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

November 20, 2019

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2019-Nov-20 (PDF)

L128 - Wed 20 Nov 2019 / Mer 20 nov 2019

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 20 November 2019 Mercredi 20 novembre 2019

Orders of the Day

Plan to Build Ontario Together Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le plan pour bâtir l’Ontario ensemble

Introduction of Visitors

Committee sittings

Oral Questions

Government contracts

Government contracts

Trans Day of Remembrance

Government contracts

Education funding

Real estate industry

Government contracts

Affordable housing

Seniors’ dental care

Autism treatment

Social assistance

Seniors’ dental care

Services for persons with disabilities

Aggregate extraction

Water extraction

Notice of reasoned amendment

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Social assistance

Skilled trades

Impaired drivers

Nepean Sailing Club

Homelessness

Hamilton Tiger-Cats

Multiple sclerosis

Agriculture industry

Anti-bullying initiatives

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills

Introduction of Bills

Stop Cyberbullying in Ontario Day Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la Journée pour l’élimination de la cyberintimidation en Ontario

Public Safety Related to Dogs Statute Law Amendment Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 modifiant des lois en ce qui a trait à la sécurité publique liée aux chiens

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Trans Day of Remembrance

Adoption Awareness Month

Bullying Awareness and Prevention Week

Trans Day of Remembrance

Adoption Awareness Month

Bullying Awareness and Prevention Week

Petitions

Multiple sclerosis

Dog ownership

Education funding

Access to personal health records

Documents gouvernementaux

Government regulations

Public sector compensation

Opposition Day

The House met at 0900.

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

Let us pray.

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Plan to Build Ontario Together Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le plan pour bâtir l’Ontario ensemble

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 19, 2019, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 138,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes / Projet de loi 138, 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?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: It’s a real pleasure to rise today to talk about our fall economic statement and the legislation that’s going to bring this fall economic statement into force.

As a millennial, one of the reasons why I decided to stand for office was because I was incredibly concerned about the rising debt load that was facing future generations in this country. I remember one day having the chance to sit down and look and realizing that my own share of the debt was north of $23,000 and growing. My mother is a labour and delivery nurse in Ottawa; she has been doing this for almost 20 years.

It struck me that every single child that she was helping to deliver—that child was being born with a debt load on their back that they would carry for the rest of their lives, and I did not think this was fair. I realized that I wanted to get involved to help put us on a better path so that we could make sure that we weren’t leaving this intergenerational debt load to my generation, my kids’ generation and my grandkids’ generation.

I often like to look at historical parallels to find examples that teach us what mistakes we should avoid making again in the future. One need not look any further than the Canadian federal government in the early 1990s to find a parallel to the situation that we find ourselves in in Ontario today. In the early 1990s, the Canadian federal government found themselves with a truly enormous debt and deficit burden that countless governments had been fighting to get down since the government of Pierre Trudeau left that enormous debt behind, that enormous deficit, for future governments to grapple with.

The Canadian federal government went out into the global markets to try to sell Canadian debt bonds and nobody wanted to buy them. Nobody wanted to buy Canadian debt because it was viewed as something unsustainable. The Canadian government had not put themselves on a responsible track, and therefore people didn’t want to lend us money. If we aren’t able to finance our debt, that means that all of the critical public services that we rely on from our federal government, including health transfers, social transfers, pensions, social benefits—all of those things would not be possible.

That’s why the Canadian federal government at the time took the decisions that it did to make sure that we got ourselves on a more responsible fiscal track. We got ourselves on a path to return to balance that successive governments have followed through on since then, of course until the most recent federal government—but we won’t go down that road today.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: That’s a long road.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: That’s a long road.

When I stood for office a year ago, I was looking at an Ontario government that had the largest sub-sovereign debt of any state or province in the entire world—the entire world. That’s not a Guinness world record that we should be proud of, Mr. Speaker.

So I knew that we needed to get a government in place that was going to take this seriously, that was going to put us back on a path to return to a balanced budget, that was going to make our economy competitive again so that we could attract more business, grow businesses here, grow our economy and help get us on to a sustainable path so that I felt confident that when I grew up and decided that I wanted to raise a family of my own, we wouldn’t have that kind of debt burden waiting for us at the other end.

Mr. Speaker, when our government got elected last year, we tabled our first budget. We committed to returning to balanced budgets over a five-year period of time, a responsible period of time. All the while, we were going to continue making those critical investments in the things that matter most to Ontarians: that’s health care, that’s social services and that’s education.

In our fall economic statement that the finance minister tabled a week or so ago, we reaffirmed that commitment. We reaffirmed that we are on track to return to balance over that five years. In fact, we’re ahead of schedule. Our deficit, which used to be $15 billion, is now down to $9 billion. We are making impressive progress towards that goal of getting us to balance, towards that goal of making sure that when we do have to go out and finance Canadian debt in foreign markets, people look at Ontario and think, “You know what? This is a responsible group of managers. We can trust them to lend to them so that they can finance the things that they need.”

So we got our deficit down to $9 billion. And how are we doing on those critical investments that I talked about earlier? Turns out, Mr. Speaker, that because of the responsible financial decisions we’re making, we’re actually investing more in those areas. We’re actually investing $1.9 billion more in health care than the previous government last year. We’re actually investing $1.3 billion more in education than the former government. On social services, we’re investing $600 million more than the former government. These are the sorts of things that we are able to do when we are responsible fiscal managers.

That’s why this plan to return to balance is so critically important and something that I am proud to stand here today and support our finance minister on.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, there was another challenge also facing Ontarians at the last election, and that was affordability. Affordability was something that was eating away at our families, at our small businesses and at anybody who was trying to get ahead in Ontario. They found life getting more and more expensive, whether it was from hydro rates or growing taxes. So we committed to getting that under control as well because we understand that you can balance a budget while making life more affordable for everyday people and for businesses.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I can draw on an easy parallel from history. That’s the former federal government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who balanced the budget while lowering the federal tax burden to its lowest level in 50 years. That’s a model that we can use today to make sure that we can get our budget balanced and make life more affordable.

So what are some of the things in this fall economic statement that we’re doing to make life more affordable? One of the wonderful ones, Mr. Speaker, is that we are taking action to lower the aviation fuel tax in the north. We have a lot of representatives from both sides of the aisle here, who represent ridings in northern Ontario. I have had the chance, since being elected, to visit some of those northern ridings on tours for round tables with families with children with autism, and on tour with the finance committee. Affordability is always an issue that comes up.

By lowering the aviation fuel tax, we’re going to help make things like groceries less expensive in the north. The prediction at this point, from our measure in the fall economic statement, is that this will lower costs for families in the north by an average of $230 per year. That’s savings that go into folks’ pockets that they can spend on those critical things that they need for their families.

There are other things that we’re doing as well. For example, we are going to be lowering the small business tax rate by 8.7%. We all know that small businesses are the backbone and engine of our economy here in Ontario. Small businesses are the number one employers in our province. I think back to my own family. My uncle Dennis Larocque is the bathtub king of Hamilton. He has worked hard throughout his life to build his small business. He started out in a van going around reglazing bathtubs at different people’s homes. He grew that business into a thriving small business now in the Hamilton-Ancaster area, where he does refurbishments of bathrooms.

Things get tough for small business owners when all of those costs on affordability are piling up, whether it has increased hydro costs, small business taxes or burdensome red tape. All of those different things start adding up onto these small business owners, and that’s not what we want to see.

My uncle Dennis employs a team of people. It may have just started out with him in a van, going around reglazing bathtubs, but he now employs a team of people at his small business. We want to make sure that he can keep growing and keep hiring more people, so that those people get a long-time paying job to support them and to support their families.

By lowering that small business tax rate, this is probably going to provide, on average, $1,500 of tax relief per year to over 275,000 small businesses across Ontario. Let me repeat that: a saving of $1,500 to over 275,000 small businesses every year. That’s big savings, and I know, having spoken to the bathtub king of Hamilton, that this will make a difference, that these savings will help him continue to grow his business and continue to find new ways to support his local economy, support his family and support the families of those people who work for him. So I’m thrilled that this is the sort of thing that our government is continuing to do to make Ontario competitive again.

We have to remember that if we, as a government, do not take these measures to make life more affordable for businesses and families in our province, other jurisdictions will. Other jurisdictions will take the time to lower their taxes, lower their regulations, and attract those businesses and families right out of Ontario, which is going to leave us worse off in the end.

We want it to be the other way around. We want to be attracting those businesses here to Ontario. We want people to think of Ontario as the engine of Canada’s economy, as it once was, where people can come, start a family business, grow it, employ more people and find long-term prosperity.

These are the sorts of things that we’re going to be doing as we follow through on our fall economic statement and as we prepare for the tabling of our next provincial budget sometime in the spring. I can’t tell you how much I’m looking forward to that budget. I think it is going to be a fantastic document that lays out a truly strong plan to get us to that competitive environment, to that prosperous environment, and to return us to the balance that we need to be fair to our future generations.

In the fall economic statement, we also took some actions to simply make life easier for people by getting rid of some rules and regulations that were getting in the way. For example, we are starting to clear the way and make it easier for us to move to electronic documents at the Ministry of Transportation. As a millennial, I just find it ridiculous that we haven’t moved towards a truly digital system for a lot of these different things, so I’m so pleased to see our government taking this step.

We took an initial step last year when we moved to electronic proof of insurance, which, again, I thought was just an easy thing for us to do. I always remember that when I got my first car and signed up for insurance, they emailed me some documents, and I thought, “Great! I can just have these on my phone.” But, no, I was told I needed to print them at the time. Just ridiculous. We should be able to have safe, secure technology to have those sorts of electronic driving records on our cellphones.

Beyond that, we’re also making some changes to the highway act. Now, Mr. Speaker, as a member from an Ottawa riding, I often have to commute down here to Toronto. I often have to take that long, arduous drive down the 401, which is not always the nicest drive.

Hon. Todd Smith: To Belleville.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: You certainly drive through some beautiful communities—like Belleville—but the highway itself can be bit of an arduous journey. I occasionally take Highway 7 just because it’s a bit of a nicer drive. But one of the things that I struggle with, as many drivers do, is when you are driving down those highways and you’re trying to pass somebody and there is a slow driver in the left lane. It makes absolutely no sense. We need to do a better job at, first of all, educating drivers that the left lane is for passing and the right lane is for driving at a normal speed, but also enforcing it.

So we’re giving the tools necessary to our team of OPP officers to track down those slow drivers and make that commute better for our families that have to commute back and forth, for our workers that have to commute back and forth, for our truck drivers who are keeping our economy moving. So that’s one thing that we’re doing to make sure that we are making life a little bit easier for commuters.

There is another one as well, Mr. Speaker. We are currently in the middle of a pilot—you might have heard about this—to test raising the speed limits on Ontario highways. There are three pilots under way right now—one in London, one in Niagara and one in Ottawa—where we have raised the speed limit on a short stretch of highway up to 110 kilometres an hour.

