SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Terence Kernaghan

  • MPP
  • Member of Provincial Parliament
  • London North Centre
  • New Democratic Party of Ontario
  • Ontario
  • Unit 105 400 York St. London, ON N6B 3N2 TKernaghan-CO@ndp.on.ca
  • tel: 519-432-7339
  • fax: 519-432-0613
  • TKernaghan-QP@ndp.on.ca

  • Government Page
  • May/29/24 11:40:00 a.m.

My question is to the Premier. Residents at 435 Nelson Street in London are dealing with a terrible landlord. The owners, who call themselves the “House Hustlers,” have pushed tenants out so they can drive prices up further. A government that truly cared for people would pass Bill 25, the Rent Stabilization Act, and end the financial incentive to kick people out of their homes. Why does this government allow bad landlords to renovict and make the housing crisis even worse?

Back to the Premier: 11 tenants are left at 435 Nelson Street. One started chemotherapy just last week. In an email to residents, “House Hustler” Amanda claimed to have “started the permit process to demolish,” yet city records show that no permit has been requested or issued. It’s clear: They’re trying to scare people into leaving their homes.

When will this government actually stand up for renters and pass legislation to stop renovictions before they happen?

159 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border

I’d like to thank the member from Beaches–East York for her presentation. I think it’s important in this discussion, whenever we’re discussing landlords, that we differentiate between those small landlords, those families who look after their tenants in a kind way. They’re responsive, they treat them like a member of the family and they are fair, as opposed to those corporate, faceless landlords who really try to gouge people.

I believe it was the former Liberal government that brought in vacancy decontrol, which really incentivized these corporate landlords to kick good, long-term tenants out because they knew they could jack up the rent to whatever the market could withstand, and that this Conservative government has really continued that system of exploitation.

To the member from Beaches–East York: Do you have any thoughts about vacancy control?

142 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border

I’d like to thank the member from Oshawa for that excellent question, and she’s absolutely right. There are folks who are renting who simply are at a loss. They’re working paycheque to paycheque. They’re unable to afford that most basic necessity of housing because we’ve had governments that have allowed the market to get out of control. We’ve allowed governments to have these corporate landlords basically set the rules. We see things like renovictions, where a landlord will claim that they’re going to come in, they’re going to change over a unit. There are laws in place that allow renters to have the right of first refusal, but too often they do not get in. The Landlord and Tenant Board, which is moribund—it is absolutely not working—often works in the interests of landlords, but still, it’s not working for anyone.

We also see landlords who will try to pretend they’re moving in their family. We need further protections so everyone, whether it’s landlord or tenant, achieves justice and has a safe place to call home.

Interjections.

189 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/7/23 11:50:00 a.m.

My question is to the Premier. Tenants at 1276 Webster Street and 1280 Webster Street, many of whom are elderly and on a fixed income, need provincial intervention immediately. Members of London city council wrote a letter urging Minister Clark to take immediate action to prevent the owners from renovicting vulnerable tenants and pushing them into precarious situations and homelessness. Talking points about ineffective, reactive Conservative legislation about fines won’t keep these good people housed.

It’s simple: You have proactive legislation—rent control and tenant protection legislation—on the table that we could pass today. Will this government stand up for seniors and others on Webster Street and pass NDP legislation to reinstate rent control immediately?

Will this government pass legislation to re-establish rent control and plug the hole of vacancy decontrol? Yes or no?

138 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/1/23 9:40:00 a.m.
  • Re: Bill 97 

I’d like to thank the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for the question. I think there has been some misunderstanding on the government side about what we’re suggesting as the official opposition. We do not believe that a private, market-based approach will succeed in creating the truly affordable housing that Ontarians need.

We believe Ontario needs to actually invest. They need to have a public builder who will deliver those non-market homes, so that people have a safe place to call home. Crossing your fingers and hoping for the best and expecting that a private, for-profit industry will do the work the government needs to do is not a plan. Hope is not a plan. There are no legislative guarantees in any of the housing bills that this government has had to really control the number of affordable units or the rate of affordability that will be delivered.

Their plan is not going to succeed. Their budget already shows that they’re not going to succeed with their 1.5 million homes.

This government could pass NDP legislation to protect tenants. It’s on the table right now. We could pass it today. But instead this government chooses to have ironically titled bills that will not protect tenants, that will not do enough.

But the member is absolutely right: The onus, the burden is placed upon tenants, who have to be their own private investigator, and that is wrong. We need to protect tenants before there is an issue rather than having these reactive solutions that simply won’t work.

