role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">

March 12, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-Mar-12 vol. Array (PDF)

L156 - Thu 12 Mar 2020 / Jeu 12 mar 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 12 March 2020 Jeudi 12 mars 2020

Orders of the Day

Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant à rétablir la confiance chez les consommateurs

Members’ Statements

COVID-19

Baku massacre

Indigenous public health

Seniors

COVID-19

Debate tournament

Employment standards

Hospital funding

Flooding

Introduction of Visitors

Question Period

COVID-19

Employment standards

Health care

Ontario Provincial Police

COVID-19

COVID-19

Skills training

Licence plates

Employment standards

Anti-bullying initiatives

Winter highway maintenance

Natural gas

Flooding

Northern highway improvement

Human trafficking

Legislative pages

Private members’ public business

Notice of dissatisfaction

Deferred Votes

Supply Act, 2020 / Loi de crédits de 2020

Supply Act, 2020 / Loi de crédits de 2020

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Bills

Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant la protection des locataires et le renforcement du logement communautaire

Vision Zero Strategy Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Stratégie Vision Zéro

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Affordable housing / Logements abordables

Petitions

Public transit

Agri-food industry

Veterans memorial

Veterans memorial

Education funding

Ontario economy

Long-term care

Services for persons with disabilities

Education funding

Home care

Private Members’ Public Business

Sikh Genocide Awareness Week Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Semaine de la sensibilisation au génocide des sikhs

Franco-Ontarian Emblem Amendment Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 modifiant la

Loi sur l’emblème franco-ontarien

Ditch the Switch Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 pour remettre les pendules à l’heure

Sikh Genocide Awareness Week Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Semaine de la sensibilisation au génocide des sikhs

Franco-Ontarian Emblem Amendment Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 modifiant la

Loi sur l’emblème franco-ontarien

Ditch the Switch Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 pour remettre les pendules à l’heure

House sittings

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Good morning. Let us pray.

Prayers/Prières.

Orders of the Day

Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant à rétablir la confiance chez les consommateurs

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 11, 2020, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 159,

An Act to amend various statutes in respect of consumer protection / Projet de loi 159, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne la protection du consommateur.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate? The member for Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Thank you very much. It’s an interesting start to the morning, Mr. Speaker. I’m talking on Bill 159, and I’m going to be talking for about 20 minutes. For those who don’t know, I was the critic that actually took on Tarion, going back a few years ago. But we want to start by saying, and we can all agree to this—we don’t agree to a lot of things on both sides of the House, but I think we can agree to this—that buying a home is our biggest investment, and when you save to buy your home, you expect the home builder to make sure that it’s built correctly.

I want, off the hop, to say there are a lot of great home builders in the province of Ontario. Unfortunately, in the province of Ontario, there are some that aren’t so great, and they’re the ones that we’re talking about in this bill. When you buy your home, and you end up with mould, you end up with rats in your home, you end up with all kinds of issues around that particular home, what you shouldn’t have to do is fight Tarion to protect you, because that’s what they’re there for. And they haven’t done that for years, and we know that. This is strictly about protecting home builders.

Think about this, Mr. Speaker—because I know you’re not here that long; you have somebody replace you in the mornings for a while. The developer who built the home is regulating himself, and what Tarion is doing is supporting the builder instead of what they’re supposed to be mandated to do, and that is support the homeowner.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, and to my colleagues, those who are listening, that I’m from Niagara Falls; my riding is in Niagara Falls. But I also have Fort Erie—I have to say them all and I apologize for that, because if I don’t, they’ll say, “Well, he forgot about me.” I represent Crystal Beach, which a lot of people are familiar with; Ridgeway; Niagara-on-the-Lake; Niagara Falls; Queenston; Virgil; Old Town. We have problems with our builders in my own riding. How do I know that? Because the homeowners come to me and say, “Gatesy, I got a problem. This is what’s going on: leaky roofs.”

Like I said, there’s a

section in one of my communities that is rat-infested because there was no insulation put into the homes. They were able to get into the homes or in through the attics. Think about that—after you’ve saved your entire life to buy a home. And now they can’t get it fixed because they’re arguing about it. It’s absolutely wrong what’s going on. The NDP asked the Auditor General for an independent investigation of Tarion, and the AG investigation confirmed what the NDP’s suspicions were for a long time.

Think about this: We’ve been arguing in this House—I wouldn’t say arguing; I guess that’s not the right word; debating, I guess, is the right word, sometimes loudly—over a 1% increase to teachers, education workers, health care workers. Listen to this: Tarion executives took 30% to 60% bonuses for making the agency more lucrative—lucrative; it’s an interesting word—meaning management benefited personally from turning down claims. Does that make sense to you?

I was trying to figure out what would be similar to that. It’s really similar to WSIB, where they deem that you have a job that isn’t there but then they cut your benefits. And we know what goes on with WSIB.

This is the one that really bothers me: Tarion re-licensed shady builders—that’s in the report; that’s what they call them—who were demonstrating problematic behaviour. Builders are getting away with not paying for costs incurred to resolve defects and Tarion is still re-licensing them.

So they get a number of complaints about a builder. That would tell me that there’s a problem with that particular builder. I want to say that there’s a lot of good builders in the province of Ontario, and there’s a lot in Niagara that are good. But there are some that might not be as good, and they’re re-licensing them even though they’re causing problems. There are people buying their homes.

You cannot go on a website or anything and say, “Gatesy’s Builders”—let’s just use my name because it’s easier—“Gatesy’s Builders is not doing their job. They’re not building quality homes.” Yet if I go purchase a Gatesy home, there’s no way for me to know that he’s shady.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Gatesy’s not shady.

Mr. Wayne Gates: No, I know, but I’m just using my name. It’s easier. I don’t want to use a builder’s name. That wouldn’t be fair to them either.

Then the other one is: They have a board, which is fair. They’re a private organization; they have a board. But do you know what? It’s heavy with home builders, which means they regulate themselves. Would it not make sense—I’m asking the Speaker, as he’s nodding his head to me; I think he’s actually agreeing with me this morning, so it’s good. What I’m trying to say here is that you have a board that’s got mostly home builders on it and one homeowner. Would it not make sense to have a board that’s equal so that you can at least have that discussion? That would make sense to me. But, no, that doesn’t happen here.

I’m going to get into my formal part of my speech, because I saw this as I was going through all of the notes, and there are lots of notes here on this. I want to say to my colleagues—and, please, I know you guys are busy and you’ve got lots to do over there and we’re allowed to play on our phones now, but I want you to listen to this, because this is important. It’s important to all of us.

Something happens—I haven’t been on that side yet, but I know it’s true, because I’ve seen the examples. We’re heading that way in a couple of years, by the way. I’m just letting you guys know. I’m giving you advice right now. This is why I’m concerned about this.

I’m to going read something that was said by a PC member on December 6, 2017. I’m going read it out for you so you can all hear it.

I’m trying to figure out what happens when you say something on this side and then you get elected to go to that side—I’m talking to the maintenance people here: Is there something different in the water on this side than in the water on that side?

Interjection.

Mr. Wayne Gates: There isn’t.

I can’t figure out why you say something over here, and then when you go over there it’s completely different.

I think it’s fair and I think it’s reasonable to quote somebody who said something here. It’s in Hansard. Everybody can take a look at it. I’d like to start by quoting something from December 6, 2017. This is coming from the PC caucus:

“The concerns of the PC caucus and many stakeholders who warned of the failure of this bill to address key issues in the industry it affects have gone unaddressed by the government”—meaning the Liberals. We all know how bad the Liberals were. We’ve got to give them credit. They were terrible. I’m going to say that right off the top. “It is only right for us at this point in time to point out some of these issues before the government proclaims this bill into legislation.”

That’s being said by the PCs. I want it to be clear who’s saying it.

“First and foremost, the portions of Bill 166”—that was a bill at the time—“that reform new home warranties in Ontario only reflect some of the outcomes of the Cunningham report. Justice Cunningham was commissioned by this government to look into Tarion and the administration of new home warranties.

The minister at the time seemed to want to predetermine the review’s outcome when he said they expected the review to find Tarion doing a good job and meeting expectations of protecting consumers.” If I were allowed to say anything in this House, I would use some adjectives for that. “To say he missed the mark would have been an understatement.” Again, this is what the PCs are saying. “Justice Cunningham built an unassailable argument that Tarion was not doing its job and was beset by a persuasive conflict of loyalties arising from its structure.

“It was the only avenue for new home builders to be licensed and for consumers to receive compensation for shoddy building work”—shoddy building work. “As the administrative authority, Tarion had the majority of its board of directors composed of the same people it regulated, licensed and from whose common warranty fund it paid consumers who complained about the builders’ work.”

Again, I’m reading this from Hansard, said by a Conservative, and I just wish you’d listen, because it’s one of your colleagues. Maybe you can ask him after I’ve finished my presentation why he said this.

“Tarion wore too many hats, out of sight of the government”—think about that—“that for over a decade allowed Tarion to drift apart from government leadership and oversight. It was shielded from key accountability legislation, including such measures as the Auditor General’s oversight, which the government rejected again when they had the opportunity to insert it into Tarion’s governing legislation during the clause-by-clause.”

Again, this is being said by the Conservatives; not by me, not by the NDP.

“Tarion, like any other administrative authority within this ministry, mandates that businesses practising in the field it regulates become members and pay substantial fees to the regulator. Membership of Tarion is not by choice”—and for the new members of the PCs, I’m going to read that for you in case you guys don’t know that. “Membership of Tarion is not by choice and any agency with such a captive constituency should be made transparent and accountable.”

Madam Speaker, welcome.

As you will likely have come to the conclusion—and I kind of helped you along the way—that was from one of my friends who is currently a member of the PC caucus. It was from the member for Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry, who is currently a sitting member of your government. That’s who said that.

So they’re on this side and they’re agreeing with the NDP, they’re agreeing with the AG on all the problems that we’ve got with Tarion, and we’re not protecting the home builders. Yet then they go on that side and all of a sudden the water is different. I don’t understand it.

This was a speech he gave when the previous Liberal government—and I’ve already said that the Liberals didn’t do a very good job for 15 years. So it’s clear that the PCs knew—I’m including all of the members who are here today—what was wrong and what needed to be fixed. They absolutely knew that. Like us, you have caucus meetings. I’m sure you talked about the bill with your caucus.

So let’s see how this action matches up with their own words. The member says, and I quote—how many minutes have I got?

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Eight minutes.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Lots. I’m quoting what you guys have said, so you guys know there’s a problem with Tarion. The problem is, quite frankly, that when I buy my home, I want it to be built right the first time. Yes, there may be some defects in it, but I shouldn’t have to fight to get that compensation when I’m told I’ve got to pay into it to go.