I took the time to do a bit of research on this because it was something that always baffled me. Out of Ontario’s seven neighbouring jurisdictions, six of them have higher highway speeds than we do. Six of our neighbouring jurisdictions are at roughly 110 to 113, depending on how you convert the miles to ours. There is only one of our neighbouring jurisdictions that has the same speed as us. All of these folks who are commuting for work, carrying goods across borders and going between provinces and states are having to slow down in Ontario for no apparent reason. A lot of these places, Mr.

Speaker, that have those higher speed rates do not necessarily have higher accident rates, and that’s one of the biggest things that people say when they are concerned about raising the speed: “Is this going to cause more accidents?” Well, the data doesn’t actually back that up.

We are testing this 110 kilometres an hour out on these three stretches of highways. I actually went, on the first day, and drove along the stretch of highway in the east end of Ottawa and did a little video with my staff to highlight it and let people know. I know that my colleague from Niagara has said that it’s something that has been incredibly popular in the Niagara area so far. So let’s test that pilot.

Now we have given our Minister of Transportation the tools that she needs to make sure that we can raise those speed limits in a responsible way to get our goods moving and get our commuters where they need to go. This is the sort of common-sense thing that I think is going to help all Ontarians across the board. Again, it’s something that I think is long, long overdue, and I’m very pleased to hear it.

I’ve outlined a number of different things. We’ve talked about the importance of returning to balance and talked about some historical parallels there about why returning to balance is so critical. Again, I think that the plan that we have laid out, this five-year horizon, is the responsible way to do it because it allows us to continue making those investments we need. Those investments are so critical in those three key areas.

In health care—in my riding of Ottawa West–Nepean, we have the largest seniors’ population in all of Ontario—lots of people struggling with that challenge of hallway health care. So we need to make sure we are continuing to make those investments to make our health care system better so that those seniors get the best possible care that they deserve, given that they have been paying into it through their taxes for their entire lives.

We’re making those increased investments in education, Mr. Speaker, to make sure that our kids are getting the best possible education that they can. That’s an additional investment of $1.3 billion into the education system that wasn’t there before.

Then, lastly, an area, of course, very close to my heart, and that’s social services. In the fall economic statement, we reaffirmed that we are doubling the budget for the Ontario Autism Program from just over $300 million to $600 million. I know how much this is going to mean to families. I know how much it would have meant to my family when we were growing up and dealing with the challenges that we were with my younger brother, Dillon.

Having criss-crossed the province over the last six to eight months speaking with parents, I know that this investment is going to mean so much to each and every one of those families. We now have a wonderful blueprint on how to spend that money. We have the Ontario autism panel’s report in front of us. We are going to be moving forward with those recommendations, and we’re going to make sure that that $600 million is being spent as effectively and efficiently as possible to help those kids get the outcomes they deserve and build those better, stronger lives.

I’m so thrilled to stand today in support of this fall economic statement. I urge all of my colleagues in the House to support this so that we can leave behind a better province than we found for the next generation.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Questions and comments?

M. Guy Bourgouin: Ça me fait plaisir de me lever pour parler sur l’énoncé économique de l’automne.

I was listening to the member from Ottawa West–Nepean talking about how they’re going to reduce the taxes on fuel. But what he failed to mention was that in their first budget, they cut the budget for Indigenous affairs by half. And in this fall economic statement, they reduced it again by $2.2 million.

I invite any people in this House to come to my riding, come visit these northern communities and see the conditions they live in. We have water advisories in multiple communities—northern communities, First Nations communities—yet we cut the budget by half and then another $2.2 million? We have a lack of housing. Some communities have a lack of housing of 300 houses. They take sleeping rotations, because they have two or three generations living in a house that is built for six people. And we are cutting the budget by another $2.2 million?

We have a minister that said he’s lived in the community. Well, he’s disconnected, because the reality we’re seeing here—and I know my colleague from Kiiwetinoong has mentioned that many times. Cutting budgets that will affect the most vulnerable—tell me of anywhere else in Ontario where having water advisories for over 10 years, if not more, is acceptable, or of anywhere in Ontario that we have a lack of houses where six people live in one dwelling.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Stan Cho: I’m proud to stand to speak to Bill 138 once again this morning. Bill 138 is really a status update on the plan that we outlined in the spring of 2019. I’m proud to say that our plan is ahead of

schedule in many ways, and that plan, of course, is to make life more affordable, to prepare Ontarians for jobs, to create a more competitive business environment, to connect people to places, to build healthier and safer communities and to make government smarter.

My colleague the member for Ottawa West–Nepean outlined some of the highlights of these various pillars of our plan and the update to our plan. But there is also a side story here. I spoke to that side story at length yesterday, and that’s talking about the importance of debt reduction. It’s no secret, in the province of Ontario, that our debt stands at almost $360 billion. That is the highest of any state or province in the world.

That means that that debt is leading to an interest charge, which we pay in this House as the fourth-largest line expenditure, behind education, behind health care and behind social services. We all know in this House that that’s money that should be going to protect those vital programs and services for our future generations.

So I am really proud to say that our status update, Bill 138, shows that our debt reduction strategy is working without additional regressive taxation measures. And because we’ve had strong revenues through job growth, the province sits in a much better financial situation today than it did a year and a half ago, when we took office. In fact, I’m proud to say to the House that our debt reduction strategy has resulted in a decrease in our interest payments. Our interest payments have gone from $12.9 billion a year—we’ve reduced that by $400 million. That’s money that’s going to go towards health care and education. That’s money that’s going to go towards social services.

I’m proud of Bill 138, and I hope we have support in the House for this.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to speak to this bill from a different lens. Indigenous people continue to be an afterthought for this government. There is no specific path to fulfillment of reconciliation or treaty obligations. My colleague spoke about the cuts to Indigenous affairs.

I got a note a few days ago: Up in Fort Severn, the price of gas per litre is $4.19. This person bought 40 litres of gas and it cost them $167. I hear members talking about affordability. I hear members talking about “all Ontarians.” I hear about cutting red tape to bring down the price. What is that red tape that this government is going to cut to bring down the cost of the fuel? Just because people tell me that it’s all Ontarians, what about Fort Severn? What about the price of gas? How is this government going to be able to help these residents of Ontario to bring the price of gas down?

One of the things that I’m starting to realize is that when we’re talking about Indigenous people, talking about First Nations people, talking about First Nations communities—with the cuts and some of the policy approaches to Indigenous people—I’m starting to understand that this government does not care about First Nations people. That’s what I’m starting to realize. Just because we’re small doesn’t mean that we should not matter.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Ms. Jane McKenna: It’s a privilege here today to stand up and talk about Bill 138, the Plan to Build Ontario Together Act, 2019, and I’ll tell you why. We sit in this House, day after day, and we listen to a lot of facts that aren’t true and rhetoric that goes back and forth. But here’s what I can tell you, and I say this to my kids all the time: When you’re always looking in the rear-view mirror, you can never move forward.

The reality is this: When you’ve had 15 years where you haven’t done anything for health care, hallway health care, infrastructure, education, anything—the list just goes on and on and on. There are schools in Burlington everywhere that are falling apart. There is $15 billion that they didn’t spend on the schools to get them fixed.

Here’s the reality: We have a Premier and we have a government that cares about the next generation. I know I do with my kids and my grandkids and the rest of the kids and grandkids that are out here. They deserve to have a life that they can live and breathe, and there are going to have to be changes. People don’t like change, but the reality is that we need to make changes. Because without changes, we’re not going to make anything any better.

So I sit here—and I actually am thinking about this. Ontario used to be the engine. If we can believe it, we took equalization payments from Newfoundland and Labrador. It’s shocking to me that we actually say that out loud. Newfoundland and Labrador were paying our bills.

I sat here and I talked to my son the other day. We were talking about Bob Rae days. Everybody remembers the billboards in Buffalo that said, “The best thing that happened to us was Bob Rae,” as all the businesses were running there. They started out with a $35.4-billion debt in 1989; when they left in 1995, it was $90.7 billion. They almost tripled it.

So when you watch the things that we’re doing—we’re spending $1 billion a month just on the interest alone. My God, can you imagine what we could do with that money?

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): I return to the member from Ottawa West–Nepean for his final comments.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I always appreciate the vim and vigour with which you announce riding names. It adds a certain spice to the proceedings here today.

I’d like to thank my colleagues from Mushkegowuk–James Bay, Willowdale, Kiiwetinoong and Burlington for their comments. I will say to my colleagues opposite that, as Vice-Chair of the finance committee, I look forward to having a chance to visit some of those northern communities this coming budget season when we have a chance to travel again, and getting a chance to hear about some of these issues on the ground. I think that will be a fantastic opportunity.

My colleague from Willowdale spoke about interest payments, and that was something that I didn’t get a chance to address in my comments. It is so crucially important. I will repeat what my colleague from Willowdale said in case folks at home didn’t catch it: The fourth-largest spending item in the Ontario budget is interest payments on the debt. It goes: health care, education, social services, interest payments on the debt. We spend more on interest payments on our debt than we do on colleges and universities in this province. That’s shameful.

That money that we are spending on interest, which we are literally pissing away each and every day, each and every hour, could be spent on critical public services that we all rely on.

I just happened to pull up the Ontario debt clock, and as of right now we are at $353 billion. Each and every one of us has a share of $24,000. We need to make sure that we’re getting this under control, and the plan that our Minister of Finance has put forward will do just that.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate? I recognize the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: Thank you, Speaker. Good morning.

Something I want everyone to remember is that this fall economic statement is a statement of cuts. The bill is called the Plan to Build Ontario Together Act. I fail to see what in this act has anything to do with building Ontario together. What I see is a long list of regulatory changes that increase access to alcohol and online cannabis, and allow the Ontario Securities Commission to make blanket exemptions from the Securities Act—a wish list for inside lobbyists.

The government is not reversing their callous plan to fire 10,000 teachers or the brutal squeeze they’re putting on health care. Despite their messaging to the public, the cuts are still on and the people of Ontario will feel the brunt of them. Delaying, backtracking or softening the $1.3 billion in cuts is not new spending.

With their first budget, this government took things from bad to worse, and we saw the chaos that followed, with people from all across this province making their voices heard about how this government’s cuts would hurt their communities and families. And with this fall economic statement, this government is sticking with their cuts.

Nothing in this budget shows that they have heard the concerns of everyday Ontarians. They are cutting 10,000 teachers and thousands of education workers, taking them away from children who need them. They are squeezing hospitals and health care, siphoning off funds for the creation of a super bureaucracy, leaving patient care starved, all while parents cradle crying children in emergency rooms during hour-long waits and patients on gurneys line hospital hallways because there aren’t enough beds.

