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

May 28, 2019

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2019-May-28 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 28 May 2019 Mardi 28 mai 2019

Notices of reasoned amendments

Orders of the Day

Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures), 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour protéger l’essentiel (mesures budgétaires)

Notice of reasoned amendment

Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures), 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour protéger l’essentiel (mesures budgétaires)

Introduction of Visitors

Legislative pages

Oral Questions

Government fiscal policies

Government contract

Health care funding

Government fiscal policies

Children’s mental health services

Clean technology

Invasive species

Education funding

Government policies / Politiques du gouvernement

Employment supports

Government fiscal policies

Northern Ontario

Flooding

Ontario Place / Place de l’Ontario

Richard Heimpel

Anniversary of Armenian independence

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Private members’ public business

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Climate change

Ramadan

Legal aid

Police Week

Victims and Survivors of Crime Week

United Church of Canada

Celtic culture

Indigenous graduates

Waste diversion

Technology sector

Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Standing Committee on General Government

Introduction of Bills

The United Church of Canada Act, 2019

Menstrual Hygiene Day Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 proclamant la Journée de l’hygiène menstruelle

Motions

Sign-language

interpretation

Estimates

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Petitions

Abuse awareness and prevention

Veterans memorial

Education funding

Traffic control

Fish and wildlife management

Education funding

Fish and wildlife management

Education funding

Fish and wildlife management

Library services

Fish and wildlife management

Autism treatment

Fish and wildlife management

Orders of the Day

More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour plus de logements et plus de choix

Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures), 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour protéger l’essentiel (mesures budgétaires)

Adjournment Debate

Anti-racism activities

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’ll begin this morning with a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Let us pray.

Prayers.

Notices of reasoned amendments

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask for the House’s attention. I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 71(b), the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston has notified the Clerk of his intention to file notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 115,

An Act to amend the Liquor Control Act with respect to the termination of a specified agreement. The order for second reading of Bill 115 may therefore not be called today.

I also need to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 71(b), again the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston has notified the Clerk of his intention to file notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 117,

An Act to amend the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The order for second reading of Bill 117 may therefore not be called today.

Orders of the Day

Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures), 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour protéger l’essentiel (mesures budgétaires)

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 16, 2019, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 100,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes / Projet de loi 100, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires et à édicter, à modifier ou à abroger diverses lois.

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

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: I will be sharing my time with the member from Ottawa South.

Il me fait plaisir aujourd’hui de parler de l’annexe 17 du projet de loi 100.

Schedule 17 introduces the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, which provides fundamental changes to the Proceedings Against the Crown Act. This may appear to be quite a technical approach to this bill, but I really want to ensure that everybody knows what the dangers are in the changes that are included in

schedule 17. I urge the government not to proceed with

schedule 17 of Bill 100, and to do more consultation. As drafted, schedules 11 and 17 will lessen our ability, the ability of all Ontarians, to hold the government accountable and to be compensated if something goes wrong.

People who are injured through governmental action have the ability to be compensated, and this ability is being eliminated in certain circumstances or diminished substantially.

I’ll do three things: Number one, I will talk a little bit about what the state of the law is now and what the impact of this bill is on the state of the law.

Let me go back a little bit in history. In the Middle Ages, there was this legal maxim: “The king can do no wrong.” You could not sue the government. You could not sue the king because the king was presumed to have the power emanating from God, so he could do no wrong, or the queen could do no wrong.

Eventually, when we evolved and started developing a rule-of-law principle, we accepted that there was no reason why anyone should be above the law. So if the government—which acted as the king—was doing something wrong, individuals could sue the government to be compensated, the same way they should be able to sue a corporation that did something wrong or another individual who did something wrong and that injured them. So governments all across the common law accepted that they should have the ability to be sued.

The courts have recognized that governments are not like every other corporation and sometimes they are faced with difficult policy decisions. So the court developed a test to determine what’s a policy choice and what’s an operational choice.

For example, it would say: “You can decide never to inspect the roads as a policy matter, but once you say to the citizens, ‘We will inspect the roads’ or ‘We will do inspections,’ you cannot do them negligently,” because people rely on the fact that the government has said, “I will inspect the roads,” and you should rely on the fact that the roads have been inspected and therefore are safe, and therefore, “That’s why I’m driving on them: because I’m thinking that the roads are safe.”

There’s a particular case exactly on that case, which is the road between Vancouver and Whistler, where there was a boulder that came on a car. The court accepted that because the government had a program of inspection of the road, they should not do it negligently, and someone who was seriously injured—a little girl died—was entitled to compensation.

What’s in the bill is to prevent us from exercising that right. It changes and defines what a policy decision is as being much larger than what is currently in the law. There’s no reason to do this. The courts are doing a good job of balancing policy and operational concerns, and we should let that be. No other provinces have taken the route that Ontario has now taken. No other province has decided to restrict the rights of individuals to sue the government for negligence in the actions that they’re taking. That’s dangerous.

Let me just continue a little bit about why I continue to think that this is a dangerous route. When I asked the question in this House to the Attorney General as to the reason why she was introducing this, particularly in a budget bill, she responded, “I’m seeking to clarify and codify the common law.” Well, I spent a little bit of time looking at the common law, and this bill goes further than the common law. And I’m not alone in saying that; many other lawyers who looked at this reached the same conclusion.

I asked for a briefing with the members of the minister’s staff, with the Attorney General’s staff, to try to express some of my concerns. Number one, I was concerned that the bill has retroactive aspects. It deems dismissed actions that would have been instituted against the crown that are currently here. I’ve tabled an order paper question asking for the number, the list of cases that will be presumed dismissed. What is the process to assess? What will the impact be on the individuals concerned? And the cost that they’ve already incurred: Who’s going to compensate them for that?

The second thing: There is a new process that if you’re going to sue the government and allege bad faith, you can continue to do that, but you will have to ask the permission of the court first. That adds probably $20,000 to $30,000 to a lawsuit before you can even proceed.

Further, in this process, you will not have access to government documents. The government will have access to your documents, but you won’t have access to the government’s documents. This is dangerous. Nobody will be able to do that. So I was concerned about the way in which the scope of this bill—there is no urgency for it. I think it’s important that we proceed cautiously when we change the common law.

We have to remember we’re no longer in the period of a king. The king does not exist anymore. You’re not a king when—even if you have a majority, you’re not a benevolent king. You can make mistakes, and people are entitled to compensation and should have the ability and right.

We live in a democracy where there are three branches of government that hold each other to account. You should not interfere with this balancing act between the courts, the Legislature and the executive. This act does just that, so I’m concerned about it. I hope that I can influence the members on the opposite side to push the pause button on this and not go forward.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member did say she was sharing her time. I recognize the member for Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: It’s a pleasure to speak to Bill 100 and the budget. I want to thank my colleague for her very clear and concise remarks with regard to

section 17, which I’ll get to in my remarks as well.

All budgets are kind of like an iceberg. The top of the iceberg is about a tenth of the iceberg. So when we look at the top of this iceberg budget, and when we look at the budget as an iceberg, here’s what we see: First off, and I’ve mentioned this a number of times, and we were talking about it yesterday, there’s an obsession with alcohol. Fifty times in the budget, alcohol, beer or wine is mentioned. I think the word “women” is mentioned four times. So there’s a question as to why it has such a significant

part in the budget, when the budget is really the government’s plan for the people, and the things that are important to people are their schools, their hospitals, their public transit and their roads. I don’t think the government focuses enough on that in this document.

The other thing we see when we look at the budget is that there is a seniors dental plan, which is a good thing. The government is overstating the scope of that plan and how much that will impact the dental health of seniors and the general population. I encourage the government to do more and not to overstate the value of that program that they’ve put forward. It will help a small number of seniors who have access to community health centres on a very low income. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. I think that we have to think about people who are just above that threshold, and look at a wider program.

I would encourage the government to do that and not speak about it as if it’s a job that is completed.

In terms of child care, the government has made some steps forward—again, overstating the real value of that. I think a challenge with this budget is, when we get to the bottom of the iceberg—they’re saying they are protecting what matters most, and they’ve put a few shiny things in the window. But then when you actually get to the bottom of the iceberg and you start to look at what’s there—my colleague was just talking about

section 17, which is trying to change the balance of the common law in favour of the government, inside a piece of financial legislation, a plan for the people of Ontario.

I think the people of Ontario want a balance. They want to make sure that they can hold their government to account, not only at the ballot box but also in the courts. That’s why we have a court system. That’s why we have a political system. To try to tip the balance in this document, because they have a majority, is the wrong thing to do.

We didn’t hear anything about the municipal changes in the budget, but we saw the government do it, and then the Premier did a backflip yesterday, and I congratulate him. I’m not sure he landed on his feet, but he attempted the backflip and he should be congratulated for that. We’ll see what happens next year.

So here’s the bottom line. This is kind of what we’ve heard in the last three or four weeks here in Ontario. We’ve got this budget that’s nice and shiny, and nice, shiny things in the window, and then the estimates come out. The estimates don’t lie. I’m not sure I can say the same thing about the budget. Every day we hear of a cut. There’s a billion dollars coming out of the ministry of children and community services. We hear every day of cuts. People are speaking out, and that’s why the government has retreated on the municipal cuts.

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

Mr. Paul Calandra: I congratulate both members on their comments. At the outset, though, the member opposite, and in particular, the member from Ottawa South, must recognize that part of the reason why there are reductions in spending that are occurring over the next five years is because we were left in such a difficult situation.

It cannot be understated, the devastating impact that a $15-billion deficit has on the province’s ability to fund what we talk about, what matters most, whether it is education, whether it is health care, whether it is transit and transportation. The fiscal mess that the Liberals left us in is one that we had to take action on right away. Does that mean it’s easy? No government likes to make reductions; of course we don’t like to do that. It’s much easier to do what the Liberals did: spend, spend, spend, sprinkle money all over the place, try to make everybody happy.

But at some point in time, you can’t borrow anymore. At some point in time, you have to bring things back into balance. At some point in time, you have to have a priority, and for us, the priorities obviously are health, education and getting people moving.

We’ll balance the budget, yes, but we’re doing it on a timetable, which—as I’ve said in this House, I would have preferred it to be quicker. But I understand why we’ve done it on a five-year time frame.

Make no mistake about it: The situation we find ourselves in today is 100% the fault of the members opposite, who for 15 years refused to do anything about it—never. What they did was try to hide and obfuscate—those are not my words; those are the words that the Auditor General and FAO talked about. We’re putting things back on track—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you. And I would ask the member to withdraw.

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): “Obfuscate” is not one of the words we tend to use on a regular basis. It’s unparliamentary. Thank you very much.

Questions and comments?

M me France Gélinas: It is rather interesting that this is one of my first and only opportunities to put two minutes on the record about the budget, because everything in here moves really quickly.

