Report continued from volume A.

1800

Private Members’ Public Business

Supporting Mobility, Affordability and Reliable Transportation in Ontario Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour une mobilité accrue, des prix plus abordables et des transports plus fiables en Ontario

MPP Hazell moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 70, An Act to amend the Metrolinx Act, 2006 and the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act with respect to transportation / Projet de loi 70, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2006 sur Metrolinx et la Loi sur l’aménagement des voies publiques et des transports en commun en ce qui concerne les transports.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for their presentation.

MPP Andrea Hazell: Madam Speaker, I rise today to debate my third piece of legislation in this House. This bill has three smart components, three smart ideas that address promoting active transportation, the construction of affordable housing near public transit and improving safety standards on dangerous northern highways. So this is like an omnibus bill, but the only thing with that: Unlike the government, this is very positive. Everything in this bill is positive and clean.

I want to start with the Bike Share program. Over the last few years, the Bike Share system has become a critical, high-growth component of our regional mobility. In 2024, Toronto saw over 6.9 million Bike Share riders and has grown to over eight million projected riders this year. That is a massive demand signal that we cannot ignore.

The people of Ontario have chosen active transportation, and Metrolinx needs to support them. Cycling is the healthiest form of transportation in Ontario. It provides daily exercise—exercise many Ontarians struggle to find time for. It runs with zero emissions, reducing reliance on gasoline and diesel vehicles, and can help us meet our climate goals right here in the GTHA.

Madam Speaker, cycling can often be faster than public transit, as we know how the gridlock and congestion is in Ontario. This is especially for that critical first and last mile of our journey. We are seeing this reality play out across Ontario every single day as people look for ways to get out of their cars and reduce the congestion and gridlock that is affecting us mentally.

In 2023, I rose in this House, and I raised the issue of commuters who want to take their cars off the road and to use the Bike Share program. And in 2025, nothing has changed, Madam Speaker. Take, for example, a Hamilton commuter travelling to downtown Toronto: They could take the West Harbour GO train to Union Station, then transfer to the TTC subway to reach their office. With current fare integration, that trip costs about $11.44. But if they want the healthier alternative option, using Bike Share to connect to the GO system, they face three separate fees for a single trip. The total cost will be about $20.54; that’s a $9.10 increase in cost for choosing a sustainable, active and convenient option. Right now, our system actively discourages people from leaving their cars at home and penalizes anyone trying to make a greener choice.

Madam Speaker, Bike Share and public transit operate like two completely separate worlds. For commuters, this disconnect means their trip becomes more expensive. This has now become an equity issue. The people who rely most on transit are the ones paying the highest price for a system that refuses to work together—what should be an easy, sustainable first or last-mile option—and this is why we need the Bike Share program to work as an integrated system.

For example, if you’re coming from Hamilton and you’re at the Union Station, you could actually get your bike and get to work and then take that bike back and get back to Union Station. Now, if you leave your car at the first mile, you’re going to have to take a cab to get to your work.

So we’re not moving forward with transportation connectivity and integration; we’re actually moving backwards. We’re not supporting the commuters of Ontario and giving them different alternative options than getting into a car.

Madam Speaker, supporting section 1 of the SMART Ontario Act is not just supporting bikes; it’s supporting seamless, affordable, healthy and reliable transportation for all commuters in Ontario and the eight million Bike Share riders in 2025. It’s common sense; it’s about making the first/last-mile journey from door to destination easier.

The second part of the SMART Ontario Act also amends Metrolinx Act to require 20% affordable housing whenever Metrolinx sells land to residential property developers. Madam Speaker, did you know Metrolinx is the largest landowner in all of Ontario and it currently has multiple properties up for sale? What do you think happened to those properties that are up for sale? For example, Metrolinx has sold land in Scarborough, Danforth, downtown on Bathurst, along the Davenport corridor, at Oriole and even around Oakville GO. And at none of these sites did Metrolinx require a single affordable unit. This isn’t an isolated oversight; it’s a long-standing pattern of selling public land with no public benefit. This is prime real estate to redevelop for transit-oriented living, and we need to see more proactivity from Metrolinx and its government to ensure that the redevelopment includes an affordability component.

I have seen the impact that this housing and affordability crisis has on the people of Ontario and especially in my riding of Scarborough–Guildwood. We are in a generational housing crisis, and when we sell government land off for housing, we should be ensuring that there is an affordable component.

Madam Speaker, there is no rent control in Ontario, and I know this is not new news for you. Young people can’t afford to buy a home; owning a home is out of reach for young families. Students are graduating and still living with their parents, because rent is too high. In Ontario, nearly 40% of renters—listen to this—spend 31% to 50% of their income on rent, and in Toronto, the average one-bedroom costs $2,300 a month, forcing many to cut back on food and essentials just to make ends meet. This is exactly why this second section of my SMART Ontario bill must be approved. By voting for the SMART Ontario Act, this government can ease the burden of the housing crisis Ontarians are facing so that young families can afford their first home and achieve the dream of home ownership in this tough and unbearable Ontario that we’re living in today.

