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

November 13, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Nov-13 (PDF)

L047 - Tue 13 Nov 2018 / Mar 13 nov 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 13 November 2018 Mardi 13 novembre 2018

Orders of the Day

Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 pour des écoles sûres et axées sur le soutien

Introduction of Visitors

Legislative pages

Private members’ public business

Report, Environmental Commissioner of Ontario

Oral Questions

Executive compensation

Ethical standards

Police investigations

Small business

Government contract

Fishing licences

Police services

Government spending

Assistance to farmers

Assistance to farmers

Treaties recognition

Addiction services

Special-needs students

Public transit

Northern economy

Employment standards

Taxation

Apology

Hate crimes

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Non-profit veterinary clinics

John Macfie

Lou Battochio

Yellow Brick House

Long-term care

Muslims for Remembrance Day

Diabetes

Remembrance Day / Jour du Souvenir

Boys and Girls Clubs of North Simcoe

Sirvard Kurdian

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Petitions

Education funding

Ontario economy

Northern health services

School facilities

West Lincoln Memorial Hospital

Social assistance

Long-term care

Employment standards

Employment standards

Gasoline prices

Long-term care

Orders of the Day

Green Energy Repeal Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 abrogeant la

Loi sur l’énergie verte

Adjournment Debate

Education funding

Climate change

Long-term care

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 pour des écoles sûres et axées sur le soutien

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 12, 2018, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 48,

An Act to amend various Acts in relation to education and child care / Projet de loi 48, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne l’éducation et la garde d’enfants.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate.

Ms. Marit Stiles: It’s a pleasure to continue debate of Bill 48 this morning. I’ll just recap a little of what we talked about yesterday. As you may recall, I was reviewing the bill and some concerns that we have regarding the bill. I want to continue where I left off: in a conversation about the problem with the rollback to the sex education curriculum and how at odds that is with the purpose of this bill, which is supposed to be about keeping our students safe and in supportive classrooms.

As I was saying yesterday, I’m not worried about my own daughters learning about consent. I will teach my daughters about consent. I’m sure many of the members opposite will also have those conversations with their children—or have already—on how it works and why consent is expected and why it matters.

What we’re worried about are the young people whose parents won’t have talked to them about consent. I think that’s why it’s so crucial that the public education system provides those students with all the best and most modern tools, including an understanding of consent, in order to make sure that we, as a society, are taking responsibility to ensure that our young people and our children have the tools they need to understand what consent means. We can’t rely on YouTube videos about consent to teach this. We can’t rely on teachers to come up with this themselves. It’s not fair; it’s not appropriate.

We owe it to our children, to our neighbours’ children and to future generations to end the cycle of abuse, rape and violence, to end the guilt and the torment experienced by so many, and to teach these lessons based on the best knowledge and research. We cannot leave it to social conservatives or anyone else who has a different agenda.

I want to tell you a little bit about Lyra Evans. The member from Ottawa Centre knows Lyra well. She is a 26-year-old who was just elected to be a school trustee in Ottawa. You may have heard about her. She actually garnered 55% of the vote—not too shabby. I think all of us would be pleased with that. She says she felt compelled to run for trustee after this government decided to revert to the 1998 curriculum.

I’m going to quote her here. She said, “I was outraged. I was disappointed they were going to be doing this to students who, I think, should be learning the things the 2015 curriculum teaches.... So I got engaged because I wanted to be a voice for people who didn’t feel like their voices were being heard.”

One thing I haven’t mentioned is that Lyra’s journey has not been easy. She is a young trans woman. She became homeless while she was still in high school and struggled for many years. She has spoken publicly about this, Mr. Speaker. She couch-surfed and lived on the streets. She experienced transitional housing. All of those things—the volunteers and the advocacy work and the transitional housing—helped to bring Lyra onto this other path, even as she continued to face discrimination by coming out first as gay and later as transgender.

Lyra says that a big part of what made her life difficult was the lack of education, understanding and nuanced language regarding LGBTQ issues in the school system and the community at the time. That’s why this matters so much to her. It is a major reason why she decided to run for school board trustee. She wants to see schools continue with the sex ed curriculum that was developed in Ontario in 2015. She wants it to be a more inclusive education system with inclusive conversation about gender identity, relationships and consent in our schools. It’s so important.

We know that people from the trans community suffer disproportionate suicide rates, disproportionate homelessness, poverty, depression. All you have to do in my community is take a walk through a wonderful organization called Sistering to see how many of the people who are using that service are from the trans community.

It doesn’t have to be this way, but we know that many students and workers in our school system have suffered, and there are solutions. I want to talk for a minute about some of the other safety issues that are not addressed in this bill, like the chronic underfunding of our school system—chronic underfunding that has led to issues with classroom violence. Education workers report that some of the highest levels of lost work time are due to injuries in the workplace, and parents are growing uneasy about their children’s safety at school.

School boards are legally responsible for both student achievement and well-being, but are not being given sufficient resources to ensure the well-being of all learners within the classroom.

We know that special education services for children are simply not there when many families need them. We know that many students are waiting for years for the specialized education they need to thrive, and many simply don’t receive it at all. Some 61% of elementary schools and 50% of secondary schools report that they do not have sufficient access to a psychologist to adequately support students. I think many of us with children in high school can appreciate that, can identify with that. Then 47% of elementary and 36% of secondary schools report that child and youth worker services are not available.

During the election, our party made addressing mental health a centrepiece of our education platform. We committed to hiring more mental health care workers specifically to support high school students and pledged to fix the patchwork of mental health and addiction supports by giving these services their own ministry. Members on the government side didn’t release a platform at all during the campaign. In fact, they’ve already cut $330 million per year in planned mental health funding that is so desperately needed.

But it’s not too late to take action. They could help make our schools safe and supportive by changing course and providing resources immediately. I want to reach out to the other side, to the government side, and ask them to join us, to work with us to find solutions.

Chronic underfunding—I mean, it has been chronic. We’ve been looking at 20 years of underfunding for our schools. The previous government had 15 years to fix this—15 years—and the situation only got worse. We’ve seen that drastic under-resourcing of our schools, that lack of funding to support teachers and educational assistants. We’ve seen class sizes grow, and we haven’t seen the support our vulnerable students need.

The government could address these issues of classroom violence, which I want to say is, without question, the number one issue I hear from stakeholders in our education system, from parents, from the teachers’ unions, from associations, from the principals’ council. Classroom violence, the number one issue. Quite striking.

I’m very proud of what our school boards have managed to accomplish over the last 20 years, despite that underfunding and that under-resourcing, particularly in terms of bringing gender equity to the classrooms. But I believe much of this has been done in spite of the provincial government instead of because of it.

We’ve had 20 years, again, of refusing to address the fundamental issues that affect all of our schools. Let’s just say it: It’s the broken funding formula. That’s the issue. It was imposed by the Conservatives and then it was reinforced under the Liberal government. Many of us were hopeful; we were hopeful. They talked the talk, but they did not walk the walk. We did not see a change to the funding formula, which so desperately needs to be changed. Without even addressing the overall state of the economy and the government left by previous administrations, their refusal to address the fundamental issues in how our public education system was funded missed a tremendous opportunity.

I cannot tell you, Mr. Speaker, how many present and former civil servants I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know over the last few years told me they could no longer stand to stay employed in the Ministry of Education under the previous government and now under this government. It’s quite exceptional, because they care about education; that’s why they are there. I have the utmost respect for the civil service. I’ve told them repeatedly, the people who talk to me, “Don’t leave. Stay, because we need you there.” But they just can’t deal with the state of affairs, it is such a mess.

You know, it wasn’t that the sex ed curriculum, going back to that again, was faulty. It was that the government, in the first place, back in 2015—it wasn’t that it was faulty. The other side likes to say that there wasn’t enough consultation. As a school board trustee, I want to share my experience, which was that they should have introduced it back when the former Premier was originally going to introduce it. They should have brought it in then. In fact, when it was finally introduced in 2015, school boards and others were basically told: “Let’s not talk about it. Let’s just keep it quiet.

Let’s not make a fuss. We don’t want to draw too much attention. People are walking out. Don’t draw too much attention.”

Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, I think that was a massive failure on the part of the Liberal government, because we should have been talking about it. We should have been answering those questions as school board trustees and others. We should have been talking about those issues from day one.

I’ve lost all my notes, but that’s okay.

I want to talk for a few minutes about some of the changes that are being proposed by this government. Yesterday, we heard the minister and the parliamentary assistant speak at quite great length about the bill and what they were hoping to achieve with this. Frankly, it’s a bit mystifying. It’s a bit mystifying because we don’t know exactly what they have planned. There’s very little information in the bill, and even in our technical briefings, there was not a lot of detail available. What is the government trying to achieve here?

What the government, I think, made very clear yesterday is that one of the major reasons why they’re bringing forward this legislation right now is to change the College of Teachers and to take teachers off the board of the College of Teachers. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Education actually said that yesterday. It was the first time we’ve heard that. It has certainly been something we’ve suspected.

The fact that there haven’t been any conversations with the teachers, that we still haven’t seen the governance review report that the College of Teachers has initiated, that we haven’t seen that yet, is concerning, and that the government would feel the need to move forward without that information—again, it’s kind of like the so-called massive, biggest consultation ever, I think it is, the biggest consultation ever that’s under way, where people don’t find out about the consultation until they’ve only got a few hours to register during a weekday, where calls are being screened and where the government now is moving forward on a bunch of issues, including this math proficiency test, without actually waiting for the results of this so-called biggest, most important consultation ever.

So I feel that there is something missing here.

I guess the message the government is sending pretty clearly to everybody who cares about public education in this province is that they have an agenda. They have their own agenda on the sex ed curriculum. They have their own agenda on the College of Teachers. Let’s just say it: They’re heading into the bargaining with the teachers next year, and I can tell you that this is causing a lot of anxiety among many of our educators.

In the midst of all of this, they have repeatedly undermined that relationship of trust that I spoke about yesterday between teachers and parents. That relationship—for those of us who have children in the public education system or have had children in the public education system, you’ll know how crucial and important that is, that we have a great relationship with our teachers and that we have a relationship of trust. When that is broken, that affects our students’ education.

Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, I want to close here by saying, again, I appreciate the opportunity to have this important conversation about these issues, about what it means to have a truly safe and supportive classroom and education system. I am looking forward to having some conversations, to bringing forward some amendments to this bill in committee and having some important debate continue. I’m looking forward to working with the government. I hope the government will be open to listening to some of our ideas, based on some of our consultations, to improve and strengthen this bill.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Mr. Paul Calandra: Thank you to the member for her speech. I was in the House yesterday and today. It’s obvious that there is a passion for the topic that she has; she was a school trustee. But at the same time, Mr. Speaker, there was so much that was missing in that, and so much that she didn’t reflect on.

