Ontario Hansard — 11 December 2017 (41st Parliament, 2nd Session)
2017-12-11
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
December 11, 2017
41st Parliament, 2nd Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcripts 2017-Dec-11 (PDF)
L134 - Mon 11 Dec 2017 / Lun 11 déc 2017
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO
Monday 11 December 2017 Lundi 11 décembre 2017
Introduction of Visitors
Report, Financial Accountability Officer
Oral Questions
Energy policies
Small business
Energy policies
Energy policies
Government fiscal policies
Hospital services
International trade
Hospital funding
College students
Affaires francophones
Mental health services
Correctional facilities
Climate change
Health care funding
Wearing of shirt
Introduction of Visitors
Members’ Statements
Charity events in Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry
Order and decorum in chamber
Toronto FC
Perth county warden
Winter road maintenance
Investments in Etobicoke North
St. Mary’s Regional Cardiac Care Centre
Hanukkah
The Table Soup Kitchen Foundation
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills
Standing Committee on Justice Policy / Comité permanent de la justice
Introduction of Bills
Protecting Hydro Consumers Act (Prepayment Meters), 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur la protection des consommateurs d’électricité (compteurs à prépaiement)
Petitions
Hydro rates
Injured workers
Environmental protection
School closures
Gasoline prices
Simcoe Day
Pesticides
Coffee pods
Long-term care
Green power generation
Prix de l’essence
Driver licences
Orders of the Day
Cannabis, Smoke-Free Ontario and Road Safety Statute Law Amendment Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne le cannabis, l’Ontario sans fumée et la sécurité routière
Strengthening Quality and Accountability for Patients Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 renforçant la qualité et la responsabilité pour les patients
The House met at 1030.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.
Prayers.
Introduction of Visitors
Mr. Lorne Coe: I’m pleased to introduce to the Legislature Roland Goreski, the owner and general manager of Campkin’s RV Centre in Whitby, and Natalie Conway, the executive director with the Ontario Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Please welcome to Queen’s Park Manual Tavares, along with his mother, Monika, from the riding of Oakville. Please welcome them to Queen’s Park.
Mr. Arthur Potts: I want to give a big shout-out to Toronto Football Club, who on Saturday won the MLS Cup. Who can forget that great goal by Jozy Altidore? Alex Bono just pushing them out of the net; no one scored on him.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Introductions. Are they here?
Mr. Arthur Potts: Victor Vazquez got the second goal in overtime and Michael Bradley, what an incredible leader—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Line up for a statement.
The member for Hamilton Mountain.
Miss Monique Taylor: It truly is an honour to welcome a guest with us today. Her name is Tracy Schmitt, but she is better known as “Unstoppable Tracy.” She is an international inspiration for people living with disabilities. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I actually have three separate introductions. First, I’m very happy to welcome to the gallery Maria Palma Vito, who is here with us today.
Also, I don’t know that they’re in the gallery just yet, but they will be soon—they’re certainly in the building—the grade 12 civics class from St. Robert Catholic High School in my riding of Vaughan with their teacher Mr. Vito Totino.
I also want to say, because he had such a fantastic time with us last Monday in the east members’ gallery, my father, Ben Del Duca, is back for a repeat engagement to witness question period yet again today.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: I have two good friends here today from the riding of Halton: 11-year-old Sienna Sovereign is in the House today for her first question period, and she’s with her uncle Brian Tropea, who many of us know as the general manager of the Ontario Harness Horse Association. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Bill Mauro: This morning, the Ontario Home Builders’ Association hosted a breakfast here in the legislative dining room. I was pleased to be there and to deliver some remarks. I welcome their president, Pierre Dufresne, who is in the members’ gallery.
I was about to make introductions on behalf of the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, the member from Willowdale, but I see that he has just walked in, so I’m going to pass him this note right now, although he hasn’t paid any attention to me just yet.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: At the Ontario Home Builder’s Association breakfast this morning: Joe Vaccaro will be here today, as well as Louie Zagordo from Sudbury, and, from Hamilton, Suzanne Mammel and Brandon Campbell. I’ll be meeting with them later. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: There’s a group of students here today from Bayview Glen private school in my riding, and I want to congratulate them because they won first place out of 32,000 other robotics teams worldwide.
The adult mentors and teachers and parents are Eric Borromeo, Brittany Camilleri, Peter Rossos, Marco Filice, Galina Djambova, Carol Cheung, Angelina Lee, Gillian Ng and Ms. Karen Horsman. The Ctrl-Z student team members are Matthew Wong, Harrison Cazzin, Alex Alexiev, Chloe Filice, Trent Rossos, Brianna Gonzalez and Daniel Gonzalez.
Welcome to Queen’s Park and congratulations.
Ms. Cindy Forster: We have some very important people here today from the Rotary Youth Exchange. We have Nicholas Bodo from the Rotary Club of Welland and Mike Taylor from the Rotary Club of Fonthill. The youth exchange students are Federico Roman Holt from Paraguay, Anna Antalfalvi from Hungary, Heloise Blais from France and Manon Hody from Belgium. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Kathryn McGarry: I’d like to welcome very good friends of mine in the members’ east gallery this morning, John and Diane Jolliffe.
I also wanted to say a special hello to Unstoppable Tracy, whom I met in Cambridge a mere two weeks ago. Lovely to see you again.
Ms. Cheri DiNovo: It’s my delight to introduce three generations of my cousins: Celine DiNovo, first cousin; Chad DiNovo, second cousin; and Chad’s baby, Maria Cristina, third cousin.
Hon. Reza Moridi: Please join me in welcoming His Excellency Niels Abrahamsen, ambassador of Denmark, as well as Mr. Niels Kristensen, consul general of Denmark in Toronto. Please welcome them to Ontario.
Hon. Michael Coteau: I’d like to welcome Margaret and Mark, the parents of Morgan Stahl, who works for me at the ministry. Thanks for being here and welcome to the Legislature.
Mr. Arthur Potts: I want to welcome students from the grade 12 civics class from East York Collegiate Institute, home of the Goliaths and the Athenas, and their teacher Christina Ganev. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. David Zimmer: I would like to introduce page Olivia McCormick. Her father, Kevin, is in the gallery; her grandparents Noveen and Brendan; two uncles, Joseph McAdam and Mike McCormick; and a cousin, Sophia Baker. Welcome to the Legislature.
Report, Financial Accountability Officer
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Seeing no further introductions, I beg to inform the House that the following document was tabled: report on the economic and fiscal outlook, fall 2017, from the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario.
Oral Questions
Energy policies
Mr. Todd Smith: Good morning, Speaker. My question today is for the Premier.
Last week, we learned that nine companies bilked Ontario electricity customers out of $265 million. Now we know that one of those companies is run by your government: Ontario Power Generation. OPG’s turn at the trough cost electricity ratepayers tens of millions of dollars in inappropriate expenses. That’s after your government, Premier, was warned five times about the program that OPG was abusing.
My question to the Premier is this: Did her government ignore warnings from the energy board because they enjoyed collecting the money that OPG was wrongfully taking from electricity customers?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: We’re confident in the Ontario Energy Board and our system operator to run an efficient, reliable and fair electricity market for ratepayers across the province. Both the Real-Time Generation Cost Guarantee program and the congestion management settlement credits play an extremely important role in our electricity system. These programs are required to keep the electricity system reliable for families and businesses across the province, and stable for our neighbours in other jurisdictions. If these programs were eliminated, reliability would be put at risk.
When it comes to OPG, they released a statement. What they said was that in respect of some of what they thought were eligible costs, OPG repaid certain costs and claimed amounts after discussions concluded on what constituted eligible costs. OPG promptly repaid the amounts to the IESO in full in 2015.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Todd Smith: Back to the Premier: The Minister of Energy may be confident in OPG, but the people of Ontario and the official opposition have no confidence—none—in this government to keep a watchful eye on what’s happening, especially in the energy sector.
The energy board issued five warnings to four different Ministers of Energy and two different Premiers about the program that OPG was abusing. The government ignored all of them. Now we find out that the government benefited to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. This at a time when electricity prices were skyrocketing, 600,000 Ontarians were behind on their bills and 60,000 were being cut off.
Speaker, four ministers were warned, and three of them are still in Premier Wynne’s cabinet. How much would electricity ratepayers have to be out before the Premier finally held someone accountable?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Abuses within the system are completely unacceptable. That’s why the system operator has investigated those market participants. Where significant wrongdoing was present, compensation has been recovered and returned to ratepayers; $168 million of the $200 million in ineligible costs have been recovered by the IESO.
The total annual costs for the Real-Time Generation Cost Guarantee program are now $23 million, down significantly from $61 million in 2014. Also, according to the December 2016 market surveillance panel report, many of the most problematic issues associated with the congestion management settlement credits regime have been brought to an end, in large measure as a result of the panel having identified these situations and the IESO having acted to eliminate them.
The Auditor General says that our system operator doesn’t act when the board’s market surveillance panel makes a recommendation, but the panel itself disagreed.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Mr. Todd Smith: The energy minister said a lot right there, but what he didn’t say was that he was going to go back and try to get the $92 million that’s still outstanding. Electricity customers in Ontario have overpaid by that much, and energy minister after energy minister after energy minister after energy minister—four of them—and two Premiers sat by idly and did nothing, despite the warnings.
As late as September 2016, IESO was still being told at public meetings that this program was a problem. When we tried to have the justice committee review the IESO this October, what did the government do? They said no and stood firmly against accountability. The Liberals didn’t want electricity customers to know that they were benefiting from this abuse of the program.
Speaker, the Premier has shown that she thinks she’s above accountability. Does she actually think she’s above the law, too?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: As stated before, abuses within the system are completely unacceptable. That’s why we have our system operator act on these programs and that’s why the system operator investigated those market participants, where there was significant market wrongdoing present. Compensation has been recovered and has been returned to ratepayers. One of the most egregious was fined a record $10 million to make sure that we can recoup those costs for all ratepayers.
But again, Mr. Speaker, more program updates are on the way in the form of market renewal. That again is rebuilding the foundation, which will also increase the flexibility and efficiency within Ontario’s electricity market. The market renewal initiative is expected to result in a more competitive marketplace that meets our system needs while increasing flexibility and efficiencies, and we’ll always rely on the OEB and the system operator to keep the system in check.
Small business
Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is also for the Premier. Last week, the member from Barrie lashed out at small business owners concerned about the impact of a 32% increase in the minimum wage. She told business owners that they shouldn’t be operating if they can’t afford it. A member of this government thinks struggling business owners should just shut up and close their doors.
Speaker, is that the official position of this government, or will the Premier insist that the member from Barrie apologize to all struggling business owners across this province?
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. Be seated, please. Thank you.
Premier?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As the member opposite—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): This could be the beginning.
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: As the member opposite knows, I was not here last week; I was actually overseas, in China, Hong Kong and Vietnam. Over $2 billion worth of economic activity, over 2,000 new jobs for Ontario: It was a very successful trade mission.
I am, however, very happy to be back to answer the member opposite’s question and to say that even though I wasn’t here, I am 100% certain that the member for Barrie supports small business in her community and across the province. She also supports a fair society where people can earn a living wage, look after themselves and look after their families.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. Start the clock—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Tut-tut—just calming everything down.
