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

September 24, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Sept-24 (PDF)

L026 - Mon 24 Sep 2018 / Lun 24 sep 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 24 September 2018 Lundi 24 septembre 2018

Introduction of Visitors

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Legislative pages

Oral Questions

Provincial deficit

Government’s agenda

Disaster relief

Disaster relief

Anti-racism activities

Government spending and accounting practices

Municipal government

Anti-racism activities

Provincial debt

Natural gas

Government spending and accounting practices

Social assistance

Energy policies

Hospital services

Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards

Foodland Ontario

Private members’ public business

Visitor

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Private members’ public business

Members’ Statements

Curriculum

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Curriculum

Jewish High Holy Days

Le drapeau franco-ontarien

Climate change

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Tornadoes in Ottawa

International trade

TryEngineering

Notice of dissatisfaction

Visitors

Introduction of Bills

2063434 Ontario Limited Act, 2018

Petitions

Curriculum

Curriculum

Employment standards

Affordable housing

School facilities

Employment standards

Rectification au procès-verbal

Orders of the Day

Standing orders / Règlement

Visitor

The House met at 1030.

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

Prayers.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’d like to welcome members of the Grape Growers of Ontario: Matthias Oppenlaender, who is the chairman of the Grape Growers; Bill Schenck, vice-chairman of the Grape Growers; and Stephanie Gawur and Carol Mitchell, who are counsel with the Grape Growers.

I would also like to welcome the Ontario building trades representatives who are going to be here this evening. I look forward to attending their reception this evening.

Mr. Stephen Crawford: I’m honoured to have two members of my campaign team here from Oakville today. The first is my executive assistant, Christopher Warren, and the second individual is a former deputy commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who served our country, Mr. Curt Allen.

M me France Gélinas: We have members from the Ontario Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance here at Queen’s Park. There are 21 of them, so be patient with me:

—Association of Local Public Health Agencies;

—Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario;

—Ontario Public Health Association;

—Ophea;

—Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario;

—Canadian Cancer Society;

—Canadian Diabetes Association;

—Canadian Mental Health Association;

—Cardiac Health Foundation of Canada;

—Centre for Addiction and Mental Health;

—Champlain CVD Prevention Network;

—Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance of Canada;

—Dietitians of Canada;

—Health Nexus;

—Kidney Foundation of Canada;

—Nurse Practitioners’ Association of Ontario;

—Chronic Disease Prevention Managers in Public Health;

—Ontario Kinesiology Association;

—Ontario Society for Health and Fitness;

—Osteoporosis Canada; and

—Parks and Recreation Ontario.

Everybody is welcome to come see them in room 228 at noon. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: I have the privilege of welcoming a constituent to the Legislature this afternoon: George Appleton, who is here from my riding of Niagara West. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I would like to welcome Simon Hauber’s family here from St. Catharines.

Simon recently started here as a page. His mother, Michelene, is here as well, who was a page here in the House. His brothers Malcolm and Thomas have joined us today to wish Simon well in his new endeavours. Welcome.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m pleased to welcome representatives from Merit, Ontario: Bernie Melloul, Gian Fortuna, Ian Kowalchuk, Phil Besseling, Walter Pamic, Tim Henhoeffer, Ron Worrall, Domenic Mattina, Gordon Sproule, Cam Besseling, Terrance Oakey and Michael Gallardo.

They’re here to advocate for more democratic workplaces, and I invite all members to join them for a reception tonight at 5 p.m. in rooms 228 and 230. Welcome.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to welcome the Ontario Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance. They’re here today at Queen’s Park. They represent 75,000 members and volunteers. They’re hosting an annual lobby day, and I look forward to meeting with their members this afternoon. They’re doing something at lunchtime, so I hope everybody can join us.

Mr. Bill Walker: It’s my pleasure to introduce Joe Varner, the husband of MPP MacLeod, and daughter Toria MacLeod-Varner. She is also a page here. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: I just want to acknowledge Walter Pamic, who is a small business owner from Ottawa, a former federal candidate and an early supporter of my campaign. Welcome, Walter.

Mr. Aris Babikian: I would like to welcome a constituent of mine, Mrs. Jiao Jiang. She is the mother of page Eric Li. Welcome to the House.

Mr. Daryl Kramp: I’m very, very pleased today to welcome a pair of proud grandparents: Don and Virginia Mackie, grandparents of our new page Joshua.

Mrs. Robin Martin: I would like to welcome the members of the Ontario Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance in the gallery today. They represent 21 health organizations focused on chronic disease prevention and management. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I’d like to welcome the family of Vedikaa Singh, our page from Newmarket–Aurora: Ruchika Singh, Pankaj Singh and Nishka Singh. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Tornadoes in Ottawa

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order, the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I rise on a point of order today to acknowledge an incident that happened in my city of Ottawa on Friday. A tornado touched down in Ottawa—two tornadoes, in fact—in my riding as well as in the riding of the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

I would like to publicly thank those from Hydro Ottawa and Hydro One who worked tirelessly to get most of our city back on the power grid, as well as all of our first responders, who made sure that we were safe.

Given the tragic circumstances, we are very fortunate that there was not a fatality as a result of this, after having seen the severity on the ground.

I’d also like to say thank you to the volunteers throughout Ottawa who showed up with food and comfort for those who were affected. In just Nepean alone we’ve had over 10,000 people who were without power who ended up with power last night.

Lastly, to the people of Trend-Arlington, Craig Henry and, of course, my colleague’s community of Dunrobin, I would like to let them know on behalf of all the people in this Legislature that we support them, we’re praying for them and we want to make sure that they get back on track.

Finally, I’d like to say thank you to my government colleagues who have reached out from the Ministries of Energy, Health, Education and Municipal Affairs to say that they would act swiftly for our people and our city. Thank you very much.

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

Legislative pages

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would now ask the pages to assemble.

It is my privilege and honour as Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to ask all members to join me in welcoming this group of legislative pages, serving in the first session of the 42nd Parliament: Aaliyah Kinney from Hamilton Mountain; Alexander Tracey from the riding of Beaches–East York; Alisha Aslam from Scarborough North; Derek Lin from the riding of Don Valley North; Deven Sinanan, Markham–Stouffville; Eric Li from Scarborough–Agincourt; Erika Celestin, Brampton East; Isha Sarfraz, Toronto Centre; Jocelyn Kuntsi from Algoma–Manitoulin; Joshua Chicoine from Hastings–Lennox and Addington; Justine Babin from Pickering–Uxbridge; Kathleen Fleming from Parry Sound–Muskoka; Martin Leduc, Orléans; Meagan Sequeira, Mississauga–Lakeshore; Molly Jin from Milton; Patrick Bellerose from Kiiwetinoong; Simon Dubé from Nipissing; Simon Hauber from St.

Catharines; Vedikaa Singh, Newmarket–Aurora; Victoria Anne Macleod-Varner, Ottawa West–Nepean; Victoria Zhangliu, Waterloo; and William Oesch from the great riding of Wellington–Halton Hills.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It is now time for oral questions.

Oral Questions

Provincial deficit

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier. Before I give it, though, I do want to acknowledge as well, on behalf of Ontario’s New Democrats, the tragedy that befell Ottawa on the weekend and say to the members affected that our hearts are with you. I know it’s been a difficult road for your constituents in the last couple of days.

Did the Premier believe that the previous Liberal government was accurately reporting the province’s deficit figure when the election campaign began this spring?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I’ll tell the opposition what I believe. What I believe is what the Auditor General was saying: that they were cooking the books. That’s what I believe. I also believe that the Leader of the Opposition and the NDP party was supporting the Liberals every step of the way—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the Premier to withdraw the unparliamentary comment.

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

What I do believe is we have the worst political scandal in Ontario’s history at hand right now. We will be going through line item by line item. We’ll be putting a team together to make sure that people are held accountable for the taxpayers of Ontario. That’s what I believe.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: On Friday, the Minister of Finance put on a show that Ontarians see every time a new government rolls in: pretending to be shocked by the deficit numbers, which weren’t a shock to anyone who has read a newspaper over the last year. The Premier promised people change, but this pantomime act is right out of the McGuinty-Wynne playbook. Does the Premier really expect anyone to believe it?

Hon. Doug Ford: Again, through you, Mr. Speaker: As I mentioned earlier, we have the worst political scandal in Ontario’s history. We have a $15-billion scandal on our hands, and we’re going to get down to the bottom of it. As the NDP stood side by side, shoulder by shoulder with the Liberals, boosting them up—as you can hear, protecting them—that is unacceptable to the people of Ontario.

The people of Ontario want answers. We had an event, Ford Fest, on the weekend, and what I heard over and over again was, “Where did my money go? Who’s being held accountable?” I assure the people of Ontario that there are going to be answers. We will get down to the bottom of it, and there will be people held accountable.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, I wish the Premier would actually look at the numbers, because he would discover that the Tories propped up the Liberals about 50% of the time.

The Premier spent the last spring campaign promising everything to everyone. He said that he’d balance the budget within three years, slash taxes for his wealthy friends and do it all without cutting the services that families rely on. New Democrats have argued for months that the promise to balance the books by 2021 was reckless, irresponsible and could not be achieved without deep, deep cuts to the services that families rely upon.

Is the Premier still promising to balance the books by 2021, or is he now admitting that his promise was irresponsible and that he never had a plan to keep it?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I’d like to know why the Leader of the Opposition is defending the Wynne Liberals. That’s what I’d like to know.

Talk about accounting practices: The NDP had the same accounting practices during the election as we saw with the Liberals for the last 15 years. They couldn’t add up their own budget. They were $5 billion off. The only difference is that the Liberals were about $9 billion off on their projections.

But I can assure the people of Ontario: We’re going to keep with our mandate of lowering taxes for the middle-income families of this province, lowering gas prices—we’re already halfway there—with a reduction of five cents per litre. We’re going to lower the hydro rates to the tune of 12%, and we’re going to get jobs created in this great province.

Government’s agenda

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. Let’s be specific: During the last campaign, the Premier echoed our commitment to end hallway medicine in our hospitals, yet he also committed to $6 billion in across-the-board cuts, which would result in hospital closures in Ontario and layoffs for front-line staff.

I was at the Thunder Bay regional hospital on Friday, a hospital like many others across Ontario that has been operating at surge capacity for months and months. Is the Premier prepared to back away from his $6 billion in cuts to ensure that hospitals like this have the resources that they need to combat hallway medicine?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the Leader of the Opposition that we have the best Minister of Health I’ve ever seen—ever. I have all the confidence in the Minister of Health to end hallway medicine, hallway health care, and to stop the lineups that are four or five hours in the hallway of every hospital in this province.

