It’s my honour to rise today in support of our opposition day motion. You know, for the government, they often are talking about the current housing crisis in which we are living, which we are experiencing. The first and most obvious answer would be what, Speaker? If there aren’t enough homes, what do we do? We build them. Instead of leaving this up to other people and all these different roundabout ways, the most simple answer is to get shovels in the ground and to build.

I was honoured to table this legislation late last year, and I’m proud that, despite the Conservatives not wanting to get their hands dirty and not wanting to get shovels in the ground and voted it down, we are undaunted. The official opposition will raise the voices of people across this province. The affordability crisis must be addressed in a meaningful way. What is foundational, what is fundamental, what is most often the largest expense in our lives? It’s housing.

While this government blunders ahead and tiptoes clumsily backwards, the Ontario NDP is focused on solutions, and part of that is a commitment to affordable housing. We need a wartime effort to address this housing crisis. We need all hands on deck. We need to capitalize on the strengths and abilities of our community partners such as experts in the field like co-ops, municipal partners and social housing providers.

I recently had the opportunity to congratulate Homes Unlimited London in my riding on 50 years of incorporation. Carmen Sprovieri and Cathy Park were there. It was an amazing event. It was a beautiful and poignant evening. But here is a not-for-profit organization that is phenomenal. They have industry partners. They’re doers. They have industry leaders. They know how to navigate systems. They can easily leverage their own expertise as well as that of others just to get the job done. I sat with Bob and Margo Hahn and Gord and Maria Hardcastle and we had a phenomenal conversation. But it was amazing to see that those are the kinds of organizations that this government could depend upon that could help create that affordable housing.

Recently, in my riding, Richard Sifton of Sifton Properties, with the Anglican Diocese of Huron, are now taking Homes Unlimited into downtown London. There’s going to be at 195 Dufferin Ave., which is going to be 94 residential units—80 one-bedroom and 14 two-bedroom units. It’s going to cost $20 million, and Sifton is donating the building and is going to oversee the reconstruction. It’s a beautiful plan.

But this is exactly what the government could do. Not-for-profits can split a nickel five ways from centre. Co-ops have been in the business of creating and maintaining that housing stock that is vitally necessary to address the affordability crisis that is happening across our province. Yet, this government would talk about recommendations from Scotiabank as being communist. They would talk about how the government creating housing would ruin the free market.

Here on this side, the official opposition speaks to folks who are in the creation of private, for-profit housing. They do not want the responsibility of creating all the affordable housing that Ontario needs. That is not their mandate, Speaker. They are in the business of providing shareholder return. They want to make sure there is a return on investment for all of their people and, quite frankly, there isn’t a great return on investment in the creation of truly affordable housing and long-term affordable housing.

So this government in their reliance—their ideological, their fixed mindset, where they can’t seem to get it through their ears that we need to have the government incent and assist co-ops, municipal partners and non-profits to create that housing. Instead, they have this myopic vision that for-profit is the only way to go. They’re really letting Ontarians down.

We see other disastrous initiatives from this government including the removal of rent control on buildings first occupied after November 2018. During an affordability crisis, what does this government do for affordability? They poured gasoline on the fire. They’ve created a system of exploitation which has destroyed many lives.

I talk to seniors all the time who have been in buildings for decades. They have paid for the apartment building in which they live, and they are afraid, to this day, each and every single day, that that building is going to be sold to a new owner who will want to get them out so they can jack the rent up to whatever the market can withstand. It’s a legacy of the Liberal government, who shot holes in the boat of affordability in terms of renters, bringing in vacancy decontrol.

This government could follow and could implement NDP legislation to protect renters. They could pass this opposition day motion today to create more affordable housing, to stabilize the system, making sure people have a safe place to call home. Yet, I wonder if they will choose to, or if they will continue to act as partisan puppets for their for-profit friends. Time will tell, and we will see today.

Housing is foundational, housing is fundamental, housing is a human right and housing is health care. I hope this government will understand the importance of housing. They say a lot of words. Let’s see some action today.