Water in northern Ontario also moves very quickly. We can see that in the budget there is a significant cut, a decrease in funding, for flood and water management. I can tell you that the Sudbury conservation area has seen significant cuts to their budget at the same time as northern Ontario is flush with water. Lake Wanapitei, a humongous lake in my riding, is higher than we have ever seen. All of the dams are open from the Wanapitei river to French River. Wanapitei has three series of dams. Everything is open. What does that mean?

That means that Gisèle Pageau, the mayor of French River, had to declare an emergency. That means that for many of my constituents, either their home is about to be flooded or their roads are already flooded.

I was in Alban on Friday and person after person came and talked to me, with pictures where you can see that the water is inches away from coming into their houses, where you can see that the roads to their houses or back into the community are flooded under that thick of water. How long before they’re not able to go back and forth and have to abandon their houses? At the same time, the government, in their budget, decides to cut water management and flood management. That makes no sense. We now have a municipality that has declared an emergency. The Alban part of this municipality is in my riding.

People’s homes and cottages are about to flood, and they need this government’s help, not a government cut.

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

Mr. Stephen Lecce: I want to thank the various members for their remarks.

The members from Ottawa South and Ottawa–Vanier spoke about the defence of the rule of law. Just very briefly, before we speak about the budget: I find it curious to hear that commentary because I have not heard anything—an element of silence from all members of the Liberal Party when it came to the defence of the rule of law when the federal Liberal Party and the federal Prime Minister intervened in a prosecution, an active criminal investigation, with SNC-Lavalin.

I did not hear the provincial Liberal Party express an iota of concern about the institutions of our democracy and the independence from the politics of the prosecution of this country. Where were you? Why weren’t you expressing concern to the federal Prime Minister?

With that said, Mr. Speaker, just a few data points of interest:

—$347 billion in debt is the legacy of the former Liberal power;

—$36 million more spending per day today, $40 million when we came into office, than we actually had—$40 million more per day than we take in. That is a defensible policy “defending the next generation”?

—1,000 people in hallways, having the indignity of having to seek health care in hallways;

—twice the youth unemployment rate in this province and in this country;

—over 50% of students in grade 6 failing their EQAO math tests.

Mr. Speaker, with great respect to the members opposite, all of whom serve their constituents no doubt well, the people of this province are not better off after 15 years of their legacy.

The impetus for our budget is to create the conditions for affordability, to create the conditions for better private sector jobs, to lift people up, to give them an education, a curriculum, that actually helps them get jobs in the workforce.

Mr. Speaker, the record of the Liberal Party is rather clear. It is one that has left many people behind. It is one that has undermined the pocketbooks and the prosperity of this province. We will take no lessons from the members of the Liberal Party.

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

Mr. Kevin Yarde: As always, it’s a pleasure to rise in this chamber and to speak to the issues affecting my residents in Brampton as well as in Brampton North.

When I was knocking on the doors during the campaign, one thing that always came true, one thing everybody mentioned, is that our city is a fast-growing city. We’re one of the fastest-growing cities in the country. As a matter of fact, we have our population which is getting close to 700,000 people. And with regard to traffic, we are experiencing gridlock on a daily basis. We have residents who are commuting from Brampton having to come down the 410 and going back up the 410, and in most cases it’s three or more hours of commuting every day just to get to work and to school.

People of Brampton continue to do this every day, and it’s not uncommon for them to complain to me and call my office and say, “What is the government doing about transportation? Are they helping in terms of more transit?” The answer to that is no, we haven’t seen anything come towards Brampton. We’ve seen other areas across Ontario, but Brampton, as I mentioned, one of the fastest-growing cities in the country and in the province, is not getting their due course.

The problem with that is that Brampton has been neglected by this government, and necessary investments have not been made. We’ve called for that. The mayor of Brampton, Patrick Brown, has also called for that, but everything is just falling on deaf ears with this government. People have no choice, Mr. Speaker, but to buy a car since we don’t have proper transportation in the form of transit. It’s not because of the transit system; they’re just underfunded because of this government.

So when they buy a car, they’re also paying the highest insurance in the entire country because we are being, I guess you could say, prejudiced because of where we live. They’re basing it on our postal codes. We pay the highest insurance in the entire country.

So a couple of things at play here: We pay the highest auto insurance, we have gridlock in Brampton and this government is doing nothing—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you. We’ll return to—I guess we won’t.

What’s happening?

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We’ll go to Scarborough–Guildwood.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: In the minutes that I have remaining, let me remind this government and the people of Ontario that the $15-billion deficit number that the government talks about is a number that they manufactured, that they created. They did that, Mr. Speaker, so that they can continue to justify deep cuts to programs and to services that the people of Ontario depend on. Some of the most vulnerable individuals in this province are feeling those hurts that these cuts are inflicting upon them. Mr. Speaker, this is irresponsible. It is so irresponsible.

I hear that this government is putting the province at litigation risk of up to a billion dollars to cancel contracts by legislation. That, Mr. Speaker, is going to cost the people of this province at a time when the government claims that it is in a crisis and that it needs to cut. It’s justifying those cuts of its own making by lowering revenues, Mr. Speaker, by creating a deficit situation in this province so that you can continue to cut programs and services.

You inherited one of the strongest economies in the G7, the lowest unemployment rate in the G7. And what are you doing? You’re wasting that opportunity. Rather than investing in education, in health, in public services, you instead are putting this province at litigation risk of up to a billion dollars. You’re literally flushing away a billion dollars, and it is absolutely irresponsible at a time when you’re cutting transition programs and services for vulnerable people who need to buy food, clothing—

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you.

Government members, I’m having a bit of difficulty this morning listening to the independent member from Scarborough–Guildwood because of the catcalls and heckling from the government benches. I would caution you to retain your decorum as we continue the debate with the member from Carleton.

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Merci, monsieur le Président. Bonne journée.

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I’d just like to let you know that I’m going to be sharing my time with the member from Markham–Stouffville.

Having said that, I’m pleased to stand and rise today to speak here on the budget bill. It’s interesting, listening to the debate that’s going on, especially when I’m hearing from the independent party about how we’re adding to the deficit. I think part of the problem is that Liberal math just doesn’t add up and it has never, ever added up. Even when we’re reducing the deficit, for whatever reason they can’t seem to understand that, and they like to make these grandiose claims despite the facts. Because, at the end of the day, numbers don’t lie, and when you look at our budget, it all adds up. It’s something that we campaigned upon and it’s the responsible thing to do.

Le gouvernement pour la population de l’Ontario s’est engagé à équilibrer le budget de façon responsable et à rétablir la confiance, la transparence et la responsabilité à l’égard des finances de la province. L’équilibre budgétaire contribuera à protéger l’essentiel, soit les services de santé, d’éducation et d’autres services publics cruciaux et fera en sorte que la population ait le financement dont elle a besoin pour les générations à venir.

To reiterate, Mr. Speaker, our government for the people is committed to balancing the budget in a responsible manner, restoring trust, transparency and accountability in the province’s finances. Balancing the budget is not just something that we do for the sake of doing it, but balancing the budget will help protect what matters most: health care, education and other critical services.

Balancing the budget will ensure that the people of Ontario, people like Hina, who has been working in my office and who has helping me out with my campaign for a very long time—Hina and her family; she has three kids, she has a husband, she babysits my dog sometimes. People like Hina are all across Ontario and this budget is for them. This budget is to ensure that Hina’s children have a future, that Hina’s children can rely upon our public education system, and that Hina’s children and children across the province have access to the health care that they need. So, Mr.

Speaker, when we’re balancing the budget, we’re helping Ontarians like Hina and her family, to ensure that they have the funding that they need for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about protecting what matters most, there are three areas, three core areas, in our budget. Those areas are health care, education and relief for families. When we’re talking about health care, our government is investing an additional $384 million in hospitals and an additional $267 million in home and community care. This is essential to end hallway health care and to direct more health care spending to where it’s needed the most. As well, to improve transitions in care and to reduce wait times, our government is creating Ontario health teams to move towards an integrated health care delivery model.

Not only that, we are also making an historic investment of $3.8 billion in mental health. This is also going to go to addictions and housing supports in the next 10 years, beginning with the creation of a mental health and addictions system. Not only that, we’re going to be creating 15,000 new long-term-care beds across the province. We’ve already made that announcement and the beds are already starting to be made.

The second point when we’re talking about protecting what matters most is education. Our government is improving the condition of schools to support better learning and to keep children, like Hina’s children, and students safe by investing $1.4 billion in school renewal just in the 2019-20 academic year. We can already see the advantages of this investment. In my riding alone, Mr. Speaker, the Ministry of Education and the Honourable Minister of Education have already approved funding for two brand new schools: a public high school in Stittsville and a French Catholic elementary school in Manotick.

So, Mr. Speaker, when I’m hearing from the opposition or when I’m hearing from unions that we’re cutting funds to health care or education, it doesn’t make sense to me. People can talk and they can say whatever they want to say, but what really matters are actions, and when I look at the steps taken by our government and when I’m taking a look at the steps taken by our Minister of Education, all of the steps have led to more schools, which, in turn, creates more teacher jobs. It creates more educational opportunities for students. The proof is in the pudding, Mr. Speaker.

I think our actions as a government speak louder than words, and this is just the first year that we’ve been here in power.

Our third point when we’re talking about protecting what matters most is relief for families. Again, Mr. Speaker, I’m reminded of families like Hina and her husband and their children. Hina and her husband are a two-income family, a two-income household, and the past 15 years have been hard on them. They have been hard on all Ontarians. It has been so difficult because, at the end of the day, when the previous Liberal government made those policies, it wasn’t them being affected; it was people like Hina, and the taxpayers of Ontario, that were being affected by these Liberal policies. The Liberals aren’t the ones who are footing the bill; it’s taxpayers.

What we have to remember, Mr. Speaker, is that the taxpayer’s pocket is not bottomless. We as a government have to ensure that we’re respecting taxpayers, that we’re respecting their hard work and that we’re respecting their money. We can’t tax people for the sake of taxing them, because when you tax someone, you’re taking away their other opportunities, whether it’s a family vacation, whether it’s an upgrade to the house, whether it’s getting that new car or whether it’s making a repair to an existing vehicle.

And so, protecting what matters most also includes relief for families. That’s why our government is proposing the new Ontario Childcare Access and Relief from Expenses Tax Credit, or the CARE Tax Credit. This is going to be one of the most flexible child care initiatives ever introduced in Ontario. What it does is, it puts the responsibility on parents, not the government, because parents are at the centre of the decision-making process when it comes to child care. Our CARE Tax Credit is giving about 300,000 families in Ontario up to 75% of their eligible child care expenses.