We will reach out to the doctors and the nurses, who we think the world of, the front-line workers, to get their opinion. Once we get the input from the front-line health care workers, the nurses and the doctors, we will move forward with a joint plan, because nothing is worse than a bunch of politicians telling professional health care workers how to operate the hospitals, what they do every single day. We will straighten out the health care mess that was created—

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

Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, during the campaign, the Premier promised that he could and would make $6-billion worth of cuts and that no hospital or family would be affected by his cuts. But on Friday, his finance minister said, “The hole is deep and it will require everyone to make sacrifices without exception.” Which is it?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Leader of the Opposition: We’re focused on the $15-billion scandal at hand here, when the Leader of the Opposition said, “What’s wrong with that? There’s nothing wrong with that. You knew about it.”

The only person that knew about it was the Leader of the Opposition and the NDP and the Liberals, because they were shoulder to shoulder, standing together, while they were creating the biggest political scandal in Ontario’s history.

We need answers. The people of Ontario need answers. And I can tell you, the Leader of the Opposition better come up with better answers than, “We all knew about it.” That is disgusting.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I don’t know where the Premier was hiding, but it was pretty obvious that there was going to be a problem, with the auditor’s response to the Liberal books, and we all knew it. Maybe the Premier didn’t; he would be one of the only people in Ontario that didn’t.

But families in Ontario told us—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order on the government benches.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Families in Ontario told us what they want is action on crumbling schools, crowded hospitals and disappearing jobs. Instead, they get a Premier playing games with the deficit, focused on avenging old grudges and backroom deals for his friends and scrambling to explain why he’s not going to keep the empty promises that he made on the campaign trail. Everyone in Ontario knew the Liberals were playing games with the deficit. It was obvious.

Will the Premier admit that his promise to instantly eliminate the deficit while offering tax handouts to his wealthy friends was irresponsible and reckless and, if not, will he tell families exactly what it is that he plans to cut?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I want to know: Where was the Leader of the Opposition? We never heard anything from the Leader of the Opposition. But the Leader of the Opposition knew about it, that there was no big surprise.

So as the Leader of the Opposition and the NDP were voting with the Liberals 97% of the time, condoning the backroom deals, condoning the wasteful spending, they were standing shoulder to shoulder with them in the biggest political scam I’ve ever seen in my life, wasting billions and billions of taxpayers’ money that our generation and the next generation will be paying off. Our children will be paying it off, our grandchildren will be paying it off, all because the NDP stood by and condoned the actions of the Liberals.

Disaster relief

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. On Friday, as we’ve all acknowledged in the House this morning, the Ottawa region was struck by two tornadoes of devastating force. Miraculously, no fatalities occurred, as the minister for children and youth has mentioned, but several were injured, homes were destroyed and hundreds of thousands lost power.

On behalf of myself, the members of my caucus and the member for Ottawa Centre, I want to say that there was a great deal of devastation, and we want to acknowledge that and acknowledge the hard work and leadership of all of the first responders and folks in Ottawa that pulled together in the face of this tragedy.

The Premier stated that the provincial government “will provide whatever resources are required to support Ottawa as they work to recover.” Can the minister provide us with any more details on what resources will be deployed to aid the ongoing relief efforts?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. I also want to acknowledge the work that has been done by our first responders, hydro workers and city of Ottawa officials. I also want to commend Premier Ford, members of our cabinet, Minister MacLeod and Minister Fullerton, the government members, the opposition members in Ottawa, the MPs and the city councillors for all of the work that they have done.

As we announced on Saturday, our government has activated the disaster recovery assistance for Ontario program. We continue to work with the city of Ottawa officials. We continue to have people from my ministry on the ground being able to answer those questions for citizens.

Again, I appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition. This is something that we all need to rally around. There was tremendous devastation in those communities. Those citizens of Ottawa are going to need not just the financial supports, but also the health care supports and the mental health supports. There are a lot of things that our government is willing to put up to help the city of Ottawa. I’d be pleased to answer more in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, on the weekend, the government did announce that it is activating the disaster recovery assistance program in the Ottawa region to cover emergency expenses for residents over and above what private insurers can provide. The Minister of Municipal Affairs has said that the exact areas qualifying for assistance are in the process of being determined.

Can the minister assure the city of Ottawa and all Ottawa region residents who have experienced property damage or loss that they will be eligible for disaster recovery assistance? We know that this program has not been as it should in the past, in other situations that have occurred around our province. We just want to get an assurance that, in fact, people who need the support are absolutely going to get it.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thanks again to the Leader of the Opposition for the question. Typically, with the DRAO program, the two typical complaints that we received are that past governments haven’t activated the program early enough and that claims took too long to process. That’s why our government acted quickly and enacted the program within 24 hours of the disaster taking place, and we’ve committed. We have people on the ground right now in the city of Ottawa. We continue to pledge that we’re going to put in as many resources as we can to process those claims quickly. We want to make sure that we’re responsive to the needs of the citizens in Ottawa.

I think most people know that our assistance program is meant to supplement insurance, but that doesn’t mean to say that people have to wait. That’s why we acted decisively and acted in the best interests of the people of Ottawa.

Again, I want to reiterate, my thanks to all members of this House and the community of Ottawa.

The one thing that I know Premier Ford and I saw when we toured the areas of devastation was the tremendous sense of community, the fact that neighbours were working together to help each other to get through this. Our government is going to stand with them.

Disaster relief

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Mr. Speaker, as has already been noted, on Friday evening, tornadoes rampaged through the city of Ottawa, leaving a trail of devastation in their wake. Thanks to the brave work of our first responders, we are blessed that no lives have been lost as a result of this, but the destruction and anguish left behind is all too real.

In the communities of Dunrobin, Trend-Arlington and Craig Henry, many people have found themselves without a home. Thousands across Ottawa remain without power.

Mr. Speaker, could the minister please update the House on the quick actions that our government has taken to provide support and relief to the people of Ottawa in this time of need?

Hon. Steve Clark: Through you, Speaker: I want to thank the member opposite for the question. I appreciated seeing him yesterday in Barrhaven.

I want to again acknowledge the tremendous work that’s being done on the ground by our first responders and by hydro officials. The Premier and I and MPPs on the ground had an opportunity yesterday to meet with the mayor, with the chief and with other officials. There have been incredible lines of communication that have been opened between the groups. Again, I want to credit all of those people, from all sides of the House, and in the community, for the work that they have done.

As has been mentioned, the Premier toured the Dunrobin site with Minister Fullerton. I had the opportunity to tour Trend-Arlington and Craig Henry with Minister MacLeod.

Again, I want to say that we acted quickly with the Disaster Recovery Assistance for Ontarians program. In the supplemental, I’ll give more details on that program.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for that update and for his tireless work on behalf of the people of Ottawa, to ensure that they received the support they needed.

Yesterday, the Premier took the time to tour some of the damaged areas and visit with residents impacted by this disaster. As he said at the time, it was truly inspiring to see the strength and resilience of our people in this time of crisis. I am proud of both my hometown and my colleagues in this chamber and at city hall, who have stepped up and shown such tremendous leadership.

I know that many families right now are concerned about the financial impacts of this disaster. Mr. Speaker, could the minister please update us on the rollout of the Ontario government recovery assistance program?

Hon. Steve Clark: Thank you to the member.

My ministry staff are working with Ottawa officials to identify the specific areas where the disaster recovery program will be activated. It’s my expectation that those maps will be available today.

The program helps individuals and small businesses recover by providing financial assistance for essential costs not covered by insurance. Examples include basic furnishings, appliances and emergency costs.

As I said earlier, the two biggest complaints were that, in the past, the program wasn’t activated early enough and it used to take a long time to deal with these applications. I’ve committed that my ministry will maintain a strict customer service standard to get those applications turned around as fast as possible.

More information can be found on my department’s website at ontario.ca/disasterassistance. For those who would like to help, I encourage you to call the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, who are accepting donations.

Anti-racism activities

Ms. Jill Andrew: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Premier.

Will the Premier unequivocally denounce Faith Goldy and her hateful campaign and apologize to Ontarians for appearing in a photo that is now being used as a de facto endorsement?

Hon. Doug Ford: Boy, Mr. Speaker, they’ve sunk to a new low. If they were at Ford Fest, it was the most diverse group anywhere in Canada—anywhere—of every race, of every creed, of every colour, of every religion and of every political stripe. There’s no group in the entire country that represents Toronto and Ontario more than Ford nation does.

I can’t help when thousands of people are coming at you and they’re taking pictures right, left and centre.

You know something? They’ve hit a new low. They’ve hit a new low, because I’ll tell you what the people of Ford Fest talked about: The people of Ford Fest talked about the $15-billion scandal that wasted the taxpayers’ money, and how the NDP stood side by side with the Liberals as the scandal was unrolling year after year. That’s what the people of Ford Fest were talking about. They weren’t talking about anything else. They’re disgusted by this financial scandal they face right now in the province of Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Jill Andrew: The Ford government is standing up and applauding for racism and prejudice. Shame on you.

Groups like the Canadian Anti-Hate Network registered deep concern about Goldy at the outset of the Toronto campaign, saying that they “expect her to try to use her mayoral run as a platform to spread hate.” They asked media and other candidates not to legitimize her campaign, and she’s clearly used this photo with the Premier to claim exactly that sort of legitimacy.

Sadly, we live in a time where hate groups pushing bigotry and seeking to divide people are on the rise. What does the Premier say to Ontarians who may be wondering if the Premier’s photo and the viral video of our Premier smiling and taking photo shots like a glamour model—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Question.

Ms. Jill Andrew: Will the Premier denounce that photo, yes or no?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: What I found amazing is the diverse group of people who showed up to Ford Fest, the 8,000 people. And there were thousands of people who couldn’t come in through the door.

Again, I want to remind the NDP and the Liberals what people were talking about.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Toronto–St. Paul’s, come to order.

Hon. Doug Ford: They were talking about the $15-billion scandal. They were talking about the wasted tax dollars we’ve seen over 15 years. They want people held accountable. They want lower taxes, lower hydro bills and lower gas prices. They need good—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s must come to order.

Hon. Doug Ford: —when I have thousands of people coming at me.

Do you know why they’ve never experienced it? Because they couldn’t get a crowd like that. Any of them couldn’t get a crowd like that. That is what Ontario’s representative is, the group of people who showed up—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s must come to order. The House will come to order.

Next question.

Government spending and accounting practices

Ms. Donna Skelly: My question is for the Minister of Finance. Last week, we learned the ugly truth about the state the Liberals left this province in, thanks to the work of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry. Along with my colleagues, I was absolutely shocked and disappointed to learn the extent of the Liberals’ waste and mismanagement over their 15 disastrous years in government.