I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should establish and fund a new public agency called Homes Ontario to finance and build 250,000 new affordable and non-market homes on public land over 10 years, to be operated and/or constructed by public, non-profit or co-op housing providers.

If we look towards the history, government was once an integral part of building the vital housing that we need. Following World War II, a crown corporation known as Wartime Housing Ltd. successfully built and managed thousands of units for returning veterans. It was the right thing to do, Speaker. Canada built 1.5 million of these homes for heroes between 1943 and 1960 on government land for moderate-income households. This is equivalent to six million homes today.

Between 1973 and 1994, Canada built or acquired around 16,000 units, 16,000 non-profit or co-operative homes, every year—Speaker, 16,000 every single year. Since the mid-1990s, though, federal and provincial governments’ housing policies have moved away from this and towards the private, for-profit market to deliver the new housing that people need.

This government and governments prior have created a housing crisis. Both private developers and non-profit providers have noted that without access to free land, creating new rental housing is increasingly difficult due to high development costs, and creating that truly affordable housing is next to impossible. Thus, the private sector hasn’t built the types of housing that people truly require. They haven’t built enough affordable housing, supportive housing or purpose-built rental housing to meet Ontario’s housing needs. This is the government’s responsibility.

In terms of the motion itself, establishing a new public agency, Homes Ontario, to finance and build 250,000 new affordable and non-market homes would ensure an adequate supply of rental homes meeting the needs of low- to moderate-income families, and it would be at all stages of life, from couples to young families to seniors. These homes would be operated by public, non-profit or co-op housing providers and permanently protected from the speculation and financialization of the private market.

Nobody needs to say it again, but we are in a housing crisis, Speaker, and we’re not going to get out unless we have big ideas. On this side of the House, we’re proposing a massive expansion of new homes for Ontario by undoing decades of bad policy and getting the government back in the business of building housing.

The backroom deals and rampant land speculation this government has been partaking in are setting Ontario back. Housing starts are going down. We are going in the wrong direction. So here with the Ontario NDP, we are calling for a new approach with Homes Ontario, where public land and resources are unlocked for the creation of new homes that people can actually afford.

Everyone in Ontario has a right to safe and affordable housing, to live in the community they want to live in. If we look towards the foundational and fundamental principles of housing itself, we know that without housing, little else matters. Housing is even more than shelter. When we help low-income households access the housing they need, we’re doing more than putting a roof over people’s heads. We’re building a foundation for broader social and economic success for so many families.

The Canadian Paediatric Society has warned that living in housing need can negatively affect all aspects of child and youth physical, mental, developmental and social health. By depriving children of a quiet place to study, to read and to do homework, crowded living conditions compromise their educational success. When insecure housing leads to those frequent moves, children’s readiness for school and the continuity of their education and academic performance are hurt, with long-term consequences for future employment and earnings. Teachers are saying to students, “Read. Do your homework. Concentrate.” How can that happen when there is that instability for housing? It’s impossible, Speaker.

A CMHC-funded study, a survey of Habitat for Humanity families, found that participants reported across-the-board improvements for their children’s well-being and school performance since obtaining their homes. Good housing doesn’t take the place of other ingredients for success, but it demonstrably does provide the stability from which to leverage for better outcomes. Its absence makes it that much harder for vulnerable Canadians to get ahead.

I ask my colleagues on the government side of the House to picture the people of Ontario. When I’m out in my community, I meet young families who want to grow but don’t have the space. I meet brilliant young people who are living out of their parents’ basements with no path out of it. I talk to young people who are looking to pursue their post-secondary education or graduate studies, but their future is impacted by the place that they can afford, not the program of study they want to go into or the educational institution that they want to pursue. I think of all the seniors who are in places that don’t suit their needs, that, quite frankly, might be dangerous, but are trapped.

Speaker, we need to ask ourselves, why does this kind of housing matter? Housing doesn’t just keep us safe and warm; it gives us a sense of mental, physical and financial stability that cannot be understated. Stable housing changes everything. When people have stable housing, they can raise a family. They can retire. They can have something to leave behind. Secure housing impacts families for generations. A good place to call home is a source of dignity with benefits that radiate out to a family, a community and an incredible place like Ontario in a great country like ours.

