It’s great to be debating this legislation here this morning.

Recently, it has come to light that there are some 48 members of the Premier’s office on the sunshine list, and his gravy train is getting bigger and bigger and bigger as every year goes by.

I’m wondering if the minister can explain to the House how many Ontarians who are not on the Premier’s gravy train sunshine list, making over $100,000 a year, which is more than the average family in Ontario—how many Ontarians who aren’t on the Premier’s gravy train will actually be able to afford to buy a home as a result of this legislation?

It’s an honour to have the opportunity to speak to this important and historic motion in the Legislature this morning.

When I was asked if I would like to speak to the motion, I said, of course, yes, but it wasn’t without a little bit of trepidation I have to admit, because both the Minister of Indigenous Affairs and, of course, our friend from Kiiwetinoong are much more well-versed in this issue than I, but are also both much better speakers than I am. So it was with a little bit of trepidation.

As someone who grew up in the 1980s and 1990s in the suburbs of Ottawa, I have to say that I was not exposed to people from our First Nations communities, to the issues that they have faced throughout our history and continue to face. I was not taught about these issues in school like probably most of us, or the education we did receive was from a very specific point of view that did not, I think, even begin to touch the true nature of the issues that our country has very recently started to confront. So it is coming from a very isolated and, admittedly, somewhat ignorant point of view that I try to do my best to learn about the issues that members of our First Nations communities continue to confront and the history they have dealt with, and that history continues to impact their communities to this day. While I am not at all well-versed in those issues and need to do much more work on myself and my own reflections to help move those issues forward, I am familiar with assimilation of a different culture here in Ontario and Canada.

Comme fier francophile et député d’Orléans, je connais les obstacles à la protection de la langue et de la culture minoritaire ici en Ontario.

Members of my own community have had to deal with the challenges and the obstacles of trying to protect their own culture, to protect their kids from assimilation, albeit in a much different form.

Mais la lutte contre l’assimilation, bien que sous une forme différente, est un combat auquel ma propre famille a été confronté, et qu’on a perdu.

My family lost our connection to its francophone heritage and history two or three generations ago, and so we have confronted our own challenge of assimilation and efforts to regain that connection. I’m very hopeful that efforts that the member for Kiiwetinoong and all of us are trying to push forward—this effort today from the government—will be a small step to ensuring that that stops as it relates to our First Nations people and that progress can be made to continue to protect their language and their culture.

Sol, there’s one thing I disagree with, with your statement. Near the end, you said that you will be the only member impacted by this motion today, and I disagree. I think we were all impacted by your speech, and I very much look forward to seeing you here with your mom. I hope you’ll let us know ahead of time so we can all be here. And thank you very much for your work on this.

It’s a pleasure to rise and discuss this new deal for the city of Toronto. It’s great to see everyone this morning—a little bit warmer today than it has been in the last couple of days here in the Big Smoke, and maybe that’s because of this deal that the city has now entered into with the province and is trying to get through.

I think, if I was a resident of Toronto, which, of course, I’m not, or if I was a politician in Toronto, if I was a member of provincial Parliament from Toronto—especially one from maybe downtown Toronto—and I was a New Democrat and my New Democratic mayor had just negotiated this deal with the Premier of Ontario, I would with think that this is a really good deal, because it’s going to support investment in affordable housing. It’s going to support investing in transit. It’s going to upload highways off of the backs of property taxpayers in Toronto and free up even more cash for the mayor of Toronto to be able to do with as she and her council pleases.

Unlike other New Democratic leaders, the mayor of Toronto has demonstrated that she can bring disparate elements together into a common cause. There are Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats and probably others on Toronto city council that she’s been able to bring together. Obviously, she’s made a deal with a Conservative Premier in Ontario. I think that’s an example for other New Democratic leaders in the province who are currently having a little bit of difficulty bringing people together, who are having a little bit of difficulty keeping the team rowing in the same direction. I think there are some lessons that could be learned there.

It’s a very good sign, this legislation, that the Premier and his government are open to investing more in municipalities. We’ve seen over the last five years—and certainly since the pandemic began and is now behind us, we hope—that cities are struggling. They’re struggling with declining public transit ridership because of the nature of people’s workplace. There aren’t as many people travelling into downtowns of our cities and, therefore, there’s an enormous reduction in the number of people using public transit.