When the government sells off land without an affordability component, it is a major missed opportunity to make meaningful progress on housing affordability.

Madam Speaker, the Housing Affordability Task Force that this government has shelved—I don’t think they even know where to find it. The government has refused to implement the vast majority of its recommendations. By voting for the SMART Ontario Act, this government can finally show respect to the families that want to get into the housing market, but most importantly, the affordable housing market. Let’s change that today.

The last part of the SMART Ontario Act amends the Public Transit and Highway Improvement Act to finally address the dangerous conditions on Highways 11, 17 and 69. These highways remain underdeveloped two-lane routes used daily by thousands of northerners. Closures happen constantly due to collisions, winter storms and poor maintenance, and many stretches still have no cell service.

Highway 11 alone carries more than 2,000 transport trucks a day on only two lanes, forcing drivers to travel dangerously close to heavy trucks in harsh weather, with no safe passing options. Winter has barely begun, and we have already seen a series of fatal crashes. Just three days ago, on November 29, a pedestrian was struck and killed near Longlac on Highway 11, leading to a seven-hour closure. That same day, a collision on Highway 17 between North Bay and Sturgeon Falls shut down a six-kilometre stretch. On November 15, a multi-vehicle crash involving transport trucks closed Highway 11 between Highways 65 and 64 for several hours. These fatal accidents keep happening because the infrastructure is not keeping people safe.

1810

Madam Speaker, I have seen these conditions first-hand. I travelled up north a couple of months ago, and I drove on Highway 17. Within seven minutes, I passed 12 trucks that were going above the speed limit. I felt and understood why locals have been pleading for action, including my northern colleagues across from me. My heart was racing the entire drive. It is unacceptable that northerners face such dangerous conditions every single day while this government refuses to respond with urgency. Human life is priceless, and yet northern safety continues to be neglected.

This bill, if passed, will strengthen the winter maintenance standards by requiring snow removal within four hours after a snowfall and ice clearance within three hours instead of the current 12-hour window. Highways 11, 17 and 69 must be maintained at the same standard as the 400 series. Why is it different from the 400 series?

Madam Speaker, Ontario doesn’t need more promises; it needs action. Our job as legislators isn’t just to imagine a better future; it’s to build it. The SMART Ontario Act does exactly that. These proposals are not complicated. Actually, it’s smart, and it’s the right thing to implement. It’s not even controversial, but I know this government’s job is to vote down all of our bills on this side of the House or even use some of those ideas later on and get them approved themselves. I want you to marinate that for a second.

We on this side of the House come into this House, we do our research, we work hard, and we put our bills together so that we can see change for the people of Ontario and especially our ridings, but I know it’s the duty and the job of this government side to vote it down. So while I know this bill is going to be voted down today, it will never defeat me. I will never be discouraged, because I will continue to fight for every—every—person in Ontario, and especially the people of Scarborough–Guildwood who elected me.

I’m going to say this again: In my SMART bill, these are practical, common-sense amendments that will make life safer and more affordable for people across this province.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

Mr. Ric Bresee: I rise today to speak on Bill 70, the Supporting Mobility, Affordability and Reliable Transportation in Ontario Act.

Under the leadership of Premier Ford, we are focused on protecting Ontario, and to protect Ontario you need a strong transportation network. That’s why we’re investing $100 billion—billion with a B—to build highways and public transit all across this province. That $100 billion is to build new highways, like the 401 widening in eastern Ontario in my area, like the twinning of Highways 11 and 17 in the north. These are projects that, honestly, the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens all voted against. They voted against twinning Highways 11 and 17 from Thunder Bay to Nipigon. They voted against our investments to improve highway maintenance so that we can clear our roads even faster after a storm.

The former Liberal leader, Bonnie Crombie, even once questioned if we should be building new roads at all. Speaker, I’m not surprised that, in the last election, the Liberals lost every single seat in the north.

The record of the former Liberal government speaks for itself. They were in government for 15 years, and, really, they did nothing. They spent billions and they talked about projects, but they didn’t build anything. For one example, Speaker, the previous Liberal government promised to twin the Trans-Canada Highway from Kenora to the Manitoba border, but they got none of that done. Under Premier Ford, we finished phase 1 of that project in 2024. Speaker, we have the environmental assessment and the design work for stage 2 already under way because, unlike the Liberals, we are delivering on the promises we made to the people of Ontario.