It’s going to allow families to access a broad range of child care options, including child care centres, homes and summer camps. What this means is that families like Hina’s and others, who maybe haven’t been able to afford to put their child in a summer camp because of the rising bills and the increasing expenses due to the previous policies of the previous government, are finally going to have an opportunity to put their child in summer camp, something that I think every child should experience.

Who are we, as a government, to tell parents how to raise their children? It’s not our role. We’re not a nanny state. I think that’s what makes us very different, as Progressive Conservatives, compared to the other parties: We’re not here to tell parents what to do. Our government is here to create the opportunities to allow parents and to allow families to make whatever choice they deem best for their families and for their children. And so, Mr. Speaker, I’m happy with this new CARE Tax Credit because now parents can finally decide how they want to spend that money and what benefits they actually want to claim.

Not only that, we’re also looking at providing tax relief for families when they need it most. This is a little bit of a difficult topic for me, Mr. Speaker, because this is something that I actually experienced first-hand when I was out campaigning in my riding. There was a gentleman—and I don’t want to give his name—who lives out in Kenmore. I think he knows exactly who he is when he sees us. But this gentleman in Kenmore came to me with an estate administration issue because his wife had passed away.

When families are grieving, it’s difficult to look at these things, and it’s difficult to make those financial decisions right away because you’re going through such a tremendous loss. It took him some time to get to a point where he could finally look at his financials and his estate and his administration, but because he had waited so long, Mr. Speaker, due to the grieving process, he was dinged, and he was dinged big-time by policies that were put in by the previous Liberal government—completely unfair. He’s a single-income, pensioned senior citizen.

Mr. Speaker, before I wrap up, I just wanted to say that part of what we’re doing is that on January 1, 2020, the estate administration tax is going to be eliminated for taxable estates with assets of $50,000 or less.

With that, I’d like to conclude by saying that I am happy to stand here today in support of this bill. I think it’s a fantastic culmination of everything that we campaigned upon. I’m proud to support it, and I’m proud to be part of this Progressive Conservative government to help protect what matters most, which is the people of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member from Carleton did say she was going to share her time with the member from Markham–Stouffville. We turn now to the member from Markham–Stouffville.

Mr. Paul Calandra: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity especially to follow up on the member from Carleton and the remarks she made. She highlighted many of the important measures that are in this budget. As I said just recently in a question to the Liberal Party, obviously we’re put in a situation where we’ve had to make some challenging and some difficult decisions. No government likes to come into office and face—I can’t imagine any government would like to come into office and face the types of challenges that we have faced: a $15-billion deficit, the largest sub-sovereign debt in the world.

Let’s take a moment to think about that. We’re the most indebted sub-sovereign jurisdiction in the world, and despite the fact that we are so indebted, we also face some very challenging choices ahead. We face the need to renew our health care system. We face the need to improve our education system, and we face the very real need to get people moving in terms of building transit and transportation across this province.

I’m going to focus my remarks on some of those, because I think the member for Carleton really highlighted the very important measures in the budget in terms of taxation and making life more affordable for families and why this legislation was so important. But I want to focus on some of the other aspects that are in the budget.

Many of us, when we were campaigning, heard from residents in our communities—and when it comes to education, I want to set aside the results. We’ve had a lot of debate on that, and the minister has made a lot of progress on turning things around in terms of results for our students so they can achieve better. But we also heard from a lot of parents—I know that in my riding, I did—of the need to improve, renovate and repair some of the schools that we have in our communities, that there was a building backlog that had not been touched for many, many years.

Now, clearly, in this budget, we knew as a government going forward that we were going to have to make some decisions on this. What we’ve done is, of course, we’ve made some adjustments to secondary school class sizes. At the same time, we’ve used those adjustments to help us fund an enormous investment in repairing, renovating and updating some of the schools that had needed repair for many, many years. We’ve done that at the same time while protecting new teachers who are wanting to come into the system.

There are a lot of good new teachers who want to come into the system, and when you’re a government faced with a $15-billion deficit, a massive debt, you want to encourage younger people so that they know they have a strong future ahead of them. So what we’ve done in part of these adjustments is—we recognized the fact that there are some teachers who are approaching the end of their careers. We wanted to protect the younger teachers coming in, and this budget does that while making sure that we have money to invest in repairing and renovating schools.

I want to go a little bit further in the time I have left and talk about health care. The budget makes important investments in health care, yes, but more importantly than that, it builds on what the Minister of Health talked about: a new health care system, these Ontario health teams. Now, that is a very, very important change for the province of Ontario, and this budget here helps us implement that over the next number of years.

What is an Ontario health team? It’s a transformation of how we will deliver health care in the province of Ontario. It means that people no longer will feel left out of the health care system, that communities will have better access to care. We’ve heard a lot over the last couple of days about public health. Well, obviously, Mr. Speaker, as the Ontario health teams come into integration, some of these public health services currently handled by public health will be handled by the Ontario health teams, for sure, but a revamped public health system will also still be there and is still going to be supported in this budget.

But we have to recognize the fact that we have a budget to bring into balance. While we’re trying to improve systems, we also have to focus on not only the things that matter most, but we have to focus our resources on doing what is most important. When it comes to public health, we’ve heard a lot over the last couple of days about the city of Toronto. They’ve been very upset. Well, people in my community have said to me, “We need more help.” Some of the communities in rural Ontario have a challenge bringing in professionals, bringing in doctors, bringing in nurses, bringing in the types of programs that they see the city of Toronto has, and they wonder why.

When you look at a residential taxpayer in the city of Markham, for example—we appreciate the fact that the city of Toronto might want to have more services than other areas, but that’s why they’ve been given additional powers of taxation that no other municipality in the province of Ontario has. People in the city of Markham—when you look at the two, when you compare the city of Markham and the city of Toronto, a residential taxpayer in the city of Toronto—same assessed home, exact same value—pays close to $800 less than somebody in the city of Markham.

That’s a choice we’ve made, but it’s also a choice that the city of Toronto is going to have to make going forward when it looks at how it’s going to fund its programs and services.

I know the minister and the Premier made an announcement yesterday so that we can help ease this transition, but make no mistake about it: We have a deficit that we have to hit, a target that we have to hit, and we will hit those targets.

I wanted to briefly, in the few minutes I have left, also talk about transit and transportation, because this is a vital component of how we get our province moving again, how we get our cities and communities moving again, and this budget helps to get us on that way. The Minister of Transportation has brought forward a tremendous plan to get the greater Toronto area moving, but he hasn’t forgotten all of the other areas. He hasn’t forgotten the fact that we need to invest in transit and transportation in the city of Ottawa—and we’ve done that. We’ve done that and we’re doing that.

He hasn’t forgotten that part of getting people around is roads and bridges and infrastructure in rural parts of the province of Ontario, and we’re doing that. But in the GTA, it also means that we have to get people moving, and that means that we can’t sit and wait for transit decisions to be made for years and years.

What we heard yesterday in committee was actually very disappointing, from somebody who comes from outside of the city of Toronto. We heard the NDP talk about the fact that the Toronto Transit Commission is owned only by the people of Toronto, and that the rest of us can’t talk about it because it’s only the city of Toronto that owns that transit system. Well, I of course disagree, because billions of dollars have been spent by people outside of the city of Toronto to build subways in the city of Toronto through infrastructure programs—and not just in the province of Ontario, but across Canada.

Billions of dollars are being sent to the city of Ottawa by people in my riding to support light rail in Ottawa—to support light rail in Hamilton. We all own these assets. To suggest that only the city of Toronto has anything to do with transit is to suggest that the rest of us need not apply. To hear members opposite in certain communities fight for that and to suggest—to hear the member for St.

Catharines or the member from Kitchener or the member from Oshawa suggest that, no, it’s only the city of Toronto, when our taxpayers have spent billions of dollars to support those transit systems, is completely unacceptable.

When you put it in context, Mr. Speaker, when you put it in the context of the property rate taxpayer who, in the city of Markham, in the town of Stouffville, pays significantly more for property taxes than they do in the city of Toronto, despite the fact that they have additional taxing tools than others do, we say this: If you want programs and services, be they gold-plated more than others, then you’re going to have to pay for that. That’s why you have the tools. Those are decisions you will have to make.

Our decision right now, as a government, is to balance the budget, to pay down debt and to do it in a responsible fashion over the next five years, so that we can actually continue to invest in what matters most to people. For me right now, that’s health, that’s education and that’s transit and transportation. We’re getting the job done for the people of Ontario despite all of the—

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

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I’m honoured to take two minutes to chat about some of the details that have come across the floor. Some of it confuses me. One thing that I can agree on is that budgets don’t lie. Budgets don’t lie, and they tell you what your priorities are.

What I find fascinating is that the member from Carleton also said that actions speak louder than words. But what we’re seeing is a real tension between the actions from the government and the budget line items and what they’re actually saying. There’s lots of tension, is what I’m saying to you right now.

I know that Ontario residents are concerned about what this government believes the priorities should be. I know that this budget speaks about making sure that the money is aligned with their own priorities. The question becomes: Are the government’s priorities the same as the residents of Ontario’s?

If we think about health care, it’s quite fascinating. Right now, we keep hearing that mental health is going to be infused with $3.8 billion. I just want to read something from the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council. They released a report entitled Conversations of Substance: Youth in Waterloo Region on Issues of Substance Abuse. There’s a young person who, in their own words, described their experiences with mental health concerns and accessing the health care system. They say, “I am being treated like a criminal because there is something wrong with my brain, something that I didn’t choose to happen to me.”

I think about how this is the life of a young person in my area, in Waterloo region, how this is them trying to access this health care system—which I’ve been told the government really has a priority for—and yet they are being criminalized. That’s actually what is happening when we fight the safe injection sites—people are being criminalized. And so I really want us to sit back and try to align the priorities of Ontario and the priorities in this budget.

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

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: It’s a privilege and an honour to be able to stand and represent the people of Niagara West this morning, and also to respond to the excellent contributions to debate that were brought forward by the member for Markham–Stouffville and the member for Carleton. Thank you both very much for your passion for this province and also for ensuring that we get the province back on track.

Speaker, I have to say, I’m very interested to hear also the comments coming across from members of the opposition. I have some friends in Alberta. They just recently elected a United Conservative Party there. One of the fascinating things I noticed was that Premier Kenney there has actually brought on board a former New Democrat finance minister from Saskatchewan. She, Janice MacKinnon, has been brought on in order to help see where they can get back to balance, to ensure that they’re spending efficiently and to ensure that they are in fact balancing the budget.

Former Minister MacKinnon says, “I actually faced the prospect of [Saskatchewan] going into bankruptcy because for years governments ignored the warning signs of mounting debt and deficits, and they failed to act.” This is a New Democrat finance minister who understood the need to make significant and substantial change in a province that was facing bankruptcy. Frankly, Speaker, that’s the situation that Ontario has been put in by 15 years of Liberal waste and mismanagement and spending that far exceeded our income.

