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

November 29, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Nov-29 (PDF)

L057 - Thu 29 Nov 2018 / Jeu 29 nov 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 29 November 2018 Jeudi 29 novembre 2018

Orders of the Day

Access to Natural Gas Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au gaz naturel

Introduction of Visitors

Wearing of ribbons

Reid Scott

Oral Questions

Automotive industry

Automotive industry

Automotive industry

Automotive industry

Police services

Child protection

Automotive industry

Government accountability / Responsabilité gouvernementale

Climate change

Hospital funding

Automotive industry

Fish and wildlife management

Curriculum

Assistance to farmers

Decorum in chamber

Estimates / Budget des dépenses

Members’ Statements

Scarborough York Region Chinese Business Association

Automotive industry

Etobicoke-Lakeshore Santa Claus parade

Non-profit veterinary clinics

Child advocate

FishAbility

Autism treatment

Automotive industry

Holiday activities

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly

Petitions

Water extraction

Animal protection

Social assistance

Injured workers

Guide and service animals

Pharmacare

French-language services

Northern health services

Automobile insurance

Private Members’ Public Business

Safeguarding Our Information Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection de nos renseignements

Organic Products Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les produits biologiques

Keeping Students Safe on School Buses Act (Highway Traffic Amendment), 2018 / Loi de 2018 renforçant la sécurité des élèves dans les autobus scolaires (modification du Code de la route)

Safeguarding Our Information Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection de nos renseignements

Organic Products Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les produits biologiques

Keeping Students Safe on School Buses Act (Highway Traffic Amendment), 2018 / Loi de 2018 renforçant la sécurité des élèves dans les autobus scolaires (modification du Code de la route)

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Access to Natural Gas Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au gaz naturel

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 28, 2018, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 32,

An Act to amend the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 / Projet de loi 32, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur la Commission de l’énergie de l’Ontario.

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

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Thank you for the opportunity to speak to this incredibly important topic. I would like to thank our Minister of Infrastructure, Minister McNaughton, and his team for moving forward on this issue.

Speaker, in 33 sitting days previously, we have done so much to make life for Ontarians better. We announced the end of the cap-and-trade carbon tax. We reformed OHIP+, supporting people in the greatest need of assistance. We launched the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry and a line-by-line audit of government spending to get Ontarians answers. We ended the York University strike, bringing thousands of students back to the classroom. We invested $25 million to combat violence, and announced a cannabis retail model.

Our government campaigned on putting the people of Ontario first, and Bill 32, the Access to Natural Gas Act, is another example of a piece of legislation that is truly for the people. That’s why I’m proud to stand here in support of it today.

During the election campaign, the Progressive Conservatives made a commitment to the people of Ontario to provide relief from energy and hydro costs that skyrocketed under the eye of the previous government. From 2008 to 2016 alone, residential hydro costs in Ontario increased by 71%, nearly double the national average increase. The government of the day’s solution, the Fair Hydro Plan, would have provided short-term relief, but at the expense of our wallets further down the line.

On the hydro file, our government has already signalled that help is on the way. By eliminating the cap-and-trade carbon tax and repealing the Green Energy Act, we will be cutting hydro rates by an average of 12% for the people of Ontario. This is money that can stay in the pockets of hard-working Ontarians, right where it belongs. Promise made, promise kept.

Speaker, by now members of both sides of this House have heard the stories of Ontarians who have had to choose between heating and eating, stories of Ontarians who have had their electricity cut off when the days and nights are still cold because they couldn’t afford to pay their bills, and stories of Ontarians who have had to walk away from their homes because their hydro bill was bigger than their mortgage. I truly believe that we can all agree that this is unacceptable.

Currently, 3.5 million residential customers and 130,000 businesses across the province use natural gas for heating, but this is not enough. The fact is, most of Ontario, demographically and geographically, doesn’t have access to safe, affordable natural gas; 3.5 million customers is only approximately one quarter of our province’s population. Less than one fifth—about 20%—of rural Ontarians have access to natural gas, forcing them to rely on pricier energy sources such as oil, propane and electricity.

Our government wants to allow the people of Ontario to spend their hard-earned dollars the way they’d like, and by enabling greater access to natural gas, we will be doing just that. Industry and government estimates suggest that the cost savings between gas and other energy sources is significant. Residential customers can expect to save between $800 and $2,500 per year. That’s right; I’ll say it again if it caught your attention: a savings of $800 to $2,500 per year by switching to natural gas from alternative energy sources. These savings are complemented by the savings families will see on their bills thanks to the removal of the carbon tax from their bills just a few short days ago.

If passed, Bill 32 will provide access to this incredible resource to potentially dozens of Ontario communities by enabling companies to participate in the expansion of natural gas infrastructure. Tens of thousands of households and families would be connected to natural gas in the months and years ahead, all at no cost to Ontario taxpayers.

Leveraging private sector resources will result in an expedient expansion of natural gas infrastructure so that more Ontarians can reap the rewards sooner rather than later. Government involvement would serve no purpose.

This isn’t a one-shot subsidy at the taxpayers’ expense. This is a meaningful change that will bring affordability and improved business. We said it during the campaign, we said it when we were elected, and we’re saying it again through this announcement: Ontario is open for business.

Those of you familiar with my riding, the wonderful area of Mississauga–Streetsville just 45 minutes west of here, may know that there’s not a whole lot of farmland left, but even residents of downtown Toronto will benefit from increased rural natural gas access. Lower overhead and expenses mean that many of Ontario’s 50,000 farms, which support 1.2 million jobs and contribute approximately $106 billion to our GDP, and other rural businesses, can pass on the savings to consumers.

Expanding natural gas will only make Ontario communities more attractive for job creation and new business. New, better jobs will put money in the pockets of more Ontarians, decrease reliance on social assistance programs and increase investment in the province, while raising our GDP.

Speaker, Ontarians wanted a government that would stop wasting taxpayers’ money and time and create meaningful change and investment for the province. On June 7, we were given a clear mandate by Ontario voters to create and bring jobs, financial relief and prosperity back to this province. The aims of the natural gas act support this mandate.

We are not alone in our belief that increased access to natural gas is an important objective; individuals and stakeholders alike agree. Ontario Chamber of Commerce President Rocco Rossi was “pleased” to hear of our plan, adding that natural gas is a “clean and affordable option for powering homes and businesses” all across Ontario. The Ontario Federation of Agriculture, representing over 38,000 Ontario farm families, says that “natural gas is the single most important investment that will deliver a competitive edge to continue to drive growth” across this great province.

This plan is part of our promise to make life easier and more affordable for all families and businesses. Communities lacking access to natural gas, mainly rural, remote and First Nation communities, will be given access through private capital investment, subject to, of course, approval by the Ontario Energy Board.

We campaigned on lowering energy prices so people wouldn’t have to choose between heating and eating. Promise made, promise kept. We campaigned on making sure that good-quality jobs were available in the province. Promise made, promise kept. We campaigned on making sure we let everybody know that Ontario is open for business. Promise made, promise kept. We campaigned on committing to usher in opportunity and prosperity, the likes of which this province has never seen before. And we’ve been transparent about what we want for do for the people of Ontario, and that’s what we were elected to do.

The passing of this bill will allow us to get our economy moving and help those in need of assistance; $800 to $2,500 per year—that is an enormous savings for an Ontario family, savings that could be used at their discretion rather than on energy costs. Keeping money in people’s pockets is what we were elected to do, and we are all proud of what we are doing.

I’d also like to add that I personally use natural gas to heat my home and to cook my food. I take it for granted, but, unfortunately, across this province many people don’t even have that option. What we as Progressive Conservatives—as a government with the support of the NDP and the independents, we should be able to provide that for all families across Ontario.

I’d like to also continue and thank, once again, Minister McNaughton for bringing this act to fruition. We will, hopefully, gain the support of everyone here in this chamber.

Thank you very much, Speaker, and I’m looking forward to the responses.

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

Mr. Jamie West: It feels like we’ve been talking about this for a long time, and I feel like I keep saying the same thing, so I’ll say it again, hoping that this time we’re listening. I feel like, all parties coming together, we all agree with the main substance of this: that there are rural, remote and First Nations communities, as the member from Mississauga–Streetsville said, that require access to more forms of energy. My riding of Sudbury is fine. We’re densely compact, there’s natural gas everywhere and it’s easy to get to. My colleague from Nickel Belt, for example, not so good: There’s natural gas running nearby, but there’s nothing into the community, neighbourhoods and the farms.

In principle, we think it’s a good idea. The problem is—and I think I’ve said this now seven times: The rural, remote and First Nations communities, which the government continues to say time and time again in every speech, aren’t anywhere in the bill. So we can pass this bill, make it a law, and then the distributors can really use it any way they want.

What we’re saying is, “Trust us,” and cross our fingers. We have seen how energy scandals have really foiled the government and have really upset a lot of people. Why would the government want to set themselves up for something like this, a potential scandal where, in good faith, we say we want to get natural gas to rural, remote and First Nations communities, and the official opposition—myself, personally, I think seven times—has said, “Let’s put that in the bill”? And the government says, “No, trust us. It will work. It will work.” How do you think that will play out if it doesn’t work?

I’m not here to criticize and just poke holes; I’m here to help you be successful. That’s our role as the opposition: to criticize effectively and say, “Here’s how it can be improved.” It’s your role, as the owl on this side indicates, to listen and make wise decisions.

So, probably for the seventh time, we should have “rural, remote and First Nations” communities in the bill.

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

Mr. Billy Pang: I understand and appreciate the position of the opposition because the opposition is supposed to oppose whatever we put forward, right?

Today we are talking about Bill 32: that we want to allow more customers access to affordable natural gas.

I can still remember 20 years ago, when I had just come to Canada. I cooked on a coil stove, and my pan was not flat enough for the whole area to touch the coil. I strongly felt that it was kind of wasting energy, until I moved to a new home that used natural gas. Every point of the pan was heated by the natural gas. I think it is environmentally friendly and cost-effective.

I believe this bill, allowing more consumer access to affordable natural gas, is a great bill because it supports rural and northern Ontario families and businesses. To switch from electric heat, propane or oil to natural gas, we have a number that you can save: about $800 to 2,500 per year.

Since natural gas is one of the three fossil fuels that the world runs on, I believe it produces less pollution than the other fuels.

This is a good bill. We want to extend service to those people who need it, save their money and save the planet.

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

Mr. Joel Harden: It’s an honour to rise and speak to this motion today. I want to echo what my friend from Sudbury said. When you ask a question seven times and you don’t get an answer, you begin to develop a theory as to why you don’t get an answer.

Wearing my political economy hat for a second—because, thanks to the good people of Ontario, Speaker, I got to sit on my butt for years and pore through political economic research in various fields, and I’m aware of the energy industry. I know for a fact that there is an oversupply of natural gas in the market. There’s a lot of natural gas looking for a home, and it’s an important transitory fuel. It’s an important transitory fuel, but it is not the future. The future is renewable energy. The future is figuring out a way to get families access to efficient, affordable energy.