Of additional concern to me is the war they have waged on the environment, putting everything at risk for our children and grandchildren. It is hard to understand the kind of Ontario this government is looking to create. I believe the people of Ontario understand this, and I urge everyone to speak out and let your voice be heard about this deeply misguided plan for the future of our province.

Before I go any further, I’d like to do the numbers on the cuts that the government is leaving in place. There is the $700-million cut from training, colleges and universities, with a threat to withhold up to 60% of what’s left. Health care and education have been squeezed to less than inflation, just like the 2019 budget, and things are even worse for Indigenous affairs, the environment, and legal aid. The Indigenous affairs budget was cut nearly in half in the 2019 budget, and this bill, the fall economic statement, strips out another $2.2 million. Doug Ford has been waging a war on the environment.

Rather than tackling climate change, after decimating every environmental effort in the 2019 budget, Premier Ford has slashed another $25 million out of what’s left. Justice, especially legal aid, has been slashed by $330 million.

The Liberals put Ontario into a hallway medicine crisis. They left post-secondary students struggling—struggling to afford their education, struggling to pay off their student loans—and they let Ontario’s schools become so run-down that rain leaks through the ceiling, water fountains are full of lead, and little ones have to wear their coats at their desk. This government should be fixing, not making it worse. We should be investing in people by investing in children’s education, investing in the best health care system in the world and investing in the fight against climate change.

I want to address the environmental sections of this bill, starting with

schedule 13.

Schedule 13 would amend the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act and allow for the killing and abandoning of the double-crested cormorant. I don’t know how many of you have ever seen a cormorant. It’s quite a pretty bird. There are quite a few up in my region. A new subsection would be added that exempts double-crested cormorants from the part of the current law that prohibits a hunter or trapper who kills game wildlife, other than fur-bearing mammals, from abandoning it or allowing its flesh to become unsuitable for human consumption.

This

schedule comes about a year after the government initially proposed making legal changes about hunting the double-crested cormorant.

Schedule 13 is an attempt by the government to change the fish and wildlife act as part of their efforts to bring their 2018 proposal to establish a hunting season for double-crested cormorants in Ontario into force.

Across the province, concerns have been raised about the effect of cormorant populations on certain sensitive ecosystems. However, the government’s plan to allow hunters to kill up to 14,000 cormorants a year, or 50 per day, and leave their bodies to rot is no substitute for scientifically based wildlife management programs. At best, the government’s plan is short-sighted and ineffective. At worst, it could harm our environment.

I would like to share with this House an extended quote from the submission made by the Canadian Environmental Law Association regarding this government’s proposed 2018 changes that

schedule 13 is part of:

“[T]he MNRF’s proposal is contrary to the conservation and sustainability purposes of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (FWCA). In 1997, when the FWCA was first introduced to the Ontario Legislative Assembly for debate, then-Minister of Natural Resources John Snobelen stated the following about the act’s purposes:

“‘The proposed Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act will help ensure conservation and management of the province’s abundant fish and wildlife resources. It will contribute to the sustainability of the environment, social and economic benefits associated with those resources, and it will give Ontario tougher fish and wildlife enforcement provisions.’

“This statement by the minister provides direct evidence of the legislative purpose of the FWCA. The current proposal, however, is void of any consideration demonstrating how sustainability and the conservation of wildlife resources were taken into account. Neither does the proposal reference any science-based justifications for its approach. Rather the proposal references ‘concerns expressed by ... commercial fishing industry, property owners.’

“The proposal to allow cormorants to spoil is contrary to the objects of the FWCA.

Section 36 of the FWCA, states that ‘a hunter or trapper who kills game wildlife other than a furbearing mammal shall not abandon it if its flesh may become unsuitable for human consumption.’ The proposal notice—which states it will add provisions to the FWCA allowing cormorants to spoil and lawfully exempt hunters from possessing the carcass—does not align with the Legislature’s intended purpose of spoilage exemptions in ... the FWCA.

As then Minister of Natural Resources, Minister Snobelen stated when the act was being debated, there may be ‘situations where this [an exemption] is necessary to prevent or control the spread of disease.’ As further explained by member of provincial Parliament Chudleigh, any exemption to the spoilage prohibition would be reserved for instances in which it would ‘be necessary to kill fish and allow them to spoil in order to prevent or control the spread of disease.’ Unless the exemption now proposed by the government is for the purposes of controlling or preventing disease, the intention of the Legislature should not be overridden absent public debate and scientific study.”

“Due to the timing of the proposed hunt and allowable bag limit, the proposal also violates the objectives of the FWCA which include considerations of animal welfare, humane and ethical hunting practices.” As Justice Abella “speaking for the Court of Appeal stated, ‘The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act received royal assent on December 18, 1997 and was proclaimed on January 1, 1999. It was enacted to provide a scheme of wildlife conservation and management including the establishment of ethical, humane and responsible hunting practices.

The act assigns to the government the responsibility for balancing the interests of people against the welfare of animals to determine what constitutes humane treatment or the unnecessary suffering of animals.’

“‘Concerns regarding animal welfare, including humane and ethical hunting practices, fall squarely with the policy and objectives of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act.’”

This government’s obsession with double-crested cormorants is problematic, but that they ignore climate change is catastrophic. This government lacks a real climate change plan. The people of Ontario know that. What they have proposed is not an actual climate change plan. Our caucus brought forward a motion to declare a climate emergency this year, and the members opposite voted it down. Instead, they like to talk about littering and their deeply flawed climate change plan. I think

schedule 32 illustrates that. I am part of many community clean-up projects in Thunder Bay, including two this year, and I want more to be done about litter, but I also want to see this government do a lot more about climate change. Real solutions would include reducing or eliminating the sources of litter.

Schedule 32 would create a provincial day of action on litter the second Tuesday of May.

I think this government has been cynical in its focus on litter when the issue of climate change and climate emergencies have been raised in the House. Climate change is no longer only about our future; it is an imminent emergency, and it is happening now. When I think about my own children and their partners and my two grandchildren and their future, I’m filled with fear. More and more Ontario families are going to find themselves in situations where they are forced to flee their homes on a moment’s notice if we don’t act now to dramatically reduce carbon emissions.

Each flood, tornado and wildfire that ravages our province adds to the growing imperative for Ontario’s leaders to come together in common cause in the fight against climate change. Our best hope of keeping people’s homes and businesses safe in Ontario is to stop climate change from accelerating.

In northern Ontario we feel the effects of climate change acutely. We can smell the forest fires every spring, summer and fall. As someone who goes out into the forest regularly, I’ve seen the blackened terrain and the impact on wildlife habitat. Communities have to be evacuated regularly because of forest fires and flooding, and now we have the community of Bearskin Lake that had to be evacuated due to flooding.

In southern and eastern Ontario we are witnessing the devastating consequences of climate change first-hand. We have seen this in Bracebridge, Ottawa and in the southwest, where there has been significant flooding. We have seen this in the wildfires in recent years, and we need to take immediate and decisive action to tackle climate change.

Research shows that the window for staving off the worst effects of climate change is rapidly closing, and projections show that the cost of doing nothing is much greater than the cost of taking action. This government must reverse course and join the millions of Ontarians committed to fighting climate change. Declaring a climate emergency is an opportunity for Queen’s Park to change direction and take on the biggest challenge humankind has ever faced.

Since taking office last year, this government spent $231 million cancelling renewable energy contracts; has cancelled climate change mitigation programs, including Ontario’s participation in the cap-and-trade market; cancelled conservation programs; scrapped green vehicle rebates; removed electric vehicle charging stations; and eliminated the 50 Million Tree Program.

If we want to build Ontario together, we would want to protect our water, air and soil and not decrease penalties for polluters. Reducing fines to a one-time penalty rather than daily fines is not incentive enough for big polluters to fix their problems.

I call on this government to change course and prioritize the fight against climate change. Our children and grandchildren are counting on us. Unfortunately, we have another example of this government dropping the ball on the climate crisis.

Just like taking real action on climate change, Ontario needs action on improving and strengthening our public health care. Our system is one of our most cherished assets, and we must do everything to protect it. Unfortunately, this government is hard to trust when it comes to the future of Ontario’s health care system. In this year’s budget, health care was cut in real terms. Their 2019 budget allocated a 1.6% annual increase for health; health inflation is 5.3%. The fall economic statement does not add a single dollar to stopping hallway medicine, adding long-term beds or improving mental health services.

This government cut funding to our health care system. This act confirms their plans. It also raises concerns about the privacy of our medical information.

Schedule 15 will make a host of changes to the Health Insurance Act. Unfortunately, just like so much of this act, the government has been very vague on details. The people deserve a thorough explanation of what this government plans to do with our health care system.

Schedule 15 will dissolve the medical eligibility committee and Physician Payment Review Board. It removes the language that states that every person who is a resident of Ontario is entitled to be eligible for OHIP coverage.

Schedule 30 allows specific persons to use de-identified information to identify someone, and also provides cabinet with regulatory-making powers to allow Ontario Health to collect, use and disclose personal health information. It is known that when people are afraid that their health information will be disclosed, they access health care less. This move could lead to privacy violations, and we need to know more from this government about what they are proposing.

The Liberals hurt our health care system, underfunded education and left so many people behind. This government should be making things better, not worse.

With their first budget earlier this year, this government took things from bad to worse. People in Ontario saw what these cuts would mean, and they fought back against this government’s cuts. Unfortunately, despite what they say, this government is sticking to its misguided plan for Ontario.

This government isn’t listening to all the people, and it’s time they started. If we want to build Ontario together, this isn’t the way to do it.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Questions and comments?

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: It’s great to be here today and offer my comments on the previous speaker with the official opposition. It’s interesting that all we hear from the opposition side every day is doom and gloom—nothing is working, the world is going to end soon, and all this type of thing.

I like to talk about positive things. What I like to talk about is that businesses are looking at our fall economic statement with positive eyes because there are things in it that will help them prosper and grow in this province. Small and medium-sized businesses are the drivers of Ontario’s economy, and if we don’t create an environment that helps them grow, we’re in trouble. Certainly, we’ve seen this in the past 15 years with the previous government, with all the manufacturing jobs we lost in this province.

We had companies move away—actually, that is still happening a little bit now, but it has slowed down, because I think businesses have seen that this government is determined to make an environment that will help them grow in this province so that we’re not a have-not province anymore. It breaks my heart that we have to accept money from other provinces to keep us going; it used to go the other way, but not anymore in Ontario. We’re proposing to reduce the small business corporate income tax rate to 3.2% from 3.5%. This is a positive step.

That’s why I say that businesses are looking at what we’re proposing to do and they’re saying that Ontario is a place to grow—I think there was a slogan about that at one time. They want to stay here, and they’re looking at us very positively.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Chris Glover: It’s a pleasure to stand in the House today to talk about the fall update.