Supplementary?
Mr. John Yakabuski: Back to the Premier: Shockingly, that wasn’t the most ridiculous comment the member made that day. Lawrence Vindum is closing his butcher shop because he can’t afford to operate in Liberal Ontario. The member from Barrie responds by alleging he is closing his shop and blaming the Liberals why? Because he’s a Progressive Conservative. She believes Mr. Vindum is going out of business because of some grand PC Party conspiracy to blame it on the Liberals. That is absolutely ludicrous.
Mr. Vindum is heartbroken because his former employees are without jobs weeks before Christmas. Her comments were disrespectful. They were shameful. Mr. Vindum deserves an apology and an explanation. We’d love to hear that right now.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Be Thank you.
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We are thrilled that there are small businesses and medium-sized businesses across this province that are thriving. In fact, there were 100 delegates who travelled with us on our trade mission. There was one young man—his name is Chad Jakeman, and he processes maple syrup—who went to Vietnam with us. He signed a deal in Vietnam to bring Canadian Ontario maple syrup into Vietnam.
That’s a small business, and we are doing everything in our power to support small businesses. We are also working to make sure that the people who shop at those small businesses, the people who are the customers of those small businesses, can look after themselves, can feed their families and can actually go into those businesses in Barrie and across the province and buy the products that those small businesses are selling.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Mr. John Yakabuski: Back to the Premier: The member from Barrie isn’t alone. She might truly believe that businesses should close if they can’t afford to operate under your government’s policies. Her colleague from Mississauga–Streetsville called the people who feel the impact of Bill 148 “bad actor” employers. The member from Beaches–East York said that they need to rethink their business plans. The Minister of Labour said that they should simply raise their prices.
It’s clear the Liberal policy is to tell business owners in Ontario, “It’s our way or the highway.” They don’t care about the jobs these businesses provide, and they don’t care if these businesses close. Speaker, how many other Liberal members have told businesses in their ridings just to simply close their doors?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I really believe that underlying this question is another question, and that is, does this member and does this party support a minimum wage that is a living wage? Do you support $14 an hour? Do you support $15 an hour?
The reality is, our economy is thriving. Ontario is leading economic growth in the country. Now is the time to increase the minimum wage so that people who are struggling to get by actually can make ends meet. I think it’s important that the party opposite make it clear to the people of Ontario whether they support an increased minimum wage or whether they do not support an increased minimum wage.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Be seated, please.
The signalling has been very clear. We’re in warnings, and I’m all over it.
New question.
Energy policies
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Does the Premier believe that prepaid hydro meters belong in Ontario? Does she believe we should have prepaid hydro meters in this province?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Protecting Ontario’s energy consumers and ensuring greater fairness across the energy system are the top priorities of this government. Hydro One, as we said before, over the last few weeks—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Lanark–Frontenac–Lennox and Addington is warned.
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As was said before, Hydro One is exploring this technology as an effort to ensure more customer choice. This is part of a proposal that is before the Ontario Energy Board, who have to approve this technology before it’s even allowed to be used. The Ontario Energy Board makes decisions and rules to ensure that consumers are treated fairly, and they will factor this in when they make their decision about this new technology.
But let me repeat, Mr. Speaker: Even if this technology is ever approved by the Ontario Energy Board, customers will have to opt in to be part of this program. Also, no residential customer will be without power during the winter months, regardless of any type of meter they choose to have in the future.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Hydro One has filed paperwork to force families who are already struggling with sky-high hydro bills to feed the meter before they can turn on their lights. I want to ban prepaid meters from Ontario. That’s why, this afternoon, I will be introducing a bill to do exactly that. Will the Premier of this province agree and support a ban on prepaid hydro meters in our province?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Again, even if this technology is approved by the OEB—and the OEB will review this. The OEB’s mandate is to ensure that they have the ratepayers’ best interests at heart. Even if they were to actually approve this, customers will then have the—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Timmins–James Bay is warned.
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Again, Mr. Speaker, then it’s up to the customers to choose if this is something they would like. If this is something that they want, then the customer can opt in to be part of this program. Also, as stated, no residential customer will be without power during the winter months.
This is just one of the initiatives, the options, that Hydro One is examining to offer their customers more choice on how they can manage their electricity accounts. It’s important to note that this project, again, is still being reviewed by the OEB.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Prepaid utility meters were installed in homes across the UK under Margaret Thatcher. They were so disastrous for families that they subsequently banned them from that country, yet this Liberal Premier seems bent on allowing privatized Hydro One to use prepaid meters here in Ontario.
A lot of people might be surprised and disappointed to see the Premier following in the footsteps of Margaret Thatcher. But, then again, I don’t remember her campaigning on selling off Hydro One either.
Will this Premier do the right thing and agree to ban prepaid Margaret Thatcher-style hydro meters in our province?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: When that party had the opportunity to do the right thing and vote in favour of giving everyone a 25% reduction, they voted against it. It was this party—it was this government—that introduced the Energy Consumer Protection Act and updated it in 2015 by banning door-to-door sales for energy contracts, increasing consumer representation in the Ontario Energy Board proceedings and enhancing the authority of the OEB to further protect electricity ratepayers by boosting consumer protection.
We have made sure that we’ve acted on behalf of the people of Ontario. We’ve brought forward initiatives that will protect them and we’ve brought forward a program that actually reduced their rates by 25%, and even more if they’re low-income individuals or individuals who live in rural or northern parts of the province.
On that side of the House, they’re talking about a pie-in-the-sky program that didn’t even consider First Nations or low-income individuals. We acted to make sure that we protected those people.
Energy policies
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. The privatized Hydro One has applied for many rate increases already, including a plan that will hurt First Nations communities in the Far North. It’s also planning to invest more than $6 billion in a dirty, coal-burning American power company, instead of putting that money to work right here in Ontario upgrading our power system for Ontario families. And now, instead of respecting the ban on wintertime disconnections, Hydro One is trying to find a way around it.
Why is this Premier still defending this private, for-profit company that so clearly is not working in the best interests of families and businesses in Ontario?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: There is no way around the law. Hydro One cannot find a way around the winter disconnection program. The law is in place. There will be no winter disconnections once it starts. They make it up as they go along; that’s very clear.
When it comes to Avista, as we said before, rates won’t be affected here in Ontario. It won’t affect local jobs either and it doesn’t affect the maintenance that Hydro One is doing day to day in Ontario, making sure that we have some of the cleanest and most reliable power in North America because we no longer have coal on our system and we’re working to continue to have a partner. That’s what Hydro One is doing.
When you look at Avista, they’ve made sure that they’re lowering their consumption. But when it comes to being the tip of the spear, everyone looks to Ontario to be the example that they want to represent.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Last week the Minister of Economic Development and Growth said this about prepay hydro meters: They’re “not evil. There’s nothing that affects vulnerable people in any way about this.”
That’s not true. When someone gets behind on their hydro payments right now, the hydro companies will work with that person. They’ll work with that family to try to find an appropriate repayment
schedule that works with that person’s budget. But with the prepay meter, the option is completely removed. It’s either feed the meter or go without power. That’s what’s going to happen.
How can this Premier actually endorse a plan that means vulnerable families could actually have their hydro cut off?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: It was this Premier who actually created a plan, who worked on a plan that actually helped low-income families reduce their bills by 25% or even more, and it’s that party that voted against it. It’s this Premier and this government that worked on a plan that brought forward a 40% to 50% reduction for those northern and rural customers, and it’s that party that voted against it.
When it comes to protecting ratepayers, when it comes to having the best interests of the people of Ontario at heart, it’s this Premier and this government. The actions that we have taken are representative of that fact. When the opposition can continue to vote against things and fearmonger, that’s the scary thing because, at the end of the day, there is no such plan in place.
It is being looked at right now. The OEB is considering it. And if it is considered by the OEB, then it is an opt-in program. People will choose it if it is of benefit to them, and nobody else.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Prepay meters are also extremely expensive to install. This Liberal government has already wasted millions on not-so-smart meters; I can’t understand why they would want to repeat that unfortunate incident again.
The bottom line is that the private energy system in Ontario isn’t working for families or businesses in this province. Rates have gone up 300% under this government, power producers are gaming Liberal energy regulators for millions and the private Hydro One wants to install prepay meters that would hurt vulnerable Ontarians.
Will this Premier support a ban on Margaret Thatcher-style prepay hydro meters in our province?
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.
Minister?
Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Once again, I need to repeat that there is no prepaid plan coming into place. The OEB is reviewing it, and they will then make a decision.
If the decision of the OEB is to allow this to move forward, they will then do this making sure that they’re keeping the best interests of ratepayers at heart. It is their mandate to make sure that they keep costs as low as possible for all ratepayers.
If they do decide to do this—and that’s our quasi-judicial organization that makes sure that they look at the impacts that this will have on ratepayers. If they make that decision, then it is still the customer’s choice if this is something that they want to do.
There is no backroom movement like the NDP constantly say will happen; this is a plan that people will have an opportunity to choose to do if it actually gets approved and moved forward by the OEB. There still is nothing moving forward on this.
Government fiscal policies
Mr. Victor Fedeli: My question is for the Premier. This morning, the Financial Accountability Office released another indictment of this government. They said, “Additional measures to raise revenue or lower spending will be required if the province intends to achieve ... a balanced budget.”
The Premier called the media from China to say that she can’t understand how anyone can find any savings, yet last week, the Auditor General found $1 billion in savings in one report alone in just 14 programs. Speaker, the PC plan will look to save two cents on every dollar that is spent.
To the Premier: Why is this government mired in waste, scandal and mismanagement instead of helping Ontario’s families?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I want to thank the FAO for his report. He actually confirms that Ontario’s economy is growing, and he expects this growth to continue. He also confirmed that under the accounting presentation that we’ve been using for the last 16 years, the budget is balanced and, in fact, there’s a small surplus for 2017-18. So the report actually shows that our plan is working: The economy is growing, our unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in 17 years and more than 843,000 net new jobs have been created since the recession.
But the fact is that we continue to work to create more fairness in this province. The reality is that there are still people who are not feeling the benefit of that economic growth. That’s exactly why we’re raising the minimum wage, exactly why OHIP+ will be in place as of January 1, and it’s—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?
Mr. Victor Fedeli: Back to the Premier: Well, the FAO delivered a blistering indictment, so it’s obvious that the Premier read a different report than everybody else.
The PC plan is different from the Liberal plan. The Financial Accountability Office said that the government must either raise revenues or lower spending. The Ontario PC plan will find two cents on every dollar through eliminating waste this government doesn’t even believe exists.
The Premier says savings are impossible. Well, if they can’t see how to lower spending, Speaker, then the Premier must be raising taxes. To the Premier: Will we know before or after the election which taxes they intend to raise?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is part of a party that has promised that they would cut $12 billion out of health care and education and services in this province—$12 billion. That would mean that in every community across this province the impact of those cuts would be felt. So if the member opposite is asking whether we support cutting $12 billion out of programs and services in this province, the answer is no.