We’re dealing with an affordability crisis where the price of groceries is up, the price of provincially regulated hydroelectricity is up, the price of provincially regulated natural gas is up. The price of most of the things in our lives is up, and so the ability to provide some financial relief to Toronto taxpayers, whether that is through some kind of property tax action or investing in social services that will help people, is obviously very good for the city of Toronto.

But my question, as someone who lives in the city of Ottawa, is, does the government understand that there are more cities in the province than just Toronto? The Premier was very clear that he made a one-sided deal. He made a great deal for the city of Toronto, which he admitted was one-sided, because he loves his city. And I don’t blame him for loving his city. He grew up here. He represents a part of Toronto. I think we would all be silly to not say that we love our cities. Of course we love the communities that we all represent and the communities that many of us were born in.

The real question is, though, are other cities going to see some love? The city of Ottawa is the second-largest city in the province. There are a million people in Ottawa. If you include the metro region and if you include Glengarry, Prescott and Russell and going to Kemptville, and heading out into the Ottawa Valley into Renfrew, Nipissing, and Pembroke, you’re getting into 1.2, 1.3 million people. So, there are a lot of people in eastern Ontario as well that would like to see some love from the Premier, and I think part of our ongoing frustration is that over the last number of years, it doesn’t seem like that love has been there. There was an absence of love.

There was an absence of presence during the convoy protests. The government really didn’t take notice of what was happening in Ottawa and didn’t really say anything about the protests overall until the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor was being blockaded. That’s when the government decided to talk about the convoy situation.

When the derecho windstorm ripped through eastern Ontario in the spring of 2022, there was an absence of love from the Premier then. He came to Orléans. He came to the fire station on the Charlemagne Boulevard. It’s a fire station I know very, very well. He thanked those firefighters for their efforts in the recovery and he said that he would be there for the city of Ottawa. He said to the mayor that he would be there for the city of Ottawa. And as of the city’s budget process, which is ongoing right now, we’ve heard from the president and the chair of Hydro Ottawa that they’ve received no funding from the province to cover the—I think it’s $30 million or $40 million in costs they had to clean up from the derecho. The city of Ottawa itself has received no funding to help with its cleanup costs for the derecho. So again the question is, where is the love? Where is the love for Ottawa?

And it has continued since then. We know that Ottawa, as the second-largest city in the province, isn’t represented in the Premier’s cabinet. There are many—well, maybe not many, but there are certainly a few government members from Ottawa and the Ottawa region, and yet we don’t have a cabinet minister in the cabinet. We don’t have someone who can be that cabinet champion for investment in the National Capital Region, who can be on the phone with the mayor every week or occasionally to talk about the issues that are important to the city that relate to the provincial government and how they might move forward on them. We don’t have that representative who can be in contact with the federal minister for the National Capital Region to work on those issues collaboratively. So again, residents in Ottawa are wondering, where’s the love for Ottawa there?

An important part of this deal that the Premier has made with the mayor of Toronto is, of course, the uploading of the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway. I think that’s a very good deal for the property tax payers in Toronto. Property taxes aren’t really designed to pay for urban expressways like the DVP and the Gardiner, and that money that’s used on policing those highways, that’s used on repairing those highways, that’s used on snow-clearing for those highways, that’s used for lighting those highways—all of that money could be better spent on local roads, on side streets and collectors and main arteries that perhaps don’t get the care and attention that they need. Those policing resources can be better spent in the community to deal with the increase in violence that we’ve seen around the TTC and other areas of downtown Toronto. So there’s a great benefit to the city of Toronto and to taxpayers in Toronto for that upload.

Again, though, I ask, where’s the love? Because in Ottawa and in eastern Ontario, we have a very similar situation. We have an urban expressway, Highway 174/17, that travels from the centre of the city of Ottawa all the way out to basically the border of Quebec, through Orléans and through the riding of Glengarry–Prescott–Russell that is the responsibility of property tax payers of Ottawa and Glengarry–Prescott–Russell. That’s a highway that takes millions and millions and millions of property tax dollars each and every year to maintain. It requires additional policing. It requires an additional snow-clearing operation. When there are major events like the flooding we experienced in Ottawa or the sinkhole that we experienced on Highway 174, we’re talking about tens and tens of millions of dollars in both unforeseen but enormous costs to maintain that urban expressway, which is really a regional highway. The 174/17 in fact used to be part of the Trans-Canada Highway system, which I think should just in and of itself tell everyone that that’s not the kind of road that property tax payers should be paying for with property taxes. Property taxes should be used to pay for your local infrastructure: for the street that you live on, for the streets that your bus drives on, for the parks around the corner and for the rec centre your kids learn to swim at. It should not be paying for urban expressways.

