It’s my honour to rise on behalf of my constituents in Parkdale–High Park to speak to budget 2024, as presented in Bill 180.

Speaker, the Conservative government is out of touch and out of ideas. With budget 2024, they had the opportunity to provide real solutions for Ontarians, solutions that Ontarians are seeking: solutions to skyrocketing costs of living, the affordable housing crisis, the family doctor shortage, the massive funding shortfalls that are damaging our public schools, universities and hospitals. Instead, the Ford Conservatives are doubling down on policies that have failed people.

An NDP budget would deliver the homes, health care and hope that people are looking for. It would help families get child care by fully funding the $10-a-day child care program. It would secure faster and better health care, without leaving patients with a bill. It would build affordable housing in the communities that people want to live in, and so much more.

Speaker, a budget is more than just numbers and percentages; it’s a statement of values and priorities. If the Ontario government, the Conservative government, is working for the people, then the budget should reflect the values and priorities of Ontarians. It’s that simple.

As Ontario geared up for budget 2024, I listened to my constituents about the needs and priorities of Parkdale–High Park. I held multiple pre-budget consultations with local stakeholders to gather insights on spending priorities, policy directions and investment needs. I met and heard from residents, service providers, small business owners, parent councils, local community members and advocacy groups to learn what a budget for them would look like. My constituents spoke passionately about the need to address issues related to housing, health care, education, the environment, small businesses, affordability and reconciliation. I compiled that in a report summarizing their insights and shared it with the Minister of Finance, in the hopes that my constituents’ priorities and perspectives would help inform budget 2024.

Speaker, the report was not very different from what we heard from communities across Ontario. But after reviewing this Conservative government’s budget, I’m disappointed, Speaker. It’s not for the people. What would have been for them? Speaker, here are some main priorities and perspectives shared with me by Parkdale–High Park residents that are not reflected in budget 2024.

My constituents want increased funding for child care. Too many times in this past year, families in my riding have been left scrambling as lack of investments have led to program closures, facing higher fees, and have put them at risk of losing the child care they rely on. Families at Ola Day Care faced an $800-to-$900 per-child increase when the operator had to withdraw from the $10-a-day child care program due to the Conservative government’s poor implementation.

Then there was the High Park YMCA, which was forced to suspend its infant care program in January due to the shortage of early childhood educators. Despite being warned for years about the staffing crisis in the child care sector, this Conservative government still does not take the issue seriously, even as it is leading to the closure of desperately needed child care spaces.

In April, I received an email from a registered ECE in the High Park area who was distressed that the minimum wage increase that she and other ECEs were promised in January wasn’t coming until June, nearly half a year after the Ford government said it would kick in. At a time when many child care workers are struggling to buy groceries and pay rent, this delay was incredibly hard to deal with. The lack of investments also means that the $10-a-day child care program is under threat.

My constituents want proper investments into our public schools, our education system. Despite the Conservative government’s claims about historic spending, the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association confirmed in a report that this year’s funding is the lowest level of per-student funding in more than a decade. This budget continues the trend of education cuts in every year since the Conservatives have been in government. Education funding is down by over $1,500 per child since 2018.

The only historic thing about education is the number of families who are putting their children into private school. Speaker, people are not stupid. They can see right through the government’s actions. They are starving the public education system so that they can replace it with a privatized system. It’s happening in health care and it’s also happening in the education system.

School boards are getting less money year over year. The Conservative government is simply ignoring the struggles that our kids, parents, teachers and other education staff are dealing with. There is an extreme teacher shortage across all schools in this province: 24% of elementary schools and 35% of secondary schools are reporting teaching staff shortages every single day. There are students who require additional support who are being sent home from school because there are not enough staff available to help them. Parents are having to find and pay out of pocket for supplemental educational support that their children need.

These were the things that we used to be able to count on our schools to provide. It’s all boards: big school boards; small rural district school boards. They’re all facing deficits. They’re all having to make cuts and find the money somehow. The TDSB is facing a $26.5-million budget deficit this year, and this is after $17 million in cuts already. Outdoor education programs, language programs etc. have been cut.

In other programs, like the IB program, fees are being introduced now. Parkdale Collegiate in my riding is one of the few schools in Toronto that offer the IB program, and I want to read to this House a letter from a constituent of mine. She writes:

“My son is graduating from Parkdale this year, having participated in the IB program. He chose to participate in this program himself, and from what I have seen has been able to broaden his mind and perspective in a way that would not have happened if he was not part of it. I have seen how his view of the world has been challenged and how he and his fellow students have been enabled to think ‘differently’ and do more with what they have. I am proud of him for participating and grateful to his school, PCI, for making it available to him. I would hate to see this taken away from future students.