We’re very appreciative of the FAO’s report. We’re very appreciative that he recognizes the economic growth that we’re seeing in this province, that he recognizes that the budget is balanced.
We’re going to continue to invest in the province and not cut $12 billion out of—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock.
Be seated, please.
New question.
Hospital services
M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la première ministre.
Last week, Holly Pothiah went to Brampton Civic Hospital. She was diagnosed with pneumonia. At that very scary moment, when she needed a hospital bed, she was told that Brampton Civic Hospital was too overcrowded and could not take any more patients.
Just imagine, Speaker, having pneumonia and being told that you can’t get a hospital bed, being told that the hospital is so overcrowded that it cannot help you.
Holly was sent by ambulance to the emergency department at Etobicoke General Hospital. That’s where she spent two days and a night, in a crowded hallway with many other patients and a warning sign rather than an isolation room.
Why is this Premier letting down people like Holly by failing to stop the crisis of hallway medicine inside Ontario’s overcrowded hospitals?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Deputy Premier.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you for this question.
We strive to have the very best health care system in the country. We actually do have the very best health care system in the country. But we know we constantly need to respond to increases in population, to other factors that increase demand on hospitals. That is exactly why we’re investing $140 million in the hospital, home and community sectors to open new beds, new spaces to meet the needs of patients and build capacity across the continuum.
We have an excellent health care system. People in Ontario rely on it. They know it is excellent. But we need to be constantly responding to the changing demand, and that’s exactly what we are doing.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
M me France Gélinas: The Premier’s temporary beds are not a real solution. Holly knows that. Respected health care experts are saying the exact same thing.
Dr. Paul Pageau, president of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, says that funding for temporary beds “doesn’t seem to match up with what a normal hospital bed would be funded at.”
Dr. Doris Grinspun, CEO of RNAO, says, “We will not succeed to staff those surge capacity beds because people want permanent full-time work,” not part-time positions that only last a few months.
Why won’t this Premier listen to the patients, listen to the leaders in health care and fund the permanent beds, with full-time nurses, that Ontario needs to stop this dangerous overcrowding in our hospitals?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Maybe these numbers speak for themselves: We’re making over 2,000 additional beds and spaces available this year to improve access to care for patients and families and to reduce wait times. That includes 1,200 additional hospital beds. That is the equivalent of building six new hospitals.
In addition to that, we’re building affordable housing for seniors who need additional support so they can get out of the hospital and into a home and make room for someone who needs that hospital care.
We’re creating transitional care spaces for up to 1,700 patients who don’t require care in a hospital.
We’re reopening 150 beds at Humber River Hospital—a decision that party ridiculed, Speaker—and 75 more beds at UHN’s former health care site.
We are committed to ensuring excellent care.
International trade
Ms. Soo Wong: My question is for the Minister of International Trade. Along with my residents of Scarborough–Agincourt, I was closely watching the government’s trade mission to China and Vietnam. These missions are always exciting because they not only promote Ontario on a global scale; they bring foreign investment, fuel economic growth and enhance research collaboration. They also highlight the great talent we’re building right here in Ontario.
With greater access to diverse markets come greater opportunities for Ontario businesses, workers and consumers. In Ontario alone, Mr. Speaker, international exports account for 36% of the GDP. Scarborough–Agincourt residents know that diversifying our trading partners with the goods and services in which we trade is paramount. Our government’s plan to diversify our trade is an integral part of a prosperous Ontario and we are now seeing this being implemented right now.
Speaker, through you to the minister, can he please share with the House the success of the recent trade mission to China and Vietnam?
Hon. Michael Chan: Speaker, it’s great to be home. I’d like to thank the member from Scarborough–Agincourt for asking this question. Now, more than ever, Ontario’s priority must lie in diversifying our trade routes. It is why the Premier and I, along with a delegation of over 100 businesses, travelled to China and Vietnam. This was the first Premier-led mission to China and Ontario’s first ever trade mission to Vietnam.
Delegates met with local companies and institutions through the many business-to-business sessions and site visits. This mission spanned seven different cities, with focused delegations in medical technologies, science and technology, and the agri-food sector. Speaker, overall, the trade mission illustrated Ontario’s world-class education system, our competitive business environment, talented workforce, and leadership in developing innovative technologies.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Soo Wong: Thank you to the minister for his response. It is remarkable to hear Ontario is expanding its global footprint. I know that such achievements positively affect all of Ontario and especially my constituents of Scarborough–Agincourt. With China being Ontario’s second-largest single-nation trading partner and Vietnam a growing nation bursting with potential, Ontario is taking full advantage through our trade missions to create new relationships and strengthen existing bonds.
I was very excited, Mr. Speaker, to hear Ontario held meetings with BYD, Geneseeq and Johnson Electric. These businesses have committed to continue growing their businesses here in Ontario, fundamentally demonstrating a stronger confidence in our economy and our talented workforce. These trade missions are tangible evidence of our province and Ontario businesses working together to demonstrate opportunities for growth here in Ontario.
Speaker, through you to the minister, can he please inform the House of the achievements made during this trade mission that will directly affect Ontario’s workforce?
Hon. Michael Chan: I’m very, very proud to announce that Ontario companies and institutions signed an unprecedented amount of agreements valued at about $2.3 billion to create an expected 2,300 jobs in our province.
Speaker, I would like to highlight a few of our accomplishments:
(1) A subsidiary of Feihe International will set up Kingston’s first baby formula production facility which will create up to 277 jobs.
(2) Xinyi Glass Holdings has selected Ontario for its North American facility with a $450-million investment.
(3) Amway China will be hosting their 25th anniversary leadership seminar in Ontario. This event is expected to bring 10,000 people here to Ontario.
Our government is at the forefront of business and we are prepared to navigate new opportunities.
Hospital funding
Mr. Michael Harris: My question is to the Premier. As our St. Mary’s hospital cardiac care providers earn national recognition for some of the best cardiac services in Canada, patients in Waterloo region are wondering where their Liberal government is to support those services. January will mark another calendar year with patients still facing long wait times before getting bused out of the region for cardiac electrophysiology. It also marks five years—five years—since the Liberal government promised funding for an urgently needed, still-undelivered EP lab at St. Mary’s.
Speaker, the People’s Guarantee prioritizes cardiac care with a commitment to expand cardiac centres in the province. Will the Premier end the dangerous waiting game and commit to expand Waterloo region cardiac care, shovels in the ground, for the St. Mary’s EP lab before the year is out—2017?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Deputy Premier.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Speaker, I know that the minister will be more than happy to answer the specifics of St. Mary’s, but I do know that is a project that is under way.
I know the member opposite will be very interested to hear, generally speaking, about our health care system and how we’re doing when it comes to wait times. The Fraser Institute has recently announced how Ontario is doing relative to other provinces. We are only one of two provinces in Canada to improve from 2016 to 2017. We have the shortest wait times from GP to specialist, the shortest wait times in the country from specialist to treatment. We have the shortest wait times for CT scans and the shortest wait times for MRIs.
We have the shortest wait times for ultrasounds, the shortest wait times for radiation oncology, the shortest wait times for general surgery and the shortest wait times for gynecological procedures. I know the—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?
Mr. Michael Harris: Well, cardiac patients in the Waterloo Wellington LHIN and surrounding area are continuing to wait and wait and wait. And so, how many times do we have to stand up—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. The member from Kitchener Centre is warned.
Question?
Mr. Michael Harris: How many times do we have to stand up to this Liberal government just to get the vital services that they in fact committed to in 2012? How many more patient bus trips out of the region? How many more rides will this government take us on that end back where we started?
Despite ministry staff admitting that yes, there would be a letter at the time approving the project last year, no tenders have gone out to move us ahead. In fact, since then, the ministry has used a separate St. Mary’s request on top of the undelivered EP lab as an excuse to move the entire project right back to the starting line.
Let me make this simple to the Premier: This cardiac EP lab had already been approved. The Liberals promised it back in 2012 and again in 2016. Will the Premier tell the people of Waterloo region exactly when their promised critical care cardiac lab will be up and running? When?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Speaker, as I said, this is a project that is moving forward. We have put $7 million and the tendering work is under way. But let’s think about what would happen under a PC government if they were to be elected. They have promised $12 billion in cuts. Some of that must come from health care. They’ve promised 15,000 long-term-care beds, but have allocated money for 1,000. Promised 15,000, and money for—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I have a handful I could actually warn.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: They promised to make a historic investment in mental—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry is warned.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: They promised a historic investment in mental health. That investment is one fraction—one fifth—of what we have done over the last 10 years. The only thing historic about it is that it’s historically—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question?
College students
Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier. Students across Ontario will forever remember 2017 as the year they gave up their dreams of a college education because of the Premier’s refusal to use her influence and legislative authority to facilitate college collective bargaining. Following the December 5 deadline for tuition refunds, the media is—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. The member from Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale is warned. Finish.
Ms. Peggy Sattler: The media is reporting that thousands of college students have asked for their money back and are dropping out altogether. We don’t know exactly how many because the government is stalling on releasing the tuition refund numbers nearly a week after the deadline.
Speaker, Ontarians deserve to know the full impact of this government’s inaction to end the college strike. Will the Premier release the tuition refund numbers today?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know that the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills Development is going to want to speak to the specifics, but let me just say that I know that there are students and professors and instructors all over the province who are working to make up that time. It was unfortunate that students were out of the classroom; I know that they are working very, very hard to get all of that work in place.
But I think what’s interesting is that a member of the New Democratic Party is proposing that we should have used legislative authority earlier in the process to undercut the collective bargaining process. That really is a pretty counterintuitive position for an NDP member to take.
I just want to say, Mr. Speaker, that we support all of the young people, all the students who are working hard now, and we wish them all the best. There is funding, and I know the minister will speak to that in the supplementary.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Peggy Sattler: I want the Premier to know that facilitating collective bargaining is very different from legislating workers back.
Speaker, here’s what we know from the media: More than 1,500 students have withdrawn from Centennial and one third have no plans to return; close to 2,000 students have withdrawn from Fanshawe and about half do not plan to return; 1,200 students have withdrawn from Conestoga; 1,200 from St. Clair; 1,100 from Georgian; nearly 1,000 each from Mohawk and Niagara; and almost 1,200 students from the five northern Ontario colleges, which is more than double the average attrition rate. There’s likely to be another wave of withdrawals before semester two, from students who attempted the first semester but struggled with the compressed content.
Speaker, think of the huge loss of talent this represents. Does this Liberal government have a plan to support these students to return to college?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Advanced Education and Skills Development.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: I have to say I am mystified by this question, because that was the party who time and time again voted against getting students back to the classroom. That’s what they did. Everyone was here. Hansard actually records that the NDP, on record—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from London West is warned. Your seatmate is there too, pretty close.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: The NDP is, on one hand, on record as saying that they would never legislate back, ever, so we’d still have a strike. Then we hear we should have used those legislative tools earlier and legislated them back earlier.
The important thing is, the students suffered from this. We’ve given them the opportunity to do what is right for them. Some of them have chosen to withdraw, and they got full tuition refunds. They can restart. We are encouraging that. We want them back in college and colleges want them back, so we’re going to work together to get students who did choose to drop out to—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question?