This is a quote, by the way, Madam Speaker. It’s not coming from me; it’s a quote right out of Hansard: “First and foremost, the portions of Bill 166 that reform new home warranties in Ontario only reflect some of the outcomes of the Cunningham report.” To date, the PCs have publicly said they will implement only 29 of Justice Cunningham’s suggestions, yet they won’t tell us—and think about this. My colleagues, listen to this, because you’ll tell me after I do my 20 minutes. Madam Speaker, think about this: To date, the PCs have publicly said they will implement 29 of Justice Cunningham’s suggestions.

But listen to this part: Yet they won’t tell us or the media—because you don’t let media in a lot of times, particularly at your conventions—or homeowners which of the actual recommendations they’re going to implement. They’re saying they’re going to do 29, but it’s a secret. Nobody is going to know. They’re not telling us. They’re not telling the media. They’re not telling the homebuyer.

He went on to say, “Tarion had the majority of its board of directors composed of the same people it regulated, licensed and from whose common warranty fund it paid consumers who complained about the builders’ work.”

This bill will see some enabling legislation that may—and that’s the key word when you’re bargaining anything. It doesn’t say “will.” “Will” is a stronger word. “Shall” is a stronger word—“may.” They may; they may not. It’s just a weasel word. That’s kind of what it is. It’s just what it is. It may one day allow the government to address this issue, depending on who is in power. Given their concerns in 2017, why was this not more forcefully dealt with in this bill? And I don’t just mean by the board; I mean the whole process. Legislate a fair board. Get rid of this enabling legislation.

Frankly, anyone looking at Tarion today can see that the home builders have had free rein over an organization for most of its lifetime. They have controlled the board, they have controlled the proceedings and they have controlled its direction. And that’s wrong. It’s wrong in the province of Ontario. It’s certainly wrong for people who buy homes.

All the while, residents across Ontario have been denied the right to get insurance for their massive defects. Madam Speaker, do you think that’s right? I’m pretty sure you don’t.

It’s insurance, by the way, that is supposed to be offered by the builder first, and Tarion is the last resort. What’s supposed to happen: I build the house for you, I find some defects and the builder is supposed to fix them. But when they refuse, Tarion is supposed to be there, as the insurance company, to help us. Instead—listen to this—Tarion has just become an arm of denial. It’s very similar to what I’ve said about WSIB and the deeming bill. It’s the same type of thing. Just say no. Just get rid of them.

Nowhere is it more evident than Tarion’s home builder registry, where any person in Ontario should be able to pull up a name of that builder and see the faulty homes they have built in the past and see where they’ve cut corners. That is so important. If you’ve got a terrible builder that has a reputation of building terrible homes, you can’t even pull up the name to say, “Don’t buy a home from this guy,” because it’s hidden. You’re not told when you buy that home. Tarion allows that to go on. That’s wrong.

Madam Speaker, I know when it comes to designing licence plates, this government has a hard time. But how does it take over a decade to design a website that properly tracks these things? Over a decade.

Madam Speaker, I want to be clear. This is not an issue with all home builders, or even most home builders. I have a lot of friends who are home builders in Niagara. Most are decent, honest people who are glad do their work and make a living. When I talk to those home builders, do you know what they tell me? They don’t want to protect somebody who is not building those homes correctly, because it reflects on the entire industry; and they’re right.

The home builders are saying to me, “Fix it. We don’t want shoddy home builders in Niagara. We don’t want it in Ontario. Fix it, because I take pride in the work I do.” I agree with that. Not only do the home builders take pride, the workers take pride too. But there are massive holes for the bad ones, the bad ones who go on to be defended by the same shoddy spokespersons for these groups. Enough is enough, Madam Speaker. This system will work fine if we tighten the belt on these guys for the simple fact that most home builders don’t want to rip off people. We get that. They don’t want to rip off people.

If you look at home defects, you can see that these builders are cutting corners to try and make a buck. We hear stories of companies refusing to pay overtime or mileage, so they ship in guys from Toronto who have to drive to Niagara and do all their work without charging miles. So what happens? Instead of putting in eight hours, they put in three. It’s a recipe for disaster. Sometimes these disasters are small. Sometimes it’s poorly placed floorboards or cheap materials, but sometimes—I want my colleagues to hear this—it’s deadly.

Sometimes it takes people—what it did to Daniel Browne-Emery. I know my colleague raised Daniel Browne-Emery’s story in his hour lead. We’re talking about people suffering from health issues because of mould, mould that is there because of poor workmanship. What happens with mould? People lose their insurance. When they lose their insurance, they lose their mortgage. When they lose their mortgage, they lose their homes. This is almost criminal, and it shouldn’t happen in Ontario.

Madam Speaker, I’d like to go back to my colleague’s speech. I’m going to quote this from him: “Membership of Tarion is not by choice and any agency with such a captive constituency should be made transparent and accountable.” On that point, he’s right. People are forced to pay into Tarion, but it’s even worse: They’re forced to pay out of their pocket when they need to take on Tarion. If you’ve got a problem and you’ve got to take on Tarion and they won’t fix it, if you’re rich you can probably fight with Tarion. But if you just scraped up enough money to buy that home, you can’t do it.

Maybe if you’re well-off you can afford to do this, but many can’t. Many sink their savings into their house and that’s all there is, so when they need to go down the costly process of fighting Tarion, they simply can’t do it.

Madam Speaker, towards the end of my friend’s speech, he had this to say: “The government’s proposals on Tarion reform fall” drastically “short of the reforms contemplated by Justice Cunningham and of consumers’ expectations.” I can think of no better way to sum up this government’s bill than his statement.

This government has been in committee and they’ve been in this chamber. For years, people just like Tracy Wheeler, just like Daniel—they have to put their lives on hold to try and fight for justice, justice they’re entitled to and, most insultingly, justice they were forced to pay into.

This government has a real chance to reform Tarion, to tear down this failed system and rebuild it into a system that respects consumers and is not beholden to big interests, that focuses less on buying tables at home builders’ dinners and more on fixing kitchens in homeowners’ houses.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and responses?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to thank the member from Niagara Falls for his excellent comments. I really appreciated the fact that he pointed out the correlation between Tarion and the system in WSIB. It makes a great deal of sense. We see systems that need a complete overhaul.

The Auditor General, as the member has pointed out, indicated that Tarion’s executives were enriching themselves at consumers’ expense, and yet the Conservative government is doing nothing. My question: Why are the Conservatives continuing the Liberals’ scheme of allowing Tarion to continue to enrich themselves at every homeowner’s expense?

Mr. Wayne Gates: What I want to say to you is that—I only got through half my presentation, because I didn’t touch on the issue around CEO compensation. Do you know that the head of Tarion is making close to $800,000, and they’ve given themselves a 30% to 60% bonus, and the bonus is that they deny people to get their homes fixed? They are there for the homeowner, and that’s the problem with this entire bill. It’s a problem with what’s going on in Ontario.

We’ve had stories of people who have not only lost their home, they’ve ended up homeless. They’ve suffered mental stress. That’s an issue for me.

I appreciate the question.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and responses?

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Thank you, member from Niagara Falls. Thank you for his passion and thank you for his eloquent speech.

Madam Speaker, this bill, the Consumer Protection Act, is been outdated. It’s outdated for a long time. That’s why our government is wanting to make reasonable change. We want to bring confidence to the consumers. That’s why we call it rebuilding consumer confidence, through this act. And that’s why our government and our minister is committed to do some changes. That’s why they’ve been trying to do some changes.

Madam Speaker, my question, through you to the member opposite: The Consumer Protection Act is outdated and doesn’t address the needs of consumers in the present climate. Does the member opposite understand how important the proposed legislation is in order to protect our consumers?

Mr. Wayne Gates: I’ll tell you what’s outdated, sir: that you did not take in every recommendation by Justice Cunningham in his report. That’s what’s outdated. What you should be doing is protecting homeowners.

I’m going to look at you while I say this: Protect the homeowners because, you know what, it could be your son or it could be your daughter buying their first home, and they buy their first home and what happens is, it falls apart. There’s mould in the basement. The attic has rats in it. There’s no insulation put in between the walls. That’s what’s wrong.

The reason why I read what the PCs said, going back to 2017, is that you know it. This isn’t a secret to any of us. This isn’t the first time we’ve debated this issue; we debated this issue a few years ago. I know you weren’t here, but you are now. Talk to your colleagues who stood up and said how bad Tarion is, how bad the industry is. That’s what’s wrong.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): A reminder to all members to please direct their remarks to and through the chair.

Further questions.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: The member from Niagara Falls, through you, Speaker, has called Tarion the arm of denial, a lot like the WSIB. Yesterday in the media, we heard the Premier saying, as it relates to the COVID-19 outbreak, that he stands on the side of businesses. He doesn’t say that he stands on the side of people, which is in direct contrast to many of the bumper sticker slogans that we see from this government.

My question for the member from Niagara Falls is: We saw that the member from Humber River–Black Creek tabled legislation that was going to implement all of the recommendations from Justice Cunningham’s 2017 report. Why is this Conservative government continuing Liberal plans of not implementing these recommendations?

Mr. Wayne Gates: I did it right. I got it. The labour minister is smiling at me.

What I’m trying to get out this morning is that the NDP knows how to fix this problem. But I’m going say that the PCs know too, and that’s why I don’t understand why you didn’t fix it in the bill. My colleagues have to tell me why. I can tell you that on this side of the House, I’m always going to stand up for the person that’s buying his home, because, at the end of the day, when we spend 40, 50, 60 or 70 years here while we’re alive, the one thing that we own is our home. The one thing we can pass on to our kids and our grandkids is our home.

We have our family dinners. I’m married to an Italian. We used to have our lunches every Sunday, our pasta lunches—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Response?

Mr. Wayne Gates: That was my response. I’m sorry, go ahead. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: Good morning to the member from Niagara Falls. Thank you for that. I always enjoy listening to you get up and debate. You have a lot of passion with everything, so thank you for that.

To the member opposite: If the government were to choose a multi-provider insurance model, as you’re advocating for, how can you guarantee that insurance companies will be transparent and act in the best interests of the consumers?

Mr. Wayne Gates: That’s a good—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Answer? The member from Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I’m working hard on this, Madam Speaker.

I’m going to tell you—I’m going to read this out, because I think it’s fair—two of my colleagues, Rosario and Jagmeet Singh, tabled bills to fix this. They tabled bills. But nothing really changed until 2017, when an NDP MPP—his name was Wayne Gates; you might have heard of him—successfully tabled an amendment to Bill 166 that, for the first time, gave the AG the authority to investigate Tarion.

Shortly after that, the NDP successfully tabled a motion before the public accounts committee in January 2018 requesting that the AG conduct such an investigation. Her October 30, 2019 report is the response to that request.

That’s how you get it fixed. That’s how you make sure they’re held accountable for what they’re doing and all their denials. So if they’re going to deny it—okay, I’m done. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mr. Paul Miller: A very good speech today, Wayne, on this situation.