“The fact that the concept of charging for a special program in the public system goes against the entire idea of public and barrier-free education. The best part of the TDSB’s free IB program currently is that it creates an equal opportunity for all students to receive a university preparatory education and has a lack of barriers to access, to apply and attend, no matter family income. To charge for the IB program would remove the IB program’s most important feature.”

And as you hear from this parent, she continues, finally, to say, “I write to you in the hope that you can help put pressure on our government to fund education, as this is the most meaningful way that our province can progress and grow.”

Speaker, the Conservative government is denying equal learning opportunities for kids everywhere.

I only have about a minute and a half left, but I want to also share very quickly that obviously when it comes to health care, the residents of Parkdale–High Park also want to see a budget that is prioritizing increased investments into our publicly funded and publicly delivered health care system. Constituents have shared stories about their experiences in emergency departments, in accessing family doctors, and just the number of challenges that they are experiencing in terms of access to care.

Housing is another very important issue. The residents of Parkdale–High Park want the government to address the crisis head-on and to make safe, affordable homes accessible to all.

In the last few seconds that I have, I want to close by calling attention to Parkdale–High Park residents’ steadfast commitment to reconciliation. Constituents in my riding want to see meaningful reconciliation that goes beyond land acknowledgements. We need to make sure that First Nations are given the decision-making powers over their own lands.

Speaker, among the many things, they want to see an enforcement of the moratorium on the province’s staking of mining claims and requiring free, prior and informed consent from Ontario’s Indigenous people before mining in the Ring of Fire region, something that this budget does not do.

I have a petition here titled “Improve Air Quality for Our Children.” It is signed by members of family councils in schools in my riding of Parkdale–High Park.

This petition has a very simple ask: Clean air for our kids. It is asking that the House support and adopt the Improving Air Quality for Our Children Act, 2023, a bill that I have co-sponsored. The bill would require carbon dioxide level monitoring in public schools and licensed child care centres in order to measure and then improve air quality. It is backed by experts, educators and parents, and it will help ensure that kids have the best learning conditions possible.

I’m proud to table this petition, will affix my signature to it and give it to page Woods to bring it to the table.

Speaker, Ontario does not have a rare disease strategy, and that has left people living with rare diseases without access to the supports and services that they need.

The Ministry of Health established a Rare Diseases Working Group in 2016. The group did their work and presented a report to the minister with recommendations for action. That report has been ignored, has been sitting there collecting dust. So this petition is calling on the Legislature to adopt the report and to start implementing the report, as is suggested by a bill that I have tabled titled Rare Disease Strategy Act. We need to implement the recommendations so that people living with rare diseases get the support they need.

This petition is entitled “Stop Bill 166” and it is signed by scholars from my riding of Parkdale–High Park and across Ontario.

Mental health and anti-racism work have been massively underfunded in Ontario’s post-secondary institutions. And under this Conservative government, the mental health budget has been cut and the Anti-Racism Directorate has been gutted.

Bill 166 gives the Minister of Colleges and Universities unprecedented power to dictate post-secondary policy in these areas and threatens unspecified consequences if institutions do not follow ministry directives. It also threatens the democratic principles of academic freedom and university autonomy that all parties in Ontario have historically respected.

This petition is calling on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

—stop Bill 166;

—uphold academic freedom and university autonomy;

—fund post-secondary mental health supports and equity offices; and

—use the powers of the Anti-Racism Act, 2017, to re-establish subcommittees that undertake equity and anti-racism work in Ontario.

I am pleased to welcome the Girls Government group to Queen’s Park this year from Parkdale–High Park. We have from Runnymede public school: Hazel McGillivray, Stella Calandrino, Isobel Kenny, Lori Yalcin, Tori Nishi, Isidora Eror, Noelle Falconer, Chloe Lucas-Torres Barbiere, Isabel Meana, Baribelle Rands, Ella Henderson, Olivia Hollis, Meara Doran and teacher Anastasia Maniatis.

We also have from Swansea public school: Alexandra Arata Roman, Sierra Bender, Beatrix Cairns, Zoe Devlin, Teagan Kosmalski, Tessa Laceda, Chloe Lauzon, Avni Ramwani, Kaia Ratajczak, Stella Ratajczak, Jayda Richards, Naomi Sheahan and teachers Julie Gutierrez and Lisa Stewart. We also have a parent joining us, Emily Hollis.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

I have a petition here entitled “Save Ontario Place,” again, signed by residents of Parkdale–High Park and, of course, supported by residents from across the province, not just in Toronto.

Speaker, this petition basically calls on the government to halt any further redevelopment plans when it comes to Ontario Place. It also calls on the government to engage in meaningful public consultation, which has not been done for the current redevelopment plan, and to conduct a comprehensive, sustainable environmental assessment for Ontario Place, and for it to be carried out in a manner that values public space, that has proper oversight and public input, and that respects the democratic process.

