothing but a cosmetic change that will not address the root causes of the crisis in home care. It’s putting lipstick on a pig. It doesn’t provide a pathway for more funding to hire more PSWs and nurses. It won’t improve conditions to help retain the workers we already have. It won’t enhance accountability or transparency in the delivery of home care services or ensure public oversight. In fact, it creates a one-size-fits-all solution to a province that the Premier himself has said many times isn’t a one-size-fits-all province. It doesn’t make any sense.

Bill 135 could make things worse by opening the door for more privatization and profiteering in the home care sector.

We need a different vision for home care in Ontario, one that is based on ensuring dignity—dignity for our friends, our family and our neighbours.

I’d like to join everyone in welcoming members from the OMA with us today. In particular, I’d like to introduce Dr. Alykhan Abdulla, an assistant professor at the University of Ottawa and medical doctor at Kingsway Health centre in Toronto.

My question is for the Premier. Last year, the former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing overrode Ottawa’s urban boundary expansion and added an additional 654 hectares for development after city council had already evaluated and added other lands. The former minister added lands that were so unsuitable for development because of their agricultural designation that they weren’t even evaluated by experts. This includes a 37-hectare parcel on Watters Road in Orléans that was designated an agricultural resource and is an active farm.

After the city confirmed this designation, the farm was purchased by a group that has donated significantly to the Conservative Party and stood to make millions from the development. After holding up the city’s official plan for two years and after receiving tens of thousands of dollars in donations from the landowners, the former minister added these lands to Ottawa’s urban boundary.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier share with us the process used to evaluate the suitability of these lands for inclusion in the boundary, who was involved in that determination, and what influence, if any, did political contributions and personal relationships have on the decision?

Abuse of power, the breach of public trust, the exchange of favours for personal or political gain: You may rightly be attributing these sentiments to the government’s ongoing greenbelt corruption scandal, but, Mr. Speaker, this may be just the tip of the iceberg.

Ten days ago, I wrote the Auditor General of Ontario to investigate this government’s unilateral decision to expand the city of Ottawa’s urban boundary in 2022. Following a comprehensive review by the city, they added 1,200 hectares in 2020. This was done after extensive consultation and analysis with the public, with stakeholders and with experts.

A key factor in the city’s analysis was the protection and preservation of high-quality farmland as dictated by the provincial policy statement. However, in November 2022, the former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing used his ministerial powers to override the city’s process and add an additional 654 hectares to the boundary. One area of concern in particular, Mr. Speaker, was an expansion of 37 hectares in Orléans, land that was zoned agricultural resource by the city and protected from development.

According to media reporting, in August 2021, when the property was still designated as ag resource, it was purchased for $12.7 million by the Verdi Alliance companies, a group of companies insinuated in the Integrity Commissioner’s most recent report. Meanwhile, this group donated over $12,000 to the provincial Conservative Party in 2021 and 2022. Mysteriously, a year later, these—

I’d like to welcome Momina Malik, Quinn LeFort, Soobin Sung and Joubin Seyrafian. They are the four newest members of the Ontario Liberal summer internship program.

Mr. Speaker, Orléans lost an important community leader earlier this month. On May 1, after a long battle with cancer and surrounded by family, local legend Al Tweddle passed away.

Al was a chemist, an engineer, a sportsman, a musician, a conservationist and, above all, a loving husband, father, grandfather and great-grandfather. Al was a community leader and a trailblazer in Orléans for decades.

Since the 1960s, Al and his previously deceased wife, Helen, were pillars in the Queenswood Heights neighbourhood of Orléans. This is the neighbourhood I grew up in, and while I didn’t know Al back then, I knew who he was. He was the man who maintained the outdoor rinks and who helped run the community centre. He was the man who took care of the tennis courts and so much more. In fact, Al took care of outdoor rinks in Orléans for over 50 years.

I got to know Al when I joined the community association and later served as president. He was a constant fixture and an important sounding board for new ideas.