Affaires francophones
Est-ce que la ministre des Affaires francophones peut nous rappeler notre engagement envers la communauté franco-ontarienne?
L’hon. Marie-France Lalonde: J’aimerais remercier le député d’Etobicoke-Nord pour sa question.
Monsieur le Président, c’est notre gouvernement, le gouvernement de Kathleen Wynne, qui travaille avec les Franco-Ontariens.
Le Président (L’hon. Dave Levac): Question?
M. Shafiq Qaadri: Premièrement, monsieur le Président, je voudrais remercier la ministre pour sa « dédication » et aussi pour cette liste substantielle pour les francophones de l’Ontario.
Avec ce que vient de nous dire la ministre des Affaires francophones, il n’y a aucun doute dans mon esprit que c’est avec notre gouvernement que les francophones sont les mieux positionnés. Ce gouvernement continue de démontrer son engagement concret envers les Franco-Ontariens et les Franco-Ontariennes.
Est-ce que la ministre des Affaires francophones peut nous en dire davantage sur l’importance des Franco-Ontariens pour notre gouvernement?
L’hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Encore une fois, je remercie le député d’Etobicoke-Nord pour cette question. Dans son cheminement, il a toujours été la voix des francophones pour sa communauté et partout en Ontario.
Je veux vous assurer que de notre côté, notre gouvernement, nous nous sommes engagés de manière concrète envers la communauté francophone.
Mental health services
Ms. Sylvia Jones: My question is for the Premier. This morning’s Globe and Mail
article reinforced what many of us have known for years: If you need mental health care in Ontario, you will end up on a waiting list.
According to a study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, the majority of people treated in emergency after a suicide attempt are not seen by a psychiatrist for six months. Mental health needs to be treated as seriously as physical health. Yet, in Ontario, people are waiting months for their first appointment.
Under the People’s Guarantee, the Progressive Conservative Party has made a commitment of $1.9 billion additionally for mental health services. Understanding that people are not getting the care they need when they need it, will the Premier match our commitment?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know that the Deputy Premier will want to comment in the supplementary, but the fact is that the promise that the party opposite has made is woefully inadequate. Over the last 10 years, we’ve invested $10 billion. We will continue to invest in mental health supports across this province.
We know, Mr. Speaker, that there is more that has to be done. Over the last decade, there has been a huge increased awareness of mental health in this province, and quite frankly, across the country. We will continue to make record investments in mental health, as we have done for the last decade.
To suggest that $1.9 billion is adequate as an increase over the next number of years—it’s just not. It’s not adequate, and we need to continue to make increased investments.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Sylvia Jones: If you don’t think $1.9 billion in additional funding for mental health services in Ontario is going to make a difference, you need to get out of Queen’s Park and talk to the—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): It’s an odd request of the member from the same place where the question is coming from not to heckle the member who’s asking the question—kind of odd.
Finish, please.
Ms. Sylvia Jones: You need to talk to the families who are desperate for help. You need to talk to the individuals who are waiting on those wait-lists, who have had a suicide attempt, Premier, and who don’t get to see anyone for six months.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): To the Chair, please.
Ms. Sylvia Jones: It’s $1.9 billion in additional funding for mental health. The study outlines that only 40% of those who attempted suicide saw a psychiatrist within six months of their emergency room visit. That’s 45,000 individuals in Ontario without the care they need when they need it. Ontarians’ mental health system is in crisis, and that’s why Patrick Brown and the PC Party have committed to the largest provincial investment in mental health in Canadian history. That—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Premier?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The fact is that mental health has been a hidden issue in the health care system for decades. That’s the reality. There’s actually no argument among any of us in this House that there needs to be increased funding, which is why over the last decade we have invested $10 billion.
We continue to increase the amount of funding that goes into mental health supports, so when I say that $1.9 billion is inadequate, I mean just that. I mean that there is going to need to be increased funding over the next—
Mr. John Yakabuski: Don’t misrepresent what our policy says.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke will withdraw.
Mr. John Yakabuski: Withdraw.
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation is warned. Anyone else want to comment? Good.
Premier, you may finish.
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, we recognize that there needs to be increased funding over the next decade, and we have made commitments. You can look at our record: $10 billion over the last 10 years, and that funding will continue to increase.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Over and above.
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: That is over and above the money that was committed. We will continue to invest in mental health, because it is increasingly a challenge across the province to meet the needs of—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.
New question.
Correctional facilities
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Two years ago, in 2015, a riot resulted in a hostage-taking of a corrections officer at the Thunder Bay jail. In May, the minister said that a new jail was coming to replace the badly overcrowded, wholly inadequate 100-year-old facility there.
How much longer do the corrections officers, the staff and the inmates have to continue to struggle in a jail that’s considered a powder keg?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.
Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: I thank the member for her question. Certainly every time an incident occurs in any of our institutions, it gives me great concern, and certainly a desire to see how we can improve the situation. When I look at the work in the past few months, we’ve worked very closely with each institution, and each of our correctional officers, men and women, the correctional staff who work in our institutions, in improving and in working together.
We committed to transformational change. We made a commitment to bring forward a brand new facility in Thunder Bay, and we are working very closely with local representatives from the jail and area individuals. For me, moving forward in corrections means transformation, and not only just saying it, but acting on it.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, there was a rally last week in Thunder Bay, because nothing has changed in terms of the conditions of that jail. When I was in Thunder Bay last week, I learned that all of the conditions that led to the riot, the hostage-taking and the years-long isolation of Adam Capay still exist at the Thunder Bay jail.
The 100-year-old Thunder Bay jail is not designed for the number of inmates that it houses. There are staff shortages, inadequate equipment and no sign that this Liberal government is doing anything but pushing the problem down the road. When can the people of Thunder Bay expect shovels in the ground on their new facility?
Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Mr. Speaker, let me be very, very clear: We have agreed that the system needed to change. The system needs improvement. We have not shied away from this. This is actually why we brought in an independent reviewer, Mr. Howard Sapers, who brought us recommendations, and we are working through those recommendations, not only acknowledging that we need to bring infrastructure to the system, but also bringing new legislation, changing the way we identify, for instance, segregation.
I was also very proud of being part of an award recognition the Premier and I attended, where we recognized the great, courageous work that took place on that special night in Thunder Bay, with all these wonderful workers that worked that night. We did this because we appreciate and value the work. We made the announcement for new infrastructure, and we will be moving forward in that transformation.
Climate change
Ms. Ann Hoggarth: My question is for the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Last month, leaders from around the world attended the COP 23 in Germany to discuss solutions to climate change. The Minister of the Environment and Climate Change was in attendance and was able to share Ontario’s environmental initiatives on the world stage.
The minister participated in the first international meeting of the Powering Past Coal Alliance and was able to showcase Ontario’s actions to eliminate coal, including shutting down coal-fired generation in Ontario. That action alone is one of the largest-ever greenhouse gas reduction initiatives in North America. It’s equivalent to taking seven million vehicles off the roads.
Can the minister please describe Ontario’s role as an international leader in reducing smog and greenhouse gas emissions?
Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you to the hard-working member from Barrie for her very important question. Last month, I was honoured to stand with our federal government and international partners in making a commitment to phase out the use of coal to generate power. I was especially proud to represent a jurisdiction that has made it a top priority to reduce carbon in the production of our electricity. Thanks to our leadership, Ontario’s electricity system is more than 90% free of greenhouse gas pollution.
In fact, since shutting down coal-fired generation in Ontario, we’ve seen a dramatic increase in the quality of air. In 2005, there were 53 smog advisories issued in Ontario. In 2016, there were zero. Phasing out coal has saved Ontario $4.4 billion a year in health, environmental and financial impacts. I’m really proud of Ontario.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Thank you to the minister for the answer. Ontario is recognized as a global leader in taking tough action to fight climate change. Through actions like implementing a cap on pollution, we can collaborate with other provinces and states to achieve meaningful emission reductions.
While some politicians refuse to believe that climate change is real and a threat, let alone take action, subnational governments like Ontario are leading the way in the fight to save our planet. Can the minister please explain how Ontario is setting the example for other jurisdictions around the world to take serious, meaningful action on tackling climate change?
Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you again to the member from Barrie for that question. As the member mentioned, Ontario is a global leader in fighting climate change. We’re proud to be leading the way with a plan that guarantees emission reductions at the cheapest price possible for Ontarians. We’re investing millions of dollars in green programs like home retrofits, bike lanes, and incentives for businesses to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. Our plan encourages innovation and it drives investment to help Ontario continue to be a leader in the low-carbon economy.
Meanwhile, the opposition scheme would cost members of the public, families and businesses significantly more money. Our plan is helping Ontarians make more sustainable and affordable choices and guarantees a greener future for Ontario.
Health care funding
Mr. Jeff Yurek: My question is to the Premier. Last week’s annual report from the Auditor General continues to shine the light on this government’s waste and mismanagement. It was revealed that this government pays more for generic drugs than some Ontario hospitals, up to 85% more. That’s an extra $271 million in taxpayers’ dollars being spent on medication due to this government’s inability to properly manage the system. That money could have gone to fund rare-disease drugs or take-home cancer medication. Perhaps the government needs to switch priorities and have the hospitals negotiate generic drugs on their behalf.
Can the Premier explain to the House why the people of Ontario continue to pay more and receive less from this government?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Deputy Premier.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you to the member for this question.
We are determined to get better prices for our drugs. That’s why Ontario took a leadership role when we cut the price of generic drugs in half for all Ontarians. That was a policy that the member for Elgin–Middlesex–London actually opposed, and he ran for the Progressive Conservative Party because he opposed it that much. So I just don’t think he has a lot of credibility when it comes to supporting the reduction of the price of drugs.
Speaker, we have established a pan-Canadian pharmaceutical pricing network, so if we work as a country, we will continue to drive prices down. And of course, bringing in pharmacare for all people under age 25 will also give us more buying power, which will reduce the price of drugs in the future.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Jeff Yurek: Back to the Premier: When this government wants to go low and personal attack, I’ll go high and just go with—
Interjections.
Mr. Jeff Yurek: Speaker, this government’s track record when it comes to waste and mismanagement is truly astonishing, but I think they’ve outdone themselves with this report.
In 2015-16, the Ministry of Health purchased nearly $1 million in prescription drugs for those who were already deceased. Only $42,000 of that $1 million was recovered by the ministry, which resulted in the taxpayers being on the hook for over $950,000.
This government refuses to pay for take-home cancer treatments for the seriously ill and yet is fine with spending $1 million on prescriptions for the dead.
Will the Premier apologize for this gross oversight to those who continue to struggle to pay for medications, to pay for cancer treatments, to pay for rare-disease drugs in Ontario?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: I don’t consider it a personal attack when someone is on the record as opposing the reduction—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): It’s never too late. The member from Nepean–Carleton is warned.
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Speaker, as I was saying, I do not consider it a personal attack when someone is on the record as opposing the reduction in generic drugs in this province. That is a fact. That is not a personal attack.