The Liberals claim this bill will improve transportation, yet their legislation leaves major gaps unaddressed. Unfortunately, this is just like their record in government—all talk, no action. For example, when it comes to snow clearing: Under the Liberals, the northern snow clearing standard to bare pavement was 16 hours after a winter storm. Speaker, after we got elected, that standard is now four hours faster than the 16; that’s the highest standard in Canada. During the winter of 2023-24, we met that standard 98% of the time.

With over 1,400 pieces of winter maintenance equipment ready to be deployed to keep our highways clear, at the start of a winter storm maintenance crews deploy their equipment within 30 minutes to plow, to salt and to sand the highways. They are active 24/7 to clear those highways.

Speaker, as more winter weather comes, I want to take a moment to recognize the men and women who are up day and night, out in the severe storms, working to make sure that our roads and highways are safe. Those are true heroes.

However, despite the best efforts of maintenance crews, a severe storm may cause delays in clearing the highway. Ontarians that live in rural and northern communities, like my own, know that well. That’s why, Speaker, this government continues to invest in road safety. We’ve invested over $100 million in winter maintenance each year. The NDP, the Greens and the Liberals keep on voting against it; they voted against our last budget.

Just like for the 15 years they were in government, this bill is nothing more than empty promises from the Liberals. In fact, they voted against our plan to build North America’s first two-plus-one highway. That record speaks for itself, and just like that record, Bill 70 lacks a serious plan to deliver real improvements to our transportation network.

If the Liberals were serious, they wouldn’t have voted against all of our work. They wouldn’t have voted against our budget. They wouldn’t have voted against the largest highway and transit investments in Ontario’s history.

This government is getting it done. It’s getting it done for transit, it’s getting it done for our highways and getting it done for both northern Ontario and all of us across southern Ontario. Speaker, we will continue to get it done.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I’d like to thank the member from Scarborough–Guildwood for bringing this bill forward and for your presentation.

So I learned some things today that I didn’t know. I ride my bike here, so I don’t actually use Bike Share; I’ve never used it. I was quite surprised to hear that there are eight million—is that what you said?

MPP Andrea Hazell: Yes.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Eight million bikes in the Bike Share program—that is incredible. So I think having that connectivity with the rest of the transit system, obviously, would be a very good idea. Thank you for giving me a little more knowledge about that.

I also want to correct the record here, so I’m going to say something very nice about the Liberals. My predecessor, Michael Gravelle, was here for a very long time. He actually is given a lot of credit for twinning those highways, because it started long before this government came to office. In fact, it even predates Michael. At this moment, I’m going to say thank you, Michael Gravelle, for the work that you did because this is non-partisan work. This is work for all of us who use these roads every day.

Now I am also going to say something that’s not friendly towards the Liberals, in that it was the Liberal government that privatized road clearing, and that has been a problem.

I have a letter from a constituent: “Highway safety near Marathon, barely plowed, like I went through a different country. Before Terrace Bay, the roads are perfect. Just after Terrace Bay, because it’s a different contractor, now it’s just one lane, transports into the oncoming lane, going around corners because there’s so much snow.”

One of the things that we wanted to accomplish with our highway safety bill was to bring snow clearing back under the control of the Ministry of Transportation so that it’s not a hodgepodge of different contractors. Often those situations mean that you’re trying to get the cheapest for the money, and that’s not okay when you’re dealing with highway safety. We want a good standard for those people who drive the snowplows, so that they have real contracts, that we can count on them and that the clearing is consistent.

1820

I also appreciate that the member is giving thought to 11, 17 and 69. And yes, they are underdeveloped highways. We know that a very, very long stretch of Highway 11 has no passing lanes whatsoever, and it has soft shoulders, half-shoulders. There’s nowhere for trucks to pull off and rest.

Unfortunately, as the member stated, there was a very sad death that took place between the town of Longlac and the First Nation of Long Lake 58. I know that stretch very well. There’s nowhere to walk, except on the side of the highway. You think about those half-shoulders on the highway, and people walk that distance back and forth all the time, particularly going from Long Lake 58 into the town of Longlac. Any time I’ve driven through there, my heart is like—this—because I think there are pedestrians right beside me on the Trans-Canada Highway. It’s extremely dangerous, and somebody lost their life there this week. So I hope that—again, we need to be looking at the infrastructure of those highways, the infrastructure of Highway 11. And certainly, we need to create a walkway for the people who live in Long Lake 58.

I don’t want to take too much time away from my colleague here.

The member talked about having affordable units in apartments and probably near transit hubs. I think that’s excellent. What I’d actually like to see added to that are accessible units. I would like to see every new build building accessible units. It’s not going to cost that much more—36-inch-wide doors; bathrooms with grab bars. We could do it. And there is such a shortage of accessible housing for people with various kinds of disabilities. Let’s do that, and let’s make those units affordable as well.