I want to know why Tarion doesn’t notify people that their appeal period is expired—they never do—and how they are going to enforce their own rules, which they don’t do now.

I’ve had hundreds of complaints about expirations and a lack of following through. They don’t have inspectors; they just give you a nice little booklet when you start with your home ownership, and they don’t even follow their own rules in the booklet. What would you say to that?

Mr. Wayne Gates: It’s always nice to hear compliments coming from my colleague from Stoney Creek.

I want to say that they haven’t followed them because the board is controlled by the builders. That’s what people have to understand. I’m not sure if we’ve all been on boards, but I’ve been on the United Way board. We’ve had community people on the board, so they had a say in it. But when it’s 11 builders and one homeowner, what message are you going to get? The message is that the home builders are driving that message. That’s the problem. It’s the problem with this whole system.

I don’t know for the love of me—I can’t figure this out—why would you not stick up for homeowners in your ridings?

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Response?

Mr. Wayne Gates: Okay, I’ve got a couple of seconds left. Why would you not stick up for—

Interruption.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I thought it was somebody calling me. Okay, thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): There’s not enough time for another round of questions and responses.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Order, please.

Further debate?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Good morning, Speaker and everyone in the House. I’m pleased that our government is taking consumer protection so seriously, and I thank the minister for bringing this bill forward.

As the minister alluded to last week, while every ministry, agency, board and commission is vital to the operations of provincial government, the public institutions that serve Ontarians under the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services are especially important whether it’s:

—ServiceOntario, issuing birth and death certificates, photo ID cards or driver’s licences; the provincial archives, filing and protecting documents and records to protect Ontario’s wonderful history for future generations;

—the Technical Standards and Safety Authority, providing public safety services and ensuring technical compliance on behalf of the government for elevators, escalators, fuels, amusement park rides, ski lifts and much more;

—the direct administration of one of over 55 acts the ministry is responsible for, covering everything from condominiums to motor vehicle dealers, business names to horse-riding safety, the travel industry to film classification, retail holidays to new home warranties; or

—the support services and programs provided by the ministry to support other areas of government and over 60,000 members of the Ontario public service, such as administration, procurement, pay and benefits.

The ministry touches every single Ontarian at multiple points throughout their lives. This is why it’s so important to make sure that the programs, services, legislation and regulations under this ministry are up to date and doing their jobs, supporting the people of Ontario, the businesses of Ontario and the government of Ontario, all while maintaining the highest standards of safety, compliance and consumer protection.

This bill is an important one, and it’s also unique with respect to its journey through this chamber, in that we moved right into public consultations before second reading of this bill. What this did was it allowed us to make full use of the winter adjournment to travel this bill around the province and hear from various stakeholders and individuals on how we can make it better.

The Standing Committee on Justice Policy, which I had the pleasure of joining briefly on its first day of consultations, met over four days in Brampton, Windsor, Ottawa and Toronto, spanning across the province to gather feedback and bring us a stronger, amended bill which greater achieves its purpose.

As we can see by looking through all the strikeouts and underlines in the reprinted bill, there are many changes made through these amendments that were guided by the feedback we received on the bill—and great feedback, by the way. The reason we received so much feedback is because stakeholders and individuals recognize that things are no longer working as intended.

I’ll start with the Tarion Warranty Corp. and the government’s proposed changes to the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act and the New Home Construction Licensing Act. Buying a home, for most of the population, is the biggest investment in their lives. For the biggest investment of one’s life, people require the strongest protections to have confidence in the purchase and life-changing decisions.

People are often frustrated with the quality of construction of new homes and subsequently must deal with a warranties and protection system that is complex, lengthy and confusing. They want to be confident they are hiring a reputable builder to build their home and expect strong warranties and protections that they can depend on, with strong oversight and enforcement of clear rules for builders. But that currently isn’t the case, Speaker.

The proposed changes to the acts would, if passed, respond to the special report on Tarion released by the Auditor General last year and further achieve three main goals. They would:

(1) overhaul the current warranty and protection program by requiring Tarion to enter into a binding agreement with the Minister of Government and Consumer Services to strengthen oversight and Tarion’s accountability and providing them with a stronger mandate in consumer protection;

(2) enhance the dispute resolution and claims process by providing Tarion with the ability to use a range of processes to resolve disputes between homeowners and builders for vendors; restoring balance for consumers by removing builders and vendors as parties at the Licence Appeal Tribunal in disputes between homeowners and Tarion over warranties and protections claims, absent competing regulations; and enabling the government to prescribe adjudicative bodies other than the Licence Appeal Tribunal to resolve disputes between homeowners and Tarion over warranties and protections claims; and

(3) also promote the construction of better-built homes by requiring Tarion to increase the scrutiny of applications to build or sell a new home to better prevent bad actors from operating, and establishing a mandate for Tarion to promote the construction of properly built homes.

In November, the minister took steps to tip the Tarion scales back in favour of consumers who thought that for too long, the corporation inherently favoured builders and developers. By the time this House returns, the Tarion board of directors will be decreased to better align the board’s size with other boards and authorities, from 16 members to 12. No more than 34% or, realistically, one third of this board can be builders, vendors or industry associations or their agents.

As I said last week and maintain still, the previous makeup of the board most definitely leaned towards developers and didn’t really help consumers at all. These people do need to be represented on the board, to be held accountable, but should not hold the majority and never should have.

We are also proposing legislative and regulatory changes to condominium living. We’ve heard loud and clear from stakeholders that people lack clear processes to navigate condo living, because it is different from other types of housing. People also expect better, faster and cheaper digital services. As well, they need more transparency and accountability when buying and living in a condo.

Recent regulatory changes have been made to provide condo owners, corporations, purchasers and mortgagees with improved access to 17 forms made under the condo act. They are now available through the Condominium Authority of Ontario’s website, where other information is available. Owners and prospective owners now have a one-stop shop for all the information they require, rather than having to visit the ministry’s website separately. Of course, the minister retains the responsibility for the forms and their content, but we will collaborate with condo authorities to make improvements.

The government is currently consulting on changes to develop a variety of proposed regulatory changes to:

—provide condo corporations with clear processes and rules for the procurement of services and goods, and financial management of condo reserve funds;

—increase the amount of interest that would be owed to a buyer by a developer on their deposits if their pre-construction condo project is cancelled and in other circumstances;

—provide clearer processes for occupancy fees and chargebacks;

—develop a condo guide for buyers, and require developers to provide it at the point of purchase. This will better equip condo purchasers with information in an easy-to-understand format; and

—clarify the processes for mediation or arbitration between condo corporations and owners.

Another issue we have been hearing about across Ontario is the Condominium Authority Tribunal system, and how long and extensive it can be for cases brought before the tribunal to be resolved. That is why we are expanding the scope of topics that the tribunal can mediate, such as nuisances and smells. This will not only expedite the process by which condo owners can reach a resolution to a dispute that they have with their neighbours, but it also provides an alternative level of dispute resolution instead of using limited resources in the legal system.

This is an example of the government’s cross-ministry, holistic approach to addressing the issues and concerns that affect Ontarians. We are hitting two birds with one stone here, so to speak.

I’ve been talking a lot about protections for housing. While these changes are important and underlined by the investment required in these transactions, they are far from the only changes being proposed in this bill.

We’re also looking at amending the Consumer Protection Act itself. Legislative amendments introduced through this bill would enable the provincial government to issue administrative monetary penalties, or AMPs, against businesses that do not comply with the Consumer Protection Act. If this bill is passed, the government will consult with industry early this year on regulations that would be required in order to implement the administrative monetary penalties scheme in an orderly and effective manner.

We have seen in other areas, both municipally and provincially, that administrative monetary penalties are an effective tool to encourage compliance with the law and discourage deceptive and predatory practices. Adding AMPs to the ministry’s enforcement toolbox would bring our Consumer Protection Act in line with other provinces and be an additional way to enforce the act.

Would it work for everything? No. Part of the ministry’s ongoing consultations would include determining which infractions would be subject to AMPs and determining what those penalty amounts would be for these offences.

We will also be conducting an overall review of the Consumer Protection Act. This would be the first comprehensive review of the act in 15 years. Fifteen years is a long time in any context, but this past 15 years are especially significant. Think about it: Fifteen years ago, Amazon was primarily selling books, Netflix was only mailing DVDs, and you actually had to go into a store and walk through an aisle to do most of your shopping.

What I’m getting at is that there has been a massive change in technology and marketplace innovation. To continue to be effective, the act needs to be updated to strengthen protection for consumers. The review will also streamline and clarify requirements to improve consumer and business understanding and to support compliance and include effective enforcement powers and tools to deter non-compliance.

One of the important changes that this bill makes is in

schedule 10, to the Ticket Sales Act. Like many of us here, most Ontarians have likely purchased a ticket to a sporting event, concert or other form of entertainment online. The Internet has provided extra opportunities for consumers to find good deals on these tickets, but also has produced vulnerabilities that can be exploited by retailers, especially resellers.

If something is too good to be true, it probably is. In the rush to get an excellent deal, you may rush through the check-out, only to later realize that you weren’t being charged in Canadian dollars. After currency exchange and additional currency conversion fees, once they’re processed, this can represent a significant additional cost to a purchaser.

We are proposing updates to the Ticket Sales Act to ensure that all dollar amounts and ticket offers are listed and charged in Canadian currency. Being able to buy concert tickets online and know exactly how much they are costing you would make your experience that much better and encourage more Ontarians to support local events.

We will also further consult on proposed regulations under the Ticket Sales Act to improve protection, transparency and choice for consumers buying tickets to Ontario events. The consultations will include securing feedback on items that promote choice, including ensuring that ticket purchasers can transfer their tickets and that consumers who don’t have smart phones or who want paper tickets can get them upon request. Like the proposed changes to the Consumer Protection Act that I mentioned previously, we will consult on new administrative monetary policies under this act to discourage bad behaviour by the industry and promote compliance.

Our proposals under this bill don’t stop there, Speaker. The ministry is also proposing changes to strengthen enforcement and transparency measures to improve elevator safety and availability. We are proposing stronger enforcement tools to improve compliance with elevator safety laws, data collection with respect to elevator outages to better inform policy development, and publication of outage data online to educate and inform consumers. We will be consulting on these changes very soon this year.

We intend to do everything we can to ensure compliance with all elevator safety laws and adequate elevator performance. We are working with the Technical Safety and Standards Authority to resolve current safety issues in the sector and to bring the safety compliance rate to an acceptable level. We are also considering changes that would require elevator outage data to be reported to and be posted online by the TSSA as a transparency measure.

There are also several other changes we are considering under regulation that the minister announced as part of our plan to rebuild consumer confidence. Some of these changes affect the travel industry. Again, this is an industry that has rapidly changed over time, and it’s our responsibility to ensure that the industry is regulated to protect consumers, but not overregulated to put Ontario at a disadvantage against global operators and other competitors.