When we don’t know if northern Ontario and remote communities are going to get access to this natural gas, of which there is an oversupply in the market, all that one can conclude when one doesn’t get an answer is that this supply is going to come into the Ontario market and be funnelled towards suburban development and growth, where it’s a lot easier and more profitable for suppliers to turn around margins quickly. The northern communities will continue to be underserved.

What’s really galling about this bill for me—even though we’re going to vote in favour of this bill, because we want the object of this. We want access to natural gas for those communities. What’s not in this bill is access to affordable renewable energy. Later today, we’re going to hear—I hope, finally—a plan for climate change from this government. Will that plan include access to renewable energy? Will that plan include what other jurisdictions have done, making sure that Ontario is ready for the green revolution that is happening worldwide? We wait with bated breath, Speaker.

We wait with bated breath, but what I still don’t see in this bill is what we need in our northern and remote communities.

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

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: I rise today to talk about Bill 32. I was at the committee meeting on general government. Madam Speaker, you were on that committee. The natural gas extension to rural Ontario and also Aboriginal communities is a very important project. Bill 32 achieves this goal.

The reason I support it and that I’m passionate about this one is that heating is not a luxury anymore; heating is a basic, essential need for all Ontarians, regardless of where they live and what economic capacity they have. Expanding natural gas would make Ontario communities more attractive for job creation and new business. This will help send a clear message that Ontario is open for business.

Under the previous government’s restrictions, private sector companies were limited in participating in some natural gas expansion, priorities which were instead managed by a taxpayer-funded grant program. The proposed natural gas expansion support program’s charge would be limited to a very low cost to consumers, which is more than offset by the savings families and businesses will receive from the cancellation of the cap-and-trade carbon tax. We are committed to putting more money into your pocket by removing the cost of the cap-and-trade carbon tax from natural gas bills. It will save families approximately $80 a year and small businesses approximately $285 a year.

Again, I have to say, affordability is an issue for most Ontarians, especially in my riding of Markham–Thornhill. I spoke about affordability—

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

I return to the member from Mississauga–Streetsville for her reply.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: As we spoke of earlier, only about one fifth of Ontarians have access to natural gas. That leaves a very large number of communities—rural, First Nations—that still need access to natural gas. Our government has at least put a bill forward to make sure that those people can have that access. We waited for previous governments to do this, and they failed. So what we want to do is make sure that everybody has access to safe, affordable natural gas.

All of those communities that we talked about earlier, especially the Indigenous communities, First Nations, rural, farmers, businesses, households—everybody should be able to have access to affordable natural gas, and that’s what our plan is to do.

I feel that our government is listening to the people right across this province. Many people say that in the urban areas like here, because we’ve always taken for granted that we have this natural gas access, we’ve not thought about the northern ridings and rural areas. But we’ve taken a different approach. We are making sure we’ve listened to those people. They told us loud and clear throughout the campaign that they wanted to not to have to choose between heating and eating, that they wanted to be able to have options of ways to heat their home, like by using natural gas.

We have the supply; we just want to make sure they can have access. Private capital markets will provide the infrastructure to make sure that they can build and have access to that gas.

Thank you to everyone who spoke today on the natural gas act. We want to make sure we follow through. We really do hope and expect that the NDP and independents will support us.

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

M me France Gélinas: Here we are, on the third reading of Bill 32, the Access to Natural Gas Act. Like all of my colleagues, we have no problem with the spirit of your bill, that you want to give Ontarians who have limited options for energy other options for energy.

I represent the riding of Nickel Belt. I represent 33 beautiful little communities with names like Shining Tree, Biscotasing, Westree, Gogama, Mattagami First Nation, Alban and Estaire, and the list goes on.

Most, if not all of the communities that I represent—we do not have access to natural gas. As I have said before, we see the great big pipeline going by. From where I live, from my house, there’s a little hill where I go blueberry-picking. On top of the hill, I can see it. It is right there, but none of us have access. None of us are connected.

As an MPP for 11 years, how many of my constituents do you figure have asked me, “When are we going to get connected to the natural gas?” I would say pretty much all 96,000 of them have at one point or another. Have I looked into this? Oh, yes, absolutely.

My neighbour is not going to be happy, but he is in charge of Union Gas. He lives two doors down from where I live, and he does not have natural gas, because, remember, the pipe goes by; we’re not connected.

I’ve looked into this issue. I, like everybody else I represent, would love to have an alternate source of energy. We see what it does to our neighbours. I’m really close to my MPP friends here from Sudbury. Lots of people who used to live in Sudbury now live in Nickel Belt or used to live in Nickel Belt and now live in Sudbury, as people move around. We see the difference it makes.

We live in northern Ontario. It will be no surprise to anyone that when I look out here, and I can still see a few trees that have leaves on the trees, and I have a foot of snow, and I have shoveled my driveway seven times—really, my husband did, but I supported him morally to shovel the driveway seven times already. Things are colder up north.

The source of energy is something that we are really looking forward to, so when I see a bill that says “access to natural gas”—I must say that there was quite a bit of excitement on this side of the House and for the people I represent. It sure has a title that we have been waiting for for a long time.

But then it is my job to read the bills, not just the title, so I read the bill with the full anticipation that they were going to talk about us: that they were going to talk about small, northern, rural communities, that they were going to talk about First Nations communities, that they were going to talk about the people who have been wanting an alternate source of energy to heat their house.

In Nickel Belt, you heat your house with electricity. Some have an electric furnace. A lot just have electric baseboards. And you heat your house with wood. Yes, there is a lot of wood in Nickel Belt, and a lot of us heat our houses with wood. But there comes a time in a person’s life when heating with wood is really difficult. You have to go into the bush and cut the trees, bring them to your lot, cut them to size, split them, pile them, let them dry for at least two years—sometimes more, depending on the species of trees that you have.

Then you take those piles of wood that you have all around your house and you bring a little bit of it in. Some of us have basements full of cords of wood because you can dry them a little bit faster when they’re in the house, and if the wood is warm when you put it in your wood stove, it burns better. But that still means that at least once, but more than likely two or three times a night, you get up, you go downstairs, you put wood in the stove and you go back to bed.

As you keep doing this year after year, it gets hard. As people get older, to get up and go downstairs in the middle of the night is not always the safest thing to do. You don’t want to turn the light on so that the dog, the cats and the chickens outside all think that it’s morning and start to go at it. So here you are, an elderly person maybe with a little bit of vision impairment if you don’t put your glasses on in the middle of the—and there’s a risk.

Not to mention that if you’ve ever put a wood stove into your house and your insurance asks you if you have a wood stove in your house, be ready to pay double what you pay now to insure your house.

So it is difficult. It is doable, and lots of us do it, but if you offer us natural gas, I don’t know one person where I live who would not take it.

We also know—after having talked with my neighbour who’s in charge of Union Gas, remember—there is no way they are doing that on their own.

Nickel Belt is the centre of the Canadian Shield. In school, all of us learned about the Canadian Shield, this great big massive rock that goes up in northern Ontario. If you put a pin in the middle of the Canadian Shield, you’ve just put a pin in the middle of Nickel Belt. In most of the surroundings of Nickel Belt, you don’t have to dig very far at all, often none at all, and you can see that it is rock.

I’m not an expert in natural gas transportation by any stretch, but we all know that they are pipes—I know this because I’ve seen them lay the pipes—and we all know that they are underground for safety. In order for that to happen where I live, it often means what we call in the mining community “drill and blast.” You have to drill holes, put explosives in there, put all of those great big mats that they put on top, and then excavate the broken rocks and go at it. It is very expensive to do that.

The only reason we don’t have natural gas where I live is because it is too expensive to bring it to us; although, as the crow flies, I’m not even one kilometre away from the main pipe that comes into Sudbury to supply all of the good people of his riding. They’re not going to connect us because it is too expensive.

This is why when the NDP put our platform forward, we put aside $100 million specifically targeted at helping First Nations who have no other source of energy but a hydro line and heating with wood. This is why we had specifically targeted areas in rural northern Ontario and rural southern Ontario—because we know that there will never be a company that will do that on their own.

When this bill came out, I went and saw the executive of Union Gas and said, “The Conservatives have put that forward, access to natural gas. You’ll be able to raise the cost by $1 a month for everybody else so that you’ll bring natural gas to us.” He’s my neighbour; if he gets it, I get it also. The answer was, “No, a dollar more per customer is not the type of program that will bring natural gas to us. A dollar more on the bills of other natural gas customers allows them to bring natural gas to new developments, to areas that are already close to urban centres.

The $1 more is not for northern and rural—this is because the people who build houses, when they build a new sub-development, before they get the permission to expand and build a new series of houses, the municipalities will tell them, “You have to pay to bring the services out there. You have to pay to bring the water, the sewage. You have to pay to build the roads. You have to pay for the sidewalks and the ditches and the storm sewage and all of that, and you have to pay to bring natural gas.” Now the developers won’t have to pay to bring natural gas anymore.

What will happen is that everybody else in the neighbourhood will all have to chip in $1 a month more on their bills, and they will be subsidizing the housing developer so that they can develop and make money selling houses.

There’s no problem with good entrepreneurs wanting to make money. This is what life is all about: We go to work because we get a paycheque, and so do they. But now, rather than them assuming the cost of this expansion so that when they sell their houses they can say, “The house is connected to the Internet and connected to electricity and phone and natural gas. And look, it won’t cost you that much to heat the house, because we insulated it, we designed it and you have natural gas at your door,” it will be the good people of Ontario, through an increase in their natural gas bills.

When he started to talk to me about that—his name is Jim—my friend Jim. When Jim started to talk to me about this, I said, “Yes, but isn’t that going to work for us too,” the people he represents? He said, “Listen, we’re changing the pipes right now that go in front of your house from a six-inch to an eight-inch because yes, we know that there will be a higher demand for natural gas, and they need a bigger pipe.” But it’s never going to come to where I live; it’s going to go to that new development—mainly in his riding; good for him, but—

Mr. Jamie West: I win again.

M me France Gélinas: He wins, and I lose again. I feel left out. I really feel left out.

That does not even start to talk about First Nations. The member from Kiiwetinoong yesterday made the point about how this is the first time ever that we have an Indigenous person representing a riding that is, in majority, representing Indigenous people. For them, it is really new and really different, and they are watching us more than they’ve ever done.

I must say that provincial politics is something I find fascinating, but there are people who don’t share my interest. I would say that a lot of people in northern Ontario—we don’t have cable; therefore we don’t have the parliamentary channel. We get our television through satellite, and the satellite does not carry the parliamentary channel, and that’s it for us, so they never see us on TV. The news sometimes covers what’s going on—mainly if something derails badly and there’s bad news to be. But most of the time, they don’t really know.

Now they have a member. Things have changed. They have a riding where the majority of them are Indigenous people, so a lot of Indigenous people are looking at us. They live in areas like where I live, where we don’t have access to natural gas. They see a bill that says, “access to natural gas,” and they, too, are starting to think, “Wow, that means I won’t have to split 13 cords of wood. Maybe I could only split half of that next year. Man, my back feels better already. My hands are not going to be as covered in blisters and everything else.” We got kind of excited there for a little while.