We do have to define what affordable means. That piece is missing from this bill, but if this bill were to get to committee, that’s the kind of thing that we could talk about.

I’ll just close with this article from SooToday, which says, “Ontario is the Weakest Link in the Trans-Canada Highway….” This is coming from the Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities, which is the eastern Ontario group of mayors, and NOMA, the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association, who are really trying to get Ontario and Canada to take the Trans-Canada Highway seriously.

Ontario is the only province that is not four-laned. Geographically, there are problems with four-laning in some places, but we could do two-plus-one. We need to commit to it. We have not ever voted against that. We may vote against bills that have poison pills in them. But in terms of supporting the development of those highways, we completely support that.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: It’s a pleasure to rise in the House to support my powerful colleague, with her passionate speech and her incredibly smart SMART private member’s bill. I love the name. It actually is very smart, very logical, and would go a long way to address a better quality of life for Ontarians.

Of course, I will start with the mobility portion of it, as a cyclist. I never shy away from speaking about that great mode of transportation, two wheels. And yes, I think it was mentioned that it’s the healthiest form of transportation in the world, basically. But it’s also the most affordable mode of transportation, and in an affordability crisis, we want to ensure people can get to and from their destinations. Of course, we want to do that safely, so we need to invest in the proper, safe, actually physically separated lanes.

It was mentioned about Bike Share, and that is a common complaint you hear from people. They’re trying to do the right thing from an environmental point of view, from a sustainability point of view, to mitigate congestion in Toronto and do their part by taking transit, but yet they don’t want to drive to the station. So the last mile and first mile are very important to get right with cycling infrastructure, especially Bike Share.

I ride my own bike, which I love. I do love my bicycle more than my kids; actually, they know that. It’s a beautiful powder-blue bike. But I also take Bike Share, and we know that if you build it, if you install it, they will come. There were 6.9 million Bike Share riders in 2024, which has grown to eight million projected riders this year and is growing still to 12 million to 16 million by 2030. Some 37,800 bike rides in one single day broke the record, June 7, 2024—almost 40,000 Bike Share rides in one single day. Look at that: 625 stations, 7,165 bikes and 525 pedal-assists—with which you still have to exert yourself, but I will say I don’t find it cheating to take a pedal-assist. I love taking the pedal-assist, if they’re available.

It’s not only affordable and healthy; it is also a joyful commute. If car drivers are watching out for you, and you’re in safe infrastructure, it is absolutely joyful to be riding your bike around and riding to the transit station. I am like Mary Poppins on my bike, smiling and greeting people, as well as paying attention to the road in front of me. We also know the environmental benefits of zero emissions. It’s just so great to have that.

I thank the member for putting this in. It’s a godsend, honestly. There are GO stations in Ontario where it’s tricky to get to by bike, actually, so we need to deal with that. If you’re crossing a highway, you’re not doing that on a Bike Share, so we need to figure that out. But it is fantastic, and it should be easy and convenient for people. They don’t want to be tapping a million different ways and paying more money. Over $20.54 for a single trip when you’re trying to do the right thing is absolute insanity, so let’s figure that out. Make it convenient, cheap, affordable and easy for people.

The other thing I will talk about quickly is your housing component of this bill. Metrolinx is a crown agency, and so we want if we want to build those homes and build sustainable and affordable homes, we should be directing Metrolinx, or they should get on the ball with the state of the world right now and be putting in affordable units.

I have the infamous case of Metrolinx’s antics in my riding: 8 Dawes Road. Do you remember that? The new developer is installing 56 storeys. Metrolinx sold it to the developer without any requirement to put in affordable housing. It is around Main Station, which is the biggest mobility hub in Toronto outside of Union Station. There is the Danforth GO, there are streetcars, there are buses and there are subways.

I lived in Japan 36 years ago, if you can believe it, and they build housing the right way around mobility hubs. That’s where you want people to live—the 15-minute-city lifestyle. Why are we not putting in affordable housing? Metrolinx is not doing that, and this government not directing them to do it, is a fail.

This bill is a pass. It’s a smart PMB, and I’m happy to support it.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

1830

Mrs. Michelle Cooper: I want to thank my colleague MPP Bresee for reminding this House about the disastrous record of the previous Liberal government. Just like their time in office, the bill lacks any serious plan to improve our transportation network.

Speaker, Bill 70 does nothing to build more public transit across the province. It’s a poorly written bill full of empty promises and no plan, just like when the Liberals were in office: promise to build but do nothing.

Bill 70 doesn’t provide any meaningful long-term commitments to transit expansion or modernization. But instead of a long-term plan, Bill 70 creates uncertainty, which will only lead to delays in new housing and transit projects.