The work that we’ve done on the Ontario-led pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance has successfully lowered drug prices for people in Ontario and in the country, saving $1 billion each and every year. The cuts we made to the price of generic drugs are saving $500 million a year—it might be more now; that was the number a few years ago. There is more work to do.
And of course, the member opposite knows, because he is a pharmacist, that sometimes there are drugs for people, in the last days of their life, that are not used.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): There are no deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.
The House recessed from 1143 to 1300.
Wearing of shirt
Mr. Mike Colle: A point of order, Mr. Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to allow me to wear a Toronto FC shirt for the afternoon proceedings.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Eglinton–Lawrence is seeking unanimous consent to wear the Toronto FC jersey this afternoon. Do we agree? Agreed.
I want to see you put it on.
Introduction of Visitors
Ms. Harinder Malhi: I’d like to take the opportunity to introduce residents from my riding of Brampton–Springdale: the Dhaliwal family, as well as Mr. Dhaliwal’s sister, who is visiting us here from India today—Mrs. Lakhvar Kaur.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Glad you’re with us.
Further introductions? Seeing no further introductions, it’s therefore time for members’ statements. The member from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry.
Mr. Jim McDonell: Thank you, Speaker. I want to give a shout-out to the great people of my riding—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Sorry; we have a point of order.
M me France Gélinas: I seek unanimous consent to allow the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs to consider amendments on funding for Centre Jules-Léger and establishment of the proposed francophone university.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Nickel Belt is seeking unanimous consent to allow the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs to consider amendments on funding of the Centre Jules-Léger and establishment of the proposed francophone university. Do we agree? I heard a no.
Members’ Statements
Charity events in Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry
Mr. Jim McDonell: I want to give a big shout-out to the great people of my riding of Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry, who, time and time again, donate their time and money to bring the spirit of Christmas to all.
Yesterday, the South Stormont fire department held their annual food drive, where people in the community were so generous. The Benson Centre and the Benson Group, along with the Cornwall Colts, held the annual charity hockey game, raising $4,500 for the St. Vincent de Paul society. In the morning, the Optimist Club held their Breakfast with Santa.
Speaker, in community after community, volunteers gather to help make this time of year better for all, especially those in need. On Friday, we had the schools involved, bringing in thousands of pounds of food that will go towards the food banks and for baskets for individual families. The city of Cornwall, along with many of the small communities in my riding, organize Santa Claus parades, where local businesses, service clubs and individuals come together to truly put on a great show for the little ones.
There is so much more: the CP Holiday Train, raising funds for hunger awareness; the Salvation Army Christmas food baskets; the Sparky Toy Drive by the city of Cornwall’s fire department; the Snowsuit Fund; Christmas day meals for those who are alone or in need, and much, much more.
It is with great pride that I want to thank all the volunteers of Stormont, Dundas and South Glengarry for the huge difference they make in people’s lives, whether it be at Christmas or throughout the year.
Order and decorum in chamber
Mr. Percy Hatfield: All I want for Christmas—and Hansard, please record this comment—is a day without heckling in our provincial Parliament.
I want to speak today about decorum
Here in this, our legislative forum.
I’d like to challenge a parliamentary tradition
To give our partisanship more acceptable definition.
Now, I may be committing political heresy
But I want to see a better example of our democracy.
No one was elected to come here and do nothing
but heckle ...
So why do we turn into Mr. and Mrs. Hyde
and then Dr. Jekyll?
It’s one thing to bellow out our dissent
But what about those we came here to represent?
Why do we look across the aisle and see a minister
or critic as a conspirator—
Then turn our daily question period into a circus of
political theatre?
Why not—for just one experimental day—
Forgo making what amounts sometimes as
political hay?
Why not a civilized discussion?
There’d still be room for political repercussion ...
Let’s go out on a limb and leave it to trust.
Why pretend arguments from the other side only
leave us with disgust?
Just one day—no heckling,
A more collegial reckoning.
Why must we always test the Speaker’s resolve?
Why do we get so personally involved
That we act as children yelling at recess out in
the yard ...
Hoping not to get named by the Speaker and
then barred?
Let’s for once in this parliamentary chamber
Spend just one day calmer and tamer.
We’ll still have questions asked, and then answered.
It’ll still be there in black and white on the pages
of Hansard.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I wrote that.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): See? Now they’re heckling the Speaker again.
Toronto FC
Mr. Mike Colle: I rise today to pay tribute to the Toronto FC soccer club.
As you know, this team, which represents Toronto but also represents Ontario and Canada, won the MLS Cup on Saturday afternoon. This is the first time a Canadian team has won that cup, which has competitors from all over North America. It is a wonderful team made up of players from all over the world, including Canadians. It has great superstars, like Jozy Altidore and Sebastian Giovinco.
And it has incredible fans. I don’t know if you’ve ever been to a game or have seen the FC on TV. The fans are so enthusiastic, passionate and real, and the players and management really appreciate the fans. I think that is quite unique in sport, where the fans are as big a part of the team as the players are.
Hats off to this wonderful team of young men from all over the world who won the championship. It’s a tribute to their courage and their bravery. As you know, they lost last year to the same team in a shoot-out—the Seattle Sounders. This year, we brought the cup back to Canada and Toronto.
So hats off to Toronto FC. Congratulations, Toronto FC.
Perth county warden
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Speaker, I have the honour of serving 11 municipalities, including the counties of Perth and Wellington.
Last week, I had the pleasure of attending the Perth county warden’s election and inaugural reception.
For those who don’t know, the warden presides over county council—a sort of mayor of mayors, who helps bring together the shared interests of municipalities and advocate with one voice for Perth county. It’s a challenging role that involves managing the county’s budget and assets and charting out a strategic plan to build success in the future.
The new warden, West Perth mayor Walter McKenzie, is in the unique position of serving in this role twice. He was previously elected as warden in 1995.
On the subject of Walter’s long political career, St. Marys mayor Al Strathdee remarked: “Walter has been sort of a mentor of mine and a long-time political person, and recently I believe he celebrated 35 years in political service. Someone should have told him a life sentence in Canada is only 25 years.”
I would also like to thank the outgoing warden, Mert Schneider, for his excellent work over the last two years. He worked hard to expand Perth county’s agricultural and other key industries and helped make our community an even better place to live and work.
As county council prepares for a new session, I look forward to working with the new warden, all council members and dedicated staff.
Winter road maintenance
Mr. Michael Mantha: My statement today is: “The Liberal winter road maintenance program isn’t working.”
Here are some of the stories that we regularly see in our local newspapers across northern Ontario: “Highway 101 Open after Multiple Collisions”—multiple deaths; “Victim Identified in Fatal Collision” near Chapleau; “OPP Identify Man Killed in Wawa-Area Single Vehicle Crash”; “Man Dies in Collison on Highway 17, North of Wawa”; “Two Killed in Crash Near Massey; Three Others in Hospital”; “Driver Identified in Fatal Highway 17 Accident”; “Fatal Crash Closes Highway 17 at Whitefish”; “OPP Investigating Fatal Accident North of Elliot Lake”; “Two men died in a head-on collision in Sudbury”; “Multi-Vehicle Crash Closes Highway 17”; “Three Vehicle Crash North of the Sault”; Two-Vehicle Collision Snarls Highway Traffic.”
I think you get the picture, Mr. Speaker. It just isn’t working. When are they going to change the winter road maintenance program?
Just recently, Paul Beauregard, a truck driver, showed an incident that happened across one of our highways in northern Ontario. It’s absolutely unacceptable that people should be put under those circumstances.
My friend and colleague from Timiskaming–Cochrane—in south Temagami they lost a death just a few weeks ago. Up in Copper Cliff, the member from Nickel Belt—they lost some deaths.
Highways 101, 144, 17 and 129 are all under winter road maintenance concern. Just this morning, in McKerrow, another death. Enough is enough.
Investments in Etobicoke North
Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: I’m pleased to take this opportunity to speak about a number of remarkable investments that are being made in Etobicoke North, some of which are detailed, Speaker, in my calendar, which I’m not currently using as a prop, which will be distributed across the entire riding. These include, for example, the $2-billion expansion of transportation in my riding: the Finch West LRT, which has eight stops—eight stops—within my riding, all the way from Humber College/Highway 27 to Westmore, Martin Grove, Albion, Stevenson, Kipling and Islington.
This also includes a massive infrastructure expansion of Etobicoke General Hospital, part of the William Osler Health System. We’re looking at a $400-million expansion. This will quadruple—quadruple—the floor space, the footprint of that hospital.
There are a number of other initiatives, including, for example, the massive uptake of free tuition for folks making less than $50,000 a year for two- to four-year college and university tuition—particularly welcome, of course, at Humber College.
Speaker, there are a number of developments. As you will know, January 1, 2018, the minimum wage hits $14, and what’s especially welcome—and what I’m very pleased to share as a doctor—is a massive expansion of pharmacare, the biggest in a generation. We’re looking at, as you know, January 1, 2018: zero to 25 years of age. Medications: 4,400 of them will be free.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. The member did draw my attention to the fact that he read from his calendar, which indeed is a prop, and he won’t use it again.
St. Mary’s Regional Cardiac Care Centre
Mr. Michael Harris: It’s an honour to report on the world-class service at St. Mary’s Regional Cardiac Care Centre in Kitchener. Speaker, this weekend we learned that St. Mary’s was one out of only three hospitals out of the 38 cardiac centres to rank better than the national average on all quality indicators in a new Canadian Institute for Health Information report.
The hospital’s record for both successful bypasses and valve replacement well surpassed most other providers. As chief of cardiovascular services Dr. Brian McNamara indicated, the national recognition is “a team effort, and everybody has congratulations in order.” Surgeons, nurses, orderlies and those in admin are all to be congratulated.
Speaker, last year alone, St. Mary’s cardiac centre performed 5,400 cath procedures, 850 bypass and valve surgeries and 590 pacemaker insertions, as well as 10,000 outpatient clinic visits.
Dr. McNamara makes it clear that from the vigorous triage of patients before surgery to the procedures themselves and through excellent post-surgical care, credit is due to all who boost patient outcomes at St. Mary’s, but they’re always looking to do more.
I would add that behind our world-class cardiac staff, there is a very supportive St. Mary’s hospital foundation, and I want to especially thank our generous community and support for their generosity in supporting St. Mary’s cardiac care.
I, of course, encourage all who want to support our nationally recognized cardiac care centre to scroll over to SupportSt.Mary’s.ca, where “money raised, lives saved.”
Hanukkah
Mr. John Fraser: Tomorrow night, families across Ontario—and across Ottawa South, of course—will be lighting the first candle of Hanukkah. I just wanted to extend to my friends in Ottawa, Rabbi Scher and Rabbi Bulka of Congregation Machzikei Hadas, and all the families that are in that congregation, indeed, all the families across Ottawa and across Ontario who will be celebrating—I wish for all of them a joyous time with family, peace and happiness.
Speaker, I represent a riding that has families from over 125 different countries, who speak 90 languages and practise dozens of faiths. I feel very fortunate to represent the riding of Ottawa South. We live together and we work together, and definitely tomorrow night we will all celebrate together.
