I thank the members very much for their remarks. Both of them touched on the practical elements of this bill. In fact, I’m also glad that the member from Niagara West touched on the acreage issue because this is one where numbers are thrown out. I think that they’re—yes, let’s get some updated numbers. I thank the member for doing that.

I also appreciate the member’s perspective on the length of time it has taken housing to be developed in our province. I can only imagine how young this young member would have been when some of these projects first started, but I think it’s all the more relevant for, as he noted, the young folks in the gallery. This bill is intended to support young homeowners—again, unlike myself. But I want to understand the member’s perspective and what the key drivers are to enhancing home building that are contained in this bill.

I thank the speaker for her remarks—very comprehensive, and she covered many issues in her remarks today, which is a lot like the housing market itself: It’s complex. There are many elements to it and it’s not straightforward. That’s why we’re bringing forth this bill—in fact, our 13th red tape bill, which is quite extraordinary in and of itself. There’s got to be some record there. Red tape bills are not glamorous—as I said earlier, much like myself.

But I heard her say many times that there are a number of areas in this bill that she would support, and I appreciated that. Reflecting on the complexity of the subject and the measures required, would these positive elements of the bill allow you to support the legislation?

I really appreciate the representatives from the government talking about the red tape reduction bill. It’s quite extraordinary: Since our government came to power in 2018, this is, as I understand, the 13th red tape reduction package. It’s really an amazing achievement.

This stuff is, perhaps like me, not very glamorous—

Interjections.

Maybe I could ask either the associate minister or the parliamentary assistant just to summarize the impact that this particular bill will have on getting housing built and our targets. Whether it’s in infrastructure or otherwise, it’s just very, very helpful to get a sense of how it will impact our housing goals.

I thank the member for his remarks. I wanted to focus a little bit on transit and its relationship to housing and housing intensification, as the member noted, and come back to the broad commitment this government has to transit: $70 billion over 10 years, biggest in the history of the province—massive. Certainly, I would think that that does two things that the leader of the Green Party, the member, may be interested in. Number one, it helps the environment—it gets people out of cars, which is good—but secondly, the intensification that’s going on in terms of housing around that transit, the transit-oriented communities initiative that has been going on for quite some time.

Doesn’t the member think that those initiatives are worthwhile and can be supported with this bill?

I thank the speaker for his remarks on this bill. He covered a lot of topics, but there are two words that I heard and I want to draw out some thoughts, if I can. One is “infrastructure,” the second is “intensification.” These words are related. I noted the speaker’s comments about, in the city of Ottawa, the need for water and waste water infrastructure to get housing built. While not in this bill, in the budget bill, there is $1.8 billion to support that effort, a really fundamental, massive injection of capital available to municipalities, small and large, to get that infrastructure built.

I guess my question is, doesn’t the member see the measures in this bill consistent with that broad effort to get housing built in the municipal boundaries to intensify housing?

I thank all the speakers for their comments on the red tape reduction bill and the housing-related—it’s very, very exciting legislation, and I like the way the associate minister phrased the budget as the “infrastructure budget.”

My question, because I think this is such an important part of the program: The $1.8 billion that we propose, if the bill is passed, to have implemented—I was in the infrastructure world; I know how important it is to get these important assets financed. The great thing about water and waste water infrastructure is that there are revenue streams attached.

Municipalities have borrowing limits that are very restrictive. So I wonder if we could further hear from the associate minister on the impact this huge new program will have on getting those projects started that otherwise would not be started, and the impact it will have on the housing market.