The Liberals love red tape, and that’s why they introduced a bill that adds new administrative burdens.

If the opposition was truly serious about improving transit, we would not be debating this bill today. Instead, they would have voted in favour of the largest public transit expansion in Ontario’s history. Actions speak louder than words. So on the one vote that mattered, they voted against investing $70 billion in public transit.

They were in office for 15 years, and what was their record? They sat by as our population grew. Did they open a new subway, Speaker? No. Did they build transit-oriented communities, Speaker? Again, the answer is no.

And for the transit projects they built, they left projects like the Eglinton Crosstown stuck with years of construction delays. As MPP for Eglinton–Lawrence and a long-time resident in my community, I saw first-hand the impact that the Crosstown had. The Liberals signed a bad construction contract that hurt hundreds of businesses and residents along Eglinton.

We have had to clean up the mess they left in this province. That’s why we got the Finch West LRT over the finish line. Opening December 7, the Finch West LRT had years of delays because of the incompetence of the former Liberal government. And like the Finch West LRT, it is our PC government who got the Eglinton Crosstown over the finish line.

Just yesterday, Metrolinx completed revenue service demonstration, the final stage before opening. Speaker, I can tell you that my community is not only excited, but they are ready for the transit relief the Crosstown will bring.

The Liberals left people on crowded buses that were sitting in gridlock. Under Premier Ford, we delivered the projects they failed to finish, and we are doing this while building historic projects like the Ontario Line and the Scarborough subway. Again, these are projects the Liberals, NDPs and Greens all voted against.

To give members of this House another example of the hypocrisy of the Liberals, they are calling on the government to expand transit and fare integration. But Speaker, when they had the chance to support our One Fare program, which removed double fares between GO and local transit, they voted against it. They voted against saving transit riders up to $1,600 each year. And when they were in office, they had no progress on fare integration. They had 15 years but did nothing.

Speaker, Bill 70 is just a political distraction from the Liberals. This legislation is meaningless, and it does not include a realistic plan to improve affordability or build more transit. Instead, the Liberals are focused on bike sharing and empty promises.

It’s clear the Liberals are not serious. As a new MPP, I see it every day in this House. And Ontarians see this as well, Speaker.

The Liberals and the NDP continue to support policies that will only make gridlock worse. We saw the impact on Eglinton Avenue when the Liberals reduced car lanes during the Crosstown construction. Losing a vehicle lane hurt small businesses and families in my community.

Speaker, just imagine how bad gridlock would be if NDP and Liberal politicians put bike lanes along Eglinton. It would be a nightmare for residents, business owners and thousands of commuters that exit the Allen expressway onto Eglinton.

Gridlock already costs our province over $56 billion each year, and the Liberals want to make gridlock even worse. I guess that’s why, for the third election in a row, the people of Ontario rejected empty Liberal promises and voted for our plan to protect Ontario, to build more transit, highways and housing across the province. And we cleaned up the Liberal mess on the Finch West LRT and the Eglinton Crosstown.

We are the only party that has a serious plan to build Ontario and protect our economy. Unlike the Liberals, we have a serious plan to build, and we are delivering. We have shovels in the ground in all sections of the Ontario Line. We completed the Gardiner Expressway construction a year and a half earlier than scheduled.

We are the only party that has a serious plan. We are the only party building Ontario. Our plan is working.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

M^me France Gélinas: Ça me fait plaisir d’ajouter quelques mots au sujet du projet de loi 70 de ma collègue de Scarborough–Guildwood qui contient pas mal de choses dans très peu de temps, mais qui a vraiment fait un bon travail pour démontrer qu’elle est ici pour ses « constituants » et elle est ici pour aider les gens de Scarborough–Guildwood.

Je dirais que je vais commencer avec les vélos—the bike share. As you know, Speaker, I live in northern Ontario. I had seen Bike Share before, but really, I never had a chance to try them until I started working in Toronto, coming to the Legislative Assembly, and what a game-changer.

During the summer, as soon as it’s nice out, you’re able to go long, long distances on a bike in Toronto. I really like this, and I do think that it is a good idea to make sure that there is good coordination between public transit when it comes from different municipalities where people live.

I live at Bay and Bloor. I can go in the basement of my apartment building and connect to the subway. All of this makes sense. Although I drive to Toronto often, I never use my car once I get to Toronto. It is parked out there, and I use public transit, I use Bike Share and I walk. That makes so much sense. Let’s do anything we can to make this even easier.

The member also talked about things that are really close to the people that I represent: Highway 17, Highway 11, Highway 69. I will start with Highway 69. This is a highway that I drive—I shouldn’t say that I drive because I drive with the member from Sudbury. So he drives, and I drive him sometimes not so happy. But sometimes I have to drive by myself.

