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

June 4, 2024

43rd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2024-Jun-04 (PDF)

L166 - Tue 4 Jun 2024 / Mar 4 jun 2024

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 4 June 2024 Mardi 4 juin 2024

House sittings

Orders of the Day

Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 sur la prévention de la vente de chiots contraire à l’éthique

Wearing of pins

Members’ Statements

Volunteers

Anti-racism activities

Government spending

Haliburton Highlands Sports Hall of Fame

Petites entreprises

Government investments

D-Day anniversary

Woodman Park Community Centre and Pool

Government investments

ProAction Cops and Kids

Introduction of Visitors

House sittings

Question Period

Government accountability

Forest firefighting

Mercury poisoning

Taxation

Special-needs students

Taxation

Northern economy

Small business

Taxation

Mental health and addiction services

Taxation

Health care / Greenhouse gas emissions

Soins de longue durée / Long-term care

Taxation

Notice of dissatisfaction

Visitors

Reception

Pride Month

Visitor

Reception

Visiteuses

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Bills

Affordable Electric Vehicles and Accessible Charging Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 pour des véhicules électriques abordables et des bornes de recharge accessibles

Petitions

Social assistance

Caregivers

Broadband infrastructure

Health care funding

Social assistance

Automobile insurance

Tuition

Social assistance

Blood and plasma donation

Anti-racism activities

Social assistance

Post-secondary education

Anti-racism activities

Laboratory services

Orders of the Day

1828469 Ontario Inc. Act, 2024

1828469 Ontario Inc. Act, 2024

Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 pour réduire les formalités administratives afin de construire plus de logements

Private Members’ Public Business

Patient-to-Nurse Ratios for Hospitals Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 sur les ratios patients-personnel infirmier dans les hôpitaux

Adjournment Debate

Health care

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

House sittings

Hon. Paul Calandra: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government House leader, on a point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Pursuant to standing order 7(e), I wish to inform the House that tonight’s evening meeting is cancelled.

Orders of the Day

Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 sur la prévention de la vente de chiots contraire à l’éthique

Mr. Kerzner moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 159,

An Act to amend the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 / Projet de loi 159, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll recognize the minister to lead off the debate.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: I’m honoured to rise today to speak on Bill 159. I will be sharing my time with the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General, the member from Brampton North, and the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore.

Today’s third reading of Bill 159 is part of our government’s commitment to public safety. It is a road map that our government is very proud to talk about. It is a road map, as I’ve spoken many times, that confirms our government’s commitment to public safety in all of its forms and to say that we’ve never had a government or a Premier—our Premier, Premier Doug Ford—who has led by example and has prioritized public safety every single day.

I’m delighted to talk about the bill today and to give a perspective of why public safety matters. I use every opportunity that I can to thank our police officers and our firefighters. I want to thank the special constables and the auxiliary officers, civilian and sworn; our correctional officers; our probation and parole officers; the amazing 911 call operators; and the animal welfare inspectors as well.

Today, Bill 159, the third reading which we will talk about, is important because it goes to the incremental steps that our government has taken in public safety, and it’s very important. I believe the reason that we are here today is to make a difference in the lives of the province. Every day, we can do something important. Every day, we can make a difference in a person’s life.

This is what our province represents, a diversity of peoples that have come here, regardless of how they got here. They all have an equal right to live safely and to succeed and to flourish. The government’s responsibility is to do absolutely everything we can to make the lives of Ontarians something that they can go about in a safe environment.

Monsieur le Président, les raisons de leur service : ils peuvent faire une différence dans la vie des gens lorsqu’ils ne s’y attendent pas—et parce que nous croyons en notre province et en notre avenir.

Mr. Speaker, this is important. When we look at the communities that we have, there are many components that we take for granted because we go about our lives each and every day, never really understanding how important it is that the network of people who keep us safe, the people that I just gave a shout-out to, are there to ensure we can live our lives, and it’s very, very important.

Today, as we take a further step, another incremental step in animal welfare, we do so understanding where we have come from: the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, or as we like to call it, the PAWS Act. I want to specifically thank the Deputy Premier, the Minister of Health and member from Dufferin–Caledon for having the foresight to bring this bill, the PAWS Act, into force in 2020. It was passed in 2019. It modernized, it educated, and it set a standard for animal welfare. The Deputy Premier deserves a lot of credit for having the ambition to move in that direction. It has actually been transformational when we look at animal welfare today.

The PAWS Act came into force, and as a result of the PAWS Act, the assembly of animal welfare inspectors, the training of animal welfare inspectors, the setting up of the division came into being. I have seen these animal welfare inspectors in training myself. In fact, I was there with the member from Brantford–Brant in his own riding, and we went and we saw them in action. The member from Brantford–Brant and myself spoke to them about their commitment and their passion for wanting to make sure that the job that they will do throughout Ontario will be a fulfilling job for them, something that they will be able to look backwards in their lives to say, “We made a difference in animal welfare.”

The PUPS Act, which is Bill 159—the nickname of the bill is the PUPS Act—deals with filling the gaps that were as a result of learning from the PAWS Act. Now we’re filling the gaps of the prohibitions of buying, selling and breeding dogs in an unethical way, and I think it’s very important that we, again, look retrospectively as to where we have been so we understand where we are today.

I also want to mention that this is not the next incremental step since the PAWS Act came into force in 2020; it was actually Bill 102, which I was proud to speak on and help see move forward. Bill 102, as an example, did further strengthen animal welfare, including debt collection of fines, which is important.

So here we are today, and I want to speak about Bill 159, the PUPS Act, that will help crack down on puppy mills and the negative impact they have in the province. Premier Ford has made it clear that all over Ontario people need to feel safe. That’s exactly what I said in my

preamble and that’s why we’re here today. The government’s oath and duty is to protect our communities so we can live safely, but it also means the care and welfare of animals is so important to the cornerstone of our society.

As I’ve travelled the province and listened to stories in this Legislature, we hear the stories of our own pets that are part of our family. They are in every way so essential to our families, to our raising of our children and our grandchildren, and to having these pets be part of our lives. It’s very important that Ontario’s consumers understand that they should feel comfortable in purchasing or in adopting an animal.

Our government is stepping up, and our government has stepped up. As I said, this is now the third iteration that I am so happy to support. The Deputy Premier brought the PAWS Act in. I helped shepherd Bill 102, and we’re here today for Bill 159. These foundations that we’ve laid are very, very important. It is our government, under Premier Ford, that built the division of good and bad actors around the legislation from the ground up. This was our initiative to ensure that any animal has the right to be treated fairly in Ontario.

Madam Speaker, this is not only about animal rights. Of course, most of this proposed legislation expresses compassion for our current and future pets. It also sets a precedent for how our societies operate and the tone we take to all forms of life in Ontario.

I want to talk about what owning a puppy should mean. It means bringing home a puppy that will be joyful for the members of our own families, the opening of our arms when we hold our puppies and our dogs, and to see these adopted animals as part of our own family. From the moment this happens, there is this overwhelming sense of excitement and happiness and tenderness. Watching the puppy exploring its new surroundings with curiosity brings excitement to everyone.

I have to say, Madam Speaker, especially during the pandemic, we’ve heard story after story as to how having our pets—our puppies, our dogs, our rabbits—in our lives made such a vital difference in a time that we had no precedent for.

Amidst the joy of having and being fortunate to have puppies, there is also a sense of responsibility. This is also very important. If the puppies were raised under perfect conditions by good actors, then that’s great and we’re happy about it. But that’s not what we’re here to talk about today. We’re here to identify why we needed to come forward with this legislation now: because we need to create legislation that denounces the operation of unethical puppy breeding, because it happens, unfortunately, much too often.

I want to preface my remarks about unethical breeding, because it’s very, very important. Right here in Ontario, puppies who are being bred cruelly and taken from their mothers too soon, and undernourished and displaying biological behavioural issues or diseases and lack of care, is a problem. This act of criminal behaviour—trying to finesse the province with cruelty—is something we will not stand for. We will not stand for bad breeders and bad actors, and as long as we are here in government, we will do something about it.

Because when you’re dealing with a puppy mill operator, the transaction of faith must be acknowledged as something that is sacrosanct, which means that the transaction of the adoption must be something that will lead to a wonderful outcome for the family and the loving animal as well.

We have a problem when we look at the bad actors that are the problem. That’s why. We care about this province, we care about the people in the province, and we care about the pets that share our own homes. That’s why the PUPS bill is essential: because these puppy mills are a scourge on the rights of animals themselves and the peace of mind for those who have every expectation that the adoption process will be something that they can take a lot of pride in. When we’re dealing with bad actors, that’s not always the case.

The bad actors: Let me give you some examples of how they are and who they are. They deploy cruel breeding practices of poor nutrition and overcrowding; that’s absolutely true. They reduce the public’s trust in the dog-breeding industry; true. And they are the largest distributors of sick and diseased puppies in the province; true again. It’s time to put an end to all of this. Each day that goes by without this legislation is allowing these places to keep going, and we don’t want that to be the case.

The PUPS Act, if passed, will help deter the operation of puppy mills completely; ultimately, by extension, improving the health and welfare of dogs bred in Ontario. For the first time, this province would have

an act that clearly denounces puppy mill operations and the horrific distress that results from them.

I can’t stress enough how important it is to understand the incremental approach, the thoughtful approach that our government, led by Premier Ford, has taken with public safety. This intersects absolutely with animal welfare. That’s why we’re moving forward with the legislation.

I would like to take a minute to tell the House now why we have to go through the modus operandi of puppy mills—and this can also be referred to as the measures—through which the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act proposes to end. This includes but is not limited to the deplorable practices. My parliamentary assistant, my friend from Brampton North, will fill in more of the details, but I’d like to give the House some broad spectrum of this.

I want to say thank you to the responsible dog breeders in Ontario who do provide families with happy, healthy and well-cared-for dogs and puppies.

And to the puppy mills that are an abrupt departure from such responsible practices: We will come after you. I’m putting you on notice. We are coming after you.

Madam Speaker, the most important question that people ask—the members from the other side have asked it; people in Ontario have asked it; we’ve asked it: What actually is a puppy mill? This is where we start to get into more details. Operators of puppy mills devour and take for granted Ontarians’ love of animals. They prey on the desire to welcome new puppies into a household. The term “puppy mill” is generally used to describe a place where dogs endure horrendous treatment.

They are subjected to poor breeding practices, inadequate care and immense suffering, but you don’t always know it when you legitimately want to adopt your furry friend, your dog; you don’t know the behind-the-scenes story. That’s exactly the point: Where there is this lack of basic needs for the puppies, an unforeseen person wouldn’t see that; they wouldn’t know that. Potential buyers often don’t get to see the conditions of the operations because puppy mill operators won’t let them nearby. It’s obvious.

Why would a bad actor want to show a wholesome family, an honest family, a caring family who wants to adopt a dog, a puppy, what’s really going on behind the scenes? They don’t. Owners of the puppy mills do not think that we have a right to see how the puppy was raised, because it would completely ruin their income. It’s part of an unethical breeder’s business model, and this model is unacceptable.