Al had a great passion for nature and the outdoors. He was instrumental in developing Petrie Island into a beautiful park and ecological reserve, as the founder of Friends of Petrie Island. At Friends of Petrie Island, he spent countless hours maintaining the trails, planting trees, cleaning the beach, and educating visitors about the wildlife and history of the island.

He touched the lives of many people with his generosity, kindness and dedication.

While he is gone, his legacy will not be forgotten.

Rest in peace, Al. You will be missed by everyone in Queenswood Heights and right across Orléans.

It’s a great pleasure to rise and speak to the budget measures act for fiscal year 2023-24 this afternoon.

Although the province faces skyrocketing costs of living, unaffordable housing and a health care system in crisis, budget 2023 offers no relief as more and more Ontarians struggle each and every day just to get by. It’s a budget that tells Ontarians that they’re on their own.

I want to start by discussing how the residents of Ottawa are once again being forgotten by this Conservative government. In the 2023 budget, there was announced $202 million per year in new funding for supportive housing and homelessness projects, but the city of Ottawa’s allocation is disproportionately small. Ottawa is, of course, the second-largest city in Ontario, only after Toronto. Although the city of Toronto has a population three times the size of Ottawa, it’s receiving 60 times more funding than the nation’s capital. It’s absolutely unacceptable that Toronto has received over $40 million for the same program, while Ottawa is set to receive a comparatively measly $845,100. The Premier ignored Ottawa during the occupation, he abandoned farmers after the derecho storm left them in crisis, and he is now, once again, abandoning the city as we have people who need affordable housing options and are living on the street. This insufficient funding could force the city of Ottawa to cancel 54 supportive housing units that were expected to become operational over the next 18 months, and it will severely compromise Ottawa’s 10-year housing and homelessness plan to build between 570 and 850 new affordable housing options. According to Ottawa’s mayor, based on Toronto’s allocation, Ottawa should be getting in the range of at least $16 million, but they’re only receiving $845,000. Ontario’s second-largest city should be treated fairly and should be provided with sufficient funding to meet the needs of its residents.

The 2023 budget also does not include any funding for the victims of the 2022 derecho storm in Ottawa—one of the most notorious storms in Canadian history. In fact, the storm was ranked as the sixth-costliest natural disaster in Canadian history, amounting to over $875 million in damage. The storm caused widespread damage to residential and commercial property, farms and public utilities, killing 11 people and leaving 1.1 million without power. To put it in context for some of the members from the GTA, the derecho surpassed the damages incurred during the devastating 2005 flooding here in Toronto. Buildings in these Ottawa-area communities like Navan and Carlsbad Springs still have holes in the walls or are without roofs because of the lack of disaster relief from this government. We’ve heard a lot from this government about how they support small, rural communities, but when it comes to rural communities in Ottawa, that support is non-existent. And let’s not forget: In addition to denying homeowners and farmers the opportunity to apply for provincial disaster relief funding, the Premier has yet to fulfill his promise to the city of Ottawa or to Hydro Ottawa to help with the costs of cleanup. The city and hydro have spent upwards of, if not more than, $50 million to recover from the storm, without any provincial support. Despite the Premier stopping in to station 53 in Orléans during the election to thank firefighters for their cleanup efforts, he still hasn’t put a single provincial dollar behind it. So what’s the message being sent to first responders? “I’ll come for the photo op, but I won’t deliver the goods.”

The cold shoulder being shown to Ottawa doesn’t stop there. It’s even bigger. Ontario is facing—and Ottawa is facing—a massive shortage of family doctors and a high demand for primary care.

Just to list a few challenges that family doctors are facing across the province and in the nation’s capital: human resource challenges; shortages of nurses and administrative staff; a rise in the severity of illnesses due to deferred procedures or delays in seeking treatment throughout the pandemic; and ongoing financial pressures as commercial rents go up and up and up.

These problems, in addition to many other factors, are affecting the quality of care for patients and contributing to emergency backlogs in our hospitals, and the government continues to do absolutely nothing to support primary care in Ottawa.