So on Sunday, we came down. It was a mega snowstorm in Nickel Belt and Sudbury. We drove through the snowstorm. The snowstorm turned into a wind blow. The wind was so, so strong, we could barely see where we were going. And just as we got to the two-lane part of Highway 69—so I will bring you back to when we had a Liberal government that made a promise that Highway 69 would have four lanes all the way from Toronto to Sudbury by—the first time it was by 2003; then, they promised, by 2007; then, they promised, by 2013; then, they promised, by 2020. Then the Conservatives came in in 2018 and promised that Highway 69 would be four-laned.

1840

Speaker, nothing has happened. There are 68 kilometres of Highway 69 that are a two-lane highway. Usually, you follow at least 12 big trucks and there are at least 12 big trucks behind you. There are way more trucks than there are cars on that highway. You’re on a two-lane highway. Part of it has no shoulders; a long stretch of it has no passing lanes. And we had blowing snow, so there’s all sorts of stuff that comes off of the back of the truck that you’re following. You can’t see anything.

But then by the time we got to about Parry Sound, it was not snowing anymore; it was freezing rain. And not only was it freezing rain, but it was freezing rain with horrific wind that moved the car all over the place.

I’m telling you this because the member, in her private member’s bill, talks about changing the winter road maintenance, which is something that we have tried really, really hard to do. There has been a small improvement in winter road maintenance, but at the core of it all is the privatization of winter road maintenance. Not only is winter road maintenance privatized in Ontario, but the supervision of the winter road maintenance is also privatized. No thank you to the Liberals, because they are the ones who brought us that. No thank you to the Conservatives, because they are the ones who keep that.

When a contractor does a bad job, I can tell you where a contractor ends and where the other one starts. There are contractors that do a half decent job; there are some that are really, really there to make money. Every reason is a good reason to not go out and plow. And it always ends up the same way: There’s a car accident—hopefully nobody dies—the highway closes and you don’t know when you’re going to be able to go again.

All of this should not be happening. Start by bringing the supervision of the contractors under the ministry so that if the ministry says, “There are three centimetres of snow; you have to go out and plow,” they would at least have impetus to go out and plow. To make it four hours, I would say, would be a dream come true. But, you know, I’m a dreamer.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

Mr. Adil Shamji: It gives me great pleasure to rise to discuss the legislation before us introduced by my colleague. It is a bill so smart, it is matched frankly only by the brilliance of the member who introduced it. She spoke passionately and eloquently, and I’m proud to be able to elaborate a little bit more.

I’m going to concentrate my remarks on three of the features of this legislation. The first, which relates to making Bike Share services more accessible to Ontarians—I won’t speak about that too much, because it’s hard to speak about that more passionately than my colleague the member for Beaches–East York.

The second part that I wish to address relates to this bill’s efforts to increase access to affordable housing.

And then the final component of this legislation that I intend to briefly address is its efforts to stand up for the people of the north and to make sure that they get the same access to safe driving conditions on their highways that we hope and aspire to be able to enjoy here in Toronto and in other urban centres.

Let’s talk about the housing element of this bill. Bill 70 seeks to ensure that for any sale of property by Metrolinx that is intended to be used for building residential units, a requirement is instituted that 20% of the units that are ultimately built be designated as affordable.

Let’s talk for a moment about why that’s so important. If we look at this government’s housing record, we find over the last few years we’ve had three housing ministers; over 10 pieces of housing legislation, each one usually reversing something that was in the last one; an innumerable number of announcements, typically of novelty cheques for small amounts of money that allow for an announcement that doesn’t actually lead to any tangible outcomes for the community.

Mr. Stephen Blais: Don’t forget the scandals.

Mr. Adil Shamji: And then, of course, there are the scandals, such as what we’re watching unfold in literal real time with the Skills Development Fund.

You would think, against the backdrop of the announcements, the legislation, the succession of ministers, that there would be a record that this government could be proud of. But there isn’t. Instead, all we face is the worst housing performance in our province’s history.

CMHC data tells us that we’re building fewer homes this year than last, the only province in Canada building fewer homes this year than last—a double-digit decline for last year. And just yesterday, a very sobering report from the Missing Middle Initiative was saying that even though we already knew that housing starts had stalled, now too have housing sales. Pre-construction condo sales are down by 89%; ground-oriented pre-sales are down 65%—all sending the sobering and damning message that if you think that this year is bad, next year is going to be a lot worse.

Enter my brilliant colleague the member for Scarborough–Guildwood. She said, “Instead of talking about building housing, let’s actually”—to borrow a phrase that may be familiar to some members in this House—“get it done.”