I fully support this petition.

Mr. Leardi, on behalf of Ms. Thompson, moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 155, An Act to amend the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario Act / Projet de loi 155, Loi modifiant la Loi sur l’Institut de recherche agricole de l’Ontario.

As always, it is an honour to rise in this House to speak on behalf of the residents of Parkdale–High Park, today to Bill 166, Strengthening Accountability and Student Supports Act.

Our post-secondary institutions are at a breaking point, and this is because of decades of Liberal and Conservative underfunding. That didn’t happen overnight. This has been years in the making. Action on this file is long overdue, and we need serious and sustainable solutions to address this crisis. This bill that the government has brought forward just doesn’t meet the moment.

We value our world-class post-secondary institutions, and we know the positive impact they have on staff, students and surrounding communities. The Ontario NDP is committed to ensuring that everyone who lives, works and studies at a post-secondary institution has the support they need. That is why we’re calling on this Conservative government to immediately commit to serious and reliable funding for colleges and universities and strengthen oversight to end the exploitation of international students.

I’m going to talk a little bit about what’s in this bill. The bill requires public colleges and universities to have a student mental health policy that describes the programs, policies, services and supports available at the college or university. The minister may issue directives specifying the elements to be included in this policy and the steps the minister intends to take if the institution fails to comply. The policy would have to be posted on its website, reviewed at least once every five years and reported annually to the board of governors on the implementation and effectiveness.

I agree, we need to have student mental health policies, and I think many or most universities and colleges have a student mental health policy. What they don’t have is the funding to provide the support and services to the students. We know from data we see year after year that the demand for mental health supports is increasing.

Speaker, in my first term in office, when I got elected in 2018, the first bill I tabled in this House was to ensure that every child and young person had the right to receive access to timely mental health care. The bill proposed that, for any young person, basically 24 and under, if a mental health support was identified as being needed, they would get access to it within 30 days. This was an ask from Children’s Mental Health Ontario. It was part of the Kids Can’t Wait campaign. It was a fully costed plan. And, Speaker, when that bill was brought before this House and debated and voted on at second reading, it actually received unanimous support. But then, after that, the bill languished at committee. The government refused to take any action on it.

Already it was too late to be taking action because the wait-lists were growing and wait times were getting longer. But even if we had taken action then, we are talking about four or five years of work that would have already gone into ensuring that everyone, especially young people, have access to timely mental health care.

This bill also requires public colleges and universities “to have policies and rules to address and combat racism and hate, including but not limited to anti-Indigenous racism, anti-Black racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.” Again, the minister may issue directives specifying the elements of the policy and the steps the minister intends to take if an institution fails to comply. This policy, again, would have to be posted on the website, reviewed at least once every five years, and reported annually to the board of governors on the implementation and effectiveness.

Speaker, again, it’s very important to have policies, and we support that. We want to ensure, and we must actually ensure, that every student, staff—anybody—in post-secondary education feels welcome and that it’s a safe learning and working environment. But we need to make sure that our action as government, and particularly with this Conservative government, is not limited to just policies on paper, that there is proper funding in place to ensure that action can be taken.

Finally, it enables the minister to issue directives to colleges and universities specifying information to be provided to the public about costs associated with attending the institution, such as the ancillary fees, cost of textbooks and other learning materials.

It’s very, very important that this bill was tabled as part of a package of announcements that the government made following a report that came out in November, the blue-ribbon panel report—and, of course, the federal announcement of the cap on international study permits.

So, that package that this government announced in March—just last week—includes extending the tuition freeze for Ontario students for at least three or more years while allowing institutions to increase tuition by 5% for out-of-province domestic students, funding totalling just under $1.3 billion over three years. There is regulation to allow the minister to grant applied master’s degrees and the commitment to engage with colleges and universities to create tuition fee transparency.

Now, all of this is important, but I think that, again, it goes back to how for years students—important stakeholders within post-secondary education—have been ringing the alarm bells when it comes to the crisis. And the actions that I just outlined really are very, very small steps when it comes to addressing the scale of the crisis, which is why, as I said earlier, this bill does not meet the moment. The response to a crisis has to be able to solve the crisis or at least, at minimum, make a significant dent in the problem. But this does little— very, very little.

Speaker, let’s not forget that the post-secondary institutions are in a financial crisis for a number of reasons, starting with chronic underfunding. Ontario’s per student operating funding, which is really the bulk of the funding from the government, is well below the national average. This has been the case for decades. The Liberals underfunded post-secondary institutions and under the Conservative government, this current government, that funding has decreased even further. Of course, the government has talked about freezing tuition, but has not actually provided the funding to replace the revenue lost from tuition. I agree: We need to reduce tuition. Tuition should not be a barrier to attending a college or a university. But we need to provide the supports to offset that, and that has to be done through increased investments—increased public investments, I should add, because what we do not want is privatization in our public institutions, in our post-secondary institutions.