If we look towards the economic development benefits, housing also matters at a microeconomic level: to individual families and households. But this government seems to fail to understand that it also matters at the macroeconomic level: to our broader economic and financial stability. When people are in suitable housing and are not spending tremendous amounts on that housing, that money is spent within their communities. It has tremendous community benefits.

Too often, we see the reliance on the for-profit market. We see these real estate investment trusts. Where does that money go, Speaker? Largely, it leaves Ontario. It leaves Canada.

A strong housing sector supports an incredibly robust economy. It creates jobs in the construction and renovation sector, and generates spinoff benefits in related industries. The construction industry alone contributed 7.7% to Ontario’s GDP in 2021. Public development supports the generation of good, reliable jobs for the people of Ontario. Developing just one affordable housing unit generates two new jobs. These residential construction jobs are overwhelmingly local and support the economies we want to build. Housing security and housing markets play an important role in supporting social and economic stability, but this depends on ensuring housing affordability and ensuring stable, secure housing—both rental and ownership.

The government has a responsibility. We know that we’re in a crisis. What we require is a wartime effort. This government has an opportunity here today to vote for a motion where they would get back into the business of creating truly affordable housing for the people of Ontario—not sitting in the back seat, not waiting for somebody else to do the heavy lifting, but doing it themselves.

To a government that has been mired in terrible scandals, whether it was the greenbelt grab or the expansion of cities’ urban boundaries—this is an opportunity for you. This is an opportunity for you to vote for something that will create a lasting legacy for the people of Ontario.

Think back to that post-World War II era, when all of those homes were built—this government could do the same; this government should do the same. There are benefits to this in a huge way.

So to all those young families who are hoping to grow; to all the young adults who are living in their parents’ basements; to all of the parents of those young adults who want to see their child succeed; to all of the young professionals who are choosing where to pursue their dream, where to pursue employment; to the young people who are pursuing post-secondary education and choosing their institution based on the financial aspects; but also to all the seniors who are downsizing, and the empty nesters: We here on the Ontario NDP side of this House—we hear you. We see you. We understand that this government has a role. We understand that this government has a responsibility. We know that this government can get back into the business of building housing.

I think, as well, to what happened in the mid-1990s, when many of these programs were cut. I look back to 1995, when the Ontario government implemented a number of disastrous housing policies. They decreased the availability of affordable rental housing. They cut legal protections for tenants. They cut social assistance rates, including shelter allowances, by 21.6%. And if that wasn’t bad enough, 17,000 units of co-op and non-profit housing that were under development were also scrapped.

To this government: You have an opportunity to create. You have an opportunity to build. You have an opportunity to listen to the voices of all of the people across Ontario who are saying that the private market is not doing enough.

Also, on this side of the House—I don’t want to criticize the private market. They have an incredible role. They do great work, but they have also said that they can’t do it alone. It is an expectation and it is a burden that this government is simply shifting their responsibility for. You can’t expect that a for-profit industry is going to create the types of housing that people need. That is the government’s responsibility. That is the government’s lookout.

Listen to the people of Ontario. Listen to what people need. Listen to people across the housing spectrum. Get back into the business of housing, and make sure that people can build a safe life, have a safe future, and pass that future prosperity on for generations to come. You can do it with Homes Ontario, and you can do it today.

Please vote for my motion.

My question is to the Premier. Speaker, 30 years ago, the Harris government got us out of the business of building housing. If governments had continued to build at that rate, we would have built 1.2 million homes since then. Instead, Ontario needs to build 1.5 million homes to meet the current need.

Why doesn’t this government think it has a responsibility for building truly affordable homes?

This government has routinely given laundry lists of projects that did not work. Now is the time to think big. Private developers have said they can’t solve this crisis alone. The Canadian Housing Statistics Program recently revealed that housing supply slowed last year—slowed under this government.

Why won’t this government join us and get Ontarians back to work in good jobs, building the truly affordable housing that Ontarians need?