The member from Perth–Wellington just said that he wanted to create an environment where businesses can grow. I’ve also heard the government side talk about the deficit and the debt, and I share that concern about the deficit and the debt. Instead of addressing it on the backs of the children of this province by cutting their teachers and bringing in online courses and cutting funding for our colleges and universities, I’d suggest that you actually look at what has caused the debt and the deficit that we’re facing right now.

A big portion of it, $4 billion a year, is actually going to pay for hydro costs, to subsidize hydro rates. The reason we have such exorbitant hydro rates in this province is because the former Conservative government and then the Liberal government privatized our Ontario Hydro. Between 1904 and 1995, Ontario hydro rates were about four cents a kilowatt hour. It was a competitive advantage for us. But then, the Conservatives and the Liberals privatized it, and now our rates range anywhere from eight cents to 25 cents a kilowatt hour. So our hydro rates are actually a competitive disadvantage for us.

The other piece of it, the other $3 billion: The corporate tax rate in this province, when the last Conservative government was in, was 15.5%. It’s now 11.5%, and the government is planning on cutting another $4 billion over the next four years in corporate taxes. It’s not that you don’t want—you don’t want to have taxes at a rate where it’s going to discourage companies from investing in this province, but at the same time, these companies are benefiting from having a well-educated, healthy workforce in this province, and they need to contribute to that. They need to contribute to the education and health care of the next generation of workers.

I would suggest that the government—if they’re going to address the deficit, don’t do it on the backs of the children. Look at the causes.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I’m very happy to rise today to speak about this bill. I’m very glad to see that there is a focus on technology, science, engineering and math. These are the skills we need for the graduates to be able to compete at the university level and in different jobs in the future. We see a huge decline in the level of the graduates when it comes to math and physics.

As a professor before—I was teaching in IT—we received students who did not want to get into any computer science or technology because they lacked the math skills, they were behind in the physics and science. They don’t like this. They are not prepared to compete in a very competitive and fast-moving market like technology. This is going to hurt us, because technology is everywhere now, even in health.

If you are not going to be a technology specialist, you are going to touch technology in some way or shape in your specializations. Even if you aren’t going to be a doctor; if you’re going to be a writer, if you’re going to be a journalist, you need to be able to deal with technology in every aspect of our lives going forward, and I’m very glad to see there is a focus now on getting this back on track.

We are complaining; all the professors, instructors and teachers in colleges and universities have been complaining about students coming from high school with a specific level, and then, when the jump comes to the level of college or university, there is a very high rate of failure because students are not prepared for that level of academia.

I think this is great to see.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: It’s always a privilege to stand and talk to any bill that has come before this House for debate, and, in particular, Bill 138, implementing budget measures and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes. There are a lot of schedules in this bill, and, quite frankly, the one that—they’re all significant, of course. I think some of them are just feel-good things, which is important. I understand that as well. The litter bill or the Hellenic heritage piece as well—those are important, absolutely, and they all have merit.

But I do have to say, the health bills that are incorporated in here are very concerning, because the privacy issue piece is something that we need to, as far as I’m concerned, look at separately. It’s not something we can rush. If we get that wrong, it can really jeopardize someone’s future, the issues of getting those records back. It can also jeopardize them—people having it in the wrong hands and using them for the wrong purpose.

So I urge this government, in the health pieces, to really consider taking those out of this bill and letting us debate them and examine them in a full way. I say that because the pattern that we’ve had is that there’s a certain amount of time, six and a half hours, and then, at the seven-hour mark, there’s time allocation. I get the government wants to push their priorities through this Legislature, but I think, when we stop and pause and look at the health care priorities that are so important—it’s the transformational change that this government talks about—we can’t get it wrong.

When we get it wrong, it’s a trickle effect to the future, and some of those things are very damaging to the public.

Again, I understand why the government wants to put these things all compiled together and make it a one-stop shop and push it through, but when it comes to health, that’s not a good policy.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Now I return to the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan for her final comments.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: I’d like to thank my colleagues from Perth–Wellington, Spadina–Fort York, Scarborough–Agincourt and London–Fanshawe for their comments.

When I looked at this bill, Bill 138, I was impressed by the number of facets that it touched on. We’ve talked in this House before about the real problem with putting too many things under one bill, because the devil is in the details. If we don’t take a bill with all of those different types of regulatory changes and all of the different stakeholders that may want to comment or may want to engage on this bill—I am very, very hopeful that it will be sent to committee and that we’ll maybe even travel to where people can actually have a comment about what this bill will do to them.

There are private members’ bills that are in the House that were included in this bill. I can understand that the government wants to give those members a win and get them covered off in this bill, but there is a process for private members’ bills. They’re in committee, and that should be allowed to go through the process, because we are still in a parliamentary democracy, the last time I checked, and I think the process is important.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Bill 138. I hope to listen to further debate.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?

Mr. Randy Hillier: It’s lovely to be here this morning to engage in debate on Bill 138, to have the freedom to offer an independent perspective on Bill 138 and to offer some constructive criticism.

The government often states that Ontario is open for business. But when it comes to cannabis, are these words factual? Are they accurate? Or do they mask and hide an inconvenient truth? It may be more truthful to say that the black market, the illegal and the illicit market for cannabis, remains open for business in Ontario.

The very premise, the foundation that legalized cannabis rests upon, is to eliminate the black market. If we judge Ontario’s cannabis policies by this measure, it has been a dismal failure.

The government assumed office 18 months ago and now believes that it ought to consult and learn what it is they ought to do with legalized cannabis. Well, I guess that “it’s better late than never” is the best that we can say about those comments.

Should the minister or his staff be listening to or reading the transcripts of this debate, there are a few questions that need answering, and an explanation is due. But let’s lay out a few facts first for this government and this assembly to consider.

Ontario has 24 cannabis retailers opened up. Alberta, with a third of the population, has over 300. Newfoundland and Labrador, with a population half the size of Ottawa, has more stores than Ontario.

Licensed cannabis producers have begun laying people off—200 alone at the Hexo facilities in Niagara.

Canopy Growth in Smiths Falls lost $375 million this quarter and is curtailing its investment and expansion in Smiths Falls and throughout Ontario. Ontario has lost an estimated $500 million of economic growth. Another $75 million has been lost in provincial tax revenues.

In a letter to the Premier, the cannabis industry stated, “Unless the government facilitates the continued success of the sector by allowing an increased retail footprint, continuing these investments in Ontario will simply be unsustainable.”

But the black market continues to boom in Ontario since Canada legalized cannabis, all because Ontario adopted a harebrained, bizarre lottery model to issue retail cannabis licences, a model cooked up by three backroom operatives and lobbyists. I know the finance minister once headed up the Ontario lottery and gaming commission, and he may have a penchant for games of chance, but really, lottery licences for retail cannabis stores? What was this government smoking?

The government can remedy this situation, Speaker. It has the statutory authority under existing legislation. Will the government utilize their licensing functions, similar to the AGCO, which successfully licenses privately owned agency stores to sell beer, wine and spirits? Will they allow producers, licensed producers, to have a retail licence? Will they provide direct—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you very much. Time has expired.

Over to questions and comments.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: It’s a privilege to be able to stand, and I want to thank the member opposite for his contributions to the debate this afternoon.

I think it’s really important, when we hear the member opposite speaking about some of these numbers—we have clearly shown our commitment to following through with an agenda of accountability and transparency. That’s why, in the estimates committee where I had the privilege of sitting last week and this week with the Minister of Education, for example, we saw a very clear laying out of what our plan is when it comes to investing in the things that matter most.

That’s why I think the name of the fall economic statement is so very important, because it demonstrates our commitment to investing in the things that Ontarians care about most and ensuring that we have a sustainable public sector that goes forward in a way that is here not just for the students of today and the patients of today, but the patients of tomorrow and the students of tomorrow and those who depend on our social services.

I do want to challenge the assertions of the member. I think it’s important that when we look at the breakdowns that are included in the fall economic statement, we see how our government has decided to invest in the things that people depend upon and has also chosen, simultaneously, to address the long-term fiscal sustainability of our province’s finances. This is something that is so, so important.

But I want to also return to something that came up a little bit earlier from the member for Thunder Bay–Atikokan, where she was talking about our plan to fight climate change, our plan to deal with environmental concerns across Ontario. She spoke very derisively, I found, about the day of littering. I want to be clear, that’s in addition to—that’s not a substitute for—our plan to address climate change and to tackle the very real concerns that Ontarians have about climate change and the need to address it as a challenge to future generations.

I want to say—we’re talking about debt and interest—if we had more money that wasn’t going into interest payments, we could spend a lot more in the Ministry of the Environment to make sure that we’re doing what needs to be done to address climate change. I know our excellent minister is committed to doing so every single day—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you very much.

Further questions and comments?

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’m pleased and honoured, as always, to rise in this chamber, especially this morning, having the chance to listen to my esteemed colleague the member from Lanark-Frontenac—it used to be “Lennox and Addington”; I got it close enough. He is free and unchained from the burdens of partisanship, and I think you can sense the relief that he has in his debate this morning.

When he raises the issue of retail cannabis sales in the province of Ontario and how this government, and particularly this Premier—who has experience and self-professed acumen on various models of business, whether they be independent or retail chains, as it were, Speaker. You have to wonder how this Premier could, in fact, lose, in the first year of retail sales of cannabis—something that was anticipated in a market that was already existing—around $40 million. It does certainly boggle the mind, and the member raises some important questions. Can’t they wrap their heads around this?

Hasn’t he given enough thought to actually capitalizing, supporting and making sure that that revenue supports the important programs that this province requires in education and health care?

We should also talk about addictions and support for addictions, and the critical crisis that is happening in our communities around fentanyl and such. It gives us an idea of where this government has failed.

Certainly there was an existing model built in for the LCBO with its retail chain and distribution network—the training, the support, the protection for consumers—that they had already. It was ready to go off the shelf, but as the member eloquently put it, it was cooked up in some backroom, and obviously this government has failed on that file.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. David Piccini: It’s a great pleasure to rise to speak about the fall economic statement. I’d just like to touch on two things, which were spoken about earlier by members, that are really important to me in rural Ontario, in the Northumberland–Peterborough South area that I represent.

First, to contextualize: We got into the situation we’re in by excessive government spending, by excessive government intervention. I heard from rural farmers; I heard from plumbers; I heard from businesses that operated in my riding; health care, “Just get off our backs.”

From the institutions that I represent in the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities: Program approval processes would take upwards of two years when universities and colleges are trying to pivot to position our next generation to get the jobs they so desperately need.

What has this fall economic statement done? I want to hit on two things. First, the backbone: public transit. I spoke to the Minister of Transportation yesterday at estimates where she outlined the 25% increase for commuters with GO Transit. This has been done in less than a year—a 25% increase for the residents in Durham in my riding. Second, health care: investing in what matters most, which my colleague spoke about here.