Unethical puppy breeding is an unethical transaction that usually occurs in a staged area away from a boarding kennel. What’s worse is the illusion of the staged area isn’t even the worst part. Some breeders are making excuses to meet in an abandoned parking lot, straight out of a car or a van, or deliver the animal directly to your home—anywhere but where the dog was bred and where the dog was born. This legislation is to send out a red flag to a potential buyer that they’re not dealing with an ethical seller.

I’m sure many of us in this House have heard similar stories from constituents about these awful circumstances. If the customer was to be given a look behind the veil, they would be repulsed and sickened by what they saw. We hear stories, Madam Speaker, of dogs which are crammed and locked in cages, and treated badly and undernourished. Many mill kennels have no heating in the bitterly cold winters and no air conditioning in the hot summers. Mother dogs are often covered in their own waste, emaciated and suffering. It would be apparent to a person who would see it, because it would be so horrific, but we don’t get to see it. Nobody wants to take us behind the curtain.

And there are cases of inbreeding between sibling dogs and inbreeding between a parent dog and a dog of one of their litters. These breeders are breeding female dogs prematurely while they’re not physically able to breed or care for the litter. These are common practices that can lead to significant health issues for puppies. It’s absolutely sickening. It’s sickening to everyone here.

But, Madam Speaker, there are many more things that we need to talk about, and that is because we need to make change. It’s because puppy mills are churning out dogs with little or no regard to their health and their well-being.

I want to talk for a minute, Madam Speaker, about puppy mills versus responsible breeders. Breeding puppies isn’t a game. It’s not a game that you can cheat on either. So I want to compare the practices with valid, honest and responsible dog breeders, and to those, we say thank you.

Proper dog breeding comes with a significant cost. There’s a conscientious dog breeder that prioritizes the long-term care of the animal over the quick buck. And it’s not how fast they can take someone’s money; it’s more about raising a good-quality dog. So when it comes to leaving with their family on the day that somebody picks up their furry friend, they want to make sure that that dog is healthy, and that dogs that are given homes were raised in well-built, comfortable kennels with amenities like heat, air conditioning and electricity.

Things that we take for granted should be no different for the people raising dogs. These dogs have had a nutritious diet. They receive regular exercise and they undergo health evaluations and visits. I want to give a shout-out to the veterinarians who help keep all of our pets safe in Ontario.

Responsible breeders dedicate ample time to caring for the new mother. This ensures they receive proper nourishment and attention. What’s so amazing, Madam Speaker, is that a good actor, a good dog breeder, a legitimate dog breeder will proudly open their kennels to a prospective buyer, and they will make sure that there is a good match between the buyer—the family—and the dog that will soon be adopted. The difference is that they will be able to showcase their operation and be proud of it.

I want to talk about the toughness of identification, because that’s also very important. Madam Speaker, it’s not always easy to pin down the exact number of puppy mills lurking in our province. We know this because many are hidden in plain sight. This can be on a property, such as a backyard, or even in a basement. Most of the tips my ministry receives on the location of puppy mills come from members of the public. That’s very important to know. Because we have the animal welfare hotline, the value of the public’s concern is very important.

Online advertising on platforms such as Craigslist, Kijiji and Facebook Marketplace have made it easy to expand the business of unethical puppy mills. By providing an easy avenue for dog breeders to unload puppies, unsuspecting families are that much more susceptible to come into contact with them. Again, that’s why we need to act now.

This act, the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act would, if passed, help stop harmful dog breeding practices, impose new minimum penalties and make sure that dogs across Ontario receive the care and attention they deserve. Consequences are important because they impose accountability, helping these unethical people understand the impact of their actions. They reinforce learning and growth by providing clear feedback on behaviour and choices. Consequences that this legislation will contain are set to help maintain social order and fairness by ensuring the rules and the norms are respected when breeding.

And they will also encourage responsible decision-making, promoting a sense of responsibility across Ontario.

So let’s talk for a minute about the consequences of minimum penalties. I want to reiterate: Owners or custodians of dogs are already subject to all measures in the PAWS Act—that’s the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act. This includes prohibitions against causing distress and general standards of care that apply to all animals covered by the PAWS Act. But there are no prohibitions in the act related to the key facets of what constitutes a puppy mill—until now.

Puppy mills can leave no footprints when dog sales are conducted solely through online platforms. We’re sticking a red flag and putting a notice on these types of operations. Through this proposed legislation, Ontario would become the first jurisdiction in Canada to explicitly include the term “puppy mill” into law, because it is the puppy mills that are giving dog breeders a bad name.

The proposed legislation, if passed, will target individuals who benefit from assisting puppy mill operators. This includes actors that may not directly operate the puppy mill themselves. Puppy mill operations can be complex, and they cover multiple properties and vigorous sales channels. Those who enable the suffering caused in puppy mills will be held accountable, regardless of their role. Guilt by association in this case will catch the divisions of good and bad actors in communities and perpetuate justice.

Because not only does our government, on this issue, care so deeply about what we’re doing, we are also proud to implement measures to prevent it from happening in the first place. I think that’s very important.

The minimum penalties are important. The $10,000 penalty for anyone operating a puppy mill is important. The minimum penalty for anyone assisting or benefiting from a puppy mill is important. A proposed minimum penalty of $25,000 for anyone who has the audacity to cause or permit a dog to be in distress in relation to the breeding or selling of dogs is important.

Again, Madam Speaker, I want to be completely clear that the proposed legislation does not target responsible dog breeders. It’s aimed solely to go after the bad actors who breed dogs too early or breed them in a substandard condition. It is aimed at the bad actors who sell puppies in an unethical manner.

Madam Speaker, we know how important pets are in our lives and we want our Ontario, in every forum of public safety, to be recognized as a jurisdiction that is the pre-eminent, that is the mark of excellence, that is the gold standard for us to live our lives. To see our kids off to school in the morning, to check in on our parents and our loved ones, to go to work, to come home at the end of the day, to play in the park and to shop and to pray: We must do this safely, because this is our inherent right. Having our pets, our adopted furry friends in our lives, plays an important role. The standard, the expectation, of how we care for our animals is important.

I started my remarks, Madam Speaker, as a retrospective journey of why this is so important, why it’s important to me. Pour moi, c’est personnel. Rien pour moi, en tant que solliciteur général, n’est plus important que la sécurité de notre province. And I’m proud of this. I’m proud of taking this personally.

I’m proud of standing with Premier Ford every single day and having the opportunity to do my part as the minister responsible for seeing this legislation go to third reading and seeing it hopefully be approved by this Legislature, to send a message of how important public safety is in Ontario, that it is not a singular dimension. It’s not just this and it’s not just that. It encompasses so many components.

Speaking today on Bill 159 is important to me. It reaffirms our government’s commitment, a commitment that is absolute and constant, that is day and night, that we will take the public safety of all Ontarians and our animals very seriously.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It has been an honour to rise on this bill.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next, I recognize the member for Brampton North.

Mr. Graham McGregor: I think all colleagues of the House should just give a round of applause to the Solicitor General. I know he’s been a dog on a bone on this issue—

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Quite dogged.

Mr. Graham McGregor: Well, you know what, some of the opposition members might have thought our government was barking up the wrong tree, but I really hope that the opposition House leader decides not to muzzle their members and allows them to vote yes for the PUPS bill. I suspect, in the summer, if they go back to their ridings and they don’t vote for this bill, Speaker, they’re going to have a “ruff” time.

Okay, thank you for the long leash this morning, Madam Speaker. I’ll get back to my prepared remarks.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: He’s going to the kennel now.

Mr. Graham McGregor: I’m going to the kennel now.

It’s an honour to be here, as always, on behalf of my constituents in Brampton North and today in my capacity also as a parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General. It’s a responsibility, a privilege and an honour to serve the people in this way and a job that we all have to take seriously every day. This PUPS Act, if passed, will support our government’s public safety priorities by targeting puppy mills in Ontario.

I, like many members of the House, am an animal lover, and I am saddened and disgusted, as we all are and all must be, when we see images of severely emaciated, crated dogs on television or online every time a puppy mill gets busted. Dogs are often found in filthy conditions sitting in their own feces—sitting in their own feces, Madam Speaker—which is absolutely heartbreaking.

No true animal lover would operate a puppy mill. No dog lover would knowingly buy from one unless they were seeking to stop the suffering. People are buying these sick and mistreated dogs unknowingly, while operators are cashing in on such abusive practices. Experts have told us that online advertising and sale platforms—the minister mentioned Kijiji, Craigslist, others—and the greater demand for puppies during the pandemic has contributed to an increase in puppy mills and high-volume breeding. Whatever is driving the growth in puppy mills, it must end, which is why we are here today debating the PUPS Act.

If passed, the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act will make amendments to the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, the PAWS Act, to help stop harmful dog-breeding practices associated with puppy mills.

Failing to keep a dog with a contagious disease away from other dogs or animals and failing to keep the dog’s environment sanitary would also be prohibited.

Finally, if passed, the proposed legislation will create new regulation-making powers so the province can set conditions that must be met to sell a dog and require the keeping of records through future regulations.

Speaker, I would now like to do a deeper dive into the prohibitions of the proposed PUPS Act. If passed, some of the prohibitions proposed in this legislation will come into force upon royal assent, while others will come into force at later dates.

The prohibitions that will come into force if the bill is passed upon royal assent are those that seek to immediately prevent the spread of disease and ensure that dogs are kept clean and living in sanitary conditions. They will also prohibit people from supporting or benefiting from the operation of a puppy mill.

I should stress that while the legislation is aimed at combatting puppy mills, the provisions being proposed within the PUPS Act will apply to the dog-breeding sector writ large.

Good breeders and others involved in responsible operations should be able to comply with these prohibitions immediately. They shouldn’t affect their day-to-day operations.

Other provisions that will come into force at a later date will be supported by record-keeping regulations.

As has been previously mentioned, owners or custodians of dogs are subject to all measures in the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, the PAWS Act. This includes prohibitions against causing distress—and general standards of care that apply to all animals covered by this legislation. But there are no prohibitions in this act related to key facets of what constitutes a puppy mill.

That is where the proposed legislation comes in—and the problem we are looking to solve.

If passed, the PUPS Act will prohibit harmful dog-breeding practices common in puppy mills. These include prohibiting inbreeding between sibling dogs or between a parent dog and a dog in one of their litters. This practice can be common in puppy mills, especially where breeding is largely unsupervised. This can result in puppies that can suffer their entire life due to inherited health problems.

Another prohibition coming that will come into effect, if passed, is breeding a female dog at too early of an age. Dogs need to be physiologically capable of breeding and raising a litter. Some pre-breeding health tests such as hip dysplasia screening can only be done once a dog is 12 months old. Giving dogs a little extra time allows a breeder to get to know the temperament and behavioural traits of the animal and will help in making better breeding decisions.

Another prohibition that’s coming in is breeding a female dog too early in its reproductive cycle. Many dogs’ first estrus or heat cycle is unlikely to allow for successful breeding. It is industry best practice to wait until the second or even third heat cycle before breeding. It’s also just the right thing to do for the dogs in your care.

The proposed act will also prohibit allowing a dog with a contagious disease to interact with other dogs or animals or to use the same objects, such as food or water containers. Isolation of dogs with a suspected or confirmed contagious disease is obviously critical to preventing the spread of illnesses that can be fatal, such as parvovirus, which is a virus that attacks white blood cells and the gastrointestinal tract of dogs and can damage the heart muscle.