Of course, as for everyone else and in all sectors, inflation has been an issue. Higher Education Strategy Associates estimates that, accounting for inflation, the stagnant government funding and the tuition freeze have meant that Ontario’s public colleges and universities have lost about 31% of the funding, of the government-controlled revenue or the funding that the government provides, since 2010. That’s a huge figure: 31%.

Of course, as a result, what has been happening is colleges and universities unfortunately have developed an overreliance on international students. Post-secondary institutions have become dependent on international students. This actually started and ramped up under the Liberals and, under the Conservatives, it has skyrocketed. The Auditor General reviews both colleges and universities. I think multiple reviews have included warnings about this, again, over many years, but the government has failed to act on the AG’s recommendations.

I do want to acknowledge here that this growth in international students is happening across the sector. Of course, it’s not limited to private career colleges or public-private partnerships, but it is disproportionate in the private career colleges and public-private partnerships. In fact, international students at private career colleges that are partnered with the private colleges have seen skyrocketing increases in enrolment. I think some of the graphs that show the percentage of the increased enrolment have been shared around on social media, and it’s just unbelievable. There’s one—I don’t want to name any institution right now—but it’s an increase of 600% when it comes to international students.

Speaker, as you can see, the underfunding of our post-secondary institutions has led to a lot of other new problems as a consequence of the underfunding. What the government has announced in terms of this “historic funding” really is a drop in the bucket. It’s far from solving the crisis, but it does not even make a significant dent in the problem.

Don’t take it from me, Speaker. Let’s listen to what stakeholders had to say about this legislation. I’ll start with OCUFA. I’m going to quote directly from OCUFA’s statement: “The Minister of Colleges and Universities recognizes that we are facing a funding crisis, but the gap between what has been provided and what is needed is massive.” That’s from Nigmendra Narain, who is the president of OCUFA. They go on to say, “This is a one-time drop in the bucket.” As well, “The solution to the chronic underfunding of Ontario’s universities is simple: political will to make a true investment in per-student funding to get us up to the Canadian average.”

The request from important stakeholders like OCUFA is simply to have enough funding to be at the Canadian average, because right now, Ontario is dead last, and we have been dead last for many, many years.

I will add to that and say we should make it a goal to be the best. We want to be leaders. Investing in post-secondary institutions, investing in our students, in the supports and services—and in providing that funding—has huge economic benefits. It pays for itself and more in the long term, so it is extremely important. As OCUFA has said, at the very least we need to be at the Canadian average.

Another stakeholder, Council of Ontario Universities, goes on to say, “The sector will continue to adapt and evolve to better serve students and find even more innovative ways to drive greater efficiencies, as outlined in the sector’s efficiency update. However, the funding gap is just far too large to close through efficiencies alone. Ontario’s universities remain committed to working with the government on a longer-term solution to fix a broken funding model that is impacting all universities, so that they can continue to support student success and create the highly skilled talent and innovation our economy needs.”

Speaker, they go on to say, “We are calling on the Ontario 2024 budget to provide the additional multi-year base funding as recommended by the panel.” They’re of course referring to the blue-ribbon panel.

I don’t have too much time, but I do want to include the voices of students. First maybe I’ll share reaction from the workers, particularly CUPE.

Actually, before I go on to that, Speaker, I do want to state in the House that since the government tabled this bill, the past number of days, CUPE 3903, representing contract faculty, teaching assistants, graduate assistants, research assistants and part-time librarians and archivists at York University, has been on strike, and we all know why, really. In fact, it’s not a surprise. The low wages that CUPE 3903 workers experience do not come near to protecting workers from the skyrocketing inflation, the cost-of-living crisis. It is really heartbreaking when you hear that university workers—the workers who are really carrying a big percentage of the burden of teaching and the day-to-day operation of our classrooms and of the universities and colleges—have to rely on food banks to survive, and also have to work multiple jobs to survive. What kind of message are we sending to Ontarians? But also, what kind of message are we sending when it comes to what we value as Ontarians?

Speaker, I was quite surprised to learn that, in fact, it’s been a trend. A lot of the teaching assistants, the graduate assistants, they not only are now making up a larger percentage of the faculty, they’re now actually doing more than 50%—they teach more than 50% of the courses, and they are the precarious workers of our post-secondary education system.

I only have two minutes left. I did want to make sure I included voices from the students, so I will share a quote from the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance, who were here just recently as part of their lobby day. They say that—they go on to add some of the things that they welcome, but they really want to make sure that a lot of the funding need that exists on campuses when it comes to mental health services is focused. They’re appreciative that there’s some action on this, but of course, a lot more needs to be done.