There is always room for the private market. What the NDP is suggesting is that we have a public builder who is responsible for the funding, delivery, acquisition and protection of truly affordable housing. That’s something that people need. That will also make sure that people have a place to call home because, as I said, housing is health care. This government has responsibility to provide it. Housing is a human right. Housing is a social determinant of health, and this government needs to take proactive steps to make sure that it’s actually being created, not crossing their fingers and hoping for the best, like so many ironically titled pieces of legislation do.

Developers should be responsible for paying for the services that are required for all of these new homes, whether it’s electricity, sewers—all of the utilities that are necessary. But there’s no guarantee in Bill 23 that any affordable housing will actually be created. That is the biggest gap. It’s unbelievable that this government even uses the word “affordable.”

443 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/23 4:30:00 p.m.
  • Re: Bill 97 

I’d like to thank the member from University–Rosedale for her effective analysis of Bill 97.

Really, what we see with Bill 97 is something like closing the barn door after the horses run free.

I want to thank the member for bringing forward positive and proactive solutions such as Bill 25, Bill 58, and all the amendments that the NDP brought forward to strengthen this legislation.

Despite having these proactive protections on the table, we see a government that continually says no to tenants. They continue to put forward reactive legislation and fines that won’t work to address the issues that renters face.

My question to the member is, why does proactive NDP legislation make far better sense than reactive Conservative legislation?

125 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 3:10:00 p.m.

It’s an honour for me to rise today in support of our opposition day motion to re-establish rent control within the province of Ontario. Hearing debate today, it’s clearer than ever how out of touch Conservatives have become.

The NDP is the party of housing. We built the most affordable and supportive housing of any government before. It’s clear that the Conservative-Liberal consortium can’t build themselves. They’re content to incentivize eviction, renoviction, demoviction, and they disrespect renters as well as seniors.

London was hit by the biggest average annual increase in Canada of rental costs: 33% in one year. Last year, it was a 27% increase.

Huntington Towers is a 10-storey building where tenants were asked to pay a rental increase to cover the cost of a new parking garage.

Tenants at One Richmond Row were hit with a 7% rent hike because they were not informed that they were inhabiting a building that this government had removed rent control from.

You see, Conservatives carved a loophole in tenants’ rights with no rental protections for buildings that were first occupied after November 2018. People were already having a tough time paying the bills, yet this government saw fit to remove rights from them. They drilled a hole in their already sinking ship.

Conservative cognitive dissonance is at an all-time high with this government. We’ve heard members across pat themselves on the back for the creation of all these new rental buildings, but they don’t realize that they have enabled a system of exploitation because they’ve removed protections from people who can least afford it.

Tenants call my office regularly about legal and illegal rental hikes. But when they’ve fought back against their landlord, then their unit will stop receiving basic maintenance. It’s time for this Ontario government to actually lead from the front, stand up and make sure that they’re taking a strong public role in the building, the funding, the delivery and the acquisition and protection of rental housing.

You can start today. You can start supporting renters by supporting our opposition day motion.

360 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/20/23 3:10:00 p.m.
  • Re: Bill 97 

I would like to thank the member from Mississauga–Malton for his presentation. I’d also like to remind the member that the Conservative government got rid of rent control on new rental buildings first occupied after November 2018. I have heard from many tenants, as I’m sure the member from Mississauga–Malton has as well.

My question is two: What do you say to your constituents who face these massive rental increases, and how do you justify removing protections from your constituents?

84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/20/23 2:50:00 p.m.
  • Re: Bill 97 

I’d like to thank the member from Parkdale–High Park for her presentation on Bill 97, Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act.

We look at the title of this, and it talks about protecting tenants, but I do believe that there are quite a number of pieces missing which actually protect tenants. My question to the member is: If this government truly wanted to support tenants, what would they do?

70 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 3:30:00 p.m.
  • Re: Bill 97 

I’d like to thank the member from University–Rosedale for her excellent presentation and overview of Bill 97, Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act.

I’d like to take the member back to 2021, when she, along with the member from Parkdale–High Park, as well as the member from Ottawa Centre, introduced the Rent Stabilization Act, which Conservatives voted down. At that time, they said no to protecting renters. The Conservatives said no to making sure people have an affordable place to live, and Conservatives said no to long-term stability for renters, as well as for seniors. At that time, while the opposition was introducing legal protections for renters, the Conservative government actually removed rent control from all new buildings first occupied after November 2018.

My question for the member: We see all sorts of legislation with these titles which become ironic in practice. Would the member like to see the government pass the reintroduced Rent Stabilization Act?