But they did the same thing I did, and the same thing everybody else who represents a northern riding did. We’ve all been at that for a long time. It doesn’t matter where you live in northern Ontario; we’ve all wanted access to natural gas and other sources of energy for a long time. So when they reached out to the people who run the natural gas in their area, they were set straight pretty quickly that, “So far, we haven’t been able to identify a First Nations community in northern Ontario that would be able to benefit from access to natural gas.”

Yet whenever people from the Conservative government stand up, they always say “access to natural gas.” They talk about us. They talk about rural and northern Ontario. They don’t say “Nickel Belt,” but it’s as close as it ever comes. They talk about First Nations, and they describe us. But when we ask and we connect with—it’s mainly Union Gas that has the big pipes in northern Ontario. We ask them, “Is there a chance for us?” There is none. There are no First Nations who will be helped by that. There are no communities in Nickel Belt who will be helped by that.

We do want the help. We do want alternative sources of energy. Right now, as my colleagues have said, there is an oversupply of natural gas. There is a need in northern Ontario to heat our houses, and businesses and everything else that’s going on in northern Ontario. We have been asking for this for a long time, to the point where we put it in our platform that there would be $100 million, but we targeted it to where it was needed.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy that there will be people buying brand new houses in subdivisions close to urban centres who will have natural gas. I’m not against this, but I don’t see why the natural gas payers have to pay for that. It has always been done that it was the contractors and the developers who paid for those developments, not the taxpayers, the ratepayers and the homeowners who had to pay for that through an increase.

Then you start to look and you say, “Well, we give an industry access to the monthly bills of”—I used to know the number. I think it’s nine million.

Interjection.

M me France Gélinas: No, I’m too high. It’s 1.9 million consumers. We have given a private, for-profit, monopoly industry access to our natural gas bills. Is it just me who thinks that this is a little bit dangerous? Is it just me who thinks that this could derail and go really, really bad, really, really quickly? We looked for the safeguards put into the bill; there are none.

This bill is not for northern Ontario, not for rural Ontario or northern rural Ontario. It is not for the First Nations of northern Ontario. So who is it for? It’s for suburban southern Ontario. Some of it will be rural, I agree, but most of it is suburban. It will help the housing developer and it will open up this really dangerous set-up where a big monopoly will have access to your monthly bill so that they don’t have to pay the bill. They will pass it on to their 1.9 million consumers every month. I am extremely worried.

I do want natural gas. How hard would it have been to say “northern, rural and First Nations” in the bill? We tried and tried and tried, Speaker, through second reading, through deputations, through making amendments to the bill. Here we are in third reading, and we all know that after third reading this is it. We have a majority government that will vote in favour of this. “Northern, rural and First Nations” is not in it. This is not for us, and that’s really shameful.

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

Mrs. Belinda Karahalios: Good morning. I rise to speak to Bill 32. Thank you to the member from Nickel Belt for your comments.

In the news release it actually says, “Ford Government to Help Expand Access to Natural Gas: Announced legislation that, if passed, will bring natural gas to families and businesses throughout rural and northern Ontario.”

I’ll also give you a quote from the CEO of the Ontario Home Builders’ Association, who said, “The decision to extend natural gas services will support future housing supply and choice in rural and northern communities while providing homeowners and businesses with an affordable and reliable heating option that will keep their everyday costs down.”

Now I’m going to take you back to September to the International Plowing Match—I’m sure we all remember that; we had a good time. In an

article released by the CBC from the International Plowing Match, we have, “The government of Ontario says in a news release that families will save about $80 a year and small businesses $285 a year from removal of the carbon tax,” which is great.

Then, the leader of the opposition, the member from Hamilton Centre, took the stage later and “was in agreement with Ford about natural gas expansion, saying they will make sure the promise is kept”—in writing. From her lips to God’s ears, so to speak.

So it’s interesting when I hear members from the opposition benches saying that they’re not going to support the bill, when it says right here in black and white that Horwath—the

article says her name—“Horwath who took the stage later was in agreement with Ford about natural gas expansion, saying they will make sure the promise is kept.”

As I’ve read, there have been two quotes now saying that we will be bringing it to rural and northern Ontario.

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

M. Guy Bourgouin: Ce matin, j’étais content d’entendre ma collègue de Nickel Belt parler, parce que la réalité est qu’on n’est pas contre l’accès au gaz naturel. Moi, je suis un des chanceux dans ma circonscription à l’avoir. Mais je peux vous dire qu’il y en a plusieurs qui ne l’ont pas. On regarde le projet de loi et il n’y a aucune mention—on l’a répété souvent—aucune mention des communautés du Nord ou bien donc des Premières Nations. Ce n’est pas à cause qu’on n’a pas essayé; on a présenté des résolutions, on a essayé d’amener des changements au projet, mais pour une raison quelconque le gouvernement ne veut pas supporter notre position.

M me France Gélinas: Les subdivisions.

M. Guy Bourgouin: Les subdivisions, merci—les subdivisions y ont accès. On n’est pas contre ça. Mais il faut que nos communautés du Nord aient accès au gaz naturel comme tout le reste. On est des Ontariens—pas plus, pas moins. On demande juste les mêmes services que le reste de la province.

J’ai une communauté, Kitigan, où il y a six maisons qui ont accès au gaz naturel et le reste ne l’ont pas. J’ai parlé en Chambre d’un de mes commettants, M. Potvin, qui a demandé l’accès. Ça lui a été refusé par la compagnie. On est bien mieux de se préparer dans le nord de l’Ontario, parce qu’il va en avoir souvent, des lettres comme ça, par des compagnies.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions and comments? I recognize the member for Kitchener–Conestoga.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I know you had the pleasure to listen to me speak about Bill 32 a couple of weeks ago here in the House, and we had some great conversations after that, but one thing that I just wanted to reiterate to the members opposite is that I spent 26 years of my life living in northern Ontario and I understand the realities. I know what it’s like to heat your house with propane. I know what it’s like to heat your house with electricity, with a wood stove—which I think gives the best heat, by the way, and I’m sure the other members opposite may agree; you love walking into the house and smelling that smell of a wood stove.

But the reality here is that our minister and our Ministry of Infrastructure have stated, and they’ve made it pretty clear, that this natural gas expansion will not just be in the suburbs or southern Ontario; it will be in parts of rural Ontario that do not have natural gas. It will be in parts of northern Ontario that don’t have natural gas.

I can tell you that under the last government, with two economic development projects that touched on natural gas, only nine new communities received natural gas expansion. That’s dismal. We’re talking 15 years—nine new communities. We’ve been in power now for roughly four and a half months, and we’re bringing natural gas to 78 new communities across Ontario.

I have a lot of family that still lives up north, and I can tell you, I will be making sure—and I’m sure the other northern members in here as well; I know there are a few. They’re going to want to hold our ministry accountable and make sure that natural gas is expanded into northern Ontario. It’s something that shouldn’t be taken for granted.

I know that there are so many family members that I have that are currently heating their house on propane. When we’re talking about switching from propane over to natural gas, you could see a savings of—and this is a staggering amount—$2,500 a year.

I appreciate the opportunity to stand here and debate this today.

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

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: As my colleague from Sudbury has mentioned, we have spoken about this so many times, and yet the government has chosen not to work with us. We’ve mentioned how this needs to have rural, north, and Indigenous communities mentioned explicitly within this legislation, yet this government has not taken our advice and has not taken this opportunity.

It really is a sweetheart deal for developers, that they’re going to be allowed to reach into the pockets of ratepayers across Ontario, and there is no guarantee what they will take. There are no limits being placed upon them, and that’s quite frightening. This government should—as the member from Ottawa Centre has so rightly mentioned—take heed from the experiences of past governments and their mishandling of the energy file.

The member from Kitchener–Conestoga mentions that this will benefit 78 communities. Then they should be named within the legislation. Why is that so difficult? You could drive a truck through this legislation; it’s full of so many holes.

This really was an opportunity for the government. This is something that people have been waiting for, as the member from Nickel Belt has mentioned, for so many years. This was a great opportunity. But unfortunately, this government has really extended the gravy train to private enterprise. They are allowing private enterprise to reach into every Ontarian’s pocket who pays for natural gas. Quite frankly, that is not right, that is not fair, and this government will have to wear that mark forever. We’ll wait and see how this plays out.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I return to the member from Nickel Belt for her reply.

M me France Gélinas: As I said, we are now debating third reading of Bill 32, the Access to Natural Gas Act. After those few hours of debate left, it is done. This bill will pass.

Throughout this entire process, the NDP has stood up and told the PC government that you’re going in the right direction, you are saying the right thing, but your bill does not line up with your talk. You talk about bringing natural gas to northern Ontario, to rural northern Ontario, to First Nations, but your bill is not going to do that.

To say, “Well, it will be our job to hold the ministry to account”—you cannot hold the minister to account on something that is not in the bill. It would have been so easy to mention northern Ontario. It would have been so easy to mention First Nations. It would have been so easy to say “rural northern Ontario” in the bill, but none of that happened.

On est rendu à la troisième lecture, madame la Présidente. Après tout ce débat, on n’est pas plus avancé qu’on ne l’était lorsque le projet de loi a été déposé. Le projet de loi a été déposé en disant que le projet de loi était pour amener le gaz naturel dans les milieux ruraux du nord de l’Ontario et des Premières Nations. Lorsqu’on a eu le temps de lire le projet de loi, on ne parle pas du Nord, on ne parle pas des Premières Nations et on ne parle surtout pas des régions rurales du Nord.

Pendant toutes les heures de débats, lorsque les gens ont pu venir témoigner, lorsqu’on a essayé de faire des changements au projet de loi, les conservateurs ont toujours refusé de dire que—ils disent que c’est pour nous, mais ils ne veulent pas le mettre dans la loi.

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

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: I’m pleased to rise today in the Ontario Legislature to speak in support of Bill 32, the proposed Access to Natural Gas Act. I would like to first thank the Minister of Infrastructure and the Minister of Energy, as well as their parliamentary assistants and their staff, for their collective work on this proposed legislation.

As members know, this bill is designed to increase access to natural gas for those families, individuals and businesses living in the more rural, remote and northern parts of Ontario. Many may look at me now speaking in the Legislature and wonder why I rise in support of Bill 32, which may not be directly affecting my great riding of Scarborough–Rouge Park. But, Madam Speaker, access to natural gas does affect my constituents. We in Scarborough–Rouge Park are not an island unto ourselves, so to speak. We have families and friends in more rural and remote areas.

Some from Scarborough–Rouge Park are fortunate enough to have their vacation properties in the areas that will be affected by this bill. But most importantly, we have Ontarians whose lives will be improved by the passage of this proposed legislation. That is great news, and I have the pleasure of speaking to it today.

We all know that life is expensive. It’s easy to see that. Whether you live in rural and northern communities or not, you see it every time you go to pay your bills, every time you go to the grocery store. In particular, we in Ontario have the highest hydro rates in all of North America. In the recent campaign period, I heard from residents of Scarborough–Rouge Park who struggle with their hydro rates. On June 7, the people of Ontario showed they’d had enough with 15 years of Liberal mismanagement of their money and, importantly, the rising cost of energy in this province. Our government has already worked to reduce electricity costs. Help is on the way.