Speaker, I’ll just end by saying that there are aspects of the bill that we support, but to truly address the crisis, what is needed is funding. So I urge the government to make the investments to have a world-class post-secondary education system in our province, to not only show that we value that and that we want to support students and faculty and everybody as part of the sector, but that this is something that is going to benefit us all.

I’d like to give a very warm welcome to Kristin Lillyman, Lauren Mumford and Hillary Steele, visiting from Parkdale–High Park.

As well, I would like to welcome Zophine Saitua-Rippell, also participating in Model Parliament.

On behalf of my constituents in Parkdale–High Park, I’m proud to present this petition titled “Protect Vulnerable Road Users,” and it reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas vulnerable road users are not specifically protected by law;

“Whereas Ontario’s Highway Traffic Act allows drivers who seriously injure or kill a vulnerable road user to avoid meaningful consequences, facing only minimal fines;

“Whereas the friends and families of victims are unsatisfied with the lack of consequences and the government’s responses to traffic accidents that result in death or injury to a vulnerable road user;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

“—direct the government of Ontario to commit to reducing the number of traffic fatalities and injuries to vulnerable road users;

“—create meaningful consequences that ensure responsibility and accountability for drivers who share the road with pedestrians, cyclists, road construction workers, emergency responders and other vulnerable road users;

“—allow friends and family of vulnerable road users whose death or serious injury was caused by an offending driver to have their victim impact statement heard in person in court by the driver responsible; and

“—pass the Moving Ontarians Safely Act.”

I really hope the members of the Conservative Party will support the bill and pass it.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Eglinton Crosstown LRT has been under construction for 12 years, with no end in sight;

“Whereas this public-private partnership project has cost Ontarians $13 billion so far, without any indication of what the total cost will be;

“Whereas hundreds of small businesses have been forced to shut down and tens of thousands of people’s daily lives have been disrupted;

“Whereas the CEO of Metrolinx has failed to deliver on this project...;

“Whereas the CEO of Metrolinx, despite being supported by 59 vice-presidents and 13 C-suite executives, cannot seem to hold CrossLinx accountable;

“Whereas the CEO of Metrolinx’s salary has doubled to almost $1 million;

“Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately terminate Mr. Phil Verster from the position of CEO of Metrolinx.”

“Whereas the Earth just passed through the hottest three months on record;

“Whereas Canada is experiencing the most severe wildfire season on record;

“Whereas the Ontario government is preparing investments for electricity supply for the long term;

“Whereas in light of recent reports by the RBC Climate Action Institute, Dunsky Energy and Climate Advisors, and the Sustainability Solutions Group;

“We, the undersigned, call upon the government of Ontario to pause the expansion of methane-fired electricity generation and evaluate the role of renewable energy and storage, conservation, distributed energy resources, and municipal net-zero plans in meeting Ontario’s electricity needs.”

I want to thank Parkdale-High Park 4 Climate Action and Green 13 for the signatures on this petition. Thank you.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario’s social assistance rates are well below Canada’s official Market Basket Measure poverty line and far from adequate to cover the rising costs of food and rent: $733 for individuals on OW and $1,308 for ODSP;

“Whereas an open letter to the Premier and two cabinet ministers, signed by over 230 organizations, recommends that social assistance rates be doubled for both Ontario Works (OW) and the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP);

“Whereas small increases to ODSP have still left these citizens below the poverty line. Both they and those receiving the frozen OW rates are struggling to survive at this time of alarming inflation;

“Whereas the government of Canada recognized in its CERB program that a ‘basic income’ of $2,000 per month was the standard support required by individuals who lost their employment during the pandemic;

“We, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly to double social assistance rates for OW and ODSP.”

I couldn’t agree with this petition more and affix my signature to it.

I’m honoured to table this on behalf of my constituents in Parkdale–High Park. It is titled, “No More Gas Plant Expansion,” and it reads, “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas our planet is undergoing significant warming with adverse consequences for health, for agriculture, for infrastructure and for our children’s future;

“Whereas the costs of inaction are severe, such as extreme weather events causing flooding and drought;

“Whereas successive governments over the last two decades have expanded gas plants despite public pushback;

“Whereas Ontario must reduce our province’s reliance on fossil fuels and instead invest in new renewable energy projects to ensure we meet our provincial climate targets;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to stop expanding Ontario’s gas plants, end reliance on fossil fuels and invest rapidly in low-cost, proven renewable energy and conservation technologies.”

I support this petition and will affix my signature to it.

I too want to give a very warm welcome to my predecessor, former MPP for Parkdale–High Park, Cheri DiNovo.

It’s always a pleasure to rise in this House to speak on behalf of the people of Parkdale–High Park. Today we are debating Bill 131, Transportation for the Future Act. I’ve got to say, when I read the title, I had to shake my head. This government is not building transportation for the future. This government is not building transportation for the future. This government is not even building transportation for the present.

