Thank you to my colleague from Parkdale–High Park for your presentation, focusing on affordability and the Orwellian title of Bill 165.

When the standing committee met to discuss Bill 165, representatives from Unifor, including Samia Hashi and Doug Carter, testified at the committee and they stated that the Ontario Energy Board needs to do a much better job of monitoring gas companies’ investments in infrastructure. They actually stated to the committee, “When gas leaks are not fixed, Ontario families pay three times: They pay through delayed investment in upgrading and maintaining our gas infrastructure; they pay for it through climate change; they pay through the increased risks of major safety incidents.”

Would the member like to comment about how this government is not looking after affordability in this bill and actually could do so by listening to the representatives from Unifor?

It’s an honour for me to rise today on behalf of the great residents of London North Centre to discuss Bill 2, the Plan to Build Act, for its third reading in this House.

Last time, I discussed some items that were good in the budget—I’m very much in support of moving WSIB to London—but today I would like to discuss some of the elements that are missing. It’s often been said that if we do the same thing again and again and expect different results, it’s the definition of madness. But also, in nature, the tree that is unyielding will eventually break, whereas the one that will move with the wind is the one that will thrive and persevere. This budget is an example of unyielding, of unchanging, of not learning the lessons over the past number of months.

You see, Speaker, we have a budget that was tabled in April that has not undergone significant modifications. We’ve seen the affordability crisis explode—inflation at 8.1%. We’ve seen ERs closing across the province. We’ve seen nurses walking away from their jobs, retiring in droves. And this government has not done enough to address that in this budget.

The budget, as well, is a statement of priorities. We discuss values often in financial terms, but a budget also includes a government’s values in terms of principles. In short, the budget is a statement of values as guiding principles; it is both an ethical and a moral document.

In this Legislature, we ought to enforce equity to ensure those who are pushed to the margins are heard, respected and strengthened. We have to affirm as a Legislature that those at the beginning of their lives and at the end of their lives, with some exceptions, need more support than the rest of us in between. We ought to ensure as well that every single dollar that is spent by this government achieves its intended result. If expenditures are ineffective or compromised by outside forces, we should similarly adjust our approach.

We have this opportunity to learn the lessons from COVID, and we have the benefit of retrospection and clarity to see what worked and see what did not. Seniors, children, those living with disabilities, social services and small businesses were all pushed to the brink. At the same time, we saw others profiting from these disastrous conditions. We have yet to see this government stand up to pandemic profiteering and do the right thing, do the honourable thing.

As I mentioned, inflation has hit a staggering 8.1%. In this budget, the government has 2.5%. It’s less than half the current level of inflation. It’s even been called wishful thinking by some. It’s delusional. It’s unresponsive. It’s unrealistic to our current fiscal climate.

Additionally, the budget’s $1-billion rainy day provision is far, far too low. That amount is just one half of 1% of the total spending. If there are going to be spending hiccups, overruns or any other difficult or problematic decisions, this government is going to be in grave difficulty. And I worry that it’s going to be an excuse for further privatization and further cuts to our public spending if this government doesn’t do the right thing.

Furthermore, we hear a lot about this ridiculous and unnecessary highway, Highway 413, which is going to benefit many wealthy developer friends of this government, but in this budget there is no detailed costing for it and other highway spending. It’s not itemized. That’s disturbing, Speaker.

As well, with inflation being as high as it is and not being addressed thoroughly by this government, it means working people and families have lost almost one tenth of their buying power. It could mean taking on more household debt to put food on the table. People are having to make difficult decisions. To actively combat this affordability crisis, the government could raise minimum wage. They could focus on ensuring good jobs have equally good pay.

In health care, we’ve seen that Ontario has 5,400 fewer nurses than one year ago. They could repeal Bill 124 and show some respect for our front-line heroes, who have worked tirelessly, made tremendous personal sacrifices, put their families at risk. Instead, we see them plowing forward with this cut to nurses’ wages, because 1% is a cut with inflation being at 8.1%.

We also do not have wage parity across sectors. The Victorian Order of Nurses cannot respond to the number of requests that they have for service, and part of that is a direct result of wage parity, because in the community care setting, PSWs earn $3.57 per hour less, whereas nurses earn $11 less per hour. That’s a gap that needs to be addressed by this government.

I also am deeply surprised that, in terms of seniors’ care, this government has not yet learned that—having profit off of someone’s ill health or someone’s old age is something that they’re content with. When we saw that the army came in and saw the conditions that they did, this government should have been incentivized to act to make sure seniors were treated with respect and dignity, but instead we see rewards going to the worst of the worst, multi-million-dollar contracts, 30-year contracts going to homes that do not deserve to care for yet more seniors. It is a moral horror and one that is on this government’s conscience. I wish they would listen to their conscience.

As well, when we look at young people, students do not have enough supports. We see that this government has frozen tuition, but they’ve cut from the university sector. We also need to see greater further mental health supports for students, as referenced by OUSA and Eunice Oladejo. Unfortunately, we don’t see enough investments in mental health, either for the province or for children. The two-and-a-half-year wait time for children for mental health supports is unconscionable and something that needs to be acted upon.

There’s so much to discuss in this budget. Ontarians with disabilities are hardly even mentioned. We take a look at this government and their investments in hospital infrastructure, but not in the people who support that infrastructure. There’s no mention of the AODA whatsoever. It doesn’t mention the goal or the fact that they’re not going to achieve it by 2025 as promised.

I see that I’m running rather low on time, Speaker, but I also wanted to mention something that the last Liberal government let southwestern Ontario down on for a number of years, and that would be rail connections to southwestern Ontario. It’s something that was promised, and we still have yet to see shovels in the ground.

This crisis that we have in health care and long-term care and privatization should be a wake-up call for us all that privatization steals money from the public purse. It siphons tax dollars into the pockets of insiders, and how Conservative governments can justify not spending the entire health care dollar on front-line care is beyond me. It goes against the fiscally prudent values which they claim to espouse. No one should profit off of someone’s ill health or old age.

I cannot accept this budget as written. It needs to be improved.

I would like to thank the government members for their presentation. My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

When we take a look at this legislation, there’s a curious omission—in fact, a glaring omission: Nowhere in this document, despite it being about building homes, is there any mention of rental affordability. We know that rental is a necessary step in the housing spectrum. In fact, it was this government that created legislation that removed rent control from buildings created after November 2018. Will this government admit that this was a mistake and that it did not create more affordable housing, and will you fix it?