Markets 
For the past three years, a senior cabinet minister in the Ford government has been billing provincial taxpayers thousands of dollars for hotel rooms in downtown Toronto, despite living just a few kilometres away from Queen’s Park — public money that he’s now promising to partly pay back.
Between 2023 and 2026, Tourism Culture and Gaming Minister Stan Cho charged the Ontario Legislative Assembly $16,203 for “Toronto accommodation,” according to publicly available disclosure records.
While that accommodation is only available to Toronto-based MPPs for “special or unusual circumstances,” such as a snow storm, Cho repeatedly requested repayment for multiple hotel rooms during that time period.
In one year, Cho’s Toronto hotel room expenses left taxpayers with an $11,000 tab.
Those expenses have raised questions and drawn criticism from opposition parties who point out that Minister Cho lives just six kilometers away from the Ontario legislature and is entitled to a taxpayer-funded vehicle and driver.
“Ministers are being held to a different standard under Doug Ford’s government,” NDP Leader Marit Stiles told Global News. “I think it’s like a party with the taxpayer dime.”
The details about Cho’s hotel expenses, including which hotels were booked, dates or length of stay and reasons for the accommodation requirement were not included in the public filings.
Global News asked the minister’s office for detailed information on the hotel accommodation, but didn’t receive specifics.
Get daily National news
Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.
Hours later, however, Cho’s office responded with a pledge that the minister would personally pay back an undetermined amount.
“While these expenses meet the criteria for special circumstances as set out by the Legislative Guide for Member’s expenses, I will be personally reimbursing the legislature for any expense that does not meet the spirit of the policy,” Minister Cho said in a statement.
Global News has asked the minister’s office to clarify the “the spirit of the policy” and how much money would be paid back.
Between 2018, when Cho first won the Toronto-area riding of Willowdale , and 2022, the minister didn’t require the benefit and didn’t submit any expenses for overnight hotel stays in the city.
That trend began to change in 2023 before dramatically increasing over the past year:
- 2023-24: $1,431 in Toronto accommodation
- 2024-25: $3,081 in Toronto accommodation
- 2025-26: $11,691 in Toronto accommodation
Under expense rules in Ontario, MPPs who live more than 50 kilometers away from Queen’s Park are allowed to bill taxpayers for a residence in or around Toronto, allowing them to be closer to the legislature, where the bulk of a politician’s work is conducted.
MPPs who live within that 50 kilometer boundary, however, are only allowed to claim accommodation costs for “special or unusual circumstances,” according to the legislature expense guidelines, and only “on an overnight basis.”
Critics, though, are asking why Cho needed to stay in a hotel at all.
While his riding is roughly a 30 minute drive away from the Ontario legislature, publicly accessible property records show Cho’s primary residence is exactly 5.9 km — or seven subway stops — away from Queen’s Park.
As a cabinet minister, Cho also has access to a government-assigned vehicle, which is generally driven by a member of staff.
“It’s outrageous,” Stiles said. “You can get from Willowdale to Queens Park without even changing the subway train, so I don’t see any reason why a minister would have to have a hotel downtown as many times as Minister Cho has had.”
Cho’s hotel expenses come in the wake of Premier Doug Ford’s controversial decision to purchase a $28.9 million private jet for his government-related travel.
Although Ford later sold the plane to Bombardier after a wave of public backlash, critics said the Progressive Conservative Party had strayed away from its ‘respect for taxpayer’ roots.
Global News asked the Premier’s office whether Cho’s hotel expenses are “reasonable and justifiable to taxpayers” but did not receive a response.
Read the full article here