First and foremost, the minister and the parliamentary secretary have been working very, very hard, since the government was sworn in, to get out there and to meet with parents and meet with educators. I know myself and many of the members of my caucus have been doing the same. I’ve met with dozens of teachers, I’ve met with dozens of parents, both during the election and since the election. I have two daughters who are in elementary school in Stouffville. One of the things that a lot of the teachers have said to me is that one of the problems with the previous health education was that it divided parents.

A lot of the teachers said that they didn’t want to have to teach something that was so divisive, and that it was the government’s responsibility to come forward with something that actually brought people together. That’s what this government is trying to do.

She also mentioned—incorrectly, of course—that we were making cuts to mental health. This is absolutely, categorically false. In fact, the Minister of Health is working with the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services and the Minister of Community Safety, and working closely with the Minister of Education. They’re bringing in a complete package to reassess how we deliver mental health services to all Ontarians, not just to students.

I’m encouraged, on the one hand, because the member has said that she is consulting with a lot of people. So I ask her to bring those consultations over to us, meet with the minister, meet with the parliamentary secretary and share those consultations, but really take a thorough look and speak to parents from across the province and ask them what it was that they were so concerned with, with the previous health education, and how we can make our schools safer, and how we can deal with, as the member from Kitchener South–Hespeler has suggested, making our schools more accessible to those who need service animals.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Mr. Joel Harden: It’s an honour to rise in this discussion today. I want to begin just from a simple premise, because I don’t have a lot of time. I think there is a fundamental disagreement here that my colleague from Davenport laid out very clearly in what she said: We believe, on this side of the House, that you do not consult on people’s core, fundamental human rights. That is not something you consult about, and queer and trans kids in our schools need to know that.

I want my friends in government to know that we have folks back home whom I’ve talked to who may feel similar to you, who believe they should have a right to decide if a queer or a trans kid should find out that their gender identity or their parents’ gender identity matters in grade 5. Because let’s be honest: That’s what we’re talking about in the curriculum that my friends don’t like. On this side of the House, we believe that it’s not only appropriate; it’s necessary.

I want to give you an anecdote from your own party’s history that I hope will reinforce this. The parliamentarian who has taught me a lot in my life is Svend Robinson, our country’s first queer parliamentarian. What Svend did in the 1980s was to go to then-Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and work with him to make sure that the charter had written into it the necessity against discrimination for queer people.

Brian Mulroney got up in front of his cabinet in Ottawa and told them in no uncertain terms that they were to be voting in favour of that whipped vote to ensure that queer rights were written into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms—a Conservative Prime Minister of this country, who has a queer brother in the city of Montreal, who understands very well as a brother, as a friend and as somebody knowledgeable about human rights that you either stand for something or we fall for everything.

So I’m asking this government to stop the dog-whistle politics around consultation and to ensure that human rights for queer and trans kids matter and that they are written into our schools.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s a pleasure to rise today and have a few comments on Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act.

The health and safety and well-being of all our children and students is this government’s number one priority. The government has said numerous times that we have zero tolerance for sexual abuse of Ontario students and children. At the end of the day, we want to make our schools and early years child care settings safer than they’ve ever been before.

We’re taking action to ensure that students and children who have alleged that they were subjected to sexual abuse or acts of child pornography committed by educators have access to the services that they need.

The Ontario College of Teachers council: We are prepared to make changes to the Ontario College of Teachers council size and composition to better serve and protect the public interest in regulating Ontario’s teaching profession. Also, there’s a group called the Public Interest Committee, and it’s unable to make decisions or vote on those matters. They haven’t met since January 2017. Any future changes to the composition of the council would be expected to enhance the OCT’s ability to meet and protect the public interest. Accordingly, the Public Interest Committee would be dissolved if Bill 48 is passed.

It’s expected that, as a result of the Ontario College of Teachers governance review, the government would be in a position to make changes to that governance structure that would ultimately remove the need for that group.

The Minister of Education also has the power to strike a committee at any time to mandate issues of public interest.

I look forward to the rest of the debate. I agree with our colleagues on other side of the House in the opposition party that the sooner we get this bill to committee, have recommendations made and debate the bill will all be for the better.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

M me France Gélinas: I want to start by congratulating my colleague from Davenport. I was here last night when she started her one-hour lead; I’m here this morning when she finished it off. Congratulations to you. It was very interesting—she’s fairly new, newly elected in June of this year—to see her go through the bill and really show genuine interest to work with the government on issues.

Some of the parts of the bill we can truly support, and we will work with you. Some of the other parts of the bill, where we have issues: We have to be willing to listen.

I want to bring a little anecdote. We were all, I suppose, at Remembrance Day ceremonies on Sunday. I had many in my riding. I was in Onaping Falls and, for the first time ever, Rita OLink and Darlyn Hansen, who are two trans women from my riding, laid a wreath for all the LGBTQ who served in the Armed Forces. It was the first time that it was done, that a wreath was laid for LGBTQ members, and it was very heartwarming to see the support of the community. There were over 200 people. This one was indoors. Most of them in Nickel Belt are outside; this ceremony was indoors.

The number of people who took their picture with the wreath after, and with Rita and Darlyn, for what they have done—I’m bringing this forward because in Nickel Belt, we don’t have a gay village. We don’t have very many opportunities to learn about LGBTQ. The people of Nickel Belt learn it through the schools. If you take that opportunity to learn away from us, we will go back to where most trans people are at risk of taking their own lives, because they feel so ostracized. Give those kids a chance.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): I return to the member from Davenport for her two-minute summation.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I want to thank everyone—the member from Markham–Stouffville, the member from Ottawa Centre, the member from Sarnia–Lambton and the member from Nickel Belt—for your responses and your thoughtful comments. I appreciate it.

As I mentioned, we do look forward to continued debate and discussion of this bill. At the end of the day, I don’t doubt that we all want to ensure that our children and youth are supported and safe in our schools. As someone who personally witnessed teachers who had abused students moved from school to school, when I was growing up in Newfoundland, I can honestly say that we all want that practice to end. We want to see that change.

We will be looking forward to the government working with us to make this policy even stronger, to ensure that the laws and the policy that we make are the best they can be and that they serve all of our students, that they strengthen and don’t undermine that essential relationship I’ve spoken of between parents and teachers, and that they give our school boards the tools they need to make real and meaningful change.

Mr. Speaker, I’m afraid of what’s coming overall in our public education system in this province under the current administration. I worry that those who sit opposite, along with their friends in the south and across the country, don’t really want to see our public education system prosper. I believe we all want to keep our children and youth safe, but I’m not convinced yet that that means strengthening our public education system, from the other side.

I want to say that what we really need to be focusing on is not taking away the tools that our teachers have to create a more inclusive and diverse community and country. We need to focus on revising the funding formula. That is absolutely crucial. We need to focus on repairing our schools. We need to concentrate on bringing in the Indigenous curriculum, so that we can meet the requirements of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate?

Mr. Parm Gill: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to speak about Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018, brought forward by my colleague the Minister of Education.

This is a bill geared towards keeping our children and students safe and ensuring they’re better supported in their day-to-day learning environment. This legislation is the first step in closing three of the many gaps that exist in Ontario’s education system. This bill touches on topics that concern families in Ontario sending their children to schools and daycare.

This should never be the case, as students should feel safe and supported while at an institution that builds their character and provides them the education needed to succeed in their life.

The first issue the bill relates to is teachers, in some instances, sexually abusing their students without facing any sort of serious consequences. I say “in some instances,” because there are many, many teachers who go above and beyond in terms of what they do to educate our kids, and the time and effort that they spend on this. I want to thank all of those teachers around the province.

We know that sometimes students are, obviously, taught by individuals who are guilty of sexual abuse towards children; however, due to the current laws in place, these individuals are able to escape legal trials and consequences for their actions. As a government that puts student safety as one of our top priorities, we’re now looking to fix this major issue concerning our children and students. Our PC government has zero tolerance for any form of sexual abuse within the school environment.

That is why this bill is proposing a mandatory revocation of teacher and early childhood educator certificates of registration for all acts of proven sexual abuse. As per the law today, that certificate can only be revoked if the type of sexual abuse is listed on a defined list within the Ontario College of Teachers Act or the Early Childhood Educators Act. Under this legislation brought forward by the previous Liberal government in 2016, the certificate can only be revoked should a teacher commit an offence listed on this defined list.

However, if a teacher performs any other type of sexual act towards a student, they are able to keep their teacher’s certificate as well as transfer to another institution and continue teaching.

An investigation by the Toronto Star found that the previous Liberal bill does not prevent teachers who might abuse their students from transferring to a different school. If a teacher gropes a student or makes sexual comments towards a student, their licence isn’t automatically revoked. It is revoked only when the sexual abuse falls under this list of offences laid out by the previous Liberal government.

Having been part of the federal government, Mr. Speaker, there were many, many times when I would not see my kids for weeks at a time. There are many parents in Ontario who have to work away from their children or have multiple jobs and have little time to spend with their children. In such a situation, as a parent, it is important to feel at peace sending your kids to school and not having to worry about them potentially being in the midst of a teacher who is capable of abusing them sexually.

I was lucky to have a wife who was able to take care of our children so well during the time I had to be away from them, and I am forever grateful to her. But every family is different, and it is important that all children are kept safe.

It is difficult to stop these types of offences from happening altogether. However, we can work towards minimizing these by eliminating the teachers and caretakers who have been identified as sexual abusers from the schools and daycares that our children attend. Through this bill, we’re proposing that if a member of the Ontario College of Teachers or the College of Early Childhood Educators is found guilty by their disciplinary committee of committing any form of sexual abuse, their certificate will be revoked immediately.

We’re going to fix the poorly worded legislation of the former Liberals, which has created loopholes for child abusers. We will ensure that children are kept safe from individuals who pose a threat. This is all about restoring trust in our education system.

It gives me goosebumps, Mr. Speaker, just thinking about any of my three children having been taught by someone who might have committed such a crime. Sexual abusers do not belong in our schools, teaching and taking care of our children. These teachers deserve to have their certificate to teach revoked as soon as they’re found guilty of sexually abusing a child, regardless of how minor the offence may be. Parents should not have to worry about sending their kids to school or a child care facility, worrying about their child being sexually abused.