It is crucial that we end the Liberal culture of scandal after scandal and allow the public to once again have faith in its government. Can the minister explain what further work is under way to restore accountability and trust in this province’s finances?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook for the question.

The commission’s report reveals that the Liberals’ culture of waste and mismanagement was embedded at the highest levels. The Liberals told us they balanced the budget in 2017-18 when they really ran a $3.7-billion deficit. Then, in the election year, they made empty promises for programs they could not afford.

Instead of being honest about the cost of their out-of-control spending, the Liberals made up their own accounting rules to keep the true cost from the public. The Liberals secretly ran a $15-billion deficit, billions higher than anyone could total, by using what the Auditor General called “bogus” numbers.

The commission’s report serves as an important first step in restoring accountability and trust in Ontario’s finances. Our government is committed to respecting taxpayers and putting Ontario’s fiscal house back in order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Donna Skelly: Minister, it is an absolute relief to hear that further action is going to be taken based on the findings of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry. The multi-billion-dollar hidden deficits, dishonest accounting tricks and empty promises of the previous Liberal government simply cannot go—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw.

Ms. Donna Skelly: Withdraw.

The previous Liberal government simply betrayed the trust of the people of Ontario and must provide an explanation. Could the minister explain why it is so crucial to restore accountability and trust following this Liberal scandal?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thanks to the commission’s diligent work, we now have a true accounting of Ontario’s fiscal position. This was a necessary first step in restoring confidence in the government’s books.

While there’s still much work to be done, we are already moving toward positive change. We are bringing greater transparency in preparing our financial documents, beginning with the 2017-18 public accounts. This has resulted in the Auditor General giving the public accounts a clean opinion for the first time in three years. Congratulations to Minister Bethlenfalvy.

It is now our duty to return to a balanced budget. We will do so on a timetable that is reasonable, modest and pragmatic. Together, we will return Ontario to balance and reclaim our position as the economic engine of Canada.

Municipal government

Mr. Jeff Burch: Speaker, through you to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: Last week, the minister was scrambling to explain why Toronto should be reduced to 25 councillors serving 2.9 million citizens while his riding of Leeds–Grenville has a total of 96 councillors representing 70,000 citizens. He couldn’t explain the discrepancy, but he did say that other municipal councils were under review.

Can the minister tell us whether he will be reducing the number of councillors serving his riding of Leeds–Grenville from 96 to one, and what other municipalities are under review?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the member for the question. In that scrum, I did talk about the review of regional governance that we started informally at the Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference. That would be more formalized in the fall.

The member is right: There are 13 municipalities in Leeds–Grenville, and the average council size is seven elected officials. The officials in my riding are very efficient. In fact, I think they can give the council in Toronto a few lessons on how to run an efficient and effective council meeting.

I’d be more than happy to extend further details in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Burch: This minister has reduced Toronto’s local representation to one councillor for every 110,000 constituents while his riding has a councillor for every 729. Municipal leaders across the province saw what happened in the city of Toronto. The Premier ignored the elected representatives of that municipality, threw an election into chaos and made it clear he’d take a chainsaw to the Charter of Rights to get his way.

Mr. Speaker, the logic is flawed, the process is unfair and the numbers don’t add up. Will the minister commit today to dealing respectfully with elected municipal governments to ensure that they get the final say on the size and design of their municipal councils?

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, again through you to the member: Here’s a number that I want the member to hear, and that is zero. That’s the amount of full-time councillors that are in Leeds–Grenville. I want him to listen to another number: zero. That is the amount of constituency staff that a part-time councillor in a rural municipality has. These part-time councillors do an exceptional job, as they do throughout rural Ontario. In fact, again—

Interjections.

Hon. Steve Clark: —you don’t have, in a rural municipality, a 15-hour council meeting. You don’t have the deadlock and dysfunction that we’ve seen at Toronto city council. That’s exactly why we passed the Better Local Government Act.

The member can talk about part-time rural councillors all he wants. We’ve placed this bill on the order paper and it’s passed. We look forward to working with that Toronto council on October 22.

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Michael Coteau: I also, on behalf of our caucus, would like to recognize the devastation that took place in Ottawa and thank everyone involved in the cleanup, especially our first responders.

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. Premier, does the Anti-Racism Directorate still exist, and if so, can you tell this House exactly what is the next step you will be taking in order for it to reach its mandate?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I can reassure the House here and I can reassure the people of Ontario that we denounce all forms of hate, and we will not waver from denouncing all forms of hate.

What I’d like to ask the member from Don Valley East is, what was he doing when his team was wasting $15 billion of the taxpayers’ money? That’s what I’d like to ask the member from Don Valley East, as they sat shoulder to shoulder along with the NDP and their whole gang over there, wasting billions and billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. I’d like to ask the member from Don Valley East how many backroom deals he was involved in. How many backroom deals was he involved in? We’re going to find that out, how many deals you were involved in, along with—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Coteau: I have a prediction: That’s pretty much going to be the same answer this Premier gives, time after time, for the next year. We see through that, Premier.

My next question to the Premier: Within the Anti-Racism Directorate, there was a commitment of $47 million to support Black youth in Toronto, Hamilton, Windsor and Ottawa. I would like to know, Mr. Premier, do you still intend to fund the $47 million to support the Black Youth Action Plan? Recently on the website, all the information has been taken down, and people would like to know if you’re still committed to supporting that.

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you for that question. As we’ve always said and will continue to say, there is no place for racism in the province of Ontario. We are working diligently—in fact, the PA from Brampton South, who is part of my team, is working actively on that particular issue.

We are working towards doing a whole-of-government approach review, as well as ensuring that the message is clear throughout the province of Ontario: We do not support any kind of racism. We are working, through all our ministries, to ensure that opportunities are provided to all marginalized groups, including the Black communities. These are things that are very important to our government. We will continue working on them and ensure that we provide the outcomes necessary for our communities for Ontario.

Provincial debt

Ms. Lindsey Park: My question is for the Minister of Finance. It was sobering to hear the minister’s speech on Friday. It was shocking to hear the true state of the province’s finances after 15 years of the Liberals and their mismanagement. The minister promised a dose of reality. Well, Speaker, he certainly delivered: accounting tricks, empty promises and hidden deficits. The Liberals’ skyrocketing debt and ballooning deficits should concern us all: families, seniors and particularly the next generation. I know it’s deeply concerning to my constituents in Durham.

Could the minister explain to this Legislature the extent of the damage caused by 15 years of bad Liberal budgets?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Durham. The Liberals have left us with the largest subnational debt on the planet. Ontario is $338 billion in debt. Speaker, even if we paid a thousand million dollars every year, it would take 338 years for Ontario to pay off the public debt left by the previous Liberal government. That’s more than $24,000 for every single person in Ontario.

The Auditor General said the Liberals made “their own accounting rules that serve to obfuscate” their financial directions. She said that serves to “conceal the true annual deficit.”

It is imperative that we put an end to this reckless culture of waste, mismanagement and scandals. We must work together to do everything we can to put Ontario back on secure financial footing.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Lindsey Park: Thank you to the minister for his response. It’s clear that action must be taken to fix the mess the previous Liberal government has left behind. I’m proud that our government has taken the first steps in restoring accountability and trust in the province’s finances.

While we know the task ahead will not be easy, we are also well aware of the risks of further inaction. Could the minister please explain the danger of continuing down the path the previous Liberal government has set us on?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Simply put, the Liberals not only mortgaged the future of our children but the future of our grandchildren and, believe it or not, their grandchildren as well. Again, the province is $338 billion in debt. In 2017-18, we paid $11.9 billion in interest payments alone to service that debt. That’s more than the operating budget of the city of Toronto, more than a fifth of our health care budget, almost half of our education budget and nearly $1 billion more than we spend on post-secondary education and training.

Balancing the budget is not only a fiscal imperative, it is a moral imperative. We owe it to our children, our grandchildren and their grandchildren to ensure that vital services and good-paying jobs will be there for them down the road.

Natural gas

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Last week, the Minister of Infrastructure was asked a very straightforward question in this House: Has the government cancelled the $100-million grant program for rural natural gas expansion? The minister didn’t give a straight answer.

That same afternoon, the Minister of Infrastructure cancelled $8.9 million in grant funding for a natural gas expansion program in North Bay. So the answer was yes, they were cutting the grant program.

Can the minister tell us why the government cut this long-promised, $100-million program to expand natural gas into rural Ontario?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you for the opportunity to highlight the fact that we’re saving the taxpayers $100 million while expanding natural gas service to more consumers across Ontario. This is simply swapping taxpayer funding for private sector investment.

It’s quite something, actually, to hear the member attacking this when CBC reported last week that her own leader was “in agreement with Ford about natural gas expansion.” Are they still on speaking terms? You know, we’ve seen this time and time again from the NDP over the years. They tell one group one thing and tell another group of people the complete opposite.

The negativity expressed by this member and other critics is putting the project in North Bay in jeopardy. Her comments are completely irresponsible.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Again to the Minister of Finance: Interesting about doing one thing and saying another, because it is unbelievable that this Conservative government would start the day by announcing a program to expand natural gas into rural Ontario and then spend the day cancelling $100 million in funding to expand natural gas into rural Ontario.

This funding cut has unexpectedly and suddenly halted a natural gas expansion project in North Bay. Speaker, through you to the minister: Did the Minister of Finance actually approve this funding cut to the people in his own riding?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of Infrastructure.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I thank the member sitting opposite for the question. We campaigned in the last election to open Ontario up for business and to lower energy bills for the people of this province.

Mr. Speaker, the opposite party supports only 12 individual projects across this province for a cost of $100 million. What our plan is going to do is add 80 new communities. Eighty communities in Ontario will have access to natural gas. That’s nearly 35,000 more households that are going to have access to natural gas.

What this does is, this saves those households up to $2,500 per year. This is on top of scrapping the carbon tax here in Ontario that’s going to save an additional $80 per year for those families. Now, Mr. Speaker—

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

Hon. Monte McNaughton: That’s quite different from what the opposition—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Start the clock. Next question.

Government spending and accounting practices

Mr. Mike Harris: My question is for the Minister of Finance. We ran on a commitment to the people of Ontario to restore accountability and trust in the province’s finances. After 15 years of Liberal waste, mismanagement and scandal, the people of Ontario spoke loud and clear. They had enough. The people decided it was time for a government that would respect them and respect their hard-earned tax dollars—and for good reason.

Last Friday, the minister showed us all just how damaging the Liberal government’s failed fiscal policies have been to our province. Could the minister please explain the shocking findings of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Kitchener–Conestoga. I agree, Speaker. We must take immediate action to restore accountability and trust in government. That’s why, this morning, Premier Ford announced our government’s intention to form a select committee on financial transparency. Should the motion pass, Speaker, the committee will use the findings of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry to determine how the Liberals’ disastrous policies ever saw the light of day.