Madam Speaker, expanding access to natural gas in this province would greatly benefit many Ontarians by providing them with more affordable options to heat their homes. People are facing high energy costs, and reliance on electricity, oil or propane to heat homes simply adds to the cost of life in many areas. By giving those people an option to use natural gas, they have the opportunity to reduce their monthly expenses, especially during the long Ontario winters.

I come from a country where we never had winters like this, and I can attest to the fact that our winters here in Ontario are very cold. Here in Ontario, you need to heat your house. I was especially touched when I heard from the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan, who has an 80-year-old constituent who is chopping wood to ensure that she can stay warm throughout the long, cold winter we have here in Ontario. Remember, I come from Tamil Eelam, where we never quite had chilly weather, and while I enjoy sitting by the fireside as much as other Ontarians, I usually do it out of choice, not necessity.

It saddens me that we have 80-year-old seniors who are forced to be out chopping wood to stay warm, although I must say, I congratulate Fran Kolton on her health, and hope that I’ll be fit enough at 80 to be chopping wood.

If this bill passes, this legislation would help the private sector expand their natural gas service to a wider swath of Ontario. While many homes and businesses in Ontario currently have access to natural gas—3.5 million homes and 130,000 businesses—this would open up access to natural gas to many more in this province.

In fact, this legislation, if passed, would enable government to work with the Ontario Energy Board to develop programs that will allow the private sector to deliver natural gas to up to 78 more communities over the next five years. This is up to 33,000 more Ontarians—up to 33,000 more Ontarians. That’s not a number to sneeze at. That’s up to 33,000 more Ontarians who are not forced to chop their wood to heat their homes, who are not forced to use expensive and inefficient ways to stay warm.

Instead, they will now have access to natural gas, similar to many other communities in Ontario, giving them an opportunity for monthly savings and putting more money in the pockets of families and businesses. For many, it would give them more time to spend with their families if they don’t need to be out chopping wood to stay warm in the winter months, and more money to spend on their loved ones in their local community stores.

Natural gas is very affordable and an environmentally friendly way to heat your home, especially when compared with heating your house or business with oil, propane or even electricity. I mentioned earlier, we have the highest hydro rates in North America here in our great province of Ontario. Thanks to the previous Liberal government for the hydro rates skyrocketing.

As always, the numbers don’t lie. My background is in finance, and in this case we are talking about $800 and $2,500 per year for those switching from electricity, oil or propane to natural gas to heat their homes. That’s a significant amount of money that we want to put back into the pockets of everyday Ontario families, money they can choose to spend in their communities at local businesses or put toward their savings for the future, whether it be retirement, their children’s education or simply put aside for a rainy day fund. As a former financial adviser, I would say that this is a great win for those families.

Our government was elected on a mandate to reduce the cost of living for everyday Ontario families. The people of Ontario were struggling after 15 years of the Liberal government adding to the cost of living through their misguided policies. Well, as everyone here knows, we have moved fast to deliver on the mandate we were elected on. We have already passed a number of bills which are reducing the cost of living for Ontario families. We have removed outdated policies such as the Drive Clean program, which was costing the government and the taxpayers some $40 million a year.

We cancelled the cap-and-trade carbon tax, which, removed from natural gas bills, saved families some $80 a year and businesses $285 a year. This was an unnecessary cost and burden to families and businesses.

It certainly stifled investment in many industries in Ontario, chasing jobs out of this province. I’m happy to say, as many of my colleagues already have, Ontario is open for business. This province is back, and we want businesses, families and individuals to thrive and not be stifled by their government and unnecessary red tape, regulations and taxes, as it has been in the past 15 years. This is not the role of government. I’m glad we are cutting those programs and policies and ensuring that people and businesses can move forward with confidence that they have a government that supports them.

I recently received a picture from a colleague, the member for Mississauga–Malton, showing gas prices in his riding at under $1. I’m sure that some members on the opposition benches may think that this is horrible and we need high taxation and high gas prices, but that’s simply not the reality for so many Ontario families. It’s not what the average Ontario citizen wants.

Many of us Ontarians rely on gas to get us to and from work, to drop off our kids and pick up our kids from hockey practice or cricket practice or drive out of the city for a little relaxation in nature.

We are working hard to reduce the cost of living for families in Ontario. I’m proud to say that I think we are already having an effect. We are delivering on a mandate from the people of Ontario, and we are doing it in a fast yet responsible manner.

From speaking with many residents across Ontario, especially my constituents in the riding of Scarborough–Rouge Park, they appreciate more money in their pockets—more money that they get to choose what to do with. No one wants the hand of the government in your pocket more than is necessary.

There are numerous examples of legislation that our government passed which created savings for Ontario families across the province. I have already mentioned a few. This proposed bill on access to natural gas, Bill 32, would do the same for those families living in rural and remote areas of Ontario. It would put more money in their pockets. Those who currently rely on more expensive, inefficient and less environmentally friendly ways to heat their homes now have a choice to move to natural gas instead, if the legislation is passed, and put more money in their pockets by making that switch.

I strongly believe that this is a good thing, and I think many others here in this Legislature today think that as well.

We are talking about $800 to $2,500 more a year for families. You can do a lot with that money. I know that in Scarborough–Rouge Park, my residents would be thrilled with that kind of annual savings. It would allow them to spend more on programs with their children. It would allow them to buy better and healthier food at the grocery store. It would allow them to fix that broken fence that they have been putting off due to the cost. It would allow them to invest in their future, which I can confidently tell you, given my financial background, makes a difference.

If you manage to invest $800 a year towards your retirement, you could maybe stop working a little earlier to enjoy more time with your loved ones as you get older. You could save for that nice trip with your wife or husband that you have always talked about. In many cases, you wouldn’t have to penny-pinch to ensure the basics of everyday life for you and for your family. I hear this from my constituents in Scarborough–Rouge Park, and I believe that this is the same for people across Ontario.

So when we say that this legislation will save families who are using inefficient means to heat their homes some $800 to $2,500, I think this will have a larger impact on lives and certainly one for the better.

Access to natural gas is so much more than just savings; it opens up a host of options to residents of our rural and remote communities. Rural communities in Ontario contribute $106 billion to the GDP of this province—$106 billion—and rural communities support some 1.2 million jobs. And this isn’t some made-up Liberal math; this is Statistics Canada data.

Many of those in our rural and remote communities are involved in the agricultural and food industry. These are people who work hard every day to ensure cities like Toronto and ridings like my riding of Scarborough–Rouge Park have the food we often consume without much thought as to where it comes from. We enjoy the fruits of their labour, so to speak, and we need to make sure they have the supports to continue their work and live in a comfortable and affordable manner.

Expanded access to natural gas would greatly assist these farmers, and more than just in the comfort of their home, as I have already discussed; this would help them run better and more efficient businesses. This would help them employ modern technologies to help grow our food—an obvious example being the booming greenhouse industry. We need to ensure that our farmers have the tools they need to continue to supply our cities with affordable goods, that they have the ability to farm in innovative ways and to stay competitive and in business.

Beyond the agri-food industry, Madam Speaker, there are a number of other industry sectors that would benefit from the expanded access to natural gas. I’ll just highlight a couple of the many examples. The transportation industry, vital to those in the north, could greatly benefit form this proposed legislation. With expanded access to natural gas, many of those diesel vehicles could switch to the more environmentally friendly and more affordable compressed natural gas option. This would include buses and commercial trucking, both vital to life in remote areas.

Additionally, the mining sector, which employs many in the areas which this proposed legislation would expand natural access to: two thirds of the mining jobs in Ontario are in northern communities, so this is exactly where this proposed legislation would be expanding access to. This would help this important industry, which supports 26,000 direct jobs and 50,000 indirect jobs. Between the benefits to the agri-food industry, transportation sector and the mining industry, communities, families and businesses in the rural and remote areas of Ontario will strongly benefit from this proposed bill, Bill 32.

These are just a few of the key industry sectors that would see improved operations and opportunities from this proposed legislation. Madam Speaker, we want to ensure that all of Ontario is open for business.

Madam Speaker, we also want to make a long-lasting and positive change in the lives of everyday Ontario families and the small businesses that so many of them run or are employed by. Bill 32, if passed, would do just that. It’s not a one-off or a one-time subsidy. This small investment will bring lasting change and improvement to the lives of many Ontarians.

We have heard from a number of my colleagues now who have talked about the direct benefit that this proposed legislation would bring to the lives of their constituents. We have heard the emails and letters read by the Minister of Infrastructure, the member from King–Vaughan and others, as well as even some members from the opposition benches. We have heard the ringing endorsements from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Ontario Home Builders’ Association and many others.

I’m not going to repeat them and further bore my colleagues in the Legislature today, but I think that this is a clear message. Everyday Ontario families want this proposed legislation passed. This benefits the rural and remote areas of this great province, and would benefit all in Ontario.

Thank you to the hard-working ministers and parliamentary assistants and their staff who worked on this proposed legislation for trying to support as many Ontarians as possible in a responsible manner.

I’m happy to say that I support this proposed legislation. I urge my colleagues here in the Legislature to do the same.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): It being 10:15, this House is now recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have in the Speaker’s gallery some very special guests, the family of the late Reid Scott, MPP for Beaches during the 23rd Parliament: daughter Lesley Scott; son Greg Scott and his wife, Sandy; grandson Michael Scott and his wife, Holly; brother-in-law Doug Phillips; niece Judy Phillips; nephews Steve, Dave and Mike Palmer; and friends Jeanne Fraser and Murray Baer. Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

They are joined by David Warner, Speaker during the 35th Parliament and chair of the Ontario Association of Former Parliamentarians. Welcome back, David.

Also today in the Speaker’s gallery is Bill Hannan, who was the director of our legislative foodservice from 2006 to 2017. Welcome back to Queen’s Park, Bill.

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. It’s my honour to rise today and introduce a delegation from Poland, from the beautiful and bountiful province of Lublin, including: Mr. Przemysław Czarnek, the governor of Lublin Province; Mrs. Agata Grula; Bartosz Rybal; Jerzy Sądel; Mieczysław Ryba; Jacek Gołębiowski; Marek Konieczny; Stanisław Pisarski; Marcin Mazur; Maciej Kister; Piotr Pomaranski and Marek Manturowicz. I welcome you to Queen’s Park and I look forward to our discussions about how our two provinces can work together.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Speaker, I take great pleasure in informing you that today we have a guest from Kenora. The mayor of Kenora, Dave Canfield, is here. He did not seek re-election. He’s up for his final AMO board meeting and decided to take in question period this morning. Welcome, Dave.