Another prohibition: Breeding dogs in an environment that is unsanitary, such as failing to prevent an accumulation of waste that would pose a risk to a dog’s health. I talked earlier about finding some of these animals sitting in their own feces. These kinds of conditions around sanitation can be disastrous—the spread of disease. They can cause infections, parasites. And it’s just plain gosh darn gross.

Another prohibition we’re bringing in will be the failure to address severely matted fur, visible parasites or emaciation. This is to ensure that in addition to the spread of contagious diseases and cleanliness of a dog’s environment, which is already addressed in the proposed act, the breeder can be charged with the offence of operating a puppy mill if conditions such as severely matted fur or visible parasites and emaciation are not addressed.

As noted, the proposed act would create new penalties on bad actors, including a minimum $10,000 fine for operating or facilitating the operation of a puppy mill, and a minimum penalty of $25,000 for anyone who causes or permits a dog to be in distress or exposes a dog to risk of distress in relation to the breeding or selling of a dog. These new measures would make Ontario the first province to introduce minimum fines for the operation of a puppy mill. Depending on the number of charges laid, the fine amount could become substantial and exceed the minimum amount in more severe cases.

I want to talk about some personal points to this. In my debate during second reading, I talked about Georgia, who I got to spend time with on Friday last week—a wonderful dog that was rescued from the most deplorable conditions. I know dog animal rescue services across Ontario are working morning, noon and night, 24/7, to rescue as many dogs from vile conditions as they can. Previously in my life I was able to caretake a rescue dog from Texas.

I note that in committee we had many witnesses come, including Brampton Animal Services, and they do fantastic work in the city of Brampton to keep dogs safe. If you haven’t seen their recent reel of their potential adoptees, Madam Speaker, I suggest you check it out. I thought Bodhi and Butter Ball were particularly cute on the Brampton Animal Services’ Instagram page.

I want to note something the minister mentioned in his remarks that this isn’t a bill intended to go after just bad breeders. All of the prohibitions that I outlined earlier in my speech are things that are common sense for good, decent, honest, ethical people. There are dog breeders that either do it for the love or for the money—many times more love than the money—but they’re in it because they love dogs, they love what they do and they breed in an ethical capacity.

But when we have situations like puppy mills where they’re not taking care of their dogs, they’re not providing sanitary conditions, they’re not establishing strong minimum ages for breeding and preventing sibling dogs or parent-child dogs from breeding—when they’re not caring for these animals, that’s when it is our moral obligation as a government, as a society, to crack down on these people and hit them with fines of $10,000 or $25,000 in more severe cases.

Another change that’s being proposed in the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act includes a clarifying change relating to enhanced debt collection tools. The Strengthening Safety and Modernizing Justice Act included amendments to build on the PAWS Act to make it stronger, and one of those amendments improves the recovery of costs incurred by animal welfare services through greater specificity on the types of recoverable costs when providing care to animals that are in distress or have been removed by animal welfare services. These costs are itemized in a statement of account.

A statement of account is an invoice served to an animal owner or custodian for costs incurred by animal welfare services while providing necessary care for an animal that had to be removed from a distress situation or due to concerns for care. Under the current law, the Ministry of the Solicitor General can only enforce the collection of the debt through standard collection tools such as call-outs and follow-up letters.

But in order to build a more robust system and activate the enhanced collection tools under the Ministry of Revenue Act, the PAWS Act must be amended, and, if the PUPS Act is passed, an amendment is included therein to the PAWS Act which would authorize the use of these mentioned enhanced debt collection tools which would support the collection of debts owed, resulting in higher levels of reimbursements of government funds and improving the cost-recovery rates for animal welfare services.

The proposed PUPS Act introduces measures that will enable the province to zero in on puppy mills, their operators and their facilitators, including making Ontario the first jurisdiction in Canada to explicitly include the term “puppy mill” in law. To assist with the enforceability of the new prohibitions and future regulation-making authorities and offences, the legislation also proposes new

definitions for the term “dog” and “transfer.” A “dog” would be defined as “canis lupus familiaris” or any domesticated descendant of the wolf. It would include an animal which is a cross between a dog and another member of the canis family, including a wolf or a coyote. The definition of “transfer” would be specific to future conditions related to the sale or transfer of a dog and includes such practices as trading or bartering a dog. It would not include gifting.

Substandard conditions and unethical sales practices are the currency of these dog breeders. It is what keeps puppy mills in business and puppy mill operators turning enormous profits. No Canadian province has specific prohibitions on operating a puppy mill. Ontario is leading the way by proposing tougher rules to hold those who abuse dogs to account. If passed by the Legislature, this act will make the necessary changes to the PAWS Act to help stop harmful dog-breeding practices associated with puppy mills with proposed legislated minimum penalties that will give real teeth to this act—the $10,000, $25,000 fines I talked about previously.

Colleagues, think about what this means. This means that dog breeders will have to clean up their act. Unsanitary kennels will be prohibited. That means cracking down on kennels rotting with feces and other waste.

Changes in this act will allow the province to establish record-keeping regulations to help animal welfare services inspectors investigate potential puppy mills, and establish conditions that must be met to sell or transfer a dog in Ontario, to help stop unethical sales practices. This also means less pressure on municipal animal shelters and veterinary clinics. I gave a shout-out to Brampton Animal Services earlier. This will be very, very good for the day-to-day workers who do such a great job at Brampton Animal Services. This act will also mean greater trust in reputable dog breeders whose industry has often been tainted by bad actors.

We’re coming for those people who think these breeding practices are acceptable. Enough is enough.

This is part of our government’s broader package around public safety. This is a government that, under the leadership of the Solicitor General, the past Solicitor General, the Premier, the PC caucus—who vote in favour of every single bill. This is a bill that has done away with the tuition for the Ontario Police College—not reduced it; done away with it altogether, because we understand we need more boots on the ground, more police in our neighbourhoods to keep our neighbourhoods safe, to keep people safe in our communities.

This is a government that invested half a billion dollars in correctional facilities to make sure that they’re held to the right standards so that when people do a bad thing, when they’re put in jail—and make no mistake: They’re put there for a reason. But we need to make sure that we have the right conditions in place—a half-billion-dollar investment, 2,000 more correctional service officers hired in the last few years, under this Solicitor General’s leadership.

This is a government that just launched the fire prevention grant, a $30-million investment for fire services all across Ontario, to make sure that no matter what corner of the province you’re in in Ontario, you’re kept safe.

This record of public safety is something that we need—and with this act, we are doing, bringing—to help and protect our furry friends as much as we are protecting humans and people in our neighbourhoods.

I’d like to give a little shout-out to some of the witnesses we had at committee. This is a bill that has gone through some fine-tuning in committee, and we couldn’t have done that without help from the community. We saw the city of Brampton, Brampton Animal Services—I’m partial to them. We also saw Animal Justice Canada: Camille Labchuk, the executive director, came and gave excellent testimony on where we need to go with the bill. The Animal Shelter Professionals of Ontario: We saw Lindsey Narraway come and testify. We saw Humane Society International, with Ewa Demianowicz. We had Donna Power from the Humane Initiative. We had John Atkinson and Pamela Bruce from the Canadian Kennel Club.

I’ll give you an example of something where the committee did some really good work, Madam Speaker. You see, on this side of the House, in the PC government, we believe in parliamentary democracy, and we believe that Parliament can be a force for good and should be a force for good. One of the gaps that we put forward in the bill—initially, we had $10,000 fines for the puppy mill owners; we had $25,000 fines for the egregious cases, but we didn’t include a fine for people who facilitate a puppy mill.

Like, if I owned a basement and somebody else runs a puppy mill, but it’s in my basement, and I’m facilitating and aiding in that crime—those people are just as guilty. They are guilty by association, and they are doing wrong, harmful things to animals in Ontario. Those people should pay a big fine.

I give credit to my other colleagues on the Standing Committee on Justice Policy. That’s something that, through clause-by-clause, we actually amended and we actually fixed and has been included in third reading of this bill.

This is a chance for Ontario, for the Legislature, for colleagues on both sides of the aisles to stand up and say that animal welfare matters and matters in a real way. It’s a first-of-its-kind legislation in Canada to actually codify puppy mills and the definition of a “puppy mill” in law in Canada. It’s something that’s never been done before. And full credit to the Solicitor General and the team at the Ministry of the Solicitor General: Thank you, sir, for bringing this bill forward. This is an important bill and a historic opportunity for all members of this House to stand up and say that the safety and well-being of dogs matter.

Now, we know there is more to do. We know there is more that can be done. In the same way, Madam Speaker, that this PC caucus will never stop fighting to do more to get more boots on the ground, to get more police into our neighbourhoods, we’ll do more to get more correctional services officers to make sure that we have more capacity, proper capacity; to make sure that our first responders have the mental health supports that they need—a $45-million investment in first responder supports; $3 million for the families of fallen first responders who died either on the job or because of the job.

This is part of a track record of this government of putting public safety first and saying that public safety matters, which is a message out there in Ontario, certainly in my riding, certainly in places that I visit, that people really need to hear right now.

This is an important bill. This is an important step forward. I commend the minister for bringing it forward. I certainly will be voting in favour of this bill. I encourage my PC colleagues to do the same, and I encourage all members of this House to please vote in favour and pass third reading of the PUPS Act.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): I recognize the member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore to continue debate.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: What a great day in Ontario. I think I speak for all of us in this House when I say we all care about what happens to animals. None of us—it doesn’t matter what political stripe we are—want to see any animal harmed, mistreated, unfed, unwatered, uncared for. This is something that hits us all in our heart, and I want to thank the Solicitor General for making sure this bill came forward. I want to thank the House leader for ensuring that we are having third reading and debate on it. I want to thank the new parliamentary assistant for his work on this bill.

This goes back to when I first was elected in 2018. This was one of my passions, to bring forward an end to animal cruelty in the province of Ontario and of course our amazing country we live in. I did bring forward a private member’s bill, which was passed unanimously by the House at the time, to end puppy mills, to stop them. We all have reasons for running and this was one of the reasons that I wanted to run: to do better.

Growing up in a house with rescued pets—my mom volunteered at the humane society, as did my sister, when I was in school. We’ve always had rescue dogs in our house—oh, my goodness, we could name them all, but there’s numerous of them right now. We have all heard about my pets, Bruce and Edward. Edward is a cat that was found in a backyard, so a feral cat. She hasn’t destroyed too many things, just one stair, but we still love her. And my dog, who has many, many issues—he was given up just because he just had so many medical issues, like allergies.

He is at home today, desperately needing a haircut, so when we rise, guess who gets the haircut first? That would be Bruce. He won’t be happy about that. I can’t actually give him a bath myself; he likes to bite my hands, because I’m his mom, not the master. I have to learn how to be the master, but I’m the mom of the house. We certainly love our pets, and I think that goes, as I said, for everybody here.

I’m certainly, certainly proud to be part of this government and part of this Parliament that is going to, hopefully, vote in favour of this bill, the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act. I know there’s many advocates out there who we’ve talked with over the years who have been—and I’m sure they came to committee. I don’t sit on the justice committee, but I’m sure many of them came to the justice committee to share their stories. I want to say thank you to all those people who rescue animals. They spend their money.