The scandal laid out in the pages of the commission’s report is unprecedented in recent Canadian history. The Liberal Party’s accountability for the scandal did not end on election day. Their accountability started that day, the day Premier Ford took office. People deserve answers, and we will ensure that the people of Ontario get those answers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you to the minister for his answer. It is disappointing to see the depths of the previous Liberal government’s waste and mismanagement. It was no wonder that the people of Ontario voted for a government that is committed to restoring accountability and trust that was absent for so long.

Our government has been making positive change for people right across the province since day one. However, the minister’s speech last week illustrated the challenging road that lays before us. Could the minister please inform the House of our government’s next steps in fixing the mess the Liberals left for us?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I would encourage everyone here to take a look at the Auditor General’s pre-election report on Ontario’s finances. In it, she said, the government “is making up its own accounting rules. She used words like “conceal,” “bogus,” “deceptive” and “unreliable” to describe Liberal documents tabled in this Legislature.

This is not a normal situation we’re seeing, Speaker. I’ll say this again. What we are witnessing is without precedent in Canadian politics. When taken together, the conclusions of the Auditor General and the commission of inquiry are a scathing indictment of how the Liberals broke the public’s trust. This is not only about the numbers. It’s about transparency and trust. The situation cannot be allowed to fester any longer. We will restore accountability and trust in government.

Social assistance

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. People in the Basic Income Pilot had made long-term plans. They signed leases and enrolled in school based on a promise that the program would last three years. Their hopes for the future are now replaced with feelings of deep betrayal. Stress and anxiety have returned.

International researchers were watching and now they are calling out the government. They said, “Not only is the cancellation inconsistent with international best practices, but it violates your own Canadian policy for the ethical conduct of experiments involving humans.”

Why is this minister continuing to stick with their cruel and unethical decision to cancel the Basic Income Pilot?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I reject the premise of the question. This government is allowed to make decisions on financial matters and it’s allowed to set policy direction.

This matter is before the courts, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment on specifics. But what I can tell you—what I said in July and what I said in August—is that there will be a compassionate runway, which is happening. No one has lost their cheques as of this month. That member opposite knows full well—

Interjection.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: If she would like to listen to the response, I’ll provide her with the action plan of this government. We hit the pause on an unsustainable program and an unsustainable plan that the previous Liberal administration brought forward, which was disjointed and patchwork and which wasn’t lifting the one in seven people in the province of Ontario out of poverty.

What we did is we hit the pause button across the board, allowing for a 1.5% increase in social assistance rates right across Ontario, and we’ve come forward with a 100-day plan. We’re going to see more people out of—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Supplementary.

Miss Monique Taylor: I think I’d just remind the government that on the campaign trail the Premier said that he would not cancel this program, and yet here he is, cancelling the program. Adding insult to injury, the people whose lives were ripped apart have never received any communication from the ministry: no letters, no emails, no phone calls. All they have to go on are media reports.

The disrespect shown by this government is absolutely reprehensible. They had just ripped away the hopes, dreams and income of the basic income participants, but they didn’t have the common decency to speak to them. When will this government show just a little respect for Ontarians?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: We have been very clear: We are going to be a very compassionate government, and we are going to make sure that the one in seven people living in poverty in this province are set up for success. That means where someone is employable, we are going to put the supports in place to get them back into the workforce. Where they’re not employable, we’re going to make sure they have the supports in place to make their life a lot easier.

What wasn’t happening under the previous Liberal administration, aided and abetted by the official opposition 97% of the time—it was a patchwork system that didn’t lift people up. There was no social safety net.

So let me say this: The best social safety net is a compassionate society. The best social circumstances are when those people who can work are working. And the best social program in the province of Ontario is a job.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister for Children, Community and Social Services, come to order. The member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The minister will come to order. The minister will come to order. The member for Hamilton Mountain will come to order. The member for Windsor West will come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to warn the member for Hamilton Mountain. Stop now. Let’s stop now.

Start the clock. Next question.

Energy policies

Mr. Bill Walker: My question is for the Minister of Energy. Last week, our government took action to deliver on our promise to repeal the Green Energy Act. After 15 years of bad decisions by the Liberals and being enabled by the NDP, we find this province’s hydro system in the mess it is in today. The Green Energy Act was a crucial part of those bad decisions. I know repealing it is an important step for our government. Can the minister please tell the members of this House, and all Ontarians, why it is so important to repeal the Green Energy Act?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I want to thank the member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for the question and, as well, the member for Lambton–Kent–Middlesex, our Minister of Infrastructure, the champion of fighting against this horrible act, the Green Energy Act—more than seven years of his commitment has finally paid off.

Let’s be clear, Mr. Speaker: The only thing green about the Green Energy Act is the green that lined the pockets of Liberal insiders. The Green Energy Act also represents the largest transfer of money from the poor and middle class to the rich in Ontario’s history. It’s a symbol of a failed energy policy of the past, with no regard to the people who actually pay hydro bills month in and month out. The act forced wasteful projects on unwilling communities and drove up the costs of hydro bills for families and businesses across this province.

Mr. Speaker, our government was elected to deliver on our promises for the people. We’re committed to lowering hydro bills by 12%. Getting rid of the Green Energy Act is an important step towards that—a promise made, a promise kept.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Bill Walker: Back to the minister: I’d like to thank the Minister of Energy for his leadership on this important step in the right direction. Lowering hydro costs for the people of Ontario is one of our government’s most important promises and priorities. I’m happy to know that our government is making good on that promise.

I know the minister is from the northern community of Kenora–Rainy River, and I want to join with all of his constituents there in wishing him a happy birthday today. I know that he understands the impact to rural communities like mine in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound and all of the great ridings around this province.

Mr. Speaker, can the minister please tell the members of this House and all Ontarians how repealing the Green Energy Act is going to help rural communities?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I want to thank the member for his question. It’s true: I’m now old enough to reflect back on a province that had an energy advantage—manufacturers here in southern Ontario, forestry mills and mines firing on all cylinders because Ontario had a responsible energy plan. That changed 15 years ago, and the Green Energy Act had a lot to do with that.

Repealing this act is about giving power back to the municipalities and back to the people of Ontario. Our government is making sure that communities in rural Ontario aren’t forced to become home to wasteful energy projects in the future.

I take this quote from Rex Murphy, one of the most respected political commentators in Canada, who stated, “Ontario’s Green Energy Act was a horror for business, a gross invasion of municipal authority, and sent successive Auditors General to whatever is the chartered accountants version of a hospice centre.”

Less eloquently, Liberal elites got rich, Liberal party coffers were filled and—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Next question.

Hospital services

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée. Speaker, we have a crisis in our hospital system. Hallway medicine and overcrowding have become the norm. In Sudbury, Health Sciences North faces an $11-million deficit. So far, 60.5 nursing positions have been lost as they try to balance their budget. Now they have announced that they will be closing part of their breast cancer clinic, leading to more stress and longer wait times for women facing breast cancer.

Will the Minister of Health commit today to providing Health Sciences North with the funding necessary to end the layoffs and keep the full breast cancer clinic open in Sudbury?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. In fact, the situation at Health Sciences North is financially very difficult, with an $11-million deficit. However, $4.8 million has already been granted to them, to try to alleviate some of the situation. But I know that the LHIN is working very closely with Health Sciences North to try to alleviate the situation.

The nursing positions that are leaving are being dealt with through attrition and retirements, as the member will know. I know that more work has to be done; I have regular reports from the LHIN on that, and I know the ministry is doing whatever they can to try to alleviate the situation as well.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

M me France Gélinas: Earlier this month, the minister said that our hospitals will have to find “innovative” and “efficient” ways to operate. Like Health Sciences North, most Ontario hospitals are already struggling with chronic underfunding. Is the minister’s definition of efficiency just a code for austerity, flat-line, zero-increase budgets, like the Liberals did for the past eight years?

Let me be clear, Speaker: The efficiencies have already been found and implemented in our hospitals. Now they have to decide which programs they are going to cancel. In Sudbury, it’s the breast-screening clinic.

Will the minister ensure that women with cancer receive timely care and fund Health Sciences North appropriately?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The health care situation for the people around the area of Health Sciences North is, of course, our top priority. We don’t want anyone to lose services. But, while I recognize that most hospitals have done some work to find these efficiencies, there is still a lot more work to do.

We also know that many hospitals in Ontario right now are operating at over 100% capacity and that there are beds in places that there should not be beds. We are trying to alleviate that situation by, first of all, building more long-term-care beds, because up to 25% of all beds in any hospital across Ontario right now are being filled by people who should be elsewhere. They don’t need to be in hospital, but they’re there because they can’t get to a long-term-care bed or they can’t get to home care because they don’t have the supports that they need.

We are also working on alleviating the issues related to people with chronic mental health problems, many of whom circle in and out of hospitals. We need to deal with that.

Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards

Mr. Will Bouma: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

I was delighted to see that the minister was able to attend the Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards this weekend in Toronto. I was also happy to see that Meagan Wilson, a rugby coach from my riding of Brantford–Brant, was honoured with the grassroots coach of the year award.

Ms. Wilson was honoured for her work on a free rugby camp on the Six Nations of the Grand River where youth aged five to 12 could participate. The Iroquois Roots Rugby program that she started in 2017 allows Indigenous youth to participate in rugby programs free of charge.

Meagan is also a full-time student, a varsity rugby player at McMaster University and a tireless volunteer who makes our communities better off.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Meagan for her contributions to my community and to ask the minister, can she tell us more about the Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: You are rightfully proud of Meagan. She is doing an excellent job in Brantfort. Thank you for your question.

I also want to congratulate Meagan Wilson. She was one of 10 coaches who were honoured for their hard work and dedication this weekend. If I may, I would like to congratulate Dawn Manerowski of Oshawa, Ian Atkinson of Waterloo, Giuseppe Politi of Sudbury, Glenn Paulley of Waterloo, Ryan Jones of Scarborough, Brenda Willis of Kingston, Ian Roopnarine from Brampton, Jay McNeilly from North York and Kathy Boyes from St. Catharines.

It was an honour this weekend to acknowledge the excellent work that great coaches are doing across our communities, kicking off the fourth annual National Coaches Week by participating in the Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards. We are celebrating the people behind the teams that we see on the ice, in the water, in our courts and on our fields.

I’d like to take this opportunity to recognize the superb—

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Will Bouma: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. I am so pleased to see that our government for the people recognizes the importance of sport in our communities and how much coaches do to better our athletes and our communities as a whole. I think I can speak for members from all sides of the House when I say that coaches give so much to our local athletes and that we should be taking steps to make sure we recognize their great work.