It is important that, once identified, these offenders lose their licence to be around our children. If a teacher is able to commit a minor sexual act toward a child they’re supposed to be teaching or taking care of, who is to say they won’t commit

an act much worse?

Teachers are looked up to by students and they are their first mentors. There is no place for sexual abusers in our schools, and it is about time we put our children and our students first.

As was mentioned in the House yesterday by my colleague Minister Thompson, every sexual act under the Criminal Code of Canada should be sufficient to revoke the certificate of a teacher or early childhood educator upon committing the act. Bill 48 will help achieve that goal.

Another pressing issue concerning Ontario students is proficiency in mathematics. Our students have been falling behind in math, and the previous Liberal government just made things worse with an unproven and experimental curriculum called discovery math. We can conclude that this curriculum has failed our children.

The bill presented by the Minister of Education proposes to resolve this issue and help students in Ontario succeed in this essential subject. Our plan is to work with teachers to ensure they’re prepared to teach the fundamentals of math, in order to improve the success of Ontario’s students. The Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act would require any new teacher seeking to be registered with the Ontario College of Teachers to successfully complete a math knowledge test.

Mr. Speaker, I’m blessed with three bright children, two of which are still in school and going through the current education system. My youngest son is in grade 8, and I can see how the current math curriculum has failed him. My children, along with every child in this province, deserve a good education system that helps them lead a life of success, one they can be proud of. Having a solid foundation is essential for children for furthering their education. However, if we’re seeing a fall in students’ math literacy scores in grades 3 and 6, how are these children meant to build on skills they do not possess to begin with?

Our government is going to revitalize the education system for students and parents across this province. When it comes to math, in particular, we’re going to continue to focus on getting back to the basics. We will ensure teachers are supported and have the tools necessary to teach math. In turn, parents will be able to have confidence that students are learning the fundamentals that they and employers across this province are looking for.

The schools in Ontario should focus on teaching students the skills that matter: reading, writing and math. This approach will help to prepare our kids for the challenges of work and life. By ignoring parents and focusing on a narrow agenda, or providing our kids with experimental curriculum like discovery math, the Liberals’ failed policies are leaving our children unprepared to compete with other students from across Canada and around the world.

Instead of helping our kids pass their tests, the NDP want to cancel the tests altogether. The stats provided by the Education Quality and Accountability Office, also known as EQAO, show that the success numbers have decreased each year that EQAO assessments were completed since 2013. Just over half, 51%, of Ontario’s grade 6 students and 38% of grade 3 students failed to meet the provincial standards in math in 2018. The EQAO data showed that 21% of students who met provincial standards in grade 3 failed to do so in grade 6.

As a father, this is hard for me to wrap my head around, as I think of my youngest son having to struggle because of an education system that fails to provide proper resources for him to succeed. I’m sure the parents in Ontario would agree with me on this, Mr. Speaker.

Math has become a troublesome issue across the country as test scores drop in every province except Quebec and PEI. Because EQAO is only implemented in Ontario, Mr. Speaker, it is hard to compare the results to other provinces’. However, according to a recent Global News article, the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program released a report in April that examined the test results of eighth graders across the country between 2010 and 2016. The report found that Ontario students’ performance in math remains stagnant, while Quebec, which had the highest scores in the country, watched its results climb significantly.

Math scores are going up in Quebec and Prince Edward Island; however, our students in Ontario are failing their tests because the Liberals have failed our kids. We can agree that this early achievement in math is a strong predictor of one’s academic success in the future.

Starting in September 2018, our government has held consultations with parents, educators and interested individuals from across our province to allow them to contribute their thoughts and suggestions on the Ontario curriculum. The consultations focused on the following topics:

—improving math scores and standardized testing;

—the inclusion of important life skills such as financial literacy and coding, to help our students succeed in the future; and

—the steps schools should take to remove distracting cellphones from the classrooms.

This government for the people will review input from everyone who participates, and we’re going to fulfill our election promise because we’re focused on creating the best environment for students to achieve.

An

article in the Globe and Mail about math standards in Ontario references a report by Professor Anna Stokke from the department of math and statistics at the University of Winnipeg. She gave the example that if a student hasn’t memorized the times tables by grade 4, they will struggle with topics that rely on basic math, Mr. Speaker. Her report also mentioned that math is very cumulative in nature, and that’s why it’s important to get it right when students are young. She mentions that important concepts be included in elementary and middle-years curriculum.

If not, that would result in a packed high school curriculum and also students who are not prepared for success at that level. She is not surprised to see Ontario’s math scores stagnate or tumble, because the focus has been on discovery-based learning as opposed to mastering basic math skills before moving on to the more complex equations.

We promised in our campaign to focus on the fundamentals and make mathematics mandatory in teachers’ college programs, and we’re delivering on that mandate with Minister Thompson’s bill.

We also aim to address the current EQAO testing regime that is failing our kids and implement a standardized testing program that works. We believe this is the first step to achieving the bigger goal for students and parents, as well as the future of our province. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that we stop trying to hide the problem, but rather, fix it, and that is exactly what this bill will address.

The struggles that families face due to their children struggling in math have forced them to turn to private tutors and after-school math classes. Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Milton, families are having to enrol their children in out-of-school math classes to help their children get the same math skills they are meant to obtain through going to school. Parents should not have to look for substitutes to try to fix an issue that was created by the Liberals.

Parents should feel comfortable sending their kids to schools and having trust that the education system allows their children to succeed rather than set them up for failure. It is evident that this is a significant problem hindering families in Ontario, and our PC government is taking measures to address and fix this issue. We’re supporting teachers to be better prepared to teach the fundamentals of math. These changes would provide more confidence to parents that the government is working to ensure that Ontario continues to have one of the best education systems in the world.

Lastly, through this bill, the Education Act will be amended to provide that the minister may establish policies and guidelines respecting service animals in schools, and require boards to comply with the policies and guidelines and to develop policies in accordance with those policies and guidelines.

Currently, Ontario’s Education Act permits boards to bar service animals from school premises if they wish. It is important to have clear legislation in regard to such an important topic rather than leaving the decision to the board members’ discretion. Our PC government is working towards addressing this issue, as we know how important it is, and we’re supporting our families and getting it right once and for all.

To ensure that the number one priority is the health, safety and well-being of children and students, we are taking action now to make our schools and early years child care settings safer. These changes would improve the quality of education for Ontario students and children and put parents’ rights and voices first. This would provide more confidence to parents that the government is working to keep our kids safe.

We are taking action to help ensure that students and children who have been the subject of alleged sexual abuse or acts of child pornography by educators have access to the support they need. This government has zero tolerance for sexual abuse of Ontario students and children.

The government is also committed to improving the success of Ontario students overall but specifically related to mathematics. It is time we get back to the basics, respect parents and work with our teachers to ensure our kids have the skills they need to succeed in their lives.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Ms. Jill Andrew: I’ve sat here and listened to our Conservative government talk about Bill 48 and their safe and supportive classrooms. It’s rather insulting that the member who recently spoke on the government side never mentioned LGBT or trans students or educators. If you really want to make schools safe and supportive, we’ve got to identify the students who are actually in these schools, and also the educators. Many of us, myself included, are queer or from the trans community.

The next thing I’d like to say is: You talk about respecting parents, and I agree with you on that. We’ve got to respect parents, but I also feel we need to respect our teachers. We need to respect our child and youth workers, our student equity program advisers and our mental health workers. If we want to create safe and supportive schools, let’s invest in the human capital. Let’s invest in the talented souls we have who give their time and energy every day to educate our kids, as opposed to the EQAO test.

Researchers, doctors and scholars have said time and time again that teaching kids a standardized test—essentially teaching them to the test—is not really teaching. We’re not respecting our teachers, we’re not respecting their intellect, when we’re just telling them to prepare a kid to a test.

Every student is unique. They’re not standardized; they’re not a cookie-cutter model. So why are we enforcing and propping up the EQAO as opposed to propping up more educators, more parents—of course—and giving them the tools they need to engage with their schools in a way that can create a safe and supportive classroom?

Hey, I agree with you: Sexual abuse is a no-tolerance zone. You should lose every licence if you are a person found guilty of this. However, what are sexual abuse and math tests doing in the same bill? Why don’t we talk about—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you. Questions and comments?

Ms. Jill Dunlop: I’d like to start off by thanking my colleague from Milton for his comments, especially in support of our excellent teachers in Ontario, and also for respecting the parents.

Our school environments should be safe and accepting spaces where students can achieve academic success. Safe and accepting learning environments are essential for the well-being of students, and we have a role to play in making our schools secure and supportive. Our government is focused on keeping children and students safe and ensuring that they’re being set up for success. We must make clear what behaviour is unacceptable in a classroom setting, and ensure that there are measures in place to respond to all incidents in order to protect our children and youth from harm.

There were holes throughout the previous legislation that caused concern and led to many asking for better protection for Ontario students from abuse by teachers. The Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018, will expand the definition of sexual abuse and require mandatory revocation for any acts of sexual abuse. This is imperative, as expanding the definition of sexual abuse acts will result in mandatory revocation of a member’s licence and ensure they are not able to remain in a classroom setting and hurt vulnerable students.

Schools must provide support for all students, and our government is going to ensure that this is the case, if the legislation passes. We are committed to keeping our students safe. We want them to learn in a positive environment that supports their unique abilities. Teachers are an integral part of our children’s learning, and we must ensure that they are properly preparing our students with the necessary life skills they need to thrive.

As the Minister of Education stated, by making these changes, we are sending out a clear message: The government has zero tolerance for sexual abuse of Ontario students and children. We are taking action now to make our schools and early years and child care centres safe learning environments. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I just want to focus on one little area: the quote that we keep hearing, that there’s respect for parents. I’m going to stand up as a parent of three children and also as the former director of diversity and equity at Wilfrid Laurier University.

When I was in that capacity, working to support my own kids, I was also responsible for overseeing the gendered violence prevention portfolio. In that portfolio, I had the honour of working with a number of amazing experts from the sexual assault support centre at the hospital in my riding, St. Mary’s. One of the biggest stats that people often forget is that students who identify as queer or trans—and, in fact, trans more than any other within that group—are often sexually assaulted more often than our straight students. So if we have a curriculum that is focused on removing consent, removing the tools that these students need to (

a) see themselves reflected in the curriculum, and (

b) be able to know how to see what’s happening to them as unacceptable, then our schools will never be safe.