They spend their time trying to house animals, not just in our own province, our own communities, but across the world. People rescue animals and try to find them their forever home.

And that’s just a reminder, if you’re ever looking for a pet: Make sure it is their forever home, that it’s not just a, “I think, this summer, the kids need a dog.” Well, that’s not the right reason to get a pet. You have to make sure you want to have that. It’s a lifelong commitment and we want to make sure those pets, when you get them, are safe. We want to make sure they were treated well. We want to make sure that they are disease-free, and that’s why it’s important to end puppy mills.

Many of these dogs in puppy mills, as we’ve heard, they’re matted. They do not have a life of their own. They are caged. They’re very matted. Sometimes they don’t get proper food and water—nutrition. They don’t get the love, and that’s what makes a really good pet, that love and that companionship—sociability. And you certainly don’t want to pick up a pet that may not last, because it’s terrible for the pet, but it’s also terrible for the families to have to go through something like that. So ending puppy mills will stop some of these horrible situations from happening.

Also, this summer, make sure that we don’t leave our pets in the car. Sometimes, you say, “I’m just running in to get groceries,” “I’m just running in to pick up the kids,” or there’s a baseball tournament or a soccer tournament. Don’t leave your pets in the car when you’re grocery shopping; it’s really hard on them. Just like you wouldn’t leave your kids in the car—but sometimes people need to be reminded of that, which is fairly sad. But don’t leave animals or children in hot vehicles, because it’s against the law. It’s against the law and it’s actually a really terrible act.

Once this legislation is passed, Ontario would become the first jurisdiction in Canada to explicitly include the term “puppy mill” into law. When I first looked at my private member’s bill, you couldn’t see the term “puppy mill” anywhere. It meant different things in different places. I checked in the States, what they had. We have backyard breeders, but the puppy mill was never a defined term, so this legislation is actually going to define it and make it a law. That’s a huge step forward. Because we talk about it, but just because we talk about it, it doesn’t mean it’s actually a law. So this is great.

As I mentioned, I was passionate about animals and the work that we’re doing in the Solicitor General’s office. We have heard horror stories. I know the parliamentary assistant mentioned some stories. I was in committee this morning, so I didn’t hear the minister’s full speech; I just saw him on TV while we were debating in committee. But there are some horror stories—we all know them and we’ve all heard about them—about the treatment of animals in precarious positions.

I think I’ve told the story about my sister’s dog Billie. When my sister—it was a rescue for bulldogs. My sister has a bunch of bulldogs. One is crazy; the other two are pretty good. When she first got Billie, she couldn’t walk on her back legs, because all she had done her whole life was give birth—small cage. She couldn’t walk on her back legs. She recently passed away, just a couple of months ago. She had a good life after, but her start to life was pretty sad. All she did was give birth. As soon as she gave birth, she gave birth again.

That dog didn’t get to walk around, didn’t get to feel the grass, had a dirty cage. I’m not sure if she was fed or watered, certainly not loved—but got a lot of love after. But we don’t want to see these types of things happening in society because we can do better in how we think of animals. They’re part of our family now. We need to do better, and I’m very happy that today, we are going to do better with the support of, I’m sure, everybody in this House.

I shouldn’t be presumptuous, but I know everybody here has been supportive in the past of helping out animals and telling the stories of their own pets and the work that they do to make sure that their pets are looked after.

We talked about the cruelty inside some of these barns. We heard about malnutrition and starvation. We talked about puppy profiteering. That’s another thing when you’re looking at purchasing a pet: Make sure that the breeder interviews you. Usually, very good breeders ask you to come in and have an interview. Sometimes, they check references.

When I took over ownership of Bruce, I applied. It was actually a friend who found him at a rescue, and we had to apply, even though she knew me very well—talk to my vet, talk to my friends, talk to a couple of people just to see if we would be good puppy parents—he wasn’t really a puppy; he was four—because they want to make sure these animals get forever homes.

For anybody out there who’s looking for a pet, if you’re meeting in a parking lot and you found it online, just be careful, just be cautious. Think of where that pet came from. There are excellent breeders out there, and they do a very good job of making sure that the animals are healthy, they’re vaccinated, they’re cared for.

Once you take ownership of an animal, it is your responsibility to look after that pet, just like you would a kid. You have to make sure that they’re fed, they’re watered, they’re looked after, and they’re loved because I’ll tell you, they’ll love you back even more. The best thing I ever did was get my dog—and I inherited a cat, but that’s because my sister moved into a house and there was a family of cats. I was allergic to cats, and she said, “Take a cat,” and I said, “Oh, I can’t take a cat.” Anyway, I ended up with this cat. I thought it was a boy and got everything ready for this allergy.

I knew my allergies were going to go crazy. Then, I get this cat, and it’s a girl. Well, the name stuck, so Edward is a cat, and it’s a girl, and she doesn’t care what her name is. She doesn’t know, but she runs the house right now.

They are great family assets, so let’s pass this bill today. Let’s protect our pets and give them their forever home.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We’re going to go to questions.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question to the Solicitor General: I appreciated the comments that he made in his lead-off. Could he tell us how this law will be enforced and what sort of funds will be allocated to ensure that the desired outcomes actually take place?

Mr. Graham McGregor: I want to thank the member for the question. This will be enforced by the animal welfare inspectors, the same way as always. Some of the important provisions that we’re putting in are allowing them to do their jobs.

I want to caution: The members opposite have a tendency to try to poke holes in our bills to find excuses to vote against them. This isn’t a very good bill to vote against. This is the kind of bill that I think the members should be supporting. We’re bringing in minimum fines: $10,000 if you’re operating a puppy mill or facilitating a puppy mill, $25,000 if that results in the death of a puppy. These are tangible tools that we’re giving our animal welfare inspectors and our front-line workers, resources they need to hold these bad actor puppy mills accountable.

So I’d caution the members: Don’t do what you normally do and vote against this just because you’re opposition. This is a good bill. You should vote in favour of it.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is actually to the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore. Her and I have obviously shared the commitment to adopting and raising as our own fur babies those that have come from shelters. I can tell you, we adopted in the 2011 election a five-month-old baby dog that was born without any eyes and was taken back to the Ottawa Humane Society, because nobody wanted to raise her because it was too difficult.

Fast-forward to when I was heritage minister and I went to visit with Todd Smith in Belleville, he took me to their humane society, which was in dire need of an upgrade. He said one thing to me: “Lisa, I don’t want to deal with Joe when you take home a cat or a dog.” Of course, I took home a massive cat that had been abandoned.

The reason I’m asking you this question—it may not necessarily be in the bill, but I think, from one animal lover to another, it seems to me our biggest challenges can often be at the humane societies or at the shelters, who do not have enough support. I’m wondering, in your experience as former PA to this area but also as a pet lover, what your thoughts are in order for us to be better able to serve those shelters.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: It’s a great question, and congratulations on being a pet owner. I know you would make a great pet mom. I don’t know about who is the master in your house when it comes to the pets, as I’m learning.

We have the Etobicoke Humane Society. I visited the London humane society, which does a really good job. The humane societies do really great work. They have vets coming in. They can actually help with some of the vaccinations in advance to make sure that these pets are in good shape before someone will adopt. They do some homework. They do research. They will also interview people. Just because you’re walking in doesn’t mean you’re going to get a pet, which is great, because we shouldn’t just be giving them away.

I have to give a shout-out to the member from London. Your humane society does an amazing job, so congratulations to that. They’re growing, so donations to the humane society, if anybody is interested.

They do a really great job of incorporating vet and vet tech training into the humane society. So this is a way that vet techs—and I think, with our new legislation about vets, we can use more of the vet tech help to make sure—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you for the answer.

We’ll move to the next question.

M. Guy Bourgouin: J’ai une question pour le solliciteur général.

Vous savez, moi aussi, dans ma famille, on a une petite chienne, Eevee—l’animal à ma fille—qu’on adore et qui fait

partie de la famille, comme tout le monde qui a des animaux qu’on aime tellement.

Ma question est surtout sur le renforcement, qui m’inquiète parce que, vous savez, ma région est très grande, très vaste, sans mentionner les communautés qui sont au Grand Nord. Vous l’avez même mentionné dans vos allocutions que quand les « puppy mills » sont là, ce n’est pas là que les familles vont chercher l’animal. Ils vont aller le chercher à une place qui est beaucoup plus propre et où ça ne paraît pas d’où ils viennent, les animaux. Et avec une région comme la mienne qui est tellement grande, tellement vaste, très souvent, ils vont se cacher—éloignés.

C’est sur le renforcement que ma question est, pour comprendre comment on va pouvoir reconnaître mais aussi prendre ce monde-là qui prend avantage des animaux, qui fait souffrir des animaux.

J’aimerais vous entendre là-dessus. Comment peut-on renforcer ça pour protéger ces animaux-là?

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): To reply, the Solicitor General.

L’hon. Michael S. Kerzner: Je voudrais remercier mon collègue pour cette question pertinente.

And he’s right: Ontario is large. It’s very large. But the purpose of why we’re here today for third reading is to show our government’s absolute commitment in moving forward with animal welfare protection legislation that sets a tone and a standard of animal welfare, and this is exactly the next iteration.

To my colleague, I respect very much the fact that northern Ontario is very large. The answer to his question is that we will continue to move forward incrementally and to build out animal welfare services, just as it started with the Deputy Premier when she was Solicitor General. We are going to continue to build it out.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Mr. Lorne Coe: Thank you, Speaker, and, through you to the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General: In committee, we had a lot of discussion about enforcement, and there were new amendments that were brought forward at the last meeting. Can the member from Brampton North talk about how the PUPS Act gives more enforcement mechanisms to the animal welfare inspectors, please?

Mr. Graham McGregor: Thanks to my colleague for the question. The member is right: This bill, if passed, will give animal welfare officers more tools that they need to actually enforce the provisions within.

One of the important ones is around record-keeping. Bad actor puppy mills won’t have the ability to say, “Oh, I don’t know how old the dog is. I didn’t keep a record of it.” We’ll have record-keeping provisions maintained within, that they have to maintain or else face a fine—the $10,000 fine for having a puppy mill, $25,000 if resulting in a death.

But I want to say that my colleague believes in parliamentary democracy just like I do, just like every member of the PC caucus does. This is a case where we have amendments in the bill through the committee process that are really, really quite strong. That $10,000 for assisting and facilitating a puppy mill was something we didn’t bring forward in second reading, a gap that we knew that we had. We brought the amendment forward, the committee did the right thing, and we hope all members do the right thing by passing the amended bill.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Mr. Chris Glover: This government is quite famous for talking tough on crime—they’re going to get tough on crime; they don’t want criminals walking the streets—yet this government has so underfunded our court system that at least 124 cases were thrown out in 2022, some of them involving sexual assaults.

This bill is something similar. This is about animal abuse. It’s about puppy mills. The response from the government is to increase the fines, but if there’s nobody to inspect and enforce those fines, then the fines never get laid and the animals continue to be abused.

The report in the media is that the PAWS needs more than the hundred inspectors who are available right now to cover our province. Our province is a million square kilometres, so we need more inspectors. How will this government enforce these increased fines? How will you actually make the animals safe?

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: You know, here she is: The Deputy Premier is here. She’s the one who had the foresight to bring in the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, to see it passed in the Legislature in 2019 and move it forward.