Eglinton Crosstown is the biggest example right now: 12 years of construction, tens of thousands of people’s daily lives disrupted, over $13 billion already and we don’t know how much more. It’s a bottomless pit, and we still don’t know if the transit will ever run. So what future is this government talking about when we don’t know if, after everything related to Eglinton Crosstown, the transit will ever be built?

I know that this P3 contract for Eglinton Crosstown was signed by the Liberal government—big mistake on their part. But in 2018, when the Auditor General audited the Eglinton Crosstown, she said that there were numerous things that were going wrong and Metrolinx wasn’t doing their part to hold the Crosslinx consortium to account. Two years later—2020—the Auditor General did a follow up report and said that not only did everything that she raised not get addressed by this Conservative government; things were actually worse now.

The only thing that has actually happened since the Auditor General’s report was lawsuits and more payout from the public purse to the consortium. Now, we still have no credible plan, no timeline. It’s an indefinite delay. So this government, we can say confidently, Speaker, does not know how to build transit, does not know how to deliver on transit projects.

There are numerous issues with Metrolinx, and the previous transportation minister did not hold Metrolinx accountable. And it seems that the current Minister of Transportation is following in the same direction. The Metrolinx CEO is one of the highest-paid public servants—almost $900,000 a year in salary. Fifty-nine vice president positions at Metrolinx, 19 C-suite executives—all of whom seem to be unable to hold a P3 contractor to account.

Get this, Speaker: There’s no engineer at Metrolinx; it’s all consultants. The work is all farmed out. You have contractors hiring subcontractors. The whole structure is very opaque, I would say deliberately, because then it becomes very hard to hold somebody to account.

Metrolinx has forgotten that they are a public transit agency. Metrolinx has forgotten who they work for. Did the government learn from the Eglinton Crosstown fiasco? They blamed the Liberals, but then what do they go ahead and do? Award more P3 contractors for the Ontario Line project and award even bigger contracts. We’ve seen the same thing happen in Ottawa. It’s happening at Finch, at Eglinton. Why is this government continuing to go down the same path? They don’t seem to be learning the lessons, and they certainly don’t seem to be respecting public dollars.

The government side talked quite a bit about the tap feature—credit and debit tap. I have to say, I like it. I use it; it’s convenient. But then, we have forgotten what it took for us to get here. This was announced with great fanfare, but let’s not forget that the technology has existed for decades. The city of Toronto actually wanted to go with tap service 13 years ago, but what happened was that the Liberal government forced Presto on the city of Toronto. And that Presto system not only took years to roll out; there were so many problems. It was expensive: a billion dollars. Add it to the list of numerous billion-dollar scandals and problems that the Liberals had.

Also, by the time Presto was being offered to, or rather forced on, the city of Toronto, Presto technology was already out of date. The Liberal government signed a contract, in secret—we can see there’s a lot of similarities with how Liberals do and what the Conservatives do—with Accenture to deliver it. I remember—and actually it happens still very often as a transit rider—Presto systems not working, especially in the early years. What does that result in? Lost revenues for the TTC.

Now we finally have tap, 13 years too late, a billion dollars wasted. So, no, in this province we don’t have transportation for the future, because we don’t have what is needed for the present. We are so behind.

In this bill there are two schedules. The first schedule re-enacts un-proclaimed schedule 1 of Bill 2, a previous bill, the Plan to Build Act, which allows the Toronto Transit Commission to enter into service-integration agreements with neighbouring transit agencies despite the TTC’s statutory monopoly on transit service within Toronto. Such an agreement is not a sale or transfer of the TTC under the Labour Relations Act. It also adds a new provision that clarifies that such service-integration agreements do not constitute contracting out for the purpose of the collective agreement.

We support fare and service integration. It makes sense. As a transit rider, I think it will make life easier. TTC riders certainly strongly support fare and service integration, because it allows riders to travel seamlessly across transit agency boundaries without paying multiple fares.

The NDP does support transit fare and service integration. However, we do not support interfering in collective agreements. So we have to make sure that this schedule—schedule 1 of this bill—does not interfere or undermine collective agreements.

What the impact of schedule 1 is on the ATU’s collective agreement is not quite clear in this legislation. I understand from ATU that there is a way forward, because ATU’s agreement already allows for transit-service integration, provided reciprocity of service is assured with other transit agencies. What does that mean? It means that you don’t replace a TTC bus that comes every 15 minutes with another region’s bus that only comes once an hour. An interest arbitration award has confirmed this as ATU’s right, so if the government opens up the TTC’s collective agreement, just know that transit workers are going to push back. It’s an unconstitutional intrusion into their workplace. It will not be well received by transit workers, by transit riders and the general public.