I just want, as a parent of a queer daughter who has gone to the school board in my riding and spoken to the trustees there—she is petrified. She has been staying at home, anxious, because she’s not reflected in the curriculum, and she’s not able to be given the tools to be able to express to anybody that somebody has hurt her.

As a parent, and knowing from what is being told on the opposite side that you respect me because I’m a parent, please insert actual content into the curriculum so that my child knows how to say she has been harmed.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Questions and comments?

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: It’s an honour to be able to stand and address and respond to the comments from the member from Milton. I really appreciated his contributions to the debate today on Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act. It’s a piece of legislation that is truly monumental and one that will make an enormous amount of difference in the lives of students across Ontario. I have to begin by saying, though, that I rebut and I refute the allegations levelled by the opposition on a number of different fronts.

Let me begin by saying that all those on the Progressive Conservative benches believe that everyone should be treated equally, with dignity and respect, regardless of background or who they are—100%. Every single one of my colleagues will stand by that.

Second, let me say that their accusation that this is not being comprehensively consulted on, whether it’s with teachers or with students, is completely false.

We saw the former Liberal government. We saw their failed ideological experiments. We saw them reach out to, what, 1,600 people across the province? We are reaching out to tens of thousands of students, organizations, parents and teachers, allowing every single Ontarian to have their voice heard.

Speaker, that is what democracy looks like. That is about making sure that we truly are reaching out, that we’re having an open and transparent dialogue—

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Order, please.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: —about what legislation should look like going forward, and also what curriculum development should look like. We’re really pleased to see that.

I know the member from Milton spoke about that. He spoke about the importance of recognizing the contributions of our teachers as well. I want to take this opportunity to thank our teachers for their contributions.

I look forward to continuing debate on this legislation, but I wish that the opposition, instead of only presenting criticism, would provide constructive options and solutions, as they have yet to do.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for Milton has two minutes to respond.

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues from both sides of the House, of course: the members for Toronto–St. Paul’s, Simcoe North, Kitchener Centre and Niagara West.

As I pointed out in my remarks earlier, our government, during the campaign, communicated very, very clearly, as this was one of the main topics that concerned most Ontario parents. I can tell you that in my riding of Milton, we heard loud and clear in terms of how the policies put forward by the previous Liberal government were failing our students and our children.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: It is a great pleasure for me to rise today, as the member for London West, to participate in this very important debate on Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act.

I’m particularly pleased to be able to offer some comments in this debate because of my experience as a school board trustee for 13 years. I was chair of the Thames Valley District School Board for two terms and also served on the executive of the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association. I had the honour of serving as the education critic for the Ontario NDP caucus in the last Parliament.

I want to begin by commending my colleague the member for Davenport, the current education critic for the Ontario NDP, for her very insightful lead speech starting off the debate on behalf of this side of the Legislature. I think it would be worthwhile to remind MPPs of some of the context that the member for Davenport provided in her remarks.

She highlighted the fact that, surprisingly, this is the first time that MPPs in this Legislature are debating education legislation. That is surprising, Speaker, because we have seen significant change in education in Ontario since the election of this new government.

In fact, before the throne speech, before most of us were even sworn in as MPPs, we heard that this government was cancelling curriculum-writing sessions to respond to the call for action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We heard that this government was going to completely scrap the sexual health curriculum that had been put in place in 2015 to deal with the realities of society, of the changes in society, since 1998, when the previous health and physical education curriculum had been developed.

In the deal that it had made with social conservatives who had supported their leader and had supported their party, this government announced that the new, up-to-date, modern sexual health curriculum was going to be completely scrapped. Now, they backtracked somewhat and they have now announced that it is only currently scrapped in elementary schools.

The reality is that we have students attending schools across this province who come from queer families, whose parents are gay or lesbian or trans. We have students who are identifying as queer or trans themselves. They are discovering their own sexual identity from a very, very early age. We need a curriculum in our classrooms that will make those children see themselves reflected, that will make them feel that they are valued, that they have rights and that their needs have to be honoured in Ontario schools.

But we also saw, more recently, some other sweeping changes in education. We saw $100 million that has been cut from school maintenance and repair budgets. That has meant that many schools across this province are unable to proceed with some of those very important maintenance items that were planned: window repairs, window replacements etc. This funding was critical because there has been a $16-billion backlog in school maintenance and repairs accumulated over the time of the last government.

We saw a very quiet announcement, a sudden announcement, that the Parents Reaching Out Grants were going to be “paused,” as the government likes to say. These are very modest sums of money that really made a huge difference to school communities and to parents in schools across the province.

All of that has happened, Speaker, up to this point that we have reached, with a debate on Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act.

Now, Speaker, it’s interesting. This really is an omnibus bill. The title of it is

An Act to amend various Acts in relation to education and child care. I don’t know how many times in the last Legislature I heard the members on that side, who were on this side, complaining about the Liberals’ penchant for bringing forward omnibus pieces of legislation, because they knew then, as they should know now, that omnibus bills are problematic.

Omnibus bills undermine democracy, because they bundle together sometimes and often unrelated—

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for Peterborough–Kawartha will come to order, please.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: They bundle together sometimes and often unrelated pieces of legislation. What that does is, it prevents the kind of fulsome debate that Ontarians expect us to have on issues of vital public importance.

In the case of this omnibus bill, Bill 48, there are three main legislative initiatives that are bundled together. The first is to amend the Ontario College of Teachers Act and the Early Childhood Educators Act to expand the definition of “sexual misconduct.” This would allow the College of Teachers to mandatorily revoke a member’s certificate when that member has been found guilty of sexual misconduct. This, of course, arose from our knowledge of some of the gaps in the previous legislation that had been in place to deal with sexual misconduct of teachers.

I want to commend the Toronto Star for the excellent in-depth reporting that was done. We learned that some teachers were not having their certificates revoked after they had been found guilty by a discipline committee of the College of Teachers for sexual misconduct. They were being moved to other schools or other school boards because the kind of misconduct that they had engaged in was not captured by the legislation.

This legislation is a very important move forward to fix that gap because it is absolutely non-negotiable: Any teacher who has been engaged in any kind of sexual misconduct has to have their licence revoked. That is a very important legislative initiative, and it deserves a fulsome discussion in this Legislature.

The other piece related to that, Speaker, is that in the last session of the Legislature, there was an all-party Select Committee on Sexual Violence and Harassment. Members who participated in that committee—there were members from all sides of the House—heard horrifying stories of sexual abuse of children and how frequently sexual abuse of children occurs when there is a trusted adult—a coach, a teacher or a minister—and the devastating impacts of experiencing that sexual harm for a child going forward.

The one thing that we heard almost unanimously from—I think there were 150 presenters who came before that committee. Almost unanimously, every single presenter said that the most important thing that we can do to prevent sexual abuse of children is to move forward with the changes to the sexual health curriculum in schools from kindergarten to grade 12. They emphasized the need for that sexual health curriculum.

One of the things that that curriculum does, from a very young age, is it teaches kindergartners the proper names of body parts so that they can communicate what has happened to them to an adult, and then that can start an investigation moving forward, as it should. This has been something that child psychologists, police officers, child development experts and people across the board have recommended: that this remain in the school curriculum because it is so important to prevent childhood sexual abuse.

Speaker, we are 100% supportive of the changes that have been made in this legislation to deal with childhood sexual abuse, but we believe that the sexual health curriculum is equally important. It is just as vital that those changes be in place in order to prevent the sexual abuse of children.

Another piece of this omnibus bill deals with service animals in schools. I want to acknowledge my colleague the member for Hamilton Mountain for the work that she has done on children with autism to raise awareness of their needs.

It is interesting that we are debating Bill 48 and the changes that are proposed to require school boards to have policies on service animals in schools, but we’re having this debate just a month after the Ontario Human Rights Commission released comprehensive recommendations on the needs of children who have special learning needs in Ontario schools. There is a wide-ranging package of recommendations that the Human Rights Commission identified that need to be addressed in our education system. That should have been part of the changes that were included in this omnibus bill.

The third part of this legislation deals with a mandatory math test for new teachers entering the system. The government brings this forward without any evidence to say that testing teachers improves math scores. I just heard the member opposite compare Ontario’s results to math scores in other provinces. Well, no other province has a mandatory math test for teachers. It’s like this government believes that this is some miracle solution that’s all of a sudden going to raise math scores, but has brought forward no evidence to say that this is the fix that we are looking for.

I realize that my time is rapidly passing, but I did want to go back to the Parents Reaching Out Grants that I had mentioned at the beginning of my remarks. I recently received an email from the principal of St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School in my riding of London West. I asked the principal if I could read his remarks into the record. He said that he would be honoured to have me do so.

He begins his email by saying, “I recently found out that the current government of Ontario has cancelled the funding for OPHEA and has ‘paused’ the funding of the Parents Reaching Out Grants. As a secondary school principal and school administrator for the past 18 years, I have witnessed many callous acts of governments that have hurt students and degraded education. Unfortunately, I have not witnessed anything more callous than the onslaught of cancelled/paused/delayed funding to education from any other government in my time in education.”

He goes on to describe the impact of the pause on the Parents Reaching Out Grants on his school community. He says that in April of this year, the school council of his school and the six school councils from the elementary feeder schools combined their Parents Reaching Out Grants funding to hold a conference. All of the six feeder schools and the secondary school were unanimously agreed that one of the most important issues that they saw was to build resiliency in their children.

Oh, and I think I’m out of time. Okay. Thank you, Speaker.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The time being up, it is now time to recess until question period at 10:30 this morning.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before we call for introduction of visitors, I wish to call attention to the fact that I have a good friend in the Speaker’s gallery today: one of Ontario’s 24 senators, the Honourable Rob Black, senator representing the province of Ontario. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Today I would like to welcome the new team from St. Catharines: legislative assistant Mickey Calder and constituency assistants Taylor Downs and Francesca Delano. Thank you for coming, and welcome.

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I’d like to introduce His Worship Trevor Birtch, the mayor of Woodstock, visiting Queen’s Park today. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Trevor.

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I’m so excited to welcome Julie, my new community office assistant, to Queen’s Park. Thank you, Julie.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: It’s my pleasure to also add my warm welcome to Senator Rob Black. We go way back to OMAFRA days and 4-H Ontario.

Mr. Jamie West: I would like to welcome Team Sudbury to Queen’s Park: Nicole Ayotte and Nick Higgins from our constituency office, and Alison Blagden from our office here at Queen’s Park.

M me Marie-France Lalonde: C’est avec plaisir ce matin que j’ai eu le plaisir de partager une belle discussion avec des gens d’Ottawa.