Instead of addressing the lack of family doctors, the government has announced their plan to increase private, for-profit medicine. And while the long-term impacts of this are not yet clear, what is evident is that it will not help address the shortage of family doctors or the decision many of them are making to close their practices. There is nothing in the budget to help family doctors continue to do what they do and what they love to do, and that’s help us stay healthy.

Un autre échec important dans le budget de 2023, c’est le manque de financement pour le MIFO, le plus grand centre culturel francophone de l’Ontario. Le MIFO offre des programmes artistiques et éducatifs à la communauté francophone, et le bâtiment actuel est extrêmement obsolète, madame la Présidente, et ne répond pas aux besoins de la communauté. Le MIFO a un projet d’expansion audacieux qui lui permettrait de fournir des services plus efficaces à un plus grand nombre de personnes dans l’est de la ville et, vraiment, tout partout dans l’Ontario. Ce projet est essentiel à la croissance de leur organisation et au succès de la communauté francophone d’Ottawa. Le MIFO a fait de nombreuses demandes au gouvernement pour les fonds nécessaires pour cette expansion, mais jusqu’à date il n’y a aucune réponse positive de ce gouvernement.

The government is also failing Ontario’s municipalities by leaving them high and dry with Bill 23. Last fall, when the government introduced Bill 23, experts and planners warned the government that there would be consequences with removing development charges without compensation for municipalities. Development charges are what municipalities use to build complete communities. They help pay for new roads and new sidewalks and new parks and new rec centres and new fire stations and police stations. It’s what helps cities build complete communities.

And once again, the government didn’t listen. The government, in November, said that they would be conducting audits in municipalities and, based on those results, may step up and help support them financially for their loss. But six months later, the only audits announced are those in—guess what?—Toronto and Peel region. Once again, Ottawa is ignored, and there’s no indication whether or not municipalities, including the city of Ottawa, will get their audit in order to evaluate the loss of revenue as a result of provincial policy.

So as you can see, Madam Speaker, budget 2023 will not make life more affordable for anyone. Ontarians are in desperate need for support during these challenging times of runaway inflation and the affordability crisis that we’re all facing, but this government is turning a blind eye. With the cost of groceries going up, with the cost of hydro going up, with the cost of gas going up, with the cost of everything Ontarians buy each and every day going up, the government has done nothing. They’re saying you’re on your own, and that’s what getting it done looks like, Madam Speaker.

Ontarians were recently blessed with a glimpse of what summer has in store, and while it didn’t last as long as any of us would have liked, it’s a very good reminder that warmer days are just around the corner.

Warm weather brings about a great deal of activity in our communities. Neighbours are gardening and spring cleaning. Cities are sweeping away the remnants of winter. The coming of spring and summer also means more people moving about their communities.

In Orléans last week, the roads and sidewalks were full of joggers and cyclists dusting off the cobwebs of winter and getting some much-needed exercise and vitamin D.

Soon the parks will be open to welcome our children, and more and more students will be walking or biking to school. With all of this activity, it’s important that we, as motorists, pay closer attention to our surroundings and that we remind ourselves to slow down through the neighbourhood, become mindful of the ball bouncing down the driveway into the road. As much as we might try to teach them, children won’t always be on their highest guard and know all of their surroundings. It’s incumbent upon us to be extra-vigilant around them.

Everybody should be encouraged to enjoy the outdoors and the wonderful opportunities spring and summer provide. Let’s make sure everybody can stay safe while they do it.

It’s an honour to rise tonight to speak to the budget measures act for fiscal year 2023-24.

As we know, budgets are important because they tell us and they tell the people of Ontario, the people we represent, what our government’s priorities are. Now, when it comes to this budget, what we can tell, both from the budget itself and from the minister’s speech, is that the government’s priority is everywhere other than Ottawa.

During the speech, you will all remember, the minister took us on this little travelling trip across the province. It was an impressive tour of the province, stopping off in this community and that community. They talked about all the things they’re planning to do. But the minister, on this little fictional trip that he took us all through, didn’t come to Ottawa. In fact, the furthest east the minister got on his little fantasy trip, I think, was Oshawa. He completely ignored all of eastern Ontario and the second-largest city in the province.