We are taking the steps that are necessary to get this province on track. That’s really what Bill 100 is all about. Yes, we can get talking about particular components. I’m very proud of the CARE Tax Credit and very proud of the different portions of this that invest in infrastructure and health care and education. But really, what this bill brings forward is a blueprint to sustainability, to ensuring that the core services that Ontarians expect and depend on are here not just today, but for the future as well.

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

Mr. Joel Harden: It’s a rise—it’s a pleasure; I get a rise out of rising to speak to the government’s budget bill today.

So I ask you: When the government cuts $1 billion in income tax for some of the largest employers in this province, when they cut taxes for the wealthiest people in this province at a cost of $275 million—it might be more entertaining, if I could be cynical for a second, because I am an optimistic person, to just have an over-ground swimming pool in the front yard at Queen’s Park and put in all that money you’re lavishing on all these insiders and light it on fire, because that’s about as much use as the people of Ontario get from hiring these insiders and these consultants.

Take the hard-earned tax money that people in this province give to us to preside over public services and make investments in our future and put it to work. Have some faith in the high-ranking policy people who work for this government. Don’t hire your buddies to give you the advice which is getting you into trouble, quite frankly. Stop thinking about this province as something that needs to be sold. Think about this province as something we need to invest in to make sure we get ahead.

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: Mr. Speaker, I am so proud to rise this morning to speak in support of this bill, Bill 100. We often hear in this House—whether it was this morning, addressing this bill, or when we’re sitting in the Legislature—about the need for this government to protect what matters most. That’s not just a line. It’s a fundamental shift in how we govern. And the reason we are saying this, the reason we are introducing this shift and these different policies, is because this government was handed a fiscal nightmare following 15 years of reckless spending by the previous Liberal government.

There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t hear from a constituent or another resident from a community across Ontario who references their frustration with the current health care system. They’re tired of seeing loved ones languishing in hallways and our hospitals. They’re frustrated with the inability to find adequate long-term care for family members, for loved ones. That is why we have introduced these changes: to find efficiencies so that we can invest in the things that matter most to Ontarians, like public health care, public education.

We are finding efficiencies to invest $1.5 billion more in long-term care, $1.8 billion in mental health services, millions and millions of dollars for dental care for our seniors.

I’ve heard from constituents, including local business owners, health care providers, that they are excited about the positive changes that we are introducing—changes that we can introduce that will make a difference, to allow us to protect what matters most. They’re in Bill 100. I’m proud to stand in support of it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We’ll return now to the member from Markham-Stouffville to summarize what he has heard in the last eight minutes since he concluded his portion of the debate.

Mr. Paul Calandra: I thank all the members for their comments.

The member for Kitchener mentioned access to health care, and that’s really one of the priorities of what the Minister of Health has been doing, because we’ve heard this time and time and time again: It’s not just about the opioid crisis. That’s hugely important. That’s why we’ve brought forward some measures over the last day to attack this even further. But we also heard from health care professionals in my riding and across the province of Ontario about seniors, seniors who end up back in emergency rooms because they don’t know how to access long-term care. Well, that’s a system that doesn’t work and that’s why we have to change that system, Mr. Speaker.

Now, the member for Ottawa Centre talked about contracts, and broken contracts. I too like to talk about contracts. I like to talk about those contracts for green energy that we no longer are funding, which would save us $1 billion, colleagues. Those are the contracts I like to talk about. Why do we have contracts for $1 billion in energy that we don’t need? Because the member opposite and his friends in Environmental Defence and the Suzuki foundation sold the previous government, when they were in coalition, a bill of goods on green energy.

They told them, “Let’s buy into green energy and create hundreds of thousands of jobs.” Did it? No. What they did was they sold them green energy high and made the people of Ontario pay the bill—billions of dollars in extra costs on energy, which drove people out.

The contracts I like to talk about are the ones that we’re preserving—in the member’s own community, light rail—because we’ve changed the fiscal framework. Because we’re putting Ontario back on the right track, they’re able to have light rail in his community, Mr. Speaker.

This is all about what matters most. It’s all about putting people first. It’s about making sure that we have the resources that the province needs to fund health care, education, social services, and transit and transportation in the future, and I do hope the members will consider voting in favour of those very important—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you.

Notice of reasoned amendment

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 71(b), the member for Timmins and the member for Ottawa–Vanier have notified the Clerk of their intention to file notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 115,

An Act to amend the Liquor Control Act with respect to the termination of a specified agreement. The order for second reading of Bill 115 may therefore not be called today.

Protecting What Matters Most Act (Budget Measures), 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour protéger l’essentiel (mesures budgétaires)

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate? The member for Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Thank you, Speaker. Yes, I find it great that I’m rising to speak on the booze budget that has been presented by the PC Party. Thank you for allowing me to rise today and speak to this government’s first budget—an important budget, a budget that will let all Ontario see who they truly are, see who they truly represent. It’s not me. It’s not most people in this province. It’s their friends, rich insiders in Ontario, who were banking on the PCs to win the election so they could strip regulations, lower the minimum wage, ignore the environment, and attack unionized workers like they did yesterday.

They got what they wanted, and now, unfortunately, the people of Ontario are paying for it. This budget clearly lays out the beginning of their pathway forward to bring Ontario backwards and hurt the most vulnerable among us.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to start by talking about one of the most important aspects of our entire province: our universal public health care system, a system that is the pride of Canadians, not just Ontarians. My riding in Niagara is right across the border, as you would know, Madam—almost Madam Speaker—Speaker. You just have to cross that border to see the damage a private health system has had on their system.

It’s the moustache.

This PC government may not have turned our health system into the United States yet, but this budget starts to chip away at the system that we all rely on. And I’m not going to let the Liberals off the hook. For years, the Liberals froze the budgets. And when you talk about efficiencies and all that stuff, you know what? There’s no more juice in the can. They have gotten all the efficiencies they’ve had to do because they weren’t being funded properly. That’s why we ended up with hallway medicine.

I know the members across from me want to say the numbers are going up, that health care spending has increased, but what’s important to note is that those increases in physical dollars are so small that they don’t even keep up to the rate of inflation or take in the fact that we’re an aging society.

Mr. Speaker, the PC government estimates a 1.6% annual increase over the period from 2018 to 2022. General inflation is going to run at 1.9%, which means we’re going to continue to get behind in the health care budget. It should be somewhere around 5%. Make no mistake about it: They’re cutting health care. They can stand up and say they’re not. They are. Hospitals were already operating on inadequate funding. We all know that hallway medicine started under the past Liberal government. Health care costs increased—inflation, population, our growth—and the Liberals let it go that way.

We now have people who aren’t going to be staying in the hospital hallways; they’re going to be in the parking lots.

I want to say, in Niagara—it’s too bad the member from Niagara West—sorry, I’ll backtrack on that.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member from Niagara Falls knows well what he is allowed to do and not to do.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Let’s pretend he’s here, then.

The Niagara West member—I’ve talked to him about mental health in Niagara; I’ve talked to the health minister until I’m blue in the face. We have a crisis in Niagara. People are dying in Niagara. It’s young people, middle-aged people, all walks of life. I’m begging this government to help us in Niagara, to support my motion and give $2.5 million year over year so we can get more mental health services in Niagara.

We just had a story, a front-page story, in the Niagara Falls paper, the St. Catharines paper and the Welland paper about a gentleman who went to the hospital begging for help. They kept him for four hours, because they don’t have the beds, they don’t have the services, they don’t have the resources. Do you know what that person did? He left that hospital after he begged for help, and he jumped into the falls. He committed suicide. It happened in December; they still haven’t found his body. So I’m begging that if you want to say you care about mental health, help us in Niagara.

Too many people in Niagara are dying because of mental health issues, and they can’t get the help they rightly deserve.

Down in Niagara Falls we have been waiting for construction of a new hospital for six years. They have one of the prettiest signs in Niagara Falls: “Home of the new hospital.” Six years it has been going on. I learned after speaking with the head of the Niagara Health System that the current project is again at stage 2. All they’re doing is stalling.

But here’s what happened in Niagara. I’d like the PCs to listen to this because it has happened in a number of communities. The hospital closures weren’t done by the PCs; they’ve done enough mess in eight or nine months. It was done by the Liberals. Do you know what they did in Niagara? They closed the hospital in Niagara-on-the-Lake. They closed the hospital in Fort Erie. They closed the hospital in St. Catharines. And my favourite is that in Niagara Falls, they took the mental health services out of our hospitals and transferred them from Niagara Falls to St. Catharines.

If people are suffering with mental health issues, how do they get to St. Catharines? How do they get there? They closed up the facility.

Here’s the best one—I’ve said this in the House before. How many people go to Niagara Falls on their honeymoon? They go enjoy a weekend away with their partner. How many go there and they end up, “We can go there and make babies”? You know what they did in Niagara Falls? They took the maternity out of Niagara Falls. So you can make them in Niagara Falls; you can’t deliver them in Niagara Falls. It makes absolutely no sense. Why would that happen in the province of Ontario? So I’m saying, let’s get our new hospital in Niagara Falls built, get it under construction and stop the stalling of it. It’s so important down in Niagara.

There is definitely some concern when I look at the budget and see the approach this government is taking with health care in the province of Ontario.

Before I move on—it’s not in the budget. I’m going to ask all of you, when you get your two-minute hit and you want to say whatever you want to say on my 20 minutes, you go ahead, but how do you not have something in your budget that talks about the auto sector? How is there nothing in the budget when, before the budget came out, Oshawa was faced with a closure?

I know the Premier said the ship had left: “It’s closing. It’s gone.” Good thing those workers were represented by a good, strong union and they said, “No, we’re not going to stand for that,” and they fought back. Did they win the whole battle? Did they get the whole loaf of bread? No. But they kept a footprint open and saved some of those jobs. That particular community was losing 20,000 jobs, and they’re good-paying jobs, good union jobs, so they can raise their family and raise their kids and put them through education.

Then you go down a little further into your community, Mr. Speaker, into Windsor. They’re losing an entire shift; 1,500 people are going to lose their jobs in Windsor as it stands today. And again, the president of 444, my good friend Dave Cassidy, called the Premier over and over again: “I want to talk to you. What can we do to save these jobs?” The Premier never called him back until your colleague from Windsor West sent a letter and went over and talked to the Premier personally. Then he called him once but never got back to him about it.

How can you not have an auto strategy for the province of Ontario when they’re good-paying jobs, when they say, “We’re open for business”? This is a mistake. It’s a mistake. It’s one of the most important industries. There’s a lot of important industries in the province of Ontario, but I believe none are more important for good-paying jobs than the auto sector, and you missed an opportunity to protect the auto sector in this budget.