Some people from OCUFA whom I had the pleasure of meeting this morning: Susan Spronk, associate professor of the University of Ottawa; Root Gorelick, Carleton University Academic Staff Association; Stéphanie Yamin, Professors’ Association of Saint Paul University; and Michael Conlon, OCUFA incoming executive director. Welcome, to all of them, to our Legislature. Thank you for the work you do.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: I have the privilege of introducing today, in the public gallery, the students and teachers of Hawthorn School. Thank you very much for coming in to the Legislature today.

Mr. Chris Glover: It’s my pleasure to welcome today the members of the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations: Rahul Sapra, Danielle Sirianni Molnar, Michelle Webber, Catherine Anderson, Susan Cadell, Shannon Dea, Bryan Tolson, Kimberly Ellis-Hale, David Monod, John Ciriello, Benjamin Muller and Jeff Tennant.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: It is my absolute pleasure to introduce a former MPP from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, Mr. Morley Kells, who is here with us today. I also want to thank him for all his guidance and help. He’s just a really great man.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’d like to welcome Sydney Piatkowski, my constituent assistant from Waterloo, to Queen’s Park. Welcome, Sydney.

Mr. David Piccini: I just wanted to quickly welcome the members of OCUFA as well this morning on behalf of the government. Thank you for that very informative breakfast this morning and for taking the time out of your day to meet with us.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: I would like to welcome visitors from the Birchmount Bluffs Neighbourhood Centre: Camille Evans, Kathleen Brutto, Lelisa Mesadi, Jofin Lorance and Grisilda Bast. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Joel Harden: I also wanted to welcome our friends from OCUFA, continuing on the list: Glenna Knutson, Nathan Kozuskanich, Nicole Bessette, Geoffrey Hudson, Gyllian Phillips, Stéphanie Yamin, Susan Spronk from the great city of Ottawa, Jordan Morelli, Marcus Harvey, Mike Eklund, Root Gorelick from Carleton University in the great city of Ottawa, Roy Gillis, and my good old friend Mike Conlon, who is coming in to be OCUFA ED as of January 2019.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’d like to welcome my constituency assistant from Essex, the person who is responsible for keeping my life in order for the last seven years. Patti Hayes is here. Welcome, Patti, to Queen’s Park today.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I would like to add my own words of welcome to two members from the University of Western Ontario Faculty Association, John Ciriello and Benjamin Muller. I’d like to thank them for their hard work, bargaining into the wee hours last Friday to reach an agreement. Welcome.

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to welcome grade 5 students from Bruce Trail Public School, from my great riding of Milton. They’ll be joining us a little later in the gallery.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I, too, would like to welcome the former member of provincial Parliament for the riding of Humber in the 32nd Parliament and Etobicoke–Lakeshore in the 36th and 37th Parliaments, Mr. Morley Kells. Once again, welcome back to the Ontario Legislature.

Legislative pages

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have a new group of legislative pages, and I would ask them to assemble now for their introductions.

From the riding of Huron–Bruce, Aditya Pandya; from the riding of Newmarket–Aurora, Alex Zhao; from the riding of Willowdale, Andrew Mao; from Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas, Ella Jazvac; from the riding of Durham, Emily Collicutt; from Mississauga East–Cooksville, Emily Hall; from Brantford–Brant, Ethan Russell; from Beaches–East York, Georgia Looman; from the riding of Oxford, Hannah Van Boekel; from Niagara West, Imran Gulamhussein; from Toronto Centre, Isabel Chant; from Timmins, Jack Heikkila; from Etobicoke Centre, Kejsi Musta; from Bay of Quinte, Kidan Singer; from Richmond Hill, Lillian Liu; from Brampton South, Nidhi Sanjeev Kumar; from Scarborough Southwest, Samara Nolan; from York Centre, Sarah Carnat; from Whitby, Shlok Panchal; from Parkdale–High Park, Vincent Doval-L’Heureux; and from Nepean, Zoe Smith.

I want to also welcome, from the riding of Oakville North–Burlington, Rham Anpalagan.

Welcome to this group of legislative pages.

Applause.

Private members’ public business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before I ask for oral questions, 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. Crawford assumes ballot item number 37 and Mr. Roberts assumes ballot item number 42.

Report, Environmental Commissioner of Ontario

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that the following document has been tabled: the 2018 environmental protection report from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario.

Oral Questions

Executive compensation

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Premier. There is a memorandum of agreement between the Ontario government and Ontario Power Generation. Basically, the government appoints the directors, and then the directors, who are appointed by the government, run the company. They do the hiring, the firing and the managing.

Does the Premier agree with that memorandum of agreement?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Ontario Power Generation is responsible for their own hiring.

But let me tell you what we did with the energy act. We cancelled the Green Energy Act. We saved 7,500 jobs at Pickering that the Leader of the Opposition wanted to cancel. We saved $790 million in contracts. We got rid of Hydro One’s board and the CEO—they’re gone, they’re done. Home heating costs are actually going down. Energy costs are going down.

That’s what we did for the energy file. That’s what we’re going to continue to do.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. John Vanthof: Once again to the Premier: I think I heard that he said that the board is responsible for the hiring; I didn’t hear firing.

I was surprised that, according to media reports, Alykhan Velshi was fired from his executive position at OPG after a single day on the job, thanks to a call from the Premier’s office. Yesterday, when Ontario Power Generation was asked for comment, they refused to give any details about Mr. Velshi’s severance package, but some are already suggesting that it could be as high as $500,000—half a million dollars.

Can the Premier tell us how much of the public’s money Mr. Velshi will be taking home for his 24 hours on the job?

Hon. Doug Ford: Again through you, Mr. Speaker: The OPG is responsible for doing their own hiring.

I’m going to repeat: The opposition wanted to fire 7,500 people out of Pickering. They wanted to get rid of 7,500 people who were relying on good-paying jobs to pay their mortgage, to put food on their table. You didn’t worry about the 7,500 people in Pickering; we cared about the 7,500 people in Pickering. That’s why they’re still employed there.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: To the Premier: Once again, it looks like the people of this province are going to be stuck with the bill for one of Premier Ford’s decisions and paying the price for settling his political scores.

If a Tory insider is getting paid half a million dollars for one day’s work, people have a right to some answers. The question that needs to be answered is, did the Premier direct or request that Mr. Velshi be fired? If he did, how much will his severance cost the people of Ontario?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Greg Rickford: Ontario Power Generation is responsible for their own staffing decisions. OPG is a crown corporation that is responsible for their own staffing decisions. All staffing decisions at OPG are made by OPG. Thank you.

Ethical standards

Ms. Sara Singh: My question is to the Premier, and this question is about the Premier’s standards for cabinet and his senior staff and how he communicates those standards.

Over the last week, we’ve seen the Premier say that a minister was leaving for one reason, only to learn later on that that wasn’t the reason at all. Now senior staff are being dismissed in the middle of the night, and we’ve just learned that they’re hiring their own legal counsel for representation.

Can the Premier tell us who on his senior team has been let go this past week, and what were the reasons for their dismissal?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I think I answered this yesterday. When it comes to staffing, we don’t comment about our internal staffing. That is up to the PC Party, and that’s the way it’s going to be.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Sara Singh: Leadership is about setting a standard and communicating that very clearly. If the Premier has any standards at all, it’s not clear what they are, because he’s not telling anyone.

The Premier says he has 10,000% confidence in his new Minister of Tourism, even though he felt the need to move him just days after the revelations about his role in a Ponzi scheme that bilked 800 families out of their life savings. Were you aware of this when you welcomed your new minister into cabinet?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: You want to talk leadership? At least the leader is here from the PC Party and not running away—

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Order. I will remind all members, who know better, that it’s totally inappropriate to make reference to the absence of another member in this House. We all know that, from time to time, individual members will have to be away for good reasons. That’s why it’s totally inappropriate, and I’m going to ask the Premier to withdraw.

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier can respond.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: You’re going after our team personally, day in and day out. I’ll tell you about our team. Our team is a strong team for the people. Our team is there representing the people and the taxpayers of this province. We’re there for the people. We’re there to reduce taxes and reduce hydro rates, making sure the people have a voice and empowering the people of this province instead of empowering the government.

The opposition wants to just raise taxes and lay off 7,500 people at Pickering. They want to make sure that it’s unaffordable to live in Ontario. We want to make sure it’s affordable to live in Ontario and create good-paying jobs. That’s what our—

Interjections.

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

Final supplementary.

Ms. Sara Singh: People send us here in the hopes of seeing an open government that they can trust, a government that will be transparent with the actions that it has taken. Instead, the Premier is announcing cabinet changes in the dead of night and swearing in a cabinet behind closed, locked doors.

Earlier this week, the media reported that the former Minister of Transportation was related to the head of a lobby group seeking to influence that very same ministry. Was the Premier aware of this when he appointed that minister to his position?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: When Mr. Yakabuski was appointed Minister of Transportation, he took immediate steps to declare a conflict with the Integrity Commissioner. So he is clean, okay? You don’t have to worry about someone with integrity like Mr. Yakabuski. He’s one of the most credible ministers who are down here right now. He has integrity. He has honesty. He has accountability. That’s what our team is made of.

Police investigations

Mr. Taras Natyshak: This is a question for the Premier and to the Premier about ensuring confidence in the transparency of police investigations.

Ontario Provincial Police are investigating the governing party, and that should raise serious concerns. There’s an ongoing police investigation into a data breach at the 407 which forced the resignation of a PC candidate, and another ongoing investigation into potential fraud in a nomination in Hamilton West.

What steps is the Premier taking to assure the public that the provincial police are able to conduct these investigations into the governing party in an impartial manner?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: As a legislator and a long-serving member of this Parliament, I would have hoped that a member of the NDP would understand and appreciate that we cannot and will not comment on ongoing police investigations.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: People need assurance that investigations are conducted without any interference from the government. It’s a serious matter of public policy. In the ongoing investigation into the Hamilton West PC nomination, court affidavits indicate that police are unwilling to release more information because it could bias people against the Ford government, and that numerous witnesses were uncooperative and tried to control interviews with police.

To ensure that there is independence and transparency at every stage of this investigation, previous governments have appointed special prosecutors from outside of the province. Will the Premier do that today?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Speaker, with the greatest of respect, the member opposite is making my argument: We cannot interfere with these investigations. The only way that police are going to be able to do the important work they need to do to investigate and lay charges when appropriate is for us to stay out of the way.

Small business

Mr. Stan Cho: My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade.