The minister did not tell us how his government is going to support the city of Ottawa or Hydro Ottawa recover from the tens of millions of dollars spent on disaster relief from violent windstorms last spring. What’s even more surprising is that the government recently announced a small amount of funding for weather-related disaster relief and left Ottawa completely out of the list of cities to get support.

Residents in the rural communities of Navan and Sarsfield in the riding of Glengarry–Prescott–Russell and in the community of Carlsbad Springs and Orléans and other parts of Ottawa are still being left out in the cold by this government—literally left in the cold, Madam Speaker, as their farms and their barns still have holes in the walls or holes in the roof from the violent windstorm, the derecho last spring, as a result of not receiving supports from their government.

We’ve heard a lot from this government about how they recognize the importance and the value of our Franco-Ontarian communities.

C’est certainement très important pour les résidents d’Orléans et les résidents d’Ottawa et de toutes les autres communautés francophones en Ontario. Et le gouvernement parle beaucoup de leur respect pour la communauté franco-ontarienne, mais on ne le voit pas dans le budget. Dans le budget, il y a une réduction pour le ministre des services francophones, madame la Présidente.

On sait que le Mouvement d’implication francophone d’Orléans est un centre communautaire essentiel pour les résidents d’Ottawa et pour tous les francophones et francophiles de l’Ontario. Construit par la communauté, le MIFO est un endroit où les francophones et les francophiles peuvent se rassembler pour participer aux arts, à des activités physiques, et à leur programmation pour les enfants. Et c’est clair que le MIFO a besoin d’une expansion de leur centre communautaire pour offrir plus de services pour une communauté franco-ontarienne qui a grandi à Orléans et tout partout en Ontario et à Ottawa.

Et ils ont demandé plusieurs fois pour une subvention de ce gouvernement, en participation avec le gouvernement fédéral et la ville d’Ottawa, pour les fonds nécessaires pour construire ce nouveau centre, et cette subvention n’est pas dans le budget. Le gouvernement parle beaucoup de leur affection pour tous les bons programmes que le MIFO offre, mais il n’offre pas l’argent pour accommoder l’expansion du MIFO.

As I said, Madam Speaker, a budget is an opportunity to see what the government’s priorities are. It’s time for all of us, as leaders, to demonstrate to the people that we’re putting their money where the government’s mouths are.

The government claims that the budget is about a path to balance. But for middle-class families, for families in the suburbs who are facing higher grocery bills, higher hydro rates, higher housing costs, for these families, I don’t think that they would say that they’re feeling the balance. For middle-class families, all of their costs are going up. None of their costs are going down.

For Ontario’s families, simply getting by has gotten harder and harder. They’re facing skyrocketing cost-of-living increases, unaffordable housing and a health care system that is in crisis. And yet, this budget offers nothing in terms of relief for these families who are feeling the pinch every day when they go to buy groceries, these families that feel the pinch every day when they go to pay for their basic expenses.

As my colleague from Ottawa South mentioned, there are no immediate supports in the budget that will help Ontarians get by. There is nothing in the budget to make life just a little bit easier. Where are the targeted tax credits? Where are the fee reductions? Sometimes, it’s not always about reducing costs. I know lots of people who are willing to pay a little bit more to get a little bit more. So where are the service enhancements? None of that exists in this budget.

When Ontarians are feeling the pinch, they should know that their government has their back. But in this budget, that’s non-existent. There’s nothing in the budget that will help the bidding wars that are going through the rental market. We need this government to bring back the rent control on new builds that they cancelled when they were first elected. That would provide immediate relief to tens of thousands of people who are just trying to put a roof over their heads. With the skyrocketing housing prices right across the province, that would make life just a little bit easier for all those families and those individuals that are struggling to make ends meet.