160 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/1/23 5:30:00 p.m.
  • Re: Bill 69 

I’d like to thank the member from Niagara Falls for his excellent question. No, I don’t think that anyone in Ontario at this point trusts the government on the way in which they’ve handled the greenbelt. They’ve talked about this swap where they’re actually adding lands that already had some protections on them. They’d like to pretend that they are doing this thing where it’s an equal exchange, but if we look at the greenbelt as a chain, if you weaken any links of that chain, such as a watershed or something else that is contributing to the filtering of our water, then that entire chain is weak.

What they’re doing to the greenbelt is odious. They’re making sure that it’s going to be easier for these developers to make McMansions, which is not what we need more of. We need more inwards and upwards development, we need affordable housing, we need rent control, we need vacancy decontrol, we need protections for tenants—none of the things that this government is doing, because they do not care about tenants.

They, on the side of the official opposition, said that they were going to change things. They agreed with the Auditor General. And now that they’re on the government benches, we see a completely different change in attitude. They’re upholding many of the things that they criticized the Liberals for, including Infrastructure Ontario, including Tarion. Now they’ve even created yet more government bureaucracy with things like HCRA.

But this attack on the greenbelt is absolutely odious. They’re also taking money away from municipalities when they need it the most. The government should be having a public builder building housing, not expecting private, for-profit agencies to—

The government has a responsibility to ensure that everyone has access to clean drinking water. The fact that there are places in this province which do not have access to that basic human right in the 21st century is unconscionable. It’s completely unacceptable.

There are areas close to my riding that have been under boil-water advisories for 25 years. If that were to happen in any large urban centre, it would be corrected immediately. It would get government attention. But we’ve seen governments, past and present, who simply want to kick the can down the road. They want to finger-point for jurisdictional change, and they simply don’t want to do the right thing. They could get clean drinking water there; they just choose not to.

With the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs, we travelled the province and we heard about the people who are struggling. And yet we see bills like Bill 23, which are just actually—they wrap that bill with the word “housing,” but really what it’s about is McMansions, and it’s about seizing land from the greenbelt.

Instead, what we should make sure is we should have a government that’s actually looking at how Infrastructure Ontario operates. We should have a government that looks at how Tarion operates. When people make the largest purchase of their lives, they deserve to have some—

For many years, we criticized the Liberals for this. But this government is doing it almost on steroids. It is unbelievable what they have achieved with Bill 23, with Bill 7, with so many different things and ways—

572 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 3:40:00 p.m.

I’d like to thank the member from Simcoe–Grey for his very important question.

The supply chain is absolutely vital.

I’d like to return to the comments from the member from Ottawa Centre. He mentioned the occupation. Earlier, we saw this government completely stalled as the Ambassador Bridge was occupied. We saw this government refuse to call a provincial emergency and refuse to acknowledge that there was $300 million of vital trade going across that bridge every single day. There were so many workers who were sent home because their employer could not pay them. There was no work to do.

I think your comments about the supply chain with beef farmers are important, but I also think this government needs to walk the walk when it comes to actually standing up and making sure that we have not only the rule of law but that we have vital trade.

The example that happened at the Ambassador Bridge went on far too long and was absolutely unconscionable. It impacted so many families, and it should never have happened.

You are absolutely right; we have heard that the Landlord and Tenant Board is only meeting for above-guideline rent increases, when there are so many other issues.

I hear from tenants, of course, who have great concerns with their landlords. I also hear from landlords who are saying it doesn’t matter who is right or wrong in this scenario the Landlord and Tenant Board is completely stymied. It is completely unable to function correctly. That needs to be addressed. It is not addressed in Bill 46; it ought to be. We need to hire more adjudicators.

278 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Aug/22/22 10:10:00 a.m.

I’d like to take this opportunity to celebrate the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s ruling that landlords cannot ban air conditioning, as access to cooling during extreme heat waves is a human rights issue. It has long been a health issue, and now it is finally recognized as a human right.

As the number of extreme heat waves increases, the right to accessible and safe housing must include air conditioning. Extreme heat makes life unbearable. It is extremely dangerous, especially for seniors and those living with disabilities. Despite empty words in 2020, the Ford government has failed to deliver air conditioning for seniors in long-term care. This government has failed seniors, time and again.

The commission grimly notes, “Extreme heat caused by climate change is killing people.”

In London, tenants like the folks at Huron Gardens have been organizing to protect their most vulnerable neighbours from extreme heat.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission is now calling on this government to include air conditioning as a vital service like the provision of heat.

The Ontario NDP were well ahead of the curve, fighting to protect Ontarians from extreme heat. I look forward to supporting my colleague the MPP for University–Rosedale’s motion when she re-tables it. I encourage all members to vote in support of this motion.

220 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border