Mr. Speaker, there’s the Leader of the Opposition talking about Therme again. She is obsessed; that is all she cares about. She doesn’t care about revitalizing Ontario Place and bringing it back to life, making sure that we improve the site.

But, Mr. Speaker, let’s talk about what she would like to do. Okay, fine. So let’s provide millions more dollars to the existing science centre facility. Let’s do that this year. You know what? Let’s do that next year. Then let’s do that the year after and then let’s face a systemic failure, structural failure, and then be forced to decommission the building. I don’t think that is the responsible move. I don’t think that’s the responsible move for the hard-working people at the science centre.

What we’re doing is ensuring that Ontarians have a science centre for the future, for the next 50 years, and we are being fiscally prudent.

But I would like to ask the member opposite why is she so against fixing Ontario Place? Why does she want Ontario Place to continue to deteriorate, to continue to flood, to continue to flood to the degree where Live Nation actually had to cancel their concerts in 2017? How is that acceptable? Can you answer that question for the people of Ontario? Because I would like to hear it.

The same circumstances exist at Ontario Place. We have someone that is willing to invest in the site in terms of hundreds of millions of dollars, operate a facility that families can enjoy, a wellness and water park facility, and contribute to the annual maintenance of the site so that we can have a well-maintained Ontario Place.

Mr. Speaker, again, I ask the member across the floor, why is she so against bringing Ontario Place back to life and saving the science centre?

Thank you to the member for the question. Funny that she’s speaking about the business case but yesterday she was calling it a “shell game” and a “scam.” There is no scam here. We made the business case public, and the numbers are very clear that we would be saving $257 million over a 50-year period and up to $600 million in tomorrow’s dollars over a 50-year period.

Now, I know what the Leader of the Opposition is doing. She doesn’t want children to have a science centre for the next 50 years. That is what she is saying, because she’s not thinking about the long-term sustainability of that facility.

Mr. Speaker, the evidence was clear yesterday. I was super happy to share it with the public. And I’m sorry, but they have nothing to say.

But let’s talk about the size of the science centre: 18% of the size of the science centre is actually used for exhibits today. The new facility, although smaller in size, more energy-efficient, would actually be more sustainable and will have 10,000 more square feet of exhibition space for the children to enjoy.

Interjections.

The new location at Ontario Place will also be connected by the Ontario Line, which is a brand new subway line that our government is building to provide greater public access to Ontario Place and to make sure that it’s accessible to the public.

Mr. Speaker, we are building a brand new science centre, an innovative place with new and additional exhibition space. We are bringing Ontario Place back to life. We anticipate four to six million visitors a year, and we are all excited for the site-servicing work to start. We will continue working in a collaborative way with the city of Toronto.

Thank you very much to the member for the question. We made a commitment. We’ve been fully transparent with the public that we will be building a brand new science centre with additional, more exhibition space at Ontario Place. The former science centre lands are an opportunity for the province to continue discussions with the city of Toronto. There are opportunities for community amenities and for housing and we will have those discussions with the city of Toronto. But, Mr. Speaker, we are bringing Ontario Place back to life with a brand new science centre with more exhibition space.