Mr. Stephen Crawford: I’ve got seven members of the Oakville community I would like to welcome today: Francis Gao, May Xie, John Wang, Simon Luo, Lisha Peng, Zhen Zhou and Shawn Fang. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Paul Calandra: It gives me great pleasure to introduce my beautiful daughter Natalie, who joins us today. She has a school project due tomorrow and she will be giving a hard-hitting interview to the Premier later on today, so I just want to welcome her.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: As the MPP for Beaches–East York, I would just like to extend a very warm welcome, on behalf of all the constituents in Beaches–East York, to the members of Reid Scott’s family and friends. Thanks for coming, and welcome.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s a real honour to welcome two friends from Guelph here today, Crista Renner and Rob Ramage, and also to welcome climate activists Jen Ackerman and Don Hudson to Queen’s Park today. Thank you for joining us.

Ms. Lindsey Park: It’s my privilege this morning to introduce my mother, who is joining us in the east members’ gallery, Joan Park. With her is our dear friend Ruth Anne Campbell. Thanks for joining us.

Mrs. Daisy Wai: I would like to thank our page Lillian Liu from my riding of Richmond Hill. Lillian is a student in the grade 8 PACE program at St. Charles Garnier Catholic Elementary School in Richmond Hill. She is joined by her proud father, Mr. Andrew Liu. Lillian is the middle child of three children.

Mr. Liu, we are happy that Lillian is having this wonderful opportunity to participate in this full-time educational experience in the parliamentary and political process.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Sault Ste. Marie.

Mr. Ross Romano: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to beg your indulgence from the outset here. I have a bit of a list that I’ve been provided.

On behalf of Minister Rickford, I want to welcome the recently retired and first-ever mayor of Kenora, Dave Canfield. Just a little bit of background: Mr. Canfield spent 32 years working in the forestry sector, a crane operator by trade. He’s the former president of the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association. He served as the mayor of Jaffray Melick from 1994 to 1999 and the mayor of Kenora for the last 15 years.

I also want to welcome to Queen’s Park John Emberson and John Crowley, the president and vice-president of Coach Canada, here in the gallery; Jim Burnett, vice-president of Pathway Group; and Leanna Karremans, director of research, policy and communications from Pathway Group.

Welcome to Queen’s Park, everyone. Thank you for being here.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: I want to recognize Vanessa De Matteis, a young entrepreneur and student at Ryerson, here from the great riding of King–Vaughan. Welcome to the people’s House.

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: It’s my pleasure to introduce John Karapita and Matt Caron from the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association here today. Welcome, and thank you for joining us.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I’d like to welcome Laura Northey, Carolyn Young, Dora Chan, Bill Redelmeier, Eric Payseur and Kristen Howe, here today from the Organic Council of Ontario in support of my bill this afternoon on organic farming.

Wearing of ribbons

Mrs. Robin Martin: Mr. Speaker, I believe you’ll find we have unanimous consent to wear red ribbons in honour of World AIDS Day.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Eglinton–Lawrence is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to allow members to wear red ribbons in recognition of World AIDS Day. Agreed? Agreed.

Reid Scott

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

Hon. Todd Smith: Point of order, Speaker: I believe you’ll find that we have unanimous consent for a tribute to Reid Scott, the member for Beaches in the 23rd Parliament, with five minutes allotted to the independent Liberal members, five minutes allotted to the independent Green member, five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s government and five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to do a tribute in memory of Reid Scott. Agreed? Agreed.

I recognize the member for Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: It’s an honour to pay tribute to Reid Scott and his life of service to his community and to Ontario. I want to welcome his family and friends: his daughter Lesley Scott; his son, Greg Scott and his wife, Sandy Scott; his grandson Michael Scott and his wife, Holly Scott; his brother-in-law Doug Phillips; his niece Judy Phillips; his nephews Steve Palmer, Dave Palmer and Mike Palmer; and his friends Jeanne Fraser and Murray Baer.

Reid Scott was elected in 1948 at the age of 21 in the riding of Beaches and became the youngest member ever to serve in the Legislature. It was a record that stood for 60 years, but of course many records are eventually broken.

He does have a record, however, that will never be broken—and, in fact, each of us here does and anyone who has sat here does. It’s called Hansard. The words we speak are in Hansard forever, and it’s good for all of us to remember that. Those words tell us about ourselves and about others.

Here are some of Reid Scott’s words as a 21-year-old member of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation: “May I just say this much however, that if you took every Communist or Communist supporter in this country and shot him at sunrise, tomorrow, it would solve nothing. It would not build a single house, it would not increase the old-age pension, it would not provide hospitals, it would not solve any of the great problems which are crying out for solution.”

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

It is also evident that Reid cared very deeply about education and equality of opportunity. During a debate about access to post-secondary education for Ontarians who did not have the financial means to attend, Mr. Scott asked the government of the day, “How can you sit back and allow your own supporters to be so adversely affected. Don’t you see that this situation is not improving, and that it will become worse and worse unless something is done. Don’t you see that its major effects will not be felt this year or next year, but rather 10 or 12 years from now.

Don’t you see that this trend if left unchecked will sap the basic strength of our system, which is an educated population, that it will result in a decreasing level of education.” Something we’re still debating 70 years later.

Reid went on to serve as one of the first elected NDP members of Parliament, from 1962 to 1968, and served on the committee that brought us our flag, the Maple Leaf, something I am told that he was very, very proud of. The flag debate was a very contentious one—we wouldn’t know about that—as debates go. He worked hard with others to broker a solution, and the result was the flag that we know today. I don’t know the inside details of how it exactly happened, but I think he was rather imaginative and ingenious in finding that solution, from what I understand.

He also served as a Toronto city councillor from 1969 to 1976. That’s a real record of service, if you think about that: all three levels of government. Not many of us get the chance to do that.

In 2008, after a six-decade-long attachment to the NDP, Reid Scott saw the light and he joined the federal Liberals. Impressed by Stéphane Dion’s carbon tax plan, and the fact that the world was going to go to a price on carbon, Reid Scott sent a letter to the federal Liberals, saying he would like to take out a membership. “He’s got great integrity and courage,” Reid Scott said. To all my friends in the NDP, Reid Scott shows it’s never too late.

He also served as a provincial judge and a lawyer, and used his talents and knowledge to help many, many people.

Speaker, when I came to this place, I got into the habit of asking pages, “What’s the most interesting thing in this place?” I’m always hoping the answer will be me, but it never is.

Their answers are always very interesting. I’ll never forget this one answer I got from a page named Mira Gillis from Windsor–Tecumseh. I asked her the question, “What’s the most interesting thing about this place?” And here was her response: She said that when she came here she was very intimidated “because all of you were so important but when I came here I realized that you’re just one big family.” And she’s right.

Reid Scott was a member of our family and part of our heritage, and I’m honoured to have a few words to say about his legacy today.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Guelph.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s an honour today to rise in this House to pay tribute to Reid Scott for his distinguished public service to our province, the city of Toronto and our country. I welcome his children and grandchildren, nieces and nephews, and friends who are with us here today. It’s truly an honour to pay tribute to such an honourable person and such a distinguished public servant.

Mr. Scott’s accomplishments are very impressive: a career in public service that not only included being elected to serve in this House; but also to serve in our federal Parliament; to serve as, at that time, a city of Toronto alderman; and, later, to serve as a judge in our judiciary.

In 1948, Mr. Scott made history—and believe me, I can relate to making history. He was elected as the first CCF MPP in Ontario’s history and also at that time was elected, at the age of 22, as Ontario’s youngest MPP ever. In that election, he actually defeated an incumbent who had been in office for 22 years—quite an accomplishment for a 22-year-old upstart. He served in this Legislature from 1948 to 1951 and then was elected as a federal MP in the riding of Danforth in 1962 for the New Democratic Party, where he served until 1968.

He had many accomplishments, but I think the one that was most significant and that he seemed to speak about later in his life was the role Mr. Scott played in the Canadian flag. It’s my understanding that he played a critical role at committee especially, when there was a lot of controversy over the flag. We’ve all read about the Great Flag Debate, but it was my understanding that it was Reid Scott who convinced his colleagues to get behind the great maple leaf. I have to say that I believe we have the best flag of any country in the world, and Reid Scott played a critical role in making that happen.

Later in life, he was quoted as saying that every time he went to Parliament Hill, he was so proud to look at that flag that it would make him cry. What a legacy.

Then in 1969, he was elected to Toronto city council. One of the things that impressed me was that he advocated that Yonge Street should have a pedestrian zone and that cities should be about people, not necessarily about cars. I thought, “Wow, for somebody to say that in 1969”—because here we are, decades later, and we’re still having that conversation about making our streets about people. He then later served as a provincial court judge.

I’m deeply inspired by his contributions to democracy, but I have to say it was also his ability to predict the future that I find very, very admirable. In 2007, he was quoted in the Toronto Star as saying, “I believe the Green Party will elect an MPP to Ontario’s Legislature.” It may have taken an additional 11 years for that prediction to come true, but indeed it did in 2018.

I really admire Reid Scott’s commitment to the environment. He advocated for climate action decades before most people even realized climate change was an issue that we needed to address. He advocated based on principle, not party. I know my Liberal colleague has made reference to this already, but in 2008, he switched parties based on principle and based on his belief that we had to take climate action. I’ll even admit this publicly in this House so it will be on the record forever: I thought about it in 2008 myself when I saw the Green Shift plan put out by Mr. Dion.

I deeply admire Reid Scott standing up and always putting principle first throughout his entire career, regardless of which party he served in and which level of government he served in.

I just want to say to Mr. Scott’s family and friends what an inspiration he was, especially for somebody like myself, a bit of a trailblazer as well, that he blazed so many trails for so many people. I deeply admire the work he’s done and his contribution to our province and our country. Thank you for being here with us today.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Niagara West.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Speaker, I’m honoured to rise in this House to pay tribute to a former member of the Legislature, Reid Scott, who served in this very Legislature from 1948 to 1951, and served in many other capacities as well.

I’m especially grateful to pay tribute today to Mr. Scott because we have something in common. Like myself, he set the record as the youngest MPP to sit in the Ontario Legislature. He gained office at the age of 21, defeating a seasoned incumbent, and would go on to serve the public in significant ways.

Mr. Scott was born on October 23, 1926, and passed away peacefully on March 2, 2016. He is survived by his four children: Janette, Karen, Lesley and Greg; his four grandchildren: Lindsey, Michael, Katie and Sash; his sister Betty and her family. Thank you very much for joining us today.

He is remembered with love by his family and friends, and in the course of history, he is also remembered with love for his many years of public service to the people of Ontario and all of Canada at large. As an honour graduate of the University of Toronto with honour degrees in economics and political science—another thing we have in common—and a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School, Mr. Scott used his personal and professional expertise to aid and change many lives.

He first served as a Co-operative Commonwealth Federation member of the provincial Parliament for the Beaches constituency from 1948 to 1951. Scott, a law student at the time, defeated the 22-year incumbent Thomas Alexander Murphy when he was elected to the Ontario Legislature. And at age 21, he set the record for the youngest MPP ever elected, which remained unbroken until a by-election in 2016.