So I urge the new Minister of Transportation; the Associate Minister of Transportation; the new Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development; and the Minister of Infrastructure to sit down, to get on the phone and engage the leadership of the ATU—Marvin Alfred, John Di Nino. Work together and get a deal, because when you get a deal that works for ATU, we know it will also work for the riders.

Speaking of fare and service integration, I also want to make note that the Conservative government still refuses to reverse the cuts that were made by previous governments; that is, refusing to cover 50% of operational funding for municipal transit. It used to be that way, that the province covered 50% of the operational costs of local transit. Because of decades of underfunding, the result has been unreliable service when it comes to—I can certainly speak for the TTC, because that’s my local transit. Transit doesn’t arrive on time and the service wait times between buses and subways take much longer.

If people cannot rely on the TTC to get to work on time or to get to school on time, what happens? They start looking for alternatives. And that means more cars on the road. It means more traffic. It’s bad for the environment. It costs more.

We need to fund public transit to a level where, even though people have a car, taking transit and having that option is the better way. That’s when you know we have strong public systems and services in the city and around the province, because it’s the thing that everybody does, regardless of their income, regardless of where they live in the city or in other areas.

In Toronto, very specifically, we also had conservative leadership for the last 12 years, who also underfunded transit. Thankfully we’re moving in a different direction now, with a new mayor. They’re still not quite at the pre-pandemic level of service, so the province needs to step in, provide operational funding and ensure that the TTC runs smoothly, it’s reliable and there’s higher frequency of service.

I also wanted to talk about safety. I’ll just say for now that one of the things around TTC reliability and people’s confidence in the TTC system is it also needs to ensure that people feel safe. For over a decade now TTC had been trying to engage with the big three—Telus, Rogers and Bell—to provide cell service, but they were not interested. Come on: 2023 and we still don’t have cell service to make an emergency call or to call a loved one, if needed? We pushed very hard with the previous Minister of Transportation. The Minister of Transportation simply pointed a finger back to the TTC.

It is another area that we need to ensure we take action on because if people do not feel safe taking public transit, then it doesn’t matter how often transit runs. We just won’t have the ridership. We need to make sure we do that.

I want to go into schedule 2 of this bill. In schedule 2, it allows the municipality, with the consent of the minister, to impose a transit station charge—which the government is calling a station contribution fee—on new developments within a designated area around a proposed new GO Transit station. The objective of this fee would be the recovery of the construction costs of the new GO station and, of course, the revenues must be used for the intended purposes. There are some other requirements in order to proceed with that.

Essentially, in plain language, what schedule 2 is saying is that the province is telling municipalities, “We will allow you to assume the risk to build GO Transit”—provincial infrastructure, mind you—“because we can’t be bothered to build it ourselves, really.” It basically requires the municipalities to assume the risk to build this infrastructure. It’s a clear downloading of responsibilities.

There are some municipalities, I understand, that are very eager to do this. They’re only eager to do this because the government of Ontario hasn’t bothered to build important transit stations in their communities. This, unfortunately, has happened under successive governments, both Liberal and Conservative.

Already the responsibility to build and operate transit and the cost is not being appropriately shared between the province and municipalities. With this bill, Bill 131, it is possible that the situation could get worse. Think about it. Let’s say that this bill moves forward and some years down the road, a GO station is built in a particular municipality. What about the operations? The member from Waterloo, even before I got elected, in 2018, I remember has been fighting for two-way GO service—11 years.

If this Conservative government is not going to fund the operations of public transit, they’re not really building transit that people can use. It has to be there when people need it, and that means weekend service. It means more frequent service. It means things like having bike racks on GO trains and GO buses—simple things. Everybody that wants a GO station in their community knows what needs to happen, and municipalities absolutely cannot do it by themselves.

As well, this bill, with this option for municipalities to assume the risk to build a GO station, is coming at a time when the government has dramatically reduced revenue capacities of municipalities through their controversial Bill 23. Over a billion dollars in municipal revenue province-wide—gone. The government is basically saying, “We’re going to take away revenue tools through Bill 23. We will give you new tools, but then that means you have to take on a whole set of responsibilities that used to be provincial.” The government has also said, without much detail, that municipalities can only levy a station contribution fee on developers building housing projects and amenities at GO stations provided an incentive of some kind is offered. Given the recent instances where the government has engaged the private sector in controversial and questionable infrastructure projects, I would say there’s cause for concern.

While it is possible to imagine ways in which this particular schedule, schedule 2, could serve the public interest, the Minister of Infrastructure’s Transit-Oriented Communities Program is still cloaked in secrecy, and I would say it’s not deserving of public trust. The Minister of Infrastructure’s secrecy extends beyond this particular program, and we know that very well in Toronto, because we still have not seen the agreement between the province and Therme spa. A 95-year lease—it’s secret. Why is the government not releasing the lease? No one in Toronto or outside of Toronto, no one you speak to, buys that for 95 years, there’s going to be a spa in that location. So why award a 95-year lease? That’s not good business.