We started at ground zero. We are making incremental progress every day. We have built out a team of very responsible, trained and educated animal welfare inspectors. And the most important thing is that we’ve set a standard, an expectation and a tone that started with the Deputy Premier when she was the Solicitor General, which I continue to do today. We’re going to continue to do just this. Everything that our government has done in public safety sends a message: Public safety matters.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. That’s time for this portion of the debate.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

Wearing of pins

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Before we move to members’ statements, I recognize the Deputy Premier on a point of order.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to wear pins in recognition of June being ALS Awareness Month.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Deputy Premier Jones is seeking unanimous consent to allow members to wear pins in recognition of June being ALS Awareness Month. Agreed? Agreed.

Members’ Statements

Volunteers

Mr. Brian Saunderson: I want to use my time this morning to pay tribute to the people in my riding of Simcoe–Grey and across this great province who enrich our communities through their dedication, commitment and generosity. They are our volunteers, Speaker, and the work they do every day in our communities to improve and enrich the lives of so many residents, young and old, goes beyond words.

Next month, the Ontario Volunteer Service Awards will be handed out. Started in 1986, this great program is an opportunity for us to thank and recognize the many, many volunteers who give their time and expertise selflessly, groups such as:

—the Tec-We-Gwill Women’s Institute, founded in 1947;

—the Beaver Valley community outreach, founded in 1982;

—the Lions Club of Wasaga Beach, which recently celebrated 60 years;

—the Collingwood Salvation Army, which recently celebrated 140 years;

—Wasaga Beach Royal Canadian Legion Branch 645, which was just constituted last month;

—the South Georgian Bay Community Health Centre;

—the Clearview Public Library Board; and

—the Stevenson Memorial Hospital Auxiliary.

To all those who will receive an Ontario Volunteer Service Award next month, I want to congratulate you on behalf of the residents of Simcoe–Grey. And to all the many organizations in Simcoe–Grey and the incredibly dedicated volunteers who serve, I want to thank you for your service and for your willingness to help your neighbours and make our communities so much stronger, more resilient and compassionate.

Anti-racism activities

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Six years after the Conservatives formed government, Ontario still doesn’t have a strategy to address hate and racism. This is an embarrassment and another failure on this government’s tarnished record.

Not only does Ontario lack a comprehensive anti-hate strategy, but we also have a Premier who evokes racist tropes from behind a government podium. Just last week, without any evidence, the Premier speculated that “immigrants” are behind the shooting at a Jewish girls’ school. It is a shockingly racist comment to scapegoat immigrants for this senseless act. The police who are actually investigating the crime had to distance themselves from the Premier’s comments.

This is the same Premier who blamed COVID-19 on immigrants. He blames Ontario’s housing crisis on international students—the same Premier who vilified Umar Zameer and called for the jailing of this brown, Muslim man who has now been found innocent by the courts.

The Premier has denied the existence of systemic racism and cancelled Ontario’s Anti-Racism Directorate, including its committees on anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, anti-Black racism and anti-Indigenous racism. It seems like the Premier could use the directorate’s advice now more than ever before.

Ontario cannot combat racism if this Premier does not recognize that it exists. Naming it is the first step to dismantling its hateful power.

I feel like I have to say this every day in this House. All forms of hate are interconnected and have the same goal: to divide us as people, to make us afraid, to have us not trust each other and to distract us from building stronger communities that actually care for each other. Ontario needs a comprehensive—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. Next member’s statement.

Government spending

Mr. Stephen Blais: Residents in Orléans and across Ontario are asking if the convenience of buying a beer at the corner store is really worth $1 billion. The answer, of course, is no. So why the rush?

We have a teacher shortage, Ontario schools need billions in repairs, and this government has cut $1,500 in per-student funding since they were elected in 2018. But there is $1 billion to accelerate corner store beer sales by a year.

Two million Ontarians don’t have a family doctor. Imagine: Not a single person in these combined cities of Ottawa, Windsor, London, Kingston and Guelph have a family doctor, but there is $1 billion to accelerate corner store beer sales by a year.

Instead of cutting education and health care further, perhaps this government will do what they always do, which is just take on more and more debt. Madam Speaker, it’s not what we need.

If this government were to auction off the new liquor licences, it could net nearly $300 million in additional value to taxpayers. This is what the Conservative governments in Alberta and Saskatchewan did, netting a small fortune to fund education and health care.

And since this government is refusing to follow the lead of fiscally conservative governments, I have to ask: Which friend, supporter or crony is going to benefit at the expense of students, teachers, nurses, doctors—at the expense of all of us?

In the end, this government cares little about fiscal responsibility, having increased the debt by over $100 billion under their watch, the largest debt of any subnational jurisdiction in the world. This—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. Next member’s statement.

Haliburton Highlands Sports Hall of Fame

Ms. Laurie Scott: It’s my pleasure to rise today to highlight the incredible inductees into the Haliburton Highlands Sports Hall of Fame for 2024. Created five years ago, the hall of fame has been a source of local pride and honour. At the induction ceremony, we celebrated the incredible achievements and dedication of our local athletes, coaches and builders, who have made significant contributions to the community.

A total of 10 individuals and two teams received awards across multiple sports, including the Haliburton county Red Wolves becoming the first recipients of the outstanding achievement award. Part of Special Olympics Ontario, the Red Wolves help athletes and supporters connect through sports like bowling, curling and golf.

The Red Wolves bowling team has competed locally, provincially and nationally since it was founded in 1997. I’d like to recognize one of the Red Wolves and a hometown hero of mine, the late Carrie Crego, who was selected to compete at the 2006 national games in Brandon, Manitoba, and brought home a bronze medal in bowling. Thank you, Carrie, for your passion and dedication to our community and for making your hometown of Kinmount proud.

I encourage all of you to stop by the Haliburton Highlands Sports Hall of Fame and visit their website for tributes of each inductee—you can see first-hand how Haliburton county works hard and plays harder.

Petites entreprises

M. Guy Bourgouin: La Maison Verte est un producteur essentiel pour le reboisement dans le Nord. Elle fournit des millions de semis à nos forêts chaque année.

Malheureusement, elle est gravement menacée par la hausse marquée des prix de production. La Maison Verte fait face à des problèmes de revenus à cause, entre autres, des dépenses liées aux projets pendant la pandémie et à l’augmentation des coûts opérationnels. Les difficultés sont à leur sommet avec la domination de grands fournisseurs comme PRT en Colombie-Britannique, rendant presque impossible pour les petits fournisseurs de faire compétition à ces multinationales.

Monsieur le Président, il est profondément préoccupant que les petites entreprises comme la Maison Verte se fassent avaler par des multinationales d’autres provinces sans protection adéquate de la part de notre gouvernement. Les petits producteurs ne peuvent tout simplement pas survivre.

Depuis l’ouverture de la Maison Verte, le nombre de petits producteurs similaires est passé de 39 à seulement huit dans la province, une diminution alarmante qui nécessite notre attention immédiatement. L’absence des règlements pour protéger les petits fournisseurs est un problème. Par exemple, la Maison Verte fournit de cinq à sept millions de semis à la forêt de Hearst, tandis que les entreprises comme GreenFirst ne fournissent que 800 000 à un prix compétitif.

Monsieur le Président, en réponse à ces défis, nous devons envisager des règlements pour assurer un marché plus équitable. Il est crucial que nous soutenions les petits producteurs comme la Maison Verte pour assurer leur survie et la santé continue de nos forêts et des entreprises d’ici.

J’appelle tous mes collègues à se joindre à moi pour relever ces défis et soutenir nos fournisseurs locaux avec l’urgence qu’ils méritent.

Government investments

Ms. Donna Skelly: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I am so very proud to rise this morning to recognize our government’s recent investment in Hamilton. The Ontario government is investing up to $2.5 million to support the construction of Kemp Care Network’s new 10-bed children’s hospice, which will help families connect to comfortable and dignified end-of-life care, close to home, in my city of Hamilton.

Keaton’s House-Paul Paletta Children’s Hospice will offer families comprehensive palliative care for children and youth living with progressive life-limiting illnesses. Mr. Speaker, the hospice is expected to open in 2026 and will include a number of features and services, including 10 bedrooms for children where family members can stay with their child, and space for day wellness programs and therapies such as massage, movement, recreation and music.

Through the 2024 budget, our government is adding up to 84 new adult beds and 12 pediatric beds, bringing the total to over 740 planned beds. Once these beds open, the Ontario government will invest up to $2,268,000 in annual operational funding for Keaton’s House-Paul Paletta Children’s Hospice to support the delivery of nursing, personal support and other end-of-life care services.

I am so proud of our government for taking action to connect Ontario families with the care they need close to home. I am also proud of organizations in my community, such as Kemp Care Network and McMaster Children’s Hospital for making this expansion of Keaton’s House-Paul Paletta Children’s Hospice possible.

D-Day anniversary

Ms. Sandy Shaw: You will know that the 80th anniversary of the D-Day invasion will be marked on June 6. All Canadians should remember that 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed at Juno Beach in France on June 6, 1944, as part of a massive Allied invasion. The invasion led to the liberation of German-occupied France and was pivotal in ending the Second World War.

Victory in the Normandy campaign, however, came at a terrible cost. Canadians suffered the most casualties of any division, more than 5,000 Canadian troops dying in the invasion and the Battle of Normandy that followed. We all owe these brave men and women an immeasurable debt of gratitude.

As the years pass, sadly, the number of veterans who fought in the campaign declines. They are from a resilient generation who endured many hardships and experienced the unimaginable horrors of war.

We recently were able to celebrate Hamiltonian Jack Frederick Finan, a 104-year-old Canadian veteran who served with the Royal Canadian Air Force. Many dignitaries were on hand, including the Governor General, when the French ambassador awarded Jack France’s highest military honour, the French Legion of Honour.

I’d like to remark that hundreds of Canadian aircraft were in the air on D-Day, including the legendary Lancaster bomber, and that Mr. Finan is Canada’s oldest living pilot of the Lancaster bomber.

There are many celebrations across Canada to help commemorate the 80th anniversary of the pivotal D-Day invasion. In Hamilton, you can visit the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum that has one of the last flying Lancaster bombers.

I encourage all of us—let’s take a moment to pause and pay tribute. We will remember them.

Woodman Park Community Centre and Pool

Mr. Will Bouma: I am pleased to rise this morning to speak about the wave of excitement that washed over Brantford–Brant last Saturday. The Woodman pool opened for the first time this past weekend and welcomed a capacity crowd of swimmers of all ages. The new pool’s opening was eagerly awaited by the Brantford–Brant community, ever since the old pool closed in 2020.

While the pool’s official opening is still slated for June 29, these summer weekends have been too beautiful to waste, and Mayor Kevin Davis has called for the pool to be opened every weekend in June while the finishing touches are being completed.

The pool is part of the newly revamped Woodman Park Community Centre, which keeps Brantford entertained year-round. Once the Woodman project is completed, it will include a community garden, accessible playground equipment, games tables, walking paths and shade structures.

This project represents the great things that we can achieve when all three levels of government work together, as the pool was funded by both the provincial and federal governments alongside the city of Brantford.

I am proud to represent a government that places a high importance on community recreation projects such as this one. By ensuring the people of Ontario have state-of-the-art facilities to enjoy, our government continues to make Ontario the best place to live, work, play and raise a family.