I want to touch on the medium-sized hospital funding that this government has addressed in the statement on the increased funding for medium-sized hospitals. This was a funding formula that was broken. The previous government had a decade to address this; they didn’t. Funding shortfalls meant a demoralized workforce and meant underfunding in medium-sized hospitals. Thankfully, we’ve addressed that.

At my hospital, the Northumberland Hills Hospital, we’ve committed over $3 million to address historical underfunding, and we’ve seen investments in HIRF funding to support hospital repairs. We’ve seen investments into community health.

Mr. Speaker, this fall economic statement gets government off businesses’ backs, gets government off post-secondary education institutes’ backs, invests in transit, invests in education, invests in what matters most.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Chris Glover: I just have to respond to the comments from the member from Peterborough South? Have I got that right? Let’s see. He was talking about—

Mr. David Piccini: Northumberland.

Mr. Chris Glover: I apologize; from Northumberland–Peterborough South—because he was talking about how people have been asking the government to get off their backs, and yet this government is actually creating an entire bureaucratic framework to control our colleges and universities and what programs they offer.

As the critic for colleges and universities, I’ve been touring around and one of the things I’ve realized is how important colleges and universities are as economic engines of the 21st-century economy—the innovation centres that are happening there, the research that is happening.

I was touring the BioZone at U of T a couple of weeks ago. They’re actually taking farm waste, like corn stocks and things, and converting it into glycol, which is a very useful industrial product.

I was at the quantum computing lab at Waterloo University. They’ve got quantum computers that are actually operating now. They’re developing the technology for this next generation of computing, and yet this government is creating something called “strategic mandate agreements.” They’re threatening to withhold up to 60% of the operating grants for colleges and universities in any one year if they don’t meet the benchmarks the government sets, and it’s creating chaos.

The research shows that when you have performance-based funding like this, it actually creates the opposite effect, instead of allowing organizations to be more successful, because they don’t know what their funding is going to be in the next year, so they can’t invest in technology; they can’t invest in new lab equipment; they can’t invest in buildings or in permanent staff to actually create the elements of success.

This government is creating a level of bureaucracy that’s going to undermine the success of universities and colleges that are the economic engine—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you very much.

Now I return to the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston for his final comments.

Mr. Randy Hillier: I want to thank the member from Niagara West and the member from Essex for engaging in the debate on the substance of my comments, and the members from Northumberland and Spadina for commenting on something entirely unrelated to what my comments were.

Speaker, we know and you know the cannabis industry is an important element to this province. In your riding alone, in Chatham-Kent–Leamington, there is a raft of producers there. They are under threat. The member from Niagara West—he knows it. There are lots of producers there. Some 200 people are laid off in his riding.

Speaker, we cannot allow our recreational, legalized cannabis industry to be used as a game of chance and a lottery to pick the winners and losers of who is going to be in there, while we continue to allow the black market to prosper, to flourish, and we stifle our own economic growth in Ontario as a result.

Thank you for opportunity to engage in Bill 138. I do hope to hear some answers from this government on opening up the retail market so that the cannabis business can flourish and the black market can have an end put to it quickly.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): The time for debate this morning has expired.

It is now 10:15. This House will stand recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1016 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I first want to draw the attention of the House to the fact that we have a former member in the chamber today: Cheri DiNovo, who served Parkdale–High Park in the 38th, 39th, 40th and 41st provincial Parliaments. Welcome back.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And in the Speaker’s gallery today, we have a good friend of mine who is a councillor on the town of Halton Hills’ council: Bryan Lewis. Welcome to Queen’s Park today. Good to have you here.

In a former career, Bryan was the chief of officiating in the National Hockey League. He gave me a whistle this morning, in case I needed to use it. Just to warn the members, I have the whistle, and I’m ready to use it.

M me France Gélinas: I’d like to welcome volunteers from Wounds Canada: Olena Veryha, Robert Ketchen, Sue Rosenthal, Jackie Hickey, Tobi Mark, Ghada Malek and Morty Eisenberg, as well as Todd Boyd, Catherine Muir and Gord Rymal. Welcome to Queen’s Park. They’re having a reception in room 228 right after question period. I hope you’ll be able to join them.

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I’d like to welcome from Advocis, the Financial Advisors Association of Canada, Janice McFarlane from Canada Life, John Saikaley from Desjardins and, from Carleton, my very own riding, Rob Stewart from HollisWealth. It was great to meet with them today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I’m pleased to welcome several people to Queen’s Park today. Linda Davis, Dani Bartlett and Marnie Sherritt are all here from the Coalition to Empower Gender Equality.

From the Ontario Good Roads Association, I want to welcome two London West constituents: Chris Traini, who is with the county of Middlesex, and John Parsons, who is with the city of London, as well as my neighbour Joanne Vanderheyden, the mayor of Strathroy-Caradoc. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’d like to welcome to Queen’s Park my wife, Sue; my son, Neil; and my brother-in-law Robert Cochrane.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I have two very special guests in the west members’ gallery I’d like to welcome today. My daughter Beata Schreiner had so much fun at take-your-kid-to-work day that she brought her grandmother and my mother, Barbara Schreiner, to Queen’s Park today. Welcome.

Miss Monique Taylor: I have a list of invitees that I would like to announce today. First, from Advocis, from the great riding of Hamilton Mountain, we have Grace DiLeo-Lindsay. Welcome back to Queen’s Park.

From CUPE child welfare workers we have Carrie Lynn Poole-Cotnam, Noelle Racicot-Kelly, Matthew Stella, Chris Watson, Kenneth Giesen, Nancy Price-Hutley, Lorrie Pepin, Julie Riley, Sonia Yung, Beverley Bedeau, Lidia Vieira, Aubrey Gonsalves, Nancy Simone, Heather Murray, Andrew Hunter and Adi Rao.

From the autism community—it’s my daily welcome back to them—it’s Michau van Speyk, Amy Moledzki and Stacy Kennedy. Welcome, all, to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Kinga Surma: Filip, the page from my riding of Etobicoke Centre, is page captain today, so I want to welcome his family, who came out to support him. I want to welcome his mom and dad, Kalipsa and Mate Matevski; his younger sister Angelina Matevski; and his grandparents Kiril and Rodna Iliev. Welcome to the House.

Mr. Paul Miller: It’s my pleasure to introduce Susan Sharma. She’s a constituency assistant of mine in Hamilton, and it’s her first time to Queen’s Park. Welcome, Susan.

Mr. Randy Hillier: I’d like to welcome Sean Lawrence and Rob Stewart from my riding to Queen’s Park today. They’re here with Advocis.

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: I’d like to warmly welcome members of Professional Engineers Ontario, from the Scarborough chapter. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I am pleased to welcome folks from the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance: Rayna Porter, who is the student rep from Trent University Durham; Shemar Hackett; Auston Pierce; and Bilal Khan.

Also, I have the opportunity to welcome folks from the Ontario Good Roads Association: Scott Butler, Rick Kester and Rick Harms.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. John Fraser: I’m pleased to introduce some folks who are here from Wounds Canada: Ramzi Shenouda, Frank Berns, Susan Pinzer, Tom Weiz, Charles de Mestral and Robyn Evants. They have a reception today in room 228 at lunchtime, and I invite all members to join them.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I’m proud to welcome to Queen’s Park today one of the greatest mayors in Ontario—my mayor—and a good friend: Joanne Vanderheyden. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to welcome to the House today Maria Rizzo, the chair of the Toronto Catholic District School Board, who is here today as an advocate with Wounds Canada. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Dave Smith: I’d like to introduce a member of Advocis from my riding, Linda Gratton.

I don’t see them here yet, but Westmount Public School, from the city of Peterborough, will be coming later on today as well.

Ms. Suze Morrison: I’d like to welcome one of my constituents, Susan Gapka, a long-time, fierce trans activist. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome a special friend from my riding today, Jeannette Chau. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’d like to introduce Dianne Robinson. Her mother, Betty Robinson, is one of the last remaining people living at Davenhill seniors’ home. Thank you for coming, Dianne.

Hon. Rod Phillips: I’d like to welcome all of our guests from Advocis, the Financial Advisors Association of Canada, to Queen’s Park, including Greg Pollock, the president and CEO, and, from Durham, Karen Low, Chris Hudson, Irene Walsh and Ron Fennell. Welcome.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: I would like to welcome the College Student Alliance to Queen’s Park. There are three students here from Thunder Bay: Brian Mpoza, Sterling Finlayson and Kiran Ramesh.

It’s a Thunder Bay day, because I also have, from the Ontario Basic Income Network, Ruth Westcott. I’d like to welcome her to Queen’s Park.

And joining us from the Ontario Good Roads Association, from Thunder Bay, is Rick Harms.

Hon. Todd Smith: I’m happy to welcome attendees with the Ontario Agencies Supporting Individuals with Special Needs, OASIS. They’re visiting the Legislature today.

We’re welcoming self-advocates along with representatives from OASIS, Community Living organizations from across the province, the Ottawa-Carleton Association for Persons with Developmental Disabilities, the Reena Foundation, the Cochrane Temiskaming Resource Centre, Community Visions and Networking, Participation House Durham, and Counselling Services of Belleville and District. They have a reception tonight, and I’d encourage everyone to head there after the debate is over.

I also want to welcome two members of Advocis from Bay of Quinte who are here: my good friends Paul Reed and Shannon Neely.

Mr. John Vanthof: I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome Paul Schoppmann, the mayor of the beautiful town of St.-Charles in Timiskaming–Cochrane.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: I just want to welcome my friend Sam Ingram, who is here from Etobicoke. Have a great day at the Legislature.

Ms. Jill Andrew: I’d like to welcome again former MPP Dr. Cheri DiNovo.

I’d also like to welcome Susan Gapka, friend and mentor, CUPE women’s committee, Pink Triangle representative—congratulations again for getting the keys to the city of Toronto—and Rhonda Sussman.

Hon. Bill Walker: I have two announcements today.

I’d like to welcome Aakash Desai, the deputy mayor of the municipality of Grey Highlands, who is in the audience with us.

And this one is a really special one: I’m pleased to announce the birth of Millie Sajfert, born to proud parents Ana and Milan Sajfert, and little sister to Tara. Baby and mom are both healthy and happy. I’m a little lost, though, because Ana has served with me as my executive assistant since I arrived at Queen’s Park, so I wish her a great year of maternal leave, but I wish her to get back as quick as she can.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I was unable to mention this yesterday, but I do want to wish my son a belated happy birthday. He turned 27 yesterday.