We intend to address concerns we have heard from Ontarians by updating the disclosure and advertising rules to help improve protections for consumers, introducing new steps to increase employee accountability through a requirement for salespersons to register and meet requirements in continuing education, and providing the regulator with additional compliance tools to better address bad conduct, amongst other things.

Another piece of legislation that we are reviewing and consulting on is the Collection and Debt Settlement Services Act to address concerns that debtors who are struggling to pay their creditors are not being sufficiently protected from harassment by debt collectors. The government will be consulting in 2020 to help identify potential changes to the act to ensure debt settlement service providers abide by the rules.

I have countless constituents come to me with issues regarding collection and debt settlement, and I’m sure many members of the House have experienced the same. Sometimes the constituent actually does owe the debt and is having trouble paying. But there are also instances, far more than there should be, where they have already paid their debts, never owed anything or are the wrong person all together. But the calls don’t stop. We will take action to improve protections for consumers in this regard, as well as educate them as to what their rights and responsibilities are.

In conclusion—I’m running out of time, so here I will wrap up—this ministry and the honourable minister have done an excellent job here. These are long-overdue changes that are needed to protect consumers while at the same time keeping our province open for business. They’ve done due diligence consulting with individuals and stakeholders. We travelled the bill, through committee, across the province and have made amendments to make the bill better.

I was proud to see this House come together and unanimously pass this minister’s last piece of legislation, and I really hope, together, we will see that again.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and responses.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I would like to thank the member from Mississauga–Streetsville for her comments. I’m a little concerned when I hear the word “consultations” come from this government, because we see expensive things that are sometimes buried and hidden.

But for my question, I would like to turn to recommendation number 6 from the Auditor General’s report. We understand that the Globe and Mail uncovered documents from Tarion in 2020, revealing that Tarion is backing away from the arbitrary and unfair 30-day deadline for filing claims. One of the recommendations is to get rid of that. Is this an example of accountability and transparency, allowing this to continue and not following that recommendation?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I really want to thank the member opposite for the question because it is very, very important. I sat in when we were on public accounts and I listened to members from Tarion speak, and I certainly had a long time listening to the Auditor General and her recommendations.

I was actually quite shocked that Tarion has been operating the way it has been operating all of this time, with no changes put in place. Understanding that there were many, many recommendations when we travelled this bill, and I know when I was joining them in Brampton we heard loud and clear about some of the changes that must come, and will come. But we really are looking at ways on how we can make the Tarion warranty program work for everything. One of the things we really wanted to make sure happened right away was that we were going to change the makeup of the board so that not more than one third of the board can be made up of developers, builders or their agents.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: Our government is listening to the needs and concerns of the consumers to help better protect them. That’s why throughout the last year, 2019, we have been consulting on three main pillars. They are protecting the privacy of Ontarians, enabling the businesses to compete digitally and enabling better, smarter and more efficient government.

My question to the member from Mississauga–Streetsville is, what are the major concerns driving the changes to consumer protection in Ontario?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I want to thank the member from Brampton West. I know he’s spent quite a bit of time working and consulting. I know many of us, on our side of the House—and I have listened intently to members on the other side of the House on what things they want to see us make changes with, whether it be ticket sales—but I think the one big item that we heard a lot about was the Tarion warranty program. It has for so long, unbelievably, been the same way, the same old. The people who were on the board, the way they were compensated—it was appalling. There’s nothing short of that.

I know that when we were on committee—and the members opposite were very vocal in how they wanted to make sure that changes to Tarion were made swiftly, which is why we wanted to make sure we got it into this bill. But we didn’t wait. We made sure that we got out and we started consultations immediately. We started crisscrossing the province to make sure that we got input from all stakeholders and from consumers.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: The member from Mississauga–Streetsville, in addition to mentioning the consultations—which is something that frightens me early in the morning—also talked about the composition of boards. Whenever a Conservative or Liberal government talks about how they want to manipulate the composition of boards, it’s rather frightening to me.

The NDP has called for the appointment of an administrator to take over Tarion completely, which I think will be a great idea. I’m also thankful that the NDP successfully passed an amendment allowing the Auditor General, or giving the authority, to investigate Tarion; otherwise, we’d see a lot more of the same.

To the member from Mississauga–Streetsville—through you, Speaker—do you think it’s fair that everyday Ontarians and consumers have to pay outrageous salaries, such as those to Tarion’s CEO, who is paid almost $800,000 in salary and benefits? Is that fair?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I’d like thank the member opposite. I do apologize if I frighten you so early in the morning.

I have to admit, when I heard those salaries myself, in committee, I was also blown away. It was really difficult to understand not just their salaries, but the makeup of the board. It was so one-sided.

The Tarion warranty program, the way it was put together, the way that they have the 30-day windows at the beginning and at the end, the fact that they were not providing the consumer with the appropriate documentation at the time of purchase—all of that, in and of itself, showed an organization that was so out of date and very poorly put together.

We took swift action. We heard members from the opposition, who told us what they wanted to see, and we immediately, right away, got rid of the chair and the CEO to make sure that we can now put good people in there to support consumers.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: As we all know, purchasing a new home is one of the most significant investments someone can make in their lifetime. Many Ontarians have been eagerly awaiting improvements to the new home warranty program in this province after years of Liberal lack of action. Could the member please tell us what our government is doing to enhance the home warranty program in Ontario to protect the homeowners?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Thank you to my neighbouring member from Mississauga–Erin Mills. I’ll talk a little bit about some of the enhancements that we are making under the home warranty program.

First, we want to make sure that we overhaul the whole warranty program in a way that protects the interests of new homebuyers, and we’re taking the time to make sure we get it right.

That’s why we’re establishing a mandate for Tarion to promote the resolution of claims as soon as reasonably possible. We want to make sure that builders, developers, their agents and all of those who participate in a new home being built are held accountable. We want to make sure they understand that there are consequences, so that they will build proper homes in the first place and hopefully Tarion won’t even need to exist. We want to make sure that everything is done in compliance.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal will be there to resolve disputes between homeowners and Tarion over warranty and protection claims.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions?

Mr. Jeff Burch: I thank the member from Mississauga–Streetsville for her presentation.

My friend from Niagara Falls touched on this: When a new home buyer finds defects in their home and the builder is unwilling or unable to fix the problem, Tarion is supposed to step in. But what they were doing, obviously, was protecting the builder. Tarion’s board is controlled by the Ontario Home Builders’ Association, which is the lobby group for the development industry that Tarion is supposed to regulate.

Does she realize that her government’s bill doesn’t actually fix this problem at all?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I’d like to thank the member opposite for the question because it is very important, which is why we’re separating the warranty administration and builder and vendor regulator—we want to separate them altogether.

The government has heard from Justice Cunningham, which is why we wanted to make sure that, under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act, with Tarion—we wanted to address this conflict of interest because it was of serious consumer concern.

At this time, it is expected that the future regulatory authority—we’ll hopefully get that up and running by the fall of this year, because we do want to make sure that we have that separation between the builder and the HCRA.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions and answers, quickly.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Thank you to the member for her comments today.

In my riding of Etobicoke–Lakeshore, the condo market has just exploded. We actually have more condo units now than residential homes. So now, more than ever, consumer confidence is extremely important. It’s so important that I just sent out a mailer to my condo owners with a feedback card.

For the member: I just wondered if you could expand on what we’re doing to modernize this legislation to reflect the needs of our condominium owners.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I’d like to thank the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore for her question.

We want to make sure that we’re proposing these regulatory changes to condominium living. We’ve heard loud and clear from these stakeholders. They want clear processes. They want to make sure that they have access to cheaper digital services, because that’s not acceptable right now. We want to make sure that the prospective owners have a one-stop shop so that they can—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you. Further debate?

Miss Monique Taylor: I am pleased to have an opportunity today to speak to Bill 159, the Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act. This bill, like many bills that we see before us, is an omnibus bill that touches on a range of issues. But

schedule 5, which addresses Tarion, is the part of bill that interests me the most, and so that’s where I will be focusing quite a bit of time.

I have to say that there’s a real missed opportunity to make some positive changes that could really have helped the lives of homeowners in my riding of Hamilton Mountain and across Ontario. We have known about the challenges and issues relating to Tarion for years. Under the previous Liberal government, nothing was done to address them. Now under this government, we’re seeing changes that do not go far enough to reform or replace the troubled organization.

It’s important that we take real action on Tarion. The issues with Tarion are about protecting consumers who are making the biggest and most important purchase in their lives.

For too many, the dream of home ownership becomes a nightmare when frustrating or dangerous construction problems happen and Tarion abandons them. We’ve all heard the horror stories of homebuyers who find out that the company that built their home did shoddy work—maybe it was a broken HVAC system or a water heater that doesn’t work, or there’s mould or there are cracked foundations. In all of these cases, homebuyers are on the hook for thousands of dollars in repairs. That’s why an organization like Tarion, if it worked correctly, is so important.

Tarion is supposed to be the place that homeowners could go to get help and recoup their costs. Instead, for many years, Tarion has been protecting the interests of builders over the consumers.

We’ve seen the stories; they come up in the media all the time. We hear them in our offices on a regular basis, and members of this Legislature have heard those very difficult stories from homeowners themselves as the committee travelled. We all know that homeowners have complained that Tarion regularly refuses to help them. We also know that consumers have found themselves in court, not only fighting their builder but also Tarion, the organization that was supposed to protect them.

New Democrats have been raising this issue for several years. Thanks to the work of New Democrat MPPs, we were able to amend a Liberal government bill to allow the Auditor General to look into Tarion. I believe I’ve heard this morning that it was the member from Niagara Falls who made that happen. New Democrats, like the member from Niagara Falls, then requested the AG to conduct an investigation.

The Auditor General found that our suspicions were correct: Tarion has been protecting developers and not the consumers. To quote the Auditor General’s report: “We found that the strong presence of home builders on the Tarion board of directors, combined with Tarion’s internal requirement that it seek advance consultation with the Ontario Home Builders’ Association on any proposed changes to its regulations, created an imbalance at Tarion that favoured the interests of builders over homeowners....” That’s the Auditor General stating clearly that Tarion works in favour of the developers and the home builders.

Also, Tarion is supposed to act as a backstop when builders who are actually responsible for the warranty fail to deliver. Unfortunately, the AG determined that Tarion did not collect enough refundable security deposits from builders to cover the cost of homeowners’ claims that it might have had to pay out. As a result, of the money Tarion had to pay out because builders refused to honour their warranties, they were only able to recoup 30% of it. That is a huge savings for bad builders.

We also learned that the leadership salaries at Tarion were shockingly high. Tarion’s CEO was receiving over $700,000 in compensation, all for siding with developers over homeowners.