Later this afternoon, I’m pleased this House will debate my motion calling on the province to establish a new public agency to finance and build at least 250,000 new affordable and non-market rental homes at cost on public land. There will be plenty of time to debate the merits of that motion, but this morning, I would like to share with my colleagues why this kind of housing matters.

I ask you all to think for a moment about the many benefits that good housing brings us as individuals, as families and as communities, not just in terms of keeping us dry and warm, but also in providing a safe, stable place to raise our families, and a sense of mental, physical and financial stability that cannot be understated.

The impact goes beyond just housing. Stable housing changes everything. When people have stable housing, they can raise a family, they can retire, they can have something to leave behind. Secure housing impacts families for generations. A good place to call home is a source of dignity with benefits that radiate to a family, a community, to an incredible province like Ontario in a great country like ours.

I hope you will vote yes to bring dignity, security and affordable good housing to the families of Ontario.

It’s always an honour for me to rise and add the voices of the great people of London North Centre, especially on a topic that I know my community is passionate about and one that I am passionate about as well, which is housing. I believe strongly that the government needs to take a leading role. They need to lead from the front. The government needs to make sure that they are fulfilling their historic responsibility for providing an adequate supply of affordable housing in the province.

You see, housing is a human right. But housing is even so many more things. Housing is also health care. Housing is a social determinant of health. Housing is foundational for every single person in this province in order to enjoy their life.

We also need to see a government that is concerned with the creation, the building of non-market homes instead of a private, market-based approach that focuses on tax cuts, deregulation, sprawl across our treasured greenbelt. Their solutions are ones that simply make it harder for people to pay the bills and to put food on the table. There are also no guarantees of enough new affordable homes within this province’s flawed plan.

I would also like to take a look at some proactive measures that the NDP has brought forward to this government, ones that are sitting on the table right now that this government could pass to protect tenants immediately, ones that would be supported by the official opposition, ones that we could get through this House in record time. Those include Bill 25, the Rent Stabilization Act, one that I was proud to co-sponsor to make sure that we are plugging the hole of vacancy decontrol that was brought forward during the last Liberal government.

You see, this Conservative government has continued a system of exploitation on tenants. They’ve made a system of unaffordability even worse by removing rent control from buildings first occupied after November 2018. It’s a system where people are paying more and more and more every year with no signs of relief, and that is on this government. They have chosen to allow unethical corporate landlords to exploit people for something that is a basic human right, which is housing.

We also have introduced other measures, such as Bill 48, to plug that vacancy decontrol hole, to have rent control for all tenants. There’s also Bill 58, which is currently on the table, the Protecting Renters from Illegal Evictions Act. These are proactive steps, Speaker, that would effectively safeguard and protect tenants. But yet we see a government that isn’t concerned about proactive measures; instead, they have looked towards reactive measures through Bill 97.

What is deeply concerning, Speaker, is that only this government could turn a Human Rights Tribunal ruling into a rent hike. What they have allowed is landlords to increase rent on people for having the right of air conditioning. How is that right? At a time of unprecedented unaffordability, they want to let unethical landlords reach deep into people’s pockets and take their hard-earned money. That’s on this government. They want to reach into people’s pockets by this decision. People who have had air conditioning units in the past will now have to pay for them; that’s on this government. That is a choice.

We have proposed so many solutions to problems of unaffordability and the problems facing tenants, but this government has said no every single time. We’ve brought forward opposition day motions. We’ve dedicated entire days to debating this within the Legislature, and this government shuts their ears and doesn’t want to listen to the voices of people who are struggling. They don’t want to listen to the voices of tenants.

They have this ironically titled legislation which does little to help homebuyers and protect tenants. It does so little. They are talking about increasing fines, but we know that fines are not levied in many cases at the Landlord and Tenant Board. The Ombudsman has even called the Landlord and Tenant Board “moribund.” My goodness.

This government has defended rent increases as high as 57%. In London, in my community, they were hit by the biggest average rent increase in all of Canada last year, 33%. And now, this year, it’s 27%. People cannot afford that. They have continued the Liberal loophole of vacancy decontrol, keeping that incentive for unethical corporate landlords to kick good people out, who have been there for many years, so that they can jack up the rent because the market will allow it.