Mr. Scott went on to become the New Democratic Party member of Parliament for the Danforth electoral district in Toronto from 1962 to 1968. During his time as a member of the House of Commons, he was selected to be a member of the parliamentary committee tasked to select Canada’s national flag. Scott successfully lobbied Social Credit and Créditiste MPs to back the maple leaf flag. He even claimed that he rigged the final vote to ensure the 15-person parliamentary flag committee recommended the single-leaf banner that has flown across Canada since February 15, 1965.

It was up against a three-leaf pennant favoured by the Prime Minister at the time and a version of the red-leaf flag that included the Union Jack and fleur-de-lis and was supported by the opposition Conservatives. When some called his rigging into question, he argued, “I don’t call it trickery. I call it legal manoeuvring.”

He considered his presence on the committee and his contribution to the selection of Canada’s national flag to be one of his most important and proudest moments. If it wasn’t for his legal manoeuvring, we quite certainly wouldn’t have the beautiful national flag that we have today, a proud symbol of our strong Canada that is glorious and free.

Mr. Scott left federal politics when his riding disappeared due to redistribution but returned to politics in 1969 as a Toronto city alderman. In the early 1970s, as chair of the Metro public works committee, he proposed turning part of Yonge Street into a pedestrian mall. This experiment was conducted for a week in 1971, attracting 50,000 people a day.

At the age of 80, Scott threatened to come out of political retirement to contest the riding of Ajax–Pickering for the Ontario NDP in the October 2007 provincial election. He said he wanted to become both the youngest MPP ever elected and the oldest MPP at the same time. He did not end up running, but his longevity and tireless passion for politics are a testament to his relentless energy and commitment to his causes and constituents.

Scott is a true inspiration. Because of young, energetic members like Mr. Scott and many others throughout the ages, including the late William Pitt, who became Prime Minister of Britain at age 24 and was instrumental in abolishing the slave trade in Britain, that gave me the courage to get involved and make a difference at a young age. The younger you start, the more you can contribute, and Mr. Scott’s life story shows us precisely that.

Through his service as an elected member of the Ontario Legislature, member of the House of Commons and alderman for the city of Toronto, lawyer and provincial court judge, Reid Scott has made a lasting impact on the broader community. He has led a life of public service for which we are forever indebted.

I wish to also thank his family for sharing Scott with Queen’s Park, with Ontario and with Canada. Although we differ in political philosophy, I admire Scott’s legacy, tenacity and passion. I’m honoured to pay tribute to him today. May his legacy live on and inspire many more citizens to dedicate themselves selflessly for the service of others.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next I’ll recognize the member for Beaches–East York.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: It is my extraordinary honour as the MPP for Beaches–East York and a member of the official opposition NDP to pay tribute to Reid Scott. I never had the privilege of meeting Reid Scott, but in looking back at his life and in piecing together the many facets of it that were in the spotlight and the many that were not, it is clear that his drive and success were always fuelled by an intense desire to promote change for the better.

Seemingly destined to enter politics, Reid was an honours graduate of the University of Toronto, where he studied economics and political science. He then went on to Osgoode Hall Law School—all while operating an ice truck, by the way, to pay his tuition. In 1946, while still studying at Osgoode, he became the youngest person elected to the Ontario Legislature, at age 21. He was a member of the CCF and represented the Toronto riding of Beaches, where he had lived all his life and had attended the awesome schools of Kew Beach and Malvern Collegiate.

I’d like to share an excerpt from his campaign literature: “In the years just ahead, shall we again suffer unemployment, want and poverty in a land of plenty? You know that it is unnecessary.... Our province has a bright future—but only if we use our resources wisely and co-operatively. The old ways have been tried and failed. It’s time for a change.” Beautiful words, and how true they still ring.

Throughout the 1950s, Reid embraced life as a lawyer. He had a flourishing criminal law practice and became a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada.

Reid was called to federal politics in 1962, when he was scouted by then-NDP leader Tommy Douglas to run in the Toronto riding of Danforth. He won, and subsequently served three terms as a member of Parliament.

It was during this time that his most cherished political moment occurred, as we’ve heard: He was appointed to a 15-person parliamentary committee tasked to select Canada’s national flag, and he played an integral role in advocating for the single maple leaf banner which has now flown across Canada since 1965. In the last few years of his life, it brought him much joy to be able to share his experience of that pivotal moment in Canadian history.

In 1968, he decided not to run for re-election as an MP, but instead ran and won the race for Toronto city council alderman in ward 9. He also served as president of the council and, for a time, as acting mayor. Although he was one of the first crop of reform-minded politicians in council, he developed a strong working relationship with then-Mayor David Crombie, who was known as a Progressive Conservative.

Colleagues always spoke highly of Reid’s calm and focused nature, especially when he was discussing contentious issues. He was known as one of the most articulate debaters, and it was said that “his oratory was smooth, his delivery stylish and his arguments flowed in a pattern.” Throughout his career, Reid was always able to earn the respect of his colleagues, regardless of political stripe, because of his ability to combine his progressive beliefs with his genuine appreciation for the places and people he served.

In 1976, Reid left Toronto city council to accept an appointment as a provincial court judge by Premier Bill Davis, a position he held until his retirement in 1991.

As you can by now imagine, Reid’s list of achievements is just about endless. It goes far beyond the few tidbits I’ve been able to share with you today, to his time with the Queen’s Counsel; as a volunteer counsellor for Anchorage house, a centre for alcohol and drug addiction; and with the countless community organizations he supported in his retirement.

I’d like to take a moment to acknowledge Reid’s family and friends who are here today. We know that political life is difficult, and it is often the most difficult for families. He stated once that his biggest disappointment was not seeing his loved ones enough, but his kind and generous nature was no doubt in part due to the love and devotion that he shared and cultivated with you by his side.

The research that was shared with me was full of beautiful memories: Reid, with his wonderful, dry sense of humour, entertaining his family and friends with a theatrical rendition of Danny Boy. Everyone is at the family cottage in Fenelon Falls, Ontario, where many unforgettable years were spent together. People are laughing, singing and dancing. That’s the memory I’d like to leave you with here today.

Thank you for being with us today, and thank you for sharing Reid with us.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I want to thank the members for their eloquent tributes and once again say thank you to the family of Reid Scott for joining us this morning.

Oral Questions

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Premier. Franco-Ontarians from across our province—in fact, francophones across this country—have made it clear to the Premier that he has disrespected the francophone community. He has made a major mistake.

Will he do the right thing: restore funding to the French-language university and restore the independent French Language Services Commissioner?

Hon. Doug Ford: Franco-Ontarians have played a major role in Ontario. Even though they’re 3% of the population in Ontario, they played a major role in culture and history and different areas of business in Ontario.

We did listen. I’ve talked to hundreds of Franco-Ontarians, as they have my cellphone number, like everyone else does. I had an opportunity to speak to them. They really appreciate us being straightforward about the university, a false promise made days before the election from the Liberal government to actually use Franco-Ontarians—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll ask the Premier to withdraw.

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw—not too sure what I was withdrawing.

Through you, Mr. Speaker: They realize that our province was left in a bankruptcy state—a $14.5-billion deficit we’re facing. We’re paying interest of over $12 billion a year. They realized they were being used as pawns. That’s shameful, to use Franco-Ontarians as pawns during the election.

We did listen, and what we did: We’re empowering the role of the French Language Services Commissioner under the Ombudsman. We have a fantastic new minister—

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary?

Mr. John Vanthof: Once again to the Premier: They are a founding people of this country.

This is more than just a broken promise. The Premier has dashed the hopes of Franco-Ontarian youth by scrapping the plans for a university, and told them that their rights won’t be respected by scrapping the watchdog who protected French services.

Half measures and damage control won’t solve this crisis. Will he do the right thing: restore funding to the French-language university and restore the independent French Language Services Commissioner?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: The opposition is misleading the people. There was no funding—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask the Premier to withdraw the unparliamentary—

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): He may conclude his response.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Doug Ford: It was not in the fiscal budget.

What we did do: We are empowering the role of the French Language Services Commissioner under the Ombudsman. We have a fantastic new Minister of Francophone Affairs, a wonderful person, Caroline Mulroney. You couldn’t ask for a better representative. And I’m hiring a senior policy adviser responsible for francophone affairs in my office.

Through you, Mr. Speaker: We have 11 colleges and universities offering 300 courses in French language. We want those 300 courses to be filled; unfortunately, they aren’t filled. We have—

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

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: You can’t cancel something that was never there in the first place. We go back to the 11 universities and colleges offering the courses: I encourage our young people in high school to fill the courses. Fill the 300 courses that we have and make sure they’re filled. It’s our job to get our communities into these French-language courses—300 of them in 11 different colleges and universities across the province.

The temporary opposition leader knows very well that we support the Franco community in Ontario. I’ve spoken to hundreds of them; as a matter of fact, I’ve spoken to more Franco-Ontarians than anyone in this chamber the last few weeks—

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Next question.

Automotive industry

Ms. Sara Singh: My question is for the Premier.

The people of Oshawa were dealt a hard blow this week, but they’re already organizing to save jobs and reverse GM’s decision to abandon them. Yesterday, the Premier accused them of spreading false hope.

Why is the Premier so certain that they’re wrong to fight for their jobs?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the member for Brampton Centre: All I’ve heard are these leaders get up there and talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, giving these poor people—I feel so sorry for them because, again, my phone has been ringing off the hook. I have talked to hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of GM workers. My first phone call started at 6:15 this morning.

Once I talk to the people at GM, they understand. They don’t appreciate Jerry Dias giving them false hope when they have to go home and tell their spouse and tell their kids there might be a chance, when Jerry knows exactly there isn’t any chance. Our job is to find new jobs, to create an economy and an environment out in the Durham region to attract new jobs, new opportunities. They appreciated my call.

The members themselves don’t agree—

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Ms. Sara Singh: Across North America, elected leaders from all political stripes say they’re ready to stand with GM workers and fight GM’s decision to walk away from their communities.

Why is the Premier so convinced that all of these leaders are so wrong to keep fighting for good-paying jobs here in this province, and that giving up is the best option here for workers in our province?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the member for Brampton Centre: It’s called grandstanding. They know the truth. The Prime Minister knows the truth.

The president of GM spoke to me four times. Jerry Dias knows the truth because he has spoken to the president of GM numerous times. I spoke to the CEOs of Ford Motor Co., Honda and Toyota. Everyone knows GM is leaving. Our job, rather than talking and giving people false hope, which is the worst thing you can do to a family, is to create opportunities, new jobs, create the environment by lowering gas prices, lowering hydro rates, making sure we create a friendly atmosphere for businesses, because this decision wasn’t done in the last six months. It was in the works for the last year and a half. That’s the truth of the matter.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Final supplementary?

Ms. Sara Singh: Families in Oshawa deserve leadership right now, and they need a government that understands that Oshawa has the skills and talent to succeed and a government that’s willing to fight GM to ensure that those jobs don’t go to China or Mexico but stay right here in our province of Ontario.

Instead, they have a Premier who is telling Oshawa families that there’s no point in even trying to fight for their jobs. Why is this Premier so determined to just give up?