Government investments

Mr. Lorne Coe: Two new schools are going to be built in west Whitby, thanks to our Minister of Education, the Honourable Stephen Lecce: $30.5 million for an elementary school at Maskell Crescent and Coronation Road, creating 634 student spaces and 49 child care spaces; and $23.4 million for a new elementary school at Cisco Drive and Limoges Street, creating 634 student spaces.

On May 17, the Minister of Education also announced funding for new schools and one school expansion across Oshawa and Clarington, which will result in the creation of 3,155 new student spaces and 98 child care spaces. This was an historic day, as the overall investment was $139.5 million and is the single largest in Durham history.

We are working to ensure Whitby children have access to state-of-the-art schools close to home that give them real-life job skills to succeed in the future. Our government is getting it done once again for hard-working families in the region of Durham.

ProAction Cops and Kids

Ms. Jess Dixon: On Saturday morning I went to the Westin Harbour Castle hotel in Toronto, signed in, went up the elevator and up some stairs to the very top of the building, about 400 feet up, and stepped off the edge. I was, luckily, attached to some fairly strong harnesses at the time, but that doesn’t really make it any less unnerving, because the one thing your body doesn’t want you to do when you’re on the edge of a building is jump off of it, which I did.

I did this to raise awareness of a fundraising campaign for ProAction Cops and Kids, which is an incredible charity that I became aware of in my work as an MPP. ProAction Cops and Kids has five chapters: Toronto, Durham region, Hamilton, Halton and Peel. Essentially, what it does is it allows kids who are under-resourced to connect with police officers who donate their time to run sports programs, baking programs, sailing etc., and ProAction covers all the costs of equipment and facilities.

I became involved because I am so incredibly passionate about the idea of community policing and prevention-based policing, which is about building strong relationships between the community and police, particularly children.

A huge thank you to ProAction team members Jean Milligan, Michelle Marchetti and Nicole Benoit—I know you all worked incredibly hard—and to all of the officers and kids who participated in going over the edge with me on Saturday morning.

Introduction of Visitors

Hon. Jill Dunlop: I would like to introduce three of my interns who are here visiting today. From the ministry office, we have Alex Bullen and Alex Jones, and from the constituency office, Kayleigh Aitken.

Welcome to Queen’s Park, guys.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: I would like to extend a warm welcome to members of Disability Without Poverty here today, including Sabrina Latif, Lisa Presutti, Vienna Psihos, Rabia Khedr, Janet Rodriguez, Hossam Khedr. I am looking forward to meeting with them later today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: It’s a great honour and a pleasure to be able to welcome John Whitehead here from St. Catharines. He is a diabetes advocate from Niagara.

Thank you for all your hard work that you’ve done over the years. Welcome to your House, John.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Good morning, everyone. It’s always a pleasure to be here in the chamber with you, and especially today, when I welcome such amazing Bangladeshi community leaders from the east end of Toronto. They’re up there in the gallery: Hydari, Islam, Hosne, Sanjoy, Afia, Sayed and Jalal. They really make the city a more vibrant, livable, beautiful space.

Thank you for coming. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Nolan Quinn: June is ALS Awareness Month, and I’m delighted to welcome Tammy Moore and Ilayda Ulgenalp from the ALS Society of Canada back to Queen’s Park today. Welcome.

Mr. Chris Glover: I’d like to welcome a good friend of mine, Janet Rodriguez. Janet is an incredible advocate for people with disabilities.

Welcome to your House.

Mr. Andrew Dowie: I want to wish a warm welcome to my incredible OLIP intern, Evan Cameron, who’s up in the public gallery today.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I would like to welcome the members of Disability Without Poverty to the House today. I’m looking forward to seeing you later at your reception.

Ms. Natalie Pierre: I have a couple of introductions. First off, I’d like to welcome to Queen’s Park MPP Crawford’s Oakville student youth council: Aiden Pinto, Elliott Dixon, Sakeena Iqbal, Mariam Naboo, Anbo Yuan, Ahmed Anjum and Tianyang Jiang. We’re honoured to have you here today and advocating for financial literacy.

Second, I’d like to welcome the group from Ontario Students Against Impaired Driving to Queen’s Park today. With us today or joining us shortly are students from Niagara Catholic District School Board schools, including Denis Morris, Blessed Trinity, Saint Francis, Saint Paul, Saint Michael, Holy Cross, and Notre Dame College School; from the board office, Camillo Cipriano and Aldo Parrotta; and school staff Patricia Beck, Nikki Royer, Ana Krlin, Carey Bridges, Chaundra Collin, Sue Sparks and Brandy Delaney.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: I would like us all to welcome Caleb Smolenaars, who is an intern who actually resides in Oakville North–Burlington. He is currently interning for myself in Toronto Centre and for the great member from Kiiwetinoong.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Today I want to welcome Rabia Khedr from DEEN Support Services. Thank you for being here.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: We have some family here of my EA, Athena, from Whitefish River First Nation: Mariette Sutherland and her daughter Violet Sutherland.

Also, from Grassy Narrows: Chief Rudy Turtle; council members Arnold Pahpasay, Little Bear Copenace, John Clint Kokopenace; Melissa Bunting; Maka Fobister; Zuri Joseph; Zaagaate Bunting; Keewayten Bunting. Meegwetch.

Hon. George Pirie: I just want to welcome students from Roland Michener Secondary School from my hometown, South Porcupine, who are visiting today. Welcome.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): With the agreement of the House, I’d like to continue with the introduction of visitors. I heard a no.

That concludes our introduction of visitors for this morning.

House sittings

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 9(g), the Clerk has received written notice from the government House leader indicating that a temporary change in the weekly meeting

schedule of the House is required, and therefore the afternoon routine on Wednesday, June 5, 2024, shall commence at 1 p.m.

I’m going to recognize the member from Don Valley West on a point of order.

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: I seek the unanimous consent of the House for the Speaker to immediately put the question on second and third reading of Bill 195, the Cutting Taxes on Small Businesses Act, without debate, to provide immediate relief to Ontario’s small businesses.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Don Valley West, Ms. Bowman, is seeking the unanimous consent of the House for the Speaker to immediately put the question on second and third reading of Bill 195, the Cutting Taxes on Small Businesses Act, without debate. Agreed? I heard a no.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier. People have a right to know what their government is doing on their behalf and with their tax dollars. It’s why we have strict rules around things like government communications and record-keeping. It’s why emails of senior government officials are subject to freedom-of-information laws.

But this government and this Premier don’t seem to think that that kind of transparency matters. We’ve seen a disturbing pattern of government members and senior staff using their personal accounts for government business. On Friday, the Premier himself confirmed that his chief of staff regularly uses his personal email for government business. My question is, why?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: I’ve answered this question a number of times for the Leader of the Opposition. If the leader has additional information—or any information whatsoever—that she would like to provide to the commissioner, I encourage her to do so, Mr. Speaker.

I and members of this government, we’re not investigators, although we do have many former police officers amongst our ranks. That is not our job, Mr. Speaker. So if she wants to raise those issues, I encourage her—as opposed to bringing it up here in the Legislature, she could provide that information to the commissioner and allow the commissioner to do the job that we as a Legislature empower him to do.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’ll just repeat my question. My question to the Premier was, why?

Let me try to tell you why, because there’s only one reason why this government would repeatedly be using personal emails to avoid detection. These aren’t just emails about upcoming staff meetings; we are talking about major government decisions that impact the public. We’re talking about the greenbelt. We’re talking about secret meetings. We’re talking about code words and government business that was being done on massage tables in Vegas. They did everything they could to cover their tracks.

Now, the Premier himself is doubling down. He’s saying his chief of staff did nothing wrong when he repeatedly gave false testimony to the Integrity Commissioner. So does the Premier think he or his chief of staff are above the law?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, Mr. Speaker, it’s the drive-by smear from the NDP. They have no relevance in this place at all. It is obvious that the people of Ontario have overlooked the NDP and have completely forgotten about them as an effective opposition party. The evidence of that, of course, is the fact that in the last two by-elections, “other” received more votes than the NDP.

They have absolutely no policies when it comes to the economy. They understand that their continuing support of the federal Liberal Party that supports a carbon tax puts them offside of the Canadian people, including the people of Ontario who have said loud and clear that they do not want a carbon tax and that it is harming them. So they’re offside on that.

They’re offside on law and order. This is a party that opposes the police at every step of the way. They’re offside on the infrastructure funding that we’re bringing in place. They’re offside on the reforms that we’re doing in the education system. They are a party that is increasingly irrelevant to the—

Interjections.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, you know when you’re getting close to the truth, because you get a desperate response like that. That’s the truth. Multiple independent officers of the Legislature have warned this government about avoiding disclosure rules. Explosive reports from the Auditor General, the Integrity Commissioner, the Information and Privacy Commissioner and RCMP criminal investigation under way into this government—it all shows the same thing. This is a government that wasn’t just deleting emails related to the greenbelt. They were also using their personal emails to avoid detection.

The Premier himself conducts his government business on his personal devices and refuses to disclose the details of those phone records to the public, even though it’s required by law. When the Liberal government got caught covering up their gas plant scandal, you know what happened? Someone went to jail. Why is the Premier following the Liberals down the same path of code words, cover up and criminal investigations?

Interjections.

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

Member for Brampton North come to order. The member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke come to order.

Government House leader may reply.

Hon. Paul Calandra: When the Liberals of course broke the law and somebody went to jail, it was the NDP who quickly stood up and supported them to maintain them in office. That’s actually what happened.

Now, colleagues, I don’t know about you. I don’t feel very desperate. I don’t feel very desperate. I’m actually happy. I’m happy, because we have a government that is moving in the right direction for the people of the province of Ontario, out of the ashes of the Liberal and NDP coalition that put this province in the ground. What are we doing? We’re investing in health care. We’re investing in infrastructure. We’re investing in hospitals in all parts of the province. And do you know who agrees with us, Mr. Speaker?

The people of the province of Ontario, who elected two Progressive Conservatives in two by-elections, while at the same time sending a message to the Leader of the Opposition that they prefer “other” than they do the leader and the NDP—

Interjections.

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

Leader of the Opposition, next question.

Forest firefighting

Ms. Marit Stiles: This year we see that wildfires are already up from this time last year. Last year was one of the worst fire seasons on record.

So far this year, there have already been 94—four fires just this week. But inexplicably, the budget to fight those wildfires is down 37.5%. And you know what, Speaker?—

Interjections.

Ms. Marit Stiles: While they blather away over there, I’m talking about an issue that is going to affect many, many, many people in many communities across this province. So they should be listening. Wildfires are going up. Money to fight wildfires is going down. So my question to the Premier is, can the Premier tell us how that makes any sense at all?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, you can’t make this up. I have offered to cross the floor once in awhile and write questions for the NDP so that they can do better. But I can’t read budgets for them; I assume they do that.

The Minister of Natural Resources has actually increased funding to fight forest fires by 92%, colleagues. That is what we have increased the budget by to fight wildfires. Of course, Liberal and NDP math would suggest that a 92% increase is actually a decrease. But do you know what the good news is? The good news is that we’re making those investments. The bad news for the people of the province of Ontario is that these two opposition parties, both irrelevant to the people of the province of Ontario, but the NDP historically irrelevant—they always vote against all of these.