Can the minister please provide the House with more details concerning the Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards and National Coaches Week?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I’m happy to. The Ontario Coaching Excellence Awards is a kickoff event for National Coaches Week here in Ontario and across Canada. The awards honour 10 coaches from all across Ontario who have made a difference coaching aspiring athletes. These coaches work with athletes ranging from grassroots level, like Meagan, to those performing on the Olympic stage. September 22 through to September 30 marks the fourth annual National Coaches Week and the 13th Coaches Week in Ontario, to celebrate the tremendous impact coaches have on athletes in our communities.

The Coaches Association of Ontario has also partnered with four communities from across the province to deliver community clinics which recruit, develop, educate and celebrate community volunteer coaches.

I call on all members to thank the coaches in their ridings for the wonderful work they are doing.

Foodland Ontario

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

It was great to spend some extra time at the IPM last week and great to see my fellow colleagues there as well. But the word on the back roads and on the streets at the IPM is that Foodland Ontario is on the chopping block by the Ford government.

The goal of this program is to encourage people to eat Ontario-grown food. We all know the slogan: “Good Things Grow in Ontario.” Coined in 1997, by the way, this program helps farmers, processors and consumers. And do you know what, Speaker? It creates jobs—good jobs—in rural Ontario.

My question to this minister is this: Can he assure the farmers and processors of Ontario that this program will not be cut in any way, shape or form?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I thank the member across for asking this great question. I want to say that Foodland Ontario is one of the best programs for the horticulture sector in the province of Ontario that they’ve ever had to encourage people to buy our local products— the best food in the world, grown right here in Ontario. People are going to the stores and buying it because it was produced in Ontario.

I can assure you that his ears must either be not hearing anything, or hearing things that are not said, because obviously there has been no discussion from my ministry that says we’re going to do anything but improve and make sure that Foodland Ontario works for the people of Ontario.

Private members’ public business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 98(c), a change has been made to the order of precedence on the ballot list for private members’ public business, such that Mr. Gates assumes ballot item number 32 and Mr. Rakocevic assumes ballot item number 45.

Visitor

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I wish to inform the House that we have a former member visiting us today in the Legislature. The member for Burlington in the 41st provincial Parliament, Eleanor McMahon, has joined us this morning. Welcome.

Tornadoes in Ottawa

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa South informed me that he wishes to raise a point of order.

Mr. John Fraser: I’ll be quick. I just wanted to add to what the member from Nepean–Carleton said. Ottawa South too was affected by the storm. There are some very small pockets in Hunt Club and Greenboro and South Keys where there has been some very serious damage. Some people have lost the contents of their houses and their roofs.

I want to thank the minister—I had a good chat with him—but I also want to thank all the residents who, over the weekend, were helping each other. It was really quite incredible. People were checking on neighbours, seniors, people with babies. One man said to me, “I didn’t know it would take a storm like this for me to get to meet all my neighbours.”

I would like to say one more thanks to Ottawa Hydro crews who spent about two days—

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: Hydro One.

Mr. John Fraser: —it was Ottawa Hydro; thank you for correcting me—Ottawa Hydro crews fixing Albion Road. They were there for about two days. It’s dangerous work, and we all owe them a debt of gratitude.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): There being no deferred vote, this House is in recess until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 1149 to 1300.

Private members’ public business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 98(c), a change has been made to the order of precedence on the ballot list for private members’ public business such that Mrs. Stevens assumes ballot item number 31 and Mr. Arthur assumes ballot item number 43.

Members’ Statements

Curriculum

Ms. Marit Stiles: On Friday, over 40,000 students from over 100 schools across this province walked out of class in a coordinated demonstration against this government’s rollback of the health and physical education curriculum and the cancellation of the Indigenous curriculum writing sessions.

Like many of my colleagues, including the member for St. Paul’s and others, I wanted to hear first-hand from these students. At Bloor Collegiate Institute in my riding of Davenport, students told me that they took this step because they feel that the government is ignoring their voices, and they said that the health and safety of their peers is being put at risk by imposing a 20-year-old curriculum. Here’s what students had to say in their own words:

“We are here to protest against new changes to our curriculum made by our new Premier,” one student wrote. “In health class, we will no longer be learning about same-sex relationships, online safety or gender identity.”

Another student wrote, “I feel it is important to learn about the LGBTQ+ community, to learn about Indigenous issues and consent and many other topics that were taken away from us.... We should do all we can to restore the curriculum because the Premier wants us to basically go back in time and forget all of the progress we have made since 1998.”

Those are the students’ own words, Speaker.

It’s time the government listened to the voices of Ontario students, parents and educators instead of those who seek to withhold this vital information from them.

I have here some of the letters that the students wrote. I’m going to be collecting more of them. These are their own words, and I promised the students I met with on Friday that I would carry those words here to Queen’s Park. I hope that the Minister of Education is listening.

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: On Friday evening, twin tornadoes with gusts of up to 250 kilometres per hour slammed into the quiet communities of Dunrobin, Trend-Arlington and Craig Henry. Homes, businesses and properties were left severely damaged. For over 30 hours, much of Ottawa was plunged into darkness. Even now, thousands are still without power.

But in darkness, Mr. Speaker, there is light. It is often said that we see the very best of people in times of crisis. First responders acted quickly, ensuring, thankfully, that no lives were lost during this crisis. We owe our police, fire officials and paramedics a great debt.

Beyond them, the people also stepped up. Families opened their doors to one another, sharing food, water and support.

Our very own MPP for Nepean, Minister MacLeod, along with her friends Councillor Jan Harder and Darrell Bartraw, got to work right away setting up a command post and feeding centre. Over the course of the weekend, they fed thousands of individuals who needed a hot meal. I am proud to be able to serve alongside my friend the member for Nepean, who is a shining example of a public servant.

To all of those who stepped up to help, thank you for showing us the very best of humanity. To all of those who are struggling to rebuild their lives after this tragedy, know that your city and your province stand with you.

Curriculum

Ms. Doly Begum: I rise today with great pride to recognize the students across this great province who participated in the walkout to protest Premier Ford’s move to scrap the revised health and physical education curriculum. Last Friday, thousands and thousands of students sent a clear message to this government, saying, “We do not consent to this government’s changes.”

I am proud of the schools in my riding of Scarborough Southwest that took

part in this. I want to especially thank Taamara Thanaraja, from my former high school, SATEC at W.A. Porter, who successfully led their demonstration in that high school. It was extremely powerful to listen to the students who voiced their concerns, demanding Premier Ford and his government respect and listen to the students.

These students are concerned about their safety and health. The 1998 curriculum, that is 40 pages long, does not address bullying, cyberbullying, gender identity or consent. It was written at a time when students didn’t have access to Google, for example, or sexting.

I am so proud to see that these students not only demanded a curriculum that reflects the modern reality of our technology, addressing children’s safety and protection, but they also demanded a curriculum that reflects our history, highlighting the importance of learning about our Indigenous and First Nations people, which the Premier and this government failed to address.

I want to join all the students and say to this government: We do not consent to Premier Ford’s move to change.

Jewish High Holy Days

Mr. Roman Baber: When fall arrives, so do the Jewish High Holy Days. During this time, I receive lots of confused but well-meaning questions from friends and colleagues about the back-to-back-to-back-to-back celebrations in the Jewish community. So I’m delighted to offer the House this 60-second crash course.

Starting with Rosh Hashanah, the first day of the Jewish calendar, Jews welcome the arrival of the new year and wish each other Shana Tova. We eat apples dipped in honey for a sweet new year. I certainly wish that this year, being 5779, is as sweet as honey.

Yom Kippur arrives 10 days after Rosh Hashanah and is Judaism’s holiest day of the year. Yom Kippur is the Day of Atonement on which our individual fates are sealed for the coming year. It is observed by prayer and a 25-hour fast. There is strict prohibition against all work and entertainment. It is not a festive holiday; instead, we wish the Jewish community a good inscription for the coming year.

A few days after Yom Kippur arrives the holiday of Sukkot, which arrived last night, loosely translated into “huts” or “tents.” For one week, we sit with family and welcome friends for meals in the sukka, a makeshift hut, the way our ancestors did for 40 years in the desert on their way to the promised land.

We cap the holidays with the day of Simchat Torah, loosely translated as “the joy of the Bible.” On Simchat Torah, we celebrate the receipt of the Torah at Mount Sinai and the beginning of the annual cycle of the reading of the Torah, which lasts for 52 weeks a year.

It gives me great joy to conclude by wishing the Jewish community of Ontario and all around the world Shana Tova ve chag sameach, a happy new year and happy holidays.

Le drapeau franco-ontarien

M. Guy Bourgouin: Le 25 septembre, c’est la journée des Franco-Ontariens et Franco-Ontariennes, une journée où partout en Ontario les Franco-Ontariens et Franco-Ontariennes fêtent leur fierté francophone, une journée où les écoles francophones portent le vert et le blanc avec fierté, une journée où le lever du drapeau francophone se fait partout où il y a des francophones.

Monsieur le Président, je dois vous avouer que, cette année, la levée du drapeau francophone ne se fera pas dans la capitale ontarienne. Encore, ça démontre que le combat pour notre langue et notre culture n’est jamais terminé. J’invite tous les Franco-Ontariens et Ontariennes à communiquer avec la mairie de Toronto et à montrer leur déception.

Demain, j’invite tous les députés et les citoyens à venir à la levée du drapeau à Queen’s Park à 9 h 45 et au dévoilement du monument francophone à 13 h 30 devant Queen’s Park.

Faisons un effort. Même si on n’est pas francophone, un petit « bonjour » le matin pour supporter la francophonie, ça va loin, et c’est apprécié.

Climate change

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, let me begin by adding my personal thanks and compliments to all of the first responders and community members who have reacted and have helped victims of the tornadoes in Ottawa. I know that our hearts go out to everyone who has lost so much.

To all the hydro workers, whether at Hydro One or Hydro Ottawa, who have worked to restore power, or have already restored power but continue to work to get power back to families across the affected area, thank you so much.

On Thursday of this week, I will be attending the 2018 Clean50 summit here in Toronto, where companies and individuals who have made significant contributions to sustainability and clean capitalism will be honoured. I can assure you that there will be many questions and concerns about Ontario’s direction.

Our province in the last decade has been a leader in action against climate change. Under my predecessor, the shutdown of the coal-fired electricity plants was the largest contributor to greenhouse gas reduction in North America. Under my government, our action to require big polluters to pay and our then reinvestment in new clean technology, in housing retrofits and the encouragement of a clean auto and transit sector had put us on a track to meet our pollution reduction targets and to do our part to fight against climate change.