I’ve travelled to 1270 and 1280 Webster Street, where I heard from seniors, people who were in their golden years who just want to enjoy some time in their home. And yet, this building has been sold, Speaker, and because this government does not stand up for tenants and did not plug vacancy decontrol and that loophole, these people have been served with eviction notices. Those are eviction notices that have not gone through the Landlord and Tenant Board; they’re deliberately misleading and threatening. These people are concerned about where they’re going to go. They’re concerned about possibly living in their car. It’s unconscionable, Speaker, that this government has the opportunity to stand up for tenants and chooses not to.

And if that weren’t bad enough, these people—and I’m very thankful for the leadership of the MPP for London–Fanshawe, who has canvassed these buildings; she has told people about their rights, making sure they’re informed, letting them know that these notices are ones that are not correct and an eviction order can only be ordered by the Landlord and Tenant Board. But now, Speaker, this landlord has tried to deliver a charge for parking spaces. They want to charge these residents $200 per month for a parking space—absolutely unbelievable. This government wants to open up people’s pockets so that unethical landlords can jam their hand in as far as they can.

Now, this government briefing on this bill and their ironic title—they say it’s going to make life easier for renters, help homebuyers, streamline policies to build more homes, but there’s no guarantee that their plan is actually going to create the affordable homes that people need. What is concerning is that they can raise fines all they want, but unethical landlords are not afraid of these fines, because it has failed to deter this illegal behaviour. The example at 1270 and 1280 Webster Street is an example of that. NDP legislation would protect them; Conservative legislation does not.

Many tenants are simply unaware of their rights. If this government truly wanted to stand up for tenants and wanted to protect them, they would make sure that the vacancy decontrol hole was plugged. I have heard from so many tenants who have repeatedly reported serious maintenance issues with their units—pests, lack of heat, basic services. At 1270 Webster Street and 1280 Webster Street, residents were telling me just a week ago that they’re responsible for cleaning their own lobby, their hallways and their laundry room because the landlord doesn’t do it. But they care for their place, they love their home, they love their neighbours and they look after one another.

I’d like to also add the voice of the Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario, who says, Bill 97 “does not go far enough to protect renters and fix the dysfunction at the Landlord and Tenant Board.” This is just “a band-aid solution.” This bill is only as good as—it’s simply not good enough. It’s just a band-aid solution.

It falls short because it fails to mandate a maximum temperature in the summer, similar to the mandated minimum temperature in the winter. This is something that our housing critic, the MPP for University–Rosedale, has called for. Last summer, I was canvassing on this very issue before it came before the Human Rights Tribunal. I canvassed an east London apartment complex where people who are busy, who are seniors, single parents, people working multiple jobs, were saddled with the choice: They were told that they could not install air conditioning units, which they had done for years. They were told that that was not allowed, that they would have to purchase an air conditioning unit from the landlord and they could have a payment plan to then pay it off. People were told that this was a must, this was the law, and many people made that choice. I shudder to think about the price that the landlord charged for these air conditioning units. It’s unconscionable.

Now, this government in their wisdom has seen fit to let people who have had air conditioners, people who even have the sleeves that are in their units because the builder understood that there would be a necessity to have air conditioning units—those people now have to pay. They’ve never had to pay before, but this government wants them to pay. This government wants to reach into their pockets and take their money.

This government also has really done a disservice to local councils by their removal of development charges—$5 billion, as has been estimated by the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

They’ve also opened up large swaths of the greenbelt, auctioning it off to the highest donor and their insider friends, the people who actually pull the government strings in the backrooms. That is not something that is going to create the affordable housing that Ontario needs.

What is also really quite shocking is the systems that this government has in place that are supposed to protect homebuyers. For many years, when this government was in opposition, they railed against Tarion. They said how it was a system that was unacceptable. The Premier himself said that it was a monopoly, which it is, and they said that they would repair it. But now, since they’ve gone over to the government side, suddenly the song they’re singing has changed. Instead of overhauling and reforming Tarion, they’ve actually created yet another bureaucratic nightmare.