What she seeks to do is, any time property sold by Metrolinx that is intended for building residential units, 20% of those units must be designated to be affordable. Because, in fact, when you’ve got property in the vicinity of a transit station, which is typically the kind of land that Metrolinx owns, those are exactly the kind of properties that people in affordable units could benefit the most from. And so, it seeks to match demand with supply and to ensure fairness and justice and appropriateness in our housing sector. I cannot encourage strongly enough this government to adopt this policy.

We have put forward many other policies. We’ve said:

—rebate the HST on primary residences for all homebuyers, not just first-time homebuyers;

—support municipalities for the infrastructure that they need so that they don’t have to charge development charges; and

—eliminate the land transfer tax for first-time homebuyers, not-for-profits and for seniors.

I admit I can kind of understand why this government is a little bit reluctant to follow through on those, because this government has a massive, massive revenue problem: unprecedented deficits; a half-a-trillion-dollar debt. They don’t know where to find the money because they’re spending it all on getting alcohol into convenience stores for nearly $2 billion and they’re setting money aside, apparently $50 billion to $100 billion, to build a tunnel under the 401. This policy will get people into homes and will do it without you having to spend a single penny.

On the topic of spending $50 billion to $100 billion to build a tunnel under the 401, here’s a solution that can help people in the north get safe access to highways: Just set some basic standards.

The member across was crowing about the fact that snow plowing and ice clearing standards are met 98% of the time. Well, it’s because the standards are too low. It’s like saying you’re a good MPP if you can keep your seat warm. No, your constituents expect more from you.

So, all that to say, this is a great policy that we need to implement, and I encourage the members across to vote for it.

You’ve got five seconds.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): Further debate?

Mr. John Fraser: I want to congratulate the member for Scarborough–Guildwood. We’re very proud of her.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): The member has two minutes to reply.

MPP Andrea Hazell: Madam Speaker, I can’t help to wonder what sections of my SMART Ontario Act touched the government’s nerves that got them to debate so ugly with no respect for us across this floor. I think it is shameful.

All of us in this House have the authority and the privilege to create our bills, to work on our bills, to research our bills. The debate remarks from the government side were meant to deter me. They were meant to make me weak. Nothing like that can make me weak.

1850

I am from Scarborough–Guildwood. We have seen the good, the bad and the ugly, and that’s what gets me here to continue to support the people of Scarborough–Guildwood.

So I will continue to summarize my bill.

Riders must navigate added fees, confusing apps and a lack of integrated fares before they can use the option of the Bike Share program. We want to eliminate that—equity for all of Ontario.

For the people in northern Ontario: We respect them. And all we’re asking is for you to show them some respect and treat them as the same people who drive the 400-series highways every day. If you’re stuck on Highway 400 because of snow, you see so many snowplows. In the north, if that happens, the economy shuts down. We’re talking about three days to get potholes filled and seven days for snow removal.

I am asking for a fairer Ontario. That’s why I came into this chamber.

I’m going to end my summary here, but thank you, Madam Speaker, for giving me this opportunity.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

MPP Hazell has moved second reading of Bill 70, An Act to amend the Metrolinx Act, 2006 and the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act with respect to transportation.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

A recorded vote being required, it will be deferred until the next instance of deferred votes.

Second reading vote deferred.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): All matters relating to private members’ public business having been completed, we now have a late show. Pursuant to standing order 36, the question that this House do now adjourn is deemed to have been made.

Adjournment Debate

Manufacturing jobs

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos): The member for Ottawa South has given notice of dissatisfaction with the answer to a question given by the Minister of Finance. The member has up to five minutes to debate the matter, and a minister or parliamentary assistant may reply for up to five minutes.

Mr. John Fraser: Thank you very much, Speaker, and thank you to everybody at the table and everybody who’s here staying late.

Interjections.

Mr. John Fraser: All you folks are leaving. Thank you very much. Thanks for coming out.

You know, I’ve expressed dissatisfaction with the answer that I got. I think I’m going to feel dissatisfaction in what I hear because I just heard the debate back with this private member’s bill and it’s like somehow this side is bereft of any good ideas.

What we do know is that we have the lowest share of manufacturing jobs in our economy since 1976. I don’t know where some of you were in 1976, or if some of you were in 1976—that’s a long time ago. That’s like 50 years ago, right? Is that right? Almost 50; it’s 49. So I can see a few people over there who were just a sparkle in somebody’s eye. That’s a long, long time. That is a long, long time.

Here are the more recent facts: The government has literally only created about 19,000 manufacturing jobs in seven years—from 810,000 in 2018 to 829,000 now—but I listen to the Minister of Economic Development crow about the record. He says, “We’ve created this many jobs.” What he forgets to say is “net new jobs,” because the number would only be 19,000. That’s the problem.

A thousand people in Sault Ste. Marie found out that they’re going to be on the unemployment line in not so short a period of time. This is happening all over Ontario. The Premier doesn’t have a plan for jobs.