The Ford government has abandoned any attempt to take on this fight that threatens the very existence of our planet. Our children and our grandchildren deserve better. They deserve our best efforts, not deflection, not obfuscation, not outright denial.

I hope that the Ford government changes its mind, gets back on track, tackles the most significant—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I have to ask the member to withdraw her unparliamentary comment.

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: Withdraw, Mr. Speaker.

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

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I’d like to echo the statements my colleagues have made today in the House. My thoughts and prayers go out to everyone who was affected by the tornado that struck Ottawa late last Friday evening, causing particularly devastating damage to the Dunrobin, Craig Henry and Arlington Woods areas.

I want to thank my colleague Minister MacLeod for her tireless efforts in feeding thousands of families affected by the tornado, Minister Clark for his speedy and expedient initiation of the disaster relief assistance for Ontarians program, and Premier Doug Ford for taking the time to visit those affected in Ottawa.

I’d also like to express my gratitude to Ottawa’s front-line workers—the paramedics, police, firefighters, doctors and nurses, as well as city staff and all of the hydro workers—for their tireless efforts to help our citizens and restore power across Ottawa. All their hard work truly paid off.

Finally, I’d like to thank the people of Ottawa for stepping up to the plate and helping each other out. Thank you to Scott Batten, Stephen Pilon, Brent Schouten and Colleen Piercey for reaching out to me late last night to help to provide generators for a lady stuck in her hospital bed on the fourth floor of her apartment, generators for senior apartments as well as generators for subsidized and non-profit housing in Richmond.

Thank you to Graham and Neil Green of Abby Hill Farms, who donated a truckload of corn to help feed thousands affected by the blackout; and thank you to Mohamed Ali, owner of the Shoppers Drug Mart in Manotick, who provided those affected by the blackout a place to charge their medical devices and refrigerate their medication.

Mr. Speaker, it filled me with a great sense of pride to watch how our community came together during this time of need to help each other out and make sure everyone got the care and support they needed. Our city’s true colours showed this past weekend, and I couldn’t be more proud to represent such an amazing city.

Tornadoes in Ottawa

Mr. Joel Harden: As another Ottawa member, I also rise today to pay tribute to the people whose heroism has helped our city get back on its feet and brought us closer together, as our friends have already mentioned.

I’m in awe of the courage of people who rose to the occasion over the weekend: the members of IBEW Local 636, the hydro workers, who spent day and night restoring power; the paramedics, the firefighters and the doctors, the crisis workers; and also, frankly, other public officials like myself, working at the municipal level—people in Ottawa Centre like Catherine McKenney, Jeff Leiper and Riley Brockington—who kept Ottawa Centre residents daily apprised of power outages and options they had to look after themselves.

I’m also touched by other local examples. Last night, I attended a free barbecue hosted by the Ottawa mosque for residents who had lost food due to the power outage. Community organizations like the Parkdale Food Centre, the Causeway Work Centre and the Ottawa Food Bank all did so much to ensure that the vulnerable were fed.

We know that with the advent of climate change, Speaker, extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and more severe. Let’s commit, all of us here, to ensuring we reduce emissions and we toughen up our infrastructure to better protect our communities from increasingly potent natural disasters.

Finally, I do want to echo what my colleagues have said. I offer my deepest sympathy to people who have lost their homes or experienced trauma or physical injury. Please contact my office if you’re an Ottawa Centre resident. We have your back, and together we will rebuild our city.

International trade

Ms. Donna Skelly: Protecting our industries and workers during this time of trade uncertainty is paramount to my hometown of Hamilton and, indeed, to all Ontarians. That is why I want to thank the Premier and the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade for being proactive on this critical issue and working tirelessly to ensure that our government is doing our part for a deal to get done. This includes their travels last week to Washington as well as burning up the phone lines to US political and business leaders directly.

Mr. Speaker, it has been an eye-opener for me as I chair round-table meetings with business leaders and stakeholders right around the province to discuss the implications of the current NAFTA situation. Participants have spoken passionately, and the stakes are high. The consequences of continued uncertainty are dire. One in five Ontario jobs depend on Canada-US trade and investment and, as we remind the Americans, millions of jobs on the other side of the border, as well.

I look forward to hearing more. I have consultations in the coming weeks.

I want to assure the business leaders we have talked to thus far that your Premier and your government are standing shoulder to shoulder with you.

TryEngineering

Mr. Deepak Anand: “Sometimes if a child can’t learn the way we teach,” counselled Ignacio Estrada, “maybe we should teach the way they learn.” Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge members of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers—Olivier Trescases, chairman of the Toronto section; Satish Saini, chairman, education committee; Nina; and Kate—who are doing just that in the GTA.

With a mission to bridge the gap between engineering education and practical workplaces, IEEE is working towards making meaningful advancements by integrating classroom studies with ongoing research and workplace practices for the best interest of the engineering community and the society as a whole.

TryEngineering is a unique program with a goal to raise interest in engineering careers, improve access to high-quality educational resources and show students how engineering can be part of their lives.

IEEE is the world’s largest not-for-profit technical professional organization, with 400,000 members in 160 countries. It truly has a global presence.

I’m thankful to IEEE for selecting Mississauga–Malton as a pilot area to implement this new and innovative program. As the MPP for Mississauga–Malton, I’d like to welcome and applaud the efforts of IEEE. Thank you, IEEE.

Notice of dissatisfaction

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 38(a), the member for Toronto–St. Paul’s has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer to her question given by the Premier concerning denouncing Faith Goldy. This matter will be debated Tuesday at 6 p.m.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I want to recognize the member for Spadina–Fort York on a point of order.

Mr. Chris Glover: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to make this point of order.

I just wanted to introduce Frantz Améculeé, Huguette Améculeé and their friend Immaculee Adjanah. Frantz and Huguette are the grandparents of Erika Celestin, one of our new pages.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Welcome to the Legislature.

Introduction of Bills

2063434 Ontario Limited Act, 2018

Mr. Pettapiece moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr2,

An Act to revive 2063434 Ontario Limited.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 86, this bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills.

Petitions

Curriculum

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I’d like to table this petition in support of the students across Parkdale–High Park who participated in the walkout on Friday. I want to especially mention Thea Baines and Oscar Fellows for their leadership.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the health and physical education curriculum empowers young people to make informed decisions about relationships and their bodies;

“Whereas gender-based violence, gender inequality, unintended pregnancies, ‘sexting,’ and HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) pose serious risks to the safety and well-being of young people;

“Whereas one in three women and one in six men experience sexual violence in Canada, and a lack of age-appropriate education about sexual health and healthy relationships leaves children and youth vulnerable to exploitation;

“Whereas one in five parents reported their own child being a victim of cyberbullying; and

“Whereas” Premier “Ford and the Conservative government is dragging Ontario backward, requiring students to learn an outdated sex ed curriculum that excludes information about consent, sexual orientation, gender identity, sexting, cyberbullying and safe and healthy relationships;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Ministry of Education to continue the use of the 2015 health and physical education curriculum in schools and move Ontario forward, not backward.”

I fully support this petition and will be affixing my signature to it.

Curriculum

Ms. Jill Andrew: Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I’d first like to give a shout-out to the kids of Forest Hill Collegiate Institute for their brave advocacy against Doug Ford’s, our Premier’s, antiquated—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I have to say to the member—I interrupt the member to again state that it’s not appropriate to make political statements while you’re introducing your petition, but you can read the text of your petition.

Ms. Jill Andrew: My apologies, Mr. Speaker.

“Protecting Children: Forward, Not Backward, on Sex Ed.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the health and physical education curriculum empowers young people to make informed decisions about relationships and their bodies;

“Whereas gender-based violence, gender inequality, unintended pregnancies, ‘sexting,’ and HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) pose serious risks to the safety and well-being of young people;

“Whereas one in three women and one in six men experience sexual violence in Canada, and a lack of age-appropriate education about sexual health and healthy relationships leaves children and youth vulnerable to exploitation;

“Whereas one in five parents reported their own child being a victim of cyberbullying; and

“Whereas Doug Ford and the Conservative government is dragging Ontario backward, requiring students to learn an outdated sex ed curriculum that excludes information about consent, sexual orientation, gender identity, sexting, cyberbullying and safe and healthy relationships;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Ministry of Education to continue the use of the 2015 health and physical education curriculum in schools and move Ontario forward, not backward.”

I happily sign this petition and hand it off to my page Josh.

Employment standards

Mr. Jamie West: “Petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly:

“Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I proudly affix my signature to this, and I will give it to page Simon.

Affordable housing

Mr. Faisal Hassan: “Whereas for families throughout much of Ontario, owning a home they can afford remains a dream, while renting is painfully expensive;

“Whereas consecutive Conservative and Liberal governments have sat idle, while housing costs spiralled out of control, speculators made fortunes, and too many families had to put their hopes on hold;

“Whereas every Ontarian should have access to safe, affordable housing. Whether a family wants to rent or own, live in a house, an apartment, a condominium or a co-op, they should have affordable options;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately prioritize the repair of Ontario’s social housing stock, commit to building new affordable homes, crack down on housing speculators, and make rentals more affordable through rent controls and updated legislation.”

I support this petition, add my name to it and give it to page Will.

School facilities

Miss Monique Taylor: I have a petition that is titled “Fund Our Schools.”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas too many children are going to school in buildings without proper heating or cooling, with leaky roofs or stairways overdue for repair;

“Whereas after years of Conservative and Liberal governments neglecting schools, the backlog of needed repairs has reached $16 billion;

“Whereas during the 2018 election, numerous members of the Conservative Party, including the current Minister of Education, pledged to provide adequate, stable funding for Ontario’s schools;

“Whereas less than three weeks into the legislative session,” Premier “Ford and the Conservative government have already cut $100 million in much-needed school repairs, leaving our children and educators to suffer in classrooms that are unsafe and unhealthy;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Minister of Education to immediately reverse the decision to cut $100 million in school repair funding, and invest the $16 billion needed to tackle the repair backlog in Ontario’s schools.”

I couldn’t agree more. I’m going to affix my name to it and give it to page Molly to bring to the Clerk.

Employment standards

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: This petition is entitled “Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.”

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I fully support this petition and will be affixing my signature to it.

Rectification au procès-verbal

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order, the member for Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

M. Guy Bourgouin: Monsieur le Président, je voudrais faire une correction à ma déclaration de député. J’ai fait mention que la ville de Toronto ne ferait pas la levée du drapeau; je suis ici pour me corriger. Ça va bien être fait. La tradition va être faite comme dans le passé. Donc, je voudrais retirer ma déclaration. Merci.