Hon. Doug Downey: I’d like to welcome the delegation from the Professional Engineers of Ontario: Nancy Hill, president; Johnny Zuccon, CEO; Warren Turnbull; Arjan Arenja; and Jeannette Chau. Welcome.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: It is my pleasure to welcome everyone that’s up here from the basic income network and also those from the Ontario Agencies Supporting Individuals with Special Needs, also known as OASIS. I look forward to meeting with them later and speaking at both of their receptions.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: In the gallery today is a great friend of this House, Cheri DiNovo. She and I years ago brought in the Trans Day of Remembrance as a piece of legislation.

We’re joined today by a delegation: Susan Gapka, Melissa Hudson, Kendra Fry, Jacob Wenzel, Emma Wakelin, Judi Bonner, Bishop Kevin Robertson, James Holzbauer, Andrew Fraser, Joy Gawa, Jill Dilts, our good friend Stella Skinner, Darwin Skinner, Jessica Skinner, Davina Havier, Michelle Haley, Wendy Snowdon and Dorothy Snowdon.

Welcome to Queen’s Park on the Trans Day of Remembrance.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: I’d also like to introduce, from the Ontario Good Roads Association, Amin Mneina, as well as Aakash Desai.

Mrs. Robin Martin: I’d like to welcome two groups of guests. One is a number of guests in the gallery from Wounds Canada: Celine Bryenton, Crystal McCallum, Giuliana Quinto, Katie Bassett, Mariam Botros, Marina Yassa and Adelaide North. They will be hosting a reception, as mentioned, in room 228 after question period.

I’d also like to welcome the Catholic school trustee in my area, Maria Rizzo. Thank you. Have a great time.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’d like to welcome two amazing people from the Kincardine area: a provincial director with OASIS, Andy Swan, and I’d also like to echo the welcome to Arjan Arenja with PEO.

Mr. Norman Miller: I’d like to welcome Liam Broad. He is in the public gallery, west side. He was very helpful in the past provincial campaign for me. Welcome, Liam, to the Legislature.

Ms. Lindsey Park: We’re joined in the east members’ gallery by members of the Durham

chapter of Advocis. I’d like to welcome Chris Hudson, Brent Holmes and Brittany Hudson. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Michael Parsa: I’d like to welcome Jordan Angus, a great volunteer in my campaign and a strong voice for our youth in Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill. I’d like to welcome him to Queen’s Park as it is his first time visiting us.

Hon. Ross Romano: I’d like to welcome some very special friends of mine from my home of Sault Ste. Marie and from the Sault Ste. Marie

chapter of Advocis: Eric Barton, Anthony Deluco, Denton Middaugh and Gord Rymal, sitting to my right here.

Mrs. Daisy Wai: I’d like to welcome Mr. Charlie Lyons, sitting in the public gallery. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Mike Harris: If my eyes don’t deceive me, I believe we have a former member of Parliament up in the gallery. Jay Aspin, I think, is here today.

Committee sittings

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader has informed me he has a point of order that he would like to raise. I recognize him.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, I’m seeking unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding the Standing Committee on Estimates.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent of the House to move a motion without notice regarding the Standing Committee on Estimates. Agreed? Agreed.

Again, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I move that the Standing Committee on Estimates be authorized to sit until 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 20, 2019. This is to allow the Minister of Francophone Affairs to speak in the House to the NDP opposition day motion.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Calandra has moved that the Standing Committee on Estimates be authorized to sit until 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 20, 2019. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Motion agreed to.

Oral Questions

Government contracts

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier. Yesterday, we learned that at a time when the entire world is moving toward renewable energy, the Ford government is wasting at least $231 million—and quite possibly more—tearing down clean energy projects and paying wind energy producers not to build renewable energy.

Why did the government claim that there would be no cost to Ontarians when, in fact, ripping up these wind energy contracts is costing at least $231 million?

Hon. Paul Calandra: To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Greg Rickford: One of our first actions as government was to wind down over 750 contracts, to the tune of a net present value of $790 million—almost a billion dollars—that communities didn’t want and the grid didn’t need. We repealed the Green Energy Act to ensure that expensive contracts and energy projects that would be forced on unwilling communities would not be a burden on our system.

This is not a cost that the ratepayer will bear. They appreciate the fact that we’ve taken significant steps in an effort to reduce it for the ratepayer. Every single time the NDP had an opportunity to work with us and reduce those rates, they voted against it.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, it all comes out of the same pocket, Speaker, and the families of Ontario deserve more affordability with electricity, not less, which is what this government is providing them: less affordability.

Government sources say that the costs of scrapping these renewable energy projects could exceed $231 million. In fact, the full cost of tearing down the White Pines wind project still has not yet been finalized. Media reports indicate the cost of cancelling that project alone will run as high as $141 million.

I can remember when the Liberals sat where the Ford government sits now and lowballed the cost of the gas plants scandal. Can the government guarantee that their $231-million number will not climb any higher?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Mr. Speaker, isn’t it interesting to hear the chairman of that party talk about where money comes from? I think this party here has done a lot to take care of the taxpayers’ dollars and make sure that they get the best value from government services and programs. But if, in fact, she was here—let’s rattle off some interesting statistics: November 1, 2009, a 5.5% increase; November 1, 2010, a 6.25% increase; November 1, 2011, an 8.7% increase to the ratepayer.

It actually goes on and on right up until, oh, about 2018, when a government took over and took swift action to take projects off that were structurally causing this system to be complex and unaffordable for ratepayers; that’s senior citizens, small businesses, families and major industries that employ thousands of people.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The minister responsible is conveniently forgetting that his Ford government promised a 12% decrease in electricity rates, not a 2% increase in electricity rates.

But do you know what? It has been more than a year since the Premier proudly announced that he would start tearing down clean energy projects, even while the rest of the world was rushing to build them. A year later, the government still claims that they don’t know the full cost of this move.

When will the public get an answer? Can the government maybe set a date today as to when people will expect to know exactly how much the ripping up of contracts by this government is going to cost?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Mr. Speaker, we will not be deterred from our efforts to continue to ensure that our energy system is simpler, less complex and more affordable.

We’ve heard it from just about every major industry and small business you can think of. Our constituents are showing us these peak demand costs of the price per kilowatt hour. Isn’t that interesting? That is borne by the increases that I just rattled off—and I can rattle off more.

Here’s what I know about it: The NDP supported the ideologically driven previous government every step of the way. We already have a green energy system here in Ontario; 92% of our energy system is GHG-free. It employs thousands of workers in Pickering and Oshawa across the GTA. We have an extraordinary opportunity to build that out, Mr. Speaker, and continue to remain committed to green energy that’s affordable and competitive with other jurisdictions in Canada and North America.

Government contracts

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The next question is also for the Premier. When the previous Liberal government cancelled two gas plants, they had the same $230-million opening estimate as the Ford government now has. But thanks to the Auditor General, all Ontarians learned that $230 million under the Liberals was actually over $1 billion. At that time, Conservative members, including many who now sit in the Conservative government’s cabinet, considered the auditor’s numbers to be definitive.

Any member of the Ford government cabinet has the power to ask the auditor to review these expenses. Will the Ford government take action today to ensure transparency and ask the Auditor General to conduct a complete review of the total cost of these cancelled contracts?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines.

Hon. Greg Rickford: It’s interesting that the member opposite would introduce the Auditor General’s role in all of this. It was, in fact, the Auditor General who said that these increases that I mentioned earlier—and as I said, there are more. There are 8.9%, 8.2%, 22%—it’s incredible. That was in 2014.

The thing is, nobody knew about it. Nobody knew the secret plan that was hatched over there to build in expensive projects that would make our energy system more complex and way more expensive.

The 750 projects had not reached their milestones, to the tune of almost $1 billion in net present value, which doesn’t include any inflationary costs against that price and the structural support that that kind of energy would need to continue to make our system the most complex and the most expensive in North America. Those are facts, Mr. Speaker.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: At a time when we should be investing in renewable energy and renewable projects, this government is not only tearing them down, they’re squandering hundreds and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that could have built new hospitals and long-term-care beds or taken lead out of the water in schools and daycare centres. The least the government should do now is give the people of Ontario an honest accounting of their boondoggle.

Will the Ford government call in the auditor? And, if not, why not?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Mr. Speaker, the auditor was called in, and she made some pretty impressive observations about the previous plan that was supported by the anti-nuclear democratic party every step of the way.

The fact of the matter is that we have an energy system that employs tens of thousands of highly trained and highly skilled workers at a competitive cost—somewhere in the seven-cents-per-kilowatt-hour price. That’s competitive with Quebec, where I was yesterday, which is in full-blown competition with us in the mining sector.

It’s difficult to compete when the NDP and the Liberal Party, the former government, were in cahoots together to build the most expensive system in North America. That system, Mr. Speaker, it has been told to us over and over again, is the most complex and the most expensive.

I see that the NDP are conveniently still on that fact-free diet that they started last December. Let’s be clear: People wanted a pathway—

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, it looks like the government side doesn’t want to talk about their boondoggle, although they talk a lot about the Liberal boondoggle. But I’m actually talking about the Conservative boondoggle that is unfolding right before our eyes, as we sit in this chamber.

The Conservatives used to be upset about the gas plant contracts that were torn up by the Liberals. They shouted about the scandals. They shouted from the rooftops about—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Okay, that’s it. I’m going to start calling out members by name and then I’m going to start warning them. And we know that that leads to the next step.

I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition.

Trans Day of Remembrance

Hon. Paul Calandra: Point of order, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The clock is stopped. I’m going to listen to this.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Inadvertently—and I apologize. Today, we were supposed to be observing a moment of silence for Trans Day of Remembrance before question period, and inadvertently that did not happen. I seek unanimous consent in order for us to do it right now, to stop the clock so that we might do that and continue with question period.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We normally don’t listen to points of order but I recognized or sensed that there might be something serious that was going to be raised. But I think it would be most appropriate that we deal with that point of order after question period and observe then, if the House agrees, a moment of silence at the end of question period.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay, I’ll listen to the government House leader again.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Speaker, I appreciate that this is not normal, and I apologize to the entire House for the mix-up today. I assume responsibility for that. I know that this is completely not a normal course of action, but it has been raised to me that the community will not be here towards the end of question period and that there perhaps is a legislative requirement that it be done before question period, so I beg the forgiveness of the House for this intrusion. Question period will continue for the full length of time, if you’re in agreement, Mr.

Speaker, but I ask for this unusual—given the importance of this, and again, I apologize to the House and I apologize to the community for this. But I again seek just a moment, if we could do that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent of the House to observe a moment of silence. Agreed?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, can I just ask that when we have this moment of silence, then, in the middle of question period that I’ll begin from the beginning of my question—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Of course. Not a problem. I assure you of that.

Agreed.