The Table Soup Kitchen Foundation
Mr. Norm Miller: During the Christmas season, many of us give to those less fortunate. I’d like to take this opportunity to talk about the Table Soup Kitchen Foundation in Huntsville, which operates a soup kitchen, food bank, exchange store and the only men’s shelter in Parry Sound–Muskoka.
While all of these services are very important, today I want to focus on the shelter. It opened one year ago this month, but its future is already in jeopardy. The shelter is funded exclusively by donations and, right now, they are facing a decision about whether they can afford to stay open after December 31. It is a small shelter with eight beds but, as I said, it is the only shelter for homeless men in the area.
Over the past year, this shelter has hosted 80 men. It offers not only a warm place to sleep but meals, access to laundry facilities and a sense of community to the men who stay there. The shelter opens daily at 6 p.m. and the men are required to leave by 8 a.m. The foundation would love to be able to offer day programs but right now they’re focused on keeping the doors open.
Many local businesses support this shelter. I want to recognize that just last week the Huntsville Canadian Tire store donated $10,000 to the Table Soup Kitchen. To donate to help save the men’s shelter, visit www.thetablefoundation.ca.
I want to encourage everyone to not only shop locally this holiday season but give locally and support important local charities like the Table Soup Kitchen Foundation.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I would like to thank all members for their statements.
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills
Mr. Ted McMeekin: I beg leave to present the second report, 2017, from the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills and move the adoption of its recommendations.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Mr. McMeekin presents the committee’s report and moves the adoption of its recommendations.
Does the member wish to make a short statement?
Mr. Ted McMeekin: I just want to say thank you very much to the hard-working staff with the standing committee, and, of course, all the members who contribute so freely and substantively in important ways.
In many ways, this in unheralded group of people who try to get things right every single day. They work very, very hard. I’m pleased to have privilege to be the Chair of the committee.
I’ll move adjournment of the debate.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Mr. McMeekin moves adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Debate adjourned.
Standing Committee on Justice Policy / Comité permanent de la justice
Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on Justice Policy and move its adoption.
Je demande la permission de déposer un rapport du Comité permanent de la justice, et je propose son adoption.
The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:
Bill 174,
An Act to enact the Cannabis Act, 2017, the Ontario Cannabis Retail Corporation Act, 2017 and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017, to repeal two Acts and to make amendments to the Highway Traffic Act respecting alcohol, drugs and other matters / Projet de loi 174, Loi édictant la Loi de 2017 sur le cannabis, la Loi de 2017 sur la Société ontarienne de vente du cannabis et la Loi de 2017 favorisant un Ontario sans fumée, abrogeant deux lois et modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui concerne l’alcool, les drogues et d’autres questions.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed? Agreed.
Report adopted.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to the order of the House dated Wednesday, November 22, 2017, the bill is ordered for third reading.
Introduction of Bills
Protecting Hydro Consumers Act (Prepayment Meters), 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur la protection des consommateurs d’électricité (compteurs à prépaiement)
Ms. Horwath moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 188,
An Act to amend the Electricity Act, 1998 and the Energy Consumer Protection Act, 2010 respecting prepayment meters / Projet de loi 188, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur l’électricité et la Loi de 2010 sur la protection des consommateurs d’énergie en ce qui concerne les compteurs à prépaiement.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: What this bill does is to basically ban prepaid metering of our electricity system in this province. People will know that Hydro One has applied, in one of its recent applications, to be allowed to install prepay meters in households as a way to have people pay for their electricity before they use it. We think this is an absolute wrong direction for the province of Ontario. New Democrats are taking a leadership role in bringing this bill forward to ban prepay meters in Ontario.
Petitions
Hydro rates
Mr. Ted Arnott: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:
“Whereas the price of electricity has skyrocketed under the Ontario Liberal government;
“Whereas ever-higher hydro bills are a huge concern for everyone in the province, especially seniors and others on fixed incomes, who can’t afford to pay more;
“Whereas Ontario’s businesses say high electricity costs are making them uncompetitive, and have contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs;
“Whereas the recent Auditor General’s report found Ontarians overpaid for electricity by $37 billion over the past eight years and estimates that we will overpay by an additional $133 billion over the next 18 years if nothing changes;
“Whereas the cancellation of the Oakville and Mississauga gas plants costing $1.1 billion, feed-in tariff (FIT) contracts with wind and solar companies, the sale of surplus energy to neighbouring jurisdictions at a loss, the debt retirement charge, the global adjustment and smart meters that haven’t met their conservation targets have all put upward pressure on hydro bills;
“Whereas the sale of 60% of Hydro One is opposed by a majority of Ontarians and will likely only lead to even higher hydro bills;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To listen to Ontarians, reverse course on the Liberal government’s current hydro policies and take immediate steps to stabilize hydro bills.”
It’s signed by hundreds of my constituents, and I agree with it.
Injured workers
Miss Monique Taylor: I would like to thank Karl Crevar and the injured workers for putting this petition together and bringing it to my office. It reads as follows:
“Whereas about 200,000 to 300,000 people in Ontario are injured on the job every year;
“Whereas over a century ago, workers in Ontario who were injured on the job gave up the right to sue their employers, in exchange for a system that would provide them with just compensation;
“Whereas decades of cost-cutting have pushed injured workers into poverty and onto publicly funded social assistance programs, and have gradually curtailed the rights of injured workers;
“Whereas injured workers have the right to quality and timely medical care, compensation for lost wages, and protection from discrimination;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to change the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act to accomplish the following for injured workers in Ontario:
“Eliminate the practice of ‘deeming’ or ‘determining,’ which bases compensation on phantom jobs that injured workers do not actually have;
“Ensure that the WSIB prioritizes and respects the medical opinions of the health care providers who treat the injured worker directly;
“Prevent compensation from being reduced or denied based on ‘pre-existing conditions’ that never affected the worker’s ability to function prior to the work injury.”
I fully support this petition. I’m going to affix my name to it and give it to page Katrina to bring to the Clerk.
Environmental protection
Mr. Arthur Potts: I have a petition signed by thousands of constituents and others from the GTA.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas there are over 200 species at risk in Ontario that need meaningful protections to prevent their extinction;
“Whereas protecting special concern, threatened and endangered species is critical to maintaining Ontario’s biodiversity and meeting its commitments under the international convention on biodiversity;
“Whereas making sure species at risk are protected is central to achieving sustainability objectives in the province;
“Whereas there was multi-partisan support for the Endangered Species Act in 2007;
“Whereas support for the act has been wavering as of late with proposals to water down the Endangered Species Act either through private members’ bills or an omnibus budget bill;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To reaffirm your support for stopping threats to and promoting the recovery of species at risk in Ontario through the implementation of the Endangered Species Act in keeping with the spirit and intent and purposes of the act.”
I’m happy to sign my name and send it to the table with Andrew.
School closures
Mr. Lorne Coe: A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas the Minister of Education ... declared on June 28, 2017, a province-wide moratorium on future school closures based on the results of the spring engagement process, stating that the pupil accommodation review process was flawed and should be overhauled; and
“Whereas during the 2016-2017 school year this flawed pupil accommodation review process was used to close schools; and
“Whereas some of these schools are not scheduled to close until the end of June 2018, so that staffing for these schools remains in place for 2017-2018; and
“Whereas it would be consistent with the spirit of the moratorium and the reason for the overhaul of the PAR process, to stop those closures announced after September 2016; and
“Whereas the 2015 Auditor General’s report
section 4.3.2 (p. 299) recommends greater funds be put towards maintenance of current schools; and
“Further,
whereas the current funding formula does not properly address the needs of schools within rural and northern communities;
“We, the undersigned residents of the province of Ontario, petition Minister of Education ..., Premier Kathleen Wynne and all MPPs of the Ontario Legislative Assembly to:
“1. Reverse the closure decisions for all schools where those decisions were made after September 1, 2016;
“2. Provide fair and equitable pupil accommodation review processes that school boards must follow, recognising the unique needs of rural and northern communities; and
“3. Review the current funding formula with a goal of developing fair and equitable funding formulae for all rural, northern and urban schools.”
I agree with the content of this petition, affix my signature and provide it to page Erion to take to the table.
Gasoline prices
M me France Gélinas: I’d like to thank Nicole Dugas from Val Caron in my riding for signing the petition. It reads as follows:
“Whereas northern Ontario motorists continue to be subject to wild fluctuations in the price of gasoline; and
“Whereas the province could eliminate opportunistic price gouging and deliver fair, stable and predictable fuel prices; and
“Whereas five provinces and many US states already have some sort of gas price regulation; and
“Whereas jurisdictions with gas price regulation have seen an end to wild price fluctuations, a shrinking of price discrepancies between urban and rural communities and lower annualized gas prices;”
They petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Mandate the Ontario Energy Board to monitor the price of gasoline across Ontario in order to reduce price volatility and unfair regional price differences while encouraging competition.”
I support this petition, will affix my name to it and ask page Katrina to bring it to the Clerk.
Simcoe Day
Mr. Toby Barrett: I have signatures on a number of petitions titled “Proclaim the Civic Holiday Monday as Simcoe Day.
“Whereas John Graves Simcoe and his Queen’s Rangers played a significant role during the Revolutionary War against George Washington’s army; and
“Whereas the somewhat uninspiring moniker Civic Holiday lacks a distinct identity;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Facilitate the process to proclaim the first Monday in August each year as Simcoe Day, except in municipalities where a bylaw specifies otherwise.”
I support the initiative and sign the petition.
Pesticides
Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to thank Mr. Paul Darlaston from Kagawong, who presented me with these several hundred petitions.
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That it should consider either (
a) changing the body of the Pesticides Act and/or (
b) the related regulations, to limit all use of pesticides by utilities only to extreme circumstances and only on noxious non-native invasive weeds or plants which are displacing native varieties and only when all other options have been eliminated (rather than pesticides being used as part of standard operating procedure to sterilize regrowth on land on their rights-of-way as a means of reducing labour costs); and (
c) consider partially restoring to individual municipalities (lower or upper levels) the authority to determine when and where utilities may use listed pesticides in these extreme circumstances within their jurisdictions.”
I agree with this petition and present it to page Olivia to bring it down to the Clerks’ table.
Coffee pods
Mr. Norm Miller: I have, with this petition, over 800 signed online as well. It reads:
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas single-serve coffee makers are estimated to be in 38% of Canadian homes; and
“Whereas single-use pods make up 49% of coffee sold in grocery stores in Canada; and
“Whereas 1.5 billion single-use coffee pods end up in Canadian landfill each year; and
“Whereas even recyclable coffee pods are not easy or convenient for consumers to recycle properly; and
“Whereas compostable coffee pods help keep food waste out of landfill, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and
“Whereas there is a made-in-Ontario single-use coffee pod that is certified 100% compostable by the Biodegradable Products Institute on the market; and
“Whereas there are other compostable single-use coffee pods available;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“The Legislative Assembly of Ontario pass Bill 173, the Reducing Waste One Pod at a Time Act, and request that the province of Ontario start to purchase exclusively compostable single-use coffee pods.”
Mr. Speaker, I support this and give it to Iman.