The AG report also found that Tarion’s executives were enriching themselves at the expense of consumers due to a compensation framework that rewarded officials who denied consumer claims. So Tarion’s senior management were given large bonuses—sometimes up to 60% of their annual salary—for increasing profits and minimizing financial aid paid to homeowners who were seeking their help. That is absolutely shameful.

Further, Tarion has received the AG’s report and promised to adopt the recommendations. But the Globe and Mail discovered through obtaining internal documents that Tarion was quietly backing away from many of the consumer protections it had promised to implement. For example, one of Tarion’s arbitrary and unfair rules was that the claims had to be filed within a 30-day window. Many homeowners missed this deadline, even by just a few days, and thus lost their warranty protection. The AG asked for this rule to be scrapped; instead, Tarion is keeping it.

We have a situation here in Ontario where our homeowner consumer protection organization is run by the agency that it is supposed to oversee, and they’re giving themselves bonuses to congratulate themselves for abandoning consumers. This is clearly so broken, and I cannot believe that it’s still in place.

Tarion is so broken that some of the things that the AG reported just seem absolutely absurd. For example, Tarion’s call centre was determined to provide inaccurate information in 14% of the calls—all of this from a consumer protection organization. Does that not sound ridiculous? I believe it’s ridiculous.

Ontarians deserve to have peace of mind that the home they are buying is safe and in good shape and that they are protected from bad actors.

New Democrats have proposed solutions to Tarion several times over the years. Former MPPs Rosario Marchese and Jagmeet Singh both tabled bills to create more transparency with Tarion and to give the Ombudsman oversight into its operations.

We’ve been talking about this for so long that I went back and checked and saw that Rosario Marchese’s first Tarion reform bill was tabled a decade ago in 2010. He then introduced bills on Tarion reform in 2011 and 2012. We’ve been trying to push for a solution for many years.

Most recently, our New Democrat member from Humber River–Black Creek introduced Bill 169, Home Warranties to Protect Families Act. That bill would eliminate Tarion and would replace it with a new agency, not another delegated authority over which the government and the people of Ontario have no control. All existing Tarion cases would be immediately moved into this new agency. That bill would also open up the new home warranty system to a multi-provider model, which is a recommendation from Justice Cunningham’s 2015 review of Tarion.

The multi-provider new home warranty system exists in other jurisdictions in Canada, like BC and Alberta. The builder would be responsible for finding their own warranty provider, and that provider would be in charge of providing the new home warranty. The new government agency that the bill would establish could also provide new home warranties. Either way, there would be no monopoly of the home warranty providers.

The bill tabled by my colleague also directs the new agency to open up past cases that were rejected by Tarion in order to see if those rejections were justified. That bill, Bill 169, offers a real solution to the issues that plague new home ownership. Stakeholders, like Canadians for Properly Built Homes, and others, all overwhelmingly support Bill 169, and they also believe that this government bill that we’re debating today does not go far enough. In their view, the bill “does not go nearly far enough to provide adequate consumer protection, and it is taking far too long to address the serious issues with Tarion.”

Further, every homeowner who testified at the Standing Committee on Justice Policy travelling sessions in Brampton, Windsor and Ottawa have said that Bill 159 does not go far enough. We need real action on Tarion to protect homebuyers, because ultimately, real people’s lives are affected. Here’s a quote from the committee, from Krista Shuman, whose husband, Dr. Earl Shuman, took his own life in 2016 after fighting Tarion for 27 years: “The impact of the Ontario government’s inaction and its lack of oversight has been devastating for many families.

It is extremely disappointing one year after MPP Walker’s announcement of their promise to correct Ontario’s hew home warranty program, and not enough has been done.

“Through Bill 159, the Ontario Conservative government had an opportunity and also a duty to protect Ontario families in the most important purchase that homeowners make. Our government has failed to protect us from building code violations and the impacts on the financial, physical and mental health of Ontario families, including my own.”

That’s a big story to come to the committee to share. That says a lot about how many people are at home facing these issues that don’t get the space to come to committee. I thank her greatly for putting herself and her family out there for the best interests of the people of Ontario. Tarion’s failure to adequately protect families in Ontario has had a real human impact. This bill does not go far enough in ensuring homebuyers in Ontario are safe.

I wanted to talk about a couple of other sections of the bill, but I see that our time is ticking and I may not have the opportunity get there. Some of the major issues that are addressed in this bill, again, that do not go far enough are the 12 delegated administrative authorities and the ticket sales that we have for events. It was something that we thought we were making headway on to try to get fixed, and then when the Conservatives came into power they changed what had been done, and now they’re doing very minimal changes to ensure that ticket sales are correct. I know, ordering online, many times you can order—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize to the member. I am compelled to interrupt her as per the standing orders, since it is 10:15.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That means it’s now time for members’ statements.

Members’ Statements

COVID-19

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: COVID-19 is bearing down upon Ontario, and the government has yet to develop a solid plan for the most vulnerable among us: people across the province experiencing homelessness; overcrowded shelters and drop-ins; a community whose health is already compromised; many folks chronically ill and with poor immune systems; a community made up increasingly of seniors and families evicted from rental units they can no longer afford; people forced to migrate through cities and towns during the day, unable to self-isolate or maintain a safe social distance.

These conditions are inhumane and downright cruel for the individuals concerned. They are also a serious public health challenge. Shelters where people are crammed in like sardines could become virus incubators.

The province has an obligation to keep all Ontarians safe. That means listening to advocates like Cathy Crowe, who has decades of experience with homeless health care.

Among other measures, it means extra funding to allow cities to open additional shelters, to relieve congestion and allow for beds that are six feet apart, to lessen the chance of transmission; relaxed rules that allow people to remain in bed during the day; enhanced cleaning protocols; screening on admission; nurses on-site; pocket hand sanitizers; and extra funding for motels or other spaces where people can recover in isolation.

I can’t emphasize this enough: The government needs to declare a state of emergency on homelessness in Ontario, and it needs to begin with a serious plan for COVID-19.

Baku massacre

Mr. Aris Babikian: The 30th anniversary of the Baku massacres was recently commemorated by its survivors and descendants who reside in Ontario.

On January 13, 1990, nationalists in Azerbaijan launched widespread and predetermined massacres against the unarmed Armenian minority in the capital, Baku. Hundreds of Armenians were killed, tortured and forced to leave their homes during these atrocities.

The massacres were preceded by the mass killing of Armenians in the Azerbaijani cities of Sumgait, Kirovabad and Ganja in 1988 and 1989.

These crimes against humanity resulted in the ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population in the former Soviet republic. About half a million Armenians were deported from Azerbaijan and had to seek refuge in different parts of the world, including Canada.

To silence the voice and the will of the people of Artsakh for self-determination, Azerbaijan escalated the crisis into a war. The impunity the criminals enjoyed only served as fertile soil for new, even more horrible crimes.

Sustainable peace and development in the South Caucasus is impossible without facing the past and restoring justice based on the principles of international law.

Finally, the survivors condemn the manifestation of xenophobia, intolerance and extremism—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much.

Indigenous public health

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Just yesterday, the Minister of Health announced new protocols aimed at protecting what she called the “province’s most vulnerable people” from the COVID-19 pandemic. Experts continue to indicate that the best preventive method is to wash your hands with water and soap.

But what can we do in dozens of communities under water advisories? And how will the minister contain the pandemic in remote and fly-in communities?

Just this week, Neskantaga and Attawapiskat chiefs shared their concerns about the arrival of COVID-19 in their communities. The Attawapiskat chief said the virus is “going to spread like wildfire.” The Neskantaga chief said “it’s going to be ... devastating,” because people live in dreadful conditions and lack the essentials of a health system worthy of this province.

The Minister of Health needs to work for the well-being and health of all Ontarians. It’s about equity, not the distance from Toronto.

I thus demand that the Minister of Health and the Minister of Indigenous Affairs work quickly to provide proper health services to Indigenous people living in remote areas.

Seniors

This government was elected with a clear mandate to stand behind the men and women who, together, built this province. We have kept our promise to them by introducing free dental care for seniors most in need, providing record spending on health and long-term care and investing over $14 million in Seniors Active Living Centres across the province.

When I was out door-knocking, many seniors told me that they wanted to live out their years in their homes, close to family and friends. That is why I am proud that this government is also investing an additional $155 million to expand front-line home and community care services. This includes $150,000 to Community Care Concepts’ take-me-home program, which provides transportation for seniors to and from the hospital.

I am excited that these community organizations will be playing an active role in providing modern, wraparound and continuous care within our new Ontario health teams.

COVID-19

Mr. Jeff Burch: People in my community of Niagara are concerned about COVID-19, and I want to use this opportunity to provide them with an update.

Niagara Region Public Health has been working with the province and the federal government on identifying travellers who might be carrying COVID-19. Locally, they have developed multiple scenarios for what may happen, and plans for those scenarios are continually being revisited as we learn more from other countries.

I would join the Association of Local Public Health Agencies in imploring this government to put their modernization review of public health and emergency health services on the back burner. Health workers are working around the clock to contain COVID-19, and a modernization plan in the midst of a global outbreaks creates unnecessary confusion in trying times. Public health units have been challenged for years due to ministry caps on budget increases.

My office spoke with Dr. Thomas Stewart, CEO of Niagara Health, who informed us that “the key immediate priorities are to get alternative sites up and running. In addition, given that occupancies are so high, we need plans to move patients not needing hospital care out.”

It is vital that the province work with local hospitals, health units and public health to ensure the necessary funding is provided.

I would like to thank the front-line health care workers, public health officials, administrators and everyone working on this file. Those in Niagara and across the province can have confidence that they are working tirelessly behind the scenes to contain and mitigate COVID-19.

Debate tournament

Mr. Vincent Ke: The art of debate is important, and it is what we do here every day in the House.

Last weekend, a team of young debaters in my riding of Don Valley North, students of the Extraordinary Education Centre—EEC—participated in a debate tournament at Harvard University.

Please join me to welcome our champion, Max Rosen from team Canada, and finalists Randy Chang, Diba Heydary, Stella Zhang and Sarah Zhao from EEC.

Also, congratulations to the three top speakers, Randy Chang, Diba Heydary and Stella Zhang from EEC, and to the principals of EEC as well for their commitment and effort in educating our future leaders.

Max Rosen from team Canada is also the debate coach at EEC, being a two-time champion for both 2019 and 2020, and coach for the finalist team. It is quite an achievement.

I am confident that they will become influential leaders of tomorrow. Some of them may one day be sitting in this Legislature.

I’m honoured and proud to welcome these brilliant young debaters, all dreamers and doers. They are great role models for their peers and—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Yet again, one more time, I will remind the members that we are in members’ statements, and when we’re in members’ statements, I would ask you to keep your private conversations to a minimum and as quiet as possible, so that I can hear the member who has the floor. I’m reluctant to stand up in the middle of a member’s statement and interrupt the clip—and I’ve heard back from members about that too.