A week ago Saturday, the minister’s parliamentary assistant and I met with a dozen small business owners in my riding to discuss the challenges they face every day in building their businesses and our economy and creating meaningful employment for the people of Willowdale. These hard-working entrepreneurs from a variety of sectors applauded the work this government is doing to make Ontario open for business, and are anxiously waiting for the steps being proposed in Bill 47 that will stop punishing small business owners for the important work that they do.

Can the minister provide an update to this House on those measures and on our government’s larger strategy for making Ontario open for business?

Hon. Todd Smith: A great question from the member from Willowdale. It’s very helpful to have two great parliamentary assistants in Donna Skelly and Michael Parsa, who have been doing outstanding work across the province, hearing first-hand from business owners and operators right across Ontario.

Good news, Speaker: Yesterday, Bill 47 passed second reading. It’s heading to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs here at Queen’s Park. I just want to remind everyone that the deadline to request to present at the committee is noon today.

Bill 47 is a key piece of our government’s plan to reverse 15 years of Liberal policy that attacked small business. I’d like to read one of the many quotes that say we’re on the right track with this bill:

“We are very supportive that the Ford administration is listening to Ontario’s hospitality industry as we were considered among all other sectors in a one-size-fits-all approach to all labour reforms”—Tony Elenis, CEO, Ontario Restaurant, Hotel and Motel Association.

I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Stan Cho: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Through you, I’d like to thank the minister, on behalf of the small business owners in my community, for this very, very important work.

One of the entrepreneurs I spoke with runs a restaurant in Willowdale, with very humble beginnings. With some hard work, he had some success, and planned on opening a second location, creating new jobs and opportunities. But he put those plans on pause because he could not justify the cost and the risk with his wage expenses. They were to jump 32% in 18 months under the Liberals’ Bill 148.

Increased red tape and out-of-date apprenticeship ratios are not just a barrier to business, Mr. Speaker; they’re a hidden tax on employment.

Can the minister expand on how the measures of Bill 47 will help business owners like those in my riding to expand, be successful and create more meaningful employment?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks again to the member from Willowdale for another great question. Think of Bill 47 as one stop on the train to success on this particular rail line here in Ontario. We’ve got a long way to go to make this province the best place to open a business, expand a business and have a job in the whole country.

Here’s another quote: “The repeal of Bill 148 is a major step toward reducing costs and restoring business competitiveness for Ontario manufacturers.... We applaud the government’s action to eliminate these barriers to doing business in the province.” That’s from Dennis Darby, from the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters association.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve got a great team and we’re on the right track over here with this PC government. The Tories like to work day and night to make sure that we are open for business. We’ve unlocked the door. We’re turning on the lights. We’re flipping over the “Open” sign. We’re making—

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Next question.

Government contract

Ms. Sara Singh: My question is for the Premier. Yesterday the Premier refused to answer a simple question, one that the public has a right to know, so I’ll ask it again today, hoping for a straight answer this time. Will the Premier disclose what private company is running our cannabis warehouse operations? And how were they able to land such a lucrative contract?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Well, the Ontario Cannabis Store has a number of contracts and agreements with different businesses and entities to provide recreational cannabis to its customers. Let’s just run through this, Speaker, once and for all.

The Ontario Cannabis Store has signed supply agreements with 32 federally licensed producers who provide the Ontario Cannabis Store warehouse with its product, so there are several of these 32 out there that are well-known names.

Shopify was awarded a contract under the previous government to power the infrastructure of the OCS website, where customers order their products.

Orders are fulfilled at the Ontario Cannabis Store warehouse in a competitively tendered and negotiated contract under the previous government. Canada Post then delivers the orders.

Those are the people who are involved in the Ontario cannabis supply.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Sara Singh: Thank you, Speaker, but we still haven’t heard who is running the actual warehouse. We’ve heard about all the others, but perhaps we can get an answer this time.

With at least a thousand complaints to the Ontario Ombudsman in just a few weeks, with problems with the OCS’s deliveries, issues with the website, mislabeled products, and botched shipping and packaging, Ontarians want answers. But we’re not getting straight answers from this Premier; instead, he’s just blowing smoke.

Now, to make matters worse, the government is unwilling to disclose who exactly is running our cannabis warehouses. Why won’t the Premier tell us who is running those warehouses and how they landed those contracts?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Again, I’ll repeat myself: The Ontario cannabis warehouse was competitively tendered and negotiated under the previous government.

Many of us on the government side came here in the same way: We serve the people today provincially; many of us served the people locally and many of us were in business for ourselves beforehand. We understand how business works.

Now, I can appreciate very much that the NDP don’t quite understand how business works, but as the security of the OCS warehouse is a top priority, we will not be sharing further information on the day-to-day operation. That’s how business works. Idiot.

Fishing licences

Mr. Rick Nicholls: My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry.

This past week during Remembrance Day, millions of Canadians participated in Remembrance Day ceremonies across the country to pay their respects and recognize the many service members for their sacrifices, continued service, and for putting their lives on the line every day to defend our freedom and values. I want to thank all the veterans and military personnel for their outstanding courage and tremendous sacrifices for our country. Many made the ultimate sacrifice to keep our country safe. We, as Canadians, will be forever grateful to them and their families.

Minister, can you inform the House of the changes that our government is making as our way of giving back to the men and women who have served and those who continue to serve our country?

Hon. John Yakabuski: I would like to thank the member for the question. I would also like to extend my thanks to all our service members, active and veterans, for their bravery and sacrifice to defend our freedom and our values in this great country and province.

Last week, I had the honour to announce that work was under way to amend fishing regulations so veterans and active Canadian Armed Forces members can enjoy free recreational fishing by early 2019. As all members in this House know, recreational fishing is an important part of the lives of many Ontarians. Fishing is a memorable way to experience the outdoors, relax, de-stress and get involved in their local community. We are blessed to live in a province that has a great diversity of freshwater fish and is recognized worldwide for its recreational fishing.

By allowing veterans and active Canadian Armed Forces to fish for free, Ontario is making life a little easier for those who gave and continue to give so honourably with their service.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock again. Supplementary?

Mr. Rick Nicholls: It’s nice to know, Minister, that our veterans will be hooked on fishing.

Thank you for that response. It’s great to hear that our government for the people is giving back to veterans and the Canadian Armed Forces and their families by giving free recreational fishing licences.

But in addition to this great announcement, our government also announced during Remembrance Week that the Royal Canadian Legion branches in the province will be exempt from paying property tax, and that consultations will start on a new hotline for military families moving to Ontario, making it easier to find information on health care, schools, job opportunities, child care, licensing for drivers and vehicles, and other programs and services.

As well, the government has also announced plans to build a memorial that honours the heroes of the war in Afghanistan right here on the legislative grounds.

Can the minister provide more details on the 40,000 veterans and 25,000 active service members in the Canadian Armed Forces who will be able to fish for free in early 2019?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you to the member for his question. In early 2019, all veterans and active Canadian Armed Forces members residing in Ontario will no longer need to purchase a fishing licence in this province. Valid military and veteran identification will be legally recognized as a fishing licence, and for those who have already purchased their three-year permit, they will be refunded on a pro-rated basis starting on the effective date of this change. More information will be available once this change becomes effective in early 2019.

We are excited to be able to give back to the 40,000 veterans and 25,000 active service members in the Canadian Armed Forces who live here in Ontario. Your government for the people is giving back to those who have given so much to our country and province. This announcement is a small but tangible step to show our veterans and members of the Armed Forces that we celebrate their courage and are grateful for their service. Thank you.

Police services

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Remarks in Oji-Cree.

This question is to the Premier. In May, a new tripartite agreement for improved police services was signed between Ontario, Canada and Nishnawbe Aski Nation. This legally binding agreement marked a new era in policing in the Far North where, after decades of chronic underfunding, Nishnawbe Aski Nation communities would finally benefit from a level of police services available to all other citizens in Ontario.

However, in a letter to the Premier, the Nishnawbe Aski Nation police services and the NAN leadership sought confirmation within seven days that this agreement would continue to be honoured, citing a significant breach in payments of over $4 million. That response is due today, Mr. Speaker. The letter noted that without adequate funding, this government would be putting children, families and communities in the Far North at risk again.

Does the Premier not believe First Nations in northern Ontario communities deserve police services that meet the same policing standards as those in the rest of Ontario?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members will please take their seats.

Premier?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you so much for the question. As I hope you can appreciate, I just came to this file. There was a letter sent on November 3 with a very short seven-day time frame. I am actively engaged in making sure that the excellent work that is happening with our First Nations policing continues, but I do respectfully ask that you give me the time to assess and review those files thoroughly. Thank you.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch. Again, a question to the Premier: The Nishnawbe-Aski Police Service patrols an area the size of France, often without backup or proper basic equipment such as working radios. If this government is serious about honouring its treaty and legal obligations, it would not withhold payments that are essential for the very existence of these police services and the safety of the people in my riding and also in the Far North.

When will the Premier be providing the promised funding to the Nishnawbe-Aski Police Service, as per the agreement the government of Ontario signed?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Hon. Greg Rickford: I appreciate the honourable member’s question. Of course, we celebrate the great police work that they do up in the Far North. I’ve been involved with those police officers as a front-line worker working in nursing stations. I’ve been involved in supporting those resources in the past in previous capacities in the other place. We’re very excited about the work they do, the level of community engagement that they have, and the assets that they have, not just to enforce the law but to engage the community on their own terms.

With respect to the radios, Mr. Speaker, just a couple of weeks ago we made a great announcement that we’re going to be having a world-class PSRN network of communications that will fit all front-line workers: police, ambulance and fire. That member should be very pleased with that—if he even knows what it’s about.

Government spending

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: My question is for the Premier. Last night, the Globe and Mail reported that Mr. Ford’s top staffer intervened to have a Patrick Brown Tory fired from his position as vice-president of Ontario Power Generation. Speaker, to everyone here, I can tell you this really looks sketchy.

Not one, not two, but three PC sources told the media that this would cost Ontario taxpayers $500,000.

Through you, Speaker: Will the Premier tell the House if he thinks it’s appropriate to use resources meddling in internal staffing matters instead of funding affordable housing, education, seniors, health care, transportation and infrastructure?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Greg Rickford: I just love it when the independent members, once the Liberal government, list off all the different files that they fundamentally failed Ontarians at. It’s a bit rich, Mr. Speaker.