Hon. Doug Ford: Again, through you, Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible, terrible situation for the people of Durham, but there’s only one scenario that would even be worse. What would even be worse is if the NDP got elected. There would be 7,500 people at the Pickering nuclear station who would be out of work as well, and their families. That would have been even more of a disaster.

You listen to the Prime Minister’s staff saying all options are on the table. Well, Prime Minister, you can’t be promoting a carbon tax on Monday and then wonder why jobs are leaving on Tuesday. Jobs are leaving because of the terrible carbon tax, because of cap-and-trade, because of the highest hydro rates in North America, the highest taxes, the worst labour laws right here in Ontario.

But guess what, Mr. Speaker? We’re changing it. We’re turning the corner and making an atmosphere and an environment—

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

Automotive industry

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Premier. Speaker, I have said I will fight alongside workers in my community and so I will bring their questions directly to the Premier. Michelle, a worker at GM, writes:

“Jennifer, thank you for standing with us in this fight. I am a second-generation autoworker. I was born and raised in Oshawa. General Motors raised me, it paid for all my birthdays, extracurricular activities, medicine when I was sick, and dental, food, school and the roof over my head. My father and I have given our blood, sweat and tears to this company and have always supported them by purchasing the vehicles that employed us. I am absolutely devastated knowing that I’m soon to be out of a job with hardly any notice.

I worry how I’m ever going to get through Christmas let alone how I’m going to pay my mortgage with no job. I hurt so badly inside thinking about what I will face in this next year. I hurt because we currently have a Premier who doesn’t care about me or my family or General Motors having a manufacturing presence in Canada.”

Michelle’s question—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Government, come to order.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Speaker, they’re heckling Michelle. Michelle’s question to the Premier is, “Why does my government not care about me and my family?”

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I guess what I said about the Prime Minister applies to the NDP: You can’t support a job-killing carbon tax and wonder why companies are leaving by the droves. That’s a big issue.

My friend from the Durham region: I would like to know what the NDP is doing to create new jobs, other than voting against a bill that gives money back to the most needy people in society, lowering hydro rates, getting rid of the job-killing carbon tax and scrapping Bill 148, which was a job-killing bill.

What is the NDP doing? I’ll tell you what they’re doing, Mr. Speaker. They’re doing nothing, zero. As you’re sitting there, running around talking, we’re out there creating new jobs. We’re going out there, as we did in southwest Ontario, opening new plants across this province. We’re going to continue to open new plants, attract new companies—

Interjections.

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

I’m going to ask the Premier to withdraw.

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The House will come to order.

Start the clock. Supplementary?

Ms. Jennifer K. French: What I am doing is standing alongside my community, because I believe Oshawa is worth fighting for.

Speaker, the Premier has spoken to GM; I have spoken to them too. It sounds like we are in for really uncertain times. However, I know better than to count Oshawa out. But on day one, the Premier said it was over. He threw in the towel without a fight.

My community does have some hope. The thousands of GM workers, their leadership and the tens of thousands of workers in the automotive supply chain have some hope. One would think the Premier would want to meet with them to see where that hope comes from and to make sure that he has indeed considered every option to keep those jobs.

My question is, why does this Premier have no hope at all?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I’m just wondering if anyone from the NDP even spoke to the president of GM. The answer is no. I wonder how many people the NDP talked to—front-line workers. I’ve talked to hundreds.

It’s amazing, Mr. Speaker, when I talk to them on the phone, starting at 6:15 this morning—my last call was at midnight last night. In every single call when I speak to them, they say, “You’re right, Doug, and by the way, we’re no fans of Jerry Dias.” I heard that over and over and over again. All he was doing—one person described him as a 1930s union member, sitting in front of his members, banging on the table, but doing nothing.

We’re doing something. We’re out there. We’re creating jobs, and we will create jobs for each and every person who lost their job. I can tell you, Durham will be booming under our—

Interjections.

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

Next question? Start the clock.

Automotive industry

Mr. David Piccini: My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. Over the past few days, our government has laid out a plan to help workers affected by GM’s recent announcement of the closure of their plant in Oshawa. We know these workers are going to need help transitioning to new careers over the next year. I know, personally, our Premier has responded on the ground, has responded to hundreds of calls and hundreds more text messages.

My question is to the minister. Can the minister update this House on steps our government is taking to help workers in Oshawa?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks to the member from Northumberland–Peterborough South, who was with the Premier and I, and our Minister of the Environment, the President of the Treasury Board and other caucus members from the Durham region in Oshawa, meeting with officials, with the CEO of the chamber of commerce, talking about the next steps for Oshawa after the closure of General Motors, which seems imminent, as far as car and truck production is concerned, in late 2019.

It feels like the Premier and I have been on the phone for the last week, constantly talking with business and civic leaders in Oshawa but also across the entire auto sector, working with them on how we can make it easier to build cars in Ontario, how we can make it easier to sell cars and drive cars in Ontario—that’s a real plan—and how we’re going to dig ourselves out of this. What the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities is doing with the rapid re-employment team, that’s a real plan. Mugging for the cameras? That’s not a plan.

Interjections.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: Tell that to Lyndsey Vanstone.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Waterloo, come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Start the clock. Supplementary?

Mr. David Piccini: I thank the minister for his work on behalf of a number of my constituents affected by this recent announcement, constituents like Jim, who reached out to me, who is looking, in a time of uncertainty, for certainty. He’s certain in his skills training, and he’s looking for certainty from this government. That’s what we’ve given them: certainty in skills training, certainty in linking jobs to transitioning into a new career in the next year ahead—not desk-banging and not grandstanding.

We know there are efforts on the ground to help General Motors workers find new careers, but there’s more our government is doing to improve the prospects for workers and businesses in Ontario’s auto sector. Can the minister elaborate on the Premier’s commitments regarding our government’s plan to help Ontario’s auto sector?

Hon. Todd Smith: As a matter of fact, I can. We’ve already done a lot, including passing the Making Ontario Open for Business Act. The Premier said it yesterday: You can’t be out there in favour of a carbon tax on Monday and then complain about job losses on Tuesday. It just simply doesn’t balance; it doesn’t add up.

Getting rid of the regressive job-killing carbon tax, the cap-and-trade system that we had in place here for the last couple of years in Ontario, is going to help us build cars, it’s going to help us buy cars, and it’s going to help people drive cars in Ontario. That’s a real plan.

We’re also committed to working with the federal government in a full-court press to get rid of

section 232 tariffs. Those are on steel and aluminum. We want to get those tariffs lifted, Mr. Speaker. They are an attack on auto sector jobs and manufacturing jobs on both sides of the border. I’ve spoken with the US ambassador and I know the Premier has spoken with the US ambassador. We’re going to do everything that we can to make sure that Ontario is the best place to do business in North America.

Automotive industry

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Premier. Speaker, the Premier likes to make a big show about giving out his cellphone number, but this week it seems like he’s not too happy about the nature and volume of calls that he’s getting from the Oshawa region and the workers at GM. The president of Unifor Local 673 tweeted yesterday, “Doug Ford called our national president, Jerry Dias, to ask if he can stop Unifor members from calling him” on his personal cellphone “regarding GM.”

Does the Premier think that if he can stop the calls from coming in, the people in Oshawa won’t care that he refuses to fight for their jobs?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: When I did speak to Jerry Dias, I told him that there was a lot of rude, nasty swearing going on, attacking my family, attacking my brother, and I said to him, “I wish you would get your members—the rude ones—to stop calling.” But the good ones that I’ve talked to, 99% of them—and there were 99% good calls. When I spoke to them, I found out one thing: Jerry Dias doesn’t have too much support within his own Unifor union. That’s what I learned.

I learned that people actually realize and appreciate the truth. They know that the biggest problem here is the tariffs. The tariffs are killing the auto sector. I made it very clear: If the Prime Minister wants to do something, get rid of the carbon tax and get rid of these job-killing tariffs. That’s the truth. I’ve talked to more GM workers—

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

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: The Premier can blame the Prime Minister and he can blame Jerry Dias. In a question yesterday to the Minister of Economic Development, the minister said that your government has been on the phone with GM for weeks and weeks and months. But it’s pretty clear that it was only when GM spoke with Ford that they decided to get the hell out of Dodge.

Speaker, the Premier is in for quite the education this week: The women and men fighting for their jobs in Oshawa aren’t the trained seals and backbenchers who do standing ovations on command, and Dean French’s temper tantrums aren’t going to scare them. For the workers watching at home who may not have the Premier’s number but want the Premier to fight for their jobs—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to caution the member on intemperate language and ask him to withdraw his offensive remark.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I withdraw, Speaker. Thank you.

For the workers watching at home who may not have the Premier’s personal cellphone number but want the Premier to fight for their jobs, can the Premier confirm that his cellphone number is still 416-805-2156? Let me say that again: 416-805-2156. Is that what it is?

Hon. Doug Ford: Boy. You know something—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Mississauga–Streetsville, come to order.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I’m glad that people talk to me. You don’t get stuck in a bubble like the opposition does. They get stuck in this ivory tower. They say they’re for the working people. They aren’t for the working people. They’re there for the Jerry Diases and the rest of the heads of big unions. They aren’t there for the front-line union workers. It’s amazing.

The best thing that happened—Unifor did send out my number, and the best thing you did is remind people to call me, because once you speak to them—

Interjections.

Hon. Doug Ford: Once you actually speak to people, and you actually talk to them and you get into a conversation—

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

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the House to stop the constant interjections. I can’t hear the member who has the floor when I’m constantly calling members to order.

Start the clock. Next question.

Police services

Mr. Deepak Anand: My question is for the Attorney General.

This government has done tremendous work to date supporting our law enforcement and providing them with the support they need to help keep our communities safe, whether it’s aligning the standards for police carrying and administering naloxone with other responders or replacing the crumbling Public Safety Radio Network to ensure front-line responders have reliable, modern tools and resources.

Yesterday, our government announced an additional funding initiative to support our law enforcement in helping victims of crime and keeping our communities safe through the Civil Remedies Grant Program. Mr. Speaker, can the Attorney General provide us with the details of this program and the benefits it will provide to Ontario’s law enforcement?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Thank you to the member from Mississauga–Malton for the question.

Our government takes the safety and well-being of Ontarians very seriously. We are always working to find ways to support initiatives that help us achieve those goals, which is why yesterday our government announced that through the Civil Remedies Grant Program, we will be providing $1.5 million in funding to help 17 police services across the province keep our communities safe.

This year’s funding will help law enforcement agencies run 21 programs to assist victims and prevent unlawful activity. These include programs such as Project Enhance in Sudbury, which will receive $77,000 to prevent and combat sexual exploitation, human trafficking, organized crime and opioid trafficking through state-of-the-art surveillance equipment.

Our government values and respects the work our law enforcement does, and we want to ensure that they have the resources they need to continue their work. These grants will—

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Deepak Anand: Wow, 21 programs that will receive funding this year throughout the province. This is certainly good news for many communities across the province. Our law enforcement agencies do fantastic work in supporting victims of crime, and working to prevent unlawful activities. It is reassuring to know that they have the support and the resources to do that.