Le Président (L’hon. Ted Arnott): Merci beaucoup.

Orders of the Day

Standing orders / Règlement

Resuming the debate adjourned on September 20, 2018, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion regarding amendments to the standing orders.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate? The member for Chatham-Kent–Leamington.

Mr. Rick Nicholls: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to the government House leader’s amendments to the standing orders of this House.

I think that when understood in the context of the role of the Legislature within Canada’s Constitution and the Westminster parliamentary system we use in Canada, the only opposition to these amendments would be a case of the old adage that some people like the liberties of a free society until those they disagree with employ those liberties.

The Canadian Constitution, one that has been evolving for 151 years to 803 years, depending on how you count the legal precedents, is a constitution based on the supremacy of Parliament. The elected Legislature makes and passes laws, and the civil service representing the crown applies those, resolving disputed applications of law, while also having a key role in repealing laws that can be proven, in a reasoned manner, to be unjust.

We in government do not begrudge those rights of other branches to provide checks and balances. We are, however, taking a clear stand for laws to be drafted and passed by the elected branch. This right must be renewed because when the Legislature ceases to reform, repeal and pass laws in the present moment for the good of the people they govern, the application of coercive power towards the average person loses the consent of the people. Unaccountable and unelected persons having the primary power over the people places our society in a state of oligarchy at best and tyranny at worst. I’m sure that the opposition would agree with us on that.

The supremacy of Parliament and the exclusive right of the elected Legislature to pass laws require effective use of the House standing orders. Reasoned amendments from the opposition can serve a positive purpose. Madam Speaker, the positive incarnation of reasoned amendments is when they bring concerns of constituents to bear on legislation and, less often noted, act to present the agenda of the opposition party.

It was Hannah Arendt, a survivor of 20th-century totalitarianism and a scholar of political freedom, who pointed out that a great part of the unprecedented prosperity seen in countries that use the Westminster parliamentary model of government is that those opposed to a current government still engage in the system, presenting their case peacefully, as they know they are one change in government away from being able to legislate their own program.

What we’ve seen in the past eight weeks, Madam Speaker, is a degeneration of the use of reasoned amendments. Unfortunately, their increased frequency has not led to more debate but less debate; not to more clarity but less clarity, taking up the time needed to pass legislation.

Without these amendments to the standing orders, it would become impossible for the agenda laid out by this government to be passed. The opposition knows this, and that’s disturbing when you take a moment to think about it. An attitude inside and outside the House is developing that no perspective outside that formulated by a particular group of media, business and academic interests—usually represented by the Liberal and New Democratic parties—has any right to influence public policy. We often see in the universities that anything not presently qualified by the words “progressive” or “left” is attacked as not deserving, even of freedoms of expression, association and conscience.

Madam Speaker, our model of government presumes that difference of opinion is both necessary and good for a free society, as no one has a monopoly on truth or good ideas, and therefore no one should have a monopoly on power.

After a House passes legislation, there are several checks and balances respecting this reality, as I’ve already noted. The system will fall apart if a government is forbidden from passing legislation the second that a governing party with ideas other than those of economic and cultural power brokers forms a majority.

Madam Speaker, it is in this context that we can now go amendment by amendment through the standing orders. I will read what the standing order will be after the amendments are applied, then explore the utility of the amended standing order to increased quality of debate as well as to passing legislation.

Amended standing order 6(

b) will read as follows: “With notice, the government House leader may propose a motion to extend the hours of meeting during the last 12 sessional days in the fall and spring sessional periods provided for in clause (

a) and during any extension thereof.”

Well, Madam Speaker, the opposition’s amendments in the summer session took up 16 hours. We all know that a day in the House is not a consecutive eight or more hours of voting in the Legislature. Sixteen hours can take up to at least two days of House business, if not more, and with eight days, that math just simply would not add up to pass bills at the rate which the people of Ontario have been accustomed to for decades, going across governments of all parties.

Our amendment allows not only for more days but for an expansion of night sittings. Night sittings will ensure that the House considers more questions and that members on all sides have more time to debate the important pieces of legislation that we will be faced with.

It’s in the spirit of extending more privileges of debate to the opposition, for the sake of bringing forward sincerely proposed ideas as well as presenting an alternative agenda for the people of Ontario, that we have amended standing order 35(

e) to read as follows: “Following ministerial statements a representative or representatives of each of the recognized opposition parties in the House may comment for up to a total of five minutes for each party commencing with the official opposition, and one independent member may comment for up to five minutes.” This amendment is pretty straightforward, Madam Speaker.

With the current status of the Ontario Liberal Party’s caucus being seven MPPs, and the addition of a member from the Ontario Green Party, our government deems it important to ensure that those members have a voice in debates. Further still, this extra five minutes can allow members of all parties to take a break from toeing the party line and speak to the concerns of their constituents. Our government wants the grassroots of society in every community to have their concerns voiced in a productive way in the House.

Interjections.

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

Mr. Rick Nicholls: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Moving on, we are extending opposition time on Tuesdays and Wednesdays to balance what is no doubt the major point of contention to those amendments, those to

section 43. With our amendment,

section 43(a)(

v) regarding opposition day debates will read that debates “shall be limited to two hours if held on a Monday or any other day that routine proceedings is scheduled for 1:05 p.m.” Madam Speaker, this amendment builds on our previous decision to move the start on Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 3 p.m. to 1 p.m.

As we have no way of predicting when the opposition will engage in different filibuster tactics, we may require more time on the key days of House business in the week, as we know that Thursday is devoted to private members’ business, and Fridays to constituency matters. I might also add Friday, Saturdays and Sundays—just saying.

Having sat on the opposition side of the House, I do understand the need for opposition days. The increased flexibility of having extended and consistent time on all opposition days will help the opposition and grow our parliamentary tradition.

For full clarity,

section 43(

d) will read as follows: “After two hours of debate on an opposition day held on a Monday or any other day that routine proceedings is scheduled for 1:05 p.m., or at 5:50 p.m. on an opposition day held on a Tuesday or Wednesday, the Speaker”—or the Speaker of the day—“shall interrupt the proceedings and put the question without further debate. If a recorded vote is requested, the division bells shall be limited to 10 minutes. Such vote may not be deferred.”

Madam Speaker, the House already limits motions to adjourn in two other instances. Standing order 46(

a) holds that motions to adjourn may not be moved prior to routine proceedings, keeping them from being moved in the morning. Standing order 98(

h) also limits the ability of members to move adjournment of the debate during private members’ business. All this does is adjust time allocation motions on opposition days to that seen in the standing orders governing private members’ business.

This does not denigrate opposition days or business in any way. Both opposition business and private members’ business have certain rules which stand apart from those observed for debate on general government business.

Our government reserves the right, as government, to invoke existing standing orders to create consistency in when and how debates take place, countering earlier opposition charges that we were being ad hoc and arbitrary about time allocation. It is in the interest of consistency and predictability in format—two things that clarify true debate and distinguish it from smashing tables and kicking walls—that we are also amending

section 47(

b) to read as follows:

“(

b) Two hours of debate, apportioned equally among the recognized parties, shall be allotted to debate on the motion, at the end of which time the Speaker shall without further debate or amendment put every question necessary to dispose of the motion. If a recorded vote is requested by five members, division bells shall be limited to 10 minutes. A motion to adjourn the House may not be moved during this debate, except upon unanimous consent of the House.”

Madam Speaker, the new combination of

section 43 and

section 47, the appropriate use of reasoned amendments, as well as avoidance of deliberate disruption of the House like what we saw just a few weeks ago, will see the opposition meet more of their goals than the current strategy that they have been using.

Nothing will prevent a member who seeks to address the House on time allocation from moving adjournment. The subsequent division bells will remain as they are envisioned by the standing orders.

The reasoning for this motion is simply the efficient use of the House. It’s to ensure that as much debate takes place as possible right here, right now, in the House, not as little as possible.

The efficient use of time is the motivator for our final amendment, the deletion of standing order 98(e). This order reads as follows:

“If consideration of private members’ public business under this standing order is concluded before the expiry of the allotted two and one-half hours, the Speaker shall suspend the House for the balance of such time before putting the questions to the House.”

The current party composition of our Legislature has produced a 31-minute suspension in the middle of Thursday afternoons, due to the smaller caucus size of two of the four elected parties. During this period, the House can neither debate nor divide over any issue.

We all know that it’s already hard to pass a private member’s bill. We also all know that these bills are essential to a healthy democracy, one where grassroots voices can influence public policy, not just party insiders.

If all four sitting political parties had full party status in the Legislature, standing order 98(

e) would require the House to adjourn a debate in the middle of a third private member’s bill or motion, because the time allotted to the individual member in each of the caucuses would then exceed two and a half hours. This would kill countless private members’ bills, Madam Speaker, and we simply do not want that to happen.

Private members’ bills go beyond party politics and provide a voice to power for the grassroots in each constituency and, as such, must be protected from the technical loopholes in the standing orders.

Our position is for time allotted to private members’ business, as governed by standing order 98(a), to be sufficient for the House to protect the rights of private members to debate business on Thursday.

Madam Speaker, as my colleagues in government will clarify these amendments further, let me just conclude by applauding an earlier statement from our government House leader, the Honourable Todd Smith. That is, if the opposition is truly concerned about a bill’s effect on the common good, their goals and concerns are better served by making clear arguments and, most importantly, making a vote, not by making a vote impossible.

We’re blessed to live in the greatest country in the world, and our Westminster parliamentary model is a pivotal reason for our greatness, because it embraces rather than condemns difference of opinion.

The opposition will need to utilize our system of reasoned debate to fully detail the alternative that they would legislate were they to one day form government. Our amendments, in fact, help them do that. If they continue to ignore the purposes of parliamentary debate and seek to create a muted Legislature, I suspect they will suffer the same fate in the next election that the Liberals did in the last election.

Madam Speaker, my colleagues in government will clarify these amendments further, so just let me conclude by applauding an earlier statement, again, from the Honourable Todd Smith. Again, I repeat: That is, if the opposition is truly concerned about a bill’s effect on the common good, their goals and concerns are better served by making clear arguments and, most importantly, making a vote, not by making a vote impossible.

Again, I mentioned earlier, we’re very fortunate to live in what I feel and I’m sure every member in this Legislature feels is the greatest country in the world. Our Westminster parliamentary model is a pivotal reason for our greatness, because it embraces rather than condemns differences of opinions.

The opposition will need to utilize our system of reasoned debate to fully detail the alternative that they would legislate were they to one day form government. Our amendments, in fact, help them do that. If they continue to ignore the purposes of parliamentary debate and seek to create a muted Legislature, I suspect they too—

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

M me France Gélinas: I will try to add a few points to this debate on the motion to make changes to the standing orders and, speaking more specifically, to the amendments that were made to that motion.