Long-term care
Ms. Peggy Sattler: I have a petition calling for a minimum long-term-care standard. It reads:
“Whereas quality care for the 78,000 residents of (LTC) homes is a priority for many Ontario families; and
“Whereas the provincial government does not provide adequate funding to ensure care and staffing levels in LTC homes to keep pace with residents’ increasing acuity and the growing number of residents with complex behaviours; and
“Whereas several Ontario coroner’s inquests into LTC homes deaths have recommended an increase in direct hands-on care for residents and staffing levels and the most reputable studies on this topic recommend 4.1 hours of direct care per day;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:
“Amend the LTC Homes Act (2007) for a legislated minimum care standard of four hours per resident per day, adjusted for acuity level and case mix.”
I couldn’t agree more. I affix my signature and will give it to page Emma to take to the table.
Green power generation
Mr. Jim McDonell: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
“Whereas Ontario already overpays for wind and solar energy supplied under the FIT and microFIT programs compared to other provinces, including Quebec; and
“Whereas many townships have declared themselves unwilling hosts for industrial wind turbine developments;
“Whereas the IESO has ignored municipalities’ wishes and approved projects in unwilling host municipalities;
“Whereas the Auditor General identified that the global adjustment—the cost of overpaying for electricity under the Green Energy Act—has cost Ontarians $37 billion to date and will cost us another $133 billion by 2032;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To immediately impose a complete moratorium on all wind and solar project developments in unwilling host communities.”
I agree with this. It was signed by a former teacher of mine, a math teacher. I’ll hand it off to page Adam.
Prix de l’essence
M. Michael Mantha: J’ai une pétition ici sur le prix de l’essence.
« À l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario :
« Alors que les automobilistes du nord de l’Ontario continuent d’être soumis à des fluctuations marquées dans le prix de l’essence; et
« Alors que la province pourrait éliminer les prix abusifs et opportunistes et offrir des prix justes, stables et prévisibles; et
« Alors que cinq provinces et de nombreux états américains ont déjà une réglementation des prix d’essence; et
« Considérant que les juridictions qui réglementent le prix de l’essence ont : moins de fluctuations des prix, moins d’écarts de prix entre les communautés urbaines et rurales et des prix d’essence annualisés inférieurs;
« Nous, soussignés, demandons à l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario :
« D’accorder à la Commission de l’énergie de l’Ontario le mandat de surveiller le prix de l’essence partout en Ontario afin de réduire la volatilité des prix et les différences de prix régionales, tout en encourageant la concurrence. »
Je suis complètement d’accord avec cette pétition. Je la présente au page Andrew pour l’apporter à la table des greffiers.
Driver licences
Mr. Jim McDonell: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
“Whereas many residents and businesses in Ontario rely on the ability to drive a vehicle in order to work, buy food and otherwise function;
“Whereas licence suspension upon receipt of a medical notice to that effect is immediate; and
“Whereas constituents are forced to wait 30 business days following a positive medical review by their physician prior to being reinstated; and
“Whereas this wait time is not prescribed in any legislation or regulation, but is solely due to Ministry of Transportation policies that ignore the reality of living and operating a business, especially in rural and northern Ontario; and
“Whereas a needlessly long licence suspension threatens the livelihoods of many families in Ontario;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To direct the Ministry of Transportation to institute a five-business-day service guarantee for drivers’ licence reinstatements following the submission of a positive physician’s review.”
I agree with this and will pass it off to page Katrina.
Orders of the Day
Cannabis, Smoke-Free Ontario and Road Safety Statute Law Amendment Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne le cannabis, l’Ontario sans fumée et la sécurité routière
Mr. Yasir Naqvi moved third reading of the following bill:
Bill 174,
An Act to enact the Cannabis Act, 2017, the Ontario Cannabis Retail Corporation Act, 2017 and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017, to repeal two Acts and to make amendments to the Highway Traffic Act respecting alcohol, drugs and other matters / Projet de loi 174, Loi édictant la Loi de 2017 sur le cannabis, la Loi de 2017 sur la Société ontarienne de vente du cannabis et la Loi de 2017 favorisant un Ontario sans fumée, abrogeant deux lois et modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui concerne l’alcool, les drogues et d’autres questions.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I look to the Attorney General to lead off the debate.
Hon. Yasir Naqvi: I rise in the House today to open third reading debate on a bill that would, if passed, prepare Ontario for a safe and sensible transition to the federal legalization of cannabis. Speaker, as we all know, cannabis legalization in Canada is imminent, with the federal government’s July 2018 deadline less than seven months away, and Ontario still has a lot of work to do. The bill before us today would, if passed, help us to make sure Ontario is ready when legalization comes.
Everybody in this Legislature knows what a momentous and important change this is. And as we get closer to implementation, it really is on people’s minds. Legalization has constantly become a part of conversations with neighbours, friends and constituents. In fact, personally, I cannot go to one event or meeting in my community of Ottawa Centre without a question about cannabis, and I’m sure many of my colleagues have the same experience.
While people have all kinds of opinions regarding their support for legalization or on how best to legalize, I’ve found that almost everyone has questions about it. Cannabis legalization is a big, complicated and complex issue. As legislators, it is hard to untangle. It is even harder for people to figure out the impacts it could have on their family and society writ large.
The people of Ontario are concerned about their communities, their roads and their children’s health. Our government takes these issues very seriously. We want Ontarians to know that we hear their concerns, and this bill, if passed, will represent a major step towards addressing those concerns.
Speaker, with the measures in this bill, we are supporting four clear objectives: (1) protecting our youth; (2) promoting public health and safety; (3) prevention of harm; and (4) elimination of the illegal market.
These goals are distinct but also interrelated. Eliminating the illegal market, for example, will help protect youth by making unregulated and potentially unsafe cannabis less available to young people. Prevention and harm reduction efforts will help protect everyone’s health and safety. Taken together, these four goals will be crucial in ensuring a safe and sensible transition to legal cannabis in Ontario.
Speaker, one of our top priorities throughout the legalization process is to keep youth and young adults safe. This is an area where the proposed federal rules leave a lot of the work to the provinces, but it is also one of the most critical challenges we are facing. Medical studies have shown that cannabis use can be harmful to the developing brain up to the age of 25, and existing cannabis laws, simply put, have not been successful in mitigating this harm. Young people in Canada already use cannabis at rates that are among the highest in the world; that is even before legalization.
It is not just that we have to protect youth when cannabis is legalized; we need to address a problem that already exists. Legalization presents us with an opportunity to do so in a new way.
The measures in this bill would introduce a tightly controlled distribution system for legal cannabis and work to eliminate the existing illegal market that clearly is making this substance available to youth.
I would now like to take the time to walk through the measures that we have proposed, starting with the basic rules that we are setting for legal cannabis by way of Bill 174, if passed.
The federal government has put forward a federal minimum age of 18 to purchase, possess, use or grow legal cannabis. We are proposing to raise that minimum age in Ontario to 19 years old, a year older than the federal minimum. This is important for a number of reasons. We felt that 18 was simply too low as a minimum age for our province, but at the same time, we heard from public health and law enforcement experts that there are also risks with raising the minimum age too high.
Young people would simply continue to rely on the illegal market, which could undercut many of our other prevention and harm reduction efforts. A minimum age of 19 finds a balance between these priorities and also aligns with Ontario’s minimum age for alcohol and tobacco use, which people already know and understand.
Speaker, having determined who can legally access cannabis, we also have to restrict possession for those who cannot. We wanted to do so in a way that focuses on prevention, harm reduction and diversion, not on punishment. Our goal is to stop bringing youth into unnecessary contact with the justice system for possessing small amounts of cannabis. To help enforce the minimum age, our bill proposes to allow police to confiscate small amounts of cannabis from youth under the age of 19.
These young people could receive a provincial offences ticket similar to the kind of ticket one would receive for a minor traffic offence or youth possession of alcohol. In cases where youth are found in possession of cannabis, this bill would also empower police officers, prosecutors and courts to refer them to youth education or prevention programs.
Speaker, this brings us to another pillar of our approach: prevention and harm reduction. It is important to remember that there are concerns about the impact of cannabis on the developing brain up to the age of 25. That means that as we are working to prevent cannabis use among youth under 19, we must also be working to address the potential risk for those between the ages of 19 and 25 who would be able to legally buy and use recreational cannabis under our proposed approach. To support both of these goals, we are committed to developing a comprehensive prevention and harm reduction approach for Ontario.
This will promote awareness of the health harms that are associated with cannabis use and will give people the tools they need to make informed decisions about use.
Our work on this front is well under way. In fact, we have already taken our first step by endorsing Canada’s Lower-Risk Cannabis Use Guidelines. These guidelines were developed with the understanding that many Canadians will choose to use cannabis whether or not it is legal. From this core premise, the guidelines encourage honest conversations and really focus on harm reduction. They offer recommendations grounded in science that help people make decisions to reduce the health risks associated with cannabis use.
We will also work closely with our partners in health care to share that information and promote uptake. Another key part of our prevention and harm reduction approach will be to ensure that our service providers, whether in education, health care, youth justice or social services, have the resources they need to be effective. Ontario already has a fantastic network of these service providers, and we are committed to exploring training and other supports that might be needed to increase their capacity and improve prevention and harm reduction efforts.
Finally, we will be developing resources to guide employers, labour groups and others as they manage workplace safety issues related to impairment at work through education and awareness initiatives.
Speaker, I am confident that these measures will help people make healthier choices around cannabis use, but we also have to consider the health impacts that cannabis use can have on others.
Just as we have in the past with cigarettes and other tobacco products, we are committed to limiting the health impacts of second-hand cannabis smoke. To do so, we are proposing strict limits on where cannabis can be used. The general rule under our proposed legislation is that recreational cannabis use would be restricted to private residences. That means that it would not be allowed in public places, workplaces or inside any motor vehicle.
Our bill also provides clarity to ensure that individuals who use medical cannabis have the access they need without compromising our public health objectives. This precautionary approach is based on consultations with key public health stakeholders. It also draws on lessons from our existing laws for consuming alcohol and from the province’s Smoke-Free Ontario Act, which has greatly reduced tobacco use and lowered health risks to non-smokers in Ontario.
Speaker, our bill also includes an overhaul of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act. The new Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017, if passed, would build on the success of the existing act and that of the existing Electronic Cigarettes Act, 2015, by addressing vaping and the use of e-cigarettes to better protect the people of Ontario from second-hand smoke.
Some of the questions I’m most often asked have to do with how and where Ontarians will be able to buy recreational cannabis. I’ve spoken at some length about keeping cannabis out of the hands of underage youth, and in many ways, retail is the most important part of that issue.
We have to ensure that cannabis is being distributed in a way that is carefully controlled and socially responsible. That is why we are proposing a retail approach that will do just that. If passed, this bill would create a single, legal retailer of recreational cannabis across Ontario, online and in dedicated stores. This agency would have a clear mandate to responsibly serve Ontarians across the province and would be overseen by the LCBO. This is important as the LCBO already has a strong proven record of customer service and safety, and this approach will ensure that we benefit from that expertise in the context of cannabis as well.