Also, the government announced that 850 mature trees at Ontario Place are going to be cut down. They sent a press release out. These trees are healthy, mature, and should be saved. It’s very hard to grow trees in urban settings, even harder to grow them at the waterfront. And the trees are being mostly cut down on the west island. That island, conveniently, was not included in or part of the environmental assessment, which is one of the parts of the entire Ontario Place redevelopment plan.

Just recently, the province removed the temple bell, less than a month after the creator, architect Raymond Moriyama, passed away. Speaker, that bell commemorates the 100th anniversary of the arrival of the first Japanese immigrants to Canada. This government continues to do things in secret, last-minute—things that either people find out on very short notice or find out as things are happening. The Conservatives also want to destroy the Ontario Science Centre, which is another masterpiece by the same architect. This is from the Globe and Mail, and this is what they wrote: “The late Raymond Moriyama built boldly in an era when public spaces mattered. We must save his legacy from the small thinking of our time.” The small thinking of our time—

Before we move on to questions and answers, I want to welcome back to the House Cheri DiNovo, member for Parkdale–High Park in the 38th, 39th, 40th and 41st Parliaments. Welcome to the House.

Questions?

It’s my pleasure to welcome students, part of the Ontario Parliamentary Friends of Tibet summer program. We have Tenzin Dolker, placed with MPP Patrice Barnes; Tseyang Palmo, with MPP Trevor Jones; Tenzin Kelsang Tawo, with MPP Christine Hogarth; and Tenzin Wangmo, with me.

I’d also like to welcome from Parkdale–High Park my constituent Andrew Goldberg, who is here for question period.

I’d like to give a very warm welcome to the Girls’ Government group from Parkdale–High Park. We have, from Annette Street public school and High Park alternative school: students Olivia Walli, Ryo Kumar, Amelia Wallis, Maya Jordan, Vesper Johnson, Jo Connors-Robertson, Soleece McBrien; teachers Kelly Iggers and Christine Rowe Quinn; parent Jeanhy Shim; and from Humbercrest Public School: students Kayden Rankin-Goodman, Maya Witty, Clara Winders-d’Eon, Ella Kemper, Nesiah Craig-Williams, Evelyn Dinis, Ava Macklin; and teacher Jessica Bailey.

Welcome, and thank you for being here.

I, too, want to give a very warm welcome to University of Toronto NDP and a special shout-out to Parkdale–High Park’s star campaigner and volunteer, Emma Hartviksen.

I see in the galleries Parkdale–High Park page Lindsay Matheson’s family: her father, brother, sister and grandma. Welcome.

This year, I launched the first-ever member’s statement writing competition for high school students in Parkdale–High Park. Students could submit a statement on any issue they wanted. This competition is designed to empower young people and foster youth participation in politics by bringing their voice directly to Queen’s Park and speaking about issues in their own words.

The winner for 2023, as selected by an independent committee, is Ian Snider from Humberside Collegiate. Here is Ian’s statement:

“Ontario is in a housing crisis.”

Premier “Ford’s solution: Allow suburban developers to create overpriced, car-dependent suburbs. This isn’t so much a solution as a capitulation to those who caused the crisis in the first place.

“It is the increasing sprawl that has raised housing prices, especially in the city, where the poor have been priced out in favour of the highest bidder.

“The demand for walkable neighbourhoods is there, yet the government refuses to hold developers accountable to build the housing needed in Ontario: walkable, affordable, mixed-use development.

“Today, more and more Ontarians favour living in the city over the suburbs. As public transit is expanded in anticipation of new residents” Premier “Ford is unwilling to build destinations.

“As young couples are forced between living in the city and starting a family,” Premier “Ford refuses to build affordable housing. As food prices rise,” Premier “Ford lets cul-de-sacs replace farmland.

“Our neighbourhoods make all the difference in our lives. With walkability comes healthy living, a greener environment, and a sense of community. We can build our cities to support their residents, but this government is doing the opposite just for the profit of a few developers.”

I’d like to give a very warm welcome to my former MP for Parkdale–High Park, Peggy Nash, and all the women who are part of the TMU’s Women in the House program. Welcome.

I’d like to welcome Alexander Primrose from Parkdale–High Park, who is here to participate in the Ontario model Parliament program; and also two students from the Women In House initiative who are shadowing me today, Joy Chen and Sthuthi Satish.

I, too, would like to give a very warm welcome to my predecessor and former boss, MPP Cheri DiNovo from Parkdale–High Park, who is also the author and lead of the Trans Day of Remembrance bill, which is now law. We mark that date today. Thank you, Cheri.