You spoke about one of the projects, in Sudbury, receiving support from the government. Can the Attorney General share with this House the additional projects our government is supporting to bolster Ontario’s law enforcement?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Mr. Speaker, I’d be delighted to provide that information. Many of these projects are aimed at combatting human trafficking and supporting survivors of this heinous crime. Project Safe Horizons: Eyes Open in Barrie will receive $92,000 to fund outreach for information-sharing across all Ontario police services and outreach to local businesses to increase awareness of human trafficking.

The Seeds Project in Brantford will receive $93,000 to help create an international database of individuals, addresses and vehicles associated with human trafficking in the community.

Exit Strategy in Windsor will receive $99,000 to provide officers with advanced technology and training to enhance their ability to identify both victims of human trafficking and perpetrators. The program will also provide support to community partners, allowing for a multidisciplinary approach to rescuing victims.

Mr. Speaker, I would love to be able to list all of the projects, but as time is short, a complete list can be found on the Ontario Newsroom website. I encourage everyone to check out these important projects and speak to—

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

Child protection

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Speaker, Anna is one of the speakers who joined us in the media studio this morning. She is a fearless youth advocate. She is also a former crown ward. She’s a social worker, and she is joining us here today in the gallery. Anna knows what the system is like and she knows how important the advocate’s office is for youth who are hurt, abused or taken advantage of. To her, the big question is: Where are young people supposed to go now?

Like many, Anna knows this cruel decision to cut the child advocate’s office makes absolutely no sense. The government must restore the independent child advocate’s office that can make sure that voices of vulnerable youth in this province are heard.

Will the minister commit today to reversing this hurtful decision?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I appreciate the question. Obviously, it’s great to see Anna at the Legislature. Just over a week ago she was actually in my office, as I’m the minister responsible for children’s issues, and I was listening to her and other children and adults with lived experience. That made my resolve even more strong to make sure that we uphold a stronger and higher standard for child protection in the province of Ontario. That’s why we are moving towards the Ombudsman, who has a stronger oversight capability than the child advocate did. We’re going to ensure there’s a turnkey unit for children, especially there.

Finally, one of the things that I think is most important is with respect to the Ombudsman and the coroner. They have investigative powers that are able to provide my ministry and children’s aid societies, as well as youth detention centres, with recommendations as a result of their investigations, and they’re stronger than what the advocate had. We’re going to continue to do that. That’s why I’ve asked for all pending investigations by the child advocate to be reviewed by our Ombudsman.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Miss Monique Taylor: Just in case, and I know the minister is new in her role, but the Ombudsman is reactive and the coroner is when children are already dead.

Speaker, for many in Ontario it’s unbelievable that the Ford government would cut the independent child advocate’s voice to save a few bucks. Today the gallery is filled. People are watching from home. These are people who have experienced care. They’re advocates and they’re parents, and they want to share their disappointment and disgust with this decision. This cruel decision means that children and youth will be left to fend for themselves, left without an independent, dedicated officer of this Legislature to speak out solely for these children’s needs.

Speaker, why does this minister believe that children and youth do not deserve to have their voices heard by an independent officer of the Ontario Legislature?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Obviously, the move that we’re making strengthens oversight and accountability. It will strengthen the investigative side in the Ombudsman’s office. I think the member opposite knows I’ve been here for 13 years. I used to be a children and youth critic—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Davenport, come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: —so I do know a thing or two about what I’m talking about.

But where the member opposite gets confused from time to time is that she thinks the investigative unit is the same as advocacy.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa Centre, come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: That’s why I’ve created three tables—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: —one Indigenous-led, one for youth in care, and one for youth in custody—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for York Centre, come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: —and they will report directly to me, who is accountable to the Premier and to the people of this province.

To suggest that we are lessening an advocacy role—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: —when we are actually going to have this embedded within my ministry is disgraceful. It’s fearmongering and, again, it is unbelievable—

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order.

Once again, I’m going to inform the House that the Speaker is having a great deal of difficulty even listening to what the person who has the floor has to say because of the constant interjections. Therefore, I will call you to order once, I will warn you and, if I have to speak to you again, you’ll be named. I hope that’s clear.

Start the clock. Next question.

Automotive industry

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is to the Premier. First and foremost, my heart goes out to the Oshawa and Durham community. I can imagine what those families are going through right now. Two of my brothers are auto workers, and they were not surprised by the news on Sunday night. It’s not unusual for lines to have to fight for products in this sector.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Mississauga Centre.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: But this government’s response has been so underwhelming at best—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: —it has left everyone feeling dejected. GM employees don’t want retraining.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Mississauga Centre.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: They want their jobs.

Interjection.

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

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: In 2013, Heinz announced that they were closing Leamington operations. Seven hundred and forty jobs were at stake. It was a done deal. But the government of the day did not sit back. Speaker, the collaboration between the previous government, municipalities and business saved 250 jobs.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Mississauga Centre is warned.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: What is the Premier doing to save those GM jobs right now?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Before I answer the question of the member for Scarborough–Guildwood, I had a great experience the other day. I went to the painters’ union. There were about 600 people, and guess who I saw? I saw the member of provincial Parliament from Scarborough–Guildwood. I introduced her and told the crowd that they did a great job.

But I’ll tell you one thing: It was a real wake-up call for the member over there, Mr. Speaker, because I’ve never had a warmer reception. When I walked through those doors, everyone was standing on their feet, cheering away. I went all the way through the room.

My point is that front-line union members support this government. They don’t support the NDP and they don’t support the Liberals, because they know the Liberals and NDP destroyed this province. They made it uncompetitive. They had 300,000 manufacturing jobs leave this province under their watch. They bankrupted this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Premier, it’s not about you; it’s about those workers and it’s about those families. That is your job: To fight for—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for King–Vaughan.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: —those workers and their families.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry is warned.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question to this government is, what are your plans for a changing economy? You talk about the 300,000 manufacturing jobs that were lost.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Niagara West.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: You refuse to talk about the 800,000 jobs that were created.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Northumberland–Peterborough South.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Our province, like every other place in the world, is experiencing a changing workforce: automation, innovation, technology. What are you doing to lead this province into a new era of work? Because you have said, “The ship has sailed.” That is not good enough. It is not good enough for those workers; it is not good enough for those families. They want leadership.

What are you doing in the face of a changing economy to make sure you stand up for Ontario jobs?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Or are we just going to be importers of hundreds and thousands of vehicles and—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the member for Scarborough–Guildwood: We’ll tell you what we’re doing. We’re changing every law that they destroyed this province with. That’s what we’re doing. We’re changing the job-killing labour law, Bill 148, which we did. It’s the best bill we put forward, Bill 47—creating jobs.

We’re lowering hydro rates. Under their watch, we had the highest hydro rates in North America, the number-one issue when I went across this province and talked to small, medium and large businesses. They were killing them.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Scarborough–Guildwood, come to order.

Hon. Doug Ford: The regulations under their government: There are 380,000 regulations that they created.

There’s the carbon tax—cap-and-trade—destroying this entire country. Companies left by droves. They left to the tune of 300,000 manufacturing jobs.

Now the door is open for business. People know Ontario is open for business. We’re attracting new jobs—

Interjections.

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

I would remind the House that when the Speaker stands up, your microphone goes dead. We will have order in the remaining 24 minutes of this question period.

Start the clock. The member for Kingston and the Islands.

Mr. Ian Arthur: Mr. Speaker, through you—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize. I made a mistake. I have to recognize the member for Mississauga Centre.

Government accountability / Responsabilité gouvernementale

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: My question is for our stellar President of the Treasury Board.

My constituents in Mississauga Centre are concerned about how government spending ballooned over 15 years of Liberal mismanagement. While the NDP supported this spending, it’s clear that there was little oversight and even less good governance practices when they mattered the most. In fact, one of the key points from the line-by-line review was that Liberal spending was not based on evidence, was decentralized and was out of control. It’s clear, Mr. Speaker, that the fall economic statement tabled by the Minister of Finance earlier this month is going to improve our province’s fiscal standing.

Si on veut que notre province prospère, on doit changer la façon dont le gouvernement se comporte et dépense.

Can the President of the Treasury Board please tell us how announcements in the fall economic statement will help control government spending?

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Thank you to the member from Mississauga Centre for that great question.

The line-by-line review showed that labour costs are our single largest expenditure across government, totalling about $71 billion. Shockingly, under the Liberals, government agencies were not required to have their bargaining mandates approved by government. Well, Mr. Speaker, as part of our promise to restore accountability to government, that lack of oversight ends right here, right now.

Earlier this week, I informed my colleagues that agencies with collective agreements expiring at the end of the year must seek bargaining mandate approval through the Treasury Board.

Let me be crystal clear: In no way does this impact collective bargaining rights. Instead, it ensures that the people footing the bill, the taxpayers of Ontario, will know what the final amount will be.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Thank you to the President of the Treasury Board for that excellent answer.

The practices of the previous Liberal government are indeed shocking. It’s encouraging to see that this government is taking bold action to increase accountability and oversight on spending. In fact, the line-by-line review showed that every 1% increase in compensation-related spending translated into a staggering $720 million in additional costs. It’s clear that after 15 years of Liberals signing blank cheques on the backs of the people of Ontario, our government is taking action.

Well, Mr. Speaker, accountability and good governance are not just sound bites; they are the very foundation of what we are working for: a government that respects the taxpayer.

Can the President of the Treasury Board please inform this House what the impact of this new accountability initiative will be?

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Merci à la députée pour cette question. Let me be frank. The line-by-line review revealed that, for 15 years, when the Liberals were signing the paycheques, they were letting someone else fill in the blanks.

If we want this province to prosper, if we want our public servants to be sustainable, we must change the way government behaves. This new oversight effort will apply to 24 agencies, accounting for approximately $2.6 billion annually in compensation costs.

Ontarians can be assured that we are taking action to control government spending and are implementing appropriate oversight measures.

Mr. Speaker, not only will this government approve the numbers going on those cheques, but in the memo line we will have one word and one word only: “Accountability.”

Climate change

Mr. Ian Arthur: Mr. Speaker, through you, my question is for the Premier. Yesterday, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks was asked whether the government’s new climate change plan would use tax dollars to pay polluters and—shocking, I know—the minister did not answer.

I’ll ask again: Is the Premier flipping the principle of the polluter-pay model upside down by forcing taxpayers to pay polluters instead?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Our plan is a fabulous plan, and our Minister of the Environment is going to be rolling that out today. Let me tell the people here that the Paris agreement 2030 goal is 30%. Guess what Ontario is at? Ontario is at 22% already. We will make sure we hit the 30% by the end of 2030, because we have the best plan.

When we went across the province—people want clean air. They want clean lakes. They want clean rivers. They want clean parks. I can tell you that people who want to pollute, the companies that want to pollute—we’re going to come down twice as hard on them.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Ian Arthur: I hope the Premier has time to read the Paris climate agreement at some point.

Yesterday, the minister was asked to explain where he will find the money to pay for his climate change plan and again he refused to answer, and then the PC caucus gave him a standing ovation for that. I will ask again: How will the Premier pay fo