What he does have a plan for, though, is advertising for the Ring of Fire, spending tens of millions of dollars on self-serving partisan ads that don’t help anybody, that don’t protect anybody’s jobs, that don’t get anybody a new job. But what they do is they make sure that the Premier and his party will look good by constantly trying to pump out good information about the Ring of Fire. For God’s sake, the pictures that you see mostly aren’t of the Ring of Fire. They’re made up, for crying out loud.

I guess the most egregious thing, if we are talking about advertising in jobs, is the Premier’s failed $75-million ad—the Reagan ad, the failed Reagan ad, that two-spot ad, the one that he was asked not to do by the Prime Minister: “Stay out of negotiations.” But he wanted to insert himself, he wanted to show the people he was doing something when they said, “Just leave it alone.” But no, no, he wanted to spend that money so we could see that he was doing something, something big.

What happened? Negotiations ended. The next thing the Premier had to say is, “Well, it was such a great ad. We saved so much money. We got all this free advertising.” Nothing was free. The ad wasn’t free. And the reality is, not only are taxpayers paying for that ad with the money that they give to the government, but Ontarians are going to pay with their jobs because of what the Premier did. It was a bad decision. It was a self-serving decision. It didn’t take into consideration what that decision—that the effect would on the employment of thousands and thousands of Ontarians. And a thousand people at Algoma Steel in Sault Ste. Marie—well, they just found that out, and there may be more and more, because the government isn’t actually making a plan for the workers of Ontario, to protect them.

Because if he had a plan, if there was a plan—and it’s not rocket science; anybody could have told the Premier, “You do this ad, here’s what can happen: We can give Donald Trump an excuse, something to point to. We can make him mad.”

The fact of the matter is the Premier is not involved in negotiations. He’s not down there. He doesn’t know what is going on. He inserted himself in something he shouldn’t have, just so he would look good—an exercise in vanity that will cost Ontarians jobs.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the member for Eglinton–Lawrence.

Mrs. Michelle Cooper: Thank you to the member opposite for such theatrics. It keeps me really entertained every time I come here, so thank you. I always enjoy the late nights as well. I’m pleased to respond on behalf of the Minister of Finance.

Today, Ontario finds itself in a very different place than it did back in 2018. Since we were first elected seven years ago, this government and the Premier have turned our province’s course towards one of success, growth and prosperity. Not only have we delivered a growing economy with a GDP of $1.2 trillion, over $350 billion more that was in 2018; we have provided confidence and certainty to markets, investors and job creators at incredible speed, including the manufacturing sector.

Prior to 2018, the previous Liberal government chased away 300,000 manufacturing jobs and wanted to get Ontario out of manufacturing altogether. But unlike the Liberals, our government has worked to secure tens of billion of dollars in new manufacturing investment that has created thousands of good-paying jobs in the sector.

Last month alone, Ontario added 55,000 new jobs, including 4,400 in manufacturing. And over the last four months, we have seen the creation of 24,600 manufacturing jobs.

What’s more is that since we first took office, we have secured over $110 billion in foreign direct investment, including the nearly $40 billion that over 409 international companies invested in 2024 alone. As a matter of fact, I’m pleased to say that just last week, we welcomed a historic $3.2 billion in manufacturing investment from Vianode to manufacture synthetic graphite in St. Thomas, which will create up to 1,000 direct jobs.

Since taking office in 2018, we have helped create around one million additional jobs, putting more men and women to work today than there were in 2018. Even in the midst of unprecedented global economic uncertainty, our government will never turn our backs on the more than 800,000 men and women who work in Ontario’s manufacturing sector and the businesses who employ them. This year alone, our government is enabling $11.7 billion in cost savings for businesses, $5. 6 billion of which would go directly towards helping small businesses. We have never raised a tax on the businesses and people of Ontario, Speaker, and we will keep going.

Our success thus far has come in large part thanks to our prudent handling of the province’s finances. In fact, Ontario closed the fiscal year with a deficit of $1.1 billion and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 36.2%, the lowest in over a decade. We’ve also seen the cost of servicing Ontario’s debt come in at $1.3 billion lower than expected, and the cost of servicing the debt hit a 40-year low at 5.5%, allowing us to invest or to reinvest in the priorities that drive long-term prosperities like infrastructure, tax relief and our workforce.

Whether it’s in our manufacturing sector or any other sector of the economy, our government has a proven track record of generating growth. Simply put, thanks to our plan to protect Ontario, our government is unleashing our economy and making us the most competitive place in the G7 to invest, to create jobs, to do business and to unleash Ontario’s fiscal and economic growth.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): There being no further matters to debate, pursuant to standing order 36(c), I deem the motion to adjourn to be carried.

This House now stands adjourned until 9 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 1903.