Interjection.

Hon. Paul Calandra: She just called me a “mad dog.” Do you know what I am? I’m a dog with a bone, because I want better for the people of the province of—

Interjections.

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

The House will come to order.

Start the clock. Supplementary question?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, the government can shrug off these concerns, but the fires are still coming. The concerns are coming from an increasing number of townships and cities, from First Nations that have been evacuated in previous years—and some are already being evacuated now, especially in northwestern Ontario. It’s coming from farming communities, where they have to contend with poorer air quality, with less productive days. And importantly, it’s coming from the front-line wildland firefighters themselves. They’re worried that they may not have the fire crews that they need this season.

So I’m going to ask the Premier, who’s sitting in his seat right now, if he could stand up, answer this question: Can he explain why he thinks this is enough when those who fight the fires are telling you it’s not?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw her unparliamentary remark.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The government House leader may reply.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Speaker, it is precisely because of the seriousness by which we take this is that we have increased funding by 92% to fight those fires. We have done that in every community across the province of Ontario, and we’re not doing it in isolation. We work, of course, with the Minister of Northern Development to help us highlight some of those areas. We work with the Solicitor General to ensure that in many of the communities that did not have fire protection before, they actually have fire protection, and in some of the unincorporated areas so that they could actually participate in this.

We’ve made the investments. Imagine that when we came to office, this sector was so underfunded by the previous Liberal and NDP coalition government across the province of Ontario that we’ve had to increase it by 92%. Of course, the Leader of the Opposition and the Liberals voted against those increases—because you know what happens: When the camera is on, they say one thing, but when the camera turns off, they do something completely different. We’re consistent. We’re always there for the people of the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I believe this is the final supplementary.

Ms. Marit Stiles: “Consistent”? Consistently underfunding, cutting, leaving people desperate and alone with a fire season before them. Speaker, we are down as many as 200 firefighters in Ontario—that’s the truth—with as many as 40 wildland firefighters being laid off just since May. That’s the truth. Fires are raging right now. That’s the truth. And this government hasn’t backed up those firefighters with the resources that they need to keep people safe and communities safe while fires are raging in this province. It is time to do right by the firefighters.

I want to be very specific with my question to the Premier: Will the Premier assure Ontarians that there will be fully staffed crews and planes for every single region that needs it?

Interjections.

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

Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, Mr. Speaker, that is why the Minister of Natural Resources has brought forward a plan that saw an increase in funding by 92%. That is why the Solicitor General brought forward a program to ensure that we had fire services in unincorporated areas, so that they could participate. On both occasions—

Interjection.

Hon. Paul Calandra: —the NDP and the Liberals voted against those supports.

We’ve increased support for new technologies by over $20 million. In fact, Ontario is such a valued partner that we are called upon to participate and to assist other provinces and internationally whenever we can, Mr. Speaker. That speaks to the professionalism of Ontario’s fire crews, it speaks to the investments that we have made and it speaks to why, again, the NDP and the Liberals have become so irrelevant in the province of Ontario: because for a decade and a half they underfunded it, and it took us to bring those resources so that we could fight fires not only in Ontario, but around the world—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next question. Once again, the Leader of the Opposition.

Mercury poisoning

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, the Deputy Premier just said, “It’s raining,” so I guess none of us have to worry. Boy, I tell you, that is—

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I did not.

Ms. Marit Stiles: You did.

Anyway, this question is for the Premier. Grassy Narrows—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I did not.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Hansard caught it.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: That’s a lie.

Ms. Marit Stiles: She just called it a lie.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Let’s stop the clock, first of all.

Secondly, as the member is aware, unparliamentary language cannot be permitted. I’m going to ask the Deputy Premier to withdraw her unparliamentary comment.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I will withdraw my unparliamentary language, but the official opposition also—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the Deputy Premier and Minister of Health to withdraw, without reservation, her comment.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Withdraw. I—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay, no. The Minister of Northern Development and Minister of Indigenous Affairs will come to order.

The Minister of Health will please withdraw her unparliamentary comment.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I withdraw.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. The member for Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry will come to order. The member for Mississauga–Malton will come to order. The Minister of Health will come to order.

Start the clock. The Leader of the Opposition has the floor.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you, Speaker.

This question is for the Premier. Grassy Narrows has been searching for justice for generations. They are living through one of Canada’s worst environmental and human rights catastrophes. They are now suing Ontario and Canada. Judy DaSilva, a grandmother from Grassy Narrows, has a simple ask which I’m going to read out today to the government. She says this: “Stop poisoning us, let us protect our land and our people and we will be healthy again.”

So my question to the Premier is, will this government stop the ongoing poisoning of the people of Grassy Narrows today?

Interjections.

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

The Minister of Northern Development and Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Hon. Greg Rickford: The member opposite knows that one of the first actions we took upon forming government in 2018 was to actually index the mercury disability benefits to inflation after not being increased for inflation since the inception of the mercury disability fund. As a result, most beneficiaries saw their monthly payments nearly double, Mr. Speaker. The mercury disabilities investment fund was then replenished with over $127 million, based on a triannual assessment that we received in June 2021. These funds will ensure that the mercury disability fund is resourced to provide benefits to beneficiaries for many years to come. The next actuarial assessment is expected in June of 2024.

In June 2022, the Mercury Disability Board marked the opening of its new clinical space in Kenora, along with the successful launch of reformed assessment clinics. We’re working with communities—

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Perhaps the minister didn’t hear my question. It is the responsibility of a government, surely, to ensure that the people are not being actively poisoned by the fish they eat or the water they drink, right? The lawsuit that we’re talking about doesn’t prevent anyone on the other side, the Premier or his cabinet, from taking decisive action to stop the ongoing contamination of the river today, tomorrow and every day after that. They’re the government; they have the power to do the right thing right now.

So, back to the Premier: How can they knowingly allow this terrible poisoning to continue on their watch?

Interjections.

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

Minister of Northern Development and Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Hon. Greg Rickford: Our world-class resource development sector is matched only by their compliance to the highest environmental protection standards out there, and we enforce it. But in the situation of Grassy Narrows, as I said earlier, we came on to this file in 2018; even the former Premier of what is now the non-affiliate Liberals, or whatever they’re called, admitted to me that it was high time we took action. In 2018, that’s exactly what we did.

We’re taking good care of those beneficiaries from Wabaseemoong and Grassy Narrows First Nations. The mercury disability fund, having been replenished, will ensure that all people currently on that registry are going to get the benefits that they deserve for those historical damages.

Taxation

Mr. Steve Pinsonneault: My question is for the Minister of Energy. People in my riding of Lambton–Kent–Middlesex and across the province are facing hard times. As this federal carbon tax continues to drive up the cost of living, families cannot afford ever-rising grocery and gas prices. My constituents, who rely on their cars for their primary form of transportation, are being punished with high fuel costs driven by this punitive tax. They need relief.

The governor of the Bank of Canada has stated that the carbon tax contributes 15% each year upwards on inflation and that scrapping this tax altogether would lower inflation. It is clear to every Ontarian that this carbon tax is not helping them, it’s not delivering the environmental gains the Liberals claim it would and it’s costing all of us.

Can the minister please explain how, unlike the Liberals, our government is achieving our energy objectives without introducing a costly carbon tax?

Hon. Todd Smith: I’m delighted to talk about our energy initiatives and how they’re also helping the environment and keeping costs low in our province so we can see record investment in Ontario of the types that we have been seeing, multi-billion-dollar investments.

Now we’re announcing the development of new, clean, affordable, reliable energy generation, like our nuclear facilities in the clean energy capital in the Durham region, the first small modular reactor in the western world; refurbishing the Pickering nuclear generating stations; continuing with refurbishment at Darlington and at Bruce, building out new nuclear power at Bruce, as well; and new clean energy storage, the largest procurement in Canadian history, just happened a couple of weeks back. We’re not going to go back to the Liberal ways of providing energy to our province where electricity prices triple under their watch.

Now, I heard the leader of the Green Party this morning saying he wanted to go back to the ways of the Green Energy Act—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa South will come to order. Order.

Member for Lambton–Kent–Middlesex, supplementary.

Mr. Steve Pinsonneault: It’s reassuring to see our government continue delivering affordability and fight the terrible carbon tax as we roll out our real, practical solutions to make Ontario’s electricity grid not just more affordable but cleaner and more reliable.

Our province boasts one of the cleanest electricity systems in the world. However, rather than bolstering our energy endeavours, the federal government prioritizes taking money from families by forcing them to pay a carbon tax. Their provincial buddies, led by the carbon tax queen, Bonnie Crombie, continue to prop up this failed tax policy.

It’s time for the Liberals to face reality and acknowledge that this tax only hurts the hard-working people of this province. My constituents in Lambton–Kent–Middlesex and all other Ontarians want to see the end of this carbon tax today.

Speaker, can the minister please tell the House how the government is fortifying Ontario’s economy through our clean energy advantage without the use of a carbon tax?

Hon. Todd Smith: Speaker, the queen of the carbon tax, Bonnie Crombie, the leader of the Liberal Party, is ebullient in her support of Justin Trudeau’s federal carbon tax, which is going up every April 1, including two months ago, with a whopping 23% increase that is affecting the price of groceries and gas and home heating, as the member from Lambton–Kent–Middlesex mentioned. The Liberals and the Greens and the NDP, their leadership was having a press conference this morning, and they want to go back to the ways of the Green Energy Act, where we paid over-market prices for energy and electricity generation in our province.

We brought in a new way of doing business, Mr. Speaker. It’s competitive procurements that are driving down the cost of energy in our province. Bills like Bill 165, keeping energy costs low, is what our Premier and what our government believes in. And the result is massive, massive multi-billion-dollar investments in our—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member will take his seat.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Beaches–East York will come to order. The House will quieten down, please, so I can hear the member who’s answering the question or posing the question.

The next question.

Special-needs students

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Every parent’s worst nightmare is receiving a phone call that something has happened to your child at school. On May 14, Landyn Ferris’s mother received that phone call. Landyn was left alone at school despite having a seizure disorder and was found unresponsive.

Landyn should have come home safely to his mother that day. We want every child in Ontario to come home safely at the end of the day. But parents of children with special needs are warning that this could happen again if we don’t address the funding shortfall and the lack of resources for special education.

Will the Premier address that gap today and ensure that we are doing everything we can to protect our kids?

Interjections.

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

Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The loss of a child is indeed an unspeakable tragedy, and I believe all of us are deeply saddened by what has transpired at the Trenton High School—the loss of this young man. All of us express condolences to his family.

Now, there is an active coroner’s investigation, police investigation and school board investigation into the circumstances of what led to this tragedy, and I would ask all of us to responsibly allow that process to carry forth with the commitment that the coroner will inevitably bring forth recommendations to learn from this and to ensure it never happens again. That is our obligation. It’s the sombre obligation we will fulfill for this child and every child in this province.

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

Ms. Chandra Pasma: School boards are spending tens of millions of dollars more on special education than what they’re getting from this government and they still don’t have the resources they need to keep our kids safe. Kids who should never be left alone are being left alone at school every single day in Ontario.