So the upload of the Gardiner and the DVP in Toronto, I think, is a very good step. It’s a step in the right direction. It’s obviously a very good deal for the residents of the city of Toronto. But for the residents in Ottawa and the residents of other cities across the province who have similar situations, I think they are and will continue to ask, “Where is the love for our communities?” Because we have these same financial pressures.

I want to continue to talk about the city of Ottawa a little bit more because the government doesn’t have that member in cabinet to maybe share with their caucus the challenges that Ottawa is facing. I want to spend the next three or four minutes sharing some of those.

OC Transpo, which is the second-largest transit agency in the province, is running a $40-million deficit this year. They are cutting back bus routes—and I’m not talking about a bus route at 11:30 at night that’s got one person riding it; I’m talking about suburban connection routes that feed into the hub-and-spoke system of OC Transpo, two in particular in Orléans that travel past a community rec centre. It travels past a library, and it travels past a high school. These are the kinds of bus routes that are now being cut in the city of Ottawa because of the financial challenges that the city is facing.

The city is also facing challenges when it comes to affordable housing. In fact, right now, as the city is going through its budget process for the next fiscal year, it is contemplating and debating the purchase of those white military refugee-style tents. Imagine that—

Good morning. My question is for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, Ontario is in the midst of an affordability crisis, and this government has had five years to act. Despite that, grocery prices are up, hydro prices are up, mortgage payments and rents are up, transit prices are up. After five years, Ontarians are asking themselves, “Are we better off?” This government has the power to act. The Premier has the power to act.

Mr. Speaker, will the Premier support the elimination of the HST from home heating and get it done before Christmas?

Interjections.

It was a few weeks ago now that I was sitting on my couch, enjoying my morning coffee and settling in for what I thought was going to be a quiet day of Formula One, football and family, and then my phone started to go berserk. At first, I didn’t really know what to make of it; I think, Madam Speaker, many of us have become a little numb to the violence that takes place in the Middle East.

But quickly, I began to learn about the cowardly, heinous and brutal terror attack by Hamas against innocent civilians simply going about their daily lives, doing the same things that I was doing right then and there with my family in my home: parents killed in front of their children, children killed in front of their parents, women raped, kidnappings, and the cowardly use of hostages. As I heard one Israeli official discuss on television, these were not the overzealous acts of soldiers in war—as bad as that would be on its own. This was the plan. This murderous rampage, this terror, was the plan. Hamas wanted to provoke a confrontation.

And this has happened before. When peace was in their grasp in the 1990s, during the Oslo peace process, it was Hamas that launched the first suicide bombings, derailing all efforts to find a peaceful two-state solution, a solution that would undoubtedly have benefited millions of Palestinians over the last 25 years. Now that Israel and Saudi Arabia are on the verge of a new historic agreement and recognition, Hamas strikes again with barbarism and hate. Why? Because Hamas doesn’t believe that Israel has the right to exist and does not want to see any progress or peace that would recognize Israel’s right to exist—even if that agreement benefits the people of the Palestinian territories in Gaza and the West Bank.

Now, Madam Speaker, the loss of civilian life, whether it be Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, Christian or any other religion or ethnicity, is a tragedy. On that we can all agree. But the blame of what is happening lies with the terrorists of Hamas.

While the men and women defending Israel stand in front of schools and hospitals, fighting for those who can’t fight for themselves, to protect the democratic pluralistic society they have built, we see the terrorists of Hamas hiding behind and within schools and hospitals, placing innocent lives in front of them, into the danger, in an effort to give themselves more time and space to continue to kill and destroy.

It’s time, Madam Speaker, for Hamas to be ended. Palestine, Israel, the Middle East and the world will be a better place when Hamas is eliminated and a legitimate Palestinian group can govern Gaza and bring about the peace and partnership with Israel we all dream and hope for.