We’re trying to adapt to the new rules. It’s just common sense and courtesy that we try to be quiet when another member has the floor.

Start the clock. The next statement is the member for Waterloo.

Employment standards

Ms. Catherine Fife: Karen reached out to my office and told us, “I’m terrified of getting sick, because if I don’t work, I don’t get paid and I have a lot of people relying on me.” These are tough choices for workers in Ontario.

As we begin to grapple with the unprecedented effects of COVID-19, we need to get real about paid sick days. Research shows that in jurisdictions where paid sick days are required, there are fewer flu cases, which means there is less stress on the health care system. It’s as simple as that.

The Decent Work and Health Network is here today at Queen’s Park, and they reported that eight out of 10 workers will go to work sick; over three quarters of emergency room doctors report they have to write sick notes; and a family doctor reported just this week, in a health crisis, that one third of the patients in his office required sick notes in one day. But in PC-run Ontario, employers have no legal obligation to offer any paid sick days to employees. In our current climate, that is just not good enough.

We have called on this government to introduce responsible measures to ensure that employees can stay home when they’re sick. That would entail preventing employers from requiring people to get a sick note, and giving employees access to paid sick days.

Public health officials are working desperately to prevent the spread of COVID-19. They need a government that supports the employees and the front-line health workers in this province. Step up today. Put in place paid sick days that protect the people of this province.

Hospital funding

Ms. Lindsey Park: On March 6, I was joined by my fellow Durham region PC colleagues, the member for Whitby and the member for Pickering–Uxbridge, to announce that some very important hospital upgrades at Lakeridge Health’s Bowmanville and Ajax-Pickering hospitals are coming.

Speaker, as you know, we’re modernizing the way health care services are delivered in the province of Ontario, moving toward a more connected and patient-centred model. But while we work on this bigger-picture transformation, it’s still important that we focus on the smaller and more urgent needs of our hospitals that enable continuity and reliable patient care.

Our government has invested a total of $175 million this year through the Health Infrastructure Renewal Fund to support hospitals across Ontario. As part of that fund, Lakeridge Health Bowmanville received $1.3 million and Ajax-Pickering received $215,000 to meet their urgent infrastructure needs. This funding will allow both locations to make needed improvements, so that patients in Durham region can continue to rely on the high-quality health care services they have come to expect.

Speaker, my constituents in Durham rely upon the services provided by the Bowmanville Hospital every day. This infrastructure funding helps support a healthy and safe environment, while our incredible health care professionals can continue to provide reliable patient care to the people of Clarington in their time of need.

Flooding

Mr. Rick Nicholls: On Thursday, February 27, the municipal council of Chatham-Kent declared a state of emergency regarding the flood dikes on Erie Shore Drive near Erieau. In a bylaw passed, Chatham-Kent council empowered administration to bring a report to council within eight weeks regarding options for either preparing an alternative access via a newly constructed road, considering a buyout of the property owners affected by the road closure and/or introducing a further permanent road closure of Erie Shore Drive.

Thanks to the generosity of Ridge Landfill and its president, Izzie Abrams, 10,000 metric tonnes of clay have been donated for dike stabilization. We look forward to continuing to work together to ensure the safety of our community and fairness for all residents. What a great corporate citizen. But as Izzie says, “It’s the right thing to do!”

The municipality gave residents a short time frame to evacuate, causing frustration and major inconvenience. The time to act, however, is now, because of weather unpredictability.

In the event of a disaster, our government stands ready. I’ve engaged the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Solicitor General and the Premier’s office. They have all been unequivocal that the safety of residents is first and foremost.

Thank you to everyone for ongoing efforts as we tackle this situation, ranging from the rebuilding of the dike road, to police officers guarding properties, to volunteers bagging sand and helping residents in the danger zone.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’d like to introduce a very active volunteer in our community of Davenport, Nahum Mann. Thank you for being here.

Mr. Vincent Ke: I would like to introduce the champion from the Harvard College World Schools Invitational 2020, Max Rosen from team Canada, and finalists Randy Chang, Diba Heydary, Stella Zhang and Sarah Zhao from the Extraordinary Education Centre in my riding of Don Valley North. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’d like to welcome the following residents from my riding of University–Rosedale: Karie Hiebert, John Corso and Bryan Beauchamp. Thanks for coming.

Hon. Bill Walker: I’m pleased to welcome three guests from my great riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound to Queen’s Park. John Hammill, Ron Ledingham and Tyler Stone, who I’m told loves politics, are all here today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Miss Monique Taylor: From the Ontario Autism Coalition, today we have Amanda Mooyer and her son Finn, Stacy Kennedy, Angela Brandt, and Laura Kirby-McIntosh.

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: I’d like to welcome Shakila and Sami Rafiq, the brother and mom of our page from Mississauga Centre, Nyle Rafiq. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Stan Cho: It’s my privilege to welcome two of my constituents from my riding of Willowdale, Dr. Hamid and his son, Ali Hamid. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Question Period

COVID-19

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier. Yesterday, as the Premier and I were meeting in his office, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic. The federal Minister of Health said it was safe to assume that 30% to 70% of Canada’s population could become infected.

The Premier has stated, “We have a plan for every scenario.” At this point, information about these contingencies is vital for families, so my question is: When will the government start laying out the details of these plans?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the opposition for the question. I can tell you that our government is absolutely committed to making sure that Ontarians, and our front-line workers, have the information that they need. We are putting together a command table to make sure that everyone is informed.

This situation is evolving. It will change day to day. The most important thing we can do right now is containment, and that’s what our plan is about. We have a command table. We have response teams. We are making sure we’re working with Public Health Ontario and PHAC. Up to $100 million in a response fund was announced by the Premier just yesterday, to include our readiness and response to COVID-19. Ontario’s command table has been refining and finalizing plans for enhanced measures.

I can tell you, as the Minister of Long-Term Care, that we are on this. We are making sure our active screening is occurring in all our homes—and the enhanced access to screening, the dedicated assessment centres, the physician billing codes, the launching of a self-assessment tool. This situation is evolving. This government has a plan and we’re acting on it.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Health experts have urged the government to share information about planning so people can be prepared, and so that the resources needed to confront this pandemic are being properly allocated.

Speaker, people are hungry; they’re hungry for information. Parents are wondering what will happen at schools, many of which are already in a poor state of repair. Shelters need to know that support will be there to protect especially vulnerable populations. Telehealth Ontario has waits as long as 11 to 15 hours for people seeking information.

Will the Premier commit to laying out the government’s contingency plans to address these concerns as soon as possible?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again for this important question. I can tell you that our government is actively creating screening centres at hospitals across Ontario that will be separate from the hospitals themselves. This will be in special locations across Ontario.

We want to make sure that the Telehealth issue is resolved. Our government is committing additional resources to make sure that Telehealth is responsive and staffed properly, and responsive in a timely way. We’re working very closely with Telehealth to ensure that they have the adequate supports.

Containment is of the utmost importance right now, and that will require advanced screening and that people have the proper communication tools at hand. Communication, communication, communication: Our government understands that and is acting on it.

We are committed to allocating additional resources to Telehealth as needed, and we are making sure that we will review virtual care options as well. Virtual care uptake through the command table is being assessed. And our command table, our regional tables, provincial table are working hard as we speak.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, there’s definitely no doubt that families are especially concerned about the ability of Ontario’s health system to cope with the dramatic increase in people seeking medical care. We know that hospitals are already routinely stretched well beyond their capacity.

Despite promises of ending hallway medicine, the government has continued to freeze funding, and that leaves hospitals treating patients in hallways and boardrooms to this very day.

So will the government be announcing their plans to support hospitals as COVID-19 spreads? And if so, will that include the announcement of new additional funding resources for hospitals?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Again, thank you for the question. Our government is working closely with our counterparts in collaborating with different levels of government, including our public health agencies and the federal government. The federal government has announced $1 billion to help provinces to address this issue, so we’ll be looking forward to how that will best be used for our hospitals.

Our first wave of assessment centres is established at Brampton Civic, the Ottawa Hospital, North York General, Mackenzie Health, Scarborough Health Network and Trillium Health Partners. These centres will help with the testing that is so badly needed right now.

Our government is doing everything possible to make sure that people are adequately screened and that active screening is taking place. We are making sure that Ontarians have access to credible, up-to-date information, and the public education campaign is up and running. For resources, you can go to ontario.ca/coronavirus, updated twice daily at 10:30 and 5:30, seven days a week. Our website provides relevant information in 30 different languages.

Communication, communication, communication of our plan is ongoing. Swift action is—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. The next question.

Employment standards

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. The Ford government’s decision to make sick notes mandatory and strip workers of paid sick days was concerning to both health experts and working people when it was passed two years ago. Now, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it poses even more serious threats to public health.

This morning, doctors, nurses and other health providers here at Queen’s Park spoke out in a press conference, urging the government to reverse their changes to these policies. Will the government do that?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. I want to reiterate our government’s commitment to the safety and well-being of all Ontarians and our front-line workers. That’s why we are looking at asking the federal government to increase the health transfers to 5%. This is really important, that we understand how different levels of government can contribute to this. We’re all in this together. This is not a time for vitriol. This is a time for active and responsive caring and compassion for each one of us.

We all have responsibility for our own health and the health of others. And we’re recommending that people who feel ill stay at home, and we encourage employers to support that advice. This is a time for unity. This is a time for working together. This is a time for caring and not vitriol.

Employers have the option to require reasonable proof of the circumstances that entitle the employee to leave.

Our government will continue to work with our federal counterparts to coordinate our response to COVID-19, and that includes addressing the needs of our front-line workers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, what we’re asking this government to do is to roll back their decision on sick notes being required in this province writ large. Every employer should not be asking any worker for a sick note. We should make sure that those workers have paid sick days to rely on, so that their financial ability is maintained.

It’s not just us, of course. Doctors, nurses and public health specialists are all speaking out for a simple reason: There is no point whatsoever in telling workers to take time away from work if their work won’t allow that to happen. They’re calling for paid sick days, emergency leave and an end to mandatory sick notes.

We have already made it clear that we will work with this government to ensure that legislation rolling back these policies passes quickly in this House.

Why is the government refusing to adopt these common-sense measures that are coming from all kinds of different sources in terms of recommendations?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Thank you to the Leader of the Opposition for that question. I can assure her that we are monitoring the situation minute by minute here in the province and across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage employers to be reasonable, to be responsible, and the ones I’ve spoken to have acted that way.

I also want to highlight what the Premier just said this morning. He is in Ottawa, meeting with the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, all the Premiers and territorial leaders. First off, he thanked the Prime Minister for the $1 billion in funding to the provinces and territories. He also asked the Prime Minister and the federal government to increase health transfers to Ontario by just over 5% per year.