We don’t need to wait for the results of the investigation into Landyn’s death to take immediate steps to make children safer in our schools. We could properly invest in special education today and make sure that children have the caring, qualified adults around them that they need to stay safe.

Will this Premier make that commitment today so that no one else receives this awful phone call?

Interjections.

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

The Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The answer, Speaker, is yes, we will continue to make those investments. This year, in special education, funding is up over $100 million when compared just to last year. There are 3,500 additional EAs supporting kids with exceptionalities. There are 9,000 additional education workers hired because of our funding. We’ve increased special education funding by over half a billion dollars when compared to when we started in 2018.

Now, we recognize there’s more to do, which is why in budget 2024 we increased in-class supports for children with exceptionalities by an additional $10 million. We announced more funding for students with disabilities to pursue co-operative education, more training of our staff.

It would be irresponsible to draw conclusions at this point on what transpired, but be assured, we take this seriously. We’ll continue to invest, we’ll continue to hire, continue to do everything humanly possible to ensure the safety of children within our care.

Taxation

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Residents in my riding of Mississauga–Lakeshore and across the province are seeing the devastating impact of the federal carbon tax. Families are cancelling their summer vacation plans because they cannot afford the high fuel costs, and small businesses are stretching every dollar on a tight budget.

It is concerning that the NDP and Liberal members in this House are choosing to ignore the hardship people in our province are facing as a result of this carbon tax. As our government works to build a healthy future for Ontarians, we are also continuing our efforts to fight against this regressive Liberal carbon tax.

Can the minister please explain how our government is strengthening Ontario’s environmental protection without imposing a costly carbon tax?

Hon. Andrea Khanjin: Speaker, the member is absolutely right: At a time when families are trying to get a little relief to enjoy their summer with their kids and their family, now is not the time for a job-killing carbon tax.

The carbon tax has proven that it is a tax policy; it is not an environment policy. But under the leadership of this Premier, we’ve been able to prove that we can protect the environment, grow the economy and create good-paying jobs without a carbon tax.

We’re working with industry, not against industry. For example, take green steel in Hamilton and Sault Ste. Marie. We’re creating electric vehicles made here in Ontario, creating high-paying jobs, while using our green steel. Instead, the Liberals, with carbon Crombie, would drive manufacturing jobs—and we’ve seen it: 300 manufacturing jobs out of this province.

Instead, Speaker, our government is balancing the environment while creating good-paying jobs and creating the right economy that will spur economic growth.

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

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Thank you to the minister for that answer. Under the leadership of this Premier and this government, we are creating jobs and economic growth right across this whole province. But the carbon tax undermines this progress as it raises the cost of living at a time when many people are struggling to make ends meet. The 23% increase to the carbon tax has only made things worse.

The Liberals haven’t met a tax they don’t like and that’s why they are reaching their hands deep into our pockets. The federal government must scrap this costly tax that does nothing to protect the environment.

Can the minister please tell the House how our government is keeping costs down while preserving the health of our environment?

Hon. Andrea Khanjin: Just look to our great transit projects. Not only are we building more transit projects, but we’ve introduced One Fare, making transit more affordable for Ontario families so they can discover Ontario this summer. And if they want to discover more of Ontario’s beautiful parks, it’s this government that’s creating the first Ontario urban provincial park and creating new parks, something that hasn’t been done in 40 years.

Do you know what else is going to help those families get to discover their beautiful province? It’s the 10 cents off of gas that we’re giving them in relief. Those Ontarians can enjoy their summer in an affordable fashion. But if it was up to the Liberals and the opposition, they’d continue taxing Ontarians, making their summer holiday plans more expensive. Perhaps that’s because Bonnie Crombie would rather go glamping in her Maserati.

Northern economy

MPP Lise Vaugeois: In April, Premier Ford said, “We’re there to retrain the workers, find them new opportunities, new jobs,” but workers in Terrace Bay have still heard nothing.

Quoting from a letter received this week: “The government has forgotten the north and continues to give money to conglomerates with no accountability. Our families are being torn apart looking for work that doesn’t exist.”

Premier, we need you to answer two questions: Is a deal for the mill imminent? And if not, what training will you provide for those with family responsibilities who cannot leave home for weeks at a time to work?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant and member for Ajax.

Ms. Patrice Barnes: This government is laser-focused on empowering or workers. We understand that workers need to be reskilled and retrained, and that is why we continue to invest in our workers, especially through our SDF funding. We commit and continue to commit to supporting our workers to get in well-trained jobs as they move forward in their new positions.

We continue to do pre-training programs that provide $28.3 million from 2022 to 2023 and the $1.25-million In-Class Enhancement Fund to support delivery of quality retraining programs.

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

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I did not hear an answer that responded to the Terrace Bay situation, but I’ll continue.

Speaker, this government is failing to use all the tools at its disposal to keep people working at the Alstom plant in Thunder Bay. American manufacturing contracts must have at least 70% American content, yet you lowered local content rules to a mere 10% and gave the Ontario Line to a Japanese corporation—$9 billion paid by Ontario taxpayers, with not one of the trains built in Ontario.

We have the expertise, facilities, skilled workforce and supply chain. What we’re missing is a commitment from this government to keep people in northwestern Ontario working.

Premier, will you commit to the maximum possible local content in all future contracts?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: There has been no other Premier in the history of this province that has been committed to more Ontario jobs than this Premier—over 700,000 more people are working today because of Premier Ford and this government’s policy, including building transit across this province.

That member knows how many of those investments are supporting communities all across the north and all across this province—thousands of workers employed because of this government’s plan to build transit all across this province. It’s because of this Premier that we’re building in the north, whether it be the Ring of Fire, Highways 11 and 17, supporting transit workers in Thunder Bay. It’s because of this Premier that we have over $40 billion worth of new foreign direct investment into this province, and because of this vision of this government, $70 billion are being invested into public transit to help support—

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

The next question.

Small business

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: The government has been very busy over the last week defending their latest blunder: the billion-dollar booze boondoggle paid for by Ontario taxpayers. They could have waited for about a year for the deal with the Beer Store to end. Instead, they keep the gravy train chugging along by wasting taxpayer dollars to cancel the deal today.

While small businesses struggle, this government gives money out hand over fist to big-box stores and—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member will take her seat.

The House will come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Start the clock. Member for Don Valley West.

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Do you know the last time small businesses got a tax break? In 2010, under an Ontario Liberal government. Speaker—

Interjections.

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

I cannot hear the member for Don Valley West. Okay. The warnings are starting next time.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Kitchener–Conestoga is warned.

Start the clock. The member for Don Valley West has the floor.

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Speaker, this Premier has yet to keep two big promises, maybe because they don’t relate to beer: a middle-income tax cut and a corporate tax cut. Both of those would help small businesses.

My question to the Premier: Will he help fix his broken promise today by passing Bill 195, the Cutting Taxes on Small Businesses Act?

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

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: I don’t know where to begin on this one.

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite had read some of the budgets passed by this House that her party voted against, she’d know that we cut the small business tax in our first mandate. She would know that we also accelerated the capital cost appreciation to help small businesses invest in capital.

It boggles the mind. In fact—boggle, boondoggle—the only way you can get to the Liberals’ numbers on alcohol is if Bonnie Boondoggle increased taxes and increased fees.

Mr. Speaker, this party is reducing fees, reducing taxes, helping small businesses so they can compete across the province and provide more consumer choice and convenience.

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

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Speaker, I asked the government a simple question about a bill. It’s too bad they won’t answer it.

Small business owners need help from this government. The CFIB wants Bill 195 passed. The Tourism Industry Association of Ontario wants Bill 195 passed.

The CFIB has said that for every dollar spent at a local small business, 66 cents stays local, versus with multinationals, like some of those benefiting from the billion-dollar booze boondoggle, only 11 cents stays in Ontario.

Bill 195 is not complicated. It cuts the effective tax rate on small businesses in half, from 3.2% to 1.6%, and increases the income threshold for this deduction from $500,000 to $600,000. It will reduce taxes on small business by up to $17,900 a year. It will help them.

Through you, Speaker, to the Premier: What will it be, yes or no, to helping Ontario small businesses by passing Bill 195?

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

Hon. Doug Ford: Well, Mr. Speaker, let’s start off with the CFIB and their quote about the alcohol: “Speeding up the process to allow more Ontario small retailers to sell beer and wine is a very positive move for entrepreneurs and consumers.” It’s so positive for the economy that small craft brewers are going to see an increase of $800 million to $1.2 billion more. This is creating over 7,500 new jobs that didn’t exist before—compared to the Liberals, who signed the worst contract I’ve ever seen in business in my entire life.

It’s all about taxation when it comes to their leader, Bonnie Crombie. That’s all they believe in, is taxing. We don’t believe in taxing. We have never increased a tax in six years. We’ve decreased taxes. We’ve given money back to the people. We’ve given over—

Interjections.

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

The Premier will take his seat. The members will please take their seats.

The member for Ottawa South is warned. The member for Hamilton Mountain is warned. The member for Brampton North is warned.

Start the clock. The next question.

Taxation

MPP Zee Hamid: The question is for the Minister of Energy. The federal carbon tax is a tax that farmers, small business owners and Ontario families have repeatedly said no to. While our government continues to deliver measures to make life more affordable, the Liberals and NDP fail to empathize with Ontarians who are struggling. They have no problem seeing this carbon tax triple over the next six years—triple.

While the cost of living is at an all-time high, it is beyond disappointing to see opposition members fail to do the right thing and hold the federal government accountable.

Speaker, can the minister please tell the House why the Liberals must stop playing politics and finally scrap the carbon tax once and for all?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks to our amazing member from Milton. It’s great to be able to take on this question, especially in the moments after the last question from the Liberal member over there.

Now, I know a leopard can’t change their spots and neither can a Liberal. The Liberals love to tax. Bonnie Crombie, the queen of the carbon tax, is happy to support Justin Trudeau’s federal carbon tax, which is driving up the price for everyone and every business in Ontario. Anybody who gets anything trucked to them is paying more because of Justin Trudeau and Bonnie Crombie’s carbon tax.

We’re not in favour of a carbon tax. We’ve lowered taxes. We’ve lowered fees. We’ve cut red tape. As a result, our economy is thriving with multi-billion-dollar investments from Windsor to Umicore in Loyalist township and into the north. And we’re not done yet.

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

MPP Zee Hamid: Thank you to the minister for his response. Our government knows that we can build a growing economy, produce clean energy and make the transition to Ontario-built EVs without jeopardizing affordability for people in this province.

Unfortunately, the federal government is unwilling to listen to provincial leaders and Canadians on this topic. Speaker, when Bonnie Crombie was a federal leader, she was one of the first to support the carbon tax. Now, as the Ontario Liberal leader, she continues to side with her federal buddies on this punitive and regressive carbon tax.

The last thing people need right now is another expense on their bills. Ontarians cannot afford the carbon tax, and they cannot afford the carbon tax queen, Bonnie Crombie. Can the minister please explain how the Liberal taxes are killing businesses and draining Ontario families’ household budgets?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks again to the member for Milton. It’s no surprise to anybody from coast to coast in our country, especially here in Ontario, the impact that the federal carbon tax which is fully supported by the queen of the carbon tax, Bonnie Crombie, is having on residents in our province. It’s driving up the cost of everything from groceries to gasoline to home heating.

Now, we’