Now, Madam Speaker, I truly believe that a budget is one of the most important ways that a government demonstrates to the people that it’s aware of what’s going on, it’s aware of the pressures that people are facing. And it’s an opportunity for the government to present their priorities to the people. We get to see their actions, their spending, their priorities; we get to see that those things match their rhetoric, match the things that they’re saying, match the things that they’re trying to convince Ontarians they believe in. But what we’ve seen with this budget is that the government’s rhetoric is writing cheques that their treasury just isn’t willing to cash. Ontario families deserve better.

My question is for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, everyone in Ottawa knows that the Premier and this government abandoned the nation’s capital during the convoy occupation last year. In fact, Justice Rouleau said, “I find the province of Ontario’s reluctance to become fully engaged in such efforts directed at resolving the situation in Ottawa troubling.”

A few weeks later, the Premier and this government would abandon Ottawa again when a massive windstorm with winds of 190 km/h ripped through the city and left 180,000 residents without power. Ottawa taxpayers are collectively on the hook for tens of millions of dollars for the clean-up of the storm and from the convoy.

Individual farmers and homeowners in Glengarry–Prescott–Russell have holes in the walls of their barns and in the roofs of their barns, Mr. Speaker. This winter, instead of storing equipment and hay, those barns are expensive storage for snowdrifts.

So when Ottawa is in crisis, why does this government always turn its back and say no?

Ottawa taxpayers were hit again with the funding formula change to Ottawa Public Health. In fact, the chair of Ottawa Public Health says that will add $3 million to Ottawa taxpayers’ responsibilities if this isn’t addressed by the government.

Ottawa taxpayers simply can’t fulfill the bill that this government wants to send them. So, given the economic damage they’re already creating in Ottawa and with the upcoming budget, will the government reverse course on the public health funding formula and ensure Ottawa isn’t shortchanged $3 million?

I’m not sure if I missed something; I don’t think that anything is for sale in this piece of legislation. What I said is that what’s critical is that the safeguards are in place to ensure that the facilities are professionally run, that the professional credentials of those who run them are there, that they are safe and that they are universally accessible. That would be the advice that I would provide to this government if they’re going down this path of outsourcing surgeries outside of hospital: that they are safe, that they are professionally run and guaranteed and that access is universally guaranteed for Ontarians.

Issuing a licence is the first step, and it’s an important first step. But there is much more that goes into ensuring that something is safe and professional and that access is universally guaranteed than simply issuing a licence.

This bill isn’t perfect. There’s lots in it to criticize and lots of questions that need to be answered. We’re committed to asking those questions and trying to get a resolution to that. But take off the partisan blinders.

It’s nice to finally be back. My question is for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most important priority any government should have is the health of the citizens that it represents, and a critical element of maintaining good health is regular access to your family doctor or other primary care professionals. Right now, here in Ontario, there are 2.2 million Ontarians without access to a family doctor. That’s almost 15% of the population, and it’s up from 1.8 million just a few years ago. Too many of our neighbours, parents and grandparents, fathers and mothers, don’t have access to primary care. Too many children don’t have access.

We’re hearing a lot of talk about big plans to reform the health system. What we haven’t heard is how this is going to help Ontarians access primary care. So what is the Premier’s government going to do to ensure that these 2.2 million Ontarians can access the important and often life-saving care from family doctors, nurse practitioners and other front-line health practitioners?

My question is for the Premier. Children’s hospitals across Ontario are facing unprecedented challenges. In Ottawa, CHEO is operating at 113% capacity, while its intensive care unit is at over 180%. CHEO is cancelling surgeries and converting that space for more intensive care need. There are shortages in the lack of children’s pain medications, which is forcing more and more parents to go to the emergency room to seek care for their kids. Under the watch of this government, CHEO has had to cancel appointments and surgeries because of this influx of patients and the lack of sufficient resources to deal with the surge.

They don’t have sufficient resources because of Bill 124. They don’t have sufficient resources because this government is fixated on election gimmicks instead of investing in our health care. The hospitals don’t have sufficient resources because this government doesn’t have their back.

Mr. Speaker, what is this government going to do today to fix the health care crisis in our hospitals, in particular our children’s hospitals?