I would ask the members to rise to observe the moment of silence.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

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

Government contracts

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re going to recognize the Leader of the Opposition’s final supplementary, and you can start at the beginning of your question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, what I asked is that I could start my questions from the beginning. I was in a bit of a discussion here about what this government is doing and that was interrupted by, by the way, the moment of silence for the Trans Day of Remembrance—so that people are aware of why we had a moment of silence—but it is not appropriate to break my question period questions by a moment of silence. It’s completely—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I am going to recognize the Leader of the Opposition, the first supplementary of her second question. Start the clock. I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: At a time when we should be investing in renewable energy projects, this government is not only tearing them down, they’re squandering hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that could have built new hospitals, long-term-care beds or taken the lead out of the water in schools and child care centres. The least that this government could do now is to give the people of Ontario an honest accounting of this boondoggle. Will the Ford government call in the auditor? And, if not, why not?

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

Hon. Greg Rickford: The government of Ontario continues to make significant investments in green energy. That’s why we have some of the largest infrastructure projects in the history, certainly, of this province, and of Canada for sure, in refurbishing our nuclear facilities, ensuring that we have a green source of energy that’s competitive and that comes in at around seven or seven and a half cents per kilowatt—not the 17 cents to 50 cents that was embedded in these contracts for wind and solar power that made our system more complex, Mr. Speaker, and was recognized, for all the wrong reasons, as being the most expensive energy system in North America.

Those are facts. Ask ratepayers that question. They now understand it. They’re paying closer attention to their bills because the subsidy—which we now know was debt—that the Auditor General asked us to put clearly on the bill so that the people of Ontario could understand it better, Mr. Speaker, is there for all to see.

We’re going to continue to take the right steps to reduce costs and find efficiencies in our system to reduce the rates that families and businesses pay, Mr. Speaker.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, my question is actually about the previous Liberal boondoggle on tearing up energy contracts and its striking resemblance to the current Conservative boondoggle of tearing up energy contracts. The Conservatives used to be upset about the gas plant contracts that were ripped up by the Liberals. They shouted from the rooftops about that scandal. But now the tables have turned and they’re doing the exact same thing: ripping up contracts for renewable energy for Ontarians and not only leaving families to pay the bills, but refusing to tell them how much this is going to cost them.

The Ford government is now paying companies millions of dollars not to produce clean energy. Will they, at the very least, allow the Auditor General to tell us how much we’re all going to be paying for their energy boondoggle?

Hon. Greg Rickford: It’s not every day that I get an opportunity, over the course of my career, to speak to the boondoggle of a previous government that that party supported. So I will. I’ll speak to it with certainty. Let’s just continue with the statistics here; they’re compelling. I think I stopped at 2012.

In 2013, on November 1, there was an 8.9% increase; on November 1, 2014, an 8.2% increase; November 1, 2015—you’re sitting down, Mr. Speaker; wait for it—a 22% increase in what ratepayers pay.

We took appropriate, responsible action to deal with more than 750 projects that communities didn’t want and that the grid didn’t need. They were costing us anywhere from 17 cents to 50 cents per kilowatt hour, Mr. Speaker. We won’t stand for that. Ratepayers certainly won’t stand for that. We stand by those changes and will continue to do the right—

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

The next question.

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Acting Premier. When it comes to bargaining, this government has a lot to say, but there’s not been a lot of action. In the last 24 hours, teachers have expressed extraordinary frustration at the government, who seem determined to pick a fight. They also have plunged our bargaining into chaos, just like they’ve plunged our classrooms into chaos.

Scoring points at press conferences is not going to undo the damage that this government has caused to our schools, and it certainly isn’t going to get a deal at the bargaining table. Why is this government so determined to pick a fight?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: This government is determined to get a good deal for our students, for our teachers and for the parents of this province. That is why, Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked our teachers’ union partners to consider seriously mediation as a mechanism to get a deal. I think what is important is that we turn to the same approach as with CUPE, our education workers, just a month ago. It worked.

At the end of the day, the Premier and this government are absolutely committed to a resolution that keeps kids in class and improves education for every student in this province.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: The minister doesn’t seem to know where we’re at in the bargaining process.

Again to the Acting Premier: The minister has already delayed bargaining because he’d rather see himself on television than kids in the classroom. It is no surprise that this government is going out of their way to make things worse at the bargaining table. They’re the ones who made things worse in our classrooms to begin with. Teachers are saying, “Your actions have thrown negotiations”—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Order. I apologize to the member for Davenport.

Start the clock. She can place her question.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think I hit a nerve there.

As I was saying, teachers are saying that this government’s actions “have thrown negotiations into complete chaos.”

We are days away from potential work action. Families are wondering what they’re going to do and how they’re going to make ends meet. There’s no one else for the government to blame but themselves.

Again, when are you going to do the right thing, reverse these reckless cuts and stop the attack on our schools?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The government is going to continue to be a reasonable, student-centric force at the tables. That is why we were able to achieve a deal with CUPE just one month ago, which kept kids in the classrooms of this province.

Mr. Speaker, while we do those initiatives, while we take reasonable actions at the table, we’re seeing an escalation by teachers’ unions. That is regrettable for families to observe, because their children should not have to pay the price for disagreement at the table. My hope is that, through mediation, we can actually provide a credible pathway to getting a good deal for our parents, for our teachers and, most importantly, for the students of this province.

Real estate industry

Mrs. Gila Martow: I have a question for the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. Yesterday, the minister introduced the Trust in Real Estate Services Act. This bill, if passed by the Legislature, would bring a much-needed update to the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002, strengthening consumer protection and modernizing rules for registered real estate brokerages, brokers and salespersons.

Making sure that real estate professionals and brokerages across the province are trusted and ethical is important in giving consumers confidence in an open marketplace.

Can the minister elaborate on the proposed changes to the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Thank you to the member from Thornhill for the great question. I appreciate it very much, because we have heard loud and clear from consumers and from professionals alike that it was time to review the aged legislation, if you will.

I’m very excited to highlight our government’s Trust in Real Estate Services Act, which focuses on five key areas, the main one being enhancing consumer protection. This means ensuring that consumers have access to better information, such as getting the right disclosures from real estate professionals as well as brokerages.

Number two: We’re increasing professionalism among real estate professionals and brokerages by ensuring that they have a clear set of rules and ethical requirements to follow.

We’re also ensuring efficient and effective regulation in the real estate sector. After it was ignored for too long by the previous Liberal administration, we have listened, we’re being bold and we’re taking action.

I’d also like to add, Mr. Speaker, that we’re going to be reducing the burden on businesses and we’re going to be building a stronger business environment by laying the foundation for real estate professionals to incorporate.

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

Mrs. Gila Martow: I want to thank the minister for her answer. I was the caucus team advisory chair that heard this bill and the discussion. I want to thank the minister for all of her hard work and dedication in introducing a bill that was developed—and I want to thank the minister for all of the consultation that was done on this bill.

In fact, I was able to see first-hand the extent to which the minister and this government are dedicated to listening to the people of Ontario. This is a commitment that our government and our Premier take very seriously, especially when it comes to legislation that impacts one of the most important decisions Ontarians make in their lives: purchasing a home. I know that many Ontarians will be glad to hear of the proposed actions the minister is taking to modernize laws governing real estate brokerage professionals in this province.

Can the minister tell this House how the Trust in Real Estate Services Act will enhance consumer protection?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: To the member from Thornhill, I say thank you for your kind remarks, but we have to share all of the credit with the caucus and the members opposite, because in this House for years we’ve been hearing the need to review the legislation that had been outdated.

I’m really pleased to share with everyone today that our proposed changes would not only enhance consumer protection, but increase consumer confidence in the real estate sector through better information and disclosures, which lead to choice in purchase and a better sales process. These changes will allow consumers in Ontario to have confidence that the real estate industry and its professionals are operating with accountability.

If the bill is passed, Ontario’s government remains committed to continue to consult with consumers and with stakeholders to develop proposed regulations. This is good legislation. These changes will help consumers make more informed decisions and also reduce the burden on our real estate professionals.

Government contracts

Ms. Sandy Shaw: My question this morning is to the Minister of Finance. Ontario families are anxious about other contracts that the Premier has pledged to rip up. We now know Ontario is paying clean energy providers $231 million not to build green power. The government’s political interventions with Hydro One have already led to a cancelled contract and a $103-million penalty, and the government has lost court battle after court battle, with probably more to come. Earlier this year, the Premier passed legislation to tear up the province’s 10-year contract with the Beer Store. Industry sources estimate that this reckless move could cost Ontarians up to $1 billion.

Can the minister please give us an update on the plan to rip up the contract with the Beer Store, and how much that will cost taxpayers?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member for her interest and her question. We are modernizing alcohol and the legislation around alcohol, as the member will know. In the FES bill, there are several very progressive amendments contained, amendments that all stakeholders, whether it’s the wine industry or the cider industry or members of the beer industry, have indicated they support—the idea of decoupling the issues of the regulator versus the LCBO, so there is a great deal of progress in that regard.

We’ve also made it clear that we want to increase convenience for Ontarians, and we are in discussions with all stakeholders, including the brewers, in that regard. When we have news to report on those discussions, I’ll be happy to bring them to this Legislature.

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

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Thank you for that answer, Minister, but I would say that the people of Ontario are more interested in what this is going to cost them, not how often they can get a buck-a-beer in Ontario.

This government is now notorious for ripping up contracts without consideration for the costs. To quote one observer, “governments can also make bone-headed, ideological decisions that close businesses, kill jobs and drive away investment”—which is exactly what the Ford government is doing.

It has been months—months—since the government passed legislation giving themselves the power to rip up the Beer Store contract, a cancellation that we know could cost hundred of millions of dollars for taxpayers.

Will the minister please tell families how much public money will be spent on ripping up these contracts, and why is this money being diverted from our schools and underfunded hospitals?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I appreciate the member’s interest in this priority. We have many priorities, and, as I laid out in our fall economic statement two weeks ago, critical among those are making sure we put money back into the pocket of Ontarians—$3 billion in 2020, making sure that we invest in critical public services. That’s why we have record spending in the Ministry of Health, $1.9 billion more than last year, and $1.2 billon more in education, ensuring that we put Ontario back on a sound financial footing. That’s why we’ll balance the budget in 2023.

All of this underpins our commitment to the economy: 254,000 net new jobs. Those are the things that are our priorities. As I said: On other issues, we’ll report back on those priorities when we have new information.

Affordable housing

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My question is for the Acting Premier. Ontario is in the midst of a housing affordability crisis. A minimum wage worker in Toronto must work 79 hours per week just to afford a basic one-bedroom apartment.

In Hamilton, Ottawa, Kitchener, my riding of Guelph and most other cities across the province, zero per cent of rental housing is affordable to someone working full-time on minimum wage. The lack of affordable rental housing is hurting the students who are visiting Queen’s Park today, seniors, and young families, yet there is nothing in the fall economic statement about affordable rental housing. As a matter of fact, the ministry’s budget is being cut.

Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Acting Premier: Will the government commit today to make investments in affordable, purpose-built rental housing be part of the fall economic statement, so we can address the housing affordability crisis in Ontario?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: We believe as a government that everyone in Ontario deserves a place to call home. That’s why our government has made housing a top priority since we came to government 16 months ago. I know that the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has worked hard and has had many, many conversations across this province with people. That’s why we introduced our Housing Supply Action Plan.

Mr. Speaker, our plan is responsible and sustainable. It’s going to help reduce red tape to increase the supply of housing. But in 16 months, we have also worked really, really hard to create more than a quarter of a million new jobs in the province of Ontario. Wages are going up in the province and, as I said earlier this week, one of the greatest initiatives that the Premier has brought forward in Ontario is that those making $30,000 or under this year will pay zero provincial income tax

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: With all due respect to the minister, most of those low-wage workers can’t even afford to rent a basic one-bedroom apartment. As a matter of fact, over the last 30 years in Ontario, only 9% of our housing stock was purpose-built rental housing.

The lack of affordable options is driving people out of our communities. It’s increasing levels of poverty. We’re seeing more and more people sleeping in unhoused situations in ridings like mine, in Guelph, and others across the province. Yet nothing in the fall economic statement talks about building more purpose-built affordable rental housing in Ontario. As a matter of fact, the ministry’s budget has been reduced in the fall economic statement.

I go back to the minister: Will the government commit today to making investments in purpose-built affordable rental housing so people with modest and middle incomes can afford a rental unit in this province?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Again, this has obviously been a top priority of our government. That’s why the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing brought forward the Housing Supply Action Plan.

We are investing in a community housing system that was neglected for years by the previous Liberal government. They had 15 years to make this a priority. In fact, in 2019-20 alone, our government is providing more than $1 billion to sustain, repair and grow community housing right across this province.

It is important that we continue to grow Ontario’s economy so we can make these investments. Under the previous government, supported by the official opposition, we lost 300,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs. Because of the former government and the official opposition, hydro rates tripled in the province of Ontario. In 16 months, we are turning this province around. We’ve created over 250,000 well-paying jobs. Unemployment is at a three-decade low—

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

The member for Markham–Thornhill.

Seniors’ dental care

Many low-income seniors face challenges accessing regular dental care due to the financial implication and other obstacles. That’s why our government has brought forward this program. Our seniors deserve a program that will help relieve the burden and stress they can feel about their dental care.

Can the minister tell this House how eligible seniors can apply to this program?

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Thank you to the member from Markham–Thornhill for raising such an important question. I would also like to thank the member for being a passionate advocate for seniors’ well-being, not only in your riding but all across Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to say that the publicly funded Ontario Seniors Dental Care Program is now officially available online and in person for seniors to apply for the program. The portal can be accessed at ontario.ca/seniorsdental. Seniors can also pick up hard-copy application forms at local public health units.

Mr. Speaker, the well-being of all Ontario seniors is a top priority for our government—

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

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Thank you, Minister, for that great answer, and thank you for your hard work for the seniors. I know that you came to the Markham–Thornhill riding for the seniors round table as well.

Speaker, the seniors’ dental program is another great step that our government is taking to address hallway health care. Our government has been working hard to implement our comprehensive plan to end hallway health care. This will, of course, involve building new beds, but it will also involve changing how care is delivered to make our system more efficient.

We are investing in health care promotion, enabling new models of care for 911 patients, and mental health and addictions services.

Now we have fulfilled our promises to seniors and announced our new dental care program for low-income seniors. Can the minister tell the House how our seniors’ dental program fits into our government’s plan to end the hallway health care system?

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: I would like to refer that question to the Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Speaker, I am very proud that our government has officially launched the Ontario Seniors Dental Care Program, which will provide free, high-quality routine dental care for eligible low-income seniors.

Preventable dental issues lead to more than 60,000 emergency room visits every year. Preventable dental issues can be solved by the dental care that we would be providing. A significant number of these visits are by seniors who do not have dental coverage and have difficulty accessing care. The Ontario Seniors Dental Care Program will help eligible seniors receive the high-quality dental care that they deserve. By keeping seniors healthy, we can also help them avoid emergency visits to the hospital and help avoid chronic diseases.

This new program will help our government continue on our path of ending hallway health care and increasing the quality of life for all seniors across our province.

Autism treatment

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Acting Premier. Today is Universal Children’s Day, a day to reflect on how we’re serving the children of this province. And quite frankly, Speaker, this government continues to fail our most vulnerable children.

Last night, the Star had yet another story of families waiting in the dark for their funding. No one will give them the information that they need. Families are beyond disappointed. Life is getting harder and harder for them, and the stress continues to grow. They need action now.

When will all of these families languishing on wait-lists finally get the funding that their children need?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks to the member opposite for the question. I understand the urgency from the member opposite; we get that too. We were given the Ontario autism expert panel’s recommendations three weeks ago today, as a matter of fact. As the member knows, it was a rather hefty piece of recommendations, 63 pages in all. My officials are looking at that, and we are looking at how we can start to roll funding out the door to these families.

I can tell you that we are continuing to roll out childhood budgets while we are awaiting further news on the Ontario autism panel to be released in the coming days, weeks and months. But we understand the urgency. We understand that these families are having difficult times. We know that this is an imperfect situation, and I’ve mentioned that when I’ve spoken about this in the past. However, we are promising that we are going to bring in a needs-based program for autism families to ensure that they’re getting the help that they need.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: This minister promised that the program would be out by April. This is the second program that this government has put forward. If they can’t get, with the first program, money in parents’ pockets in nine months, how are they possibly going to do the next program in less than four months? It doesn’t make sense.

With us today is Stacy. Today is day 846 that her child has been on the wait-list. She has met with her Conservative MPP. She has met with the minister and his parliamentary assistants. This government knows the challenges that Stacy’s family and thousands of families like hers are facing, but nothing has changed. Families need money in their pockets to be able to purchase services. Families across this province are in crisis.

When can Stacy and families like hers expect the supports that their children need?

Hon. Todd Smith: I thank the member opposite for the question. I know there are many families out there who are in a similar situation. The member opposite talked about 845 days, which means that that family has been waiting back into the Liberal government’s previous program and they were not getting the services that they need. But that’s why, Mr. Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Todd Smith: Mr. Speaker, I think the opposite members need to understand that. That’s why we have taken the time to meet with the expert panel over the summer. They have brought forward recommendations. This is a new Ontario Autism Program designed by the autism community, one that we are going to roll out, because families shouldn’t be waiting for 850 days to receive services. That’s why we’re taking the time to ensure we get this right so that we don’t have to have these families coming to Queen’s Park every day, waiting to get services.

They will have an Ontario Autism Program that is the best in the country. With the help of those families and with the help of that expert panel, we’re going to get there.

L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: Je remercie la députée de Mississauga-Centre de sa question. Notre gouvernement travaille avec la communauté francophone afin de promouvoir les intérêts et de défendre les droits et les acquis des Franco-Ontariennes et des Franco-Ontariens.

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

M me Natalia Kusendova: Je remercie la ministre des Affaires francophones pour sa réponse et pour son travail pour promouvoir les intérêts et les droits de tous les Franco-Ontariens et Franco-Ontariennes. Comme elle, j’ai eu le plaisir de rencontrer les chefs de l’AFO cette semaine et aussi d’assister à leur congrès annuel le mois dernier à Sudbury.

Les libéraux avaient 15 ans pour faire ce travail important pour la communauté francophone, et ils ne l’ont pas fait. Quant à nous, nous sommes sérieux et nous voulons réaliser cette tâche importante avant la fin de notre premier mandat, comme je l’ai dit ici dans cette Chambre à plusieurs reprises. En tant que ministre des Affaires francophones, je vais travailler de très près avec mes collègues en vue de faire progresser les dossiers des affaires francophones, et je veux m’assurer que la voix de la communauté francophone en Ontario est entendue.

Social assistance

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: My question is for the Acting Premier. It’s Universal Children’s Day, and children’s aid workers are here today with a dire warning for this government. The cuts to child welfare services under the Liberals were bad, but they’ve gotten worse under the Ford government. One CAS worker from Woodstock called it “death by a thousand cuts.” Year over year, cuts to these agencies have resulted in front-line job losses and service cuts, but it’s the kids in care who ultimately suffer. They can’t wait and hope that maybe the Premier will raise money for them through a cash-for-access dinner.

Will the Premier reverse the cuts to children’s aid that began under the Liberals and that continue under the Conservatives?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: I would like to thank the member for your question.

Our vision is for an Ontario where every child and youth who is receiving services through the child welfare system has the best supports possible. Children and youth receiving services in Ontario’s child welfare system deserve the best care and support that we can provide for them. Their safety and well-being is our top priority. And I can assure you, as the minister and as a mother, children and youth are our top priority.

I want to talk about our modernization system that’s taking place—and looking at prevention, I want to congratulate the Toronto’s Children’s Aid Society today on launching their Journey to Zero Program. We know that the system is broken and that we can be doing better. In August, I announced that we would be opening the modernization program, where we are engaging youth and families, caregivers, Indigenous partners, front-line workers, family law professionals, and child development sector leaders on their experiences and ideas on how we can strengthen the child welfare system.

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

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: Modernization should not be a euphemism for cuts.

This question is back to the Acting Premier. When this government cut a planned increase to social assistance by half, they made life more precarious for recipients of Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program. Poverty costs all of us between $27 billion and $33 billion a year.

The government is apparently stuck in the discredited notion of trickle-down economics, but what trickles down from an economy that benefits the Premier’s friends is not opportunity but food insecurity, unstable housing, uncertain access to better education, and more homelessness, all of which leave people further behind and without hope. Will the Premier clearly state that he will reverse the deep cuts he has made to OW and ODSP?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Todd Smith: Our government is focused on a broader plan to ensure that we lift people up who are on social assistance.

Just an interesting stat for you: During the 15 years the previous government was in power, we saw the number of individuals receiving social assistance increase by 55%. We can do better than that, and that’s why we’re working to ensure that those who are on social assistance have received an increase in their funding by 1.5%.

I think the one thing that’s probably the most staggering about the Ontario Works stats is that there are almost half a million people on Ontario Works, and half of those individuals are under the age of 24. We need to be doing more to ensure that those individuals, when they can, are entering into the workforce. That’s why, working with my colleague the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development, we’re preparing those individuals to join the workforce so they can stand on their own, raise a family, own a home. That’s what we’re doing. The best social program—

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

Seniors’ dental care

Mrs. Gila Martow: My question is to the Minister of Health. This morning, our government announced a great new program that will make an immediate difference in the lives of our seniors.

Many working Ontarians have dental insurance through their employer or through private insurance. However, our government recognizes that seniors living on low incomes were being left behind. That’s why, today, we followed through on our promise to seniors and announced a great new program that will expand access to preventive care for Ontario seniors. Can the Minister of Health tell this House about the kind of difference our investment in this seniors’ dental program will make?