What is disturbing about this is that the information—when homebuyers have concerns with a builder, they report that, and it should be information that is posted on the Ontario Builder Directory. Unfortunately, that information is not being posted, so consumers are not being protected. Consumers don’t know when a builder who they may be seeking to invest in—it’s the biggest investment of their entire life. They don’t have accurate information provided on the Ontario Builder Directory. It’s deeply, deeply concerning.

It’s something as well that people are forced to pay for. Homebuyers are obliged to pay provincially mandated warranty fees, and it’s factored into the price for new home buyers. They’re stuck paying for it. For a long time, the entire composition of the Tarion board has been suspect. It has been one that has been controlled by the Ontario Home Builders’ Association. There are no consumer advocates on it. There is just a deep, huge concern. The official opposition has brought forward legislation again to help protect people who are making the largest investment of their life, with our consumer watchdog. But this government chooses not to stand up for homebuyers at all.

I think as well of so many people who have had absolutely horrendous stories. I think of Earl Shuman, who lost his life after making the biggest investment of his life and battling with Tarion for years and years and years.

I think of Daniel Browne-Emery, who, again, had mould in his basement the size of pizzas. Finally, after battling for years and years and years, he succumbed to cancer. He took a paltry amount of money as a buyout so that he could at least give something to his family, so that he could leave some sort of legacy.

I think as well of Gayle and Gary Dudeck, who have reached out to every single member in this House. I know you’ve received the letter—every single MPP did. They are from Oshawa. They described how their daughter and partner were fighting with a home builder who was engaged in some really disturbing behaviour. They said there was a weasel clause in the contract that stated that all of the lots had to be serviced by January 13 and if not the builder could cancel. The lots weren’t serviced by January 13—no surprise there; that was probably their intention the entire time—they were serviced on the 28th, 15 days later. That allowed them to renegotiate the contract with the purchaser. They added $200,000 to the purchase price.

Now, through HCRA, this government claims that renegotiations are illegal, but there’s been no enforcement. HCRA took 15 months reviewing the Dudecks’ complaint and they emphasized in their code of ethics that price renegotiations are unacceptable. They still did nothing. In their summary, they said that the builder could have communicated better, but there were no penalties and no negative repercussions for the builder. How is this government, through HCRA, standing up for homebuyers? They are not.

Typically, as well, when people enter into these issues with an unethical home builder, they are subject to having to sign non-disclosure agreements. It silences people. They’re stuck in a situation where their only option, after making the biggest investment of their lives and having their rights taken away and being subject to these massive increases—they then have to sign an NDA.

Whenever the minister for MGCS is questioned on this, there’s always a repeated, canned response. There’s been no positive action for purchasers. This government has known about this for many years. They’ve known about it for 15 years while they were in opposition. They promised to do something and they chose not to. It’s heartbreaking that people are stuck with this.

Many folks have reached out from the Ottawa area who had concerns with Greatwise Developments, which engaged in that very same sort of renegotiation of price. They said, “Well, the market has changed. The cost of materials is up.” That does not change the contract that they legally committed to.

I’d like this government, if indeed they want to stand up for homebuyers and protect tenants, to consider the proactive measures that they need to do. Increasing fines after someone’s rights have been taken away is not enough. That is not getting ahead of the problem. In fact, they ought to know, with the Ombudsman’s report and the backlog of cases at the Landlord and Tenant Board and all of the voices of people across Ontario who have struggled with that system, that Bill 97 is nowhere near enough.

In this bill, as well, they could end exclusionary zoning, a measure that their own Housing Affordability Task Force Report has called for. Their own budget shows that they are not on track to meet the 1.5 million homes they are pretending they’re going to reach.

Instead, this government really needs to focus on adequate housing as a human right. They need to make sure young people have an affordable, safe place to call home. They need to make sure that there’s a rights-based approach to housing, that there’s a variety of public policy tools to make sure that these housing units are being created.