Despite the level zero crisis we’re facing, neither the word “paramedic” nor the word “ambulance” is mentioned one time—not once—in the fall economic statement. The city of Ottawa is asking for $5 million to strategically position paramedics at hospitals across the city to help with offload delays. Will the government provide the city this funding to reduce level zero events and ensure an ambulance is there to respond to 911 calls?

It was ruled out of scope, not late. It was ruled out of scope, Madam Speaker, for the bill. So, if tracking the supposed results stemming from a piece of legislation is out of scope, then I don’t know what we’re doing. If we’re not going to track the results of what we do, what are we doing at all? It was ruled out of order because even the government knows that this is not a housing bill. It was ruled out of scope because it doesn’t address housing and the amendment was about housing. So even the government knows that this isn’t a housing bill. It’s a municipal governance bill, and one that doesn’t address the most important governance issues facing Ontario municipalities.

Given that this bill is about the city of Toronto and the city of Ottawa, the first thing they should do is to approve Ottawa’s official plan: to bring new lands into the urban boundary, to change policies around intensification and density around transit, to address the missing middle, and to help Ottawa build more and better 15-minute communities for all the residents of the nation’s capital.

I know that the mayor was caught off guard. We were at the Navan Fair a day later, and he told me that he had yet to be called about this bill.

Certainly, if you’re going to make change and work collaboratively with municipalities in Ontario, the easiest thing you can do is pick up the phone and have a chat before you go to a microphone.

Members of this chamber might be forgiven—and their laughter demonstrates it—for not paying day-to-day attention to the planning decisions and debates at Ottawa city council; I can forgive you for not paying that close attention. So let’s make sure we know what we’re talking about.

Last fall, after literally years of work, after countless public delegations, negotiations with the home-building industry, consultations with community associations and other stakeholders, after extensive discussions and debates, Ottawa city council came to consensus—without a veto, without a carrot and a stick—and approved a new official plan. That was October 27, 2021, almost a year ago. Within this official plan, there are proposed plans for urban expansion to help create more neighbourhoods by partnering with the Algonquins of Ontario, an important part of Ottawa’s efforts towards reconciliation. In addition to adding these development lands, the official plan includes a direction to achieve the majority of growth through intensification and growing the city around rapid transit systems. It recognizes the city’s climate change master plan and seeks to reduce Ottawa’s greenhouse gas emissions by 100% by 2050. It includes higher density around higher-order public transit. The city, through the official plan, is embracing the idea of 15-minute neighbourhoods, not just in the downtown or inside the urban core, but in the suburbs as well. New communities in Orléans and Barrhaven and Kanata and Findlay Creek are now more dense than inner urban areas like the Glebe and Old Ottawa South.

Ottawa has the vision to address major issues facing us as a society. Creating livable communities with active transportation is a step towards dealing with Ontario’s affordability crisis. It’s a step towards the climate crisis. It’s a step towards addressing the physical fitness crisis. And it’s a step being held back by this government. The plan laid out in Ottawa’s official plan clearly provides the solution to tackling some of Ontario’s most serious social problems. It’s a plan that will spur growth and move housing forward—housing of all types—not just in Orléans, but across the city of Ottawa. And it’s stalled by this government. When council approved the plan last fall, the law said that the minister had 120 days to approve it. That would have left the decision until about March. Ottawa’s official plan continues to sit on the minister’s desk, collecting dust, waiting for approval. So, despite this minister and this government claiming that red tape is their enemy and that cutting it is imperative to solving the housing crisis, they’ve wrapped Ottawa’s aggressive housing goals in an enormous ball of red tape, and that ball of red tape is the minister’s signature.

If this government is serious about addressing Ontario’s and Ottawa’s housing crisis, the minister should first approve Ottawa’s official plan to get housing built, to bring in new lands for new communities, to address density and intensification around transit infrastructure.

As I’ve said, this is not a housing bill or a housing plan; this is a municipal governance bill.

I pointed out the important work that the city of Ottawa has done to measure its progress on so many critical elements of change.

I found it interesting that, in committee, an amendment to allow for the measurement of new housing built as a result of this bill was ruled out of order. It was ruled out of scope for the bill.