I’ll have more to say in the next answer.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: With all due respect, monitoring and encouragement is not leadership on a file like this. We need leadership, and we need the government to act.

People who can’t afford to take a sick day from work are not going to take a sick day. People who could lose their job if they take a sick day will go to work. They will not take a day off.

No one should have to choose between their job and their health—no one. That choice puts all of our health at risk.

The Ford government knows that their current laws put public health at risk. Now is the time to change those laws, in the midst of the situation that we are facing.

Why is this government refusing to make the changes that are being recommended by experts? The changes need to happen. It’s not about encouragement. It’s not about simply monitoring. Make the changes.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: As the member opposite knows, our government added three new types of leave: sick leave, family responsibility leave and bereavement leave.

Mr. Speaker, we need everyone working together on this issue. This is a global challenge for every single person across the globe.

I want to pay tribute to our front-line health care workers, who are working every single day for the health and well-being of the people of this province.

I also want to commend the Deputy Premier of Ontario, the health minister, Christine Elliott, who is doing an outstanding job communicating this issue with all of the people of the province.

As well, I want to thank the Chief Medical Officer of Health for the province of Ontario, who is working very, very closely right across the government with all ministers.

As I said, we’re monitoring this situation minute by minute.

Health care

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Like everyone, families in my community of Brampton are worried about the COVID-19 pandemic. But Brampton has been struggling with a health care challenge for years. Before the COVID-19 outbreak, Brampton city council declared a health care emergency because our hospital routinely operates beyond capacity.

Yesterday, the Premier claimed that he had a plan for every scenario regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the chronic underfunding of Brampton Civic, the thousands of people treated in our hospital’s hallways and the health care crisis declared by the city of Brampton, what is this government’s plan to meet Brampton’s health care needs? My question is to the Premier.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Hallway health care is a complex issue, and hospitals across Ontario have been feeling the pressures for many years. Under the previous government, very little was done to address that for 15 long years, so due to the previous government’s mismanagement, we are dealing with this reality now.

Our government’s campaign promise was to relieve hallway health care and we’ve been diligently working on that ever since. We know that there are many pieces to this, and our efforts have included investing millions and billions of dollars into our health care system: $384 million in our hospital sector to maintain critical hospital capacity, increase access to highly specialized and innovative treatments and support the volume. We have an aging population, a growing population, and the neglect of 15 years of the previous government takes time to settle. Our estimates suggest that these investments will help. It will take time. I appreciate your concerns.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Back to the Premier: The people of Brampton see the incredible work our public health teams are doing to protect our community, but they also know that our local health system is facing tremendous strains already. Hallway medicine has been a fact of life in Brampton under Conservative and Liberal governments.

Will the government commit the resources Brampton needs to meet the COVID-19 pandemic and permanently stop the hallway medicine emergency in our city?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Once again, in the case of Brampton, we’ve announced that the first wave of assessment centres will be established at the Brampton Civic. That is one of the hospitals that will be included. The active screening processes, the treatment centres, the testing capacity are being ramped up. They will be ramped up across Ontario, and we’re working with Public Health Ontario.

We recognize that COVID-19 is novel. We are learning every day about the issues associated with it, and understanding the science and the evidence behind how we respond to it. We have amazing people working non-stop at Public Health Ontario and our federal counterpart as well, making sure that our front-line providers, as well as long-term-care homes, are equipped and ready to deal with it.

We’ve launched a province-wide public education campaign, and we want to make sure everyone understands we’re all in this together. We have to work together to solve this issue. It will take all our resources and all of our compassion.

Ontario Provincial Police

Ms. Jane McKenna: My question is for the Solicitor General. The mental health and well-being of police and other first responders in Ontario is incredibly important to all Ontarians. I want to thank all the front-line police officers that keep us safe every day.

I was pleased last year that the Solicitor General commissioned an external, independent review panel to review and report back on the workplace culture of the OPP. And I’m glad that, this week, the Solicitor General shared the report and its recommendations, and an update of our government’s progress in implementing those recommendations.

Can the Solicitor General share with this House the circumstances that led to her commissioning this report?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you to the member from Burlington. I know that there are many colleagues on this side of the House and on the other side that have had a long and focused interest on well-being, particularly related to mental health and, of course now in my current role, as it relates to our front-line officers.

The tragic deaths that have occurred over a number of years in OPP ranks led us, as a government, last April to strike a commission. This independent panel has done some excellent work. This will not be easy work for us to do, but it is critically important to ensure for our front-line officers that when they need help, when they reach out, the assistance is there.

I am so pleased that we are working in cooperation with OPP Commissioner Carrique and his management team. Equally important, Rob Jamieson is the president of the Ontario Provincial Police Association.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Ms. Jane McKenna: Thank you to the Solicitor General for that response and for all your hard work. I’m proud that our government, under the leadership of this Solicitor General and Premier Ford, has been taking action on this critically important issue.

Speaker, the review panel’s report makes it clear that action is required to improve the workplace culture at the OPP. Our dedicated and selfless front-line heroes deserve nothing less than our absolute commitment, leadership and support. I’m confident that our Solicitor General, our Premier and our entire government are committed to doing the necessary work to get this right.

Can the Solicitor General share how we are taking action in response to the recommendations of the independent review panel?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you for raising this. It gives me an opportunity to talk about the very positive things that we have already begun to do.

This report truly is a turning point in the transition to a healthier, more positive and supportive workplace. The reviewers made 66 recommendations, Speaker, and of those, 42 are already complete, in progress or well under way. It speaks to the commitment that Commissioner Carrique, as the head of the OPP, Rob Jamieson as the head of the OPP Association, and our government have, to ensure that people have the supports where and when they need them. And in the coming weeks and months, you will find that there are new and exciting announcements that will be made that add to what the independent review panel has recommended.

COVID-19

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier. As Ontarians are watching the developments around the COVID-19 pandemic unfold, there is, understandably, growing concern among parents and guardians about protections for our kids in our school system.

While so far the virus has had very limited impact on children younger than 10, the nature of children’s interactions could increase the risk of transmission in schools.

Can the Premier tell the House what steps the government is taking to support school boards and families as they deal with the threat of COVID-19?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. The health and well-being of Ontarians, including students and school staff, is Ontario’s top priority. Students, parents and school communities should rest assured that we are working together in close cooperation with partners in both the education and the health care sectors to ensure the continued safety of students and staff.

In the course of case and contact management, public health units can contact employers, schools, restaurants and places of business. This is a completely normal part of Ontario’s response to COVID-19, and it means our system is working.

Our government will continue to keep school boards up to date on the current situation and work to contain COVID-19. We all have a role to play in this. We all have respect and responsibility for our own health and the health of others.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you to the minister for that response. I have to say, though, that I was hoping we would get a little bit more detail here in the House about what’s happening now. What we’re hearing is that there are going to be regular calls starting after March break. That is concerning, I think, for a lot of us. We want to know that this is happening now, that there’s a plan in place and that there’s complete transparency.

School boards are already taking, as we know, extra precautions to guard against outbreaks. Custodians are logging extra hours. Extra cleaning and sanitizing supplies are being ordered. But at a time when we’ve seen school boards squeezed and custodial staff laid off, the government needs to be prepared to provide resources as necessary.

During the H1N1 outbreak, the province provided additional funds to offset these extra costs for boards. Is this government prepared to do the same for COVID-19?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Education to reply.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. I think we all have a shared interest in ensuring the safety of our students and our staff in our schools. That’s why, on the first presumptive positive case of COVID-19, I asked, with the support of the Minister of Health and Deputy Premier, to get the Chief Medical Officer of Health to speak to every director of education this Sunday, the day after that first case.

Information is flowing in real time. We have constant dialogue with directors and our stakeholders within the system to ensure that staff and students remain safe.

Of course, Speaker, we have increased the heightened vigilance in schools to ensure the safety of our personnel. The federal government, as well, has provided guidelines surrounding best practices to keep safe.

We are obviously going to continue to have those discussions in real time with the directors of education, in consultation with the Chief Medical Officer of Health, to ensure that every student and every staff member in Ontario remains safe.

COVID-19

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Acting Premier. Speaker, COVID-19 is a challenge we’re all facing together. We do, I think, on all sides appreciate the government’s invitation to yesterday’s briefing on the government’s efforts and some updates.

My question relates to the $100-million contingency fund that the Premier announced yesterday. Speaker, through you, my questions are, and there are two: Is the $100-million contingency fund solely for anticipated health care costs? And secondly, is the money allocated in this fiscal year, or is it the anticipated contingency in the upcoming budget?

Hon. Paul Calandra: I appreciate the question from the honourable member. Just let me thank oth himself, the leader of the Green Party and the Leader of the Opposition for making themselves available for a briefing with the Premier, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Health yesterday.

The initial funding that was announced by the Minister of Finance is directed to preserve and protect health care. It would be made available, obviously, immediately. We are continuing to monitor the situation. It is an initial contribution. We’re obviously monitoring the situation very, very closely and if more steps need to be taken, the government stands ready to make those additional resources available.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Mr. John Fraser: I thank the House leader for his answer. I appreciate the clarity, and Ontarians will need further clarity as to the government’s contingencies going forward for both health care costs and the economic impacts that are going to be felt in this province. I would encourage the government to be open-minded about those potential impacts.

We all know the public health advice that we’re getting, which we can all participate in, which is to wash your hands and don’t touch your face. If you’re sick, stay home. Practise social distancing. Call if you’re concerned.

But we know that next week is March break, and millions of kids are going to be off. They’re going to be with their families. I know the Premier said this morning that he wants families to have a good time, and we all agree. Many of those students and their families have travel plans, and we all know that travel is going to create some risk. Parents are looking for direction and advice.

Through you, Speaker: Does the government have any advice for parents about this March break and travel?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I thank the member opposite for the question. Indeed, some of these parents and students may be travelling on the eve of March break. As I noted in the prior question, we are encouraging all citizens, including, of course, staff, to strictly adhere to the guidelines set by both the province and the federal government with respect to travel, informed by the Chief Medical Officers of Health of Ontario and Canada with respect to travel and isolation protocols.

To ensure that students and staff returning from March break remain safe is the paramount priority, I think, of all members of this Legislature, united to ensure that the citizens of this province travel safely and adhere to those precautions, as mentioned by the Chief Medical Officer of Health.

Yesterday I convened a meeting of all ministers of education across the country, on my request, to help ensure that there’s a national dialogue about how we can ensure that we take action to combat this virus and ensure the safety of all citizens in Canada.

Skills training

Mr. Parm Gill: My question is for the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development. Landing a good job is not just about a paycheque; it also gives people purpose and dignity. Everyone is better off when people are working. For too many people across the province, it is hard to put a roof over their head.