It is clear by what the members have said so far that some of the changes that they are putting forward are focused on giving the sitting government more power.

It is clear that some of the changes that have been brought forward by the amendments brought forward by the independent members of the Liberal Party are there to bring a little bit more resources to that party.

The amendment that I have tabled to this motion is to give people a voice. The creation of a select committee of the Legislature to look at the standing orders, frankly, is long overdue. Most of you have never seen the standing orders, and you will be happy ever after if you never look at them. But for the people who live in this House, “standing orders” is a fancy term that says, “Here’s what we can and cannot do.”

For some of you who sit on boards, most of you know Robert’s Rules of Order: “This is how you do things. These are the procedures.” Well, the standing orders are about the same things, but they’re about the House and its committees. They date back a very long time. The standing orders are needed because they bring clarity as to, how you move a motion forward, how a bill moves forward, what it is that you’re allowed to do and not allowed to do. I respect all of this.

At the same time, I would tell you that it is long overdue that we take a look at those standing orders in the view of, this is 2018. I can tell you that for those of you who read the French version—I’m one of those—you will see that the entire text of the standing orders is written as if only men were ever elected, only men could sit in the chair. In French, we call it “le Président,” but if it’s a woman, as is the case for you, Madam Speaker, we call it “la Présidente.” There are ways to bring forward language that includes both.

You could speak about “la présidence.” That would include whether a man or a woman happens to be in the chair. None of this exists in the standing orders the way that they are written right now. They were written at a time when most people who were elected here were men. But I’m not. Neither are you. Neither is half of my caucus. We are all women.

Applause.

M me France Gélinas: Yes, thank you.

Yet, the standing orders are written in such language that we don’t see ourselves in this. So if we are going to make changes, why don’t we take our time and look at them more broadly, to bring them up to 2018, to make them more reflective as to how this Legislature could be as effective as possible for our end goal?

Our end goal is clear. We are there to govern the province of Ontario. We are there to pass laws that will oversee how people in Ontario live their lives, access services, access programs, run their businesses. This is our job as legislators. This is what we do. In order to do our jobs as effectively as possible, we need standing orders that allow us to do that; that allow us to do this when you sit on the government benches and that allow us to do this when you sit in the opposition bench. You have to realize that all 124 of us were elected to represent all of the people of Ontario. When we all sit here together, the entire leadership of the province is there.

Do we need the standing orders to do our work? Yes, we do. Do the standing orders need to be refreshed? Yes, they do. Are the five or six recommendations that have been put forward needed? I would say, some of them, absolutely; others, not so sure. But what I would like is to not only focus on those five or six that have been put forward. There are many other aspects of the standing orders that need to be looked at.

When I look at some of the issues that I hear in my constituency, the number one issue that I hear about is Health Sciences North. That’s the name of our hospital in Sudbury. Whether I hear about the overcrowding in our hospital—at Health Sciences North, we have no shower room. We have no patient lounge. We have no TV rooms. All of those have been changed into patients’ rooms. It is not unheard of that somebody who is admitted from the emerg or after surgery is moved into what used to be a bathroom or what used to be a shower room or suddenly finds themselves with four other people in what used to be the TV room.

Everybody always jokes that the TV is pretty good in there—they have one of those great big ones. But when you want to have a little bit of peace and quiet and are trying to recover, to share a room with other people—it’s sometimes really hard to respect patients’ privacy in those. So those are certainly issues.

It is the mandate of the provincial government to provide health care services. It is the mandate of every MPP to bring forward the issues that they hear in their constituency that have to do with the programs and services of the provincial government. Our opportunities to do this and to be effective are directly linked to what we can and cannot do, and all of those are written within the standing orders.

Am I allowed to show people what the standing orders look like? Because—I’m looking at the Clerk right now. This is the little book that we get our standing orders from. It’s not a very good read, I must admit—

Mr. Rick Nicholls: It’s a good late-night read.

M me France Gélinas: Yes, if you suffer from insomnia, you can start to read this book and it should help you greatly, because it’s not easy to read. It’s not my kind of reading, but I know that, by knowing the standing orders and by following the standing orders, I can become a better MPP.

Those are the rules of Parliament. Just think of any other sport that you do. If you know the rules of your sport, you will be a better athlete, and you will increase your chances of winning. For me, I look at the standing orders as—because I’m becoming more knowledgeable about the standing orders and because I know how to use them, I become a more effective MPP for the people that I represent. This is true for all of us.

Just for people that are watching: When you first get elected, we have the good people that are sitting here, from the Clerks’ table, give us a crash course as to what’s in the standing orders. They are very, very good at doing this introduction. The Clerks’ table is always there to help us if we need any

interpretation. They are the keepers of all of the rules. They know them inside and out. They are extremely good at what they do, and they are extremely helpful to all of us in this chamber who need to follow some of the orders.

Here, again, we come to a point where a review is needed. The government agrees that a review is needed, which is why they have put forward this motion that tables some changes to the standing orders.

But I would tell you, Speaker, right now, I can’t help but see that the changes they are bringing forward are skewed. They are skewed toward giving the governing party more power. There is nothing wrong with the government having power. This is why we have elections. But when it comes to everybody here that has been elected, we all have a job to do. The people in government—I’m in opposition; I am there to hold the government to account.

Have we found the right balance? I will tell you right now that if the changes that have been put forward all pass, this balance will be skewed in the government giving themselves even more power.

Don’t get me wrong: The government has way, way more power than any MPP and any group that is in opposition. The government has won the election, they have won the right to govern and they have the power to do so. In opposition, we have the responsibility to be the checks and balances.

We have the responsibility to make sure, if the government brings something forwards—did they really look at what impact this is going to have to the people of Cartier, who live in the riding of Nickel Belt? Did they know that such a thing exists in Sudbury and the effect of what they’re trying to do will be different? This is our job, to make sure that the laws they are bringing forward, the pieces of legislation they are bringing forward—but if you curtail this opportunity to bring balance, nothing good will come of it.

We need to make sure that the government is able to carry out its mandate, but you need to make sure that the opposition is also able to hold the government to account, to point out when a piece of legislation is having an unforeseen effect on a riding or a part of a riding that people didn’t know about. That’s why we have representatives from all over the province; it’s so that we represent the entire province and we can bring forward different perspectives to make things better.

The amendment that I had the pleasure of tabling is really to open this up. This is basically the opening of changes to our standing orders. Some of them are good, some of them not so much, but let’s look beyond that, Speaker. Let’s look at how we make sure that each and every one of us has an opportunity to be heard and to make things better for the people of Ontario so we can all prosper, so that we can all have a good life, no matter where we live and no matter who we are.

This is a huge responsibility that sits on each and every one of our shoulders. Whether you have never been in the riding of Nickel Belt or you’ve lived there all of your life, it makes no difference. Each and every one of you is responsible to make sure that people who live in my riding have equal opportunity, have equal access, and that means bringing forward pieces of legislation.

How do you make sure that the pieces of legislation that you bring forward are attaining those goals? Well, you make sure that the opposition continues to be able to do their job. This is how Parliament works. It’s not always perfect. We are human beings, after all, and sometimes human beings come with all their frailties and all the errors in their ways, but at the end of the day this is the best system we have come up with: to have a party in power and have opposition holding this party to account.

The motion that we have there is a step—part of it in the right direction and part of it not, but it certainly is an opportunity for all of us to look at the rules that govern and ask ourselves if it’s time that we have a more in-depth look. I’m looking at our Clerks right now. They know the standing orders inside out. We have the resources to be able to move this forward, to make sure that what we want to do, we give ourselves an opportunity to do that.

On est en train de parler des règles qui gouvernent l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario. Dans les règles qui gouvernent l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario, la plupart de ces règles ont été écrites il y a des décennies de ça. On parle de v’là longtemps : depuis que le Parlement de l’Ontario existe, on a des règlements. Les règlements sont vraiment pour nous dire comment est-ce que le Parlement doit fonctionner, comment est-ce que le Parlement s’assure qu’on est capable de passer les meilleures lois possibles pour les Ontariens and Ontariennes.

En ce moment, le gouvernement de M. Ford veut faire des changements à ces directives-là. Dans les changements qu’ils veulent faire, certains changements sont assez faciles à comprendre. Le changement de jeudi après-midi, lorsqu’il nous reste du temps, puis on n’est pas capable de rien faire avec ces 36 minutes-là, oui, certainement.

Mais il y a d’autres changements qu’ils veulent faire qui, là, sont beaucoup plus problématiques, des changements qui permettent au gouvernement de se donner plus de pouvoir. Ça, il faut vraiment regarder à long terme quel effet ça va avoir sur les lois, sur les règlements qui sont faits ici à Queen’s Park. Les lois qui sont passées—la plupart des lois vont rester là pendant des décennies. Quand on fait une loi, ce n’est le genre de chose où on revient faire des changements tous les deux ou trois ans. La plupart des projets de loi sont là pendant longtemps.

Le système a été fait avec première et deuxième lecture, aller en comité, troisième lecture et sanction royale. Tout ça a été mis en place pour s’assurer que, lorsqu’on met une loi, on prend le temps d’écouter tous les députés de tous les partis, pour s’assurer qu’on n’a pas de changements qu’on n’avait pas vus venir et que, par inadvertance, on ne fait pas de dommage à une communauté ou une

partie de l’Ontario—pas qu’on en avait l’intention ; mais que, parce qu’on est allé trop vite, on a fait des erreurs. Les erreurs dans des lois ont souvent des conséquences néfastes à très long terme, donc les règles du jeu que le gouvernement veut changer en ce moment, c’est quelque chose d’important.

C’est une chance de revoir les règles du jeu, mais assurons-nous qu’on ne laisse pas passer cette opportunité-là.

L’amendement que nous avons fait à la motion, c’est de créer un comité qui aurait des membres des deux partis, le Parti conservateur et le Parti néo-démocrate, mais qui inclurait également des représentants du Parti libéral et le représentant du Parti vert, pour que tout le monde, de façon aussi collaborative que possible, ait la chance d’être entendu et ait la chance d’amener des changements qui ne seront pas pour donner aux conservateurs plus de pouvoir ou pour donner aux membres du Parti libéral plus de ressources, mais qui seront vraiment là pour s’assurer que le Parlement fait bien son travail et pour nous permettre de passer de meilleures lois.

I see that my time is up, Speaker. I would encourage everybody to really look at the amendment that we have put forward. The amendment is not to give the Conservatives more power or to give the independent members or the Liberal Party more resources. The amendment is really to give everybody a chan