The cuts outlined in this budget seem to be a pattern for this government. Since the introduction of this budget, we have witnessed this government continue to attempt to cut important services in the province, like public health departments. We saw from this absolute disaster of a policy decision that this government does not consult with people, organizations or municipalities.

And yesterday—yesterday was good. They backtracked—sort of, because they’re still going to go ahead with the cuts in a year. But wouldn’t it have made more sense—and, again, I don’t know; I’m just an MPP from Niagara Falls. But wouldn’t it make more sense that, before you put a policy out and do what you did, you actually consult with the municipalities and the mayors before you come and put a policy in place that you have to find out nobody agrees with—even though they thought they had control of Toronto council?

Because of what they did in cutting the council, they thought they had control of it and they could do what they wanted and get support from the PC friends on that council. Even the PC friends—except, I believe, a relative of the Premier—voted against the cuts, and they had to backtrack. I’m saying to the government that before do you that, consult. Go around the province. Find out what the municipalities want. That’s what you have to do.

It’s not a win for the government. Quite frankly, it’s a win for the municipalities that stood up and talked to him. They want to walk back these public health care cuts now, and they were hammered by the municipalities in the province. Really, I think it’s because of the ratings in the polls they were seeing.

Let me talk for a bit about the idea of cutting public health in our province.

Down in Niagara, I’ve met with our current head of public health twice now, and let me tell you, they are very concerned. This government loves to talk about the fiscal crisis they walked into once they were elected. We know that doesn’t mean that the previous Liberal government was throwing money around to every organization. We know that because they were not increasing the funding for public health. They had three years of frozen funding by the Liberal government. We know that every year, our public health department had a frozen budget and they had to find ways to do more with less.

They have found all the efficiencies they can. Mr. Speaker, they have worked with less for a while now, and they still provide these vital services. They don’t need further downloading from this province.

Let’s see what happens when we attack public services. We can look at a tragedy like Walkerton or the outbreak of SARS to see how important public health organizations are to the communities across Ontario. SARS: 42 people in Toronto died from that—42. It killed tourism for years. People didn’t come to Niagara Falls for years. They blamed it on the high Canadian dollar, and some of that might have been accurate, but they didn’t come because of SARS. Do you know what that does to tourism and the economic growth of the province? And what do you do? You cut public health. People end up dying.

They’re not getting sick; they’re dying. You know what? We’re only allowed to live once. It shouldn’t be cut short because of cuts to public health.

This government is absolutely no different. I understand the government has had a change of heart on public health, and I’m telling you, I’m glad of that. But I want to say to the municipalities that said to this government, “We’re going to make sure you change your mind”—and they did. But don’t get too excited about this change of heart from this government. The mission for them is still to cut, cut and cut with no regard for how it affects people in our province.

We all saw the polling numbers. We know that this PC government is struggling to stay afloat because of what they’re doing to people. When I say the polling numbers—you know, sometimes the only poll that matters is on election day, but when you’re tied with the Marijuana Party in the province of Ontario, you start to get concerned. People are starting to feel the pain. Maybe when these polling numbers bounce back up and Mr. Scheer is done campaigning this fall, I wouldn’t be surprised to see these cuts come right back. It’s what the PCs do.

I want to talk a little bit—I’ve got some time left—about what happened yesterday with the Beer Stores. We’re talking about convenience. Again, it’s really what the budget was about: booze. We’re going to potentially lose 8,000 good-paying union jobs that have good wages, good benefits; I’m not sure if they have pensions or not. It’s nothing more than an attack against unions. They’re saying, “We’re going to increase jobs in convenience stores.” The reality is that convenience stores don’t pay the same types of wages and benefits that are paid in unionized jobs—another mistake.

I think it’s important that we don’t just talk about health care or public health without talking about mental health in the province. Mental health care is one of the most important issues that we face in this country, and I know it’s a difficult challenge. I’ll do a little bit about Niagara, but I won’t get into making a mistake on mentioning anything else. In Niagara, we have unfortunately seen how devastating the outcomes can be when people can’t access services that they desperately need.

Too many people have taken their lives in Niagara recently for me to simply sit by and not stand up when this government ignores mental health issues that exist throughout our province. That’s a tough one, the crisis in Niagara.

This government has cut $330 million a year from mental health funding. It’s one of the first things they did. I want everyone to stop and think about what happens when vital services that you depend on are cut right out from below your feet. It causes stress. It causes stress for the individuals, for the family and, quite frankly, for the community. We are witnessing the anxiety with families right now that have children with autism. It creates an incredible amount of undue stress that can ultimately affect someone’s mental health.

Mr. Speaker, another area of the budget that is extremely important to me is the area of education. In the fashion of this government, they have once again sought to reduce, cut and dismantle our education system. They can’t seem to help themselves when it comes to rolling back essential services for the people in this province. They had no problem forking out $1 billion to a corporation so they can buy a beer from a corner store, but if you want them to invest in your children’s education—well, we have a fiscal crisis that needs to be addressed.

So what are we seeing from this budget on education? The same thing we saw in health care: Spending does not keep up with inflation. School boards are already notifying the public that class sizes are increasing, teachers are being laid off and the quality of children’s education will be significantly reduced.

The one thing I always said—I’ve said this a number of times in this House. Remember Tim Hudak? I know some of the people who are here were part of his government. He was honest. He said that he was going to cut 100,000 jobs. They’re doing the same thing in the province of Ontario today, but what they’re saying is that nobody will voluntarily lose their job. But here’s how I think, and they can correct me if I’m wrong: On June 30, when school ends and there are 30,000 teachers—whatever the number is in the province of Ontario—if, when they go back in September, there’s 24,000 people having teachers’ jobs, you’ve lost 6,000 jobs.

We have kids, maybe your kids, maybe your grandkids, who today are in university who want to be teachers. They want to graduate into a job to be a teacher and teach our young people who are in front of us, the pages. They won’t have that opportunity. They spent thousands of dollars getting a good education, thousands of dollars trying to get the opportunity to be a teacher. So when they say there’s going to be nobody losing their job, there’s job loss. There’s job loss. There’s layoffs any way you cut it. I don’t think that’s acceptable in this province. In such a rich and vibrant part of the world, our children should be getting a quality education.

I wish I could say that things get better as you go through the budget, but they don’t. The budget talks about the expanding alcohol sales, and I already mentioned that. That seems to be a big priority in this government, how much you can buy. Climate change, labour protection, quality education and health care don’t seem to be very high on the priority list.

I have a particular concern when it comes to the expansion of alcohol sales into convenience stores. This is important for you guys to listen to, including the rural people who are in your party. My riding is home to a large number of wineries in Niagara, and they make some of the best wines in the entire world. But my concern—which was raised to me, by the way, by the Grape Growers of Ontario—is the possibility of the large wineries, with few Ontario-grown grapes, or international wines filling up the shelves in convenience stores.

The wine industry creates good jobs. It helps preserve our greenbelt. It helps preserve our greenbelt, which I hope this government is going to make sure they do. I think it’s important that we work to ensure our local VQA and 100%-Ontario-grape wines are properly supported and promoted in this province.

Mr. Speaker, the last issue I want to talk about is obviously something that’s very important to me: the protection of workers in this province. This budget falls miserably short and does more to roll back the protection of workers than it does to advance them. It’s clear once again that workers are left behind while the employer gets handouts courtesy of this government.

Here’s one that I talked about yesterday in a question, Mr. Speaker: They cut the employer contribution by $1.45 billion—that’s with a B—to WSIB. That’s $1.45 billion. Yet, what are we hearing about the new review of the WSIB? We apparently need to find cost-saving efficiencies from the private sector for its long-term financial stability. We know what that really means. How can the WSIB cut back on workers’ claims even more? But if this government is so concerned about the WSIB’s financial stability, why are they giving their millionaire big-business friends a $1.45-billion gift? That’s with a B.

When I was growing up, I had never even heard of a billion dollars. We know exactly what this review is and what it will mean for workers. The WSIB will further cut back and not provide injured workers with the compensation they are owed.

I’d like to talk a little longer, but my time is up. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Yes, your time was done a couple of minutes ago, but we let you go on anyway. That way, we wouldn’t do questions and comments today, and we’ll pick up with questions and comments the next time this comes before us.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): I know Norm Sterling will get a fulsome introduction at the beginning of question period, but welcome back to the Legislature, Norm.

This House will now stand in recess until 10:30 and question period.

The House recessed from 1017 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before I invite the members to introduce their guests, I would like to introduce a special guest who is here today. A former member of the Ontario Legislature, representing the riding of Carleton–Grenville in the 31st to 33rd Parliaments, the Carleton riding in the 34th to 36th Parliaments, Lanark–Carleton in the 37th and 38th Parliaments, and Carleton–Mississippi Mills in the 39th Parliament, Mr. Norm Sterling, and his wife, Joan Sterling, are here with us today. Welcome back.

Mr. Chris Glover: It’s my pleasure to welcome two friends of mine, Mara Boedo and Pixie George-Benjamin, to Queen’s Park. Both are dedicated education workers with CUPE 4400 at the TDSB.

I’d also like to take a moment to wish all CUPE workers in Ontario who are attending their 56th annual convention this week best wishes for a very fruitful discussion in Toronto.

I’d also like to welcome Michau van Speyk.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Introduction of visitors? Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry.

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you very much, Speaker. I, too, would like to introduce Norm Sterling. Norm was instrumental in getting me to run for this office, so you can blame him. I also want to introduce his wife, Joan, which you did. Joan worked for me for several years and was a tremendous asset in my office. One of the reasons that they’re here this morning is because they are the grandparents of Jackson Stearns, who is here for Kingston and the Islands as a page in the Parliament for the next couple of weeks.

Ms.

Jill Andrew: Joining us in the House today after my press conference this morning on saving Ontario library services, we have Megan Houston, executive director at Ontario Ancestors; Phil Gold, president of CUPE 905 library workers at Vaughan Public Libraries; Emma Lee, a Toronto Public Library worker at Fairview library; Viveca Gretton, a Toronto Public Library worker at North York Central Library; Gobi Sooriyakumar, a Toronto Public Library worker at Agincourt library; Teresa Gowman, CUPE 960 president and an Oshawa Public Libraries worker; Carmela Corrado, a Toronto Public Library worker at Albion library; and Wendy Rhead, a municipal appointee at Brock township library board.

Welcome to the Legislative Assembly. Thank you for all your hard work.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before we continue, I’m going to remind all members that it is not appropriate to be making political statements in the context of our introduction of guests.