At a time when Ontario has a talented, skilled and dedicated workforce with so much to offer, can the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development please tell this House how we’re helping laid-off manufacturing workers find work?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I want to thank the member for Milton for that excellent and important question.

Mr. Speaker, we are helping manufacturing workers retrain and get jobs faster. I firmly believe that with the right kind of training and support, people and businesses can have great opportunities in our ever-changing economy.

On Tuesday, I was pleased to meet Maksud. He was an electrician in India and came to Ontario with $500 in his pocket. After 16 years, he was laid off from his job at a textile company. Through our Second Career program, he retrained, got a diploma, and now has an excellent job. In his own words, Maksud says that his dream came true right here in Canada. We need more stories like Maksud’s.

We’re going to continue to work with all of our workers right across the province so they have the best opportunities possible.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Mr. Parm Gill: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. I’m pleased to hear that our government is committed to supporting our manufacturing workers and creating opportunities for them.

Mr. Speaker, it’s important to remember that jobs are about people. Every time there is a layoff, workers, their families and their communities are impacted.

Can the minister please share with this House how he is making it easier for laid-off workers to get back to work sooner?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Thank you again for that question.

Mr. Speaker, last year, the Second Career program helped train more than 3,800 people. This program offers assistance not only with training, but also for related costs like books and transportation. But I agree that we need to make it work sooner and better for Ontario’s workers. Recently, with the member for Cambridge and the member for Kitchener South–Hespeler, I announced that we have ended the delay for laid-off manufacturing workers to get retrained in Ontario. We are adapting the program to make it work better for the people of this province.

Mr. Speaker, we will always stand with the working men and women of this province, because when everyone can contribute to the economy, our communities and our province can prosper.

Licence plates

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Acting Premier.

Recently, the Premier was heartbroken that there won’t be PC-blue plates on every Ontario vehicle. But this issue isn’t heartbreaking; it’s absurd and mind-boggling.

It’s so mind-boggling that even one of this government’s former top officials, Jenni Byrne, weighed in publicly and said, “There is no defending it. This issue was managed absolutely terribly. I can’t imagine how it could have been managed worse.” Ms. Byrne went on to say, “The government seemingly defended this licence plate issue for three days. This was the hill they were going to die on, and then it became evident four days, five days in, that it wasn’t going away and there actually was a problem with the licence plates.”

Speaker, she’s not wrong, and inquiring minds want to know what will be tomorrow’s hill to die on for this Premier. Will it be billboards, or could it be something like autism services, clean drinking water, affordable housing or public health?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Obviously, for us, what we’re doing right now is, we’re focused on the economy, and we’re focused on COVID-19. That’s the priority of this government.

I can appreciate the role that the opposition has in both supporting the government in times of a health emergency and also extracting accountability. But I’m sure the member opposite can appreciate that we will continue to focus on what matters most to the people of Ontario, and that’s the health and safety of all Ontarians in communities across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?

Ms. Jennifer K. French: This strange, winding road we’ve all been on with the Premier’s hand-picked party plates has captivated the attention of folks across the province. It has been a weird circus that never should have happened.

This Premier’s heartbreak, however, doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to bury the costs and details of these party-blue licence plates. I have asked repeatedly, and the government has dodged repeatedly. But Ontario still deserves the answer. How can this government justify using a non-disclosure agreement to hide their self-serving misuse of public money?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Government and Consumer Services.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I want to assure everyone in this House and everyone watching today that we are working with our stakeholders and we’re working with the vendor in terms of delivering a product that addresses the concerns that we have taken very seriously.

Again, I appreciate that people felt that they could speak to us and share their concerns. Ontarians should feel confident that they have a government that is actually responding and acting on those concerns. I can tell you that our focus is absolutely on delivering an enhanced plate that meets the highest standards.

Employment standards

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My question is for the Acting Premier.

I want to first thank the Premier for hosting an all-party meeting for a briefing on COVID-19 yesterday, and I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for pushing to have the meeting. I think it’s really important, at this moment in time, that we work across party lines.

I also think it’s important that all Ontarians work together to care for each other. As we all work hard to contain COVID-19, health experts are saying that if you’re showing symptoms, self-quarantine. The bottom line is: If you’re sick, stay home.

But many Ontarians cannot afford to stay home. We’ve been seeing articles in the newspapers about people struggling: Are they going to pay the rent or stay home?

I’m going to ask the Acting Premier: Will the government commit to a paid sick and emergency leave program so people can self-quarantine without fear of not being able to pay their rent or mortgage or put food on the table?

Hon. Paul Calandra: I thank the honourable member for attending the briefing yesterday. As the member knows, the initial response was $100 million, which goes to protecting the health and safety of those who are dealing with it on the front line.

We are working very closely with our federal partners to ensure that Ontarians and Canadians, more broadly, are protected in this. I know that the federal government has announced a number of measures through employment insurance to make it easier and quicker for Ontarians who are impacted by COVID-19 to access support.

As the Minister of Finance said yesterday, we are monitoring the economic situation very, very closely, not only across Ontario but with our partners across the country, to ensure that we can respond to that, once we have the health care situation under control across Ontario. But obviously, we are going to continue to work with the federal government and with all members to ensure that Ontarians are safe and secure in this time.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I appreciate the House leader’s response, but self-quarantining, staying home from work when you’re sick, is directly related to public health. Public health officials are saying, “If you’re sick, stay home,” but not all workers can afford to stay home. As a matter of fact, EI supports don’t always benefit people who are in the hospitality industry, the service industry and the gig economy. I was just reading an

article in the National Post this morning about workers saying that they are going to go to work even if they’re sick, because they can’t afford not to.

While I would like to see a permanent reversal of the government’s move to cancel paid sick days and sick notes, I’m wondering if the minister would at least agree to a temporary program to support workers to stay home while we’re trying to contain COVID-19.

Hon. Paul Calandra: As I said in my initial response, the Premier, the Minister of Finance and Minister of Health are in Ottawa today meeting with the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and Premiers across Canada. Many of the Premiers, the member will know, share some of the same concerns. We understand that across the economy, there are impacts which will be felt, and that different areas of the economy are impacted in a different way.

As we said, the initial investment of $100 million is, first and foremost, to ensure the safety and security of those people who are dealing with this on the front line. The federal government has made some initial moves to assist through employment insurance, and we will continue to monitor the situation so that Ontarians can be assured that not only will we get through this, but we’ll get through this together.

I think it also highlights the need to ensure that the province is always on sound fiscal footing. I appreciate the fact that we’ve been able to do that in 18 short months.

Anti-bullying initiatives

Mr. Stan Cho: I know how devastating bullying can be on a child. Today in the Legislature, I have a very special visitor who has been dealing with some bullies at his school. He’s a young, bright, wonderful person. He and all other victims of bullying do not deserve such treatment.

We know that the longer a child is bullied, the more likely they are to develop physical, emotional and psychological scars that can last a lifetime. That should never happen. We need to learn from these incidents and take action to protect our children.

Can the Minister of Education please tell us how the government is combatting the bullying issues that we have in Ontario schools, and what we can do to stop this problem in the province of Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government House leader to reply.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I appreciate the question from the member for Willowdale. Let me just reach out to the guest he has brought with him today, to tell him that not only this side but all members of this House stand with him constantly.

This is something that we all agree should not be taking place in the province of Ontario. I know that the Minister of Education has been working very closely across party lines to address this very real problem in schools across the province.

I have two young daughters. Often I hear some of the stories that they bring back and they recount, and I wish I could say that they weren’t, on occasion, themselves the victims of bullying. As a parent, it breaks your heart, but as a parliamentarian, it makes me want to redouble my efforts to work across the floor with my colleagues to make sure that we educate our students and work with our school partners to make sure that we can put an end to this.

Again, to the honourable young man who joins us in the galleries, thank you so much for being here and having the courage to share your story with us.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Mr. Stan Cho: I’m glad to hear that the government House leader and this government do indeed take the issue of bullying very, very seriously.

Through you, Mr. Speaker: I’d like to thank the government House leader for recognizing that the topic of bullying is a non-partisan issue. I encourage all members of this House to work together to provide constructive ideas on how we can eradicate this problem for good in our schools here in the province. No kid should ever have to go through bullying. This government is committed to making sure that we get rid of it in our schools and we get rid of it in our societies. I look forward to those constructive discussions.

I was wondering if the government House leader could provide some other examples of what we’re working on in government to prevent bullying, and how we can help each other get rid of this problem once and for all.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, let me just thank the member for Willowdale for the question. Our government is taking action to combat bullying, but the member is correct: We need to learn more about the systemic challenges surrounding bullying so we can drill down and focus our attention accordingly to combat it.

In November, the minister announced the assignment of the member for Scarborough Centre, who is a former teacher, to advise on education matters, with a focus on bullying prevention. I know that we all value that advice.

The government will also conduct a province-wide online survey to better understand students’ experiences with bullying. We will conduct a review of school reporting practices on bullying, and a review of the definition of bullying in ministry policies, to ensure it reflects the realities of today. We are working to change the culture to one where everyone sees inherent dignity in the value of a person, irrespective of their faith, heritage, orientation, race or income.

Finally, on a day when we’re all thinking of a lot of different things, we again congratulate and thank the young man who joins us today for his courage in bringing this forward.

Winter highway maintenance

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: My question is for the Acting Premier. Two months ago, almost to the day, three people died in a winter road collision on Highway 11/17 near the junction with Highway 102 in Thunder Bay. Every single time there is a fatal accident like this one, there is a family that is torn apart. There are people and an entire region that come to a halt.

When questioned about the state of northern Ontario road maintenance, the minister indicated that Highway 11/17 is cleared of snow in an average of seven hours. Well, that came as a shock to someone who routinely drives those highways. That is less time than it takes to clear the 401, Speaker.

Can the Acting Premier explain the seven hours, when northern Ontarians see roads packed with snow and ice every single day?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Transportation (GTA).

Hon. Kinga Surma: I want to thank the member for the question. Certainly, safety is the number one priority for the Ministry of Transportation as well as for all the members in the House.

The Ministry of Transportation has been working very diligently over a number of years to improve winter maintenance and snow removal across our northern communities—such as greater oversight with contractors—as well as working with contractors so that they have the equipment necessary so that they can remove snow as quickly as possible.

I will continue to work with the members opposite to ensure that all drivers on our highways are safe, and that our roads continue to be rated amongst the safest in North America.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Thank you for explaining the seven hours.

Speaker, people may say that our highways have always been treacherous and risky. But since the Liberal government privatized the winter maintenance system and enforced performance-based area maintenance contracts in 2009, things have gone from risky to deadly.

To be fair, the member from Nipissing made himself a name by telling the then Minister of Transportation, now the leader of the Ontario Liberals, that driving conditions in the north are disgraceful. Yet neither the member from Nipissing nor any