But with respect to the question, OPG is responsible for their own staffing decisions. OPG is a crown corporation and they make their own staffing decisions. All staffing decisions are made by the OPG.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier: For a government that says that they care so much about respecting taxpayers, this just doesn’t seem right. Combined with the $3-billion cancellation of cap-and-trade and their fated lawsuit against the feds costing the province $30 million, this seems more like a government for the lawyers, for the insiders and for the Premier himself.

Can the Premier tell us how much more of Ontarians’ money he is going to waste fighting old battles as he prepares for his federal leadership campaign?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Well, there it is, Mr. Speaker. We’ve finally heard it from the independent Liberal Party. A waste of taxpayers’ money is when a government actually tries to put it back in their pockets. Their philosophy is it’s a waste when they can’t actually waste it, when billions of dollars go out the door to projects that people didn’t want and communities didn’t need. They stripped municipalities of their powers of decision-making, Mr. Speaker, and threw up the kinds of projects that have cost the families and businesses who are having difficulty paying those monthly bills a lot of money.

We’re out to reduce hydro rates. We’re out to reduce tax rates. We’re opening Ontario for business. After a decade and a half of darkness, the people of Ontario are going to be able to turn the lights on, Mr. Speaker, to a brighter future.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Next question.

Assistance to farmers

M lle Amanda Simard: Ma question est pour le ministre de l’Agriculture, de l’Alimentation et des Affaires rurales.

This past summer, farmers across Ontario and in my riding faced dry conditions from severe rainfall shortages. This drought has reduced their pasture yields that are vital for their livestock. Farmers have had to make tough herd-management decisions following the drought, including selling a portion of their livestock, in some cases, due to not having enough feed for them in the winter months.

Farmers already experienced enough red tape and regulatory burden hurdles under the previous government and are counting on this government to help them when they need it the most.

Can the minister please let us know what he is doing to help livestock farmers as a result of this drought?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I thank the member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for the question. I’ve written to the federal Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to ask that he designate areas severely impacted by the dry weather as eligible for the livestock tax deferral program. The ability to use this program was a request from the Beef Farmers of Ontario, and I want to commend them for standing up for their members and working towards finding a solution for those impacted. This program would allow cattle producers who have to sell at least 15% of their breeding herd to defer a portion of the sale proceeds to the following year when they have to replenish their herd.

Our government is committed to standing up for our farmers and putting money back in their pockets so they can continue to produce the best-quality food in the world and keep Ontario open for business.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

M lle Amanda Simard: Thank you to the minister for his answer and for his quick action on this important issue that has impacted many areas across the province. Our government is committed to making life more affordable for our farmers, and this includes putting more money in their pockets through temporary assistance programs like the federal livestock tax deferral program.

Certain areas across the province, including parts of eastern Ontario near my riding, have been affected by these droughts proportionally higher than other areas. Can the minister please tell us which areas are most impacted by these droughts and what type of assistance they can expect from this program?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I thank the member for her supplementary question and her leadership on this issue. The federal livestock tax deferral program will greatly help farmers across the province if they sold a portion of their livestock due to experiencing a reduction in their forage yields of at least 50% of their long-term average. Some of these areas with the highest forage reduction are in Manitoulin, Grey county and Leeds-Grenville. I recognize the challenges and tough decisions that farmers in these areas have had to make, and I want to reassure them that our government is committed to making life more affordable for our farmers.

The request I sent to the federal government about this program will activate a process that examines which areas of the province are eligible for assistance. I look forward to hearing from the federal minister and working with the federal government to provide our hard-working farmers with timely and effective solutions.

Assistance to farmers

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture. As we just heard, it has been a tough year for farmers. They’ve experienced drought. Grain farmers experienced a really tough spring, and they’re experiencing a really tough fall to get their crops off.

They’re experiencing record yields, which should be great, but once the crops started coming off—they’ve been impacted by something called mycotoxin. You thought you were having a record yield, and you could sell. It’s a very low price, but you have the record yield to compensate. All of a sudden, part or a majority or all of your corn crop is unsaleable. Now, that should be covered by production insurance, but this is an emergency for farmers. If you have a crop and you thought you could sell it and now you can’t—they need help now.

My question to the minister: How is he expediting that process?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I thank the member for the question. I’m aware that this year’s pre-harvest grain corn survey revealed higher vomitoxin concentrations than previous years. This year’s results were likely largely due to the wet and humid growing weather, as he would know. I understand that these findings are concerning to some farmers. As they’re taking their crop off, they can be very disruptive. These vomitoxins are very hazardous in some areas to the livestock feed.

I spoke with the Grain Farmers of Ontario immediately following the issue and went to work with them to find solutions to the problem. Ministry staff are monitoring this issue and working with the Grain Farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Agri Business Association and the livestock sector to notify farmers about the findings, as well as what steps can be taken to reduce the risks to their operation. We look forward to continuing that work as we go forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you once again to the minister, and to everyone else. To understand the severity of this issue: If you have part of your crop infected with vomitoxin, you can’t store it with the rest of your crop. So if you have a storing facility or you take it to the elevator and they don’t want it, so what do you do with it? Unless you know you’re going to get compensated, what do you do with it?

This isn’t something we can take a lot of time to study, because, for certain farmers, they might not have much. If the majority of your crop is impacted by vomitoxin, it could be the end of your farm. This isn’t something that they can control.

So again, I urge the minister to act as quickly as possible to make sure that the farmers who have put everything in actually are, somehow, compensated under their production insurance so that they’re still there to farm in the next year.

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: Thank you very much again to the member for the question. I want to say, we are working with the farmers, recognizing that all the things that the member put forward in these questions are, in fact, happening on the ground as we speak.

We have farmers taking their crop off. We have been advised by the ministry to make sure that they harvest the most acceptable crop in the marketplace first, to make sure that the problem doesn’t get worse as we collectively work to find a solution as to what we’re going to do with that which cannot be used. Now, some of it can be used, mixing it with others that have less vomitoxin on it. If you mix it properly, it can be used in certain cases. In ethanol they can use it, but we have to worry about the effluent that comes off of the process. They can’t use that for livestock feed.

There are a lot of questions. That’s why, this coming Thursday, we’re having a meeting with all the players involved, including Agricorp, as to how the insurance is dealt with. We’re going to meet with all the people to come up with solutions to deal with the issues that are left over after we have dealt with harvesting that crop which is still harvestable.

I want everybody to understand that we have a lot of good corn coming off the fields in Ontario. We have to make sure we deal with that, and then we have to make sure of what we do with the product we can’t use for its originally intended purpose. Thank you very much again for the question.

Treaties recognition

Mrs. Nina Tangri: My question is for the Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, I know that our government is committed to making the right decisions that create economic prosperity for all the people in Ontario. This is a promise that our government for the people takes very seriously, and it includes creating the conditions for prosperity in Ontario’s Indigenous communities. Together, we can create mutually beneficial partnerships with community leaders that deliver economic prosperity to Indigenous peoples across Ontario.

While we are developing these partnerships, we must always respect the treaty rights of Indigenous communities. Can the Minister of Indigenous Affairs tell the members of this House about an important week that highlights the significance of our treaties in this province?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I want to thank the member for Mississauga–Streetsville for the question. Last week, from November 4 to 10, the province of Ontario celebrated treaties in Ontario during Treaties Recognition Week.

I want to do a special shout-out to my very capable parliamentary assistant, who was over at Nipissing University and Canadore College while I was at Beaver Brae Secondary School. We put a particular emphasis on having these celebrations in our schools. It’s a chance to gain a better understanding of the importance of the treaties to the history of Ontario and how they gave shape to it. We have more than 46 historical treaties, Mr. Speaker, and last week was a great sharing opportunity.

I’ve had the unique opportunity of living in Kenora for a great deal of my life, where we’re covered by Treaty 3—most of the riding. We had a chance to, again, celebrate the history of these treaties. We look forward to a renewed relationship with Indigenous communities and their treaties moving forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Back to the minister: Ontarians can be confident that this government is working hard to ensure that we create economic prosperity right across Ontario. The members of this House are well aware of the important investments our government has continued to make to support the goal.

Mr. Speaker, many of the members know how much beauty northern Ontario has to offer. It’s important that our government for the people continues to make investments that will help northern communities become even more vibrant destinations for tourists. Can the minister please tell the members of this House about how our government is supporting tourism in the north?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Thank you for that question. There’s no doubt that it’s high time that we’re able to celebrate the rich history and contributions of treaties and the Indigenous communities—and the opportunities and level of interest, frankly, that people have when they come and visit our vast region of northern Ontario and, in particular, northwestern Ontario. I’m speaking, of course, of the numerous pow wows. Eagle Lake First Nation, for example, is known around the world as a great place to come in the middle of summer and celebrate Indigenous culture.

I just want to finish this answer by celebrating something that happened in Kenora–Rainy River during that week. I had a chance to take

part in a Living Library event at Beaver Brae Secondary School. Go, Broncos! I want to thank Principal Benoit and Elder Bert Landon for leading our opening prayer. Robert Greene gave a compelling story of the history of Treaty 3 and how it shaped northwestern Ontario.

We’re very proud of our heritage, Mr. Speaker. A common understanding is important for us all moving together, and I appreciate the respect and candour that I’ve drawn—

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

Interjections.

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

Next question.

Addiction services

Mr. Percy Hatfield: My question is to the Minister of Health. Four people died from a drug overdose in Windsor within a 24-hour period last weekend—four. Some say that as many as 30 other users overdosed, but their lives were saved. Fentanyl is one of the suspected causes.

Speaker, the government has put an arbitrary cap on the number of overdose prevention sites that are allowed to operate in the province, pitting community against community, while the opioid crisis continues to claim lives. With four fatal overdoses in just one day and 30 more close calls, how can the minister justify an arbitrary cap on overdose prevention sites that will leave Windsor without this important life-saving resource?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I do thank the member very much for the question. This is a tragic situation. I understand that it is being investigated at several levels and that they’re particularly concerned because the four deaths did not happen together, which sometimes happens. They happened separately.

I do understand that the coroner’s office is investigating, as is my office. We want to understand exactly what happened here to make sure that we put procedures in place to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: With an escalating opioid crisis, we need more sanctioned overdose prevention sites, not fewer. The new application guidelines the ministry has put forward will make it next to impossible for some overdose prevention sites to continue, and the arbitrary cap will make it next to impossible for new sites to open.

In Windsor, we need a sanctioned site where people can test their street drugs for fentanyl and other toxic chemicals to avoid more horrific fatalities. We need to fill the gaps in harm-reduction-based treatments. We need more outreach workers and we need more mental health and addiction supports. Most of all, we need the government to recognize these needs and to take action on all fronts.