Introduction of visitors? Member for Mississauga–Erin Mills.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome Ms. Mariam Ishak, the federal candidate coming all the way from Pierrefonds–Dollard, Quebec, to get some oversight of our Parliament in Queen’s Park. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and best of luck.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will say once again that it’s not appropriate to be making political statements in the context of the introduction of visitors.

The Minister of Transportation. Please do not make a political statement as you introduce your visitors.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Mr. Speaker, I have a number of guests here today: Kelly Franklin, who is the founder and CEO of the Courage for Freedom division of Farmtown Canada and project lead for Project ONroute; Ashley Boyes, a lawyer for Global Shapers Toronto hub and Project ONroute/Global Shapers project lead; Lorry Dawdy, the Courage for Freedom division of Farmtown Canada director; Candice Van Diepen, who has taken pictures with them and who is also an Elgin county resident; Heather Ellis, BPW Ontario/Project ONroute project lead; and Linda Davis, BPW Canada president.

Mr. Speaker, this isn’t partisan: July 30, Project ONroute. I hope all MPPs are part of this, to end human sex trafficking for our minors in the system. Be part of this on July 30.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: I’d like to welcome Lark Barker from my riding and also welcome back Faith and Michau.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Please join me in welcoming, from the beautiful riding of Dufferin–Caledon, specifically Bolton, Vanessa Abruscato to Queen’s Park. Welcome.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to welcome Dave Stimac, Toby Stolee, Sue Wastell and Lois Langdon from the London Home Builders’ Association. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Bill Walker: This is not a political statement, but it is a bit of a sports statement. We want to congratulate Constable Greg Rogers, part of our legislative security team, who has become a grandpa for the second time. This time, it is Easton Tony Nicholas McGillivray, who came into this world at five pounds, six ounces and 19 inches on May 5 to mother Nikole McGillivray and father Grant McGillivray. Last night, Easton, Kowen and Greg all cheered on the Bruins’ victory.

Mr. Aris Babikian: I would like to welcome back to the House Aris Movsessian, better known as Junior, my youngest volunteer.

Ms. Jill Dunlop: I have a few guests this morning. I would like to welcome Dennis Rizzo, who is the father of Ariana Rizzo, who is our page from Simcoe North.

I would also like to welcome Marcus Smith and his mother, Alicia, and sister, Simone. Marcus and his mom are huge advocates for dyslexia, and Marcus was meeting with myself this morning and with Minister Thompson. Thank you for being here and thank you for sharing and being so brave, Marcus.

Mrs. Amy Fee: I’d like to welcome, from the riding of Kitchener South–Hespeler, Louis and Sharon Zister. They are the grandparents of one of our pages, Sadee Zister.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Transportation once again.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Sorry, Speaker, I missed one person up here: Delia Reiche, from our area—economic powerhouse down in southwestern Ontario.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I’d like to welcome, from Parkdale–High Park, my good friend Crystal.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): With us in the Speaker’s gallery this morning are interns from l’Assemblée nationale du Québec avec la Fondation Jean-Charles-Bonenfant : Benoit Bérubé, Karim Chahine, Catherine Gagnon, Christian Jaouich et Astrid Martin. Bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

Also in the Speaker’s gallery this morning are guests from Manila, the Philippines: Doy, Rafaela and Isabella Roque, Floro and Rosette Oquias, and Chloe and Soleil Oquias-Natividad. Here today with them are Howard Brown and Kim Cohen. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Legislative pages

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would now ask our pages to assemble for their introductions.

This is most likely the final group of pages for this spring sitting of the 42nd Parliament, and I’d like to introduce them at this time. From the riding of Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, Aaryan Harshith; from the riding of Kanata–Carleton, Alexis Kam; from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, Amelia Markson; from Simcoe North, Ariana Rizzo; from Scarborough–Guildwood, Catherine Walke; from the riding of Mississauga–Streetsville, Christopher Xiang; from Toronto–St.

Paul’s, Declan Fowler; from York South–Weston, Felipe Gaertner; from Brampton South, Gia Chahal; from the riding of Pickering–Uxbridge, Hillary Brown; from Markham–Stouffville, Jack Lynch; from the riding of Kingston and the Islands, Jackson Stearns; from the riding of University–Rosedale, Julien Levit; from Eglinton–Lawrence, Kian Ahari; from Davenport, Liam Ung; from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, Maisie Cottrill; from Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte, Matthew Crank; from the riding of Oakville, Monica Nicole Crawford; from Orléans, Patrick Osezua; from Brampton North, Richelle Furtado; from Kitchener–Conestoga, Sadee Zister; from Mississauga–Erin Mills, Samantha Carson; and from Ottawa West–Nepean, Sophia Stocki.

I would ask the members to join with me in warmly welcoming this fine group of legislative pages.

Applause.

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

Oral Questions

Government fiscal policies

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier. Yesterday, the Premier finally admitted what Ontario families, mayors, municipal councillors, medical professionals and most of his caucus already knew: that his plan for retroactive cuts to everything from public health to child care to emergency services was reckless, irresponsible and put families at risk—yet the Premier still claims that he plans to make the same cuts, just next year.

Why does the Premier think that the cuts that failed so disastrously this year are going to work better next year?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Our government was elected to clean up 15 years of mess that the opposition created, the Liberal government created—$347 billion. And just think: Over the last 10 years, they’ve doubled the debt. The NDP doubled the debt, along with their partners, the Liberals. We were elected to clean up the mess.

I’m glad to see the municipal partners that we spoke to yesterday, many mayors right across this province, acknowledge there’s actually waste to be found. There is tons of waste in federal, provincial and municipal governments. I know the NDP and the Liberals haven’t come to realize how much waste there is of taxpayers’ money down here. We were elected to clean it up.

We look forward to working with our municipal partners. They have acknowledged that there’s waste, and we’re going to give them a little more runway. It’s a good-news story. The news story yesterday was a good-news story—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members, please take their seats. Order.

Start the clock. Supplementary question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: For months, the Premier has stood in his place and denied the damage his budget was causing. Anyone who raised legitimate concerns was “fearmongering.” Anyone who pointed to a serious problem was “spreading false information.” Now, even when he has been forced to admit he was wrong, it’s unbelievable that the Premier is still planning to impose the same municipal cuts next year that failed this year. If that’s not the case, what other services to people is he planning to cut as part of his fiscal fantasy?

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, we listened to the municipalities. We are a government that listens. We heard that they can save money. They know there is a tremendous amount of waste in this government. Not only that, we’re going to provide them with $7.35 million to support them in finding efficiencies. Actually, a lot of the mayors I spoke to are looking forward to taking advantage of the $7.35 million. We’re also providing $200 million we’ve committed to small, rural municipalities to modernize services.

I don’t know what the opposition doesn’t get. This can’t go on. It just can’t go on, spending and spending and wasting taxpayers’ money.

We have to start respecting the taxpayers. Every single dollar from the day we got elected until the day of the next election—we’re going to watch every single penny that this government spends.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The opposition has to come to order. The member for Waterloo must come to order.

Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I guess the Premier found out the hard way that emergency services, public health and child care are not a waste of people’s tax dollars, Speaker. They are necessary services that people and families rely on.

But the reality is that even as the Ford government scrambles to do damage control, very little has changed. They’re still moving ahead with cuts to municipal transit funding. They’re still ramming through Bill 108, the biggest gift to developers that this province has ever seen, despite serious concerns from municipal leaders. And they’re still planning to make the same cuts next year that were a disaster this year.

If the Premier actually listens to municipal leaders, what does he plan to do when they tell him they can’t afford these cuts this year or next year, Speaker?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member for King–Vaughan must come to order. The Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry must come to order. The member for Kitchener–Conestoga must come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Yes, you are.

Start the clock. Premier?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition got it bang on. She said we’re in damage control. We’ve been in damage control since June 7 when we looked at the books. The damage that they created—the Liberals created—there has been so much damage in this province. I’ve never seen anything like it.

Mr. Speaker, when you talk to the small business owners and business owners right around this province, they’re as happy as punch. When you talk to the average person—you go out there, you speak to them—they’re as happy as punch that someone finally has the backbone to stand up to other governments to say we need to find efficiencies.

Mr. Speaker, as sure as I’m standing here, they’re going to find efficiencies, because there is no one on this planet who doesn’t believe there is one, two, three or four cents’ waste in any level of government. The only people who believe there is no waste are the NDP and the Liberals, because they created the waste.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. I know there is a lot of excitement and enthusiasm in the House today, but I would ask the members to allow the person who has the floor, whether they’re asking a question or making a response, to make it without shouting at them.

Start the clock.

Government contract

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is to the Premier, but I’ll remind him that this June 7 is the anniversary of all of the damage this government has done for a year that people are already sick and tired of, Speaker—very clearly.

Yesterday, the Ford government revealed to Ontarians that their plans to rip up Ontario’s contract with the Beer Store are going forward, and they’re going to enter into yet another legal battle that is set to cost Ontario families hundreds and millions of dollars.

Can the Premier provide an estimate of exactly how much Ontarians anticipate paying to get out of this contract?

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, we campaigned on making sure we kept a promise to bring more choice and convenience to the people.

I don’t know what the NDP—if they don’t want to give the people choice, or do they want to keep it with one of the conglomerates, as I say, one of the multinational—international global beer companies, three of the largest in the world, control the market. It was a terrible deal. It was an absolute, terrible deal that the Liberals put forward, a 10-year deal—I don’t know who signs 10-year deals—to have a monopoly.

What beer company, Mr. Speaker, would not want more distribution? What is the reason? Anywhere in the world—this only happens in Ontario, that three beer companies control the market. It’s absolutely unheard of. What is the reason the Beer Store—

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

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Niagara Falls to come to order, and the member for Orléans to come to order.

Supplementary question?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, beer is fine, but it’s certainly not my priority, and certainly not for hundreds of millions of public dollars.

But with only two weeks left in the Legislature, the government is suddenly introducing legislation to force through a contract cancellation that could literally cost hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of jobs. The government points to this bad deal, this particular bad deal signed by the Liberal government, but the Ford government happily maintains other bad Liberal deals, like private hydro schemes and private hospitals.

Somehow, a group of well-connected lobbyists has the Premier ready to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in public money to rip up this particular contract. So my question is: Why is the issue of dissolving contracts with the Beer Store so urgent for this government?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you, Premier. This is not just about beer and wine. This is not just about choice and convenience. This is about creating fairness for the people of Ontario.

To be clear, the government does not own the Beer Store, as many people believe. It is owned by three global beer multinational corporations. Ken Hughes, our special adviser, stated that the Liberals’ sweetheart deal with these multinationals is the obstacle to us delivering on our commitment. Mr. Hughes states that it is a “bad deal for” all “Ontarians,” that it “stifles competition, keeps prices artificially high, and prevents new craft beer entrepreneurs from getting a strong foothold in the market.”