The other side of the coin in our effort to ensure a safe and responsible retail channel for recreational cannabis is stopping the sale of illegal, unregulated and potentially unsafe cannabis. No matter how many safeguards are in place at a legal retailer to ensure socially responsible sales, they will not help us if underage youth can simply walk across the street to an illegal cannabis storefront. Right now, these shops are a very active, very profitable and very visible part of an illegal market in Ontario that makes cannabis readily available to youth.
I know that in my riding of Ottawa Centre alone, there have been many of these illegal dispensaries that have opened and continue to stay open.
This cannot continue. I have said it before and I say it again now: These storefronts have never been legal, are not legal now and will not be legal retailers under our proposed model. We are committed to eliminating the illegal market and closing down illegal cannabis storefronts.
The first step in doing so is to provide police and other officials with the tools they need to enforce the law. That is why this bill proposes tough new penalties for illegal cannabis sales. These would target individuals and companies that engage in the illegal sale of cannabis, and landlords who knowingly permit their property to be used for this purpose. We are also proposing an interim closure authority to allow for the immediate closure of any site that is being used to illegally sell cannabis. Penalties could include fines or imprisonment and would escalate based on repeated or continued offence after initial conviction.
We are also committed to making sure that our law enforcement partners are equipped to help keep Ontario’s roads safe—among the safest in North America. Impaired driving is a concern that must be taken seriously. Ontario recently gave police the ability to immediately remove drivers from the road who they believe are impaired by drugs, including cannabis. With our proposed legislation, we are working to make our impaired-driving laws even tougher on those who drive and use cannabis or other drugs.
If passed, our bill would increase the financial penalty for those who fail a roadside breath test, a standardized field sobriety test or an evaluation by a drug-recognition expert, and would create a zero-tolerance policy for young, novice and commercial drivers, with new penalties to enforce this policy.
This is a sensible approach that focuses on drivers who present a greater risk on the road, whether through the likelihood or potential severity of a collision. Research shows that younger and newer drivers have a higher risk of collision than more experienced drivers. Collisions involving commercial vehicles are far more likely to be severe in nature, as they account for approximately one in five fatalities on Ontario roads. A zero-tolerance approach means these drivers would be taken off the road if they have any drugs or alcohol in their system as detected by federally approved screening devices.
We developed these proposals in close partnership with our road safety partners and stakeholders who believe that Ontario’s approach is the right way to go.
I will soon be turning the floor over to my colleague the Minister of Transportation, who will provide further details of our plan to keep Ontario’s roads safe.
As we continue to develop, refine and implement the details of Ontario’s transition to legalization, we recognize the importance of engaging in dialogue with our law enforcement and safety partners. With input from these partners, we are currently developing a coordinated enforcement strategy for Ontario. This strategy will support community safety, with a focus on prevention and diversion, as we continue to pursue a safe and sensible approach to legalization.
Even as our proposed legislation continues to move forward, there is still a lot of work to do: decisions yet to be made and challenges to overcome. We continue to work closely with partners at all levels of government to make sure we get these decisions right.
In particular, we continue to look to the federal government for guidance and leadership when it comes to the projected supply of cannabis and the timing of its availability, the adequacy of federal resources to support effective provincial implementation, including public education and enforcement-related costs, and a fair and equitable taxation framework.
I also look forward to ongoing dialogue with Ontarians, stakeholders and partners at the municipal level and many others. In particular, we recognize the continued need to meaningfully engage with First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations and peoples about cannabis legalization. We also understand and recognize that some First Nations communities may wish to develop specific approaches to the sale and use of cannabis.
With this understanding, our bill includes flexibility for the province to enter into agreements with First Nations communities to establish these approaches, reflective of our government-to-government relationship with First Nations. I look forward to continued consultation and conversation in the lead-up to July 2018 and beyond.
Speaker, this bill lays out a blueprint for Ontario’s transition to cannabis legalization. I’ll be the first one to admit that we face many challenges here, not least of which is the impending timeline that has been set by our federal counterparts with their decision to legalize recreational cannabis. But I’m confident that the measures we have put forward here will allow us to make that transition in a safe and sensible way, with the best interests of all Ontarians in mind.
I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Justice Policy for their consideration of and amendments to this bill.
I hope that all of my fellow members will join me in supporting this important piece of legislation.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: Point of order.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Point of order, the member for Huron–Bruce.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: I want to take this opportunity to welcome—they’ll be coming in any time—a special grade 10 class from F.E. Madill Secondary School in Wingham, Ontario. They really like their civics classes, and their teachers do a great job. I just wanted to take this moment to welcome them to Queen’s Park.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Further debate?
Mr. Randy Hillier: I wish I could say it was a pleasure to speak to this bill today, but of course what is not pleasurable about this is the time allocation motion and the restrictions on debate on this bill that this government has put forward.
As everyone in this House is aware, the PC Party put forward a motion to split this bill up, the schedules, into four different votes—the ones on cannabis as well as on the Smoke-Free Ontario Act and the Highway Traffic Act elements. This government would not permit the debate on that motion and then proceeded to put in a time allocation motion.
I just want to contrast that time allocation procedure with the minister’s very words just a few moments ago, when he said they look forward to continued consultation on this bill. Well, clearly, there’s a contradiction there if the minister is saying that they want continued consultation but they brought in a time allocation motion which actually prevented further discussion on this bill.
Speaker, I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Kitchener–Conestoga, our transportation critic. He’ll be talking about
schedule 4; I’ll focus my elements on schedules 1, 2 and 3.
At the start of his debate, I heard the minister say that this is a “momentous and important” bill. Those are the words that he used. He used the words “hard to untangle” and said that it’s hard to understand the impacts. I won’t disagree with him—all the more reason that further discussion and debate is required. When the minister himself says that it’s a difficult bill to understand and that it’s difficult to understand what the consequences will be, that is not the time to limit debate and discussion, when there is confusion, even amongst the government members.
I’m going to take some time to illustrate to people what happened with this bill in committee. I think that’s an important element that people need to recognize—how what happened in committee is very different compared to the minister’s own words here at third reading debate.
I’ll start with this first example. The minister said that the prevention of harm and protection of health was a hallmark priority for this government with Bill 174. Bill 174 is absent of any government responsibility for education, monitoring or awareness.
The PC Party introduced an amendment that would have made it an obligation for the government to take on the role of education, awareness and monitoring. The members of the committee—the members from Beaches–East York, from Northumberland–Quinte West, from Kitchener Centre, from Ottawa–Vanier—all voted down the PC amendment that would have created a statutory framework for the government to engage, monitor and create an education program for cannabis use. That was the very first one. Oh, actually, there was one before that.
One of our PC amendments was also to make a requirement that physicians—I’ll just read a little bit about this. This was “Reporting of illness, disease, injury or death related to cannabis use.” This amendment would have permitted—
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Point of order, Speaker.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Point of order, the member for Essex.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’m wondering if we have quorum in the House.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I would ask the table staff to determine if there’s a quorum.
The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Valerie Quioc Lim): A quorum is not present, Speaker.
The Acting Speaker ordered the bells rung.
The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Valerie Quioc Lim): A quorum is present, Speaker.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. I return to the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Lennox and Addington, who had the floor.
Mr. Randy Hillier: Thank you, Speaker. I’m glad that quorum was called. Obviously, there are members on the Liberal side who don’t believe this debate is—
Interjection.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): You shouldn’t be making reference to the absence of any members. I’d ask him not to do so again.
The member for Lanark–Frontenac–Lennox and Addington.
Mr. Randy Hillier: Thank you, Speaker. I’m glad we have enough people here—
Interjections.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I’m going to have to ask the government members not to make reference to the absence of any other member in the House. As everyone knows, there are times when members are absent; all of us are absent from time to time. It’s not fair to take shots in that respect.
The member for Lanark–Frontenac–Lennox and Addington.
Mr. Randy Hillier: Thank you, Speaker.
Our first amendment was to put in the responsibility to have a triggering mechanism so that monitoring could be entailed. That would have required physicians or practitioners of health to report if somebody experienced an illness or an injury due to cannabis use.
The member for Ottawa–Vanier responded that this was not important; that we’ll leave it up to the federal government to do that. That’s a paraphrase, of course, of the comment, but people can go to Hansard and read the debate that ensued. The comment, again, was that we’ll just let the feds do this, contrary to what the minister said about the priority of the prevention of harm and protection of health.
As I pointed out to the member for Ottawa–Vanier during that debate, how can the feds possibly do the studies if we don’t have a mechanism first to require physicians to report on that? There is no reporting mechanism with Bill 174. I think that she understood the argument and maybe even agreed with the argument, but the Liberal Party whips were on full display during the justice policy committee hearings on this, and that was rejected.
So we rejected the mechanism for physicians to report on injuries and illness. They rejected any obligation or responsibility to put in an educational component or monitoring or awareness to the bill. That is very much contrary and not consistent with what we have seen with all our other provincial Legislatures in this country, where governments have recognized the obligation for education awareness and reporting on this.
Another good example was the PC amendment that would have made it a requirement that there be a review of this act in four years’ time. It was quite simple: “The minister shall conduct and table a review of this act within four years after the day it receives royal assent.” Speaker, that was rejected. This government does not want to be accountable—not today, not tomorrow, not ever. Accountability is sort of like a four-letter word for these guys over here; it is just rejected at every opportunity.
The member for Beaches–East York actually said, “Well, we don’t want to tie the hands of government.” A review tabled in this Legislature is viewed as tying the government’s hands? It is tying the government—it’s tying the government to accountability. That’s what a review does and that’s what this government has so blatantly and so forcefully rejected: any level of accountability to the people of this province and even to members of this Legislature—their own members—absolutely no accountability.
The PC Party also put forward an amendment that would make it mandatory for this new liquor and cannabis control board of Ontario that is created under this act—that if they fail to meet the obligations of the act, they would have to explain why to this House. The genesis and the motivation for that amendment, Speaker, is in another creature of this government, and that’s Ornge. We can all remember Ornge. They were an arm’s-length agency created by government.
It had a memorandum of understanding on how it was to do business, but failed miserably, and resulted in a boondoggle of billions of dollars of poor delivery of service and a rogue agency that was buying speedboats and Harley-Davidsons and not transporting people in critical condition.
Our experience has shown that this government does not take oversight as important. So the PC Party put in this amendment that it would require any violations of that memorandum of understanding to be reported back to this House. Once again, all five Liberal members on that committee voted down that amendment. The member for Beaches–East York, the member from Northumberland–Quinte West, the member from Ottawa–Vanier, the member from Kitchener Centre—everybody voted against that amendment of accountability.
Speaker, I’m going to leave the cannabis side now for a little bit, schedules 1 and 2. I think people are getting the picture that there is a distinct difference between what is said in this House during debate by the Ministry of the Attorney General and what happens in committee—the actions of Liberal members in committee—very, very different. There is a contradiction between the statements here that we hear in debate and the actions of Liberal members in the committee.
But I think clearly the Liberals’ commitment to the prevention of harm and the protection of health must be taken with a big box of salt—not just a shaker of salt; a big box of salt—because they would not put their money where their mouth was. They would not follow up o