Will the minister commit today to answer our needs in Windsor and to do more to address the opioid crisis in every corner of our province?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I can certainly assure the member that we do take the opioid situation very seriously in Ontario, and in all parts of Ontario. In actual fact, as we announced several weeks ago, it is possible for any organization to apply to become a consumption and treatment service operations site. That is open to organizations in Windsor as it is open to other organizations across the province.

It’s also really important to remember that while we do have the consumption and treatment service sites available, we also need to make sure that we have appropriate mental health and addiction treatment across the province. That is what we’re working on now. That is one of our primary election promises to the people of Ontario. That is why we have committed to spending $3.8 billion over the next 10 years to expand our services, to make sure that we have the detox beds, to make sure that we can help provide housing and to make sure that we can provide the treatment services that people need.

The consumption and treatment service sites are important, of course, but they are only one part of the bigger picture that we are working on—

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

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Next question.

Special-needs students

Mrs. Belinda Karahalios: My question is for the Minister of Education. Yesterday, the minister and parliamentary assistant stood in the House to debate the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act. This bill is designed to put students, families and educators first by making our schools safer and more supportive environments for everyone.

Part of this bill focuses on ensuring more consistency and transparency for families that request permission for service animals in the classroom, an initiative championed by my seatmate, the fantastic member for Kitchener South–Hespeler.

Today, only half of Ontario school boards have service animal policies in place, meaning half the school boards’ families are left unsupported, without answers, and sometimes forced to move to another school board district.

Minister, what will this government do to provide consistency across the province when it comes to student access to service animals?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: First of all, I would like to thank the member from Cambridge for this very timely question. I, too, appreciate the fact that I have a team that’s working very, very hard at the Ministry of Education to make sure that students who require special supports have every opportunity to have success in the classroom. Also, with the member for Cambridge, I add my appreciation not only to my amazing parliamentary assistant, the member from Niagara West, but also to the member from Kitchener South–Hespeler’s family. They have been tirelessly advocating for the proper approach to addressing the need for support dogs.

That said, it is because we know some students in this province rely on the assistance of service animals in their school environment. This includes students with special education needs, such as students with autism spectrum disorder and mental health needs.

We know, unfortunately, that school boards don’t have a consistent approach. What this bill, Bill 48, will do is make sure all school boards will be directed to have clear and fair policies regarding service animals.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Belinda Karahalios: Thank you to the minister for that response. Thank you especially to your team for all the hard work you’re doing for such a fulsome consultation.

My constituents have been participating in consultations via fortheparents.ca. What I’m hearing as a member and as a mother is that our classrooms are safe and welcoming learning environments.

Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Will you commit today to continuing to listen to parents, educators and students in my riding of Cambridge and in our great province of Ontario?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: To the member from Cambridge: Absolutely, yes, we are going to continue to listen and we have been listening. That is why it’s so nice to be bringing forward a piece of legislation that demonstrates that parents in Ontario matter to the PC government.

All members of the public will also have an opportunity to provide input on the policy directive that will be issued to the boards. That includes families, education partners, advocacy groups and community agencies. It will help us form the best possible guidelines for school boards to develop policies that work for families of students with special needs.

Speaker, I can’t stress this enough: After 15 years of absolute mismanagement in this sector, parents deserve a clear and transparent process for requesting service animals, no matter where they live.

Public transit

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the Premier. The Hurontario LRT is a transit project that has a lot of community support. During the election, the Premier promised to build it, yet when we met with Ministry of Transportation staff, they refused to say whether this government is moving ahead with the Hurontario LRT.

People are fed up with being stuck in traffic for hours or crammed like sardines in sweaty, overcrowded subways, buses and streetcars.

Since I can’t get a straight answer from the ministry staff, I’ll ask the Premier directly: Is this government going to build the Hurontario LRT and provide transit relief to residents?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the honourable member for the question. As has been said in this House many times, our Premier and our government’s commitment to transit is second to none. We’re going to continue to work with our partners.

I appreciate the input that the honourable member has put on the floor today. I look forward to engaging her and the minister further on this matter.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Back to the Premier: Residents across the GTA are feeling the pain of transit construction that is required to expand and electrify GO service. From Davenport to the St. Lawrence Market area to the Beaches, residents are grappling with round-the-clock noise, dust and increased pollution.

Their one consolation in the face of this disruption is the provincial promise to electrify GO, which will reduce air pollution and noise once the trains are running. But when we met with Ministry of Transportation staff, they would not confirm whether the electrification of GO is going ahead.

Ontarians deserve the electrification that was promised. My question is to the Premier: Is this government cancelling the electrification of GO service?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, I want to thank the honourable member for the question. As Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, I know I speak on behalf of my colleague the Minister of Transportation: This is a very important item for us.

We look forward to dealing with that new streamlined council when they get sworn in in December, because we want to work with them. We want to work with the people of Toronto, their new council and our agencies to make sure that we build transit, that we build housing, that we build infrastructure in this community.

I look forward to continuing that conversation with this member and the agencies and council further.

Northern economy

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: My question is for the Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines. I know our government for the people is committed to supporting northern Ontario’s agricultural system. Investing in the agriculture sector sends a clear message that northern Ontario is open for business. This is especially important in the agriculture sector because of increasing need for locally grown and produced food.

I’m proud that our government for the people, through the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp., is supporting agricultural projects. We are taking real action to support strong and vibrant communities across northern Ontario. Can the minister please tell us about recent investments that are helping northern Ontario’s agriculture sector?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I appreciate the member from Mississauga East–Cooksville’s question. In fact, I like the way Mississauga is trending this morning, Mr. Speaker: an appreciation for Indigenous culture, tourism in northern Ontario and now this burgeoning agricultural sector that we have across northern Ontario, but particularly in northwestern Ontario. They know that farmers feed cities.

I spent a great deal of time in the southern portion of the great Kenora–Rainy River. We have an awesome agriculture sector. I was happy to announce that our government for the people is investing in four agriculture projects. The four applicants included Delton Martin, Allen Jolicoeur, Cornell Farms and AG’s Produce. We’re going to be helping them purchase necessary farming equipment, building grain storage capacity and increasing greenhouse capacity. Cloverbelt Country Meats, later on in the week in Dryden, building a great abattoir to support the processing of meat—we’re very excited about agriculture in northwestern Ontario and being open for business.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: Thank you to the minister for the great answer, and yes, we do respect our farmers.

There is no doubt that our government is doing everything it can to ensure that we create economic prosperity right across Ontario. The members of this House are well aware of the important investments our government has continued to make to support this goal. Many of the members know how much beauty northern Ontario has to offer. It’s important that our government for the people continues to make investments that will help northern communities become even more vibrant destinations for tourists.

Can the minister outline our government’s plan to grow our tourism sector and create better jobs in northern Ontario?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I’ll talk about a particular investment in a very special town, and make a shout-out for the media, which I’m not reputed to do.

I did a great announcement in Ignace, Ontario, last week. Dennis Smyk, who ran the Ignace Driftwood for several decades, passed away with cancer last week. He was an honourable man with integrity. He kept the Ignace Driftwood alive and well, informing those constituents of important events that were going on in his town and across the region, and I appreciate him very much.

Mr. Speaker, I was in Ignace to celebrate a business development plan, a master plan to help a town historically hard hit with economic hardship over the course of time, way out there on the eastern side of my riding. But they’re fighting back. Resolute Forest Products has put a mill not too far away. They’ve got some other activities they’re focusing on: a beautiful golf course and some opportunities for kids to do things in their communities. We’re investing in those small towns. Ignace wants to stand with northwestern Ontario and the province of Ontario, and be open—

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Next question.

Employment standards

Mr. Chris Glover: My question is for the Minister of Economic Development. This government is stripping away basic security for part-time temporary workers and creating conditions that encourage employers to hire people on contract rather than creating full-time permanent positions.

Last week, Professor Kimberly Ellis-Hale came to Queen’s Park. She has been teaching in Ontario’s community colleges for 21 years as a part-time temporary contract employee, and every three months over those 21 years, she has had to reapply for her job. She says, “Despite having taught thousands of students in over 100 courses, spanning two decades of front-line experience, I am paid substantially less than a full-time counterpart teaching for the very first time.”

Is this what a good job looks like in Doug Ford’s Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’ll remind members that we refer to each other either by our riding or our ministerial title, if applicable.

Response?

Hon. Todd Smith: It’s a pleasure to take this question from the member opposite. We were elected with a strong mandate, as he would know and we all know, on June 7 to make Ontario open for business. That requires us to change the environment for business in the province that the Liberals had created over the past 15 years. That was an environment that led to over 300,000 manufacturing jobs leaving this jurisdiction for other jurisdictions south of the border or other provinces within our country.

We’ve already started to get Ontario back on track and make Ontario open for business by lowering the cost of electricity, by eliminating the very costly cap-and-trade carbon tax and by taking on the very harmful Bill 148, which was brought forward by the previous Liberal government. Speaker, we’re doing everything we can to make Ontario open for business.

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Chris Glover: Does “open for business” mean that you’re going to do it on the backs of the staff and students at Ontario’s colleges and universities? Does it mean that we’re in a race to the bottom?

One of the professors, Hamish Russell, said of his students at Ontario’s universities, “They juggle multiple jobs, high rent, rising tuition and severe course loads. Bill 47 punishes them further by stripping them of paid sick days and allowing their employer to reschedule shifts without notice or with little notice. I as an educator have seen first-hand how this jeopardizes studies and causes stress and anxiety.”

Can the minister explain how this is setting students up for success?

Hon. Todd Smith: Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. As the member knows, Bill 47 preserves equal pay protections based on gender and other Human Rights Code characteristics. Our government strongly supports equal pay and strongly supports fairness and human rights. The so-called equal pay provisions in the previous government’s Bill 148 were impractical and burdensome for our job creators.

Ontario’s job creators know best how to recruit, retain and reward their employees. The Making Ontario Open for Business Act will give our job creators the ability to hire workers, invest back into their business and attract new businesses to come to Ontario and invest.

Taxation

Mr. Stephen Lecce: To the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks: While I see that the minister has moved to the right in this House, I seek clarity from him if our opposition to Prime Minister Trudeau’s job-killing carbon tax remains on the right side of history, following the federal Liberal announcement to circumvent the province and the people of Ontario by imposing a carbon tax on workers, commuters and job creators in this province.

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives say no. We say no to a carbon tax which disproportionately affects lower-income Canadians and increases the cost of everything. We say no to a carbon tax that undermines