The previous government put multinational profits ahead of our families.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What this is about is the Premier’s priorities. Families in Ontario want excellent schools for their kids. They want health care that they can count on. But when they look to this Premier for leadership, Speaker—

Interjections.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: —the only thing he is offering is beer.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition. The government side must come to order. The volume is growing progressively louder. I can barely hear the Leader of the Opposition.

Start the clock. Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: When they look to this Premier and his priorities, all they see is somebody who is offering more beer. Really? That’s the priority for Ontario families? The Premier is ready to lose 7,000 jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars in a fight with the Beer Store, but he can’t find funding for children with autism. What kind of priority is that, Speaker? How did the Premier lose any sense of Ontario’s priorities?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government side, come to order. Minister of Finance to reply.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Well, it’s obvious that the NDP do not understand that our parliamentary system gives us the tools to get out of these bad deals signed by previous governments. Our legislation ensures we can get the best possible deal and consumers and taxpayers won’t be held hostage by multinational companies. This sweetheart deal is “a terrible deal for Ontario consumers and small businesses.” Left alone, it will continue the unfairness of this system for the next six years.

You have to wonder why these multinationals supported by the NDP would be so opposed to selling their products in more convenience stores, more grocery stores and big box stores. It’s because the sweetheart deal with the Liberals is so lucrative that they are choosing to ignore the economic opportunities before us, the 9,000 new jobs that can be created, the $3.5 billion that will be added to our—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. The next question.

Health care funding

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My final question in this round is to the Premier again. But I’ve got to say, the Premier and his caucus and his cabinet like to call everybody “fear-mongerers.” Well, they’re nothing but beer-mongerers.

Yesterday, the Financial Accountability Office tabled their report looking into spending at the Ministry of Health. The Premier insists that spending is on the increase, but when the FAO dove into the numbers, they found something quite different.

Perhaps the backbenchers would like to hear exactly what the FAO said in this report, Speaker, and I’ll tell you what they note: “The 2019 budget projects a net spending reduction of $2.7 billion over the next two years.” This is in the Ministry of Health. They also note: “The FAO cannot disclose the $2.7 billion reduction ... by program area, as the province has deemed this information to be a cabinet record.”

Can the Premier tell us what health services he plans to cut in order to find $2.7 billion and why the Ford government would try to keep that information secret?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member for Whitby must come to order. The member for King–Vaughan must come to order. The entire government side needs to come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The opposition must come to order.

Start the clock. The Premier to reply.

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Certainly, we thank the FAO for his report and his confirmation that our government’s measured, thoughtful and responsible path to balance is credible, and the plan laid out in budget 2019 will put the province on a sustainable footing.

Speaker, the title, Protecting What Matters Most, says everything. We’re taking a balanced approach to managing the province’s finances. We’re already seeing the success of our plan. The business community has hired 170,000 people in the province of Ontario. That tells you our plan is working.

We know the opposition does not share our vision. Their priorities are to continue to tax more, to spend more and to get less. But we will continue our responsible path to balance while providing true and real relief, and protecting what matters most: the people of Ontario.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: For months, the Premier has insisted that his cuts don’t have any consequences. I think the finance minister is trying to tell that same story. The fact is, after yesterday, no one believes them anymore.

The Premier can accuse the Financial Accountability Officer of fearmongering—in fact, they can call him a lefty if they want—but the numbers are in black and white, at least the numbers that the Premier will let us see.

Is the Premier willing to do the right thing and reverse the health care cuts—the $2.7 billion in health care cuts that were identified yesterday by the FAO—or is he once again going to deny reality, ignore public outcry and pretend the cuts just aren’t happening?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you for the question. Let’s be perfectly clear: The budget is fully costed and all efficiencies and all value-for-money initiatives are accounted for.

Let’s talk about what’s in black and white. What’s in black and white in the health budget is: a $1.3-billion increase in the budget; a $384-million increase in hospitals; a $267-million increase in home care; $1.75 billion for 15,000 new long-term-care beds, many of which are under construction this very minute; and $90 million for low-income seniors’ health care. I can’t wait for the NDP to stand up tomorrow and vote in favour of giving $90 million to 100,000 seniors in need of dental care. I can’t wait for that tomorrow.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member for Essex has to come to order—yes, you. The member for Waterloo has to come to order.

Start the clock. Next question.

Government fiscal policies

Ms. Donna Skelly: My question is to the Premier. Our government was elected to clean up the fiscal mess left behind by the previous Liberal government. For 15 years, there was reckless spending and promises made on the backs of taxpayers in an attempt to simply stay in power.

Last June, the people of Ontario voted for change. They voted to end the wasteful spending of the previous government and to get our fiscal house in order. Speaker, that means we need to make tough decisions, which is what responsible governments do. Can the Premier please explain to this House the actions our government is taking to return to balance while protecting what matters most?

Hon. Doug Ford: I want to thank the fabulous, incredible member from Flamborough–Glanbrook. Finally, they have a voice up in Hamilton, rather than a bunch of people who want to spend money up there.

Mr. Speaker, we were elected, again, on June 7 to clean up the financial mess in this province that the NDP and the Liberals created, the $347-billion long-term debt left to the children and grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, you hear them always talking about children and grandchildren. What are we going to leave them? A debt of $347 billion and $13.3 billion in interest every single year? As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, we’ve been here an hour; it will cost us $1.5 million in interest that the NDP left us. You can’t continue on with the socialist mentality that—

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: Back to the Premier: Speaker, when we committed to balancing the books of the government, we also made it clear that we expect our partners to do the same, and we are helping them to achieve this. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing previously announced $200 million to small and rural municipalities, and our government has announced over $7 million in funding through the Audit and Accountability Fund to help municipalities find four cents on the dollar in savings.

Speaker, can the Premier please speak further to the announcements he made with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing yesterday to further our work with municipalities to find savings and bring Ontario back to balance?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I thank the MPP from Flamborough–Glanbrook again.

I talked to numerous mayors over the last week. Every single one of them—every one of them—said, “Yes, we can find savings.” They admitted they can find savings, so they admitted that there’s waste. They asked for a little bit more time. We sat down. We said, “Okay, we’re going to extend the runway a little longer. We’re going to support you. We’ll give you $7.35 million,” to any of the large urban mayors. We said to the small municipalities that they’ve taken advantage of, “We’ll support you with $200 million,” because when you find savings, it goes right back into the pockets of the taxpayers.

For 15 years, the taxpayers haven’t been respected around here, Mr. Speaker. They’ve been insulted.

All they do, constantly, is want to tax and spend. Our government doesn’t believe in tax and spend. We believe in creating jobs, prosperity, growth, wealth for every single Ontario resident—

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

Children’s mental health services

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: My question is to the Premier. One in five children and youth in Ontario will experience a mental health challenge. Yesterday, the Financial Accountability Office published a report that revealed that the Conservative government cut $69 million from children and youth mental health programs compared to the year before. This is a 15% cut to children’s mental health, when children and youth are already waiting months too long for mental health resources.

Does the Premier believe that these children and their families should fend for themselves because they are not what matters most to his government?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: We take mental health and addictions seriously. We ended up committing $1.9 billion to mental health.

But do you know something, Mr. Speaker? When the federal government supports us, I give them credit. I give the federal government credit, to match the $1.9 billion. We put $3.8 billion back into mental health and addictions. We’re making sure we go after core services to support people with addictions and mental health. There’s no government in this country that has put $3.8 billion into supporting mental health.

I have all the confidence in the world in our Minister of Health. She’s making sure we are not leaving anyone out—no one at all. We’re going to be making sure we support the people with mental health and addictions.

Interjections.

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

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Back to the Premier: The Premier and his government talk a lot about mental health and addictions but, so far, what we see are direct cuts to front-line care and services. In fact, the Conservative government failed to match the $174-million federal investment in mental health and addictions funding in Ontario this year, and now they’re cutting $69 million from children and youth mental health services. Once again, the government is choosing to balance the budget on the backs of vulnerable children.

Will the Premier do the right thing, listen to families seeking help for their children and reverse the deep cuts made to children and youth mental health programs?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Laurie Scott: Mr. Speaker, we have made historic investments in mental health. To say the opposite is just not accurate. Yesterday alone, legislation was introduced—

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

Hon. Laurie Scott: —the Foundations for Promoting and Protecting Mental Health and Addictions Services Act. We are actually following the select committee on mental health and addictions that I know a member of the opposition was on in 2010. One of the key recommendations was to establish a Mental Health and Addictions Centre of Excellence with Ontario Health. Investments by the ministries coordinating with community services—that is what the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care is doing. We speak about mental health and addictions and health every day in this Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of pieces to the puzzle in getting health right and mental health and addictions right, but we are well on our way to solving—

Interjections.

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

I have to ask the member for Parkdale–High Park to come to order, the member for Essex once again to come to order and the Solicitor General to come to order.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Follow the money.

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

Next question? Start the clock.

Clean technology

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My question is for the Premier. Last week, a report came out showing that the clean-tech sector generated $35 billion of investment in 2017, representing 3% of Canada’s GDP. Ontario is home to 39% of this GDP growth, generating 138,460 jobs, yet your government seems determined to shut the door to these jobs. To date, the government has ripped up contracts for clean energy, cancelled retrofit programs helping people save money by saving energy, and now you are cutting programs that support job creation in innovation and clean tech.

Mr. Speaker, will the Premier stop attacking innovators and clean-tech job creators by reversing cuts to Communitech, MaRS and other innovation programs that are creating Ontario jobs and helping grow clean-tech businesses?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’d again remind members to make their comments through the Chair.

The question is to the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Economic Development.

Hon. Todd Smith: We, as the new government here in Ontario, have had to make a number of very difficult decisions over the last number of months since we’ve been here, but the one thing I can tell you is that we’re continuing to work with our partners in the clean-tech sector. We’re certainly working with our partners in the innovation sector, and when it comes to groups like Communitech or MaRS, we’ve worked with them every step of the way.

The one thing that I will say is, they understand the challenges that our government is facing when it comes to the $15-billion deficit here in Ontario, and that everyone is going to have to work together to make sure we’re getting the end result that we all want, and that is, that Ontario is on a fiscal financial footing.

Because if we are fiscally responsible here in Ontario, if we’re working with our partners in the innovation and tech sector to ensure that we’re getting the outcomes that we want, we will continue to see the type of job growth that we have experienced over the last several months; 170,000 jobs have been created here in Ontario across all sectors and that’s because we’re working with our partners.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Given the Premier’s response that he received at a recent international tech conference, I would suggest that the minister work a little more closely with the tech sector.

Any good economic strategist will tell you that you need to skate to where the puck is going, not to where it has been. Ontario is well positioned to be a global leader in the fast-growing clean-tech sector, if we support the sector.