There needs to be investment from this province. There needs to be a focus on non-market housing. Too often, we see a government that is overly reliant on the private market. They believe they can simply make a policy change and that the private market will magically create affordable housing. That is not the case. There is no way that a private, profit-motivated organization is going to create the affordable housing that Ontario needs. Their motive is profit. They have to deliver value to their shareholders between 10% and 15% of investment. Their motive is not going to be creating the affordable housing that Ontarians need.

You see, the NDP has always been and will always be the party of housing. Despite all of the flaws of the Rae government in the 1990s, that government created the greatest amount of social and affordable housing of any government before it. Much of that housing still exists to this day, Speaker, despite the attempts of the Liberal government to redevelop some of that housing into luxury condos.

We see also this government allowing huge holes through Bill 23, allowing these real estate investment trusts to snap up rental buildings to redevelop them into luxury housing. That is backwards. The Non-Resident Speculation Tax has loopholes big enough to drive a truck through.

If this government wants to truly focus on affordable housing, they need to build and provide that affordable housing. Don’t expect someone else to do the heavy lifting for you. The official opposition is here to work with you. Use us, and we will build it together.

I’d like to thank the member from Carleton for her comments. I think we can all agree that the best place for seniors—the place where they are healthiest in body, mind and soul—is at home, when they are supported in their home.

Community support services presented during the pre-budget consultations for the 2023 budget and showed how early intervention is key and critical to make sure that people are healthiest at home. Presenters from community support services included such groups as Meals on Wheels. I also heard from Cheshire homes in my community, St. Joe’s hospice and the Alzheimer Society.

When seniors are cared for properly within the community, with community support services, it actually diverts costs and makes sure that people have the care that they need, because for someone to be supported at home, it costs $42; in long-term care, it’s $126; and in hospital, it’s $842.

My question to the member: Why do we not see increased investment in community support services for our seniors living at home?

I’d like to thank the member for Windsor–Tecumseh for his questions. You quite rightly cited the deep concerns that many people have right now, which are about inflation and cost of living. There are two key areas which could be addressed with greater protections for folks, such as reinstating rent control and making sure that people have a safe place to call home. In the absence of it, we’ve seen terrible circumstances for a lot of people who are frightened about losing their homes.

With Bill 23, we’ve seen also that rental buildings can be purchased by some of these international key players, redeveloped into luxury condos—and what happens to those people who are in those units, Speaker? What happens to buildings full of seniors who have lived there their whole lives and lived there in a good way, in a comfortable way, in an affordable way, who are now at risk of losing their home? Those are key ways.

There are investments like these, but they also have to be backed up with union protections, good wages, benefits and a pension.

I think about so many different industries that closed. We look at what happened to the folks at Sears, who worked there for many years, and when it came time for them to close, the business looked after shareholders before it looked after workers. The loss of pensions was something that was deeply concerning.

We need legislation in this province that makes sure to protect workers—workers first. Business will look after itself, but a business is nothing without the people who comprise it.

One third of housing in London is owned by real estate investors who scoop up entry-level properties away from first-time homebuyers. This is on top of the 86% of condo apartments already owned by investors—86%; that’s more than twice the provincial average.

Speaker, this government is telling the people of this province that they’re building new homes. It remains to be seen whether these will be truly affordable homes.

What is this government doing to ensure that first-time homebuyers can actually get into these new homes?

They talk about record housing starts, and the reason for that is that you have removed rent control. You’ve created a power imbalance between the owner and between renters.

Professor Diana Mok from Western stated: “Interest in housing used as an investment tool likely spiked in Ontario after the province removed rent controls on new builds after 2018.” Again, this has led to an unfair power imbalance where landlords can jack up the rent in between or when someone completes their tenancy, because there is no rent control. You did that. You did that to renters.

Young families are being completely left behind. The Housing Stability Bank, a local program that helps renters get out of arrears, is reporting a 35% increase in demand for their services. People are sinking even more under water each day.

Will this government close the loophole that allows foreign investors and real estate investment trusts to stockpile rental properties across Ontario?