Supporting young people in the tech sector is key to our success and it will also help tackle the high youth unemployment rate of 12%. If the Premier is not going to restore cuts to Communitech and MaRS and other innovation hubs, will the government at least restore the Youth Job Link and the Employing Young Talent Incentive that were helping tech businesses hire young people to give them the help and the hands-on job experience to succeed?

Hon. Todd Smith: I can tell you that we’ve been meeting with people who are working in the tech sector right now. Ontario is exploding, bursting at the seams, when it comes to our tech sector jobs, whether it’s at Kanata North—and I had the opportunity there, where they’re serious about tech, with our Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. This morning I was at a digital media creator where they’re making video games that are being spread all around the world—65 jobs right now at the company that I was at this morning, heading for 250 jobs in the next couple of years.

You know why they are expanding, Mr. Speaker? They are expanding because the government has tax incentives in certain areas, but we’re also creating an environment where they can be successful, by reducing red tape, working with my colleague here, the Minister of Government and Consumer Services, to make sure that we’re changing procurement in Ontario so that we can be extremely successful and continue to see the type of job growth in the tech sector that—

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

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. The next question.

Invasive species

Mr. Ross Romano: My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. In budget 2019, our government committed to protecting what matters most, and that includes protecting our environment and our natural resources. Invasive species cost Ontario taxpayers billions of dollars every year. In fact, recent studies estimated the impact of invasive species in Ontario at $3.6 billion—with a B—every year. Our Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan recognizes these impacts and is committed to working with partners to combat, prevent, detect and respond to invasive species.

Could the minister please update our House on the recent announcement where our government committed to supporting the important work done by the Invasive Species Centre in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie?

Hon. John Yakabuski: I want to thank the great member from Sault Ste. Marie for that question. I also want to thank him for making the funding announcement on behalf of our government for the people.

We know that we must continue to work together on all fronts to identify and respond to the threat of invasive species. The Invasive Species Centre is a leader in invasive species science, education and action, and we believe that they are in the best position to protect our ecosystems province-wide.

Our government recognizes the important work the Invasive Species Centre does through research and on-the-ground actions to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species, and we are pleased to announce that we will be investing $850,000 to support their continued efforts.

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

Mr. Ross Romano: I want to thank the minister for that great answer. The Invasive Species Centre does vital work, and people across Ontario know that invasive species pose a real and active threat to Ontario’s lands, lakes and rivers, and our economy.

Since 2011, when the Invasive Species Centre was formed as a strategic initiative of the Ontario and the federal governments, it has served as a unique example of partnership, and as a hub for collaboration. By bringing together governments, industry, Indigenous communities and academia, the Invasive Species Centre plays a leading role in coordinating our efforts to fight invasive species in Ontario.

Could the minister please elaborate on how much invasive species cost the people of Ontario and what our government has focused on as we continue to combat their spread?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thanks again to the member for the question. Perhaps no one knows the cost of invasive species better than Bob Lambe, president of the Invasive Species Centre board of directors, who had this to say about our government’s announcement:

“The Invasive Species Centre is committed to working together to find efficiencies in the fight against invasive species and thanks the government of Ontario for its support and commitment to protecting our natural spaces and economy. The Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan recognized that preventing invasive species is the single most effective and least costly method to manage invasive species. In fact, for every dollar spent on coordinated multi-jurisdictional prevention activities, $3 in mitigation, regulatory and depletion costs can be avoided if only one such pest is prevented from establishing.” I think Bob has got it right.

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Premier. Speaker, following a massive public backlash against the Premier’s cuts to municipalities, he has decided to give them a bit more runway. “Runway,” I think, was the word used before bringing down the axe on child care, ambulance services and public health.

But when it comes to our schools, the runway to adapt to this government’s massive education cuts is getting shorter every day. These cuts will hit students hard this fall as they return to larger classes, fewer course options, and less time with teachers and other education workers.

Speaker, school boards are finalizing their budgets right now. It is not too late for the Premier to do the right thing. Will he reverse his cuts to our schools?

Hon. Doug Ford: The Minister of Education.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’d like to start off by saying that perhaps the member opposite missed the memo. We’re actually increasing spending in education by $700 million. Again, we are getting education back on track because we inherited a system that was absolutely broken and failing our students. So we need to take steps in terms of getting it back on track. Let me tell you, we’re working with our school boards. I’m pleased to say that when I was in northern Ontario last week, the school board, the Keewatin Patricia school board, actually indicated to me that they will be able to find 4%.

Other school boards across this province are keeping their heads down and working with us and identifying ways to achieve efficiencies. You know, the fact of the matter is that we are working on introducing an opportunity for school boards to work with us. We have invited them to come forward and say, “Yes, we would like to participate in the audit and accountability exercise that you’re working through,” because surely school boards across this province can find 4%—

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Back to the Premier: I’ve got to ask, what does this government have against kids—cutting $69 million from children’s mental health; slashing our classrooms? I’m happy to brief the minister, Mr. Speaker, on how her budget is shortchanging our kids. Every single day, more teachers and education workers are being handed pink slips. This government knows it. We know it. Families know it. Students know it.

I heard first-hand last week from parents and teachers in North Bay, in the Minister of Finance’s own riding, where half of all secondary teachers in a single board stand to be lost, along with 62 in elementary schools—62. Speaker, as we sit here—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government side, come to order. Member for Essex, come to order.

Ms. Marit Stiles: —students are being forced to reselect their courses. It’s causing enormous anxiety, Mr. Speaker. And the programs that help our most vulnerable students are at risk.

Will the Premier take a second look and change course before it is too late?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: You know what, Speaker? I have to tell you, I absolutely reject all the dramatic, preposterous nonsense that’s coming from that member opposite. All the drama that she’s trying to create—sincerely I say to her: It has no merit whatsoever. When we go across the province—the member from Niagara West actually shared with me that no teachers are losing their jobs. As we go school board to school board, we are going to get it right, and we’re working with our partners.

And you know, let’s talk about our budget. Our plan, Education That Works for You, is absolutely gearing up to make sure that after 15 years of failing our students by the Liberal government under Kathleen Wynne and Dalton McGuinty, we’re getting things back on track.

I met with the Ontario Student Trustees’ Association last Friday and they are absolutely on board with making sure that we are engaging and we’re preparing students—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): There is considerable noise on both sides of the House, and it’s rising. I’m going to ask the members to come to order. Order.

The next question: the member for Orléans.

Government policies / Politiques du gouvernement

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: My question is to the Premier. Earlier this week, this government added the Transition Child Benefit to their seemingly endless list of short-sighted cuts. It is a program of last resort that gives families money for food and basic needs.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that in this House we can all agree that children should have food and clothing. They should not be cold and hungry. Meanwhile, the Premier and his government are spending millions on peddling beer in corner stores.

Speaker, is the Premier okay with having cold and hungry children in Ontario, as long as it’s easier to buy a beer?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Our government is moving forward with social assistance reforms that will restore dignity, encourage employment and empower the province’s most vulnerable to get back to a path of self-reliance. The previous government, which the member opposite was a member of, had a patchwork of benefits and support programs that forced families to spend precious time searching for relevant resources through multiple offices. Our government is committed to helping families by simplifying the complicated and unequal supports.

The Ontario Child Benefit provides families equal access to government support for those who file their taxes. That’s why we’re increasing our investment in the Ontario Child Benefit by $31 million, for a total of roughly $1.2 billion this year. There will be a slow and gradual wind-down of the Transition Child Benefit, and recipients will be notified directly, well in advance of the implementation date.

Mr. Speaker, we’re dealing with the record deficit and debt that that member opposite was a part of, that devastated our services in Ontario. We’re protecting what matters—

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

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: I certainly would have appreciated the Premier answering the question about the importance for children or beer in Ontario, and I think so far, what I have heard time and time again from this government is the importance of beer all across Ontario. I’ll remind this government also of last year’s decision to slap our Franco-Ontarian community in the face by cutting the French Language Services Commissioner and abandoning the francophone university.

Les francophones, les Franco-Ontariens et les francophiles de l’Ontario, nous sommes une communauté importante et dynamique. On a aussi une dualité linguistique importante.

So, Speaker, the Premier has made a choice to spend up to a billion dollars—a billion dollars—to sell beer in corner stores. Why is selling beer more important to him than francophone Ontarians?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay. I’m going to ask the member for Kitchener–Conestoga once again to come to order. The member for Markham–Stouffville must come to order.

The Minister of Transportation can reply.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker, for that question. I can tell the member opposite that on this side of the House, we’re determined to sit four years straight and to serve the people of Ontario who elected us last June 7, not run off and try to join another party which is down and desperate in the polls and highly doubtful that they’re actually going to retain power, Mr. Speaker.

But, Mr. Speaker, let us be straight. That member opposite, part of that government—a $15-billion deficit and over $300-billion debt, and some $1 billion a month in servicing that debt. Over $13 billion a year goes to service the interest on that debt. Could you imagine what we could do for services across this province if we weren’t servicing that debt with $13 billion, Mr. Speaker? It’s unheard of, what that government, that member, did to this province of Ontario. Hopefully, she’s not going to join her comrades up in the federal government and do what they did to Ontario.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. The next question.

Employment supports

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: My question is for the fantastic Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Employers and job seekers in my riding of Carleton are frustrated about the skills gap that is preventing young people from finding work and employers from finding the workers with the right skills. The previous employment services system inherited from the Liberals was complex and, Mr. Speaker, it did not produce results for job seekers, employers or taxpayers in Carleton or across the province.

I know that it is a priority of our government to address the skills gap and connect our young people with high-quality, well-paying jobs in sectors that are in high demand. Through you, Mr. Speaker, can the minister please tell us how our government is transforming our employment programs to ensure that Ontarians in Carleton and across the province are prepared for the jobs of today and tomorrow?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member from Carleton for her very hard work. She’s an amazing MPP.

Speaker, our government is transforming employment services so that they are innovative, responsive and create good local solutions. The previous Liberal government, supported by the NDP, did not deliver for job seekers, for employers or for Ontario’s economy.

We are modernizing our employment services system by creating a new model that integrates social assistance and employment services into Employment Ontario to help the province’s most vulnerable, including those with disabilities, break free of the poverty cycle. Our government has promised the people of Ontario to create good jobs and make Ontario open for business. That is exactly what we are doing.

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

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Thank you to the minister for her hard work for job seekers in Ontario and getting this province back on track. It is so important that we ensure our employment programs are responsive to the needs of the job market so that job seekers in Carleton and across the province can actually find good jobs, while taxpayer dollars are respected.

There’s an urgent need, Mr. Speaker, to connect Ontarians with job opportunities that will lead to a prosperous career. The previous employment services system failed to do that. That’s why I’m so pleased to see that our government ha